Blind Listening Tests & Amplifiers – Commentary

[Nicwix]

The post that launched a thousand replies …

I'll probably be outcast here, but what are everyone's thoughts about blind listening tests of amplifiers? ...

I'm not trying to start a flame war here, but I am suggesting those of you who think high quality amps have magical qualities like "warm", "airy", "detailed", "liquid", etc. might want to do some blind testing ...

Comments?

No one dreamed this would go on to break all records for activity:

~~~~~ 528 posts totalling 102,259 words in just 7 days ~~~~~

As pinkmouse pointed out in Post 36:

... p.s. As a past student of psychology, ( most of which is rubbish), I find it fascinating to observe the group dynamics of this discussion

And, at that stage, no one knew we were just at the very beginning...

This thread is for commentary on the group dynamics, value system, styles and social interactions that are evident in Blind Listening Tests & Amplifiers. Please post any views on blind testing, etc in the original thread.

Comments?

 

[Nicwix]

And to kick things off, some basic statistics ...

Here are the thread participants - ranked by number of posts.

1. nw_avphile: 90
2. fdegrove: 56
3. Peter Daniel: 56
4. Steve Eddy: 47
5. SY: 44
6. Tube_Dude: 36
7. Fred Dieckmann: 33
8. mikek: 29
9. mefinnis: 21
10. traderbam: 17
11. pinkmouse: 11
12. planet10: 9
13. Rob M: 8
14. mrfeedback: 7
15. Christer: 6
16. Fantastic: 6
17. vic: 6
18. analog_sa: 5
19. Cobra2: 5
20. carlosfm: 4
21. grataku: 3
22. pmkap: 3
23. ashok: 2
24. Brett: 2
25. jam: 2
26. jcarr: 2
27. moamps: 2
28. moe29: 2
29. nania: 2
30. vuki: 2
31. blmn: 1
32. Brad Kizer: 1
33. haldor: 1
34. Kilentra: 1
35. mb: 1
36. RobWells: 1
37. sam9: 1
38. slowmotion: 1
39. thylantyr: 1
40. UncleJessie: 1

 

[SY]

Well, it's definitely helped me get to 1,000 posts in record time. Do your stats include the branched-off post on feedback and propagation?

 

[Fred Dieckmann]

dishonorable mention

I am relieved to have not finished any higher than 7th. The only thing I can compare it to is trying to deprogram someone from a cult. How about a list of the every one converted to the premise that all amps that (what ever the moving target is today) the same, can not be differentiated sonically in a double blind (as designed and run by those are have decided a null result is the desired outcome) test.

 

[haldor]

Re: dishonorable mention

I am relieved to have not finished any higher than 7th. The only thing I can compare it to is trying to deprogram someone from a cult. How about a list of the every one converted to the premise that all amps that (what ever the moving target is today) the same, can not be differentiated sonically in a double blind (as designed and run by those are have decided a null result is the desired outcome) test.

I've about convinced myself that not only does ever amp sound the same, but now every song is starting to sound the same, no wait that's just the radio station with their 3 song playlist...

Phil

 

[Fred Dieckmann]

hot air and hydrogen

Well, it's definitely helped me get to 1,000 posts in record time. Do your stats include the branched-off post on feedback and propagation?

In words used to describe another famous disaster...........

Oh the humanity!

 

[fdegrove]

ACCIDENTS WAITING TO HAPPEN...

Hi,

1. nw_avphile: 90

Only proves that the man is more ful of crap than I am?

Ouch,

 

[Fantastic]

Judgement.

Only proves that the man is more ful of crap than I am?

What's the basis of judgement? Your opinions?

 

[Nicwix]

Update

We are now up to 752 posts (excluding spin-off threads) - sure to hit the magical 1000 before too long.

Top 10 posters (as of 8 April) are:
1. nw_avphile : 128
2. fdegrove : 77
3. SY : 69
4. Steve Eddy: 62
5. Peter Daniel: 61
6. mikek : 41
7. Tube_Dude : 37
8. Fred Dieckmann : 35
9. mrfeedback : 25
10. Pan : 25

Note: these stats don't include the branched-off posts

We can see that Peter is tiring, but nw_avphile is going stronger than ever !!!

 

[fdegrove]

Bull's Eye.

Hi Mr Fanplastic,

What's the basis of judgement? Your opinions?

No, not really.
My experience with DBLTs is more like it, said it before, say it once more: the outcome tells more about the people involved than the gear under test.

FWIW, I participated in quite a few of those, most of them at the kind invitation of British magazines.

Somehow I always scored so high that they offered me a post as an hi-fi consultant.
Funny,huh?

Even so, I wouldn't really make my choice depending on the outcome.

Which is again entirely subjective.

Cheers,

/Listen first, than measure.

 

[mrfeedback]

Pitch Perception, Or Lack Thereof.

My experience with DBLTs is more like it, said it before, say it once more: the outcome tells more about the people involved than the gear under test.

Hi Frank,
Yes, I could not agree more.
In my experience, many, many 'audiophiles' have not yet learned how to use their ears, nor do they undersatnd what to listen for in order to distiguish amplifiers, or any other gear for that matter.
Recall earlier what I said about listening modes - 'Sinewave' mode or 'DSP' mode.

Also is the subject of 'Tone Deafness', and I find that this applies to a lot of 'audiophiles' to varying degrees.
This quote is long but illuminating - worth the read -

Born to Be Tone Deaf? - Searching for the Cause of Musical Dysfunction

Jan. 16, 2002 -- Monica is a perfectly healthy middle-aged woman. She's normal in every way -- except that she's tone deaf. And as NPR's Joe Palca reports for All Things Considered, she's helping Canadian researchers discover why it is that some people can't carry a tune to save their life. They say genes might be the answer.

Psychologist Isabelle Peretz studies people with amusia -- the technical name for people who can't recognize or tell the difference between melodies. Usually, amusia is the result of some form of physical damage, like a brain injury or a problem with the ear.

But Peretz decided to study people who were perfectly healthy, and still have no ear for music. She advertised in a newspaper in Quebec, Canada, asking for volunteers who had clear musical disabilities. That's how Peretz found Monica. In tomorrow's issue of the journal Neuron, Peretz describes her work with Monica, a woman in her early 40s with a remarkable case of amusia.

"She knew all along of course that she was not really good at music or participating in musical kinds of activities because she tried," says Peretz. "In Quebec, it's rather common to be enrolled in church choirs, so she did participate in those choirs, and she was told of course not to sing."

Just open your mouth, the choir directors said, and let the others carry the tune. Monica's attempts to play in a band were similarly disastrous. After that, Monica steered clear of music whenever she could. Just listening to music gave her a headache.

At Peretz's lab in the University of Montreal, testing showed that Monica was off the bottom of the scale in her ability to recognize melodies. Peretz then tested Monica's ability to hear changes in pitch. She played her several sequences of five tones, with the fourth tone in each either rising or falling in pitch. In one of the sequences Monica listened to, most people -- even babies -- could detect the change, says Peretz. Monica couldn't.

Monica could detect some dramatic shifts, but sometimes even those weren't enough. And for some reason, she couldn't identify tone differences that were lower than the surrounding tones. Peretz's team isn't able yet to make a definitive conclusion about the source of Monica's amusia -- only that her musical deficits aren't related to physical defect or damage. Monica may be, therefore, the first documented case of congenital amusia. And that puts researchers on the trail of genes as the cause.

Many researchers are looking for genes that are associated with musical ability. The difficult part is finding ways to tell who really is tone deaf. Peretz's work should help pin that down, says Dennis Drayna, a geneticist at the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders.

"We now have a much better idea of the sorts of things we should be testing if we want to study these kinds of people."

There are a whole bunch of interesting and relevant references on the above linked page including this Absoloute Pitch Self Test .

I recommend that this test be undertaken in order to guage one's own pitch perception.
I did only the first 10 due to lack of time - I got 10 out of 10 correct, and I picked most of them within the first three notes or so, easily.
Realted is that when adjusting turntable or cassette speeds, I have always tuned such machines by ear, and then looked at the test instruments.
By this method I have always been able to consistently get to within +/- 10Hz of 1000Hz, with careful listening and careful adjustment.

So it looks to me that part of the DBLT equation is discrimination of hearing ability.
I contend that if the subjects were also tested for AP, then DBLT results would be rather different.

It seems that Fred, Frank, myself and some others have AP - what about the rest of you ?.

Eric.

 

[SY]

Wow, so adding things up, I'm old, I've got crappy speakers, I've got a crappy room, I'm an alcoholic, and I'm tone deaf.

 

[mrfeedback]

Retirement Home Next ?.

YOU said it, not me.
So long as you are enjoying all of the above, then nothing else matters.

Eric.

 

[mefinnis]

Oh my God .........

Like the devil it has sporned progeny

Wow, so adding things up, I'm old, I've got crappy speakers, I've got a crappy room, I'm an alcoholic, and I'm tone deaf.

Yeah .... but you can still smell & taste, I trust

If you ever find your way down-under do drop-in. I do have crappy speakers but plenty of nice red to compensate!

Since we have left the "scientific thread" and are now in commentary mode, I guess we are all entitled to make general comment.

I have to say I was stunned by the general lack of intellectual argument, the abuse and frank rudeness of many author's posts. Pathetic is a good word.

All a number achieved was to clearly define their own intellect.

cheers
mark

 

[Nicwix]

Re: Oh my God .........

... I have to say I was stunned by the general lack of intellectual argument, the abuse and frank rudeness of many author's posts. Pathetic is a good word.
All a number achieved was to clearly define their own intellect.
cheers
mark

I was tempted (actually still am) to rate the various contributors, not only on the number of posts, but also rate each person on:

• where they stand on the relevance (or otherwise) of objective tests (null and blind)
• logical thought processes and intellectual capability
• degree of rudeness (as indicate by sarcasm, putting other views down, etc)
• ability to appreciate others views
• etc

Perhaps, perhaps not ... perhaps, perhaps not ... perhaps ...

Nic

ps And if one really wanted to stir the pot - oh my God indeed ....

 

[pinkmouse]

Re: Re: Oh my God .........

I was tempted (actually still am) to rate the various contributors, not only on the number of posts, but also rate each person on:

• where they stand on the relevance (or otherwise) of objective tests (null and blind)
• logical thought processes and intellectual capability
• degree of rudeness (as indicate by sarcasm, putting other views down, etc)
• ability to appreciate others views
• etc

Ah, but to get a truly representative scale the posts would have to be marked blind with the details of the poster removed and by a panel of independant third parties, with the results scaled appropriately

 

[x. onasis]

Is this the thread where I can chime in a bit and not be off topic?

I've found these threads to be remarkably enlightening as to how we hang on to our subjectivity, while objectively justifying our beliefs. It also has helped me note how much salt to take with certain posters' viewpoints.

A wise woman I know says. "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."

I have not read the entire thread, so I wish to ask if anyone addressed the idea that the Onkyo is a particularly decent amp for it's price? I understand the Bryston is well regarded, but the initial stated "blind listening test" compared these two, and nw_avphile, although stating "I couldn't tell a $300 amp from a $3000 in the store I was working at" certainly, in my mind, did not mean that any $300 amp would similarly pass this test.

The reason I ask is because I'm cheap. My listening room is a collection of repaired amps collected from garages and attics, my speakers (I have 7 pairs) are all decent, some repaired commercial, most DIY, ranging from Altec A7's to TB elf's. I have never spent more than a hundred bucks on any one electronic item except this PC.

So now it's time to get into Dolby Digital and Soundblaster ain't cutting it. My feeling is the Onkyo 500 is right for me. Are there any other suggestions for a cheap amp?

I thank you all for your openness in this very public forum, being polite and reasonable is not at all unseen.

 

[Peter Daniel]

If you play them at appropriate levels, all amps sound the same, so go for the features and colors that you prefer. I like it, because I'm cheap too.

 

[nw_avphile]

Is this the thread where I can chime in a bit and not be off topic?

I've found these threads to be remarkably enlightening as to how we hang on to our subjectivity, while objectively justifying our beliefs. It also has helped me note how much salt to take with certain posters' viewpoints.

I have not read the entire thread, so I wish to ask if anyone addressed the idea that the Onkyo is a particularly decent amp for it's price? I understand the Bryston is well regarded, but the initial stated "blind listening test" compared these two, and nw_avphile, although stating "I couldn't tell a $300 amp from a $3000 in the store I was working at" certainly, in my mind, did not mean that any $300 amp would similarly pass this test.

The reason I ask is because I'm cheap.

Hopefully you realize that Peter's post above is pure sarcasm...

The Onkyo SR-500 is a relative bargain. I suspect that many receivers in its price class would NOT have passed the blind test I put the Onkyo to. The Onkyo actually exceeds its power ratings while most receivers in this class struggle to meet their ratings. Of course they rate it a lot more conservatively (65w/ch vs 100w/ch for most in this class).

I've bench tested my SR-500 and it manages nearly 100 watts for one channel into 8 ohms and 80 watts/ch for two channels driven. It produces over 140 watts into a 4 ohm load (one channel driven). These numbers give you some idea of the headroom it has playing real music in stereo or 5.1 mode. It also has unusually low levels of distortion for a cheap receiver. I've measured it at or below 0.05% for most power levels and frequencies which is an order of magnitude lower than some cheap gear I've measured.

It doesn't have a ton of features, but it is well made with real binding posts for the speakers, a real aluminum front panel, etc. Most receivers in this class give you push spring clips for the speakers, plastic front panels, etc. It also has the "direct" bypass feature that no-doubt helped it pass the blind test. Onkyo has always been in the "2nd tier" of mainstream gear--they're a cut above the main lines from Pioneer, Sony, Kenwood, JVC, etc. I use mine for my bedroom receiver.

So yeah, if you want, you can buy an SR-500 for $250 and sleep well at night knowing a golden eared muscian could not tell your receiver from gear costing more than ten times as much.

 

[Peter Daniel]

Hopefully you realize that Peter's post above is pure sarcasm...

Not necessarilly. Until I perform a proper DBT myself I actually prefer to share your POV. Certainly it's much more convenient and gives me much more free time as I don't have to bother with improving my stereo anymore. I just took my old Pioneer integrated and JVC equaliser out of the storage and I love the sound and looks as well. I only have to change the binding posts as they became a bit rusted (and I don't think that gold plated RCA jacks are really required).
Thank you for putting me on a right track again.