Can the hard drive on which you store files affect your sound?

[John Duncan]

And can I point out the pubs are open? :cheers: :cheers:

Sadly, I work at a company where the consumption of alcohol during work hours is strictly forbidden. I loved my old job...

 

[Anonymous]

i have been a subscriber for about a year and in that time ive seen a few articles that i find dubious but the HDD one takes the biscuit. its so ridiculous it makes me want to cancel the subscription.

 

[Andrew Everard]

its so ridiculous

To ask a question?

 

[Lee H]

i have been a subscriber for about a year and in that time ive seen a few articles that i find dubious but the HDD one takes the biscuit. its so ridiculous it makes me want to cancel the subscription.

Again, you seem to be implying that the article was written by WHFS&V and represents their views. All they did was print some readers views.

It's like blaming Sky for a poor referee as they screened it.

 

[The_Lhc]

i have been a subscriber for about a year and in that time ive seen a few articles that i find dubious but the HDD one takes the biscuit. its so ridiculous it makes me want to cancel the subscription.

Again, you seem to be implying that the article was written by WHFS&V and represents their views. All they did was print some readers views.

Not quite, they do draw a conclusion at the end, when, in reality, the opinions expressed (very minor if any differences, which could certainly be due to suggestibility) do not warrant any such conclusion, other than "No, they don't make any difference".

 

[Anonymous]

So, maybe opening myself to some flak here - i was one of the three readers who took part.

I work in IT and in principle agree with the 1 and zero's argument. However, differences could be heard, though these were minor and certainty more noticeable on the poor quality track. Testing was blind, through the same hi-fi kit. We didn't even know what was changing until after the testing was complete. I'm pretty happy to say what i feel, hey i'm posting here, so don't believe i was influenced, and in fact at one point one of the guys even said on one peice of music they couldn't hear a difference. I can only go buy want i heard.

The one wrinkle would add, they may all have had the same hard drive for all i know (a seagate or whatever), it was the NAS that was different.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Not quite, they do draw a conclusion at the end

Not quite – the article finished thus (bold type is mine, for emphasis):

"So, having heard three tracks at three
resolutions, our readers are observing subtle,
but definite, differences between all three
‘systems’. These differences seem to be more
apparent at the lower resolutions.

"It seems there may be another variable we
need to take into account in our hi-fi systems…"

"Verdict – our readers decide
> They are undoubtedly small,
but there was a discernible
difference between these
three music storage devices
> It appeared to our panel that
these differences were clearer
with the lower-resolution files."

 

[Timbot]

We take for granted that 0's and 1's are 0's and 1's, and because they're digital they're untouchable, but how do we know that we know everything about 0's and 1's? There could be something undiscovered about them that might one day completely change what we think we know.

A friend of mine always said: "There are 10 types of people in this world- those who understand binary and those who don't".

 

[Andrew Everard]

Timbot

Online
Joined: 07/06/2010 Posts: 111
A friend of mine always said: "There are 10 types of people in this world- those who understand binary and those who don't".

If I had £1 for every time I'd read that, I'd have £1000000. Not that £64 will get you far these days. But not bad for a 7th post...

 

[Timbot]

Timbot

Online
Joined: 07/06/2010 Posts: 111
A friend of mine always said: "There are 10 types of people in this world- those who understand binary and those who don't".

If I had £1 for every time I'd read that, I'd have £1000000. Not that £64 will get you far these days. But not bad for a 7th post...

Sorry for being so 11111011011 (last year).

I am usually of the "bah humbug" opinion when it comes to things like this as if the 1's and o's get mixed up or changed then I would imagine that you will get pretty much zip (or more likely a horrible hissing noise) from the speakers.

You might as well ask if your choice of hard drive would affect the numbers in your spreadsheet, or the colours in your holiday photos.

Perhaps RBS et al were using the wrong NAS to store their data and forecasts on before the banking crisis?

 

[BenLaw]

My problem with this month's BQ was the complete lack of context that WHF put it in. It is too easy for WHF to defend the concept by simply saying, as Andrew has done on this thread, 'we merely publish the answers that 3 of our readers give'. This ignores three things: (i) WHF chooses the question and is aware whether or not it is controversial, (ii) WHF is well aware, as has been pointed out on this thread, including by former participants in TBQ, that you play people 3 'systems' and ask them to comment on differences some may well be identified whether or not they really exist, (iii) WHF is in a position of responsibility as the leading magazine in this sector, one on which many purchasers (the 'majority', not the sort of people on this forum) rely almost exclusively for their purchases. IMO there is a risk of people spending more than they need after reading an article such as this because the conclusion they will draw is that they need to get (or even just may need to get) the best (the 'most expensive') storage device they can afford.

So I find it odd first of all that TBQ appears out of nowhere in this edition: it's not introduced in the 'welcome', nor in any one of the 5 different sections of 'contents' spread across the 2 contents pages. Then the introduction to the article states 'That a different DAC or streamer might affect our music isn't too controversial a concept for most people to accept, but what about the Network Attached Storage device music files are kept on? Might they make a difference? Well, there's only one way to find out...'

So not 'wrong' as such, but entirely lacking in any context. No mention (as there often is with digital cables and mains products, say) that this is controversial. Nothing saying 'science might suggest this should make no difference'. And 'only one way to find out' is no doubt great journalism, but misleading, and suggests that WHF can't put this in context.

I find the conclusion similarly lacking. 'It seems there may be another variable we need to take into account in our hi-fi systems...' 'They are undoubtedly small, but there was a discernible difference between these three music storage devices'. For a magazine that champions (usually rightly) its pro-consumer statuts, this 'verdict' is lacking, and it is too easy to say 'we didn't draw conclusions, we just wrote down the opinions'. To be genuinely neutral there ought to have been some comment to the effect that 'the readers apparently heard differences, although it is possible this is down to the way they were tested' or even just 'there may be another variable we need to take into account, but it is possible there was no real difference or that the difference was so small money could be better spent on other parts of the system'.

 

[Crossie]

+1 Ben very well argued.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Not on the contents page? An oversight, for which we apologise.

But the context? It comes immediately before a streamers test – though with hindsight, it may have sat better after that test than before.

Beyond that, this Big Question does exactly what any other Big Question does – poses a question of the moment and puts it to a group of readers, then reports their findings. We don't draw conclusions of our own in this feature – never have done – and this one is just the same.

 

[BenLaw]

Not on the contents page? An oversight, for which we apologise.

I didn't think it anything other than an oversight, it just meant a missed opportunity to provide some context.

But the context? It comes immediately before a streamers test – though with hindsight, it may have sat better after that test than before.

Can't say I'd put two and two together. Maybe I was being dense, but there's an unrelated ad between them, they look different and nothing is said in either article to link them. I don't naturally link articles / features just because they are consecutive, especially when storage / streamer are different, albeit I accept related. Also, this was not the sort of context I was talking about, as set out in my first post.

Beyond that, this Big Question does exactly what any other Big Question does – poses a question of the moment and puts it to a group of readers, then reports their findings. We don't draw conclusions of our own in this feature – never have done – and this one is just the same.

I addressed this defence in my first post, and IMO it is inadequate. There is an intro and a 'verdict' and they do not put it neutrally. Do you accept the criticism that this may lead some people to buy more expensive storage devices when they could be better spending their money elsewhere or not at all?

 

[moon]

Can I just ask, if the differences are so small, does it really matter? If I was trying to tell the differences between hard drives I wouldnt really be enjoying the music.

Of all the big questions to take part in, I would have been gutted if it had been this one. But I guess the lunch was good. :beer:

 

[Anonymous]

I can confirm the lunch was very good :cheers:

It was very interesting to look around the test rooms and kit as well.

 

[Anonymous]

I can confirm the lunch was very good :cheers:

It was very interesting to look around the test rooms and kit as well.

 

[Andrew Everard]

There is an intro and a 'verdict' and they do not put it neutrally.

The intro asks questions; the verdict quotes what the participants felt. Neither offers any editorial stance on our part.

Do you accept the criticism that this may lead some people to buy more expensive storage devices when they could be better spending their money elsewhere or not at all?

No, not at all. If they read the whole piece, they can then form their own opinion of whether they should investigate further, or dismiss the whole thing as 'case not proven'.

 

[moon]

I can confirm the lunch was very good :cheers:

It was very interesting to look around the test rooms and kit as well.

What did you get to play with? or did they have :read:do not touch signs everywhere?

 

[moon]

Further more, I would be delighted Andrew if you could put my name down for the TBQ as it would be fantastic to look around. And it's not just because the lunch is good. Also hard drive testing has already happened so I won't get that one.

?

 

[Andrew Everard]

Further more, I would be delighted Andrew if you could put my name down for the TBQ as it would be fantastic to look around.

When we next have a Big Question planned, no doubt our Managing Editor will put out a shout for volunteers here on the forums.

 

[Trefor Patten]

I have come a bit late to this. I also fear it is another circular argument, but surely the point has to be taken on board that all hard drives and every component in a hi-fi or computer chain CAN affect the outcome. This digits is digits nonsense only applies in a theoretical where everything works perfectly, not just once, but every time it is activated. Saying the idea that a hard drive affecting sound is as likely as changing the colour of your pictures or the figures on your spreadsheet is true, however, not in the way implied. The hard drive CAN affect these things - it can lose them altogether.

 

[Timbot]

Saying the idea that a hard drive affecting sound is as likely as changing the colour of your pictures or the figures on your spreadsheet is true, however, not in the way implied. The hard drive CAN affect these things - it can lose them altogether.

So presumably the music will sound different every time you listen to it on the same system in that case?

 

[BenLaw]

Saying the idea that a hard drive affecting sound is as likely as changing the colour of your pictures or the figures on your spreadsheet is true, however, not in the way implied. The hard drive CAN affect these things - it can lose them altogether.

So presumably the music will sound different every time you listen to it on the same system in that case?

I think Trefor is using a semantic argument. He could quite accurately answer you by saying, 'it might!' The answer is it won't, but strictly it might.

 

[The_Lhc]

Saying the idea that a hard drive affecting sound is as likely as changing the colour of your pictures or the figures on your spreadsheet is true, however, not in the way implied. The hard drive CAN affect these things - it can lose them altogether.

So presumably the music will sound different every time you listen to it on the same system in that case?

I think Trefor is using a semantic argument. He could quite accurately answer you by saying, 'it might!'

Only if his argument was correct. Which it isn't.