John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

[john curl]

Actually, Steve, you are 'spot on'.

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by janneman

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

Your beliefs have nothing to do with my reality.
It looks like you are going to continue with your beliefs. However my reality is that different amps sound different to me, even when it's a blind listening, that is, when I don't know which amp is playing at a given time.

Furthermore, I heard setups which I could see the brand name of the various components, though I didn't bother to look. Later on I found out that I never heard before on those brand names. Anyhow, I had a concrete impression of the sound signature and the sound quality of those setups. Later on I compared notes with an audiophile friend of mine who heard the same setups on different occasions. Our impressions were similar. So, I don't always need a blind test to know that I hear what I hear. However, seeing brand names which I never heard about them before is somewhat equal to a blind test, though not to a double blind test. I don't need a double blind test to hear what I hear. I don't need a double blind test to note neither the extended details and microdynamics of a SET amp, neither its' unbearable distortion on loud passages.

It looks to me that double blind tests may be necessary to those who don't trust their ears.

[Steve Eddy]

How 'bout this thread just be shut down under the "No religion" policy?

se

[scott wurcer]

Originally Posted by Joshua_G

neither its' unbearable distortion on loud passages.

In my experience SET amps in typical listening tests are frequently used with inappropriate speakers. This would make the test unblind as the amps maybe (more likely are) clipping.

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by Steve Eddy

How 'bout this thread just be shut down under the "No religion" policy?

se

Indeed, some people here are attached to their beliefs in a manner typical to extremely religious people.

[Joshua_G]

Originally Posted by scott wurcer

In my experience SET amps in typical listening tests are frequently used with inappropriate speakers. This would make the test unblind as the amps maybe (more likely are) clipping.

I would rephrase your statement.
Only on very sensitive (and rare) loudspeakers, SET amps wouldn't distort on loud passages.
Furthermore, the extended details and microdynamics of SET amps are notable on almost any loudspeaker.

[SY]

Originally Posted by SY

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?

John, I'm repeating the question. Here's your chance to shut up all those terrible skeptics. Or you can continue running away. Which is it?

[john curl]

SY, I was told over 20 years ago, that I should never fall for a test made by critics of listening differences. I can't be 'suckered in' like Ivor was, years ago.
In fact, all that I will say is that I like what I like, and many people, even many here, hear essentially what I hear as to what they like.
The problem, to me, in double blind testing, even in my own environment, is that most differences do disappear, YET they come back with normal listening. Why, is unproven as yet, but I think that the reason is how the brain handles information differently, under different listening situations.

[SY]

Thanks for a very frank answer. So, in fact, you can't tell the difference by ear alone, by just listening. You don't "trust your ears." You have to peek. The SOUND is the same. (Unless you want to reactivate the bizarre "Stuart has bad vibes which make me deaf" excuse?)

And that's OK. You're selling Rolexes, and even Rolex can't claim that their watches make the time any different.

[KBK]

Originally Posted by SY

Thanks for a very frank answer. So, in fact, you can't tell the difference by ear alone, by just listening. You don't "trust your ears." You have to peek. The SOUND is the same. (Unless you want to reactivate the bizarre "Stuart has bad vibes which make me deaf" excuse?)

And that's OK. You're selling Rolexes, and even Rolex can't claim that their watches make the time any different.

Sy, you just committed the offense you commit here far too often. You made an empirical personal internal decision on what John's words mean and decided for the rest of us what that is.... and projected that whole mess into the world as one of those icky self created 'facts'.

You just committed the 'crime' you accuse others of ...and are, seemingly, completely unaware of having done so.