wakibaki said:
wakibaki, with all due respect I cannot see how ad hominem arguments further the position we seem to share.
tinitus said:
Not at all. An artist is a shaman whose purpose is to reveal clearly what is only dimly perceived in our experiences, one who leads us to experience our experiences at a deeper level.
eStatic said:
I am sorry you see it like this as I feel your contribution has been very valuable, and it is not my intention to give gratuitous offence. I would much prefer not to have to adopt these tactics, but I must point out that john has had ample opportunity to make a pledge, or for that matter withdraw from the conversation. Everybody has had plenty of warning. I'm not taking any prisoners.
john exposed himself to these comments in his posts earlier in the thread. He makes constant reference to his expertise and the value placed on it by a number of individuals who he has not been shy in naming. He put his reputation in play, not I, and I have only drawn on what I have gleaned from this thread. He has been taken to task about this previously by another contributor, who described his contribution as 'not worthy of a highschool debate' but he failed to desist.
You will notice that he cannot attack my reputation, as I have not exposed it, since no part of my position depends on it.
Further to this I would point out the robust and cynical nature of his reply, which, were it in spoken conversation, I would probably describe as akin to a 'Freudian slip'. One of those little things that give you a big insight into how somebody's mind works.
We had a guy here once, his name was Gerald Ratner, a jeweller. He thought it was funny to be cynical in public about his product too, and boy did we all laugh when it came back to bite him in the ***.
w
I did not know that I was under attack. It is a bit like 'proving' that anyone ever went to the Moon. Perhaps is it just all a sham. Some say so, and no double blind test has been done to prove it one way or another. I personally rather prefer to believe in people, rather than disbelieve them without any evidence.
wakibaki said:
It's not that it gives offence, only that it is an invalid form of argument. This may be related to another bias, as I am loath to attribute to malice or self-aggrandizement that which can be explained by simple self-deception--the most common of all human failings. And I am most uncomfortable with the temptation to divine the motivations of others.
I want to believe it is more productive to hammer subjectivity, when found in those domains where it does not belong, relentlessly with science and logic...to never let its assertion pass without a reasoned challenge.
A product doesn't have to be better to command more money in the marketplace. People will pay more money for a product if they percieve it to be better. Said product does not have to be demonstratably better.
Niche manufacturers make up a story to convince people that an inferior quality product is better. All you really need in audio is low hiss and hum, and the rest really doesn't matter. Audio is pretty old hat as far as technology goes, and you see this kind of business crop up in such markets. Point to point wiring of a tube amp is available to pretty much any charlatan.
All the people who realize how futile it is to sell a perpetual motion machine end up in audio.
Niche manufacturers make up a story to convince people that an inferior quality product is better. All you really need in audio is low hiss and hum, and the rest really doesn't matter. Audio is pretty old hat as far as technology goes, and you see this kind of business crop up in such markets. Point to point wiring of a tube amp is available to pretty much any charlatan.
All the people who realize how futile it is to sell a perpetual motion machine end up in audio.
Everything sounds different to me.
Greetings Programs! (Any other TRON fans out there?)
I usually try to keep my half-witted ravings to myself, but this thread has been going for awhile and I would like to offer my personal experience.
My systems have included a Stromberg Carlson valve preamp/amp, a Pioneer, and a Denon integrated amp. All sounded different on the same speakers.
I bought a Hafler XL280 amp/DH110 preamp specifically to drive some low-Ohm (4.7) Magnepan speakers and it has been making me happy for 18 years.
Recently, I acquired a second XL280 on eBay.
It sounds totally different. Mine sounds way better.
After popping the hood for an examination I noticed that some components were different brands/voltages than mine, but everything was basically the same. The largest difference was the input JFETs. Mine shipped with K163/J44 NEC fets and the eBay one had non-complimentary Toshiba FETs.
I also recently experimented with 'recapping'.
EVERY single cap change I ever made in my amp or my preamp made it sound different, and unfortunately, basically worse.
The biggest reduction in quality came from the 6.3V BiPolar 1000uF low-frequency cutoff cap in my amp's driver circuit.
I replaced an original 'large can' Nichicon 6.3V BP 1000uF (which I then proceeded to throw away) with a brand new '07 date code Nichicon 6.3V BP 1000uF - Yeaaachh!
I now have one less octave of bass at the bottom.
My poor amp will never sound the same.
All amps, every brand, every serial number of every type -
sound completely different to my ears.
My 2 cents 🙂
Greetings Programs! (Any other TRON fans out there?)
I usually try to keep my half-witted ravings to myself, but this thread has been going for awhile and I would like to offer my personal experience.
My systems have included a Stromberg Carlson valve preamp/amp, a Pioneer, and a Denon integrated amp. All sounded different on the same speakers.
I bought a Hafler XL280 amp/DH110 preamp specifically to drive some low-Ohm (4.7) Magnepan speakers and it has been making me happy for 18 years.
Recently, I acquired a second XL280 on eBay.
It sounds totally different. Mine sounds way better.
After popping the hood for an examination I noticed that some components were different brands/voltages than mine, but everything was basically the same. The largest difference was the input JFETs. Mine shipped with K163/J44 NEC fets and the eBay one had non-complimentary Toshiba FETs.
I also recently experimented with 'recapping'.
EVERY single cap change I ever made in my amp or my preamp made it sound different, and unfortunately, basically worse.
The biggest reduction in quality came from the 6.3V BiPolar 1000uF low-frequency cutoff cap in my amp's driver circuit.
I replaced an original 'large can' Nichicon 6.3V BP 1000uF (which I then proceeded to throw away) with a brand new '07 date code Nichicon 6.3V BP 1000uF - Yeaaachh!
I now have one less octave of bass at the bottom.
My poor amp will never sound the same.
All amps, every brand, every serial number of every type -
sound completely different to my ears.
My 2 cents 🙂
Back in the late '50's and early 60's, my primary sound source was a 1938 Gibson guitar amp, with a couple of 6L6's and an attached electrodynamic 12 inch speaker in a Bass Reflex cabinet. I think that the caps in the supply totaled less than 10uF, and I doubt that it used negative feedback. It made enough sound for me to add an FM tuner to it and listen to it for hours when I was not playing an electric guitar through it.
I had very good hearing then, better than now, and evaluated the sound of classical and folk guitars to an extreme, compared to most people at the time.
I had very good hearing then, better than now, and evaluated the sound of classical and folk guitars to an extreme, compared to most people at the time.
Well I enjoy all these tests that indicate no one can tell the difference between nominally good amps. I enjoy them because they puzzle me; they run so against my experience.
But, I have never taken part in a test so well controlled. I have been in tests where my expectations were thoroughly trumped, though. And tests were I was hard pressed to hear a difference. But mostly amps sound different to me. Can this all be the result of volume level mismatches?
Let's not forget, Mr. Edison used blind tests to show that the audience could not tell his disk player from a live orchestra! How can that be? The Edison disk players are rather amazing, but they don't fool me. I doubt they'd fool anyone here.
And you may not know, but a number of rigorous tests were done in the 19th century (with 20th century follow-ups) that "proved" the earth is flat. Do any of you here believe it is?
I admire the tests, the testers and the test subjects. I hope to learn more, precisely because it goes against what I think I know. 🙂
I'll be happy to put up $100 for further tests.
But, I have never taken part in a test so well controlled. I have been in tests where my expectations were thoroughly trumped, though. And tests were I was hard pressed to hear a difference. But mostly amps sound different to me. Can this all be the result of volume level mismatches?
Let's not forget, Mr. Edison used blind tests to show that the audience could not tell his disk player from a live orchestra! How can that be? The Edison disk players are rather amazing, but they don't fool me. I doubt they'd fool anyone here.
And you may not know, but a number of rigorous tests were done in the 19th century (with 20th century follow-ups) that "proved" the earth is flat. Do any of you here believe it is?
I admire the tests, the testers and the test subjects. I hope to learn more, precisely because it goes against what I think I know. 🙂
I'll be happy to put up $100 for further tests.
wakibaki said:
What make you think that I did not do double blind tests? I've stated earlier that all I care for is to make music sound real, I don't care what is needed to achieve that, so no preconceived ideas or preferences.
To me the ultimate foolishness would be to try and fool yourself, unfortunately many are masters at that.
dwk123 said:
For sure people will perceive sound differently, perhaps thats the reason that there is such a variety of equipment available. Most important is that you enjoy what you hear and we must accept that it will vary from person to person.
wakibaki said:
I did not see anything wrong with any of his posts, in fact I feel the input from somebody of his background must be valued in a DIY forum.
Please tell us more about your experience. What have you designed or built?
panomaniac said:
Once I had the priviledge to go and listen to an amplifier that was said by many to be one of the best in the world. Obviously the expectations were very high. This turned out to be one of the worst listening experiences I've ever had, to be honest I had a sick feeling for a few days about it.
Surely volume levels are important but that can never explain the difference between good and bad sound or the ability to realistically recreate music.
Regarding the personal attacks on John Curl...very serious and scientific indeed...you say you dont reveal yourself, well...you just have 
Don't they teach critical thinking in your country? His experience carries no bearing on whether or not his argument is valid. This is very basic logic and you should know better.Andre Visser said:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.