Loading...

SurroundSound@googlegroups.com

[Prev] Thread [Next]  |  [Prev] Date [Next]

RE: [SurroundSound] Re: Can you tell the difference and find the original? Noreltny-gmail Wed Feb 08 21:00:24 2012

So am I (from Wisconsin). And I certainly do appreciate our dairy
products... 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Britre
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 9:31 PM
To: SurroundSound
Subject: [SurroundSound] Re: Can you tell the difference and find the
original?

That debate could get very intense being I am in Wisconsin USA see the
internet for that info

On Feb 8, 5:34 pm, grill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Low-fat or hi-fat? Please specify :-)
>
> On febr. 8, 08:21, ROBERT COOGAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Tune in next week for the great butter vs margarine debate on the 
> > dairy spread forums.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Steven Sullivan
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 5:49 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [SurroundSound] Re: Can you tell the difference and 
> > find the
>
> > original?
>
> > > We are obviously not talking about the public at large, we are 
> > > talking about people in this group who claim to have good ears and 
> > > whom you have tried to educate about the tricks the mind can play 
> > > and the misperceptions you feel we likely are subject to and how 
> > > that diminishes the authenticity of our claims.  There are over 90 
> > > emails in this thread... I don't have time or patience to quote 
> > > you verbatim every time I post.  This is still you dancing around 
> > > my point with semantics and nit picks.  The GIST of your argument 
> > > is that when tested, those who THINK they hear a difference LIKELY 
> > > are not really.  Certain members claimed we could.  I believe you 
> > > probably can too, and are just trolling and being argumentative 
> > > for argument's sake.  What I originally asked has yet to be 
> > > answered.  When those who claimed they could are shown to have 
> > > been able to back up their claims, how will you counter?  
> > > Coincidence?  Improper test procedure?  Statistical success? 
> > > etc...
>
> > To be *rigorous* about it, a positive result could have several 
> > causes that couldn't be ruled out without further information:
> > 1) real audible difference, due to formats. (true positive)
> > 2) real audible difference,  due to something else (false positive)
> > 3) difference not heard, 'correct' answer due to chance (false 
> > positive)
>
> > And if we could narrow it down to (1), there would still be the 
> > interesting question of how much the result depends on the 
> > particular sample music and encoding methods chosen; both are 
> > factors well known to influence audibility of lossy artifacts -- 
> > another being training. There would even be the question of what 
> > effect just knowing beforehand that the choice here was between 
> > lossless (GOOD!) and lossy (EVIL!), has on *preference*. These are 
> > all variables that a scientific study would investigate, or at least 
> > address in discussion. (See Sean Olive's classic series of studies 
> > in JAES, for a great example of work that investigates the relative 
> > contributions of multiple variables to listeners' loudspeaker
> > preferences.)
>
> > Btw if you don't quote me verbatim that's fine.  Just don't mangle 
> > my meaning if you paraphrase.
>
> > > And that whether lossy vs lossless "OR" low rez vs hi rez, there 
> > > are artifacts/identifying qualities that add up to the perception 
> > > of a lesser listening experience whether you can scientifically 
> > > quantify it or not.  (I understand that they are two different 
> > > comparisons of two different things with two different sets of, I 
> > > would argue, audible differences or artifacts as fits the example.  
> > > The end is the same... a lesser quality listening experience in my 
> > > opinion, whether subconsciously perceived or determinately 
> > > analyzed and noted.) S
>
> > And again, what are the plausible artifacts of standard rez vs high res?
> > Various artifacts of lossy compression are pretty well characterized.
> > (Which doesn't mean they are routinely perceived.)
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> > Groups "SurroundSound" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For more options, visit this group 
> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/SurroundSound-Idézett szöveg 
> > elrejtése -
>
> > - Idézett szöveg megjelenítése -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"SurroundSound" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To
unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/SurroundSound

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"SurroundSound" group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/SurroundSound