Linear Phase filter settings. Topping: How we (ASR) can help?

[solderdude]

What I hear from Topping D30, it sounds like detuned piano. The initial dissonance is natural, but on the Topping tone is not cleaning up on decay. So you are right - DSP is not shifting frequency, but it registers stage 1 or the beginning of stage 2 and attempts (wrongly) to clean this sound.

The problem I have with this theory is that there are no attempts made to clean sound.
It is merely an observation you made, listening sighted, and with an idea of what a DAC does in the back of your mind.

What a DAC does is it is being told what voltage to create and for the next sample it is told what voltage to create.
In case of the Topping those sample values need to have 'inbetween' values calculated using quite large voltage level steps but in a way that the average level during that time comes out as exactly as possible.
Different filters use different ways to calculate these values.
There are no attempts to clean or change anything. Just in-between sample average output voltage values are calculated.

If you want to know what happens use a recording of a piano hit (short sample) and play that back using both types of filters and record the analog output. It may only be an excerpt of a few seconds and there is bound to be music where a single piano note is well recorded,
96/24 or 192/24 is good enough.
Most likely someone else is interested and will either compare the samples or analyze them.

 

[digitalfrost]

Before you make these claims, was anybody able to ABX this?

 

[sajunky]

Before you make these claims, was anybody able to ABX this?

References to a harshness given in OP. Detuned piano example is my own observation.

 

[digitalfrost]

Yeah okay, do you have proof?

 

[sajunky]

Yeah okay, do you have proof?

If you are reading from the beginning, you should be aware, we are looking for both a proof and solution. So why asking?

 

[solderdude]

Proof can be found in valid listening test results (conducted blind and under controlled conditions) or by recording and analyzing a recording of a pianokey 'hit'.
A solution is only necessary when a problem is found.
So one needs to prove a problem exists first.

 

[sajunky]

Proof can be found in valid listening test results (conducted blind and under controlled conditions) or by recording and analyzing a recording of a pianokey 'hit'.
A solution is only necessary when a problem is found.
So one needs to prove a problem exists first.

This is why this thread is, isn't? Help find it, but do not disrupt, we will find it and help Topping. If you disrupt, we can't find it.

 

[solderdude]

One has to prove a problem exists first.

An ABX test result can easily be faked (it is just text) so proof will be 2 high res recordings of the exact same (not processed) piano-note recording with the only difference being the applied filter.
Until those recordings have been submitted in this forum and it has been analyzed I see no reason to further speculate about this.

 

[Krunok]

If you are reading from the beginning, you should be aware, we are looking for both a proof and solution. So why asking?

Because elementary logic suggests it doesn't make any sense to look for solution unless you have proof that problem exists.

 

[sajunky]

Because elementary logic suggests it doesn't make any sense to look for solution unless you have proof that problem exists.

Nope. The only reason for for this person post was to disturb this thread. I am glad to see a proposal for a test pattern. If you have one, you are welcome.

 

[Krunok]

Nope. The only reason for for this person post was to disturb this thread. I am glad to see a proposal for a test pattern. If you have one, you are welcome.

Nobody is disturbing a thread - from what I can see you are inventing the problem without giving any proof that it exists. And if you are not accepting a simple truth that burden of proof lies on one who made the claim (which was you in this case) than any further discussion is pointless.

 

[Eirikur]

I looked around a bit and found some uncompressed synthesizer piano single strike samples; all 44100/16.
Would that do? I expect the sources to be a real (grand) piano.

For instance these three Yamaha samples:
Yamaha MU90R ConcertGrand C2
Yamaha MU90R ConcertGrand C4
Yamaha MU90R ConcertGrand C6

 

[Eirikur]

Even better: an actual Steinway & Sons (Model B) with any key you want!

 

[sajunky]

An ABX test result can easily be faked (it is just text) so proof will be 2 high res recordings of the exact same (not processed) piano-note recording with the only difference being the applied filter.

I can't do such tests having D30, as it only has one filter. The owner of DX3 Pro can do, so input is welcome. I only have reservation to the verification process, I simply have no idea how to distinguish between bits and bytes.

I would also like to separate a harshness problem as quoted in OP (while I do confirm it is also present on my drive, I have no idea how to set it up) from a piano tests. Piano tests could be made with a specially prepared tone in a lab I think. I am not looking here for a comparison between different filters as I don't have DX3 Pro, but a slow-scan spectral analysis as it was suggested earlier.

 

[sajunky]

Nobody is disturbing a thread - from what I can see you are inventing the problem without giving any proof that it exists. And if you are not accepting a simple truth that burden of proof lies on one who made the claim (which was you in this case) than any further discussion is pointless.

We are looking a way to find a proof, so you are mistaken. I am not going to discuss other things with you or anybody else, unless you follow forum rules and adjust yourself to the purpose (objectives) of this thread.

 

[solderdude]

I don't get it... you only have a D30 with a 'poor' filter. If I were so adamant about filter differences I would have sold the D30 and got one of my favorite filter DACs.

Finding a piece of music where there is only one piano note can't be that hard. There is no need to simulate this. Of course excellent digital pianos exist and one could simply record that.

Fortunately I am not making the claim so don't have to prove anything... I can just enjoy music using steep linear phase filters and don't need to worry about it sounding bad.
How wonderful simple life can be...

 

[sajunky]

I don't get it... you only have a D30 with a 'poor' filter.

True. Paid $130 for a poor filter. Can you imagine?

Finding a piece of music where there is only one piano note can't be that hard. There is no need to simulate this. Of course excellent digital pianos exist and one could simply record that.

Natural sound of piano is very complex, so I gather it would be difficult to analyze. A simplified test pattern is probably better way to do that.

 

[Krunok]

We are looking a way to find a proof, so you are mistaken. I am not going to discuss other things with you or anybody else, unless you follow forum rules and adjust yourself to the purpose (objectives) of this thread.

There is no "we", only you. And as you can't provide a proof this thread is pointless. Unfortunately lack of serious moderation allows you to continue with this nonsense.

But I do admit you have chosen your nick accordingly.

 

[sajunky]

There is no "we", only you. And as you can't provide a proof this thread is pointless. Unfortunately lack of serious moderation allows you to continue with this nonsense.

But I do admit you have chosen your nick accordingly.

View attachment 32538

//ignored//

 

[BDWoody]

We are looking a way to find a proof, so you are mistaken. I am not going to discuss other things with you or anybody else, unless you follow forum rules and adjust yourself to the purpose (objectives) of this thread.

So, I'm trying to decide if the problem being solved, is how to prove this phenomenon actually exists in the audible realm, or if it's trying to help you figure out to prove to the forum that you hear what you claim to hear?

It's almost like you enlisting help to prove a point that you haven't been able to convince anyone of, because it is purely subjective on your part.

I appreciate you trying to advance science, but how about the actual properly conducted blind test as at least a threshold starting point? That at least gives a common beginning point?

Why is that such a huge ask when you are trying to get the backing and help you seem to so desperately want?