• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

High Bitrate FLAC - Can YOU even hear the difference?

Status
Not open for further replies.

danadam

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
956
Likes
1,496
If somebody explains to you they can hear the difference, you should be inquiring what they were feeling during this experience, rather than if it can be accurately measured and reproduced by a graph.
Consider that somebody's feelings during an experience caused by imagined differences may not be something that is particularly interesting to other people :) So ABX result allows then to determine if it is something interesting or not.
 
Last edited:
OP
A

audiofilet

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
79
Likes
38
Consider that somebody's feelings during an experience caused by imagined differences may not be something that is particularly interesting to other people :) So ABX result allows then to determine if it is something interesting or not.
I think what they're trying to tell you is that there are elements of listening to very high resolution audio that possibly can't be expressed scientifically yet, thus making the human experience the only available means of measuring and describing them.

Also, there's no need to accuse others of imagining things. There are many highly reputable people in this field who are absolutely convinced they can perceive, not just hear, a difference. I think we should keep an open mind instead of dismissing by default anything we can't observe, measure or reproduce with current science.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
Agreed. However, the most important thing is controlled and blind testing is essential when it is to have a scientific meaning.
The hearing is notorious for being influenced by many, many factors outside of the auditory input.
 
Last edited:

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,064
Likes
14,694
So I downloaded the Holly Cole Jazz 192khz 24bit Recording from that website you linked, Sample 1.5 to be exact, and converted it to mp3/320kbps.

I too have the 770 Pros and that Oratory1990 EQ FIR profile (which you got through my thread here :p lol).

To be reeeeally perfectly honest, without EQ I can't hear much of a difference. The FLAC sounds a tiny bit brighter and I can hear background noises or her lip smacks slightly more prominently, but it's definitely not a world changing difference, and tomorrow I might not notice anything at all.

But with that Oratory FIR filter for optimal Harman correction I must say that the gap between FLAC and mp3 is noticeable.

I switched APO on and off and with EQ I think I could tell those apart if blindfolded.
Then buy a blindfold.
 

Koeitje

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2019
Messages
2,292
Likes
3,880
Although there are question of around the source material, levels volume, statistical significance among other things, it is fun to see their facial expressions and how they put into words how they think it sounds.

It is therefore not really possible to draw any conclusions from what appears in the video. It is, as pointed out in the thread, a lot to keep track of, have under control when testing and comparing.

It's called controlled blind test for a reason.

Edit:
Had they heard a difference between the different bit rates if the test had been done according to accepted rules, methods regarding blind tests, with those headphones? You can wonder about that. Probably not.

This test by The Verge is absolutely useless due to differences in mastering.
 

DanielT

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 10, 2020
Messages
4,750
Likes
4,631
Location
Sweden - Слава Україні
. I think we should keep an open mind instead of dismissing by default anything we can't observe, measure or reproduce with current science.
Quite right right, but with the addition yet ..and this is the absolute most exciting thing about new science. New findings, new explanations, scientific evidence and so on.

An example, among many:

Researchers have devised an ingenious method of using acoustics to conceal and simulate objects.
 
Last edited:

JJB70

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
2,905
Likes
6,148
Location
Singapore
I am quite willing to accept that we may not be measuring everything that is germane to understanding music reproduction. However, as others have said this does not affect the results of a double blind test. If there are real differences then they should be discernible in a double blind test. Not everything measurable is audible but any audible differences are measurable.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,064
Likes
14,694
Also, there's no need to accuse others of imagining things. There are many highly reputable people in this field who are absolutely convinced they can perceive, not just hear, a difference. I think we should keep an open mind instead of dismissing by default anything we can't observe, measure or reproduce with current science.

Some of them may not even be trying to sell you something. And if they are absolutely convinced themselves, they will have no problems absolutely convincing us too, by setting up a run of abx tests in foobar or similar and posting it here or elsewhere along with the files used in the test.

Its really easy, it must be as even I managed to do one.
 
OP
A

audiofilet

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
79
Likes
38
Some of them may not even be trying to sell you something. And if they are absolutely convinced themselves, they will have no problems absolutely convincing us too, by setting up a run of abx tests in foobar or similar and posting it here or elsewhere along with the files used in the test.

Its really easy, it must be as even I managed to do one.
Don't you see?

If those people's personal, subjective experience is the only possible way of describing this phenomenon, which possibly cannot be explained scientifically yet, then the result of an ABX test would be irrelevant.

An experiment to determine the ability or rather accuracy with which one can differentiate between high res and non-high res, thus an application of the scientific method, would simply be subordinate to the personal user experience, if not to say moot.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
Don't you see?

If you cannot ABX the differences then they are below audible thresholds. So quite relevant.
The best things is... you can do this at home.
And if you really want to know whether the perceived difference comes from the format only use the highres, downsample it to 16/48 using a known good resampler and then AB the 24/192 with the 16/48.
As it is now there are too many unknowns to draw any conclusion at all.

When it is already clear as day for you then buy the hires material and enjoy. It is rather pointless to share it here as most already have done some experiments and found out that what one is sure they can hear magically disappears when circumstances are more equal and the 'knowing what is playing' part is removed.

One can play the 'we don't know everything yet' card which then is supposed to validate what was perceived as 'solid evidence' but so far, under ideal conditions, this has never been shown to be the case.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,064
Likes
14,694
Don't you see?

If those people's personal, subjective experience is the only possible way of describing this phenomenon, which possibly cannot be explained scientifically yet, then the result of an ABX test would be irrelevant.

An experiment to determine the ability or rather accuracy with which one can differentiate between high res and non-high res, thus an application of the scientific method, would simply be subordinate to the personal user experience, if not to say moot.
No , I dont see. If they experience the music differently because of the black and gold sticker on the box or the numbers displayed on the DAC then so be it. That is up to them. But when they start spreading the word that they are convinced it is better, the world should expect more than "trust me" to back it up.

They might also save themselves some money by proving (to themselves) that they cant actually hear a difference and save us from repeat threads like this.

If they actually can hear a difference, I will happily concede it is up to them entirely to decide whether they want to pay the premium for getting that difference in their daily listening.

Oh, and I am pretty sure science can explain the "phenomenon" , just look to the correct discipline.
 

voodooless

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
10,221
Likes
17,799
Location
Netherlands
I think what they're trying to tell you is that there are elements of listening to very high resolution audio that possibly can't be expressed scientifically yet, thus making the human experience the only available means of measuring and describing them.
To quote Hitchens:
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence
Or Sagan:
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
Also, there's no need to accuse others of imagining things. There are many highly reputable people in this field who are absolutely convinced they can perceive, not just hear, a difference. I think we should keep an open mind instead of dismissing by default anything we can't observe, measure or reproduce with current science.
No, we should demand evidence! An "open mind" has nothing to do with it. Garbage in, garbage out.. What is that reputation that you talk about? Who are those people? What do they claim?
 

BDWoody

Chief Cat Herder
Moderator
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2019
Messages
6,948
Likes
22,625
Location
Mid-Atlantic, USA. (Maryland)
I think we should keep an open mind instead of dismissing by default anything we can't observe, measure or reproduce with current science.

My mind will be opened by evidence. Until then...
 
OP
A

audiofilet

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
79
Likes
38
No , I dont see. If they experience the music differently because of the black and gold sticker on the box or the numbers displayed on the DAC then so be it. That is up to them. But when they start spreading the word that they are convinced it is better, the world should expect more than "trust me" to back it up.

They might also save themselves some money by proving (to themselves) that they cant actually hear a difference and save us from repeat threads like this.

If they actually can hear a difference, I will happily concede it is up to them entirely to decide whether they want to pay the premium for getting that difference in their daily listening.

Oh, and I am pretty sure science can explain the "phenomenon" , just look to the correct discipline.
Let me rephrase in simpler terms.

If we accept that the reason why so many people are convinced of being able to perceive high res audio differently, cannot be explained with current science, then it would obviously be illogical to perform a test that relies on the scientific method and produces results only significant in a scientific context.

It would be equivalent to insisting on measuring the decay of a Higgs Boson with a thermometer.
 
OP
A

audiofilet

Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2021
Messages
79
Likes
38
To quote Hitchens:


No, we should demand evidence! An "open mind" has nothing to do with it. Garbage in, garbage out.. What is that reputation that you talk about? Who are those people? What do they claim?
You are choosing to dismiss the human experience.

Information acquired by observation is the literal definition of empirical evidence.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,064
Likes
14,694
If we accept that the reason why so many people are convinced of being able to perceive high res audio differently, cannot be explained with current science
Let me rephrase in simpler less condescending terms too.

With regards to the above quote, "we" do not accept. End of discussion.

And yes @SIY ,feeding time is over.
 

abdo123

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 15, 2020
Messages
7,423
Likes
7,940
Location
Brussels, Belgium
Let me rephrase in simpler terms.

If we accept that the reason why so many people are convinced of being able to perceive high res audio differently, cannot be explained with current science,

Can you (or anyone) establish that the perceived difference is actually true?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom