audiventory

There sum (interference) of direct + bounced + re-bounced [infinite thin] acoustic rays from acoustic source in a point. These rays may propagate differently for different frequencies (depend on source and its environment). Sum is complex (in math meaning) and it is sum of amplitudes and phases of all rays. Rays have different sum in each point. We can consider all surfaces of ears, inner ear, face bones as the points. I suppose, there is many nerves are used in these points. And brain get and process more sophisticated picture, then come to ears, to localize sound source. To emulation of place of sound source, sound engineers can use: time delay between channels; level difference between channels; EQ; total source track level; other; complex of these action. I suppose, modern systems try build ray propagation model and convert it according channel number. Remarks: The rays are virtual. But they are need to classical math description of wave propagation and interference. Phase is like to time delay, but it is angle (angular coordinates). Sum is not constant. Sum is oscillation.

How to listen speakers? [step-by-step] I suggest, listen speakers in usual position (like it shown in speaker user guide). Speaker have apperture (angle dependency of frequency response). So different positions can cause different impression. Listrening room is very important matter. It should have middle of high sound absorbtion. Don't use rooms with many glass and ceramic surfaces. As test stuff, I recommend: - bass note sequences from lowest to almost midrange. What listen: Resonances, how notes are separate. - cymbals. What listen: So callsed "send". Distortions on high frequencies. - trumpets. What listen: "Oil" in sound. - stick on snar, acoustic guitar. details so touch to instrument, scratches of strings, attack of notes. - classical compositions with very loud and quiet places. check sound "transparency" and so called "air" on quietest level places of a tested musical piece. Number channels is not matter. Before listening multichannel system should be adjusted/calibrated (if you like calibrated sound more).

Hi @The Computer Audiophile I never say it. If somebody think, that, I'm wrong, let's him show quote (with link). May be I'm really wrong there. But I'm very careful about my competitors always.

Where I said this?

I can't give advice, ask you him or not. It depend on, want and ready you and he discuss it or not May be I'd ask, what he meant as "closer to analog". Example in addition to my previous post (about {DSD bit stream is a lot closer to analog than PCM}): I seen the picture where was shown lesser ringings for DSD system comparing PCM one. But I understand, why it so. It is matter of band width and used digitial filter steepness. If we expand band of PCM and apply non-steep filter we get the same ringing.

You understand how to work software, that you never designed, wrote and debuged or seriously research? It is too optimize claim for any experienced engineer/programmer/manager, who works with a complex project, even. May be you just read at AccurateRip site how it works and rip number disks? "you are violating forum rules" looks like way to remove opponent in argue when no other arguments. I discuss concept, not software. I says that the concept neither good nor bad. Me only need new information about the concept. Do you understand it?

Ok. If you'll have time, write me. I use Drupal and custom theme. Standatd themes may be not so responsible (time of site opening, that impact to rank of site and view page time, that impact to the rank too). But good design is very important too.

All correct. I wrote, what need take and move demo window. After ripping, interface show table with ripping results under log. Though, in demo really no access to track ripping result visualization. You are right. Probably, in further versions I'll remove closing of application after demo window closing. Tell me about other issues, please.

I never told that it don't work. I don't know the system figures. It was big research? It's fine. Just show us methodics and protocols.

Do you really designed or programmed AccurateRip? Or you just have read its site something?

Common words without figures. Discussion is cycled. Help @kumakuma to answer my questions for experts.

I like that we discuss certain things now. If you are expert in rippers you should know, why it so and why it need. And what happens, if reduce the time. There is elementary answer, if you learned programming code or read about secure ripping of some rippers though. There is @Ralf11 said, that he expert who able to estimate my knowledges. Ask him. Really? There detailed information is displayed: you know where and see what is error there for each sample of each track. Shift demo window after ripping. Read details: https://samplerateconverter.com/cd-ripper/visual-cd-rip-error-display Learn stuff about other rippers and secure ripping. Try plays with settings. Probably, you are wondered. If you are expert, you should know why it need. Practically, I don't noticed any ripping impact to multiple and multiple ripped test CD kit. Let's ask expert @Ralf11 or learn rippers yourself. Write details, please.

All clear.

I lIke that you think, that you expert in probability theory. Take one of my formulas and analize it right now. WARNING: there is need to be expert in CD-audio too.

Nice. But here need more details. Including details about correctness probabilites fo all these "4477 drives" and ? rippers in each version. May be you read something at AccurateRip site. Do you really think, that you know enough, how to works multiple software, that other people designed?

If you claim, that I'm wrong, I expect, what you, as expert, know, what you say. As 20+ year engineer, team lead, ripper designer and professional researcher, I don't see your applicable background in the ripper issues. I see emotions and phrases like "you are mistaken about it" without detailed discussion. "It" is so general. At last, I here under real name and I should keep my reputaton, that is important part of my business. But you here as tmtomh and claim that I'm wrong. I'd be happy, if you take my formula-to-formula and discuss it. But I don't see it. I see "you are mistaken about it" instead. So I expect safe proofs of your authority in the ripper issues, though: May be you programmer of the checksum database and actually know that inside there? May be you have designed ripper, that we can learn? May be you have references to your scientific researches in rippers? Do you have wrote articles though? What is your education? What is your math experience?

If you think, that me need "go back and actually learn so that you understand why you are wrong", it is not mean that it is true. I can give same advice. Why you think, what you know more, than I, in rippers?

To claim, "the fact that..." you should just prove, that you are expert.

It's nice argument in discussion I have reputation and keep it for business too. And I can't allow myself to write things, that mislead "for financial gain". Is you expert, who can estimate my knowledge in audio?

Let's list things that I missed: 1), 2), 3), etc. Do you prohibit me to write? It's nice final argument in addition to "1.153617588 E+334" repeating You can rip such way as you want. And belive in things that you want. And let's say something new instead posting of repeatable posts about "1.153617588 E+334".

Let's show example for other people, before writing of advices. Do you think, that you can recommend something in ripper subject? You are expert? What is your background? Yes. I remember, how and what was "demostrated" and who upvoted there. I remember, what is math, that "destroyed" my formulas You can infinite repeat "simply that you're wrong". But it change nothing. Let's develop the topic.

Digital "stairs" vs analog From math and electrical implementation points of view, no difference between analog and any known us kind of digital signal. As example, usual sine is described for analog and digital signal same way: Y(t) = A * sine(Ω*t) Digital signal is discrete form of presentation of analog signal. But digital signal is not "stairs" (for PCM) or "pulses/bits" (for DSD). These stairs and bits are ideally interpolated by analog filter, when some conditions are performed. Read details ("PCM digital-analog converter" part) https://samplerateconverter.com/educational/pcm-audio DSD vs PCM To easy understanding, I'd recommend consider DSD and PCM in spectral view. The view show full identity of DSD and PCM, except noise shaping, that compensate minimal bit depth of DSD. We also can apply the noise shaping for PCM to improve signal/noise ration and dynamic range expanding. Read details: https://samplerateconverter.com/educational/dsd-vs-pcm https://samplerateconverter.com/educational/dsd-pcm Resume From technical or audio unit design points of view, I don't see principial difference between analog, PCM and DSD, except some details of implementation.

I remember: what "incorrect" was found there Do you really think, that multiple repeats do true from any claims? Read details above: And do you remember your words? Or you hope that multiple repeats force me to agree with you?

As far as I know, most advanced DAC technology for PCM is "sigma-delta based DAC". DSD DAC have no PCM issues and, in general, DSD DAC is simpler, than PCM one. Simpler devices have lesser internal element number, and have potential possibilities to achieve better sound quality. Read details: https://samplerateconverter.com/educational/r2r-ladder-dac-vs-sigma-delta https://samplerateconverter.com/educational/nos-dac

The database using don't correct audio information in completed rip. The database try to give us information, with unknown degree of trust, to decission, that we should do about ripping correctness. I consider unknown degree of trust as factor of higher risk of wrong decission about ripping correctness. Also, checksum from the database can't help recover damaged audio data.