Do You Hear a Difference

[FractalAudio]

In the "Questioning" thread I posted the waveform of the Axe-Fx followed by the real amp. I then posted the clip for that waveform. Do you hear a difference?

http://www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/triaxis_comp.mp3

Here's the same clip but with the parts reversed:

www.fractalaudio.com/tmp/triaxis_comp_reversed.mp3

 

[ninja9]

Listening with headphones, going back and forth in a DAW from same point in the riff...trying to hear a difference. Sometimes I think I do, then I go back and forth again and decide it could be something psychological.

Basically, I don't hear a difference. Maybe brains can invent differences if you try hard enough.

 

[Hellbat]

No noticeable difference heard here.

 

[FractalAudio]

If you do, please elucidate. Grape said in the "Questioning" thread that the amp was "rounder and punchier". I don't hear it.

 

[laughyouraxeoff]

I don't hear any difference in the tone so much, but it sounds like the first one has more saturation vs the 2nd one, I have no idea why and I would never be able to tell that if I didn't have the A/B you just posted so thanks Cliff!!!!!

 

[BigD1977]

The first sounds slightly sharper on the bass strings, but the second sounds sharper on the trebles. I would put it down to playing nuances rather than difference of tone though.

Eh, I heard a difference, but not of tone. Is the difference of tone or sound?

 

[TheScientist]

The first one sounds better. The dynamics aren't muffled.

 

[unFILTERed]

i listened on my studio monitors(adam a5x)...there is a difference, but i have to listen really carefuly and i could tell it after 3-4 times listening. the second one has more definition. i dont hear a difference in the lowend but smth in the higher frequencies.
the second one sounds better. hard to describe, more ear friendly...would i be able to tell the difference in a mix...i dont think so, i wish i could

 

[is9582]

If you do, please elucidate. Grape said in the "Questioning" thread that the amp was "rounder and punchier". I don't hear it.

I was using my headphones and the first time through I didn't think there was any difference. Decided to listen again and I noticed what I would call low-mid (felt like the lower frequencies were more promenant, mainly in the chunking, but also the lower structure for the higher frequencies, too) impact. Listed another couple of times and heard the same each time. Just to be sure, this "extra" heft was in the first of the two waveforms, and less of the same in the second.

 

[levipeto]

yes, second sounds "rounder and punchier".

 

[Speculum Speculorum]

Listening with headphones, i do think that the first example has more definition than the second, that the percussive quality of the envelope on the chords and notes are more lively - ie they have more depth and change to them. The second clip sounds almost damn identical, but it loses some of that last bit of sparkle in the highs and action in the lows that gives it the crunchy quality the first one has. In addition, it sounds like the low mids are ever so slightly more present in the second clip - perhaps like the response is trying to make up for the lack of bass integrity.

 

[levipeto]

For the record: I can only tell the difference because they are side by side. If they weren't I couldn't tell.

 

[henryrobinett]

To me its negligible. The second one seemed slightly more compressed and the first one had a tiny bit more saturation or something. But hell, not really. You can hear it in the diad interval pull off mid the 2nd bar. I voted that I couldn't hear the difference because I really can't. So trivial and insignificant.

 

[RichHowe]

It seems like an auditory illusion to me. When I listen to them consecutively the first clip sounds better to me; more clarity, more open, and less compressed then the second clip. However, if I jump back and forth to the same spot in each clip they sound the same to me. I believe it may be because the clips seem to end on higher frequencies than they start, so the beginning of the second clip appears to sound a little duller and more compressed when compared to the end of the first clip. But, when I jump back and forth to when they should be playing the same frequencies they sound the same to me.

 

[Poparad]

I listened on a few different speakers/headphones, and I don't hear a difference.

 

[shasha]

Had to A/B quite a bit to hear the difference because it's ridiculously close. First thing that stood out is obviously the amount of fizz in the first clip and it seems to lose energy faster between notes or something. It's very, very hard to notice though.

Tonally you'd hear a bigger difference moving the pick 1/4" or changing your playing position; it's dead on.

 

[henryrobinett]

To me anyone who is going to nit pick differences THAT small, if indeed I wasn't imagining a difference, needs to get a life or do something else, because they're simply too bored. Play your frigging guitar.

 

[levipeto]

Ok wait, What do you mean by more compressed?

Compressed as it has more attack or so compressed like it has no dynamic range?

 

[Sidivan]

Question: couldn't you just reverse the phase on one and see if they cancel? Forgive my ignorance on this subject.

 

[RichHowe]

OK, with the clips reversed I still tend to like the first one better when listening consecutively for the same reasons. When listening to similar parts of each clip they sound the same to me. So, I'm chalking this one up to auditory illusion.