georgehifi Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 @Marc any chance making this a sticky? Just to bring some self proclaimed "Golden Ears" back to earth. 6 different artists doing the same intro 3 different times https://www.npr.org/sections/therecord/2015/06/02/411473508/how-well-can-you-hear-audio-quality Cheers George 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wimbo Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 Yeah, not into digital so couldnt play it back thru my system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Muon N' Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 Can only play physical media here. Cool for the Filephiles though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eltech Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 33 minutes ago, Wimbo said: Yeah, not into digital so couldnt play it back thru my system. 29 minutes ago, Muon N' said: Can only play physical media here. Cool for the Filephiles though. You can use a device called a "3.5mm jack to RCA cable", and connect the thing you typed your replies on, into your amp and listen. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Muon N' Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 Just now, eltech said: You can use a device called a "3.5mm jack to RCA cable", and connect the thing you typed your replies on, into your amp and listen. Yes, there are all sorts of wizz bang inventions these days Not appropriate, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eltech Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 Just now, Muon N' said: Yes, there are all sorts of wizz bang inventions these days What will they think of next? 1 minute ago, Muon N' said: Not appropriate, thanks 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgehifi Posted August 31, 2018 Author Share Posted August 31, 2018 The hint is correct, "turn it up". Sennhiser HD650's straight into the computer headphone socket got me 5 from 6, and I only just hear to 16khz. Cheers George 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wimbo Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 12 hours ago, georgehifi said: The hint is correct, "turn it up". Sennhiser HD650's straight into the computer headphone socket got me 5 from 6, and I only just hear to 16khz. Cheers George Those Ducati's must be quiet. I'm down to around 12k. Funny though, depends on what I'm listening thru as well. It can vary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteD Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 I would love to play this game but don't believe that connecting the PC to the amp using a 3.5mm jack to RCA cable will be suitable in terms of getting the best quality sound. Unfortunately, I don't have a USB cable to connect the PC to the DAC. Of course, downloading the files (if that was possible) would invalidate the "blind" aspect of the test because I would be able to see the file properties - FLAC vs MP3, 16 bit vs 24 bit etc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bass13 Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 (edited) I got 5 out of 6, listening to it through my Audioengine D1 Premium 24-Bit DAC / on my Audioengine 5+ PC speakers. Edited August 31, 2018 by Bass13 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 (edited) 48 minutes ago, PeteD said: I would love to play this game but don't believe that connecting the PC to the amp using a 3.5mm jack to RCA cable will be suitable in terms of getting the best quality sound. Unfortunately, I don't have a USB cable to connect the PC to the DAC. If you create the files yourself you have the added advantage of using content you know and love, and using whatever formats you like too.... and you can also trust that there is nothing dodgy going on. Quote Of course, downloading the files (if that was possible) would invalidate the "blind" aspect of the test because I would be able to see the file properties - FLAC vs MP3, 16 bit vs 24 bit etc Just don't look?!... or configure the player not to show those details. Edited August 31, 2018 by davewantsmoore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgehifi Posted August 31, 2018 Author Share Posted August 31, 2018 (edited) Also they change the order of the three on each 6 passes, every-time you go back to the website, so you can't cheat and wow your friends into thinking you've got "golden ears". Cheers George Edited September 1, 2018 by georgehifi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussievintage Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 So, oldish ears here, listening through cheap Fiio Q1 DAC into Sennheiser HD 558 and Grado SR60e headphones. So all cheap gear. I got 6/12 (I did it twice) correct. Enough to indicate that I do have some preference for the best files. btw. 3 times out of 12 I chose the worst 128k mp3 ! Or, in other words, I chose the better files 9 out of 12 times. I have always believed that high bitrate mp3s are good enough for all but the most discerning situations. Even so, with storage so cheap, I have switched to using Flac at home. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgehifi Posted September 25, 2018 Author Share Posted September 25, 2018 On 01/09/2018 at 9:54 AM, aussievintage said: I got 6/12 Half deaf 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desap Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 Interesting - and I've always been skeptical about this. So using Sennheiser 700's into a Denon AVR at fairly loud SPLs, I scored 3/6 correctly BUT I was really guessing and couldn't actually define any perceived differences - perhaps the uncompressed was ever so slightly "smoother", but really not much difference. I'm happy enough streaming Spotify Premium at 320 kbs (or whatever) and not paying more to get uncompressed. Cheers Des CAVEAT - I'm getting on in age (67) and hearing isn't as good as younger folk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgehifi Posted September 25, 2018 Author Share Posted September 25, 2018 (edited) 15 hours ago, Desap said: perhaps the uncompressed was ever so slightly "smoother", but really not much difference. CAVEAT - I'm getting on in age (67) and hearing isn't as good as younger folk From memory when I did it almost a month ago the uncompressed just sounded a touch easier and bigger, not necessarily smoother, just like it had more time. Btw same age. I probably have an advantage over you, that both my ears drums have been protected most of my life with Exostosis (surfers ear) which is a narrowing half way down of the ear canal to protect the ear drum against cold during my life as board rider from 8 till 60, also rode motorcycles without a helmet when you could, and snow skiing. Everyone has it to a degree, interesting also in Australia the right ear is most effected, yet in America it the left, because of driving with the window down. Both mine were worse in the right. Had them both drilled out at 25 but they grew back again and had them done again after I stopped surfing a few years ago, got the doc to make them oversized this time, so I have built in horns now. BTW It's not a nice operation, takes 3 or more hours per ear, and the biggie is they cut your ear off at the back and fold it over onto your cheek, so they can do the job with good vision, as they just can't drill it out they need to save the skin first then drill the bone with something like a surgical Dremmel then put the skin back, stitch your ear back and surgically pack the ear canal for 6 weeks. Everyone having their dinner as it's 6pm. Cheers George Edited September 25, 2018 by georgehifi 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 (edited) On 01/09/2018 at 9:54 AM, aussievintage said: I got 6/12 (I did it twice) correct. Enough to indicate that I do have some preference for the best files. No that's not. Statistically, you will get "50% right" if you guess randomly..... and so the score needs to be substantially above 50% to start showing that result. Quote btw. 3 times out of 12 I chose the worst 128k mp3 ! Or, in other words, I chose the better files 9 out of 12 times. Indeed. That's more like what (9/12) would be 'starting to show a preference' ... and also supports the typical result that well-made high-bitrate MP3 is audibly transparent. Edited September 25, 2018 by davewantsmoore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussievintage Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 1 hour ago, davewantsmoore said: No that's not. Statistically, you will get "50% right" if you guess randomly..... and so the score needs to be substantially above 50% to start showing that result. Are you sure? There were three choices, so random choice gives you 33% doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 7 minutes ago, aussievintage said: Are you sure? There were three choices, so random choice gives you 33% doesn't it? Geez, I'm glad someone is paying attention (not me). Sorry. Yes. (I often do trials with choice A and B, so I just get 50% stuck in my head). Carry on 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLXXX Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 I got 5 out of 6 using my pc sending through HDMI to my AVR, and plugging in Sennheiser HD 800 phones. (I failed on the Mozart piano concerto by choosing the 320kbps version.) I found the 128kbs mp3 distinctly "mushier" in all cases except the last piece of music. Generally I found it quite hard to differentiate the 320kbps mp3 from the uncompressed version. The fact I got 5 correct answers may partly be due to a lucky guess in one or two cases [after I had eliminated from contention the 128kbps version]! This exercise would be much more difficult if a modern codec such as AAC were used (instead of the now dated and relatively inefficient mp3 codec). On 31/08/2018 at 7:41 PM, georgehifi said: Sennhiser HD650's straight into the computer headphone socket got me 5 from 6, and I only just hear to 16khz. I understand that the artefacts of mp3 encoding can affect frequencies all over the audible spectrum. (My own hearing no longer extends as high as 16kHz.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Upgrayed Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 If you don't get at least 5/6 sell your gear or upgrade. I always find mp3 has lumpy bass and bad distortion. Tidal do 6 months mp3 for free if you want "normal" service it costs, do they know something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLXXX Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 13 minutes ago, deblur said: If you don't get at least 5/6 sell your gear or upgrade. I always find mp3 has lumpy bass and bad distortion. Tidal do 6 months mp3 for free if you want "normal" service it costs, do they know something? Audio files compressed with the mp3 codec differ in the noticeability of the artefacts depending on a number of factors including: the bitrate (128kbps being much more susceptible to creating audible artefacts than 320kbps) the nature of the music (e.g. complex orchestral music can be harder to encode successfully than simply textured music) whether an uncompressed version of the same music is available for immediate comparison. I think the audible differences (such as they are) are revealed with even modest hi-fi equipment. (Having said that, very high quality equipment may make it a little easier to hear differences in a 320kbps mp3.) I suggest @deblur that if a person cannot hear artefacts in a 320kbps stereo mp3 played on a hi-fi system, then the most likely explanation is that their hearing is tolerant of, and oblivious to, the minor artefacts arising from the compression to 320kbps stereo mp3. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davewantsmoore Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 9 hours ago, MLXXX said: This exercise would be much more difficult if a modern codec such as AAC were used (instead of the now dated and relatively inefficient mp3 codec) Most results show they are both equally as transparent, assuming encoded well..... just at different bitrates (like you say, lower for AAC) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLXXX Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 (edited) 56 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said: Most results show they are both equally as transparent, assuming encoded well..... just at different bitrates (like you say, lower for AAC) I meant using the same bitrates as used in this test. I know from my own listening experience that 320kbps stereo AAC is indistiguishable from an uncompressed version except in occasional passages in the music and needs very careful immediate A B comparison for me to be able to hear any difference. As for 128kbps stereo AAC, I find that a distinct improvement over 128kbps stereo mp3. Edited September 25, 2018 by MLXXX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussievintage Posted September 25, 2018 Share Posted September 25, 2018 8 hours ago, MLXXX said: Audio files compressed with the mp3 codec differ in the noticeability of the artefacts depending on a number of factors including: the bitrate (128kbps being much more susceptible to creating audible artefacts than 320kbps) the nature of the music (e.g. complex orchestral music can be harder to encode successfully than simply textured music) whether an uncompressed version of the same music is available for immediate comparison. Maybe also the quality of the encoding software? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts