MTurboEQ
-
- KVRist
- 243 posts since 17 Sep, 2006
Heard of it - I might give it a try. But usually MCompare does the job for me, also from the screenshots there seems to be a "blind test" modules as well in MCompare (haven't tried it though). Maybe I'll give that one a shot first, and report back...
Cheers,
Codex
Cheers,
Codex
-
- KVRist
- 243 posts since 17 Sep, 2006
Ok did the tests, there you go...
MTurboEQ - Moto Town Plus -Airband Gain +10dB with 1x Oversampling vs.
MTurboEQ - Moto Town Plus -Airband Gain +10dB with 2x Oversampling vs.
MTurboEQ - Moto Town Plus -Airband Gain +10dB with 3x Oversampling
1) Blind Test in MCompare: In 4 out of 5 times I chose the 2x or 3x over the 1x
2) Null Test:
- Base Line: When both channels where set to 1x oversampling the signals nulled out as expected (MLoudness showed -145dBFS)
- 1x vs. 2x: MLoudness showed a residual of -59dBFS and the residual was very clearly hearable with my normal listening volume
- 1x vs. 3x: MLoudness showed a residual of -58dBFS, still very clearly hearable but no perceivable difference to 1x vs. 2x
Discussion:
First, there is definitely a difference between 1x and 2x in the null test. Although -59dBFS does not seem a lot the residual was clearly hearable at the same listening volume as I listened to the un-nulled signal, so the residual is in the perceivable loudness range. Moreover in the blind-test I chose the upsampled signal more often than the normal one. (However statistically I would need a lot more trials to get significance)
Cheers,
Codex
MTurboEQ - Moto Town Plus -Airband Gain +10dB with 1x Oversampling vs.
MTurboEQ - Moto Town Plus -Airband Gain +10dB with 2x Oversampling vs.
MTurboEQ - Moto Town Plus -Airband Gain +10dB with 3x Oversampling
1) Blind Test in MCompare: In 4 out of 5 times I chose the 2x or 3x over the 1x
2) Null Test:
- Base Line: When both channels where set to 1x oversampling the signals nulled out as expected (MLoudness showed -145dBFS)
- 1x vs. 2x: MLoudness showed a residual of -59dBFS and the residual was very clearly hearable with my normal listening volume
- 1x vs. 3x: MLoudness showed a residual of -58dBFS, still very clearly hearable but no perceivable difference to 1x vs. 2x
Discussion:
First, there is definitely a difference between 1x and 2x in the null test. Although -59dBFS does not seem a lot the residual was clearly hearable at the same listening volume as I listened to the un-nulled signal, so the residual is in the perceivable loudness range. Moreover in the blind-test I chose the upsampled signal more often than the normal one. (However statistically I would need a lot more trials to get significance)
Cheers,
Codex
-
- KVRist
- 243 posts since 17 Sep, 2006
Oh and for comparison:
When you null
MTurboEQ - Moto Town Plus -Airband Gain +0dB with 1x Oversampling
vs.
MTurboEQ - Moto Town Plus -Airband Gain +10dB with 1x Oversampling
the residual shows a loudness of -32dBFS. That means that this 10dB gain by itself only leads to a difference of -32dBFS in the residuum, which puts the -59dbFS of the former tests into the right scale.
Dammit guys, the Moto Town Plus -Airband in 2x mode is nothing short of impressive. I tried it on different material, voices mainly, and it adds such silky smooth high-frequencies to it! I'd say "Go home Mäag Audio EQ4", but I don't have it, so this would be made up of thin air...
Please try it for yourselves and then tell me if I went completely crazy!
When you null
MTurboEQ - Moto Town Plus -Airband Gain +0dB with 1x Oversampling
vs.
MTurboEQ - Moto Town Plus -Airband Gain +10dB with 1x Oversampling
the residual shows a loudness of -32dBFS. That means that this 10dB gain by itself only leads to a difference of -32dBFS in the residuum, which puts the -59dbFS of the former tests into the right scale.
Dammit guys, the Moto Town Plus -Airband in 2x mode is nothing short of impressive. I tried it on different material, voices mainly, and it adds such silky smooth high-frequencies to it! I'd say "Go home Mäag Audio EQ4", but I don't have it, so this would be made up of thin air...
Please try it for yourselves and then tell me if I went completely crazy!
-
MeldaProduction MeldaProduction https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=176122
- KVRAF
- 14019 posts since 15 Mar, 2008 from Czech republic
For the record, choosing options 2x or 3x instead of 1x 4 out of 5 times is statistically a horrible result proving nothing . (my wife is a statistician ) Try it 20x, if you will choose 2x or 3x at least 17 times, then it is a reasonable result. Or just test 1x & 2x and if you choose 15 times 2x, then it is a usable result. Otherwise the statistics is just not usable at all.
-
- KVRist
- 243 posts since 17 Sep, 2006
I know, I know... I had a pretty good statistics education in university myself. The probability is about 0.46 to choose it 4 out of 5 times (or more).
17 out of 20 (or more) would be an alpha-error of 6%, so pretty close to statistical significance, yes...
17 out of 20 (or more) would be an alpha-error of 6%, so pretty close to statistical significance, yes...
-
MeldaProduction MeldaProduction https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=176122
- KVRAF
- 14019 posts since 15 Mar, 2008 from Czech republic
Interesting! Well the filter shapes can be slightly different with different sampling rates, but I'm surprised anyways!