Noise Floor Modulation

[March Audio]

Hi John,

BTW it was Opus who suggested you might be him.

Two sets of files have been prepared with "complex fluctuating grass" of different nature.

Let's make a start, before getting into a long debate by listening to these files and feeding back observations. Please pm and not post those observations so as to not influence others.

Thanks

 

[John Kenny]

Hi John,

BTW it was Opus who suggested you might be him.

Nah, I watched with amusement at both you & purite making this assumption

Two sets of files have been prepared with "complex fluctuating grass" of different nature.

Let's make a start, before getting into a long debate by listening to these files and feeding back observations. Please pm and not post those observations so as to not influence others.

Thanks

Well, why not tell the makeup of these files before people waste their time with downloading (which is very slow & isn't working, anyway) & listening to what may well be audio files of no consequence to the topic at hand "noise floor modulation"?

 

[March Audio]

Nah, I watched with amusement at both you & purite making this assumption

Well, why not tell the makeup of these files before people waste their time with downloading (which is very slow & isn't working, anyway) & listening to what may well be audio files of no consequence to the topic at hand "noise floor modulation"?

Have you read the thread? They ARE described.

This thread has a basis in listening tests. Waffling on about things you have read won't make any progress towards what may or may not be audible.

As I have said to opus, if you want a particular type of noise based on your understanding of the issue then please specifically describe and we will see what can be implemented.

The download is working.

 

[John Kenny]

Have you read the thread? They ARE described.

Yes, I read but your files are not downloadable as I said
How did you create the 10 bands of white noise modulated by the signal & I will try to prepare this test myself with Audacity?
I see you edited your post & added this to it

This thread has a basis in listening tests. Waffling on about things you have read won't make any progress towards what may or may not be audible.

As I have said to opus, if you want a particular type of noise based on your understanding of the issue then please specifically describe and we will see what can be implemented.

The download is working.

I've tried the download twice & after 30mins of download time it appears to finish but eventually craps out with "network error"
Anyway, as I asked - tell how you prepared these files & we can probably create some of our own!

 

[March Audio]

I like this thread to be a true investigation of this topic, not debate. BE, thanks for creating the thread and discussion topic. Posts must be constructive from here on.

JK, This .

 

[March Audio]

Wh

Yes, I read but your files are not downloadable as I said
How did you create the 10 bands of white noise modulated by the signal & I will try to prepare this test myself with Audacity?

What's happening when you click on the link?

You need to wait and be patient whilst it says connecting.

No, we need one set of files, not multiple people doing different things.

 

[John Kenny]

Wh

What's happening when you click on the link?

You need to wait and be patient whilst it says connecting.

I already told what happens - "I've tried the download twice & after 30mins of download time it appears to finish but eventually craps out with "network error"

No, we need one set of files, not multiple people doing different things.

Sorry, if that's your response I don't see how this thread is being constructive - as Amir said, "you need to share your knowledge" if you want to be constructive

In a speculative investigation like this, I would have thought that different people preparing files using some standard tools may well be a more productive way of scoping out the issue rather than one person asking "specify what you want" & preparing 240mB files for downloading!

 

[John Kenny]

This thread has a basis in listening tests.

Can you tell me what "basis in listening tests" means? What listening tests & what basis?

Waffling on about things you have read won't make any progress towards what may or may not be audible.

Please don't start this immediate attack of what I post - calling it waffle. I posted it to give some background for the reason for the existence of this thread. Remember there are readers of these threads & it's to them that this background was addressed

 

[March Audio]

Can you tell me what "basis in listening tests" means? What listening tests & what basis?Please don't start this immediate attack of what I post - calling it waffle. I posted it to give some background for the reason for this thread. Remember there are readers of these threads & it's to them that this background was addressed

First of all is actually establish audibilty and at what level. Different types of NFM may well be audible at different levels.

It wasnt an attack, it was pointing out the intent of the thread and to stop it going off track.. It is intended for investigation and not debate. Amir clearly pointed this out.

It was also to point out that you are in no place to criticise the files that have been prepared.


Regarding the download I am checking this is OK. I am currently downloading from 2 different locations (the office) and via mobile phone. These are independant from the network where the NAS is. They are both currently showing transfer rates of around 2 Mb/s and download times around 20-25 minutes. If they fail I will investigate further.

 

[John Kenny]

First of all is actually establish audibilty and at what level. Different types of NFM may well be audible at different levels.

OK, I thought "basis in listening tests" meant more than there are two amplitude levels used for NFM in the audio file.

It wasnt an attack, it was pointing out the intent of the thread and to stop it going off track.. It is intended for investigation and not debate. Amir clearly pointed this out.

And I gave the reasons for why I posted this "waffle" as you called it.

It was also to point out that you are in no place to criticise the files that have been prepared.

I simply asked for the detail of how you prepared the noise floor modulation - not a criticism - just a suggestion that it might be of worth for others to prepare their own files with their own music selections with which they are familiar & have a better chance of perceiving differences - they also can try many variants of modulation & amplitude level rather than you being the source for these 240mB files

But if you don't want to share that info, so be it.

 

[fas42]

I'll mention I tried downloading the 2nd lot too, but it went into limbo - I forgot that it was happening in another window, came back to it - and it was still "connecting" ...

I would suggest using something like Dropbox - seems to be what most are using.

 

[John Kenny]

I'll mention I tried downloading the 2nd lot too, but it went into limbo - I forgot that it was happening in another window, came back to it - and it still "connecting" ...

Mine connects & varies in speed from 90 to 200KB/s until about 30 mins later it reaches the zip file size of 242MB(?) - hangs around then for quite a while before the error "unknown network error"

Anyway, I'm more interested in preparing my own files according to BE's recipe rather than wasting time & bandwidth downloading 240mB files. As I said I have some tracks that I use as reference & would prefer listening to these for audible differences than some unknown track of BE's.

You are probably similar, Frank?

 

[March Audio]

I'll mention I tried downloading the 2nd lot too, but it went into limbo - I forgot that it was happening in another window, came back to it - and it still "connecting" ...

I would suggest using something like Dropbox - seems to be what most are using.

I cant seem to get it to go wrong here, just finished downloading both files from two different locations (different networks). So 4 files being downloaded at around 2 Mb/s each, all completed in about 25 minutes.

 

[March Audio]

I simply asked for the detail of how you prepared the noise floor modulation - not a criticism - just a suggestion that it might be of worth for others to prepare their own files with their own music selections with which they are familiar & have a better chance of perceiving differences - they also can try many variants of modulation & amplitude level rather than you being the source for these 240mB files

But if you don't want to share that info, so be it.

John, if everybody goes off doing their own thing we will learn nothing, too many variables. 240mB is hardly a big file.

If you want to upload a specific track for testing I can PM you a link. I will treat the file in the same way the two existing files.

 

[fas42]

Anyway, I'm more interested in preparing my own files according to BE's recipe rather than wasting time & bandwidth downloading 240mB files. As I said I have some tracks that I use as reference & would prefer listening to these for audible differences than some unknown track of BE's.

You are probably similar, Frank?

John, I'm always interested in what other people come up with - they may have put something together that does tell a story that one is unaware of. But otherwise, yes, I have huge variety of audio material that "stresses" systems in different ways - and every system behaves differently to the material, surprisingly so at times. Hence, have as big a variety of "test signals" as possible on hand ...

 

[John Kenny]

John, if everybody goes off doing their own thing we will learn nothing, too many variables. 240mB is hardly a big file.

If you want to upload a specific track for testing I can PM you a link. I will treat the file in the same way the two existing files.

That's not the way I see it - we are looking for the possible conditions & composition of NFM that may be audible - as I said this is a speculative search & will require many different variations in approach which is best done by as many people as are willing. If a audible result is found then investigation of the details of that NFM can begin & possibly some learning come from it. Your approach is not likely to succeed, I suspect.

 

[March Audio]

That's not the way I see it - we are looking for the possible conditions & composition of NFM that may be audible - as I said this is a speculative search & will require many different variations in approach which is best done by as many people as are willing. If a audible result is found then investigation of the details of that NFM can begin & possibly some learning come from it. Your approach is not likely to succeed, I suspect.

To be blunt John I dont agree and I dont care what you believe. Speculatively and randomly searching for "something" will not succeed.

You are under no obligation to participate in this thread.

 

[John Kenny]

To be blunt John I dont agree and I dont care what you believe. Speculatively and randomly searching for "something" will not succeed.

You are under no obligation to participate in this thread.

That's a shame as I thought this thread has some hope of achieving something (even if it was just some semblance of co-operation between sides)?.

I can create, in Audacity, a noise floor which modulates at a fixed frequency - I just can't figure out how to do random modulation or modulation that uses another signal as the template for the modulation. Maybe somebody else can help here - I've tried looking into the Nyquist Prompt area in Audacity where processing commands can be given & that's where I found how to do noise modulation but not how to use a random modulation or an audio stream as a modulation template

Pity you want to hold onto this information - I don't consider this attitude in the spirit of what this thread purports to be or in the spirit of scientific investigation - it's a real shame as it had the potential to be of use.

You know that you will need to spell out the details of how you prepared the audio files & created the noise floor modulation at some point, otherwise this test is pointless? So I don't see what your reluctance is, to do so now!

 

[AJ Soundfield]

I said this is a speculative search & will require many different variations in approach which is best done by as many people

No, these audiophile believer wild goose chases, require only one single believer to provide reliable audible evidence of the apparition. That's it.
The rest will follow.

 

[John Kenny]

No, these audiophile believer wild goose chases, require only one single believer to provide reliable audible evidence of the apparition. That's it.
The rest will follow.

Thank you for your "constructive" addition to this thread - we know your opinion - no need to spray this over all forum threads