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

[rastasean]

To be fair, sitting and picking out subtle differences 7 times is a pretty time consuming task.  I'd be somewhat convinced if someone could pick out the 3 or 4 most revealing cuts (to their ears) and get them all right.  You couldn't publish it in a journal, but it would be enough to convince me they more likely than not could hear a differences.

I think digifish was getting at trying to find out just how much you can hear a difference. If you have two songs and one is modded and one isn't, that's a pretty high chance of getting the modded one right (basically just a guess) but if those same files are chopped up, who can then hear the difference? He was attempting to come to a very good conclusion that not many people at all will be able to hear the difference. It would still be nice to see some specs, graphs, charts, etc for  BEFORE and AFTER mod work.

[digifish_music]

Thanks for the answers Tennessee Jed.
I chose the t-mod for both samples.
Great test.

There was a 25% chance you would do that (fairly likely), but now there is no convincing you that you heard something So can you pick the modded version 7 times or more?

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,113482.0.html

digifish

To be fair, sitting and picking out subtle differences 7 times is a pretty time consuming task.  I'd be somewhat convinced if someone could pick out the 3 or 4 most revealing cuts (to their ears) and get them all right.  You couldn't publish it in a journal, but it would be enough to convince me they more likely than not could hear a differences.

I maintain there are no audible differences between the two recordings (until proven otherwise). 3 or more correct out of (lets say) 4 comparisons happens with a ~31% frequency by chance alone, that isn't convincing at all. In other words, about 1 in 3 people would pick the mod 3 or more times out of 4 comparisons. Meaningless.

However let's say 10 people read this thread and participate, you will have (by chance alone) 3 people posting they picked the modded file on 3 or 4 occasions. The other 7 keep their mouths shut, because who likes to put their hand up and say the king isn't wearing any clothes?

BTW: If it takes that much effort to tell them apart that 7 comparisons are onerous, then it's a questionable difference. Looking at the preferences in the poll, it certainly does not seem to show any trend.

digifish

[Will_S]

Thanks for the answers Tennessee Jed.
I chose the t-mod for both samples.
Great test.

There was a 25% chance you would do that (fairly likely), but now there is no convincing you that you heard something So can you pick the modded version 7 times or more?

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,113482.0.html

digifish

To be fair, sitting and picking out subtle differences 7 times is a pretty time consuming task.  I'd be somewhat convinced if someone could pick out the 3 or 4 most revealing cuts (to their ears) and get them all right.  You couldn't publish it in a journal, but it would be enough to convince me they more likely than not could hear a differences.

I maintain there are no audible differences between the two recordings (until proven otherwise). 3 or more correct out of (lets say) 4 comparisons happens with a ~31% frequency by chance alone, that isn't convincing at all. In other words, about 1 in 3 people would get 3 or more out of 4 comparisons. Meaningless.

No, I said pick 3 or 4 and get them ALL right.  That's (for only 1 person taking the test) a 1/8 chance or a 1/16.  Good enough for me to believe they probably do hear something, though as I stated not something I would run off and submit to a journal.  Of course if 8 people take the test and one or two pass, that would be less convincing, although if it turned out to be the two with the best playback systems that would factor in to my interpretation as well.

BTW: If it takes that much effort to tell them apart that 7 comparisons are onerous, then it's a questionable difference. Looking at the preferences in the poll, it certainly does not seem to show any trend.

Meh.  I certainly believe subtle differences are hard to pick out in a blind test, especially with short passages, and that some passages might be more revealing than others.  I agree that it is pretty silly to claim that the mod makes a big difference in this case, but that does not lead to the conclusion that it is necessarily inaudible to everyone.

If you have two songs and one is modded and one isn't, that's a pretty high chance of getting the modded one right (basically just a guess) but if those same files are chopped up, who can then hear the difference? He was attempting to come to a very good conclusion that not many people at all will be able to hear the difference. It would still be nice to see some specs, graphs, charts, etc for  BEFORE and AFTER mod work.

I understand this.  I'm just saying, listening to all 7 cuts carefully enough to hear a difference may be more work than most folks are willing to put into it.  3/3 or 4/4 would be reasonably convincing to me, so long as there were no mistakes mixed in.

[digifish_music]

Meh.  I certainly believe subtle differences are hard to pick out in a blind test, especially with short passages, and that some passages might be more revealing than others.  I agree that it is pretty silly to claim that the mod makes a big difference in this case, but that does not lead to the conclusion that it is necessarily inaudible to everyone.

Actually research has shown that short passages back-to-back A/B makes listeners as sensitive as they are going to get to hearing the smallest differences. Given the case that repeated exposure is allowed, subjects can concentrate on different aspects of the sound on each run-through. Nothing beats the moment of A/B switching for detecting changes in audio. This was all thrashed out long ago in the battle of the bit-rates. Our memory for subtle audio qualities, turns out to be quite short.   

BTW: I agree 3/3 is or 4/4 certainly a better test than 2/2.

digifish

[digifish_music]

BTW: This is worth watching, as it has principles that I think apply here...

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Nphg4YVm37I

[rastasean]

Although this is about the Oade mod, I thought it was worth posting here, as well at the post started by Will_S:

Here's a post about the Oade mod on the fostex forumn.

http://www.fostexusa.com/mercuryboard/index.php?a=topic&t=4084

[illconditioned]

Although this is about the Oade mod, I thought it was worth posting here, as well at the post started by Will_S:

Here's a post about the Oade mod on the fostex forumn.

http://www.fostexusa.com/mercuryboard/index.php?a=topic&t=4084

They make a good point: modders should tell what parts they use/replace.  I have no trouble paying a modder to do the work, but I would like to know what chip(s) are being replaced.  BTW, I'm perfectly happy to tell you what mod I did: I replaced the four NJM (SOIC) chips with LM4562, a great new audio chip from National Semiconductor.  I'm still waiting to hear a difference in the mod.  I *suspect* I'll hear it in quiet and/or "ambient" type recordings, but I have not tested this yet.  Too quick to the soldering iron I guess...

  Richard

[it-goes-to-eleven]

They make a good point: modders should tell what parts they use/replace.  I have no trouble paying a modder to do the work, but I would like to know what chip(s) are being replaced.  BTW, I'm perfectly happy to tell you what mod I did: I replaced the four NJM (SOIC) chips with LM4562, a great new audio chip from National Semiconductor.  I'm still waiting to hear a difference in the mod.  I *suspect* I'll hear it in quiet and/or "ambient" type recordings, but I have not tested this yet.  Too quick to the soldering iron I guess...

For proprietary reasons, I don't feel the modder has any obligation to disclose specifics.  Especially when they have a good reputation and are first to market.   It is far easier to copy than to innovate.  Oade certainly has made the substantial investment in his playback to evaluate the sonic changes.

[page]

For proprietary reasons, I don't feel the modder has any obligation to disclose specifics.  Especially when they have a good reputation and are first to market.   It is far easier to copy than to innovate.  Oade certainly has made the substantial investment in his playback to evaluate the sonic changes.

Graphs and some data is what I'm looking for, maybe some samples recorded that can be compared. I personally see "reputation" as a cop-out for not providing test data that may or may not help your product sell. Look at Madoff and the ponzi scheme, he had a rep for being a great guy, guess that didn't work out so well...

[it-goes-to-eleven]

For proprietary reasons, I don't feel the modder has any obligation to disclose specifics.  Especially when they have a good reputation and are first to market.   It is far easier to copy than to innovate.  Oade certainly has made the substantial investment in his playback to evaluate the sonic changes.

Graphs and some data is what I'm looking for, maybe some samples recorded that can be compared. I personally see "reputation" as a cop-out for not providing test data that may or may not help your product sell. Look at Madoff and the ponzi scheme, he had a rep for being a great guy, guess that didn't work out so well...

Graphs of what?   In a lousy bar, my psp2 sounds better with my MG200's than my v3.  But acoustic bluegrass?  Give me the v3.  What graph is going to reveal that?  You need to hear it.

Dragging Madoff into this, especially as a likely to be convicted criminal and fraud, is absurd.   Why not just use hitler if you're going to make an absurd comparison.

Oade has posted samples in the past. I don't know if he still does.  I've done a lot of livingroom tests but don't bother much anymore because it doesn't match what I hear in the field.   Want to know how well your rig records F-18's?  Record live F-18's.  Live, they make the hair on the back of my neck stand up.  A recording of F-18's?  Nah.   Same applies to live music.

[page]

For proprietary reasons, I don't feel the modder has any obligation to disclose specifics.  Especially when they have a good reputation and are first to market.   It is far easier to copy than to innovate.  Oade certainly has made the substantial investment in his playback to evaluate the sonic changes.

Graphs and some data is what I'm looking for, maybe some samples recorded that can be compared. I personally see "reputation" as a cop-out for not providing test data that may or may not help your product sell. Look at Madoff and the ponzi scheme, he had a rep for being a great guy, guess that didn't work out so well...

Graphs of what?   In a lousy bar, my psp2 sounds better with my MG200's than my v3.  But acoustic bluegrass?  Give me the v3.  What graph is going to reveal that?  You need to hear it.

Dragging Madoff into this, especially as a likely to be convicted criminal and fraud, is absurd.   Why not just use hitler if you're going to make an absurd comparison.

Oade has posted samples in the past. I don't know if he still does.  I've done a lot of livingroom tests but don't bother much anymore because it doesn't match what I hear in the field.   Want to know how well your rig records F-18's?  Record live F-18's.  Live, they make the hair on the back of my neck stand up.  A recording of F-18's?  Nah.   Same applies to live music.

For purposes of replying, I'm referencing your paragraphs in order of your composition above.

1) Well, follow this logic; if you have a piece of electronics that produces measurable results A (and produces A repeatedly when tested with a designed controlled test case), then you alter that with the intention of now product, wouldn't it be nice to know that it changed? For example if we wanted to know if the noise has decreased in volume, a graph can illustrate whether noise starts to show at -60 or -80. Graphs, data (such as specs, but not limited to), and samples; all three can help tell a story about an experiment, just a matter of choosing the right tool for the right task or analysis. So if we were comparing different types of gear, then your right, generally hearing is about as good as it gets to know the difference, however I'm not referring to that. I'm interested in how the same gear (which has a given "sound" or signature) is different after someone changes components, so I'm not sure that the psp2/v3 comparison fits well *in this* discussion.

2) The intended illustration was that reputation for good behavior does not preclude future (or unknown) behavior in an absolute manner, it only gives a guide or general suggestion which may or may not be correct at all. For example, an ebay seller could have 2000 perfect feedback transactions and a reputation for selling mobile phones that were claimed to be authentic name brand, only to discover that some of them are excellent chinese knock offs by an engineer who bought one. Up until the truth was found, this person was considered a great person, with a great reputation, but that did not prevent them from doing unfavorable deeds unbeknownst to others. Reputation may be based on actions, but the foundation of reputation is rooted in perception, and perceptions are not absolute in their accuracy.

3) He evidently doesn't anymore, and I've never seen any comp samples available. If I've missed them on his site or publicly available, please, I'd like to know for future reference. On another note, I find it interesting about your reaction of live actions vs recorded play back as it differs from my personal experience. If I go home and listen to a recording at a similar volume, I generally experience similar physical and emotional reactions as when I heard it, similar but not exact duplicated. Maybe I'm reading into your remark too much and that slight difference is what you are referencing. However for purposes of discussion, with the above jet theory, it wouldn't make any difference (and thus be pointless for analysis) to do any comparisons as you'd never get a true comp short of for each single channel in gets duplicated into 2 out channels (1 to the unmod and 1 to the modded) as it's not "live" (which I interpret to mean non-recorded and from a single source), any other way.

Now, I'll be the first to admit that sometimes I don't explain my thoughts fully and for that I apologize for any confusion, but I'm honestly interested as to where there is a fallacy of logic?