John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by janneman

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

Reproduced music is not equal to live concert.
Reproduced music is being reproduced in two different mechanisms: the stereo setup is one and the ears-brain-mind is the second.
Thus, ones' mind is always involved in reproduced music. The stereo setup with its' various components is also involved.
Do we agree, so far?

It seems that there is an interaction between the two mechanisms, the stereo setup on one hand and the ears-brain-mind on the other hand.

The ears-brain-mind takes part in evaluating and enjoying live music and reproduced music alike.
The stereo setup components take also part. One loudspeaker sounds different from another one – and this holds true to most people, or to very many people, in myriad of mind-sets. Also, one amplifier sounds different from another.

Since my stereo setup is intended for me enjoying reproduced music (the best I can afford), when one amp makes me enjoy reproduced music more than another one – and when this is so also when I don't know which amp is playing at given time – this is all I need know concerning choosing an amp to my setup.

Of course, another person will prefer another amp, but I choose amps to my setup and to my enjoyment.

Therefore, the fact that the ears-brain-mind are involved in appreciation of music, live and reproduced, is irrelevant to the fact that various amps sound differently and to the need to choose one amp from few ones.

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by Steve Eddy

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

You assume that the difference in level between components isn't adjusted.
You also assume that there aren't any real, objective differences between components.

[Steve Eddy]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

You assume that the difference in level between components isn't adjusted.

No, I only offered it as a possibility, seeing as you didn't give any details, but rather a broad, ambiguous claim.

You also assume that there aren't any real, objective differences between components.

Even if there were, it wouldn't necessarily mean the objective differences were sufficient to produce actual audible differences.

se

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by Steve Eddy

No, I only offered it as a possibility, seeing as you didn't give any details, but rather a broad, ambiguous claim.

Even if there were, it wouldn't necessarily mean the objective differences were sufficient to produce actual audible differences.

se

I hear what I hear, while others assume what they assume.

Without knowing the details of my comparisons of different amps, all assumptions are baseless.

[jan.didden]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

Reproduced music is not equal to live concert.
Reproduced music is being reproduced in two different mechanisms: the stereo setup is one and the ears-brain-mind is the second.
Thus, ones' mind is always involved in reproduced music. The stereo setup with its' various components is also involved.
Do we agree, so far?

It seems that there is an interaction between the two mechanisms, the stereo setup on one hand and the ears-brain-mind on the other hand.

The ears-brain-mind takes part in evaluating and enjoying live music and reproduced music alike.
The stereo setup components take also part. One loudspeaker sounds different from another one – and this holds true to most people, or to very many people, in myriad of mind-sets. Also, one amplifier sounds different from another. [snip].

Yes, agree.

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

[snip] when one amp makes me enjoy reproduced music more than another one – and when this is so also when I don't know which amp is playing at given time – [snip].

I do not believe this is proved to be the case under controlled blind conditions.

jd

[john curl]

I think that Rod Coleman is right on track. There apparently is NO WAY that we will satisfy 'double blind test' demands, but I feel that this is the fault of the test, NOT the listener.
To me, it is something like putting someone on a blanket in the back seat of a Mercury and of a Mercedes, and demanding that they can tell the difference.
No, you have to DRIVE the Mercury and compare it to DRIVING the Mercedes, and usually you are forced to know which is which, because the nameplate will probably be noted by you. However if you could DRIVE both autos, and you did NOT know which was which, then the one you chose as 'better' would be your choice. IF the Mercury really outperformed the Mercedes in drivability, and comfort, then let's give them an award. Most serious drivers would ignore the name-tag. It is the same for serious audio listeners when comparing audio equipment.

[Steve Eddy]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

Without knowing the details of my comparisons of different amps, all assumptions are baseless.

And without any details, your assertion that Jan's argument is wrong is completely baseless.

se

[SY]

Originally Posted by john curl

I think that Rod Coleman is right on track. There apparently is NO WAY that we will satisfy 'double blind test' demands, but I feel that this is the fault of the test, NOT the listener.
To me, it is something like putting someone on a blanket in the back seat of a Mercury and of a Mercedes, and demanding that they can tell the difference.
No, you have to DRIVE the Mercury and compare it to DRIVING the Mercedes...

So, by not peeking, how are you prevented from listening?

With no ABX box, but controlled blind level-matched conditions, your system, your choice of material, your control of changeover (other than seeing it), and arranged as repeated paired preference, could you tell the difference BY EAR ALONE between any of the preamps you have in house and a cheap opamp line stage? If "no," then case closed- you believe that can't tell the difference by ear, no matter your dancing. If "yes," I'll be happy to run that test for you, my expense, but you agree that the results be published no matter what the outcome.

Ready to stand up for what you loudly and repeatedly assert?

[Steve Eddy]

Originally Posted by john curl

There apparently is NO WAY that we will satisfy 'double blind test' demands, but I feel that this is the fault of the test, NOT the listener.

Yet you aren't able to actually substantiate that "feeling" with anything other than, well, "feeling."

*yawwwn*

se

[Steve Eddy]

Originally Posted by SY

So, by not peeking, how are you prevented from listening?

Silly. It doesn't prevent them from listening. It prevents them from hearing the differences. If they can't peek, it discombobulates their audio cortex preventing them from hearing differences that would otherwise be audible.

se