If Bits are Bits

[Trell]

Both are 44.1/16 is hardly confirmation that the bits are the same.

You've had many answers informing you the possible reasons for differences you hear.

It is now up to you (only you can do it) to confirm the bits are the same some how, OR (probably easier) to do a properly controlled, statistically valid blind test to prove you can actually hear the difference.

You'll have to do the second one anyway, if the first confirms bits are the same, so you may as well start there. It should be easy if the difference is as clear as you say, right?

And now we’re on page six in this thread. I don’t have much hope that he’ll actually try finding the cause, if any, for the differences in sound.

 

[sq225917]

If you are generally interested in finding out if your two sources really do sound different. Then you need to replay identical files via each source at exactly the same volume level.

This is not a trivial task, and requires a modicum of preparation and access to tool/ equipment.

From reading your posts I get the feeling that you will not take the required steps to perform a valid, unbiased test, no shame there, many people want answers but would prefer others to provide them rather than have to 'science them out for themselves'.

 

[Mart68]

By far the most likely explanation is that the CD and the file have different mastering. Until that variable is eliminated there's nothing further to discuss.

One basic characteristic of the audiophile approach is to go for the most unlikely explanation for any perceived difference, in this case - 'Bits are not bits!'

 

[Takaya]

Watermarks.

(Are they still doing that?)

https://www.mattmontag.com/music/universals-audible-watermark

This answer makes sense to me.

 

[Takaya]

Lucky for him he didn't say MQA.

MQA makes no sense to me, Hey let's compress the file into gone and magically unfold into...

 

[Trell]

This answer makes sense to me.

How about all the other answers? They for sure made sense as to what could cause the claimed audible differences, and what to test for. Do note they did not claim you did not hear what you claimed to hear.

 

[Takaya]

And now we’re on page six in this thread. I don’t have much hope that he’ll actually try finding the cause, if any, for the differences in sound.

And now we’re on page six in this thread. I don’t have much hope that he’ll actually try finding the cause, if any, for the differences in sound.

Trell, i hope to. But some of the answers are not helping.

 

[Takaya]

How about all the other answers? They for sure made sense as to what could cause the claimed audible differences, and what to test for. Do note they did not claim you did not hear what you claimed to hear.

You must be referring to the unscience condescending ones. Maybe bits are a math thing. It is either right or wrong.

 

[Trell]

Trell, i hope to. But some of the answers are not helping.

Personally, I think you've got some terrific answers on how to proceed. Granted, some of them are not easy to implement, but at least verifying that various settings are set as expected can't be that hard.

 

[Deleted member 48726]

I read right here on ASR that the internet is dirty. Maybe the bits just need a good scrub and polish

Well that's to be expected when they transport the bits on a muddy ocean bed. They must be exhausted when they finally arrive. Bits from a CD don't need to travel as far and are much more eager to perform.

 

[MAB]

Trell, i hope to. But some of the answers are not helping.

I think you now need to help yourself. You have been given good advice on how to determine a valid comparison. Your comparisons are not apples to apples. Nothing more can be done here to sort out your perceptions from reality.

 

[fpitas]

And now we’re on page six in this thread. I don’t have much hope that he’ll actually try finding the cause, if any, for the differences in sound.

Good heavens. Would someone really do that on the internet?

 

[Trell]

You must be referring to the unscience condescending ones. Maybe bits are a math thing. It is either right or wrong.

Perhaps you are posting in the wrong forum?

 

[Trell]

Good heavens. Would someone really do that on the internet?

Because we're bored for the moment and these threads do contain some interesting information? It's not like we didn't know what the OP (old one, @MAB, not you) was up to.

 

[fpitas]

Because we're bored for the moment and these threads do contain some interesting information? It's not like we didn't know what the OP (old one, @MAB, not you) was up to.

It's true, I've learned some stuff about data streams here. I'm still enjoying the popcorn

 

[solderdude]

Trell, i hope to. But some of the answers are not helping.

Rip a CD yourself (easy to do).
Play the rip via the streamer and see if it sounds different.

This is part one of what you have to do yourself.
This technically says something about the sound quality of the streamer.
IF the streamer sounds different than the CDP at least you KNOW it is not the mastering or the streaming service.
IF the streamer sounds the same as the CDP then it is the streaming service that has inferior sounding files.

When you do this we can get a little further in your, till now completely subjective, theorizing as to what causes YOU to hear an obvious quality difference.

You want a scientific answer.... do these tests otherwise you are comparing things that cannot be compared because of too many unknown variables.

Or I could tell you a nonsense story in a similar fashion as Paul McClown would do which may sound totally believable to you... your choice.

 

[Galliardist]

You must be referring to the unscience condescending ones. Maybe bits are a math thing. It is either right or wrong.

Funny thing about bits. The modern world is built on them, and they tend to be incredibly reliable (because engineers and programmers have made them so, and found ways to protect their meaning in storage and transit). Your bank balance doesn't change randomly as it travels around the internet. Emails don't just suddenly change their meaning on their way to your inbox. This response to your comment won't suddenly become less condescending between my typing it, and it appearing on your screen to make you even more annoyed with me.

Audio bits are, well, bits, and clever people - some of whom post here, in fact - have made them as reliable as any other bits. They arrive at your system as they have been sent. With some small number of badly made exceptions early on, we can be pretty certain your CDs also contain the same bits that were put on them.

Those things are the least of your worries here, and the question comes down to whether the bits you received equate to the same sound waves (actually, audibly the same sound waves, not exactly the same) once correctly converted.

It's most likely that in at least a large minority of cases, they do. Not all, of course. So if you get better sound from CD every single time, as you assert, it's probably not the bits.

As an aside, if the bits are "wrong" - as in irretrievably badly received or stored - you won't get a slightly distorted or inferior version of the music, you'll get horrible noise. Since you can compare the sound, they are not "wrong", as I suspect you mean it, here.

 

[Takaya]

Rip a CD yourself (easy to do).
Play the rip via the streamer and see if it sounds different.

This is part one of what you have to do yourself.
This technically says something about the sound quality of the streamer.
IF the streamer sounds different than the CDP at least you KNOW it is not the mastering or the streaming service.
IF the streamer sounds the same as the CDP then it is the streaming service that has inferior sounding files.

When you do this we can get a little further in your, till now completely subjective, theorizing as to what causes YOU to hear an obvious quality difference.

You want a scientific answer.... do these tests otherwise you are comparing things that cannot be compared because of too many unknown variables.

Or I could tell you a nonsense story in a similar fashion as Paul McClown would do which may sound totally believable to you... your choice.

Realized that Lindemann has a USB input. I had used it before with a disc drive. Did some listening. CD is only slightly better than the stream. Bryston still rules.

 

[Galliardist]

Realized that Lindemann has a USB input. I had used it before with a disc drive. Did some listening. CD is only slightly better than the stream. Bryston still rules.

Of course we still can't be certain without that blind test(!), but I think we can say it's not the bits for your particular issue.
If there's no firmware update or settings change for the Lindemann (and I can't see one) then you need to try to deal with any other potential causes.

Do you have the Bryston connected wiith RCA or XLR? If RCA, then plug the LIndemann in using the Bryston's input connection at the amp and with the Bryston's leads and listen, just in case something is up downstream. If you use the Bryston with XLR, plug in instead with what you are using with the Lindemann and see if the sound deteriorates. These are really just a sanity check before you replace the Lindemann (assuming you want to fix the poorer sound). The nominal/specified RCA output of each is 2V, and I don't think we are looking at an impedence mismatch.

We'll define the issue neutrally - your hearing doesn't trust the Lindemann, whether this is something in your head or a technical deficiency. Either way, if you want to "fix the problem" I'd go with replacement, unless you can do the blind test and that restores trust.

When you replace, consider a good DAC and separate streamer, just because there are fewer decent all in one devices out there. You need to be able to test at home and return the replacement if it's no better for you. Don't buy ultra expensive stuff unless it has features you need, or better ergonomics: don't buy magic cables, supports or anything else somebody says will "improve the sound". Just cut out the bad bit. Since you like the Bryston, it's likely you need a DAC that "measures well" - most people will prefer such a DAC. Even so, that's most of them, not just the "best SINAD" stuff.

If you are happy to live with the current sound difference, that's fine as well. Good enough is good enough. But I'm betting that you're an audiophile...

 

[Takaya]

Of course we still can't be certain without that blind test(!), but I think we can say it's not the bits for your particular issue.
If there's no firmware update or settings change for the Lindemann (and I can't see one) then you need to try to deal with any other potential causes.

Do you have the Bryston connected wiith RCA or XLR? If RCA, then plug the LIndemann in using the Bryston's input connection at the amp and with the Bryston's leads and listen, just in case something is up downstream. If you use the Bryston with XLR, plug in instead with what you are using with the Lindemann and see if the sound deteriorates. These are really just a sanity check before you replace the Lindemann (assuming you want to fix the poorer sound). The nominal/specified RCA output of each is 2V, and I don't think we are looking at an impedence mismatch.

We'll define the issue neutrally - your hearing doesn't trust the Lindemann, whether this is something in your head or a technical deficiency. Either way, if you want to "fix the problem" I'd go with replacement, unless you can do the blind test and that restores trust.

When you replace, consider a good DAC and separate streamer, just because there are fewer decent all in one devices out there. You need to be able to test at home and return the replacement if it's no better for you. Don't buy ultra expensive stuff unless it has features you need, or better ergonomics: don't buy magic cables, supports or anything else somebody says will "improve the sound". Just cut out the bad bit. Since you like the Bryston, it's likely you need a DAC that "measures well" - most people will prefer such a DAC. Even so, that's most of them, not just the "best SINAD" stuff.

If you are happy to live with the current sound difference, that's fine as well. Good enough is good enough. But I'm betting that you're an audiophile...

Thanks.