I don't know... this test is unscientific... clearly mud and banana can have an unintended side effect that makes audio sound better and needs to be investigated immediately.

on a more serious note.. doesn't seem like the "good" audio was good? there is a huge difference between noise free audio and garbage integrated audio / speakers with hizz imbalance and peaking... if the "good" audio is bad then there obviously won't be a difference between any of them.

which makes me think... banana and mud are noise filters... hmm...

▲

mmmattt 5 hours ago | parent [-]

The experiment compared .wav files directly ripped from the cd to these same files played through copper/banana/mud.

So yes, the “good” audio is good.

▲

kachapopopow 4 hours ago | parent [-]

less about the files, more about the audio equipment in between

	▲	atoav an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Well ot is very easy to figure that out using the Null method. You have the original recording (A) and play through whatever chain recording it at the end, resulting in recording (B). You now place A and B into seperate tracks of the DAW of your choice and align them in time. You flip the polarity on B and adjust the levels till the output level is minimized (to account for level changes in your playback/recording chain). The mixed signal is the difference. If it is imperceptibly silent, the difference is in fact imperceptable. And with this simple method you can demask a metric ton of bullshit, like differences in wire materials or capacitors materials.