[theveterans]

Well if my theory is true about the bass impact, if someone is curious, i advice to listen preferably on full range speakers (or something close to that) with silly songs like this: https://deezer.page.link/tmsy2618sSpojeJx5 to "maybe" make the difference obvious (also listen to a volume close to 80dB to make differences more obvious...)

The rocket start is usually enough for me to hear the difference pretty clearly with lossy vs lossless .... with lossless it sounds like your house lifts up with some imagination.... tho this feeling is gone with lossy

It’s not about bass impact to me when I do notice it (320 kbps Ogg Vorbis aka Spotify very high quality), it’s about the tightness/snap in the note edges from subbass to cymbal strikes to percussion and strings note edge definition that gives it away for me (on a really good day). Otherwise, the difference is almost to the point of imaging it on a normal day for me, ie it’s perfectly fine for 99% of people

 

[Ghoostknight]

it’s about the tightness/snap in the note edges from subbass to cymbal strikes to percussion and strings note edge definition that gives it away for me

this sounds a bit like what i described as "sheen" overall on lossy, just the other way around

Otherwise, the difference is almost to the point of imaging it on a normal day for me, ie it’s perfectly fine for 99% of people

its definitely debatable that "you must hear to flac", for me listening almost exclusively music in lossless and then going to mp3 is pretty much always audible if i A/B one song i know well but if im listening for example to youtube for a while, thats totally fine too.... IMO A/B gives it away the most but if you just listen to one or the other for a while, its not like you "obviously" miss something with the majority of songs if you get my drift

 

[theveterans]

this sounds a bit like what i described as "sheen" overall on lossy, just the other way around

Hmm. Sheen = veil sounding to me. It can be a manifestation of blunted/smoothened out transients which is not how I perceived real instruments unamplified. Lossless has that closer to real instrument dynamics than lossy. The difference is really subtle but over long term listening, it starts to add up (but I still don't feel anything missing with lossy during my normal everyday listening and not critical listening on a good day TBH)

its definitely debatable that "you must hear to flac", for me listening almost exclusively music in lossless and then going to mp3 is pretty much always audible if i A/B one song i know well but if im listening for example to youtube for a while, thats totally fine too.... IMO A/B gives it away the most but if you just listen to one or the other for a while, its not like you "obviously" miss something with the majority of songs if you get my drift

This all comes down how well you train your ears for that test. I've read people online that they can subjectively tell differences between audio equipment undergo a couple of listening sessions A/Bing to get their ears trained prior to an actual single blind test (using Val Alstine ABX Comparator) and proclaiming to the internet they indeed are confident with 8/10 correct guess rate

 

[Ghoostknight]

veil

yes thats probably a better word for it, sheen could actually imply something positive if i go by google translater

This all comes down how well you train your ears for that test. I've read people online that they can subjectively tell differences between audio equipment undergo a couple of listening sessions A/Bing to get their ears trained prior to an actual single blind test (using Val Alstine ABX Comparator) and proclaiming to the internet they indeed are confident with 8/10 correct guess rate

hmm interesting, actually let me try some DBT with lossy vs lossless

Did somebody used this before? https://lacinato.com/cm/software/othersoft/abx
or is there some better alternative for Linux?

 

[bigshot]

The effect of compression with lossy isn't an overall veil over the sound, except for an audible high end rolloff at lower data rates (128 and below for AAC). Most of the time compression error comes in the form of artifacts, momentary digital glitches when the data rate isn't sufficient to render the sound properly. These often sound like electronic gurgles. These artifacts come and go as the data under runs and catches up, being more plentiful at lower data rates.

The most common description of expectation bias is an overall veil over the sound, and perceptual error due to failure to level match is usually described as clarity and a difference in dynamic punch. With a blind, level matched test, the veil and dynamics would disappear and lossy would be identical to lossless with a modern codec at high data rates.

 

[Ghoostknight]

Did somebody used this before? https://lacinato.com/cm/software/othersoft/abx
or is there some better alternative for Linux?

i wasnt able to get it running, i think its outdated for my debian trixie setup

i did this instead: http://abx.digitalfeed.net/lame.320.html ( B seems to be always the lossless, to know this actually helped a bit i think)

Please ignore the james blake sample, its imo the hardest sample to get right (atleast for me) and assume i got 15/20

Tho i would really like to test some full (own picked) songs and only compare one song
i might check this one out later: https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/ABX https://abxtests.com/
this also looks like a great tool/website to share ABX comparisons with others

 

[Ryokan]

of course

I was criticizing anyone who shares their views here without presenting any facts that can be substantiated.

 

[gregorio]

As you "may" have noticed, i wrote " i hear the most difference in bass ", it was an opinion yet again

Yes I did notice it was an opinion yet again, an opinion which demonstrates that what you hear (“the most difference in bass”) is incorrect/flawed because the most difference is actually in the treble! So, what is wrong with your hearing? Surely you’re not contradicting yourself again? Lol

You guys hang yourself up on my opinions, thats not my fault …

How are your opinions (which are wrong), not your fault? Whose fault is it, do you have someone else controlling your opinions and then posting them?

power cable phase direction that has measureable effects

Great, show us the measurements then!

Please ignore the james blake sample, its imo the hardest sample to get right (atleast for me) and assume i got 15/20

Why stop there? Why not also just eliminate the other 5 answers you got wrong, then you could assume you got 15/15, a 100% success rate and could claim you definitely can tell the difference, instead of your actual result (“you probably can’t tell the difference”), which contradicts your opinion/claim?! Lol.

G

 

[BS5711]

Go easy gregorio, he has been relatively well behaved the last little while

 

[Ghoostknight]

Why stop there? Why not also just eliminate the other 5 answers you got wrong, then you could assume you got 15/15, a 100% success rate and could claim you definitely can tell the difference, instead of your actual result (“you probably can’t tell the difference”), which contradicts your opinion/claim?! Lol.

Isnt it strange that i did the test 3 times, and never actually landed under 50% correct rate ? (and somehow failing the james black sample each time)

i mean sure, 50% is completely random..... but if the result is "really" random then it wouldnt be that rare to actually hit under 50% correct guesses, but i get the bell-distribution thing, hitting 20% might be just as rare (when guessing) as hitting 80%

IMO its also strange to assume on one side "the brain definitely has flaws" and on the other "but you need to get 10/10", for obvious differences i completely agree... 10/10 shows there is a reliable proofable way of telling the difference is "definitely" real, but if we go into regions of audible treshholds... its hard to assume we (humans) will be each time right

tho before i go more into this, let me check a DBT i can actually put into my favour with picking songs i know and getting full songs, so i actually can get used to lossless a little bit better and avoid rapid switching back and forth

Tho i also noticed that this test:

i might check this one out later: https://github.com/jaakkopasanen/ABX https://abxtests.com/

actually randomizes the A and B samples... imo this is a unnessecary complication of the whole thing, i mean why you cant know which is B and which is A, the thing is about telling what X is and not figuring stuff out from the ground up each round, again, maybe great to double check for "obvious" things but if we go into minor difference regions its something that makes this way harder

EDIT: i might just play the lossless file seperately to the blind test for reference here...

 

[Ghoostknight]

Great, show us the measurements then!

You can easly do them

1. plug the device under test into a power distribution with a open socket beside it
2. now you measure VOLTAGE with a multimeter, lowest range, from the free power distribution socket earth to the device ground, you get something close to zero
3. turn the plug around (or switch cables if you cant turn your plugs...), measure again
4. now with (most) devices you will get a lower measured voltage difference with the phase on a specific pin, thats the right way around and imo also audible

5. if you would disconnect ground to the device... you would actually measure quite high voltage (which i dont recommend since safety and all that...), when the ground is connected values are usually either close to 0,00V or something like 0,2-1V


I mean, i cant proof audibility here, but this is something that can be measured.... and since amps/dacs actually utilize the ground reference level its not that far off to assume this might have an audible effect, even if its not easly measured on the dac output

i think the thing with this is also, the devices that benefit the most from this are usually devices with linear power supplys, tho this also seems to work on SMPS (for power supplys with barrel jacks and an plastic case you can measure from ground of the power distribution to barrel jack minus)


And just for completness, if you dont measure a difference with the above method, either you can disconnect ground to the device to measure the quite high voltage (also the difference you measure is larger in that case.... something like 90V vs 120V on 230V powered devices dont seem unusual)
THO I ADVICE IF YOU DISCONNECT GROUND (AND ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT YOU ARE DOING!) TO STILL AVOID TOUCHING THE DEVICE GROUND as long its ungrounded...

Or just do it the old way, open the device, and usually the cable that goes to the fuse is the right one to put the phase on

 

[gregorio]

I mean, i cant proof audibility here, but this is something that can be measured.... and since amps/dacs actually utilize the ground reference level its not that far off to assume this might have an audible effect, even if its not easly measured on the dac output

1. But your method only measures the power at the end of the cable, it does NOT measure the “effect” of that, as you claimed! Please show the measurement that demonstrates an “effect” on the signal you’re outputting from the DAC.

2. If as you now say it is not “measured on the dac output” (or not easily measured) then completely contrary to your assertion, it is absurdly “far off to assume this might have an audible effect”, where do you think the music/sound you’re listening to is coming from? If there is no measurable difference at the output of the DAC, how can no difference possibly have any audible effect?

G

 

[Ghoostknight]

But your method only measures the power at the end of the cable

No, my method measures the voltage difference between different ground points, so essentially the potential difference between them! it also doesnt measure "power" but "voltage" (potential difference) on the earth "network", not the relationship between N and Phase, which gets you the actual voltage of your power grid, thats probably also why why the dac output doesnt change here obviously because it still gets "the same kind of electricity"

i think this method actually measures some kind of leakage between N (or the overall circuit) and Ground in the end (or something along those lines)

if there is a potential difference than currents will flow around these different ground points for example, tho my electronic knowledge is fairly limited here what this could actually mean in the end, but this is actually a measurement method that most of the time lines up with audible preference, so i thought its interesting

EDIT: isnt this something similar to ground loop issues? ground loops also form when you have potential difference between grounds... tho i guess with this you dont get a "loop" like usually

Just for completeness here

Spoiler: Listening Expression

i tested the audible effects of this quite intensively, also the difference heared is actually quite large, i would even argue its on a level some people describe hearing between different dacs for examples, for me the effect was always most audible if i actually listen to some kind of "distorted" music.... (for example distorted bass/electronic guitars are a great example here, tho also stuff like hardstyle and hardcore which can be fairly distorted works for comparisons) for me the "distortion" sounds actually cleaner with the phase on the right pin, and sounds kind of "more distorted and a bit more unpleasent" with the phase on the wrong pin
that is not the only audible effect, also bass impact seems to change, but keep in mind, i might explain/hear differences different to others, i get a feeling of that most tweaks seem to impact bass quite audibly compared to other stuff

this listening expression mainly comes from turning around plugs on my active speakers, since that are the two devices i just used mostly (because it was most audible with amps as it seems) to actually A/B to get a sense of what this does, other devices are audible too (and its most of the time kind of the same change, just to different degrees)

 

[joremita]

Tidal is much better. Contrary to the common way of thinking, I love MQA files

 

[Ghoostknight]

I love MQA files

i think Tidal got rid of MQA mostly by now from what i read, most music should be in FLAC now, maybe you have missed it

for me that was actually a great point to check tidal again, tho on linux you can just "easly" listen to tidal with the webbrowser and firefox doesnt support high res (on tidal, for some strange reason), google chrome (and everyother chromium based browser, so 90% of all browsers) resamples everything to 48khz but works with high res (if i remember right), which is quite mind boggling if you ask me and i cancelled tidal again, since i can also use Deezer for CD Quality on firefox...

The whole chromium resamples everthing to 48khz (since YEARS, "they wanna fix it") is also quite funny because probably most people use chromium based browser to listening to high res.... which is effectively nonsense

EDIT: this is how it looks under Linux... (Floorp is a firefox based browser)

Of course i played deezer on both, it just doesnt show in the pic

Actually just as i checked here, they changed something up since the last time i checked
Now.... chromium doesnt resample everything to 48khz but actually uses the samplerate that pipewire under linux uses.... but chromium is still resampling on its own, making the good quality resampling i set for pipewire non-effective

not sure how this changed for windows, but i guess chromium resamples on windows instead of windows itself to the samplerate the dac is set to (this fact might be negligable on windows now... probably both resampling methods of either windows or chromium are crappy (or perform similar ), so not much of a difference, tho it might be still interesting to check wether you can hear a difference between the resampling methods, google chrome might be actually better than windows)