I would still say placebo effect.. do an abx test.

well, everyone hear music differently. resampling will "not downgrade" the originality of the music.

for my setup the 44.1/48Khz and 96Khz is totally noticeable u r welcome to my house to try it.

"maybe" this could be the different, i don't listen to lossless or lossy format. I only listen to so-called 24bit/192khz remastering CDs or imported CDs.

just my 2cent

cheers!

Not placebo.
It does sound different.

I too have tested 96KHz 24bit. Somehow it sound different from 24bit 48KHz. The difference is very subtle, it make it sound a little bit airy. Vocal and instruments are all the same. White noise due to resampling again? Who knows...

u r right... again its all depends on your hardware, software as well as your source

do a blind test.. ask someone else to change the setting for you

I did close my eyes when I clicked to change the setting.


When I set to higher 'khz', I notice that the sound's bigger.... and I enjoy it. What's this placebo effect anyway? Is it like the in room's echo effect?

Hahaha..either you're so innocent or trying to make fun of fariz statement

placebo effect meaning that you feel there is improvement but technical and scientific result found that there is no changes occur from the original source.

44.1 kHz -> 96 kHz - i believe it's placebo..

but 16 bit -> 24 bit - due to my limited technical knowledge..there should be very subtle improvement that we mainly ignore..or some sifu can highlight me on this matter..


found a link 16 bit vs. 24 bit , although its more on recording purpose rather than resampling purpose, but you should get the idea..

Cheers

This post has been edited by jigon: Oct 20 2008, 12:00 PM

Music CDs you buy off the shelf are 16 bits.

No need la. Basically I didnt say there is improvement, just that it sound more airy like got white noise in the background. The rest sounds the same.

As for 16bit vs 24bit, I wont say got audible improvement nor will I rule out possible improvement. But what I can say is mp3 are bitless, thus having 24bit playback allow it to store more data after the conversion through the decoder compared to 16bit. Regardless what kind of source it was originally encoded with, because the original sound was already altered, having it refined for a smoother wave through 24bit isnt really a bad idea because there is not bit conversion in this case.

Honestly I did that, not making fun of anyone instead. So that's what placebo is, a change that scientifically unfounded but we want to believe there is.


Resampling from 44.1khz to 96khz gives me the almost same experience when I did ABX on comparison between 192kbps and 320kbps.


When the first time I tried this resampling, I didn't expect at all there'll be an improvement. However to my surprise, there's an improvement. Just like when I felt there's improvement when moving from 128kbps to 320kbps

whether is placebo or placedo or placeto effect .... doesnt matter but one thing is important here.

1) i do feel the significant improvement when higher resampling. (maybe there is number of factors resulting to this, who cares!)
2) sources are important... there are different between lossless, lossy etc kinda formats.

forget about all those technical knowledge or bundle theory .... as long as i can feel the improvement or betterment, that is! whether my mind lied to myself or the machines lies to me, its not important. those stuff is happening every way in the world

if u want to find out.... come to my house and do whatever "test" and i will prove incorrectness of all those statements.


cheers!!!

This post has been edited by gac: Oct 21 2008, 12:34 PM

Yeah maybe right also. All in all increasing resampling involve no cost at all and if one's brain interpret the change as there's improvement, that's still can be cost-free enjoyment for some

technical issues & theory is good to know. no one prove it could be better or on the other hand nobody proves it is bad....

your ownself experiment is trusted. even a sophisicated machine can tested and prove my system is bad but as long as i like it will do.

i just bought an expensive hifi system.... and i prefer both


ok guys lets go back to FOOBAR2000 issues......

This post has been edited by gac: Oct 21 2008, 12:43 PM

Good, now let us all move up one higher and more serious level of foobar2k discussion. This time we talk about skin customization... kidding only la


Beside the resampling, are there any DSP or Output plugins that can slightly improve clarity? I starve for crystal clear sound clarity of all instruments played in every songs.


I said 'slightly' improve because I do realize that software can only does so little. Still need physical headphone/amp/DAC for huge boost in SQ nevertheless.

skin customization ... no no no in newer version right? i m using 9.5.6.0...... i think anything beyond 9.5.3.0 u cant mod.

some plug ins does improved the quality of sounds. sadly i have not try others except

1) ASIO
2) Secret Rabbit Code
3) Wasapi (its sounds like wasabi!)

i might others out and let have some reviews on this.

see, letting other device to enhanced our pc rig deserved the purpose of having it. might as well getting a separate hi-fi system.

well..ermm..since you don't care..i'll drop the subject then..will find other soul who can contribute to my curiosity..

music is subjective after all...

Cheers

thanks

I have one thing to comment.

Your CDs and sources are encoded in 16bit 44.1KHz format. Changing it to something else does not theoretically "change" anything. You cant add anything else that is not there at the first place right?


There's one benefit of increasing the bit rate. It gives you more headroom for digital attenuation. Attenuation is often needed so that your source does not clip before it reaches your amplification stage. Since increasing the bitrate normally just pads the extra bits with zeroes only, I personally suggest increasing bitrate but leave the sample rates to default.


yeah, if you can tell the difference, there are only two reasons:

1) Placebo
2) Resampling distorts the origina signal hence you hear the difference. But being the purists most of us are, why do that?

hi guys!

LittleGhost & jigon

First this is the Foobar2k Q&A, so we discussed all about fb2k right?

first of all, i do agree with some of your points but in fact how many of us really undertstand music? even including myself. Well, fyi i only sticked to WMP11 for music.... not even foobar2k. i used foobar2k mainly to fulfill my curiosity in comparing both players.

after numerous testing, if u would read my earlier posting. together with number of other people, we did realized the differences in applying different bit/sampling rate without them realizing what i use. does this prove anything to you??

*** my point is there are differences in those resampling plug-ins. principally, i do not encourage "colouration" of music. but on the other hand, if other people like why stopping them?

placebo effect is rather subjective here. in real life there bundle of so-called "placebo" effecting our life. so are treating any sort of comparison is "placebo" here?

recently, before buying my new hifi set, i have visited many audio shops. And different sales person, have different technical knowledge & theory. Some expensive items & less expensive one.... And one thing i realized, do u want / prefer in listening to others in order getting your choice? after much audition, i chose my own preference that suit my taste bud. so the theory is just like choosing your spouse/wife. we dont depend to others preferences in life, right?

As a starter, i do aware that all the CDs are mastered at 16bit/44.1Khz. But again, it is all depends the mastering process. thats the reason why some CDs are good and bad in quality. with a good CDs like those 24bit/192khz remastering CDs it limits Data Accuracy Losses during those processes. it is not the matter of purity or not....

resampling might gives you more "accuracy" in the music. There's more to it than that; a sampling rate of 44 does not accurately capture or re-create the complex frequencies generated by real guitars. thats why a resampling comes in. it is not distorting persay


cheers!!!

This post has been edited by gac: Oct 21 2008, 02:51 PM

We using foobar more than audio quality alone, the unlimited customizability it offers that I crave on, plus it can use ASIO and Kernel Streaming and it low memory footprint is great, as I only need a fast player to play my music, simple interface that I can customize to my taste and organizing my music. Its a lot better than WMP offers

We are not stopping people from using fancy DSP or resampling software, the point is, if you can hear differences when using resampler (bar the DSP, as it DOES alters the music), like LittleGhost said, its either purely placebo or the software itself alters the data itself, hence differences. I'm not stopping them using them, just telling the fact what going on when they uses them

Talking about own preferences, some people do listen to others for advice, even when they talking about who are going to be their partner in life (husband/wives). Just look at 'Cupid Corner' subforum and see what I mean, people nowadays is funny, they don't know what they want

EDIT: Resampling does not ADD anything, the standard audio redbook CD is at 16-bit 44.1kHz. I taking a post by gregorio on Head-Fi regarding this:


This post has been edited by Najmods: Oct 21 2008, 03:11 PM