Blind Fool Love Mp3 Download' title='Blind Fool Love Mp3 Download' />AOL Radio Stations Free Internet Radio. On Air. Fresh 4. 0. The 4. 0 hottest songs on AOL Radio right nowOn Air. Top Country. Todays hottest country hits. On Air. 1 Hit Wonders. Flashbacks from the where are they now file. FBE2AKK.jpg' alt='Blind Fool Love Mp3 Download' title='Blind Fool Love Mp3 Download' />You dont need complicated arguments to know the Bible is true. You can see the Glory for yourself. AOL Radio is powered by humans Great radio is all about unexpected connectionsthe kind that an algorithm cant predict. Pick any station in any of the 30 genres. Free Karaoke Downloads. Welcome to Free Karaoke Downloads. Your great source of karaoke music to download. On Air. Sailing Away. Drift away with classic soft hits. On Air. A mix of the best jazz from yesterday and today. On Air. All the big hits from 2. On Air. Blues current chart toppers and new releases. On Air. The best party hits from the 8. On Air. Hip Hops latest and greatest. On Air. Todays best indie rock, pop, rhythm and more. On Air. Slow, soulful grooves for you your love. On Air. All the hits, from Garth to Shania. Archimagos Musings MQA Core vs. Hi Res Blind Test Part II Core Results is now published. Within it, I laid out in detail the test, how it was constructed, and how data was collected. Today, well embark on the exploration of the data itself. While I will try to conclude with some general points by the end of this post, I will not have had time to analyze everything quite yet. Im currently anticipating at least another couple of posts to fully flesh out the data set including posting some of the subjective comments made by listeners. I feel this is the only way to properly thank those who took their time and provide as much information as possible to answer any lingering questions. Lets start. Today, lets focus on the core or headline results I think most of us are interested in. Who are the people who tested and submitted results What overall were their preferences What was the result for each specific trackHow confident were the respondents about their choice And how significant were these findings ultimately As I mentioned last time, the advertisement going out for this test were placed in a broad range of audio forums on the Internet. Some of these catered to more subjectivist listeners such as Audio. Asylum, maybe Computer. Audiophile, other sites more objectivist Hydrogen Audio, Squeezebox Audiophile subforum, and others I would call more balanced Steve Hoffman. As you can see, this is a worldwide test with some of these graphs, in general, ignore the standard deviation stat which is meaningless it was just automatically generated by the survey site. The clear winner were Europeans who contributed a full 5. This is followed by N. Americans with 3. Aussies 8, Asians 6, and S. Americans 2. Too bad no representation from Africa and not surprised at the lack of Antarcticans. That last point is at least internally consistent with expectations. So how about gender of the respondents. Hmmm, looks like there arent many women out there in the audiophile world interested in blind tests andor MQA. Only one of the respondents was female thank you for doing this How about age groups This I think gives us a good look at the age distribution of computer audiophiles at least those most likely interested in hi res digital audio and playback. As you can see, the peak of those who were able to give this test a try with the pre requisite gear were clearly within the 5. Overall, I see that 6. Not surprisingly these days, USB DACs dominate 5. SPDIF users these days 1. Again this is quite reasonable as I think most audiophiles appreciate that asynchronous USB offers better jitter suppression whether audible is another matter of course. Looking at OSs, Windows gets 3. Mac OS 1. 2. Interesting that 1. Linux variant including Android based machines not surprising since audio streamer machines often run Linux software underneath such as the Raspberry Pi, Sonore x. Rendu, etc. So how about the cost of the audio systems used to evaluate Remember, Im asking people to exclude the peripherals like  power conditioners, cables, and the like. It looks like the sweet spot for a good 2. US2. 00. 0 5. 00. US1. 0,0. 00 2. If I look at the system descriptions offered by the testers, I see some really good stuff no particular order. Source i. Mac, Raspberry Pi 3, Intel NUCs, Linn Majik DSM2, Intel i. PC, various Windows laptops, various Linux desktops laptops, Mac. Book Pro, Naim Uniti. Qute, Sonore micro. Rendu, Bluesound Node 2, Aria music server, ODROID XU4, Auralic Aries Femto. DAC Cambridge Audio DACMagic Plus, GD Audio DAC, Jadis JS2 Mk IV, TEAC UD 5. Oppo BDP 1. 05D, DIY AKM AK4. DAC, Rega DAC R, Accuphase DP7. Oppo HA 1, Fiio X3 II, Burson Conductor V1 V2, Auralic Vega, Mytek Brooklyn, TEAC UD 3. Schiit Yggdrasil, ASUS Xonar Essence STX, Meridian Explorer, i. Fi i. DSD Nano, Sony NWA 3. Audiolab Q, Chord Mojo, Schiit Modi 2, Emotiva DC 1, Cambridge Audio Azur 8. D, Denafrips Aries, TA DAC 8 DSD, Gryphon DAC One, Resonessence Audio Herus, Hi. Fi. Berry DAC Pro, Chord Qute. HD, d. CS Vivaldi stackAmplifiers Linn Majik 6. Musical Concepts Hafler mod, mbl 9. Spectral DMA 1. 50, Bryston 4. B SST2, Electrocompaniet, ATC SIA2 1. Emotiva models, Rogue Audio integrated, Parasound Halo A2. Yamaha A S5. 00, Benchmark AHB2, BOW Technologies Walrus, Olive Naim 7. Hicap2. 50. Speakers Paradigm Studio 1. Siemens Optipoint 500 Advance User Manual. Golden. Ear Triton One, Acapella High Violon mk VI, Linn Kaber, KEF LS5. JPW Sonata, Infinity Renaissance 9. Quad ESL 2. 80. 5, Naim Allae, Thiel CS2. SE, PMC IB2i, Genelec 8. B, Focal Alpha 8. Magnepan 3. 6R, Celestion A2, Monitor Audio Bronze 2, ATC SCM1. Definitive Technology Studio. Monitor 4. 5, Harbeth speakers, Polk TSi 4. Thiel CS3. 7, Sonus Faber Guarneri Evolution. Headphones Sennheiser HD6. Sennheiser HD6. 00, Beyerdynamic DT 2. AKG K2. 40, AKG K6. Audeze LCD XC, Sennheiser HD8. Sennheiser Momentum, AKG HSC2. Grado SR 8. 0, Hi. Fi. Man HE 5. 00, Beyerdynamic DT 7. Audioquest Nighthawk. Whew, quite the list and thats not totally complete I think everyone gets the idea of the breadth and depth of the gear used. Many testers listed much more details Some even posted their own objective equipment test results confirming low noise, high resolution capability. I didnt even list some other equipment like high end NAS storage, pre amps and headphone amps used here and details around all kinds of power conditioning, cabling, etc. Impressive systems, folks. From the software side, numerous programs were used from foobar to JRiver to Roon to Media Monkey to Audacity to Audirvana for computers and with streamers everything from Volumio, pi. Core. Player, Rune. Audio to customized streaming solutions. We also had a few testers with other musical production experience as well as those who write audio hardware and music reviews. II. What sample MQA Core decode or standard Hi Res PCM did people prefer and with what confidence We now get to the moment of truth TRACK 1 ARNESEN MAGNIFICAT. As you can see, the majority preferred Sample B which is the Hi Res Audio version of the song with a 5. PCM vs. 4. 2 going with the MQA Core decode. Statistically, binomial one tailed probability of achieving 4. What threshold one puts for significance can be debated, but we can at least say there seemed to be a bias towards the PCM sample. There are more nuances we need to consider. Like whether this preference still holds true if we consider the level of confidence reported by the listeners. Here are the confidence levels rated from essentially no audible difference to easy to tell the tracks apart. As you can see, a full 6. One way we can calculate a weighted composite result is if we score by awarding 1 point for No real difference, 2 points for Slight difference, 3 points for Moderate difference, and 4 points for Clear difference. Doing this, we get a weighted composite score of 7. MQA and 1. 10 6. Hi Res PCM audio. Percentage wise, thats a slight gain for Hi Res audio which means that with confidence level factored in, most listeners still chose the standard PCM as preference. TRACK 2 GJEILO NORTH COUNTRY IIOkay, moving on to track number 2. Wow. You really cant get any more 5. The difference is basically the fact that we have an odd number of total responses. Check out the confidence ratings.