Audio Blind Tests and Listener Training (video)

[Zensō]

Amir’s training, and the need for the specialized techniques he used to pass the blind tests, confirms what I already suspected: hi-res music provides no advantage over CD quality in normal listening.

 

[nimar]

For anyone that missed it (discussed elsewhere on ASR), this is an enjoyable exercise https://harmanhowtolisten.blogspot.com though it no longer works on OSX, had to use a windows XP VM to run it.

 

[xxie]

@amirm, Fantastic lecturing! If you don’t mind, what is the technique you used to tell the 40hz jitter insertion test you mentioned?

 

[magicscreen]

Amir’s training, and the need for the specialized techniques he used to pass the blind tests, confirms what I already suspected: hi-res music provides no advantage over CD quality in normal listening.

No! Exactly the other way around. Hi-res music is better, only blind testing is hard.

 

[Zensō]

No! Exactly the other way around. Hi-res music is better, only blind testing is hard.

Prove it.

 

[magicscreen]

Thankfully, these are minor audible differences that you can only hear if you listen back to back really fast.

In the normal audio listening context, you probably won’t be able to hear the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit (maybe even a high bit MP3).

You can hear it in normal audio listening context! It is night and day.
But you need training in blind tests to prove it.
Amir proves it.
But you are so ignorant.
You cannot hear it, it is your problem. Then do not listen to 24 bit. It is not mandatory.

 

[BDWoody]

You can hear it in normal audio listening context! It is night and day.
But you need training in blind tests to prove it.
Amir proves it.
But you are so ignorant.
You cannot hear it, it is your problem. Then do not listen to 24 bit. It is not mandatory.

I think that's a bit out of context, and you are getting a bit out of line. Please dial it back.

 

[Long Audio Beard]

I too agree that quick AB testing is important, and sometimes even too many seconds to cue same piece and switch IMO makes the test less reliable, maybe you can do a video dispelling "burn in" for certain (or all LOL) components if you have not already, very nice video I like your approach very much

 

[BDWoody]

So, knowing this, why do I care about Sinads of 96 vs 120dB, hi Rez vs mp3 (other than wanting a well engineered piece of equipment or audio material)?

This is exactly why I started getting into vintage gear. It's almost always more than good enough, is often extremely well made (my old Luxman Pre-amp makes me want to just turn the volume knob when it's off, because it's fun), and all of these veils that I could possibly hear were effectively removed a long time ago from well designed gear. I did a couple of controlled self-tests some years ago, and realized I'd not ever listened to gear in a way that let me actually evaluate it more meaningfully. Good enough really is good enough, more money won't buy me better sound, so why not spend it where it's more fun to me.

 

[don'ttrustauthority]

So it sounds like these diffeences are rarely significant, if not audible. So why say dacs have subpar performance when their dynamic range is only 90db? What are we not hearing with that dynamic range?

 

[Deleted member 27694]

You can hear it in normal audio listening context! It is night and day.
But you need training in blind tests to prove it.
Amir proves it.
But you are so ignorant.
You cannot hear it, it is your problem. Then do not listen to 24 bit. It is not mandatory.

I disagree. What makes a big difference IMHO is the mastering. If you listen to the same master I seriously doubt that people could pass a blind test.

 

[BDWoody]

So it sounds like these diffeences are rarely significant, if not audible. So why say dacs have subpar performance when their dynamic range is only 90db? What are we not hearing with that dynamic range?

In a normal room, with normal music, under non-pathological conditions, I think most would be very hard pressed to tell a difference beyond that. Most well below.

That said, a CD has 96dB of range, so the base standard seems to be whether it is capable of giving you whatever there is to be had from a CD or whatever source. At some point, it is more about boundary case issues than veils being removed or hearing that triangle for the first time, unless you are starting with a really crap DAC.

 

[the_brunx]

Great video. transparent and very informative.

 

[amirm]

@amirm, Fantastic lecturing! If you don’t mind, what is the technique you used to tell the 40hz jitter insertion test you mentioned?

I trained myself using a much more exaggerated sample that either he had provided or I made myself (I forget which). I selected where that would occur in content and then listened to samples with much less of it. This is standard practice as I explained in the video. It shines light on where a distortion is audible, and where it is not and familiarizes you with what the distortion sounds like. Otherwise you are searching a 3 minute song for a 1 second artifact that you don't even know what it sounds like.

Listener training this way is highly encouraged in standards for listening tests for example. Here is the bible standard, the ITU BS1116:

4.1 Familiarization or training phase
Prior to formal grading, subjects must be allowed to become thoroughly familiar with the test facilities, the test
environment, the grading process, the grading scales and the methods of their use. Subjects should also become
thoroughly familiar with the artefacts under study.

 

[pma]

That said, a CD

with proper dithering is more than enough for every kind of music signal. Anything above is just technical/engineering training .

However, I am a bit disappointed that not enough effort is made to explain importance of the complete chain wiring, grounding, RFI/EMI immunity and hum/buzz groundloop preventing. This is IMO far more important than debating 100 vs. 130 dB SINAD of the single isolated component.

 

[Rottmannash]

Fantastic video probably the most informative Hi-Fi video I’ve watched and your balance adds so much to your credibility.

Confirmed that I wasn’t going mad. So many times I’ve listened to different sources such as Apple Music vs hi-res Qobuz and really struggled to hear anything different. This was so hard as I was listening to a 10 to 20 second clip and normally it takes about 5 secs to change source. I just couldn’t make out any difference. Now I know why.

Really disappointed in the bull that the mainstream reviewers come out with now. I gave them the benefit of doubt as I don’t know how to critically listen. The descriptions they give of veil lifting, the singer is now in the room etc etc, I think they have a random phrase generator for the reviews. Also helps you to gauge the credibility of the audiophile who constantly states they can pick out the differences instantly trashing the ‘perceived’ lower quality stream or equipment. I also remember reading one post where an owner of massively expensive power cables >$3000 commented that they didn’t work well when first plugged in and needed to stabilise and when he came back to them in the afternoon they were fantastic.

I’ve seen the same at Dealers they’ve changed cables, support stands etc and they go into some form of rapture as their feet and legs bounce to the ‘difference’. I wanted to hear the difference but couldn’t. At the time it saved me a fortune. I always suspected PRaT was an in joke in the industry, now I’m sure it is.

This is a fantastic site thank you.

"random phrase generator for the reviews"-- best phrase I've heard about this ridiculous drivel.

 

[ezra_s]

I enjoyed this video whole heartedly. It is hard to find a good teacher, someone who doesn't bore you to death. It is hard trust me, because when I try to explain something I always get the feeling people get bored quickly of me, and that's usually past the first five minutes.

 

[Deleted member 27694]

For me the whole point of the video is: don’t bet your house and money that NOBODY could pass those tests. But there are also people who run 100m <10sec and even if it is possible for more people to pass those tests than to run so fast I think (forgive me) there are no real world implications. There is obviously a very specific technical training and background required and who plays music in tiny loops to listen for artifacts? If I understand Amir right than even musicians, mastering engineers or Amir himself couldn’t tell a difference if they would listen to one track after another or an entire album without stopping repeating etc.

 

[Cbdb2]

But NOBODY can run the 100 in 5 sec.

 

[Deleted member 27694]

But NOBODY can run the 100 in 5 sec.

Maybe Elon Musk is working on a SpaceX ass rocket...