Boomzilla's Journey (ongoing)

[Boomzilla]

I have a bunch of music that has totally sabotaged my music player. How?

1. Some CD rips are incomplete and have only a few songs from the album.

2. Other tracks by the same artist then got added to the folder. Now, songs from two, three, or four albums are in the same folder.

3. Often, track names have been eliminated, identifying the songs as "Track 1, Track 2, Track 3, etc." Even worse, sometimes the three tracks are the same song, just ripped at different bit depths and sampling frequencies.

4. The result of this is that my player's search engine is totally blind when it comes to finding a song I want to hear.

I think I'm going to have to spend a month or so with mp3tag to try to identify and put song names to all these anonymous songs. I'm not enthusiastic that this will work. Why? Because (I think) mp3tag uses file size as a confirmation metric that it has the right track name. If the ripping process used different bit depths and sampling rates, the track will no longer conform to the database value that mp3tag is trying to use for file identification.

I'm also still fighting the variety of file formats that are in the batch. In addition to common ones like wav, flac, and mp3, some are really obscure, like ogg vorbis, and a variety of obsolete formats that I've never even heard of.

So the first question I need to answer is whether or not the music I'll gain by identifying it is worth the time and effort. If not, I need to just delete everything that isn't clearly labeled and move on.

Your thoughts?

[audiobill]

Stream everything except your special tunes not otherwise available.

[Boomzilla]

Nov 29, 2022 14:21:28 GMT -5 audiobill said:

Stream everything except your special tunes not otherwise available.

This seems like a thrifty and eminently reasonable prospect, but in practice, there seem to be buried obstacles.

On even relatively well known songs, they are sometimes unavailable from your streaming service of choice. Additionally, the fact that a song is currently available for streaming does not guarantee that it will continue to be available in perpetuity. Streaming services have a track record of removing titles based on demand so that their limited storage and streaming bandwidth can be better optimized.

I suspect that the limitations of streaming services (both current and future) will result in the unfortunate necessity to maintain a broad and varied home library. Perhaps streaming services will improve in the future to increase their utility? We can always hope!

[audiobill]

The integration of Tidal and Qobuz is a major selling point of Roon for me. And, listening almost exclusively to jazz, there’s always tons of tracks to enjoy. If an album disappeared, I likely wouldn’t miss it. I guess I have favorite performers and genres vs. particular tracks. Perhaps the same way I wouldn’t collect movies like many HT fans!

[leonski]

Nov 30, 2022 17:59:38 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

Nov 29, 2022 14:21:28 GMT -5 audiobill said:

Stream everything except your special tunes not otherwise available.

This seems like a thrifty and eminently reasonable prospect, but in practice, there seem to be buried obstacles.

On even relatively well known songs, they are sometimes unavailable from your streaming service of choice. Additionally, the fact that a song is currently available for streaming does not guarantee that it will continue to be available in perpetuity. Streaming services have a track record of removing titles based on demand so that their limited storage and streaming bandwidth can be better optimized.

I suspect that the limitations of streaming services (both current and future) will result in the unfortunate necessity to maintain a broad and varied home library. Perhaps streaming services will improve in the future to increase their utility? We can always hope!

[Boomzilla]

My music library is now cleaned. I checked every folder and for any album that lacked track names, I deleted it entirely. I could have futzed about on the internet and added track names but it just wasn't worth the time. Whatever I'm missing, I can probably stream from Qobuz instead.

I then opened Roon and tried to merge box sets into a single title. This was particularly helpful on box sets that had a LOT of albums in them (Essential Bach box set & Tchaikovsky Complete Works box set) for example.

And last of all, I fought until I was able to delete goofy files. I had one, for example, called "China." This was a folder that couldn't be opened or deleted because it was not only too large (72.7 megs) but also had too many characters in its title. I got rid of it by deleting all the contents of the folder and then renaming the folder to a shorter name. Then I could drag it to the trash and delete it.

Rather than battling Apple's "Finder" application (that is notoriously loathe to search external hard drives), I downloaded and installed "Owlfiles" that is less picky (and significantly faster). The Owlfiles app is so good, I may have to send the developer some $$$.

So that's where my music library stands for today - Boom

[leonski]

Dec 5, 2022 8:43:02 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

My music library is now cleaned. I checked every folder and for any album that lacked track names, I deleted it entirely. I could have futzed about on the internet and added track names but it just wasn't worth the time. Whatever I'm missing, I can probably stream from Qobuz instead.

I then opened Roon and tried to merge box sets into a single title. This was particularly helpful on box sets that had a LOT of albums in them (Essential Bach box set & Tchaikovsky Complete Works box set) for example.

And last of all, I fought until I was able to delete goofy files. I had one, for example, called "China." This was a folder that couldn't be opened or deleted because it was not only too large (72.7 megs) but also had too many characters in its title. I got rid of it by deleting all the contents of the folder and then renaming the folder to a shorter name. Then I could drag it to the trash and delete it.

Rather than battling Apple's "Finder" application (that is notoriously loathe to search external hard drives), I downloaded and installed "Owlfiles" that is less picky (and significantly faster). The Owlfiles app is so good, I may have to send the developer some $$$.

So that's where my music library stands for today - Boom

Cultivate the staff at a GOOD used CD / Movie / Video store.     Places in Boise are every couple blocks.    I visited a few and one in particular included BOOKS.    I could spend Hours in a place like that.

After shopping?    Grab a good coffee and walk 'Freak Alley'......Public art which goes on for several blocks and takes an hour or longer to view properly.....

[Boomzilla]

No such store here.

[leonski]

At ONE point I had 4 or 5 used bookstores within a 15' to 20' drive each way. No Mas.

Most frequent cause of closure? Looks like Mismanagement, to ME. Indifferent owner trying to turn a hobby into a business.

The ONE I know remains? Down toward SD and run by the Japanese, a meticulous bunch. Highly priced and VERY well organized.

Even picky about what they BUY.......

[Boomzilla]

Having now placed my new GoldenEar Triton Three+ speakers in positions that I find best for a compromise between imaging and bass response, I think that it's now time for me to drag out the UMIK-1 microphone and my copy of REW. Once I measure the response of the speakers from the listening position, I can engage Roon's Digital Signal Processing (DSP) feature to flatten the response. Of course, one can't use DSP to "fill in holes" in the room response, but it CAN be used to flatten peaks.

To do so, one must know not only the amplitude of the peak in decibels, but also the width of the peak (defined as Q). Once these are determined, Roon allows the user to specify the center-frequency of a peak, the amplitude of the peak, and the Q of the peak. With these defined, the Roon DSP will modify all future audio playback with a correction equalization that will result in flatter frequency response at the listening position.

Although this is effective and positive, it is absolutely position-dependent. If the listening position is changed, the previous measurements and equalizations are no longer valid, period. The same if you change the speaker positions (even a little bit). Addition or subtraction of room furniture can also affect the equalization.

But when it is properly set up and engaged, the effect is REALLY beneficial. If you have a home theater setup, your AVR's room correction program does the same thing.

Cheers - Boom

[audiobill]

Or you could just have REW create the filters that can be added directly into Roon's Convolution engine.....

And you can do the mic measurements over a broader area around the listener for less position dependence.

[KeithL]

That's absolutely true...

However, by calculating a solution that will work reasonably well over a larger area...
The software will be compromising, at least slightly, on the performance at any single position.

It's also worth mentioning that "a convolution" is calculated based on impulse response.
This is going to yield different results than a filter calculated based on linear amplitude response.
With the sort of filters you enter into a PEQ you basically have a list of center frequency, Q value, and gain settings for the bands.
And, with multiple measurements, you can combine the measurements beforehand, or the calculated corrections afterwards, in various ways.

A convolution matrix is based on the waveform of an impulse received at the listening position.
And involves both frequency domain and time domain corrections.
(With convolution you are basically "calculating a correction to duplicate the original or to cancel it out by duplicating its inverse".)
However, neither the original measurements, nor the corrections, can simply be summed together.
(Well, they can be, but I suspect the results might be rather... creative... like the acoustic equivalent of stacking two negatives taken from slightly different spots.)

However, in this case, I'm not at all sure that Roon is actually applying a convolution... rather than doing a correction using a DSP-based PEQ.

Dec 9, 2022 11:49:35 GMT -5 audiobill said:

Or you could just have REW create the filters that can be added directly into Roon's Convolution engine.....

And you can do the mic measurements over a broader area around the listener for less position dependence.

[audiobill]

How familiar are you with REW?

From their site:

"In addition to the gain limits, boost filters are subject to Q limits to avoid inadvertently creating artificial resonances. The Q of boost filters is not allowed to exceed a value which would cause the filter's 60dB decay time to exceed approximately 500 ms (the actual Q limit value depends on the filter's gain).

The Flatness Target controls how tightly REW tries to match the Predicted response to the Target Response. The lower the Flatness Target, the more filters will be required.

Allow narrow filters below 200 Hz determines whether target match uses filters narrow enough to counter modal resonances at low frequencies. This should be selected when applying EQ to a room measurement, but is best not selected when applying EQ to a device response (headphone EQ, for example). When this option is not selected the highest Q used will be 5.0.

If Allow narrow filters below 200 Hz is selected the Vary max Q above 200 Hz option tells REW to adjust the maximum Q from 10.0 at 200 Hz to 3.0 at or above 10 kHz. If this is not selected the max Q above 200 Hz will be 5.0.

Match Response to Target starts REW's automated filter assignment and adjustment process. REW assigns filters to match the Predicted response to the Target Response, beginning with the area within the Match Range where the measurement is furthest from the target. After assigning filters, REW adjusts the settings of the filters to get the closest match. It is best to apply the 'variable' smoothing to the response before running the target match.

For best results it is essential to first ensure the shape of the target response is correctly selected to suit the type of speaker whose response is to be equalised and set the Target Level so that REW does not end up applying filters to try and correct a level difference - equalisers are not volume controls!

Note that by default REW will not apply filters below the frequency at which the measurement first exceeds the target or above the frequency at which the measurement last drops below the target to prevent trying to boost a response beyond its natural roll-offs, if you wish to lift the low or high end response this can be done with manually applied filters but beware of exceeding the excursion limits or headroom of the woofer or power handling limits of the tweeter.
The Filter Tasks panel also includes a set of controls to optimise the settings of the current filters. Note that only filters that lie within the Match Range will be adjusted. Optimise gains will adjust the gains of all 'Automatic' PK and modal filters to best match the target response. Optimise gains and Qs will adjust the gains and Qs of all 'Automatic' PK filters and the gains of all 'Automatic' modal filters. Optimise gains, Qs and frequencies will adjust the gains, Qs and centre frequencies of all 'Automatic' PK filters and the gains of all 'Automatic' modal filters - it is equivalent to Match response to target without the automatic assignment of filters. Centre frequencies will be adjusted to within 10% of their initial setting and will remain within the match range."

[Boomzilla]

Dec 9, 2022 12:29:43 GMT -5 KeithL said:

...in this case, I'm not at all sure that Roon is actually applying a convolution... rather than doing a correction using a DSP-based PEQ...

This is absolutely correct. Roon has no room correction convolution ability. I think audiobill may be right, though, REW filters may be indirectly used via kludge in Roon. I'm not positive about that, but I think Bill's right.

[audiobill]

Thanks, Boom, here's a paper that provides instruction:

community.roonlabs.com/t/a-guide-how-to-do-room-correction-and-use-it-in-roon/23800

[Boomzilla]

So I've spent this afternoon moving my Roon / NUC to the audio stand in the living room, fighting the library drive into battered submission, and hooking up all three of the DACs I have in the house to see which I liked best. The contenders are:

Emotiva Big Ego+ (USB powered "thumbnail" DAC
Topping D10s (USB powered DAC)
Emotiva Stealth DC-1 DAC (self-powered DAC)

And the results? First a touch of background:

I bought the Big Ego+ DAC because I wanted something with remote volume to drive power amps directly. The DAC was originally plugged directly into my Mac mini. It was OK, but only that.

I bought the Topping D10s after reading a glowing review on Audio Science Reviews website. Amir praised the linearity. I plugged it into the Mac mini too, and it sounded thin and dry.

The Stealth DC-1 sounded very good driving amps directly.

For this test, since the wimpy NUC was driving everything, I connected a powered USB-3 breakout box to the NUC and then hooked all three DACs into the powered USB breakout strip. With the Emotiva Big Ego+ and the Emotive Stealth DACs, this didn't mater much. But with the Topping - WOW, no longer thin or dry!

So, up to a relatively high volume, the Topping sounded more dynamic than the Emotiva DACs, but after that volume threshold, the Topping became harsh sounding. Since I listen at modest volumes, the Topping may be the DAC for me.

Postscriptum:

The harshness that I hear at high volumes CANNOT be caused by the DAC. The Topping DAC is already running at 100%audio output. All volume attenuation is being done in the preamplifier section of my integrated amp. I’ll conclude, therefore, that the most likely causes of high-volume harshness are (in order of likelihood):

1. Underdamped echoes of the listening room

2. Amplifier distortion

3. Bad source material

These can be checked by donning a pair of headphones and turning off the speakers. No distortion at high volumes with the headphones? I can rule out potential causes numbers two and three.

If I planned to be in this house much longer, I could fix cause number one, but it isn’t worth doing if we’re moving. I’ll just listen at lower levels.

One other passing comment - I’ve been using a big 12” iPad for Roon Remote, but the thing is just too big! I’m going back to my iPad mini.

[Boomzilla]

Where should a tube buffer go?

I am using a Topping D-10s DAC and not attenuating volume in Roon.

The layout choices include:

Group 1 - Emotiva BasX preamp and tube buffer or

Group 2 - passive volume attenuator with remote control and tube buffer

With the preamp, I’m not sure that it matters whether the tube buffer is upstream or downstream of the preamp. I’m assuming that the tube buffer has a high-impedance input (maybe more than 100,000 Ohms) and a lower output impedance.

But with the passive volume control, I don’t know whether the tube buffer should be inserted upstream or downstream of the (probably 10k Ohm) passive attenuator.

What say you (and why)?

Thanks - Glenn

[novisnick]

I believe that only your ears will know. IE Try all of the configurations. Fun Times! 😁

[monkumonku]

Dec 11, 2022 23:45:32 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

Where should a tube buffer go?

I am using a Topping D-10s DAC and not attenuating volume in Roon.

The layout choices include:

Group 1 - Emotiva BasX preamp and tube buffer or

Group 2 - passive volume attenuator with remote control and tube buffer

With the preamp, I’m not sure that it matters whether the tube buffer is upstream or downstream of the preamp. I’m assuming that the tube buffer has a high-impedance input (maybe more than 100,000 Ohms) and a lower output impedance.

But with the passive volume control, I don’t know whether the tube buffer should be inserted upstream or downstream of the (probably 10k Ohm) passive attenuator.

What say you (and why)?

Thanks - Glenn

I would say the best method is to try it yourself both ways and see what sounds best to you. Because no matter what anyone says, you'll probably end up trying both anyway. And you should. It's just like asking for a 6 ohm (or even 4 or 8 ohm) speaker, which tap should you use from a tube amp, the 4 or 8 ohm one. You should use whatever sounds best.

[KeithL]

In general "music organizers" use a variety of different ways to "identify" tracks...
- they may use file names (which may be different)
- they may use tags (which may be different; and files from different sources may even have different field names for their tags)
- they may use metadata found in other places (like AccurateRip and other similar databases)
- note that some file formats do not have the ability to store internal tags... and apparently Roon maintains its own separate database as well...

Since Roon says that it doesn't alter the files themselves it shouldn't have made any physical changes to your music library.

To be honest it's been a while since I've bothered with tags... however...

As I recall dBPowerAmp gives you the ability to program how files are tagged in great detail (so, for example, "two digit track number, followed by a space, a hyphen, another space, and the song name".

I have always used a somewhat old program called Tag&Rename for tags... you might want to check that out.
As far as I know it doesn't tag files automatically "by looking them up"... but does give you excellent control for doing it yourself... 
This program has the ability to physically rename files based on their tags (and maybe to move files into folders according to their tags)...
And it also has the ability to create tags based on the physical location of files...
So, for example, if you create a folder for an artist, with folders inside that one for each album, it can automatically tag all the files with the appropriate artist and album names....

I suspect that there are also now programs that can "retroactively" verify and tag programs...
(Personally I just store my files physically in hierarchical folders and ignore the tags.)

Nov 29, 2022 9:13:52 GMT -5 Boomzilla said:

I have a bunch of music that has totally sabotaged my music player. How?

1. Some CD rips are incomplete and have only a few songs from the album.

2. Other tracks by the same artist then got added to the folder. Now, songs from two, three, or four albums are in the same folder.

3. Often, track names have been eliminated, identifying the songs as "Track 1, Track 2, Track 3, etc." Even worse, sometimes the three tracks are the same song, just ripped at different bit depths and sampling frequencies.

4. The result of this is that my player's search engine is totally blind when it comes to finding a song I want to hear.

I think I'm going to have to spend a month or so with mp3tag to try to identify and put song names to all these anonymous songs. I'm not enthusiastic that this will work. Why? Because (I think) mp3tag uses file size as a confirmation metric that it has the right track name. If the ripping process used different bit depths and sampling rates, the track will no longer conform to the database value that mp3tag is trying to use for file identification.

I'm also still fighting the variety of file formats that are in the batch. In addition to common ones like wav, flac, and mp3, some are really obscure, like ogg vorbis, and a variety of obsolete formats that I've never even heard of.

So the first question I need to answer is whether or not the music I'll gain by identifying it is worth the time and effort. If not, I need to just delete everything that isn't clearly labeled and move on.

Your thoughts?