You dissing my rig!
Yes, it is not the best. Lots of room for improvement with a better cart and phono preamp. Still this Thorens was a top LP turner in the 70's. Even has a built in speed strobe which is nice feature. I still hear people comment that it compares favorably to the Linn - LP12. But, I've never compared it to anything else, in my home. I've heard the LP12 at a shop years ago on some Wilson Watt Puppies and it was good. I like our setup better. I've also heard top LP playback on some Apogee Duets years ago at a local audiophile shop "Audition", and it was really, really nice.
I've heard lots of good analog on top gear at shows too, and we have a very nice system overall and the LP playback it very nice with good records. I mean, I don't think you got to spend $10,000+ to hear good analog. If you do, well forget it!
John
Isn't sound quality a major consideration here? Are Stradivarius violins chosen due to their playability and responsiveness, or due to their sound? Or should we perform blind tests on violins in order to know which one of them is a Stradivarius?
I'm trying to get your point.
Do you say that listening evaluations aren't necessary for audio gear?
First time we agree on something, Mr G.
At the risk of sounding arrogant, without solid lengthy exposure, a time window go-listen is futile, DBT or not.
One can stick 10 idiots into a DBT, the outcome will still be that of a bunch of fools.
Same deal as with automobiles, any step up from a sheit car will sooner feel over-expensive than obvious.
Drive a nice set of wheels for 6 months, then get ready for the shock when you get into the old piece of crab again.
Joshua, that is WHY I am still in business. More than once in my engineering career, I have gotten so dependent on my measurements and topologies, that I did NOT listen to the final product. Guess what happened? Hint: twice in power amp design with Parasound. Can you guess which model numbers?
Built To A Price....
Dave.
99% of audio is built with exactly those outlooks and constraints - standard T&M is the accepted publishable criterium, however those figures say little about the actual listening experience.
Dave.
No, you're just human.
I know that's difficult, and in some cases impossible for some people to come to terms with. But that's nothing a small dose of humility can't cure.
se
I don't know what you mean by this John, but if one participant can score 100% just because of the noise level diffrences, and Ivor scores not better than tossing a coin, how can that be 'set up to generate null results'? Ivor didn't hear any difference. So?
I mean, I can understand he felt urinated, I would be too, and by proxy you are apparently are too. But you can't unreasonably accuse people of 'cheating' just because you hate the result.
jan didden
Scott,
That strikes me as a bit snide, finding something is the first and sometimes not so easy step. Once the technique is reliable then comes the task of ruling out what it is not. That takes far longer. As this is a hobby and not my main concern I share the techniques so others who wish to try things may do so.
The nice thing is the folks who illuminate the phenomena with useful cites or experience. Resistor distortion turns out to have been well covered in the 60's. The only thing new seems to be a simpler technique for measuring it. Cable distortion, passive intermodulation distortion and directionality seems to be covered to a fairly good extent by the cell phone base station designers. Would not have found the papers without others' knowledge.
I think the area where we really disagree is at what level distortion or noise is perceived as a problem. That being OPINION there is no easy resolution.
From my Nov 2010 AES report / the Editorial of the upcoming Linear Audio Vol 1:
"Eric Valentine, a record producer from Los Angeles, built his own recording console . He painstakingly hand-selected ‘audiophile’ capacitors, discrete devices, high-quality wiring. He is convinced that that makes the music that comes out of his console somehow sound ‘better’ than from a standard mass-produced console. Yet, on an intellectual level he knows that in a controlled test he may not be able to hear a difference if those special capacitors would be exchanged for standard industrial ones. He has learned to accept that, because he knows that the way he designed, sourced and built his console makes him work just a bit harder to do the best he can. In that sense, those special components do contribute to ‘better sound’. Eric is one of the very few people I’ve ever met who has come to grips with this basic dichotomy and became a better audio producer because of it."
jan didden
Who says it doesn't meet the above conditions?
Tom Nousaine has set up a number of people with ABX systems in their own home, using their own system, so they can do all the AAAA BBBB whatever they want at their leisure for as long as they want.
And it's worth nothing that during blind tests, listeners are confident that they're "hearing" differences. If they weren't, then you couldn't really perform the test in the first place. However when the results are revealed, their responses are no better than random guessing.
se
Actually, Eric had another great story. At his AES both he conducted a preference test for two DACs with a headphone output. Visitors were handed a headphone and a switch and were requested to decide which one sounded best. The two DACs had a 1:10 price difference. As long as the two DACs were sitting there on the counter, the preference was 80% vs 20% in favor of the expensive one.
As soon as the DACs were moved behind the counter, out of sight, the preferences were 22% vs 78%, in favor of the cheap one.
There more to it, but I'll let you digest this first
jan didden
- Status
- Not open for further replies.