john curl said:Many of you will learn, in time, that the rigorous tests do not show much, yet more open tests show plenty. The apparent reason is how the brain works under serious decision making, especially left brain activity. But then, what do I know? I only get good reviews.
John,
I think you nailed it, finally! I don't know if you have the right/left thing right, but the difference in result between rigorous and open tests is indeed due to how the brain works. What do you know, we actually agree 😀
Jan Didden
A piece offering
Maybe we can reach a compromise with the auditory challenged community.
All amps sound the same. The connecting cables, however sound dramatically different.
So we can all be happy now and get back to designing/building better amps (and correspondingly better ABX boxes).
Maybe we can reach a compromise with the auditory challenged community.
All amps sound the same. The connecting cables, however sound dramatically different.
So we can all be happy now and get back to designing/building better amps (and correspondingly better ABX boxes).
Andre Visser said:
How is it that people doing a blind listening test are using their ears any less than anyone else?
Thanks cuibono, the reason for asking is that I'm trying to figure out why some hear clear differences and other not.
My thinking is that it is either the equipment hiding differences or perhaps we are not listening the same, or both.
André
My thinking is that it is either the equipment hiding differences or perhaps we are not listening the same, or both.
André
Andre, I'm trying to figure out the same thing.
I can really clearly hear large differences between my LM3875 monoblocks and my 6BM8 monoblocks, and before that, between the tube MB and the Creek integrated. Large, not small differences.
The think that confuses me, it that well thought out and executed studies of amplifiers have shown that under specific conditions, very dissimilar amplifiers could not be distinguished. This is a very serious finding, as it really goes against peoples experience. Either there is a flaw in the method of the studies, or any auditory differences between similarly matched amplifiers are very very hard to distinguish.
Hence this thread, and all of us being here. We have been trying to find acceptable explanations for how the studies might have missed something.
The only other explanation is that once specific requirements have been met, amplifiers may be almost practically indistinguishable.
I can really clearly hear large differences between my LM3875 monoblocks and my 6BM8 monoblocks, and before that, between the tube MB and the Creek integrated. Large, not small differences.
The think that confuses me, it that well thought out and executed studies of amplifiers have shown that under specific conditions, very dissimilar amplifiers could not be distinguished. This is a very serious finding, as it really goes against peoples experience. Either there is a flaw in the method of the studies, or any auditory differences between similarly matched amplifiers are very very hard to distinguish.
Hence this thread, and all of us being here. We have been trying to find acceptable explanations for how the studies might have missed something.
The only other explanation is that once specific requirements have been met, amplifiers may be almost practically indistinguishable.
john curl said:Many of you will learn, in time, that the rigorous tests do not show much, yet more open tests show plenty. The apparent reason is how the brain works under serious decision making, especially left brain activity. But then, what do I know? I only get good reviews.
So John, you're saying the simple act of using a voltmeter to match levels, not clipping the amplifiers, and relinquishing knowledge of which amplifier you're listening to, prevents you from making valid comparisons?
How is it even possible to compare anything, blind or sighted, without incurring the brain's analytical decision making?
cuibono said:
I can only concentrate on one thing at a time, so my thinking, perhaps they concentrate more on the test itself than concentrating on what they hear. Also, I've seen possibilities that the equipment used in most cases could be described as less transparent but that should not be the only reason.
Andre Visser said:
So are you trying to tell me I'm not crazy😀 [/QUOTE
Of course you are not. Are you? 😀
Jan Didden
Andre Visser said:
How is any comparison we make when auditioning equipment different?
Andre Visser said:
If the amplifiers used were 'less transparent', wouldn't that aid recognition?
Every other setup than my own sounds strange...and when other people are present my own sounds strange too...or at least I cannot hear what I am used to hear 
Andre Visser said:
So are you trying to tell me I'm not crazy
Andre Visser said:
One very serious issue is that when doing a blind test most people, if not experienced, are somewhat confused. It is as if they are lost somehow, and the reason is that now they miss a lot of inputs that they used to have. It's like driving a car and all of a sudden they take away your side mirrors and the spedometer. You can still drive but its quite unfamiliar and therefore more stressfull and hard.
Similar things happen when you do a blind test without a lot of experience. You miss the familiar sight of those amps, the colors, the nice panel LEDs, the impressive heatsinks, the reassurance that there is a fine piece of equipment you spend your hard-earned $$$ on.
I'm serious, I'm not saying these are important, but they are part of the familiar 'picture'. Remember that the brain produces a fused, integrated perception of all senses plus memories and expectation. Now part of those inputs is gone. It is a new situation and needs getting used to. It is plausible that dbt's become effective only after you have familiarized yourself with the new perceptive environment it presents.
Jan Didden
I believe it's the small differences that are the main concern. I don't doubt that someone who has very good hearing and is a good listener could, with lots of practice over a reasonable period of time, distinguish amplifier A from amplifier B better than 50% of the time. Switching back and forth at his own leisure (knowing, of course, which amplifier he is listening to), getting to know any nuances peculiar to A or B, and picking places in the recording where there exists a reliable "tell", it's quite possible, even under the pressure of having a browbeating James Randi in the room, to differentiate between components in a double blind test situation. The problem then is that the shoe will be on the other foot and it will be the scientific types who won't accept the results, because such a testing regimen doesn't correspond to any that they may have seen before.
John
cuibono said:
My experience is that it will be more difficult to get two amps to sound the same once you realize that almost everything affect the sound.
cuibono said:
I was actually referring to the other equipment, for example, I found some speakers to have a sound of their own, not very dependant on the rest of the system, but normally hiding detail also.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.