Re: Frank, Feel Free To Join In !.
..hear ye hear ye...let ye who haveth ears hear....cables cannot be heard...amps. cannot be distinguished....apart from the heroically misconceived ones....period.
mrfeedback said:
..hear ye hear ye...let ye who haveth ears hear....cables cannot be heard...amps. cannot be distinguished....apart from the heroically misconceived ones....period.
Well the folks who haven't provided a SINGLE reference, or ANY valid technical arguments are resorting to name calling again. Big surprise there.
Call ME an evangelist if you want, but who's asking people to believe in something they can't prove even exists? At least I have offered lots of very valid and credible references to support my position. I guess it's sorta like walking into a KKK or white supremacist meeting and trying to explain why racial prejudice is a bad thing? Some of the regulars get a little excited.
For the more open minded reading this thread, here's more interesting reading... Ian Masters, a long time audio reviewer, wrote a piece about sonic bricks and how the extreme high-end seemed to be getting a bit out of hand. He was rewarded by being bashed on the net (sound familiar?). You can find his response here:
http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio.shtml
He also wrote this piece where he talks about a published blind challenge done with six amplifiers ranging from a $200 cheap receiver to a $12,000 pair of mono tube amps. Two dozen listeners, evenly divded between "believers" and "skeptics" listened to the six amps and, when all the data was tallied, they wrote:
"all interpretations of [the results] lead to the conclusion that correct choices were made totally by chance -- there were no audible differences to be heard...The evidence would seem to suggest that distinctive amplifier sounds, if they exist at all, are so minute that they form a poor basis for choosing one amplifier over another."
http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20020901.htm
And again, in case anyone missed it, there are 18 references on amplifiers alone posted here:
http://2eyespy.tripod.com/myaudioandhometheaterhomepage/id5.html
And of course another 23 here:
http://www.dself.demon.co.uk/subjectv.htm
I just keep digging this stuff up, and a select few here keep ignoring it and attacking me instead. Interesting isn't it?
Call ME an evangelist if you want, but who's asking people to believe in something they can't prove even exists? At least I have offered lots of very valid and credible references to support my position. I guess it's sorta like walking into a KKK or white supremacist meeting and trying to explain why racial prejudice is a bad thing? Some of the regulars get a little excited.
For the more open minded reading this thread, here's more interesting reading... Ian Masters, a long time audio reviewer, wrote a piece about sonic bricks and how the extreme high-end seemed to be getting a bit out of hand. He was rewarded by being bashed on the net (sound familiar?). You can find his response here:
http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio.shtml
He also wrote this piece where he talks about a published blind challenge done with six amplifiers ranging from a $200 cheap receiver to a $12,000 pair of mono tube amps. Two dozen listeners, evenly divded between "believers" and "skeptics" listened to the six amps and, when all the data was tallied, they wrote:
"all interpretations of [the results] lead to the conclusion that correct choices were made totally by chance -- there were no audible differences to be heard...The evidence would seem to suggest that distinctive amplifier sounds, if they exist at all, are so minute that they form a poor basis for choosing one amplifier over another."
http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20020901.htm
And again, in case anyone missed it, there are 18 references on amplifiers alone posted here:
http://2eyespy.tripod.com/myaudioandhometheaterhomepage/id5.html
And of course another 23 here:
http://www.dself.demon.co.uk/subjectv.htm
I just keep digging this stuff up, and a select few here keep ignoring it and attacking me instead. Interesting isn't it?
OWLS AND OTHER ANIMALS.
Hi,
Just wise words from someone who's been around:
Run your own business in this minefield and that will change your perspective within months, I assure you.
As you can see, I'm just trying to have the last word here, after all that is the purpose of this thread, isn't it?
Cheers,😉
Hi,
Just wise words from someone who's been around:
Run your own business in this minefield and that will change your perspective within months, I assure you.
As you can see, I'm just trying to have the last word here, after all that is the purpose of this thread, isn't it?
Cheers,😉
Re: OWLS AND OTHER ANIMALS.
...running a hifi business is a minefield precisely because of all this inconsistent, quasi religious voodoo stuff about audible...directional cables...amps. op-amps..etc.....good luck say i..🙂
fdegrove said:
...running a hifi business is a minefield precisely because of all this inconsistent, quasi religious voodoo stuff about audible...directional cables...amps. op-amps..etc.....good luck say i..🙂
Statistics Is Not The Same As Logic.
Statistics can be misused.
In the sort of analysis presented above, if one listener gets it consistently wrong, then his results will undo the results of the listener who gets it consistently correct.
More attention needs to be paid to those who get it consistently correct, for those listeners are the real listeners.
Those who consistently wrong are not eligible to be in the test.
Including both types in the analysis, just proves that to the average noddy listener, all systems sound the same, and says nothing about those who do.
You have not been attacked personally - only your adherence to dogma.
Eric.
Statistics can be misused.
In the sort of analysis presented above, if one listener gets it consistently wrong, then his results will undo the results of the listener who gets it consistently correct.
More attention needs to be paid to those who get it consistently correct, for those listeners are the real listeners.
Those who consistently wrong are not eligible to be in the test.
Including both types in the analysis, just proves that to the average noddy listener, all systems sound the same, and says nothing about those who do.
You have not been attacked personally - only your adherence to dogma.
Eric.
Re: The Blind Misleading The Blind ?.
I can't keep out of this.
OK, Eric, could you explain in plain terms for us deaf and dummy engineers where does the detection process actually take place ?
If two amps produce the same low residual null on a real load (that is you compare amp's output to the input signal IN REAL TIME, WITH SAME SPEAKER, USING REAL SIGNAL - music of sorts), and there is no difference in voltage at speaker terminals to speak of, HOW can you hear the difference ? Speakers are not producing it. And I mean it - no driver will be able to produce any meaningful sound 60-90dB down from the 'useful signal' (and remember it has to do that at the same time). How do you actually DETECT the difference ?
Or is your exposure to the rainforest going to hone your ESP abilities as well ?
Bratislav
mrfeedback said:
I can't keep out of this.
OK, Eric, could you explain in plain terms for us deaf and dummy engineers where does the detection process actually take place ?
If two amps produce the same low residual null on a real load (that is you compare amp's output to the input signal IN REAL TIME, WITH SAME SPEAKER, USING REAL SIGNAL - music of sorts), and there is no difference in voltage at speaker terminals to speak of, HOW can you hear the difference ? Speakers are not producing it. And I mean it - no driver will be able to produce any meaningful sound 60-90dB down from the 'useful signal' (and remember it has to do that at the same time). How do you actually DETECT the difference ?
Or is your exposure to the rainforest going to hone your ESP abilities as well ?
Bratislav
NOPE.
Hi,
Eh,eh...
No, that's the easy part.
And don't think for a minute Eric or myself believe in Voodoo...Oh no, we're both pretty much down to earth people.
Tailchasing is not really a good way to evolve and once you're involved in it it's kind of hard to loose the habbit, isn't it?
Wonder why we bother,😉
Hi,
Eh,eh...
No, that's the easy part.
And don't think for a minute Eric or myself believe in Voodoo...Oh no, we're both pretty much down to earth people.
Tailchasing is not really a good way to evolve and once you're involved in it it's kind of hard to loose the habbit, isn't it?
Wonder why we bother,😉
Re: Statistics Is Not The Same As Logic.
Further, many of these studies have been published in magazines that make their money off advertising from companies that sell amplifiers. Those companies would have MUCH rather seen the outcome go the other way to where folks could hear a difference. Why on earth would a magazine skew the results, or conduct the study, in a way that would hurt their ad revenues?
Taking that concept a bit further, if an amplifier manufacture could prove their amplifiers sounded better in blind studies, don't you think they'd commission a few? At least ONE? It would make for great marketing material.
So, the ball is in your court... find a published blind amplifier study that supports your view Mrfeedback. I've given folks here a bunch of them that support mine.
Then find JUST ONE blind amplifier study between low distortion amps where the outcome went the other way?mrfeedback said:
Further, many of these studies have been published in magazines that make their money off advertising from companies that sell amplifiers. Those companies would have MUCH rather seen the outcome go the other way to where folks could hear a difference. Why on earth would a magazine skew the results, or conduct the study, in a way that would hurt their ad revenues?
Taking that concept a bit further, if an amplifier manufacture could prove their amplifiers sounded better in blind studies, don't you think they'd commission a few? At least ONE? It would make for great marketing material.
So, the ball is in your court... find a published blind amplifier study that supports your view Mrfeedback. I've given folks here a bunch of them that support mine.
Re: Statistics Is Not The Same As Logic.
Really?
Dogma:A doctrinal notion asserted without regard to evidence or
truth; an arbitrary dictum.
😀
mrfeedback said:
Really?
Dogma:A doctrinal notion asserted without regard to evidence or
truth; an arbitrary dictum.
😀
Yeah, amplifier manufactures probably know they're not likely to win any blind listening tests because most of their amplifiers are so similar as to be indestinguishable.
If you walk into a high-end retailer and ask to do a blind listening test between gear of a wide price range and have the sales person participate in the listening, you'll likely get one of two responses:
1 - Most likely you'll get a lot of excuses why that's a bad idea, why you can't do the test, or that your salesperson just remembered they have an appointment outside the store.
2 - If the person has never been involved in a blind test and/or is open minded enough, they just might agree. If they can't hear the difference between the gear, however, they may either make excuses (i.e. the owner of Sunshing Audio) or they might want to exlpore more as their listening paradigm shifts before your eyes (i.e. myself many years ago). Of course, the owner of the store might rain on the blind parade.
If you walk into a high-end retailer and ask to do a blind listening test between gear of a wide price range and have the sales person participate in the listening, you'll likely get one of two responses:
1 - Most likely you'll get a lot of excuses why that's a bad idea, why you can't do the test, or that your salesperson just remembered they have an appointment outside the store.
2 - If the person has never been involved in a blind test and/or is open minded enough, they just might agree. If they can't hear the difference between the gear, however, they may either make excuses (i.e. the owner of Sunshing Audio) or they might want to exlpore more as their listening paradigm shifts before your eyes (i.e. myself many years ago). Of course, the owner of the store might rain on the blind parade.
You have misunderstood my point.
My reference is that the Carver test is not valid to the real world - only to the two amplifiers concerned, and one of those (the Carver) was doctored in order to duplicate the reference amplifier.
If you can find two other amplifiers that in standard form null perfectly, then sure, they will sound VERY similar.
However this is not to be expected in common practice, and standard FR, THD etc testing does not say much about the sonics of any particular amplifier under real loudspeaker loading.
You detect differences by listening for differences in noise artifacts, but this requires a high resolution listening environment.
These artifacts are discernable despite being below the measured rms noise floor.
Camping out in a rain forrest brings you to earth, and heightens and references the senses.
Ever noticed how loud a city is after being out in natural surroundings, away from all the sonic, seismic and electromagnetic noise sources ?.
Try it and I expect that you will like it.
Eric.
Eric.
Bratislav said:
My reference is that the Carver test is not valid to the real world - only to the two amplifiers concerned, and one of those (the Carver) was doctored in order to duplicate the reference amplifier.
If you can find two other amplifiers that in standard form null perfectly, then sure, they will sound VERY similar.
However this is not to be expected in common practice, and standard FR, THD etc testing does not say much about the sonics of any particular amplifier under real loudspeaker loading.
You detect differences by listening for differences in noise artifacts, but this requires a high resolution listening environment.
These artifacts are discernable despite being below the measured rms noise floor.
Camping out in a rain forrest brings you to earth, and heightens and references the senses.
Ever noticed how loud a city is after being out in natural surroundings, away from all the sonic, seismic and electromagnetic noise sources ?.
Try it and I expect that you will like it.
Eric.
Eric.
Blind Turd Listening Tests.
Also when I have secretly removed a minor tweak in real time, I have had the response many times "What did you do ? - put it back !"
These are the real tests.
When a system is tuned and properly singing, just about any change is easily aparent.
In a system that is not delivering properly, the overall dissonance masks fine changes.
I expect that DBL test systems are not correctly optimised.
Eric.
There have been plenty explained here already - "Honey, what have you done to the stereo ?" etc.
Also when I have secretly removed a minor tweak in real time, I have had the response many times "What did you do ? - put it back !"
These are the real tests.
When a system is tuned and properly singing, just about any change is easily aparent.
In a system that is not delivering properly, the overall dissonance masks fine changes.
I expect that DBL test systems are not correctly optimised.
Eric.
Re: Blind Listening Tests.
None come close to the published studies I've referenced that involve carefully controlled conditions, many trials, scrutiny by others, etc. But you've somehow concluded these are all "pap":
http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20020901.htm
http://www.dself.demon.co.uk/subjectv.htm
http://2eyespy.tripod.com/myaudioan...mepage/id5.html
I'm going to send an e-mail to the gentlemen who was offering $10,000 to anyone who could pass a blind amplifier test and see if he's had any winners. I'm also going to try and dig up the details of a similar challenge/reward offered by The Sensible Sound a while back.
At best, they could be as credible as the Onkyo/Bryston one I posted at the beginning of this thread. But most have been much less so as few details have been revealed, there was no level matching, etc.mrfeedback said:
None come close to the published studies I've referenced that involve carefully controlled conditions, many trials, scrutiny by others, etc. But you've somehow concluded these are all "pap":
http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20020901.htm
http://www.dself.demon.co.uk/subjectv.htm
http://2eyespy.tripod.com/myaudioan...mepage/id5.html
I'm going to send an e-mail to the gentlemen who was offering $10,000 to anyone who could pass a blind amplifier test and see if he's had any winners. I'm also going to try and dig up the details of a similar challenge/reward offered by The Sensible Sound a while back.
Re: You have misunderstood my point.
...Eric forgive me if i am wrong,...but you appear to have missed bratislavs point altogether......if the 'speaker cannot produce this mysterious sound, how on earth are you going to hear it in the first place....rain forests and birds not withstanding????
mrfeedback said:
...Eric forgive me if i am wrong,...but you appear to have missed bratislavs point altogether......if the 'speaker cannot produce this mysterious sound, how on earth are you going to hear it in the first place....rain forests and birds not withstanding????
Re: You have misunderstood my point.
VERY similar ????? If they do null perfectly, HOW can you hear differences ? I though you'd use your ears ? And speakers, in turn ? Which require some voltage to produce sound ? Of which there is NONE (perfect null) ??? So what is it, Eric ?
Please feel free to quite me where I talk about "standard FR, THD etc testing". The only person to bring this in discussion is YOU.
I've been talking about differential null testing - have two amps on same set of speakers, substract input signal and compare residuals. This is trivial to do.
Of course, no two amps will ever null perfectly. The question all you subjectivists keep avoiding like plague is HOW MUCH difference can we have before it becomes audible. We all know (well, at least _I_ know, I'm and electronics engineer) how minute signal differences we can measure. I can tell you with utter confidence that I can measure voltage signals that will fail to move ANY speaker from its resting state, let alone to produce any detectable sound by your or anyone's golden ear.
So you keep insiting that you can hear something that I will not measure ?
And I can tell you with utter confidence that well designed amps will produce differental null in order of 60 to 90 dB below signal level. Your Golden Speaker in your Golden Room will be asked to reproduce distortion residuals 80dBs below reference level (and remember they will at the same time asked to produce 'good' sound too, at 80dBs above distortion residuals). Can you show me which speaker will do that ? And which ear will be able to pull the residuals that are 40 odd dBs below the noise floor (as golden as they are, speakers, background noise and room resonances will add MUCH more distortion than any competent amp will).
So again, WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU HEAR, Eric ?
Let's be scientific, Eric. Lets specify "high resolution listening environment". You saw my environment few posts before. Is that not enough high resolution for you ? I've had chance to listen to Dynaudio Evidences in the "upstairs" room at Carlton Audio Visual. Not enough ? A good friend of mine has Wilson Watt/Puppy. Not enough ? ATC 100 ? Martin Logan Aerius/CLS ? Thiel 3.6 ? Duntech Sovereign ? Apogee Duetta/Stage/Diva ? B&W 801/803 ? Nautilus 805 ? C'mon, give us an example of what "high resolution listening environment" _really_ is.
And by the way, point me to some references of detecting signals 30 to 40 dB below noise floor. Because that is what is required to detect amplifier residuals from those of room resonances, background noise and speaker distortion residuals.
I do like camping, and spend a fair amount of time in extremely quiet environment (night sky in the Outback, far from any cities, freeways, cars and noise).
But that is nothing to do with discussion in hand.
Bratislav
mrfeedback said:
VERY similar ????? If they do null perfectly, HOW can you hear differences ? I though you'd use your ears ? And speakers, in turn ? Which require some voltage to produce sound ? Of which there is NONE (perfect null) ??? So what is it, Eric ?
Please feel free to quite me where I talk about "standard FR, THD etc testing". The only person to bring this in discussion is YOU.
I've been talking about differential null testing - have two amps on same set of speakers, substract input signal and compare residuals. This is trivial to do.
Of course, no two amps will ever null perfectly. The question all you subjectivists keep avoiding like plague is HOW MUCH difference can we have before it becomes audible. We all know (well, at least _I_ know, I'm and electronics engineer) how minute signal differences we can measure. I can tell you with utter confidence that I can measure voltage signals that will fail to move ANY speaker from its resting state, let alone to produce any detectable sound by your or anyone's golden ear.
So you keep insiting that you can hear something that I will not measure ?
And I can tell you with utter confidence that well designed amps will produce differental null in order of 60 to 90 dB below signal level. Your Golden Speaker in your Golden Room will be asked to reproduce distortion residuals 80dBs below reference level (and remember they will at the same time asked to produce 'good' sound too, at 80dBs above distortion residuals). Can you show me which speaker will do that ? And which ear will be able to pull the residuals that are 40 odd dBs below the noise floor (as golden as they are, speakers, background noise and room resonances will add MUCH more distortion than any competent amp will).
So again, WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU HEAR, Eric ?
Let's be scientific, Eric. Lets specify "high resolution listening environment". You saw my environment few posts before. Is that not enough high resolution for you ? I've had chance to listen to Dynaudio Evidences in the "upstairs" room at Carlton Audio Visual. Not enough ? A good friend of mine has Wilson Watt/Puppy. Not enough ? ATC 100 ? Martin Logan Aerius/CLS ? Thiel 3.6 ? Duntech Sovereign ? Apogee Duetta/Stage/Diva ? B&W 801/803 ? Nautilus 805 ? C'mon, give us an example of what "high resolution listening environment" _really_ is.
And by the way, point me to some references of detecting signals 30 to 40 dB below noise floor. Because that is what is required to detect amplifier residuals from those of room resonances, background noise and speaker distortion residuals.
I do like camping, and spend a fair amount of time in extremely quiet environment (night sky in the Outback, far from any cities, freeways, cars and noise).
But that is nothing to do with discussion in hand.
Bratislav
Christer said:
Christer,
This is a good point, also mentioned by nw_avphile above. I had this experience myself. Having lived with a particular system for some time, any component change leading to a change in tonal balance, color, sound field dimensioning etc tends to be experienced as "worse". This is balanced by the expectations of a great improvement because you shelled out all that money. In that sense, it's the listener who is burned-in really.
Jan Didden
Re: Re: Re: Re: nw_avphile
So, since THD in some CDP´s typically is at 0.005% THD+N, what is the specific distortion that is so offensive in CDP´s according to you? I guess you are thinking about time domain/impulse response?
About amps, suddenly you are not surprised I can hear difference between 0.01%THD+N with dominantly 3rd and odd order harmonics VS. 0.05%THD+N with dominantly 2nd and even order harmonics???
Since both these numbers are so low it should be impossible to tell them apart according to you.. no? The output stage remains the same, only low level circuits are switched between the two modes.
What you essentially say now is that the TYPE of distortion makes a diffrence and not only the level of distortion, do I get you right?
BTW, it´s not mainly a question about single end or not, as there are amps with a complementary toplogy that also has dominantly 2nd and even order harmonics. The GamuT D200 is such a beast.
I can pick ot CDP´s. and mic pre´s in blind tests (and most likely cables as well) but the biggest difference I can hear on audio gear (with exception to mic´s, speakers and room) is power amps.
/Peter
nw_avphile said:
So, since THD in some CDP´s typically is at 0.005% THD+N, what is the specific distortion that is so offensive in CDP´s according to you? I guess you are thinking about time domain/impulse response?
About amps, suddenly you are not surprised I can hear difference between 0.01%THD+N with dominantly 3rd and odd order harmonics VS. 0.05%THD+N with dominantly 2nd and even order harmonics???
Since both these numbers are so low it should be impossible to tell them apart according to you.. no? The output stage remains the same, only low level circuits are switched between the two modes.
What you essentially say now is that the TYPE of distortion makes a diffrence and not only the level of distortion, do I get you right?
BTW, it´s not mainly a question about single end or not, as there are amps with a complementary toplogy that also has dominantly 2nd and even order harmonics. The GamuT D200 is such a beast.
I can pick ot CDP´s. and mic pre´s in blind tests (and most likely cables as well) but the biggest difference I can hear on audio gear (with exception to mic´s, speakers and room) is power amps.
/Peter
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: nw_avphile
Nice system Bratislav!
I´m sure you can hear difference between lots of low THD gear if you would take the time. Otherwise, how did you chose your electronics???
Bass aborbers and diffusors makes for a good room where carpets only dampens the highest frequencies which leads to a tilted room and power response, still I´m sure you have excellent sound.
Happy listening! 🙂
/Peter
Bratislav said:
Nice system Bratislav!
I´m sure you can hear difference between lots of low THD gear if you would take the time. Otherwise, how did you chose your electronics???
Bass aborbers and diffusors makes for a good room where carpets only dampens the highest frequencies which leads to a tilted room and power response, still I´m sure you have excellent sound.
Happy listening! 🙂
/Peter
Re: "There Arec None So deaf As Those Who Will Not Listen"
Yes, and where they tell about the set up (in short words) it usually turns out they use a lively normal room and mediocre speakers. Are we surprised those kind of tests turn out the way they do.... nope 🙂
/Peter
mrfeedback said:Hi Frank,
Oh, I thought that he is doing this perfectly.
Yes me too, and absolutely more so than any list of references where ALL the test conditions are not stated.
Ever tried to discuss with an evangelist knocking at your front door ? - Don't bother because it is pointless.
Eric.
My neighbour has a sign on his letter box saying 'No Junk Mail', and one on his front door saying 'No Evangelists' - he informs me that they both work.
Yes, and where they tell about the set up (in short words) it usually turns out they use a lively normal room and mediocre speakers. Are we surprised those kind of tests turn out the way they do.... nope 🙂
/Peter
- Status
- Not open for further replies.