I don't have a link to a site where I conducted blindfold type tests to prove I can single out the SanDisk Clip+ versus a higher quality DAP via random unsighted. Like, "which player is it now? I can't see it."
The SanDisk Clip+ doesn't sound excellent, it's not difficult to single it out, then single out something else like a $1,000 Sony, $1,000 Cowon, $1,000 Xiaomi phone, or LG phone whatever.
Why I don't have a link to the evidence? I don't know, I looked around for people conducting blindfold tests and there is not very much. I looked around pretty hard, at least 20 - 40 hours over several months.
I ranted about NwAvGuy since his claim is ¹the SanDisk Clip+ from K-mart has met all thresholds of transparency -- ¹he doesn't have evidence to back up his claim.
No more research in this area would bring any benefit. Happy hating! Flash news: there is a bigger fish to fry (unless one is in the snake oil business).
Come back when you'll be able to attach a metric to the 3D imaging properties of a stereo setup, or the audible effect of suspending clocks by rubber bands, or the noise reduction in Bybee devices, etc..., the onus to provide this is on you and your posse. Until, you are describing the illusions happening in your very own brain and you have no way to extrapolate these to anybody else.
When I mentioned talent, it should be like comparing a cheap violin with an expensive one. So it doesn't matter who the musician is, you should be able to judge which one is better between singers as if you were there live with them...
Because when live (unplugged), everything is usually obvious especially vocal. Great singer with so-so recording should sound much better than a wannabee with audiophile recordings.
Acoustic instruments like guitar, cello, etc. is very obvious too if you listen live.
Oh, female vocal recording with some H2 distortion will sound "sweet", but a natural good vocal will give you more a goosebump.
That could work but only if the head and pinna of the mannequin was a good enough match to the listener's. Online LEDR™ Sound Test | Listening Environment Diagnostic Recording Test
I can come back at some point with evidence that the AD828, LME49720 & LME49990 amplifiers all sound different,...... it's just I don't understand why I would need to be the first person in the world providing evidence of this.
When National Semiconductor developed amplifier IC chips, they had a listening room to compare stuff, not just various simulations on a PC screen. Why they didn't conduct blindfold stuff & send it to a univeristy to be published in a journal? I don't know, to keep an element of mystery?
Another example Asahi Kasei Microdevices wrote that they do listening tests to compare ~0.001% THD DAC to ~0.001% THD DAC & decide which sounds better... maybe they sent a blindfold test to a Japanese university already.
Anyway amplifiers are not placebo effect like you taste $1,000 raspberry jam on $10,000 airline company 1st class then it tastes so amazing (when scientifically it's just raspberry jam & you are imagining everything)....
Last edited:
I have no idea what you've listened to/auditioned. I've merely made a suggestion based on your bias toward tubes. Perhaps it's not too late to save you from the point of no return.
Just as I think that you have already passed the point of no return for a while.
It's just a matter of point of view.
Why don't you try & report? The clock thingy is negligible since you start with analogical, you can use PWM for motor controlling. OK, a clock is allowed, but keep in mind that is not an easy task because , as someone mentioned, the system is the room and plays while the speaker sound.
Last edited:
This changes things a lot.
In this way I measure the result of the interaction between multiple components of the audio chain.
Then you need to add the room which greatly affects the result.
In the end you should measure all the possible combinations amps/speakers/rooms available.
This suggests that the measurement of the single component of the audio chain is almost useless to evaluate its quality.
Well actually, there is consensus on what constitutes a good sounding amp. Aside from measurements it's the same consensus you cited among your friends. You presented a review like any other. Bottom line is the best sounding amps are all similar, presenting the same desirable performance characteristics whether tubed or ss. You probably would not be able to pick out which is which in a ABX. It's the extreme examples of both that are obvious and mostly unappealing, except to the outliers.
btw, I didn't say you did. We're doing our best to convince you. However subjectivity crosses the line to objectivity when it becomes extreme enough.
I have definitely passed the point of no return regarding this question. My objective point of view is that topology is not what enables the best possible result but rather the circuit itself. I have great amps with tubes and also ss.
Most probably, ... to you and your posse.
I got a very strong feeling you want to keep people like me stay in the dark, probably to remain an easy mark. Technically you are good, but your motive is questionable. I was asking and now you gave me an eviction notice? Fine, keep your business, I ask no more.
For evaluating its own quality is just fine, but predicting how the final acoustic will behave needs additional knowledge.
Where I mentioned the superiority of the topology?
I have mentioned two amps, indicating the models.
That's the shtick, me and others have no other motivation than protecting (time permitting) others from audio BS. After so many years, I can tell an innocent that read too many audio rags from one that has a vested interest in promoting his subjective crapola, while colliding with the First Principles.
Otherwise, you could promote your delusions here until the cows come home, I don't mind more than calling them for what they are.
Please note, I did not sent you to take your meds.
But it does not reflect what Geddes actually said in the context, like:
"<snip>Electronics on the other hand is quite different. It is easy for electronics to generate high orders of nonlinearity - they are very wide bandwidth, And it is common for them to have nonlinearity at low signal levels. So the typical kind of electronics distortion - crossover - is by far the most audible and actually quite common.
Haven't you ever wondered how it is that you could hear .1% of electronic distortion through a loudspeaker that is typically 1-5%.<snip>"
"Context" means wrt to his assertion that the mere number is meaningless.
You have made statements making it clear you prefer the sound of tubes in general over ss. Is that not an indication? Not taking you to task here, we're having a friendly conversation. I have not used the term "superior". I think it's very possible you may think ss is superior tech yet still lower sq than tubes, at this point in time.
Last edited:
I wouldn't call them meaningless, I'd call them wrong
He meant it especially wrt to the perception of distortion. In this context the number itsself _is_ meaningless as it does not convey the information if the distortion is perceptable.
Yes, after all, a korg B1 it's just a LCD
You have made statements making it clear you prefer the sound of tubes in general over ss. Is that not an indication? Not taking you to task here, we're having a friendly conversation. I have not used the term "superior". I think it's very possible you may think ss is superior tech yet still lower sq than tubes, at this point in time.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.