John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

[jan.didden]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

[snip]Being retired, I don't have the money to buy good commercial amps.
From the reviews I read and from other data, I feel it wouldn't be much of a risk to build Allen Wright's published designs. Anyhow, it appears to me the best I can do in my present situation.

Yes, sounds reasonable.

jd

[Rod Coleman]

Originally Posted by janneman

I don't know Rod; what if Doug Self would be waxing lyrical about the fantastic sound of his designs, would that help?
Or, would it convince you you'd absolutely want to build his design?
Chances are most people, probably including you, would fall over him for being prejudiced.

jd

Jan, we don't need designers to tell us that their amps are better than the rest of the World. But I think it helps when Designers talk about the effect of design decisions on sound. OK, that's a personal thing perhaps. To show what I mean, try Lynn Olson's account of the decisions made in his amplifier design:

The Amity, Raven, and Aurora

This work has such a finely balanced blend of engineering AND perception.

Doug is the complete opposite of that, and only talks about problems that can be measured. And he has a whole section of his writings devoted to denying any place for subjective listening, which I regard as really negative and destructive. And is the main reason I don't take his ideas seriously.

As Lynn has said - audio design needs the measurement AND the listening experience. To leave out one of these is like flying blindly.

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by janneman

Indeed. Most psychoacousticians and other reasonable studied people would see a causal relationship here.

jd

Reasonable means different things to different people.
In this case, I see a guesswork on your part, rather than any actual knowledge. Your remark suggests that the differences I hear are in my mind, rather than in the amps themselves. You are wrong here, since I hear the differences even without knowing in advance which amp is playing at a given time.

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by Rod Coleman

As Lynn has said - audio design needs the measurement AND the listening experience. To leave out one of these is like flying blindly.

I couldn't agree more, when it comes to audio design.
As a consumer I find that listening experience is all that I need, while published measurements utterly fail to predict the sound quality.

[Steve Eddy]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

You are wrong here, since I hear the differences even without knowing in advance which amp is playing at a given time.

That in itself doesn't preclude Jan's argument.

se

[abraxalito]

Originally Posted by Rod Coleman

This work has such a finely balanced blend of engineering AND perception.

Yes, I like Lynn Olson's approach too.

Doug is the complete opposite of that, and only talks about problems that can be measured.

Hardly the complete opposite, just unbalanced in the direction of trusting measurements and, apparently, not his ears.

And he has a whole section of his writings devoted to denying any place for subjective listening, which I regard as really negative and destructive.

To me its just rather quaintly self-satisfied and prejudiced.

And is the main reason I don't take his ideas seriously.

Its unreasonable to throw the baby out with the bathwater - your loss if you do.

As Lynn has said - audio design needs the measurement AND the listening experience. To leave out one of these is like flying blindly.

I'm not even sure that it actually does need the measurement myself, perhaps that's because I haven't bought myself an AP (yet). If it sounds good enough, what use are the measurements? And then, which measurements?

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by Steve Eddy

That in itself doesn't preclude Jan's argument.

se

Please elaborate.

[jan.didden]

Originally Posted by Rod Coleman

Jan, we don't need designers to tell us that their amps are better than the rest of the World. But I think it helps when Designers talk about the effect of design decisions on sound. OK, that's a personal thing perhaps. To show what I mean, try Lynn Olson's account of the decisions made in his amplifier design:

The Amity, Raven, and Aurora

This work has such a finely balanced blend of engineering AND perception.

Doug is the complete opposite of that, and only talks about problems that can be measured. And he has a whole section of his writings devoted to denying any place for subjective listening, which I regard as really negative and destructive. And is the main reason I don't take his ideas seriously.

As Lynn has said - audio design needs the measurement AND the listening experience. To leave out one of these is like flying blindly.

I'm in Doug's camp. I appreciate a guy who can resist flogging his own stuff, and subjectively to boot.
Maybe I know too much about how this perception thing works, and too much about how people make decisions and make up their mind, (completely sincere of course) to put any value to someone's judgement of his own performance.

jd

[jan.didden]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

Reasonable means different things to different people.
In this case, I see a guesswork on your part, rather than any actual knowledge. Your remark suggests that the differences I hear are in my mind, rather than in the amps themselves. You are wrong here, since I hear the differences even without knowing in advance which amp is playing at a given time.

No its actual knowledge. Knowing how people make up their mind, what factors influence that.
And of course any differences or anything anybody hears or sees or feels are all in the mind, I hope we don't have to go back to those basics please.

jd

[Steve Eddy]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

Please elaborate.

It doesn't preclude that the differences perceived are purely psychological. Or that the differences you perceive are due to something mundane, like a difference in levels between components.

se