Search results

Actually, it's back on xiph.org. https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

Just for reference (files in attachment), here's 100 Hz square (coincidentally consisting of 100 harmonics), 2800 Hz square (consisting of 4 harmonics), impulse and 20 kHz sine: And here's a comparison of previous squares to "flat" squares as generated by Audacity with option "Square, no...

They're not volume matched, so no surprise there: Track gain, Track peak 1.78 dB, 0.994873, piano_C_major.wav 2.30 dB, 0.713252, piano_C_major_-3dB.wav What if you reduce the original by 0.5 dB (or amplify the compressed version by 0.5 dB)?

I don't know if this is a valid test or what's the explanation, but I did two 44.1k loopback recordings (headphone out, low power) of a 20-20k sweep on ADI-2 Pro FS. AD filter was set to Sharp all the time and DA filter was first set to NOS and then to Sharp. Here are their spectrograms showing...

$25 million settlement https://www.billboard.com/pro/mofi-wins-settlement-approval-lawsuit-analog-vinyl-scandal/

"Distortion" is a "bad sounding" word, so obviously it cannot be what he likes and therefore invents the intangible thingy :-)

You are equating producing music with re-producing music. These are two different things.

If 25 dB isn't much. Here's the whole track: ]$ sox "Overwatch Music - (19) We Are Overwatch-nhwdxP6tlE0.flac" -n stats Overall Left Right ... RMS Tr dB -83.29 -83.24 -83.29 ... Window s 0.050 and here's with 1 second trimmed from the beginning and 5...

https://web.archive.org/web/20180917133436/http://www.dynamicrange.de/sites/default/files/Measuring%20DR%20ENv3.pdf

He shows a graph and DR is just a single number. Here are 3 tracks. Technically all of them have the same dynamic range and yet, you probably would want to assign them DR values that distinguish them somehow:

I think, technically, that's true only if those softest sounds have the same spectrum as the noise floor. In other cases (e.g. pure tones) they will be still audible even if they are below noise floor.

In a similar vein, Flim & the BB's - Tricycle

And not just that, they take into account only the 20% loudest parts of the track (or at least the older PMF (TT DR Offline Meter) algorithm does).

I think it's more that when you first proclaim: "We've done little more than scratch the surface." and then it turns out that you only just "discovered" FFT, then it sounds a bit grating. I would never say such thing on brain surgery forum, for example :-) , but that's just me.

Not sure if you realize but that's just RMS value of the signal (well, most probably, I don't know which software it is but that's how they usually do it). After the DAC it is analog domain, so of course there will be measurable differences if you have measurement device that is sensitive...

That's how we end up with "night and day" differences between digital cables :-)

Let me retract the above because Michael Murray - J.S. Bach: Prelude and Fugue in G Major, BWV 541 has 160 kbps: Average bitrate: 160.5 kb/s, w/o overhead: 159.4 kb/s

Personally I've never seen anything with actual bitrate higher than 140 +/- a few.

In the "Codecs" line in "Stats for nerds" you get: video_codec / audio_codec 251 and 399 are internal IDs for codecs that youtube is using. 251 is an ID for audio codec Opus and 399 is an ID for video codec AV1. Their parameters reported by yt-dlp are: ID EXT RESOLUTION FPS CH │ FILESIZE...

It's Opus codec at around 128 kbps if the codec is supported by the browser. If it's not supported, it will be AAC codec. If network bandwidth is limited, the bitrate will be smaller. You can use yt-dlp program to see what formats are available. For example for that Lang Lang video it shows: ID...