[jay-n-123]

When using either MME or ASIO drivers, phase inversion happened as the
result recording "What you hear" using a Creative Audigy 4. Same thing
happend recording "Stereo Mix" when using the onboard Realtek Card.

I then discovered that phase inversion happens even if I simply take a
stereo cable and patch it from the Front speaker output of Realtek to the
Line In of the Realtek, and then I select "Realtek Speakers" as audio output
driver and select "Realtek Line In" as the audio input driver. The recorded
signal is phase inverted.

Same is true if I take a stereo cable and route the headphone output of the
Audigy 4 to "Line in 2" of the audigy 4 and then choose "Audigy 4 Speakers"
as the output "Audigy 4 Line in 2" as the audio input. The recorded signal
is phase inverted.

Keep in mind that this phase inversion of the recorded signal does NOT
happen with the identical software under XP.

So it appears that Vista is either phase inverting the output or phase
inverting the input. Anyone else getting the same results?

Thanks,

J

[Geoff]

Jay-n-123 wrote:
When using either MME or ASIO drivers, phase inversion happened as the
result recording "What you hear" using a Creative Audigy 4. Same
thing happend recording "Stereo Mix" when using the onboard Realtek
Card.
I then discovered that phase inversion happens even if I simply take a
stereo cable and patch it from the Front speaker output of Realtek to
the Line In of the Realtek, and then I select "Realtek Speakers" as
audio output driver and select "Realtek Line In" as the audio input
driver. The recorded signal is phase inverted.

Same is true if I take a stereo cable and route the headphone output
of the Audigy 4 to "Line in 2" of the audigy 4 and then choose
"Audigy 4 Speakers" as the output "Audigy 4 Line in 2" as the audio
input. The recorded signal is phase inverted.

Keep in mind that this phase inversion of the recorded signal does NOT
happen with the identical software under XP.

So it appears that Vista is either phase inverting the output or phase
inverting the input. Anyone else getting the same results?


Or your sound devices' Vista drivers are.

geoff

[jay-n-123]

Or your sound devices' Vista drivers are.

Or everyone's sound devices are....thanks to the operating system.

J.

[jay-n-123]

The inversion appears to happen to the output. I routed a mixer to two
computers and both the Vista and XP machine recorded the signal in the same
phase. So, Vista is inverting the phase of the audio output since recording
the Vista output results in a phase inverted signal.

J.

[Romeo Rondeau[_2_]]

Jay-n-123 wrote:
Or your sound devices' Vista drivers are.

Or everyone's sound devices are....thanks to the operating system.

J.



Doesn't happen on my rig and I'm using Windows XP. I have two sound
devices, an RME Hammerfall and a Digidesign Mbox2Mini. Don't blame the
problem on the operating system, you've got a local problem there.

[jay-n-123]

I NEVER SAID IT HAPPENS UNDER XP!

It happens under ******VISTA******, and YES, UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE I AM
BLAMING VISTA!

I am perfectly aware that it does NOT happen under XP, thank you very much!

J.

doesn't happen on my rig and I'm using Windows XP. I have two sound
devices, an RME Hammerfall and a Digidesign Mbox2Mini. Don't blame the
problem on the operating system, you've got a local problem there.

[jay-n-123]

In my testing I've found it's the output that gets inverted under Vista.
(and yes I'm aware that XP does not have the same problem).

J.

[Romeo Rondeau[_2_]]

Jay-n-123 wrote:
I NEVER SAID IT HAPPENS UNDER XP!

It happens under ******VISTA******, and YES, UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE I AM
BLAMING VISTA!

I am perfectly aware that it does NOT happen under XP, thank you very much!

J.

OK, blame away :-)

[Romeo Rondeau[_2_]]

Jay-n-123 wrote:
In my testing I've found it's the output that gets inverted under Vista.
(and yes I'm aware that XP does not have the same problem).

J.



Explain what you did to test this.

[jay-n-123]

I explain it in my original post....did I not?

J.

Explain what you did to test this.

[Romeo Rondeau[_2_]]

Jay-n-123 wrote:
I explain it in my original post....did I not?

J.

Explain what you did to test this.



Not completely. If you want to just bitch, then just say so, otherwise
explain everything in detail and we may be able to help you.

[jay-n-123]

In my original message, I explained everything in sufficient detail.

Not completely. If you want to just bitch, then just say so, otherwise
explain everything in detail and we may be able to help you.

[Romeo Rondeau[_2_]]

Jay-n-123 wrote:
In my original message, I explained everything in sufficient detail.

OK, figure it out on your own, then.



Not completely. If you want to just bitch, then just say so, otherwise
explain everything in detail and we may be able to help you.

[Mike Rivers]

On May 28, 2:40 pm, "Jay-n-123" wrote:

I explain it in my original post....did I not?

Not entirely clearly. First off, it's POLARITY inversion that you're
talking about, I believe, not a phase shift. There's a difference, and
I've very picky about this, but I'll let it pass.

Not being a SoundBlaster user, I'm not sure what "what you hear"
means. What I suspect you're observing is that when you record
something from an analog input, the analog playback is inverted in
polarity. Is that what's happening?

It can get a little confusing when you're using the equipment you're
trying to test as the test equipment. The way I investigate problems
like this is to use an easily identifiable waveform as a test signal -
I have an AC wall wart connected to an XLR plug through a diode to
give me a half-wave rectified test signal. I know that the peaks are
up, and if they come out up, then there's no inversion. I look at the
output with an oscilloscope.

If you don't have an oscilloscope lying around, you can use another
computer with a sound card. Record the input and record the ouptut. If
they look the same then there's no polarity inversion. If they're
opposite, then something is inverted. Your method of determining
whether the inversion is with recording or playback seems to make
sense.

If there's really a problem, I suspect that it's with the Vista
driver. It took a while for sound card problems to get sorted out with
XP as I recall. They never think to test those things when developing
a new operating system.

[Laurence Payne]

On 28 May 2007 13:37:44 -0700, Mike Rivers
wrote:

Not being a SoundBlaster user, I'm not sure what "what you hear"
means. What I suspect you're observing is that when you record
something from an analog input, the analog playback is inverted in
polarity. Is that what's happening?

It's the Record Input you choose when you want to track...well...what
you're hearing. Remember the Soundblaster cards have onboard MIDI
synths. If you've built up a sequence using a mixture of audio tracks
and MIDI tracks, it's a very useful tool when mixing down. Also
allows convenient recording of streaming audio off the 'net.

[Geoff]

Jay-n-123 wrote:
Or your sound devices' Vista drivers are.

Or everyone's sound devices are....thanks to the operating system.

Well isn't that what you need to determine ?

Realtek and SB are really not great places to start. Try a serious
soundcard from a reputable manufacturerer, and see if anything is inverted
there.

geoff

[jay-n-123]

Not being a SoundBlaster user, I'm not sure what "what you hear"
means. What I suspect you're observing is that when you record
something from an analog input, the analog playback is inverted in
polarity. Is that what's happening?

Yes that's correct, and it also happens if I set it so that the input to
records the output using a stereo cable. The recorded waveform is a mirror
image of the original.

J.

[Mark]

On May 28, 5:17 pm, "Jay-n-123" wrote:
Not being a SoundBlaster user, I'm not sure what "what you hear"
means. What I suspect you're observing is that when you record
something from an analog input, the analog playback is inverted in
polarity. Is that what's happening?

Yes that's correct, and it also happens if I set it so that the input to
records the output using a stereo cable. The recorded waveform is a mirror
image of the original.

J.

somebody please explain why anyone cares about a polarity inversion to
both channels..

Please don't tell me that you can hear it.

Mark

[Richard Crowley]

"Mark" wrote ...
somebody please explain why anyone cares about a polarity inversion to
both channels..

Please don't tell me that you can hear it.

The liner notes for one of the Sheffield Labs direct-to-disc LPs
recommended reversing the polarity on your playback system
because the signal on the disc ended up inverted.

I don't think I've ever detected it, but then I haven't done a careful
study, either.

[Romeo Rondeau[_2_]]

John wrote:
In article . com,
Mark wrote:

On May 28, 5:17 pm, "Jay-n-123" wrote:
Not being a SoundBlaster user, I'm not sure what "what you hear"
means. What I suspect you're observing is that when you record
something from an analog input, the analog playback is inverted in
polarity. Is that what's happening?

Yes that's correct, and it also happens if I set it so that the input to
records the output using a stereo cable. The recorded waveform is a mirror
image of the original.

J.
somebody please explain why anyone cares about a polarity inversion to
both channels..

Please don't tell me that you can hear it.

Mark

so a kick drum gets hit and with the polarity inverted the speaker sucks
in on the initial attack transient instead of pushing out the way it
would normally. that's accurate reproduction ?

i don't think so.

What if you mike it from the other side?

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Tue, 29 May 2007 00:04:21 -0500, Romeo Rondeau
wrote:

What if you mike it from the other side?

This, of course, will only serve to make make the
polarity incorrect for listeners in the Southern
Hemisphere.

Really just another example of how devilish these
computer bugs can be.

Much thanks, as always,

Chris Hornbeck

[Laurence Payne]

On Mon, 28 May 2007 22:56:14 -0500, John
wrote:

somebody please explain why anyone cares about a polarity inversion to
both channels..

Please don't tell me that you can hear it.

Mark

so a kick drum gets hit and with the polarity inverted the speaker sucks
in on the initial attack transient instead of pushing out the way it
would normally. that's accurate reproduction ?

i don't think so.

True. But can you hear it?

[Mike Rivers]

On May 28, 11:21 pm, Mark wrote:

somebody please explain why anyone cares about a polarity inversion to
both channels..

Please don't tell me that you can hear it.

Sometimes you can hear it, sometimes you can't. It depends on the
program material. But it's easy enough to get it right, at least on
your end, so that you might as well get it right. What happens on the
listener's end is anyone's guess.

Here's an example that you can hear:

http://www.recordingmag.com/files/6_...54-poltest.wav

You'll notice an apparent change in the low frequency content halfway
through when the polarity inverts.

[Mark]

On May 29, 6:18 am, Mike Rivers wrote:
On May 28, 11:21 pm, Mark wrote:

somebody please explain why anyone cares about a polarity inversion to
both channels..
Please don't tell me that you can hear it.

Sometimes you can hear it, sometimes you can't. It depends on the
program material. But it's easy enough to get it right, at least on
your end, so that you might as well get it right. What happens on the
listener's end is anyone's guess.

Here's an example that you can hear:

http://www.recordingmag.com/files/6_...54-poltest.wav

You'll notice an apparent change in the low frequency content halfway
through when the polarity inverts.

I do hear a diff but it depends on where I am located relative to my 2
speakers.

If I use an RTA or FFT analyzer I can see that there is no real
change excpect for a brief transient during polarity switch. With the
FFT you can see the level of each individualfrequency component and
none of them change.

Any change you hear is due to phase errors in your speakers and is
totaly random.

Mark

[Arny Krueger]

"Mark" wrote in message
ups.com
On May 29, 6:18 am, Mike Rivers
wrote:
On May 28, 11:21 pm, Mark wrote:

somebody please explain why anyone cares about a
polarity inversion to both channels..
Please don't tell me that you can hear it.

Sometimes you can hear it, sometimes you can't. It
depends on the program material. But it's easy enough to
get it right, at least on your end, so that you might as
well get it right. What happens on the listener's end is
anyone's guess.

Here's an example that you can hear:

http://www.recordingmag.com/files/6_...54-poltest.wav

You'll notice an apparent change in the low frequency
content halfway through when the polarity inverts.

A well-known effect that is related to how the ears work.

I do hear a diff but it depends on where I am located
relative to my 2 speakers.

That may be true, but it does not reflect on the psychoacoustic effect that
is involved.

If I use an RTA or FFT analyzer I can see that there is
no real change excpect for a brief transient during
polarity switch. With the FFT you can see the level of
each individualfrequency component and none of them
change.

Agreed.

Any change you hear is due to phase errors in your
speakers and is totaly random.

The effect is very audible with headphones - so that takes speakers and
rooms out of the equation.

[Mike Rivers]

On May 29, 9:45 am, Mark wrote:

I do hear a diff but it depends on where I am located relative to my 2
speakers.

Doesn't everything?

If I use an RTA or FFT analyzer I can see that there is no real
change excpect for a brief transient during polarity switch. With the
FFT you can see the level of each individualfrequency component and
none of them change.

So that proves that nothing has changed but the polarity, yet you hear
hear the change. Hence you an hear a difference between normal and
inverted polarity. QED

Any change you hear is due to phase errors in your speakers and is
totaly random.

Uh . . . . out of which monkey's ass did you pull this "fact?"

Have you tried it on headphones? People come up with all sorts of
excuses of why they hear what they hear. Some people have said that
they could easily hear the polarity change on their computer speakers
but not on their "hi fi" speakers so it must be because the computer
speakers aren't very good. (couldn't be that the "hi fi" speakers
aren't any good, could it?) Whatever the reason, you CAN hear the
difference, and that's all I was trying to demonstrate.

Lots of people listen to music on computer speakers or headphones.

[Mark]

If I use an RTA or FFT analyzer I can see that there is no real
change excpect for a brief transient during polarity switch. With the
FFT you can see the level of each individualfrequency component and
none of them change.

So that proves that nothing has changed but the polarity, yet you hear
hear the change. Hence you an hear a difference between normal and
inverted polarity. QED

The quick FFT test proves that there is no change except polarity in
the ELECTRICAL signal fed to the speakers. It says nothing about the
sound signal comming out of the speakers. I'll need to set up a mic
for that test and get back to you.


Any change you hear is due to phase errors in your speakers and is
totaly random.

Uh . . . . out of which monkey's ass did you pull this "fact?"


Becasue I obtained different results by moving my head. One time the
first polarity appeared to have more bass, the next time the second
polarity appeared to have more bass. The only change was my
position. In some cases there was no perceptible change. Therefore
the use of the term random.

Have you tried it on headphones?

No I will get back to you.

Mark

[Mike Rivers]

On May 29, 2:29 pm, Mark wrote:

The quick FFT test proves that there is no change except polarity in
the ELECTRICAL signal fed to the speakers. It says nothing about the
sound signal comming out of the speakers. I'll need to set up a mic
for that test and get back to you.

If your speakers don't work like speakers, all bets are off. The
assumption is that the speaker is linear at least to the extent that
one polarity makes the cone move outward from the center position and
the opposite polarity makes it move inward.

Becasue I obtained different results by moving my head. One time the
first polarity appeared to have more bass, the next time the second
polarity appeared to have more bass.

Well then don't move your head. Or better yet, disconnect one speaker.
When you add in room effects, you disturb the experiment. This is not
about stereo, it's about polarity and speaker cone motion.

Deny it if you will, but it's real.

[hank alrich]

Mike Rivers wrote:

On May 29, 2:29 pm, Mark wrote:

The quick FFT test proves that there is no change except polarity in
the ELECTRICAL signal fed to the speakers. It says nothing about the
sound signal comming out of the speakers. I'll need to set up a mic
for that test and get back to you.

If your speakers don't work like speakers, all bets are off. The
assumption is that the speaker is linear at least to the extent that
one polarity makes the cone move outward from the center position and
the opposite polarity makes it move inward.

Becasue I obtained different results by moving my head. One time the
first polarity appeared to have more bass, the next time the second
polarity appeared to have more bass.

Well then don't move your head. Or better yet, disconnect one speaker.
When you add in room effects, you disturb the experiment. This is not
about stereo, it's about polarity and speaker cone motion.

Deny it if you will, but it's real.

Can't you fix this Vista polarity inversion thing by just turning your
computer upside down?

--
ha
Iraq is Arabic for Vietnam

[Romeo Rondeau[_2_]]

hank alrich wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote:

On May 29, 2:29 pm, Mark wrote:

The quick FFT test proves that there is no change except polarity in
the ELECTRICAL signal fed to the speakers. It says nothing about the
sound signal comming out of the speakers. I'll need to set up a mic
for that test and get back to you.
If your speakers don't work like speakers, all bets are off. The
assumption is that the speaker is linear at least to the extent that
one polarity makes the cone move outward from the center position and
the opposite polarity makes it move inward.

Becasue I obtained different results by moving my head. One time the
first polarity appeared to have more bass, the next time the second
polarity appeared to have more bass.
Well then don't move your head. Or better yet, disconnect one speaker.
When you add in room effects, you disturb the experiment. This is not
about stereo, it's about polarity and speaker cone motion.

Deny it if you will, but it's real.

Can't you fix this Vista polarity inversion thing by just turning your
computer upside down?


Everybody's ignoring the obvious... just break off the ground tab on the
power cable and force the plug in upside down! This will invert the
polarity, making his playback fall right back into phase! Sheesh! :-)

[Geoff]

Richard Crowley wrote:
"Mark" wrote ...
somebody please explain why anyone cares about a polarity inversion
to both channels..

Please don't tell me that you can hear it.

The liner notes for one of the Sheffield Labs direct-to-disc LPs
recommended reversing the polarity on your playback system
because the signal on the disc ended up inverted.

I don't think I've ever detected it, but then I haven't done a careful
study, either.

Was that some theory that if you hook one complete channel in antiphase,
then you are not hammering both rails in the PSU with both channels at once
?

geoff

[Geoff]

John wrote:
In article ,
Romeo Rondeau wrote:
depends upon the corialis effect as modulated by the space/time
continuum. what, i gotta 'splain everything ?


if the phase is inverted on playback, it ain't accurate waveform
reproduction of the original signal no matter how it was mic'd.
pretty simple concept, really. people spend a lot of time and effort
in good facilities to make sure a positive pulse remains positive all
the way thru the signal path.

Just turn around, face the other way. Maybe records should *specify*
listener orientation, and whether recorded from the performer or audience
perspective.

geoff

[Romeo Rondeau[_2_]]

if the phase is inverted on playback, it ain't accurate waveform
reproduction of the original signal no matter how it was mic'd. pretty
simple concept, really. people spend a lot of time and effort in good
facilities to make sure a positive pulse remains positive all the way
thru the signal path.


I know dingleberry, I was being sarcastic :-)

[Romeo Rondeau[_2_]]

geoff

o crap, the piano is imaged from the player position and the drums
imaged are from the audience.

what to do, what to do.... is this in 5.1 ?

NOW he gets it :-)