Wombat wrote: > You'll like that one: > http://www.avsforum.com/forum/91-audio-theory-setup-chat/1532092-debate-thread-scott-s-hi-res-audio-test-98.html#post26245673 > Since he surely used the same hardware it must be very simple to hear > bit depth. If you can't the files are not of enough bit information :) > Means that all must hear differences, if not you are deaf. This is > intelligent marketing to me. It will for sure leave some people feeling > proved right.
Wow. That guy is something! He "da man"... Not saying the guy can't possibly hear a difference but as you've noted previously, posting up ABX logs isn't definitive proof of anything since it's all so easy to fake. What would have been impressive is if he did these ABX tests before the fact during the 2 months the test was up, AND could have completed my survey with a comment about his ABX result with consistently "correct" results like always picking the 24-bit or 16-bit sample indicating *strong confidence*. I really need to seriously look around for one of these HP Zbook 14's to see if I can get some measurements on the "ninja" sound system/headphone amp on that puppy :confused:. Archimago's Musings: (archimago.blogspot.com) A 'more objective' audiophile blog. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Archimago's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2207 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101766 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
