The answer is quite simple indeed; just test in every case and make sure that your´re _really_ testing the audibility of the EUT not just the abilitiy of the listener to detect (or fail to detect) an effect under test conditions.
Or, the obvious alternative would be to avoid any controlled blind test at all.
BTW, the idea that a researcher should try to falsificate his own ideas/theories/assumption still hat its merits, while you might not want to follow Popper after a falsification was successful.
Wishes
Often stated but both assertions are wrong. It may appear so, but the basic engineering question is for at least 50% a matter of psychoacoustic.
Simple engineering couldn´t help if we are not able to find a perfect solution wrt to the question which deviation could be acceptable.
May i remind for the second assertion of Sturms dbt results?
Could one really call it _zero_ evidence? I remember you´re stating the significance were low, but i don´t think that statement was backed up by any calculation.
Wishes
Anyone that tries to make a snap decision about what they are hearing (quick A/B) testing is asking for tainted results, IMO. I often find it difficult to "try" to hear differences in a quick A/B situation. I do not "listen" to music in with analytical mind set, so why should I try to determine how something affects my system with this type of procedure? I listen to music over extended periods of time to determine if there are changes and if so, does my system sound more musical overall.
It takes time to allow myself to almost forget that I have changed anything and listen to familiar recordings for an extended period of time. Changing for the sake of changing, only allows the "differences" to be heard, not their impact on the music. If I can repeat this process and come to the same conclusions again, I trust what I hear. If it is inconclusive, I accept that too. Not ever thing is golden in audio.
I realize that many here will never accept that these "differences" do exist, but maybe its as simple as not trying to hear the differences (left brain analyzing) and allow the emotional side of your minds (right brain) the opportunity to allow you to hear what many of us do hear. Maybe that is why DBT gives such varied results.
To discredit all of the people that do hear is a closed minded stance that is to me akin to being "blinded by science".
Last edited:
It´s very difficult to describe a perception in a way that every listener would _exactly_ understand the meaning.
And it is philosophical question whether it could be even possible.
And if food testing is mentioned, i´ve seen it myself that food testing were discussing about the taste and the way to describe it and that they often have a sort of reference taste sample at hand to recalibrate their tastes and to make sure they all were talking about the same thing.
Obviously that´s hard to do if you were just writing about a perception and haven´t shared a sound reproduction event with the reader.
Wishes
Yes I think cables to some extend has a sonic impact, and that termination has it as well. But I also think that a lot of bogus went into the industry, just because any fool can make a cable that will actually work. It isn´t difficult at all, thus all the golddiggers.
What I do not understand is the reviewers behaviour on that matter, of course the reviewers are depending on the industry, but they in the end also depend on their customers.
From my experience, there are differences between cabling and connections, but you cannot at all count on any price/quality relationship. Often the expensive ones are jokes, where one single or a few parameters are taken to the extreme, often completely without any reason, just an effort to be special.
The production/retail price relation also is a mystery, normally you would find a 1/10 relation, where 100$ production cost will end up in retail for 1.000$, but on the high end market you eften will se 1/20 and on the cable market this relation often rises to 1/100.
Look at NO, MIT, Transparrent, Jorma design and even more of them
The answer is quite simple indeed; just test in every case and make sure that your´re _really_ testing the audibility of the EUT not just the abilitiy of the listener to detect (or fail to detect) an effect under test conditions.
Or, the obvious alternative would be to avoid any controlled blind test at all.
BTW, the idea that a researcher should try to falsificate his own ideas/theories/assumption still hat its merits, while you might not want to follow Popper after a falsification was successful.
Wishes
I don't see any sort of specific test recommendations in there relating to the specific question and your dismissal of my specific recommendations as "biased." The whole POINT of that answer was that particular listener's claimed ability to hear the difference between two speaker cables, then if demonstrated, to nail down whether or not it's a plain vanilla frequency response variation.
You seem to be complaining (though it's hard to tell because you're quite vague about it) that the test designed to answer THAT question doesn't answer a different one. Sorry, there's no Universal Answer to All Questions, other than "42."
??????
How does that address what I was talking about? Who gives a toss about maybe a 0.1dB or so loss between two speaker cables, over some part of the audio band? Move your butt 2 feet along the sofa and you've got a much larger variation right there.
Last edited:
Kurt,in practice there is no such a thing as a perfect wire.LRC and shielding are well understood and in the hands of engineers,diy'ers,even audiophiles can do wonders.What's left imo is a proof that different metals,different purities of the same metal and insulations can have an effect on sound.
Some years back,audioquest had three interconnect cables,the "competition X,Z and PRO".These were of the same design,same teflon insulations but different metals for the conductors.PRO was pure silver,Z was 6N copper and X was OFC copper.Using some same connectors these cables had dinstict effect on sound.Depending on your system,one could be chosen as a better or if you like more "perfect".I have mentioned these three cables in the past but I can't remember if there was any reply from anyone.I mention them again,for two reasons mainly.One is because these three cables could be the "ultimate" tools for a simple and effective test,for even the most hardcore engineer.And this,because you don't have to be a believer or an "audiophool"to be able to hear the differences they caused.One could expect silver to be different so the most important part is the differences between the two copper versions.Second reason,simply because there is no such thing as a perfect system either.Which brings to your comment(and others) on "accurate" reproduction.IMO there is no accurate reproduction either.Something to remind you of something you've heard somewhere,yes.Each and everyone however perceives sounds very differently.In fact I think that if there is a huge number and qualities of cables out there,there is an even grater number of ears and brains
NOTE:All three aq cables had solid 0.6mm conductors.
You are right!
There is no such thing as a perfect system.
Actually I think we are pretty lucky, that it works at all.
But that should not stop anyone from being ambitious and persue higher goals.
My idea is to take it as far as it gets, and to use the means necessary to do so. that means that where I can, I´ll try to take away opinion, and try to ad science and logic. I think this is the only way to push the limmits further.
Also one has to be aware of all the races going on. To me it is not important to have the latest xxx product with a dynamic range of 220 dB´s, because my speakers won´t follow that anyway. So one has to be careful about the problems one chooses to solve. Let it be the onein front of your nose, rather than the one popular at the time being.
Probably, yes. If you make a career out of selling something, you probably approach the subject with all sorts of biases. That's the beauty of controlled subjective testing- it leaves in the ears and the brain, but takes out the bias.
I never had to sell anything. Either people liked the sound or they did not. Pretty simple in my eyes. We picked the best of the best and then made it work in our systems. We rolled a lot of our own setups to take advantage of the strengths of each component, wires included.
It never fails that someone that has never been in the business has a pre-disposition to how salesmen work and how high-end audio is presented to our customer base. Sad, but most customers prefer to listen for themselves and come to their own conclusions, rather than listen to a salesman speak and try to hard sell them. I never tried that approach, as I know that I hated it and would not stand for it. I looked for people's expertise, not their judgement's.
Last edited:
Actually, according to my rough calculations (following http://www.silex.com/pdfs/Sound Attenuation.pdf) shows that a 0.1dB variation matches to a listener at 10ft. from a pair of 90dB efficient speakers (6ft. apart), moving his head about 1/8 inch off axis.
Indeed, a high precision machined head jig is required.
Last edited:
If that is the case, then there is obviously something else that accounts for the differences other than frequency response. Oh and I sit in a big comfortable chair, not on a sofa in my music room. I want the best seat as I am the one that paid for the system
Anyone else can stand around behind me if they so chose.
I haven't spent a lot of time in audio showrooms, because I build my own stuff, but have visited a few and been to many audio shows over the past 30 years.
In defense of the salesmen in the high end stores, I have NEVER been pressured into anything. I either listen to what they have set up or they ask me what system I might like to hear. In fact, I'm not sure how they sell anything! This has been true in Europe and North America.
The mass market stores are another matter all together. That's why I was not sad to see Circuit City bite the dust.
I do hear a lot of stories about snobbish, pushy salesman, but don't think I've ever met one. People in the audio business tend to be rather nice. At least the ones I've met.
In defense of the salesmen in the high end stores, I have NEVER been pressured into anything. I either listen to what they have set up or they ask me what system I might like to hear. In fact, I'm not sure how they sell anything! This has been true in Europe and North America.
The mass market stores are another matter all together. That's why I was not sad to see Circuit City bite the dust.
I do hear a lot of stories about snobbish, pushy salesman, but don't think I've ever met one. People in the audio business tend to be rather nice. At least the ones I've met.
People that would be a serious customer at any salon audio store are well educated and have a really good idea as to what they are after in terms of sonics. They have researched and searched out a specific sound that they are trying to achieve. I wished that more of them would have asked what they should buy
We did as you have said and if they wanted to hear a different setup, we obliged, unless it meant moving something exteremely large to another room on short notice. It was and always will be about the customer and their desires, period. Otherwise they will go someplace that will meet their requests. I also would be willing to bet good money that they would never return to an establishment that would not meet their requests or tried to talk down to them in any manner.
Pretty simple to me, but hey I am just an audio salesman with all of these unknown biases about what music should sound like
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.