Topic: Stock FR2LE vs. Busman T-Mod FR2LE true side by side comparison

[digifish_music]

BTW: This is the second blind test of a mod I have seen on this forum, and it looks like the results are going the same way as the first...no significant effect of the mod can be reliably detected. I am interested to see the results.

I'm interested in who thinks A or B is better of the pink floyd and A or B of Del song is better.

VOTE PEOPLE! ....even though this is no poll....just say what you like better and WHY

It may help to have smaller downloads of each. 160 Meg to test these recordings may be too much for many.

Cold hard facts & Breathe - I really cant hear any difference, I even put them in my DAW and sliced up every second bar and alternated...still no difference. I also did the same to the fade-out on 'Cold hard facts' the end and can't hear any appreciable difference there either.

digifish

[chris319]

It would seem that one difference between Oade and Busman mods is that Busman does aftermarket mods and Oade does not. You have to buy a brand new unit pre-modded from Oade. I didn't find out about the Oade mods until after I had purchased my FR-2LE; now Oade wouldn't modify my unit after the sale (if I wanted them to).

Nowadays it is trivial to benchmark audio equipment with programs such as RMAA (Rightmark Audio Analyzer). You don't need a $10,000 AP (Audio Precision) test jig. I benchmark CF recorders and mic preamps all the time and I'm just a lowly hobbyist. There is no reason for someone in the mod business not to publish test results showing an unmodded unit and the same unit after modification.

If someone has their equipment modded because they like the "warmth" or the "detail" and they're happy with it, that's great. As far as I'm concerned, I need to see a benchmark of the equipment both before and after modification to make sure the modification doesn't adversely affect the specs of the original equipment. If a mod makes something sound subjectively more pleasing but degrades the S/N, distortion or frequency response in the process, I'm not interested. I'm very happy with my FR-2LE and the way it specs out so I don't feel justified in spending $175 for a mod.

[Church-Audio]

Here are some very basic tests I have done. On the song A and B of "Cold Hard Facts"

First I converted the flac back to wav using a batch converter.

I then selected the same portion of music and averaged it out using a very large FFT window.

For noise I took the last few seconds on the sound sample and then averaged them with a shorter FFT window.

The noise test should not be used as an indication of actual performance because microphones were used to capture the sound and there might have been other factors at work in the environment that made up the differences in background noise.

There are differences between A and B I like the sound of B better to my ears it sounds warmer then A but funny enough B seems to have slightly less bottom end then A does.. Strange. Could be differences in distortion but I cant test for that with out a 1k tone being present in the recording.

Both seem very close to one another almost like they are the same recording but I am 100% SURE  B sounds warmer to me. Again testing shows there are differences I think if there are sonic differences and I seem to be able to hear them it might be something to do with even or odd harmonic distortion. But I also cant rule out mic placement changing slightly but again its hard to analyse something when you were not there.

Chris

[digifish_music]

Here are some very basic tests I have done.

There are differences between A and B

There are 4 files, 2 x A and 2 x B, is there any suggestion A is the same preamp in each case?

digifish

[Church-Audio]

Here are some very basic tests I have done.

There are differences between A and B

There are 4 files, 2 x A and 2 x B, is there any suggestion A is the same preamp in each case?

digifish

Sorry I just analysed one set of files. For the song "Cold Hard Facts"

[tenesejedd]

Nothing changed between between recordings of each song. Mics did not move, volume of playback equipment did not change, environment did not change. The only thing that changed was recorders. Recorder setting were set the same. I matched all trim and gain knobs as closely as possible between recorders.

I must say that I'm most interested in what people are hearing in the recordings instead of what people are seeing in tests.

[tenesejedd]

Poll added. We would like to hear your opinion in addition to having you vote.

Again, I have my opinion about the recordings. In my playback (KRK RP6 studio monitors), I could hear a difference and feel comfortable with the money I spent for the mod. Although, I can see that without right playback, then the advantages of the T-mod is most likely lost. In my opinion, the advantages of the T-mod is to make it clearer and more crisp response. These are things that could be lost in certain playback systems. I think that the difference between a stock and a Vintage mod would be more noticeable, but I could be wrong.

I think some of this is good discussion, some of it is just running in circles. I am most interested in hearing what your ears tell you.

[digifish_music]

Poll added. We would like to hear your opinion in addition to having you vote.

Again, I have my opinion about the recordings. In my playback (KRK RP6 studio monitors), I could hear a difference and feel comfortable with the money I spent for the mod. Although, I can see that without right playback, then the advantages of the T-mod is most likely lost. In my opinion, the advantages of the T-mod is to make it clearer and more crisp response. These are things that could be lost in certain playback systems. I think that the difference between a stock and a Vintage mod would be more noticeable, but I could be wrong.

I think some of this is good discussion, some of it is just running in circles. I am most interested in hearing what your ears tell you.

Your confident statement that you can hear differences interests me, I could not hear anything, even A/B back-to-back slicing equivalent bars. What can do is take 5 x N bar slices from each and randomize them (that's 10 things to identify) and you can tell me which is modded and unmodded, sound OK? How many bars (N) do you need to hear in a row, to identify the sound? 2, 4, 8?

digifish

[tenesejedd]

Poll added. We would like to hear your opinion in addition to having you vote.

Again, I have my opinion about the recordings. In my playback (KRK RP6 studio monitors), I could hear a difference and feel comfortable with the money I spent for the mod. Although, I can see that without right playback, then the advantages of the T-mod is most likely lost. In my opinion, the advantages of the T-mod is to make it clearer and more crisp response. These are things that could be lost in certain playback systems. I think that the difference between a stock and a Vintage mod would be more noticeable, but I could be wrong.

I think some of this is good discussion, some of it is just running in circles. I am most interested in hearing what your ears tell you.

Your confident statement that you can hear differences interests me, I could not hear anything, even A/B back-to-back slicing equivalent bars. What can do is take 5 x N bar slices from each and randomize them (that's 10 things to identify) and you can tell me which is modded and unmodded, sound OK? How many bars (N) do you need to hear in a row, to identify the sound? 2, 4, 8?

digifish

I'm not interested in someone "putting me to the test" to see if I can really hear the difference. Here are the observations I initially wrote to rastasean before I even started this thread. This just explains where I heard differences.


For Cold Hard Facts
T-Mod- Definitly makes the things more clear sounding and distinct.
The high end frequencies are especially clean compared to the non mod.
Sounds where there is a noticable difference are the sounds of the banjo
and mandolin. Not only the sound of the instrument, but you can more clearly
hear the sound of the strumming. Also, the vocals are more clear especially
the "s" sounds.

for Breathe:

The obvious difference is the cymbals and drums, percussion in general.
The other big difference are the vocals. You can hear them much more clearly
and detailed on the the T-mod version. The bass on the non-mod is more prominent
and in your face. The T-mod tames is a bit, making it more clear and tight.

[digifish_music]

Poll added. We would like to hear your opinion in addition to having you vote.

Again, I have my opinion about the recordings. In my playback (KRK RP6 studio monitors), I could hear a difference and feel comfortable with the money I spent for the mod. Although, I can see that without right playback, then the advantages of the T-mod is most likely lost. In my opinion, the advantages of the T-mod is to make it clearer and more crisp response. These are things that could be lost in certain playback systems. I think that the difference between a stock and a Vintage mod would be more noticeable, but I could be wrong.

I think some of this is good discussion, some of it is just running in circles. I am most interested in hearing what your ears tell you.

Your confident statement that you can hear differences interests me, I could not hear anything, even A/B back-to-back slicing equivalent bars. What can do is take 5 x N bar slices from each and randomize them (that's 10 things to identify) and you can tell me which is modded and unmodded, sound OK? How many bars (N) do you need to hear in a row, to identify the sound? 2, 4, 8?

digifish

I'm not interested in someone "putting me to the test" to see if I can really hear the difference. Here are the observations I initially wrote to rastasean before I even started this thread. This just explains where I heard differences.

T-Mod- Definitly makes the things more clear sounding and distinct.
The high end frequencies are especially clean compared to the non mod.
Sounds where there is a noticable difference are the sounds of the banjo
and mandolin. Not only the sound of the instrument, but you can more clearly
hear the sound of the strumming. Also, the vocals are more clear especially
the "s" sounds.

The obvious difference is the cymbals and drums, percussion in general.
The other big difference are the vocals. You can hear them much more clearly
and detailed on the the T-mod version. The bass on the non-mod is more prominent
and in your face. The T-mod tames is a bit, making it more clear and tight.

You see, perception involves expectation, if you really can hear these differences, and they are as clear as you perceive, then you should be able to hear them in a blind comparison surely? I am not trying to embarrass you, just raise this mod/non-mod thing to a objectively verifiable level. When people wanted graphs and specs, 'the human ear' was held up as the gold standard, so let's use the human ear then, but do it in a way that removes subjective bias.

digifish

[tenesejedd]

I am going to refer back to my previous post. I think that the playback plays a major role in distinguishing the differences between these recordings. These recordings are very close. This has been shown both visually (through graphical tests shown so far) and audibly (difficulty distinguishing between the two). I was able to distinguish the different recordings on my KRKs. It was difficult at first, but listening to various parts over and over again, back to back, I noticed differences. Once I listened to the songs on my headphones through my work laptop, I could not tell the differences.

Chris Church posted above that he can audibly hear differences between the two recordings. He posted his choice, and at this point, only I know whether he chose mod or non-mod. I really don't care what his decision was, because at the end of the day, he chose the recording that sounds better to him. He was able to explain what he liked and didn't like, this is what I found interesting. This thread isn't about which one sounds best, or which one performed best on a test or graph. Its about which one sounds better to each of you who took the time to listen. If you can't tell the difference, great. I don't have a problem with it. That just means you don't have to worry about getting your gear modified. If you can hear a difference and like it, well you now have an option for a mod. Also, if you can hear a difference and hear something you don't like, then you know what mod not to get.

All in all, I'm glad this thread is getting this much attention. There is some very good discussion going on.

[Church-Audio]

I am going to refer back to my previous post. I think that the playback plays a major role in distinguishing the differences between these recordings. These recordings are very close. This has been shown both visually (through graphical tests shown so far) and audibly (difficulty distinguishing between the two). I was able to distinguish the different recordings on my KRKs. It was difficult at first, but listening to various parts over and over again, back to back, I noticed differences. Once I listened to the songs on my headphones through my work laptop, I could not tell the differences.

Chris Church posted above that he can audibly hear differences between the two recordings. He posted his choice, and at this point, only I know whether he chose mod or non-mod. I really don't care what his decision was, because at the end of the day, he chose the recording that sounds better to him. He was able to explain what he liked and didn't like, this is what I found interesting. This thread isn't about which one sounds best, or which one performed best on a test or graph. Its about which one sounds better to each of you who took the time to listen. If you can't tell the difference, great. I don't have a problem with it. That just means you don't have to worry about getting your gear modified. If you can hear a difference and like it, well you now have an option for a mod. Also, if you can hear a difference and hear something you don't like, then you know what mod not to get.

All in all, I'm glad this thread is getting this much attention. There is some very good discussion going on.

My argument was never about not using your ears.. But as a electronic designer of circuits and someone who has worked and is working with some very talented electronics engineers.. I would never put out a product with out testing it.. I dont do mods or "updates" to my own products with out testing them first to make sure people are getting what they paid for. That was my whole point and its not about bussman or any one mod guy in particular its a generalized statement.. You cant mod anything properly with out doing tests period. And you cant buy anything audio with out using your ears they both go hand in hand. In the end one supports the other. I was amazed how different A sounded from B. And if B was Bussman he did a great job. A I found to be harsh and very top end heavy with a peak frequency around 4-5k that stuck in my ears like sandpaper. They sounded so different to me I had to think the mic was moved ever so slightly.. I say this because I could duplicate the same thing if I moved a cardioid mic slightly that was in front of a speaker.

[jacobmyers]

I haven't had a chance to get to the "real" computer so I downloaded them to the laptop (which has a halfway decent 24-bit sound card and reasonably powerful headphone amp), plugged in the D1001's, and listened to all four samples in WinAmp. I'm hearing slight differences but I won't elaborate (except to say that I agreed with the poll). Thanks for this. It was fun but now my little ears are "tired".

[Ozpeter]

Perhaps the real test would be to use dissimilar recordings made under different circumstances.  If the only way that differences can be heard is by comparing identical recordings, which won't happen in actual use, then there's no point in the mods.  (Yes, I'm being provocative!)

[tenesejedd]

Perhaps the real test would be to use dissimilar recordings made under different circumstances.  If the only way that differences can be heard is by comparing identical recordings, which won't happen in actual use, then there's no point in the mods.  (Yes, I'm being provocative!)

I partially agree. I think a better test would be to do identical recordings across a variety of situations/circumstances. The more I think about it, this is really a test of how these recorders capture the sound of my home stereo, which is neither fancy by any means nor a realistic use of this recorder. It would be best to do a variety of things like various music, ambient recordings, nature recordings, etc.