Version: Firmware 13.1.3 + DOS 2.2.4 Date: 2019-02-12

[Pim]

I've just found myself a way to blind test AIR v RAAT. I've named both zones SAME. The only way to identify now is by the symbol but I honestly don't know which is which. So I can change zones blindly to do a test and then decide which I like before identifying them by going into settings.

Pretty simple and pretty cool. 

Well, I've had a go. In my system, in my room, with my music and my ears, there's no difference between AIR and RAAT to be found. So I can't choose a favourite. I still have no idea which is which so I'm just going to enjoy some tunes. Who knows, I might have an epiphany and find there's some difference in long term listening. I would sincerely doubt it though.

So there you have it. No difference in measurements, no difference in subjective listening so the conclusion is that if you're hearing a difference, you have better ears than me. (Or a less reliable memory. Your choice )

[iamwappie]

Does anyone have the same issue I do atter the update which is the first tiny fragment of the song is not audible so depending on if a song starts quick you'll notice this?

[Chris Marshall]

Hi

I had that in the past, is it just the first song you queue up?

I’d try the resync delay, I have mine at 50ms and don’t have the issue any more.

In theory it should only help if there us a sample rate change but in practice, I think that’s what fixed it for me.

Cheers

Chris

[David A]

I've just found myself a way to blind test AIR v RAAT. I've named both zones SAME. The only way to identify now is by the symbol but I honestly don't know which is which. So I can change zones blindly to do a test and then decide which I like before identifying them by going into settings.

Pretty simple and pretty cool. 

Well, I've had a go. In my system, in my room, with my music and my ears, there's no difference between AIR and RAAT to be found. So I can't choose a favourite. I still have no idea which is which so I'm just going to enjoy some tunes. Who knows, I might have an epiphany and find there's some difference in long term listening. I would sincerely doubt it though.

So there you have it. No difference in measurements, no difference in subjective listening so the conclusion is that if you're hearing a difference, you have better ears than me. (Or a less reliable memory. Your choice )

It was suggested in another thread that I conduct a listening test with members of my audio club and I declined because of problems designing a process. The problem with changing zones like you did are as follows:

- you can't have both zones playing the same music at the same point so you can't swap in the middle of a track from one zone to another while the music continues so you're not doing a comparison with the same music. You could do the necessary swap with the same music if you could link the zones but you can only link Roon Ready zones and the AIR zone can't be linked to the RAAT zone so that rules that out.

- you have 2 zones using an ethernet connection to your amp current at the same time so you're not running the amp the way you would normally do. Normally you would only have one zone active. You've got twice the traffic on your ethernet connection and that could be doing things like increasing packet error rates and adding parasitic electronic noise to the amp's circuitry. These could be producing changes which mask the differences you're trying to hear. Ideally you'd be swapping disabling one zone and enabling the other every time you swapped zones, and swapping with the same music also so you're comparing performance with the same music, not comparing completely different tracks from different artists as shown in your screen shot.

- you say you don't know which zone is which because you gave them the same name. The icon gives it away. The speaker icon is the RAAT zone, the amp icon is the AIR zone. It/s a sighted test, not a blind test. That's not an issue for me but it is for a lot of people.

I''ve got no problem with someone not hearing a difference where I do hear one. I could have better hearing than you, then I might have a better imagination than you and we can't tell which is the truth. Or it could be that because you're swapping music when you swap zones, you can't tell whether there's a difference because of the differences in the music, Even swapping to different points in the same track isn't ideal and could lead to errors. I refused to do a test using your method, and a couple of other possible methods, because I could see the problems inherent in all of the methods I considered. If you had said you heard a difference using your method, I would criticise it in the same way and, as I said, I hear a difference. The problem with any listening test that I can think of which any of us can do at home is that whatever result we get, the other side can reject it because of problems with the test method. The best any of us can do is make comparisons any way we like and decide whether we think we hear a difference or not based on our experience and report it but when it comes to trying to prove we're right, I can't see any way at all of doing that at home.

[thumb5]

The thing is, if Pim says he hears no difference and you say you do hear a difference, you are both "right" and there is nothing to "prove" either way. I honestly don't understand why this generates so much debate.

[brit]

The thing is, if Pim says he hears no difference and you say you do hear a difference, you are both "right" and there is nothing to "prove" either way.  I honestly don't understand why this generates so much debate.

+1 to this sentiment. The important thing is that we enjoy what we hear. It is all totally subjective anyway, with too many variables to quantify: age, state of hearing, existing equipment, wiring/cabling (a vast debate in its own right!), room shape and size, furnishings - the list is endless. Open another bottle, sit back, relax, listen and enjoy .



David

[Pim]

I've just found myself a way to blind test AIR v RAAT. I've named both zones SAME. The only way to identify now is by the symbol but I honestly don't know which is which. So I can change zones blindly to do a test and then decide which I like before identifying them by going into settings.

Pretty simple and pretty cool. 

Well, I've had a go. In my system, in my room, with my music and my ears, there's no difference between AIR and RAAT to be found. So I can't choose a favourite. I still have no idea which is which so I'm just going to enjoy some tunes. Who knows, I might have an epiphany and find there's some difference in long term listening. I would sincerely doubt it though.

So there you have it. No difference in measurements, no difference in subjective listening so the conclusion is that if you're hearing a difference, you have better ears than me. (Or a less reliable memory. Your choice )

It was suggested in another thread that I conduct a listening test with members of my audio club and I declined because of problems designing a process. The problem with changing zones like you did are as follows:

- you can't have both zones playing the same music at the same point so you can't swap in the middle of a track from one zone to another while the music continues so you're not doing a comparison with the same music. You could do the necessary swap with the same music if you could link the zones but you can only link Roon Ready zones and the AIR zone can't be linked to the RAAT zone so that rules that out.

- you have 2 zones using an ethernet connection to your amp current at the same time so you're not running the amp the way you would normally do. Normally you would only have one zone active. You've got twice the traffic on your ethernet connection and that could be doing things like increasing packet error rates and adding parasitic electronic noise to the amp's circuitry. These could be producing changes which mask the differences you're trying to hear. Ideally you'd be swapping disabling one zone and enabling the other every time you swapped zones, and swapping with the same music also so you're comparing performance with the same music, not comparing completely different tracks from different artists as shown in your screen shot.

- you say you don't know which zone is which because you gave them the same name. The icon gives it away. The speaker icon is the RAAT zone, the amp icon is the AIR zone. It/s a sighted test, not a blind test. That's not an issue for me but it is for a lot of people.

I''ve got no problem with someone not hearing a difference where I do hear one. I could have better hearing than you, then I might have a better imagination than you and we can't tell which is the truth. Or it could be that because you're swapping music when you swap zones, you can't tell whether there's a difference because of the differences in the music, Even swapping to different points in the same track isn't ideal and could lead to errors. I refused to do a test using your method, and a couple of other possible methods, because I could see the problems inherent in all of the methods I considered. If you had said you heard a difference using your method, I would criticise it in the same way and, as I said, I hear a difference. The problem with any listening test that I can think of which any of us can do at home is that whatever result we get, the other side can reject it because of problems with the test method. The best any of us can do is make comparisons any way we like and decide whether we think we hear a difference or not based on our experience and report it but when it comes to trying to prove we're right, I can't see any way at all of doing that at home.

I'll have to explain a bit better how I did this blind test. As I said I didn't know which icon was which so I just switched from one to the other. After doing that for a while it just turns into a habit and I wouldn't even remember what icon I was listening to. That might be sighted because I could see it but from a practical point of view it's totally blind. 

I swapped zones after small parts of songs and after whole songs, playing the same parts/songs over and over. There's only one zone playing at any time so there's only one set of data going over the network at any time. When swapping zones, the volume stays the same so there's no problem there. 

I also chose intricate details in songs. Tiny details that are very hard to hear. People in the background talking ect. I would swap to and fro, listening to only a few seconds of the song and listening whether those minute details were easier or harder to hear. Nothing changed.

The most important to me when I'm listening to differences in sound quality is voices. There was no difference in naturalness of voices either.

Now, this might not prove there's no difference in sound but what it does do is tell me that even if there was a difference, it's not enough to worry about. To be honest, I'm a little disappointed there is no improvement but it is what it is. I know I can get plenty of improvement elsewhere.

As for is my test any good or not; It is pretty accurate. I own a Devialet 200 as well as the Od'A. Even though the room I'm in at the moment doesn't sound great, It was clear as daylight that the D200 isn't as good as the Od'A. There's no contest. And to me, a bloke on average wages, it's worth the extra $25,000. Anyone who knows how to listen would hear it too. That's the kind of difference that I consider a proper sound quality increase / decrease. If I have to concentrate and search for differences, it's either not there at all or it's not worth worrying about.

So the question to ask is this. Is the increase in sound quality you're hearing so large you would pay money for it?

[Axel]

If RAAT makes a difference, and I believe it does, proving that with measurements may not be all that easy.

If it makes an audible difference it will show up in a controlled listening test, and we can go from belief in a difference to knowledge of a difference.  Then it gets really interesting.  Did you say somewhere you are in an audio club, if so getting their help on the double blind part will make things a lot easier.

Putting myself through blind testing was one of the most interesting things I done in audio, and I encourage everyone to have a try at something like flac vs mp3 using a software tool.  I found it a fascinating process being presented with no other input than my ears, and having to trust them alone.

One big problem with A/B listening tests in audio is the fact that audio memory is short and you need to be able to switch between inputs very quickly. That's not possible with a Devialet where you need to cycle between inputs by repeatedly pressing the input button. Even if you only have the ethernet input active you need to cycle through different streaming inputs and it takes more button presses to go from AIR to Roon Ready than from Roon Ready to AIR. 

@David A There is a better way to switch zones. In Roon, click on the loudspeaker icon, bottom right. You’ll see two arrows pointing away from each other. Click this, then it’s simply a matter of clicking on one of the zones that are available to switch to.  I’ve been doing this just now, it takes maybe a second to switch zones and there is a dropout in sound while it happens, but it’s a whole lot quicker than pressing the input button and having to manually restart the music.  I still can find no discernible difference between RAAT and AIR.

[disarmamant]

[quote pid='82355' dateline='1550397358']

I also chose intricate details in songs. Tiny details that are very hard to hear. People in the background talking ect. I would swap to and fro, listening to only a few seconds of the song and listening whether those minute details were easier or harder to hear. Nothing changed.

The most important to me when I'm listening to differences in sound quality is voices. There was no difference in naturalness of voices either.

Now, this might not prove there's no difference in sound but what it does do is tell me that even if there was a difference, it's not enough to worry about. To be honest, I'm a little disappointed there is no improvement but it is what it is. I know I can get plenty of improvement elsewhere.


[/quote]

For me this just demonstrates that the technology is working exactly as it should. There is bit perfect transmission with both Air and RAAT. If there is any difference between the two transmission standards then one of them is not working as it should.

[David A]

I'll have to explain a bit better how I did this blind test. As I said I didn't know which icon was which so I just switched from one to the other. After doing that for a while it just turns into a habit and I wouldn't even remember what icon I was listening to. That might be sighted because I could see it but from a practical point of view it's totally blind. 

I swapped zones after small parts of songs and after whole songs, playing the same parts/songs over and over. There's only one zone playing at any time so there's only one set of data going over the network at any time. When swapping zones, the volume stays the same so there's no problem there. 

I also chose intricate details in songs. Tiny details that are very hard to hear. People in the background talking ect. I would swap to and fro, listening to only a few seconds of the song and listening whether those minute details were easier or harder to hear. Nothing changed.

The most important to me when I'm listening to differences in sound quality is voices. There was no difference in naturalness of voices either.

Now, this might not prove there's no difference in sound but what it does do is tell me that even if there was a difference, it's not enough to worry about. To be honest, I'm a little disappointed there is no improvement but it is what it is. I know I can get plenty of improvement elsewhere.

As for is my test any good or not; It is pretty accurate. I own a Devialet 200 as well as the Od'A. Even though the room I'm in at the moment doesn't sound great, It was clear as daylight that the D200 isn't as good as the Od'A. There's no contest. And to me, a bloke on average wages, it's worth the extra $25,000. Anyone who knows how to listen would hear it too. That's the kind of difference that I consider a proper sound quality increase / decrease. If I have to concentrate and search for differences, it's either not there at all or it's not worth worrying about.

So the question to ask is this. Is the increase in sound quality you're hearing so large you would pay money for it?

Pim,

Thanks for the description of your process. It's better than I thought based on your screen shot but still problematic because of the delays involved in shifting back to the start of tracks and the like. I did something similar at one stage and heard a difference but mainly I just started playing stuff with RAAT, used it for a few days noticing what I was hearing which was different to what I remembered from before the change, and then swapped back to AIR. I quickly swapped back to RAAT and it's stayed there.

"So the question to ask is this. Is the increase in sound quality you're hearing so large you would pay money for it?"

Wrong question. I'd pay money for it but the question is how much? The simple fact, however, is that I don't have to pay anything for it so I've got nothing invested in whether its better one way or another and neither do you. In the end, however, the thing I keep noticing with RAAT is that my system simply disappears. With AIR I've always got a very slight s sense of the system somewhere in what I'm hearing and the system just seems to disappear for me with RAAT. If I list the differences in the sound that I hear, they're all small, Ive got a preference for RAAT but AIR is very good also and I could live with either. I'd pay for that but I wouldn't pay much. On the other hand when I notice the way the system just seems to disappear with RAAT and how I find it easier to focus on the music and how I simply enjoy it a bit more, the difference isn't so subtle and I wouldn't want to go back to AIR. I'd also pay a bit more for the difference but once again I don't have to, there's no cost involved, and once again I don't have anything invested in the process to make me want to think RAAT is better in order to justify the cost.

And I'll freely admit that while I believe there is a difference I can't think of a way I or anyone else can prove that with a home test. As I said, I think we're all stuck with what we hear and we either accept that or not.

What I do think does lend support to there being a difference is that we've got a lot of people reporting hearing a difference but while most are reporting a preference for RAAT, some are reporting a preference for AIR. It's normal to find differences in preference where there's a difference in sound. If everyone reporting hearing a difference preferred the same thing, that would be suspicious and would cast doubt on things in my view. The fact that we have some people preferring RAAT, sone preferring AIR, all of them reporting a difference in what they hear and  in some cases people with different preferences describing what look like similar differences in what they hear is something I find supportive of their being a difference but note that I said "supportive", it doesn't prove there is a difference.