hypex ncore - Page 644 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Vendor Forums > Vendor's Bazaar

Vendor's Bazaar Commercial Vendors large & small hawking their wares

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 21st February 2013, 03:02 PM   #6431
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julf View Post
But as I keep saying, it is a bit like democracy - a flawed idea, but better than the alternatives.

So how would you ensure the reports of audible differences aren't caused by expectation bias and other psycho-perceptual causes (assuming trivial technical things like level matching have been taken care of)?


Well, yes, and that leads into the eternal question of "hi-fi" vs. "audiophile" - do you want your system to reproduce the original signal as accurately as possible or do you want it to sound "good"? (And yes, I acknowledge that what is "original" is a hard question). A debate we won't be able to resolve.
Q1: I'd say different horses for different causes.

Q2: Well, no matter what music implies some sort of human sensory and perceptive/cognitive activity.

Audio IS psycho-perceptual. How would you remove that in ABX?

Sensory perception is just as much a prerequisite for cognition as it is cognition itself.

Expectation bias will always be part of how we decipher stimuli. Expect red wine and get cola = disgust. We can try to cheat or guide our perception however we want. For me good music reproduction is about guiding rather than cheating perception. How would you remove expectational bias without messing with the cognitive foundation of an event like ABX?

Trying to take these things apart raises just as many questions as it provides answers. The question is more about what you want to prove. That you can make someone say that they don't hear a difference in a specific experimental setup only proves something about your particular setup. Could you alter the setup and produce a different result? Most likely. -Nothing generalisable about audio nor human perception is proven. That's the actual fact!

Q3: I think that the "hifi vs audiophile" dichotomy is only useful to offend people. I prefer not to use it partly for that reason and partly because it doesn't explain anything valuable.

How can "faithful" reproduction not be about human sensory-perception-cognition? Low distortion figures can be very good, but for me the perceptual-characteristics of different "types" or "sources" of distortion is much more interesting and cannot alone be defined through scopes and non-human instruments -at least if the reference is "high perceived definition". You may neglect that and only go for "high measured definition" as reference, and neglect listening and its many, many cognitive facets as equally valid sources of reference, but thats your call.

I trust my senses and hope others trust theirs too and read anything on the internet with a good pragmatic pinch of salt

cheers,
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 03:09 PM   #6432
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esperado View Post
I'm exhausted by those audiophiles non-senses, confusing engineering and instrument making, brain and hearing etc... Trying to find mysterious evils and believing in magic, even against the most obvious laws of physics.
An hifi equipment is supposed to be 'transparent'. If something is not *obvious* in an ABX test, you can neglect-it: who care what you produce in your imagination ?
How is that audiophile no-sense? I'm just trying to be equally pragmatic about all sources of information.

If something cannot be heard in situation A -does that necessarily mean that you will never be able to hear it in any other situation? -Are you for real on this? So if I can hear differences between cables in ABX it must be because I imagine it and if you make a crap setup where I can't you are thence right? Come on be just a tiny bit reflective on things that are more complicated than any can imagine...

I dont think that I am confusing these things. Moreover I think you are by what you just wrote...
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 03:38 PM   #6433
diyAudio Member
 
Esperado's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: France
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juhleren View Post
How is that audiophile no-sense? I'm just trying to be equally pragmatic about all sources of information.
If something cannot be heard in situation A -does that necessarily mean that you will never be able to hear it in any other situation? -Are you for real on this? So if I can hear differences between cables in ABX it must be because I imagine it and if you make a crap setup where I can't you are thence right? Come on be just a tiny bit reflective on things that are more complicated than any can imagine...
Well. Cables makes a difference...by their lumped elements (resistance, reactance, capacitance) as a consequence of their geometry. Some want to make believe, in order to make profit, selling stupid cables for the price of your house, that there is some magic in it, like sound of metal, or effects of cryogenics, breaking etc...
Differences in the response curve can be noticed between cables measuring differently with loudspeakers witch had non flat impedance curves. Therefore, listening to cables differences is a non sens: work where is the defect, the impedance curve of your speakers, and the filters. the same two sets of cables will have opposite differences with two different sets of speakers/amps: Does-it make sens to say that one cable gives more treble ?

In the same spirit, your system will sound differently one day and an other, because the humidity in the air, or the temperature, or, may-be your personal mood. What the hell ? Did-it change you pleasure, listening to music ? It is like the color balance with the light.
ABX blind test is just a way to ensure we do not fool ourselves with our desires or believes. it does not change our earing ability, and what is not OBVIOUS does not matter.
__________________
Ultimate Protection and more.The Only Source of Knowledge is experience, everything else is just information” ©A. Einstein
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 04:03 PM   #6434
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juhleren View Post
Audio IS psycho-perceptual. How would you remove that in ABX?
I remove some important aspects of it - if you don't know if A or B is your "preferred" one, you are less likely to allow non-sound-related factors influence your decision.

Quote:
Expectation bias will always be part of how we decipher stimuli. Expect red wine and get cola = disgust. We can try to cheat or guide our perception however we want.
Once again: Penn & Teller: The Truth About Bottled Water - the interesting parts starts at 4:00.

Quote:
Trying to take these things apart raises just as many questions as it provides answers. The question is more about what you want to prove. That you can make someone say that they don't hear a difference in a specific experimental setup only proves something about your particular setup. Could you alter the setup and produce a different result? Most likely. -Nothing generalisable about audio nor human perception is proven. That's the actual fact!
And how is that a fact? If that was the case, audio technology would still be a the level of putting together random components in an order determined by examining the guts of a frog and the phase of the moon.

Quote:
How can "faithful" reproduction not be about human sensory-perception-cognition?
Of course it is. But as an engineer I can only influence one part of it - the audible. The rest is up to marketing people

Quote:
I trust my senses and hope others trust theirs too
Well, I sincerely hope the people who design my gear trust more than just their senses.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 04:19 PM   #6435
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julf View Post
No, just different

If you have two or more amps, the best way to use them is to replace the passive crossover in the speakers with an active one, and drive each speaker element with it's own amp.
Julf: Dude, this is way too definitive a statement. An active x-over will not always be better than a passive one. While I agree that an active has the potential to outperform a passive, it is not definitively so: many speakers these days have highly engineered passive crossovers, and doing better than the OE crossover with an active will require skills and measuring equipment which few people have. Also, many active cross overs will not allow the full measure of adjustment necessary to produce a "perfect" result.
It would be dangerous to suggest to people that they rip the x-over out of their Avalon, or Rockport speakers, and start expecting improved sound with a simple active and no real knowledge of x-over design.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 04:58 PM   #6436
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esperado View Post
Well. Cables makes a difference...by their lumped elements (resistance, reactance, capacitance) as a consequence of their geometry. Some want to make believe, in order to make profit, selling stupid cables for the price of your house, that there is some magic in it, like sound of metal, or effects of cryogenics, breaking etc...
Differences in the response curve can be noticed between cables measuring differently with loudspeakers witch had non flat impedance curves. Therefore, listening to cables differences is a non sens: work where is the defect, the impedance curve of your speakers, and the filters. the same two sets of cables will have opposite differences with two different sets of speakers/amps: Does-it make sens to say that one cable gives more treble ?
Agree so far that ALL variables are considered. Excluding all but three on the cable side to instead point at other deficiencies I'd say is too speculative rather than factual at this point.

[/QUOTE]
In the same spirit, your system will sound differently one day and an other, because the humidity in the air, or the temperature, or, may-be your personal mood. What the hell ? Did-it change you pleasure, listening to music ? It is like the color balance with the light.[/QUOTE]

Yes, the point?

[/QUOTE]
ABX blind test is just a way to ensure we do not fool ourselves with our desires or believes. it does not change our earing ability, and what is not OBVIOUS does not matter.[/QUOTE]
I think you on one hand state that we easily cheat our selves through our senses as why we should do ABX to on the other hand underestimate how our senses work.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 05:28 PM   #6437
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juhleren View Post
I think you on one hand state that we easily cheat our selves through our senses as why we should do ABX to on the other hand underestimate how our senses work.
OK, so you acknowledge that our senses cheat us all too easily. So how do you suggest we make sure the differences we think we hear aren't caused by our senses cheating us?

And are you saying that the ABX framework restricts your senses so you can't hear the differences, and that is why the results wouldn't be valid?
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 05:34 PM   #6438
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrows View Post
An active x-over will not always be better than a passive one.
No, but a well-executed active crossover will most probably be better than even a well-executed passive one.

Quote:
many speakers these days have highly engineered passive crossovers, and doing better than the OE crossover with an active will require skills and measuring equipment which few people have.
Measuring equipment? I thought audiophiles didn't believe in those!

Quote:
It would be dangerous to suggest to people that they rip the x-over out of their Avalon, or Rockport speakers, and start expecting improved sound with a simple active and no real knowledge of x-over design.
Dangerous? As in the speakers might explode? Or just dangerous to their wallets? How is that different from any other audiophile advice?
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 05:36 PM   #6439
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Julf View Post
I remove some important aspects of it - if you don't know if A or B is your "preferred" one, you are less likely to allow non-sound-related factors influence your decision.



Once again: Penn & Teller: The Truth About Bottled Water - the interesting parts starts at 4:00.



And how is that a fact? If that was the case, audio technology would still be a the level of putting together random components in an order determined by examining the guts of a frog and the phase of the moon.

A: Why? I believe other factors have contributed too. Like "normal" critical listening, and measurements of course. But have we achieved absolute certainty through ABX? -NO and we never will about anything...
Luckily engineers don't need it to produce effects like better sounding and measuring gear...
Scientists never claim absolute anything -they know that they cant and instead state specifically the conditions under which they have backing for their claim. No minor detail BTW...

Of course it is. But as an engineer I can only influence one part of it - the audible. The rest is up to marketing people



Well, I sincerely hope the people who design my gear trust more than just their senses.
Agree on the last part, but I wouldn't agree I you would state that it has nothing to do with their senses -which I BTW don't think you have stated anywhere.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 05:40 PM   #6440
Julf is offline Julf  Europe
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juhleren View Post
Agree on the last part, but I wouldn't agree I you would state that it has nothing to do with their senses -which I BTW don't think you have stated anywhere.
No, senses play a large part - they just aren't very good at providing objective data.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hypex problem, who can help Hansms Class D 9 18th August 2013 06:49 AM
Hypex steveww Class D 14 18th November 2010 01:44 PM
Question for those who have tried hypex smps with hypex modules avian Class D 12 3rd March 2009 09:30 AM
Hypex UcD 180AD + signal wires, Power Supply ST, Hypex Transformer TR100A c10h12n2 Swap Meet 7 7th July 2007 03:55 PM
FS: Hypex UcD 400/180AD, hypex toroid Archmage Swap Meet 4 14th November 2006 04:23 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:50 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2