SBGK wrote: > I mainly use my earholes and feedback from people nice enough to try it > and who I respect > > eg - here is some feedback for the vs 2015 recompiled version, of course > this way of working is impossible in your world, but it seems to work, > some versions are identified as improvements and some are not liked. > > Listened to play v65/loader v25 and play v69/loader v27. > v69 is clearly better. > v69 has more clearity and a fine way of presenting the music. Very nice > listening. > > +1, was very satisfied listening to v69/v27 > > Now what about answering my questions to you about how you can measure > something when you can't hear any differences, most people would hear a > difference and then investigate why.
Hmmm. OK. Sure I hear things... Many things. - It's difficult at times but I believe I can hear the difference when I take the speaker grilles off. I can measure it as well. - I can hear a difference with my absorption panels. I see a difference in the measurements. - Digital Room Correction makes a *world* of difference. Likewise, I notice very significant improvements in frequency response and impulse/time domain measurements as well (results not published). - I can hear a difference between some DACs - quite easily between the AudioEngine D3 vs. AudioQuest Dragonfly for example and know which I prefer consistent with measurable accuracy differences. But in my world, every one of these things I hear, I have been able to explain so far. Many differences heard before the measurements, and the measurements providing feedback and education as to what component of sound quality changed (and whether my initial suspicion correct). Likewise I have been able to measure things I could -not -hear. For example, I didn't know there was a bug with JPlay 24/48 Kernel Streaming (as per this article) before I measured it and I presume none of the subjective listeners bothered the developers enough over the years. I could not easily hear jitter anomalies with the TosLink loopback through the Transporter even though evident when measured is another example. I guess the main difference is that in my experience, the measurement equipment appears to be significantly more sensitive. And I like the fact that both the subjective and objective results add to the knowledge of the experience. Have you tried to measure the sonic output from the various iterations of your program? Can you identify what component of high fidelity improves with each iteration? For example, with the response above, why do you think v69 "had more clarity" in physical / engineering terms? 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=104136 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
