Thanks for the explanation Pavel.
I still feel a bit surprised at the outcome of all this although the facts speak for themselves. Maybe we should all walk away quietly while we still can 😀
I might go and cut the lawns later......
Is it the fact we are listening unsighted and with no knowledge of which device is which that is really the leveller on all this.
I still feel a bit surprised at the outcome of all this although the facts speak for themselves. Maybe we should all walk away quietly while we still can 😀
I might go and cut the lawns later......
Is it the fact we are listening unsighted and with no knowledge of which device is which that is really the leveller on all this.
Pavel, well done, thank you!
A suggestion for a next test: you reveal the opamp types at the end of the test period, watch the comments come in, and then after a few days say: ... oops, sorry, I made a mistake, the types are really....'. Embarassment galore. Yes, who said I cannot be mean ;-)
Jan
A suggestion for a next test: you reveal the opamp types at the end of the test period, watch the comments come in, and then after a few days say: ... oops, sorry, I made a mistake, the types are really....'. Embarassment galore. Yes, who said I cannot be mean ;-)
Jan
What ! You think there will be another one after this 😀
I would suggest an LM324 somewhere in the mix. That would be scary wouldn't it. What if no one id'd that one.
It means that the only clue you have to the sound differences is, err, the sound.
The fact that you 'hear' specific difference one day and then no longer or something else next day is fully in line with documented perception and psycho-acoustic studies.
Almost all factors that are involved in audible perception vary from moment to moment and from situation to situation. The only constant is the sound (in this case), but since the actual sound only plays a part in the total perception, it is expected that you 'hear' something different if all those other factors are different. After all, what you 'hear' is a presentation of your brain to your conciousness, put together from lots of bits and pieces of info, present and memory, as well as your 'body state' of which the actual sound is only a part.
Only when the sound differences are so huge that they are obvious, does that override the other changed perception inputs.
Jan
Reading the last couple of posts, i got the impression that there suddenly a lot of conclusions are justified, although before the assertion was expressed that this experiment would not allow such..... 🙂
@PMA,
the "messages" are valid hypothesis but another experiment (or more precisely another set of experiment) would be needed for confirmation or rejection.
@PMA,
the "messages" are valid hypothesis but another experiment (or more precisely another set of experiment) would be needed for confirmation or rejection.
Hmmm interesting... and it is a subject I have never looked into much tbh.
I can say that I put a lot of effort into trying to listen to these carefully and pick the differences out, lol, and................
before I say 'and obviously I failed', perhaps its fairer to say the differences are simply not there or not there at the resolution available with my system.
And yet what you say Jan kind of fits with my listening impressions. To me, I did hear a difference in the OPA2134 vs all others on that one day. Did I imagine it ? It didn't feel that way at the time and yet out of all the devices used it is even more illogical I should have homed in on those.
So there is still some mystique left in all this thank goodness 🙂
Hi Bill,
Noted. Thank you. Without knowing the pair better, perhaps as you do, other possible interpretations spring to mind. Once you know something, it can be hard to imagine not knowing it and successfully put yourself in the shoes of someone who doesn't.
I am going to continue monitoring the situation and hopefully things will turn out well in the end.
Sure. However, there might be a problem if someone tried to explain the cause for that observation without careful experimental research.
It would be easy for two people to imagine two different explanations they believe to be logical and each person believe their explanation is the correct one. Maybe both explanations could be contributing factors, or perhaps both could be well off the mark, etc.
The cognitive psychology literature if full of studies showing ways to trick people into giving wrong answers.
Nobody is immune, although many people feel very confident they would never be so foolish themselves.
But tricking someone doesn't prove they can't produce the right answer in the absence of being tricked.
Therefore, for the most part that particular kind of trickery is not very useful in research.
Yes, like the 'is my red the same as your red?' question, which is in principle not answerable.
The big hurdle to getting deeper into this perception stuff is that for most of us it seems that there is a direct link, sort of, between ears and what you 'hear'. I hear what I hear, right? How could I 'hear' something else than what gets into my ears??
Yet if you get past that hurdle, which really requires a lot of reading and thinking and self-observation and self-criticism, the world you experience will never feel the same again. And it's not just sound.
But you know that of course.
Jan
Last edited:
Actually, it can happen. One way is through auditory hallucinations. There is no way to distinguish them from real sounds except that nobody else ever hears them too at the same time. The same parts of the brain that process and recognize sound are activated either way.
EDIT: Also, a parlor trick that often works is to say, "How do you spell shop, like when you go shopping?" As soon as the victim spells the word shop, immediately ask, "what do you do when you come to a green light?" Especially, if you talk kind of soft and fast but slow down to emphasize the last word "light," people will often say "stop."
Doesn't prove they don't know to stop on red and go on green.
Of course, there are much more sophisticated tricks. Advertisers like to use all they can find.
Last edited:
But, if you only convince yourself you are past the hurdle, then you can get in real trouble. Overconfidence bias is a strong and pervasive one.
Diff Maker results on opamp files and a small correction to image in
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ever...-24-listening-test-opamps-30.html#post5119089
I have made more diff maker files and I would also like to make one correction in my post here above, for rr - tt I posted, by mistake, a result of direct file subtraction and not the one of the Diff Maker SW.
So, here are the results of the Diff Maker for:
rr - ss (4562 - 2134/1)
rr - tt (4562 - 1458)
rr - uu (4562 - 072)
rr - vv (4562 - 2134/2)
ss - vv (2134/1 - 2134/2)
I have chosen the rr (4562) as a reference, because it is the lowest noise, lowest distortion and fastest opamp in this test.
From the attached image we can see that smallest differences are
of course between 2134/1 and 2134/2 as expected,
then between 4562 and 2134/1 and also 4562 and 2134/2,
then between 4562 and 1458,
and the biggest difference is between 4562 and 072.
This may be the reason why TL072 got the most votes, it probably sounded a little bit "different", though we have no ABX proof.
All the differences are very low in level and thus most probably undetectable in the ABX test.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/ever...-24-listening-test-opamps-30.html#post5119089
I have made more diff maker files and I would also like to make one correction in my post here above, for rr - tt I posted, by mistake, a result of direct file subtraction and not the one of the Diff Maker SW.
So, here are the results of the Diff Maker for:
rr - ss (4562 - 2134/1)
rr - tt (4562 - 1458)
rr - uu (4562 - 072)
rr - vv (4562 - 2134/2)
ss - vv (2134/1 - 2134/2)
I have chosen the rr (4562) as a reference, because it is the lowest noise, lowest distortion and fastest opamp in this test.
From the attached image we can see that smallest differences are
of course between 2134/1 and 2134/2 as expected,
then between 4562 and 2134/1 and also 4562 and 2134/2,
then between 4562 and 1458,
and the biggest difference is between 4562 and 072.
This may be the reason why TL072 got the most votes, it probably sounded a little bit "different", though we have no ABX proof.
All the differences are very low in level and thus most probably undetectable in the ABX test.
Attachments
- Status
- Not open for further replies.