[Les Cargill[_4_]]

William Sommerwerck wrote:
Just like the Pepsi challenge, if you do a quick A/B test
people will always pick the brighter and snappier signal.
With sustained listening they tend to change their mind,
though.

But that doesn't apply to soft drinks. grin

This is why I am always skeptical of claims of "more detail".

Even-order distortion makes the signal more asymmetrical. This might be
perceived as more detail -- or even contribute to hearing the detail
that's actually present.


Since I found a waveshaper plugin, it's possible to do experiments
with things like odd and even order distortion at very controllable
levels. I am not sure what to make if it, really.

Some seemingly innocuous changes vastly improve audibility.

--
Les Cargill

[Trevor]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
That's sort of what the aural exciter is. It's so clean it hurts.

I assume the smiley is implied? Otherwise how can deliberately adding
distortion be "so clean it hurts"!

Because the distortion that it adds is exactly the sort of distortion
that people perceive as being "cleaner." It make everything bright
and shiny and with kind of a glassy sheen to the sound. It adds
artificial detail, if you want to think about it that way.

Just like the Pepsi challenge, if you do a quick A/B test people will
always pick the brighter and snappier signal. With sustained listening
they tend to change their mind, though. This is why I am always skeptical
of claims of "more detail."

Exactly. What you could have said was "so shiny it hurts", but it certainly
aint CLEAN by any normal audio definition!

Trevor.