Subjective listening test

[SY]

OT posts removed. Any further attempts to derail the thread will result in read-only vacations.

 

[FrankWW]

Yes, the files are mono. I heard that some SW players cannot play mono files, I do not know way.

Here is the difference file, subtraction of the two in test, quite interesting:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/nt4wbqeqkwx4vrc/dif04.zip?dl=0

(Sorry, mono again)

Frank, try audacity, I think it can convert mono files back to stereo, with same L and R channels.

Pavel. thanks! This is interesting.

I preferred the the b file because it sounded more "dynamic" and seemed "clearer" at around the 20 second mark.

After listening to the difference file I think I understand the subjective effect: It sounded more "dynamic" because there was a bit more acoustic energy in the 1 - 4Khz range which we're more sensitive to; "clearer" because the initial attack of the notes was a bit more emphasized for same reason; "clearer" also perhaps because of masking of some of the string instrument unharmonic sounds.

I have to say I like the music but am not fond of the mic technique - too close for me. I would not be that close at a performance and so HF would be less emphasized.

 

[vacuphile]

Pavel,

Very interesting. I thought flute would make it easier, but it doesn't. I don't get statistically relevant scores on Foobar, so not possible to express a preference. Weird. I was convinced with the other test that I heard a difference. Will try that one again.

 

[Jakob2]

Wouldn´t it be better to include some informations about the configuration that listeners were using while doing the comparisons?

 

[vacuphile]

Jakob, I used both earphones (Stax) and my own small speakers. I haven't measured the Stax, but the speakers are under 1 % over most of their bandwith. However, we don't know the sign of this distortion and that of the distortion added by Pavel to the music clip. It may well be that the distortion of my speakers and the distortion added by Pavel combine destructively. The interesting question you raise is of course: how much of the added distortion actually makes it through the audio chain? If a distorted test tone was made available, I'd be most happy to measure what happens in my particular situation.

 

[fas42]

I used the internal speakers of an oldish HP Compaq laptop, with settings opimised to get the best sound. Software used for replay was MediaMonkey, using its WASAPI output module, after the mono tracks were converted to stereo - I mention this specifically because the default media player wasn't up to showing the differences.

 

[PMA]

I have the same test at our local forum. The results are similar as here, but, if someone has achieved any valuable result with foobar ABX, it was with large, matured speakers. However, I asked for only subjective preferences, so the answers here are fine for me.

 

[PMA]

Okay, have learnt my lesson! xyz is the less "interesting" track, 123 has a touch more spice about it - thus, xyz is the original, 123 is the added harmonics.

Well - Frank is right.
xyz is the original file.
123 is the distorted file.

 

[PMA]

I got 5/5 from xyz vs. 123 ABX. Next run was a mistake + fatigue. Too much concentration for ABX first five . XYZ is "less colored".