Linn Forums

Current time: 2018-07-15, 19:58 Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Linn Forums / Linn Music Systems & Hi-fi Separates / Network Music Players & Music Streamers v / Uncompressed FLAC

Post Reply 
Uncompressed FLAC
2012-09-13, 08:50
Post: #121
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
having an abx-app for linn ds devices would help this discussion a lot. so far it is near impossible to have any data on the subjective claims people make about perceived differences between codecs, bitrates and davaar versions.

with an abx-app or functionality build into a kinsky, chorusDS or any other control-point software one could conduct and log double-blind tests just like its the norm in large scale codec test done on hydrogenaudio for example.

people could thoroughly compare flac and wav, 44.1 khz vs 96khz etc and post their results in the forum. it would be really interesting to see what discrimination power different users have and what difference between setups are exposed.

implementing abx should be super easy and I wonder why its taking so long?! linn care to comment on that?

http://www.last.fm/user/mcgillroy

MDSM/2 - 6100/D - Kaber - Chakra active cards - Nubert 441w sub + Qobuz Sublime & a Kudos tuner.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-13, 09:09
Post: #122
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-12 22:34)stunta Wrote:  Another good read: http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/KB/WAV-FLAC.htm

This is a very good read, and I was particularly interested in the following quote from J. Gordon Rankin, a very well-respected audio engineer.

J. Gordon Rankin Wrote:I have done more than 10 audio shows where we bootcamped and showed that both with FLAC/ALAC and AIFF/WAV that flat PCM files (AIFF/WAV) always sounded better.

So I setup a test as follows:

MacBook Pro (bootcamp Win764ULT) <==USB={USB Analyzer}==>DAC/Conveter-->Prism dScope III.

Then hanging onto to the DAC was my TEK Scope which can decode I2S and my Wavecrest DTS and a Standford 760 FFT analyzer which I use to test power supplies as it is capable of full range 1nV readings.

So in this test I compared software programs which were bit true and sound different and also some USB cables which sound different and of course file types which sound different. I have like 200 hours in testing.... so far I can't see any difference.

YET!!!!! 82% of the time people picked the Flat PCM file over the lossless.

I would summarize this as: Many people can hear a difference between WAV and FLAC, but measurements have so far failed to identify a technical explanation for this.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-13, 09:23 (This post was last modified: 2012-09-13 09:27 by Briain.)
Post: #123
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-13 09:09)simoncn Wrote:  
J. Gordon Rankin Wrote:So in this test I compared software programs which were bit true......

Yes, but a bit true isn't good enough for us lot; I'd rather he'd compared ones that were completely true. Big Grin

KDS/1 (music) + ADSM/3 (AV) -> KK/1 -> 350A + miniDSP time & phase aligned 345 rear sub
ADSM (@ Linn for /3) -> 2250/D -> 212 and Sizmik sub (bedroom)
Sneaky DS -> Roomamp -> 104C (awaiting installation in kitchen; home-brew 'floor sub' yet to be designed)
MDSI -> Shahinian Arc (installed at my mum's house)
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-13, 10:32
Post: #124
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-13 09:09)simoncn Wrote:  
(2012-09-12 22:34)stunta Wrote:  Another good read: http://thewelltemperedcomputer.com/KB/WAV-FLAC.htm

This is a very good read, and I was particularly interested in the following quote from J. Gordon Rankin, a very well-respected audio engineer.

J. Gordon Rankin Wrote:I have done more than 10 audio shows where we bootcamped and showed that both with FLAC/ALAC and AIFF/WAV that flat PCM files (AIFF/WAV) always sounded better.

[...]

YET!!!!! 82% of the time people picked the Flat PCM file over the lossless.

I would summarize this as: Many people can hear a difference between WAV and FLAC, but measurements have so far failed to identify a technical explanation for this.

Unfortunately JGR does not explain how the tests were run: Did people know which sample was WAV and which was FLAC, or not?

It is quite easy to get a >80% success rate in 'showing' that one particular wine tastes better than the other if you tell people that they are different and one costs double the price of the other. Even if the two wines are in fact identical.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-13, 11:33 (This post was last modified: 2012-09-13 11:35 by MattC.)
Post: #125
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-13 08:03)linnrd Wrote:  LOVE the caps.Big GrinBig Grin I'll TRY and keep up.Smile
(2012-09-12 23:03)MattC Wrote:  You should have practiced what you preached....

But since you didn't - i'll suggest you have more of an open mind -
I, personally, think that bubblegumm's mind is open to just the right extent in that HIS brains haven't yet fallen out.

(2012-09-12 23:03)MattC Wrote:  These threads are actually the most interesting thing on here - as they are about ADVANCEMENT - advancement of understanding leading to advancement of musical enjoyment.
I agree with your comment about them being interesting, but likely for the opposite reason in that they are more about the retardance of people's willingness to understand, UNDERSTAND the advancement of ... oh ... well ... just about most of the points and logic...yes LOGIC of opposing views that are actually rather valid.

(2012-09-12 23:03)MattC Wrote:  No voodoo here - there WILL be a scientific explaination
Your faith in future science appears as strong as your disbelief in current science. (Oh...yes...the "current science" was a pun.Smile Just "amping" up the humour a tad to provide some levity.)

[quote='MattC' pid='213884' dateline='1347487433']
- but there are CLEAR differences, no placebo, no imagination, real...
I don't see the word double-blind here. I must be losing sight in both my eyes and being...he he...double blind.Tongue

But...seriously...eliminating placebo and imagination without mentioning double-blind...THAT is voodoo. CLEARLY pretty cool.Big Grin

(2012-09-12 23:03)MattC Wrote:  Linn themselves are privately acknowledging it
Oh...the shame .... the shame. No wonder it isn't acknowledged publicly.Wink

(2012-09-12 23:03)MattC Wrote:  perhaps when THEY say it you might open your ears and hear what many of us (and Naim) have being saying for a while now...
OH WAIT....I DO believe that there is a thread either here on another blog that a double-blind...yes a DOUBLE-BLIND test at Linn resulted in people being unable to tell the difference.Smile Whoops.

I hope the above makes a convincing counterpoint. If not, I believe importing it into MS-Word and hitting <Shift>-F3 will convert it all to caps and give it more substance...YES SUBSTANCE. Big Grin

I'm making allowances for English perhaps not being your first language - if it actually is, then I congratulate you on your creative use of the mother tongue! (a bit of work to do on your HTML though I'd suggest)

This is incomprehensible gobbledygook - but I sense we have differing views on the question being debated - which is fine! Smile

Source: Klimax DS/1, Sneaky DS, Denon DVD-A1UD

Control: Klimax Kontrol/1, Denon AVP-A1HDA

Playback: Klimax Solo/1, Klimax 350P, Klimax 340A, Custom 2K 106C, Monitor Audio GXFX, Denon POA-A1HD
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-13, 11:42
Post: #126
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-13 10:32)Macallan Wrote:  Unfortunately JGR does not explain how the tests were run: Did people know which sample was WAV and which was FLAC, or not?

It is quite easy to get a >80% success rate in 'showing' that one particular wine tastes better than the other if you tell people that they are different and one costs double the price of the other. Even if the two wines are in fact identical.

If he had set this up in a way that was likely to get a biased result, do you think he would then have spent 200 hours trying (unsuccessfully) to find a technical reason for the difference? This seems very unlikely.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-13, 12:02
Post: #127
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
What it seems to me is that with 13 pages of discussion on this subject, it is more snake oil.

[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTd480o4azDlInKTUlvGce...1Blq6xEDTb]


Enjoy Tongue

In Italy for 30 years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder, bloodshed. They produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, five hundred years of democracy and peace. And what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-13, 12:03
Post: #128
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-13 10:32)Macallan Wrote:  It is quite easy to get a >80% success rate in 'showing' that one particular wine tastes better than the other if you tell people that they are different and one costs double the price of the other. Even if the two wines are in fact identical.
It is perhaps fitting here to mention the Dunlavy trial. I hope folks read through the whole thing because I sincerely believe there's a little in it for everyone, no matter what their prejudices/notions about test-methodology are. Some people may discount this at first because of it's setup, but I hope you will be patient for the outcome.

I know how many people feel about tests that are not blinded or double-blinded, since blind-tests are the de-facto gold standard in science. However, blind tests are claimed to stress listeners and that it is better to do so in an environment that is not subjecting the listener to the "pressure of a test" but rather simply listen and allow the music to flow and judge the musicality and comment on the cable. This is not an unreasonable position. While both sides have valid points, and it is very hard to find middle ground, because there isn't any.

THE GEAR:
Speakers were Dunlavy's Top o' The Lines at the time. FYI: Dunlavy was a well respected designer in his lifetime and is remembered for his speaker design. The cables were a standard, but high-quality 12-AWG Zip cord and a clearly better well-known and respected brand name cable with extremely good shielding, geometry and conductor design and material.

THE TEST:
This was a sighted test in a relaxed environment where the listeners were allowed to listen to each cable for as long as they liked and would ask Dunlavy to swap them whenever they wished so. It was an ideal stress-free environment to allow for relaxed listening...the only way to really listen to the music. Without the pressure of a blind test, the listeners were able to pick their preference based on the presentation of the music. At the heart of it, it is about music and feeling.

THE RESULTS:
If I recall correctly, to a person, the listeners heard the differences between the cables and preferred the better cable. This clearly supports the point that a blind test can lead to incorrect results, because in a relaxed and reasonably stress-free environment a listener at ease can feel the difference in the presentation and distinguish that ephemeral quality buried within the music. It is not surprising that advocates of the other school claimed that the test was flawed and that a proper blind test would have resulted in a 50-50 chance (or closer thereto) of picking one cable over the other, which it likely might have.

Dunlavy, the designer, however stood by his test and the results.

In that relaxed environment, with no pressure, the opponents of blind testing (most of the participants) clearly proved their point about how a blind test would have resulted in a less than perfect result because of the very nature of the test. Here they were able to get the cables swapped in front of them whenever they were comfortable and ready to compare.

THE DUNK:
Dunlavy had unplugged and plugged in the cables in the most ideal of circumstances....but...he actually only had the 12 AWG Zip-Cord being plugged and unplugged in front of the listeners in a sighted test. They only heard one cord....but they preferred the sound of the one that was never in the circuit.

I can only hope that the listeners comments only mentioned included deeper silence and blacker black-grounds.

So....how about them FLAC files, eh?

Half of what I post on here is not worth reading; but I post it in order that the other half gets posted.
Boring stuff->Linn Blacks->More boring stuff->K400->Even more boring stuff, all layered with Magick Faerie Dust.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-13, 13:13
Post: #129
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
I've never understood inky black silences. Silence has always sounded like silence to me.

Rega RP6/Exact, Mytek Brooklyn, Nord One SE power amp , Raidho C-1.1 speakers.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2012-09-13, 13:58
Post: #130
RE: Uncompressed FLAC
(2012-09-13 12:02)grimreaper46 Wrote:  What it seems to me is that with 13 pages of discussion on this subject, it is more snake oil.

[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTd480o4azDlInKTUlvGce...1Blq6xEDTb]


Enjoy Tongue

That's my company logo you have just posted; see you in court!! Tongue

KDS/1 (music) + ADSM/3 (AV) -> KK/1 -> 350A + miniDSP time & phase aligned 345 rear sub
ADSM (@ Linn for /3) -> 2250/D -> 212 and Sizmik sub (bedroom)
Sneaky DS -> Roomamp -> 104C (awaiting installation in kitchen; home-brew 'floor sub' yet to be designed)
MDSI -> Shahinian Arc (installed at my mum's house)
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)