John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#15,322
RNMarsh said:
For some here, it isnt a hobby ... or not much... or once upon a time it was. Maybe.
No investment in time (or money) to improve it. Just listen to the music. Thats fine.
Click to expand...


Not aware of many people who aren't into the hobby. From those who build everything from scratch to checkbook DIYers who pay others to do it all. Most of us are too poor/tight to just spaff $$$$ at the audio store after all.


For me I can list at least a dozen other things that need to be improved before my DACs so my priorities are clear.
 
#15,323
billshurv said:
Not aware of many people who aren't into the hobby. From those who build everything from scratch to checkbook DIYers who pay others to do it all. Most of us are too poor/tight to just spaff $$$$ at the audio store after all.


For me I can list at least a dozen other things that need to be improved before my DACs so my priorities are clear.
Click to expand...

Guys like me aren't exactly hobbyists! Rumor has it you can actually make a living in this field.

As to blind testing, one of the things I find handy are the honesty detection tests. "Do you prefer A or B? Do you prefer A or C? Do you prefer B or C?" A,A,B = valid, B,A,C = not valid. Obviously the honesty verification questions should be buried in the other tests and not always in sequence. The other test is "Do you prefer A or B? Do you prefer B or A?"
 
Last edited:
#15,325
simon7000 said:
<snip>
As to blind testing, one of the things I find handy are the honesty detection tests. "Do you prefer A or B? Do you prefer A or C? Do you prefer B or C?" A,A,B = valid, B,A,C = not valid. Obviously the honesty verification questions should be buried in the other tests and not always in sequence. <snip>
Click to expand...

The "valid" "not valid" distinction can only be made if transitivity is ensured in a test or test sequence.
In one-dimensional (directional) tests it will work as described but not so in multidimensional tests.

So if a test uses multidimensional evaluation (as listening to music and asking for a preference is) transitivity is not given, because in each comparison different criteria (along different dimensions) might be choosen for the preference decision.
 
Last edited:
#15,328
JN,

All you really need now is:

Cone,
Spider,
Surround,
Voice Coil,
Magnet,
Pole Pieces,
and a 3 D printed adjustable frame.

I think you should now have a source for all the parts and probably for less than $50.00!

The advantage of a plastic basket is low easy flux leakage path.
 
#15,332
simon7000 said:
Guys like me aren't exactly hobbyists! Rumor has it you can actually make a living in this field.

As to blind testing, one of the things I find handy are the honesty detection tests. "Do you prefer A or B? Do you prefer A or C? Do you prefer B or C?" A,A,B = valid, B,A,C = not valid. Obviously the honesty verification questions should be buried in the other tests and not always in sequence. The other test is "Do you prefer A or B? Do you prefer B or A?"
Click to expand...
I agree, I like to run three way test sets for subjective test cross checking, and also as objective test cross checking.
Experimental errors are revealed (confounder changes caused by the likes of connections or grounds or change in AC mains noise etc can be discriminated), false positives are culled and correct positives are reinforced.


Dan.
 
Last edited:
#15,333
Markw4 said:
I can do matched level if someone wants.
Click to expand...
With what device?
But, I prefer to give the listener the ability to control volume so they can find out what happens when one or the other speaker is a little bit louder than the other (just not so loud so as to mask the details of either speaker).
Click to expand...
You don't seem to understand what level matching is when comparing audio electronic components.
If we can get that far, I ask them to listen for what didn't change with a small volume level change. Too many people think about frequency response and overly focus on that while ignoring too many other things. Then the 'invisible gorilla' effect occurs. People can't see the gorilla because they are too busy counting up and trying to hold in memory how many passes of the ball one or both teams make during the game. Same type of thing can happen with listening: too much attention focused on the wrong things like frequency response or 'sound stage' (whatever that is), if trying to understand what different dacs, filters, jitter, etc., do to the sound.
Click to expand...
What does that have to do with level matched double blind listening test?
 
#15,334
I think the level matching suggestion is WAY over blown. If it is a LIKE contest, you might like the louder as fuller, deeper bass heard. Some like that. If the louder causes your ear to distort more, then you might not like it.

Somethings being listened FOR dont change with small level changes. Or even larger level differences. Sound stage doesnt change its character much with small differences in level.

If listening for Accuracy and you learn to compare to real acoustic sounds, you can more easily determine which DUT is more accurate reproduction.


-RNM
 
#15,336
If I have 90 minutes free of an evening and chose 70 of them to listen to music and 20 to poke something with a soldering iron I feel that entitles me to say music comes first?



If I can get my electrostatics headphones hooked back up then I might be able to do both, which would be bliss.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom