Jakob2 said:
Maybe not, but it beats sighted informal tests by orders of magnitude, and I for one don't know of a better method.
Mind you, I'm not saying we all should do DBT's. It's in the end about the music, and whatever rocks your boat is what you should get. But if you want to convince me that amp A *sound* better than amp B (NOT that A is preferable to B), I just shrug if it's an anecdotal story, expecially if amp A is the one you built yourself 😉
Jan
janneman said:
In that case there is two of us...I fully support PeterPan fully on this subject, and I sure hope there are more out there capeable of complete objectivity
Maybe OT, maybe not...about listening
Try to focus your energy downwards when listening...its is much better to listen with your body, than with your head
You use your complete nerve system instead of your brain only...it gives much greater pleasure
😉
That is a reasonable argument. 🙂
Btw, i´d say everybody should do dbts sometimes, because it is an interesting experience and i think if you learn more about the way your perception works it does help in every case.
But please don´t believe you must have found the sonic truth doing your first dbt ever. 🙂
I have not only participated in blind tests myself, but also conducted dbts with summed ~100 participants over the years. And my concerns regarding the traps are based on this experience and the literature as well.
I was quite surprised in the beginning to see that even experienced listener fail if being unfamiliar with blind test protocols. They did a lot better after getting over this initial period by doing some training.
Btw, did i already mention that controls are an important detail? 🙂
Jakob2
pinkmouse said:
You've said that several times over the years, Al. But why?
The Left/Right brain thing may be oversimplified in popular lit, but I read a lot of books by neurologists who always talk about lesions in different hemispheres having different (and often predictable) results. They seem to believe that different functions happen in different places in the brain.
What do you know that they don't? Or am I missing something?
Sorry for the OT.
janneman said:
I am usually VERY uncertain about amps I have built myself
on the other hand, I have never had a "commercial" amp that could really please me...well, I am sure the new 30.5 from NelsonPass would, but no money fore that
Why do I have a feeling that all this is kind of "wishfull thinking"
🙂
tinitus said:
I do not have the feeling it is all wishfull thinking; what gives you that idea??
It's just that IF you are getting interested in this, there's a whole world opening up of many years of well-documented scientific research on how people form opinions and preferences. It's not specifically on audio, just in all everday situations and circumstances. But it is applicable to the way we form opinions about audio as well.
It's really fascinating to study it, you read things you can hardly believe. Then you go to this forum, and what do you know, it is exactly as they found in their studies.
For example, a few posts back I asked you why you think that you are objective. You chose not to answer that, but instead brought up this 'wishfull thinking' subject that nobody has mentioned before. So predictable!
But the main obstacle against any progress in knowing ourselves (because that is what it ultimately boils down to) is our idea that we are very good at things we do, we basically don't make mistakes, and if somebody suggests that maybe our opinion or view on something is not what we are convinced of, we feel it as an attack on our person. As if we look bad, as if we are ridiculed. You need to develop the very difficult ability to 'jump over your own shadow', if you know what I mean.
And the fact that you learn about this doesn't mean that you don't suffer from it. I can read all the books I want until I am blue in the face, but I STILL am wired just like you, and I can't escape that very human, pure subjectivism either.
Jan Didden
tinitus said:
Why are you *sure* the 30.5 would please you? (If that was meant serious, of course).
Jan Didden
I am glad to see that many people continue to contribute to this thread with apparent good humour but I am concerned with the seeming indifference to resolution of the issue or arguments advanced.
For many of us, the issue is largely academic, as our survival is not predicated on the performance of our hi-fi systems.
My continuing interest in the subject is driven by the issue of morality, and a concern for the integrity of information.
A fool and his money are soon parted, and in many ways I have little sympathy for those with more money than sense.
We all, however, understand the concerns of Jack's mother, when he returned from market having exchanged the cow for some magic beans, notwithstanding the subsequent arrival of a fruitful beanstalk and resident giant + treasure.
Only a fool would dispute that there are differences in real-world amplifiers. The problem for the buyer or builder is: - are they trivial or significant? As design progresses, it is natural that they should become less significant, and eventually fall below the level of unaided human perceptibility, while the cost of the equipment also falls.
Due to my current interest in the subject, I recently found myself reading a post from an author who had some B&W 802s, and correspondingly expensive ancillary equipment. He was writing about the 'transformation' of his system by a number of inexpensive (and in my view performance-neutral) tweaks, the most significant of which probably involved the slight repositioning of the speakers.
Here we have a system at which thousands of dollars have been thrown already. It's performance should have been superlative in any case, how could it possibly have been 'transformed'? DM2As to 802s, that might have been described as a 'transformation'.
Given that some individuals are less than scrupulous than others where personal profit is concerned, they can be overwhelmed by the temptation to exaggerate these differences. A problem also arises where individuals seem to have their personal self-esteem in some way tied up in the equipment they choose and use.
Because we continue to acknowledge the real differences in amplifiers without emphasising their ABSOLUTE TRIVIALITY in terms of enjoyment of the program material and fail to impose and acknowledge the results of rigorous testing whether 'objective' or ABX, we open the door to less and less plausible and more and more expensive modifications foisted on the buying public by unscrupulous vendors.
I have a system now which cost less (in pounds, not accounting for inflation) than the first stereo I bought nearly 40 years ago, and which blows the old system (Pioneer,Goldring,Rodgers,B&W) away.
How do I know? ...Now I know the words of all those Van Morrison tracks. Even tho' my hearing only goes up to 15k now.
Sorry, even I can't resist an anecdote.
I notice that even on the TNT audio site, a site which I think has much else to recommend it, when the author is talking about constructing speaker cables, he takes care to orient the cables identically in terms of which end came off the drum first. Not because he believes there is any difference, but 'just in case'. Presumably on the same basis that he doesn't walk under ladders, even though he knows that it's not unlucky. This is an example of how we can all be affected by superstition.
How would you feel if your plumber added 10% labour because the pipes had to be put in 'in one direction', because they 'work better'.
If we're not careful we're going to end up in a situation where 'domestic audio engineers' are going to end up regarded with the same suspicion and mistrust as plumbers.
w
For many of us, the issue is largely academic, as our survival is not predicated on the performance of our hi-fi systems.
My continuing interest in the subject is driven by the issue of morality, and a concern for the integrity of information.
A fool and his money are soon parted, and in many ways I have little sympathy for those with more money than sense.
We all, however, understand the concerns of Jack's mother, when he returned from market having exchanged the cow for some magic beans, notwithstanding the subsequent arrival of a fruitful beanstalk and resident giant + treasure.
Only a fool would dispute that there are differences in real-world amplifiers. The problem for the buyer or builder is: - are they trivial or significant? As design progresses, it is natural that they should become less significant, and eventually fall below the level of unaided human perceptibility, while the cost of the equipment also falls.
Due to my current interest in the subject, I recently found myself reading a post from an author who had some B&W 802s, and correspondingly expensive ancillary equipment. He was writing about the 'transformation' of his system by a number of inexpensive (and in my view performance-neutral) tweaks, the most significant of which probably involved the slight repositioning of the speakers.
Here we have a system at which thousands of dollars have been thrown already. It's performance should have been superlative in any case, how could it possibly have been 'transformed'? DM2As to 802s, that might have been described as a 'transformation'.
Given that some individuals are less than scrupulous than others where personal profit is concerned, they can be overwhelmed by the temptation to exaggerate these differences. A problem also arises where individuals seem to have their personal self-esteem in some way tied up in the equipment they choose and use.
Because we continue to acknowledge the real differences in amplifiers without emphasising their ABSOLUTE TRIVIALITY in terms of enjoyment of the program material and fail to impose and acknowledge the results of rigorous testing whether 'objective' or ABX, we open the door to less and less plausible and more and more expensive modifications foisted on the buying public by unscrupulous vendors.
I have a system now which cost less (in pounds, not accounting for inflation) than the first stereo I bought nearly 40 years ago, and which blows the old system (Pioneer,Goldring,Rodgers,B&W) away.
How do I know? ...Now I know the words of all those Van Morrison tracks. Even tho' my hearing only goes up to 15k now.
Sorry, even I can't resist an anecdote.
I notice that even on the TNT audio site, a site which I think has much else to recommend it, when the author is talking about constructing speaker cables, he takes care to orient the cables identically in terms of which end came off the drum first. Not because he believes there is any difference, but 'just in case'. Presumably on the same basis that he doesn't walk under ladders, even though he knows that it's not unlucky. This is an example of how we can all be affected by superstition.
How would you feel if your plumber added 10% labour because the pipes had to be put in 'in one direction', because they 'work better'.
If we're not careful we're going to end up in a situation where 'domestic audio engineers' are going to end up regarded with the same suspicion and mistrust as plumbers.
w
wakibaki said:
Why? Because for the first time we are trying to figure out if there could be problems with DBT's?
Perhaps that could be said about all off us but some of us are trying to find "perfection" and I don't think we are near that yet.
Let me see, more money than sense.... I thought to make money you need sense, surely you won't get rich by wasting money, or is the problem in that certain people are willing to spend more on their enjoyment than you are willing to?
Nice bedtime story.
Yes they are significant, I promise I will stop to develop my amplifier as soon as there is no gain in making it better.
Somebody with equipment like that should know that the positioning of the speakers as well as the room setup is important from the start. Stupidity is not the equipment's fault.
So, how is that your problem?
Trivial to you perhaps, I enjoy every moment of it.
I would think that technology and knowledge have improved a lot during the last 40 years, are you suggesting it must stop now?
Is it superstition? Maybe he know enough about cables to realise how complicated it can be.
Another bedtime story.
Pan said:
We can probably put this thread to bed, as Pan has offered as clear a statement on the fundamental incompatibility of the perspectives of the two sides as we could hope for.
If it really is the case that there are a group of people who fundamentally deny even the possibility of non-auditory influences on their subjective perceptions, I'm left feeling there is nothing to discuss.
I'm sorry Pan, but if you don't see the complete and total irony contained in this statement I just don't think you begin to understand at all the points people have been trying to make about non-auditory influences.
I've been reading this thread for a while and want to post my thoughts.
I find it very suspicious that most "I hear a difference" people say they are not influenced by looking at a brand, but on the other hand they are supposedly influenced by looking at a curtain during ABX. That is totally contradictory to what I would expect. If anything, taking away the visual stimulus should enable you to focus better on the task at hand. That is if you want to evaluate sonic differences. If you want to evaluate the music experience as a whole, it's different.
The explanations why ABX should not work are way more farfetched than the explanations why most amplifiers should be sonically indistinguishable from one another. By the way, ABX has been shown to work (e.g. when comparing sonic differences for different bitrates for MP3 encoding) IF the differences are large enough (i.e. audible or relevant if you will).
Just look at what we have in terms of electronics (computers, cell phones etc.) and how complicated they are compared to an audio amp. I think it is not that difficult to build a power amplifier that is "real world perfect".
Just accept it, it doesn't take away anything from the justification of building amps or selling a very expensive amp that is good craftsmanship or a status symbol. Just don't tell me that it sounds "better" or even "different" for that matter. And don't take it personal if somebody tells you, that your endeavours to improve sound on the amp level are futile.
I built a couple of amps with great help from this forum. In contrast to what I read here, there's no difference audible between them and the ones I bought. That is AFTER the initial excitement about finishing the project. Don't tell me I have bad hearing, cause A) you don't know me and B) I don't. Don't tell me I don't have enough experience either, cause A) you don't know me and B) experience is not always a good thing anyway, common sense is definitely better.
Maybe one day, we will have "real world perfect" speakers and recordings. Then differences in amps might become audible. Until then, I don't worry about how my amps (or my D/A converters or my cables) sound. It's a waste of time and energy.
The problem with this debate is: it's ideology (and sometimes poisoned by commercial motives). The facts are proven, if people want to discuss their ideology beyond that, it's not going to lead anywhere.
In general, this forum is great for technical, safety or creative advice. Everyone who takes the sound claims for granted needs to get her/his head examined! I'm surprised the army hasn't tried recruiting all these superhumans with hearing beyond the level of the "bionic woman". I can claim whatever I want here, in fact I might one day do just that. A bogus claim just to see what the reaction is going to be (I still think, this is how this whole playstation thing started....).
Cheers
I find it very suspicious that most "I hear a difference" people say they are not influenced by looking at a brand, but on the other hand they are supposedly influenced by looking at a curtain during ABX. That is totally contradictory to what I would expect. If anything, taking away the visual stimulus should enable you to focus better on the task at hand. That is if you want to evaluate sonic differences. If you want to evaluate the music experience as a whole, it's different.
The explanations why ABX should not work are way more farfetched than the explanations why most amplifiers should be sonically indistinguishable from one another. By the way, ABX has been shown to work (e.g. when comparing sonic differences for different bitrates for MP3 encoding) IF the differences are large enough (i.e. audible or relevant if you will).
Just look at what we have in terms of electronics (computers, cell phones etc.) and how complicated they are compared to an audio amp. I think it is not that difficult to build a power amplifier that is "real world perfect".
Just accept it, it doesn't take away anything from the justification of building amps or selling a very expensive amp that is good craftsmanship or a status symbol. Just don't tell me that it sounds "better" or even "different" for that matter. And don't take it personal if somebody tells you, that your endeavours to improve sound on the amp level are futile.
I built a couple of amps with great help from this forum. In contrast to what I read here, there's no difference audible between them and the ones I bought. That is AFTER the initial excitement about finishing the project. Don't tell me I have bad hearing, cause A) you don't know me and B) I don't. Don't tell me I don't have enough experience either, cause A) you don't know me and B) experience is not always a good thing anyway, common sense is definitely better.
Maybe one day, we will have "real world perfect" speakers and recordings. Then differences in amps might become audible. Until then, I don't worry about how my amps (or my D/A converters or my cables) sound. It's a waste of time and energy.
The problem with this debate is: it's ideology (and sometimes poisoned by commercial motives). The facts are proven, if people want to discuss their ideology beyond that, it's not going to lead anywhere.
In general, this forum is great for technical, safety or creative advice. Everyone who takes the sound claims for granted needs to get her/his head examined! I'm surprised the army hasn't tried recruiting all these superhumans with hearing beyond the level of the "bionic woman". I can claim whatever I want here, in fact I might one day do just that. A bogus claim just to see what the reaction is going to be (I still think, this is how this whole playstation thing started....).
Cheers
there's very simple way to remove the 'terror' of an ABX test, just give people the kit in identical boxes and let them listne at their leisure and come to a conclusion over an extended period of time.
just like we do daily in our typical lsitening but without the visual clues.
During my time enjoying musical reproduction i've noticed that different people appear to be sensitive to different things. At first i though this was simply ********, i couldn't hear the differences they claimed to hear, so i naturally discounted them as not existing.
then i met a friend with an exceptional set up, and during the course of experiencing his system he has made many changes, and largely i find myself in agreement that they are changes in the sound, we naturally differ on what we prefer, but sometimes he hears things i can't.
Originally i thought it was wishfull thinking on his part. Then one night i was listening to his set up and mentioned that it sounded different. he said he had made no changes and i was simply imagining it.
i wasn't. A quick investigation revealed that the antiskate weight on his unipivot had slipped off its mount and the loop was no longer under the tension of the hanging weight arrangement. it was just sat on the plinth rendering it useless.
To me this manifested itself as a flutter across channels as if the balance was being varied randomly, but quite subtly. he couldn't hear it at all.
He also can't tell when the speed of his deck is slightly out, if playing familiar music i immediately notice when its 1% fast or slow.
So i'm a firm beleiver that we all listen out for different things and hear and interpret music differently..
just like we do daily in our typical lsitening but without the visual clues.
During my time enjoying musical reproduction i've noticed that different people appear to be sensitive to different things. At first i though this was simply ********, i couldn't hear the differences they claimed to hear, so i naturally discounted them as not existing.
then i met a friend with an exceptional set up, and during the course of experiencing his system he has made many changes, and largely i find myself in agreement that they are changes in the sound, we naturally differ on what we prefer, but sometimes he hears things i can't.
Originally i thought it was wishfull thinking on his part. Then one night i was listening to his set up and mentioned that it sounded different. he said he had made no changes and i was simply imagining it.
i wasn't. A quick investigation revealed that the antiskate weight on his unipivot had slipped off its mount and the loop was no longer under the tension of the hanging weight arrangement. it was just sat on the plinth rendering it useless.
To me this manifested itself as a flutter across channels as if the balance was being varied randomly, but quite subtly. he couldn't hear it at all.
He also can't tell when the speed of his deck is slightly out, if playing familiar music i immediately notice when its 1% fast or slow.
So i'm a firm beleiver that we all listen out for different things and hear and interpret music differently..
janneman said:
That's for some customers. They will get the myth (construction, reviews, price, luxury store) no matter what. Because they are set to consume a myth right from the start. Not everybody thinks like that. My DIY stuff when a rat's nest on a wooden board phase, still sounds different when tweaked a little. If you get me to ABX it, and can not probably detect it, I am at a loss if it will pause having a difference when I will listen to it normally again.
Andre Visser said:
Well the *cough cough* and "musician" was meant to comunicate that I' an happy amateur. I enjoy learning new instruments and making them (I have made my own flutes such as Zamponas, Irish whistles), playing and writing songs, recording me making sounds but even more so recording others that perform but I don't have any material I'd like to share at the moment.
Regarding equipment, I'll get back to that later.
Certain things can IMO be captured and repoduced faithfully, and studies have shown that some material can fool some listeners in believing they hear live when it actually was playback.
/Peter
jacco vermeulen said:
Jaco,
I will check that thread. Thanks!
Please se my last post regarding the rest.
/Peter
janneman said:
Jan you are completely off here (if I get what you mean) assuming that all people choose the bling bling.
What in the whole wide world makes you think this is the way it is?
To make things clear, I KNOW there are people that are like that but I know MANY that are not.
Again you really must start to realise that people are different.
Of course it's true, otherwise I wouldn't have said it. I'm not alone either, again you really need to start thinking along other lines.. really!
Agree. And wouldn't it be funny if someone succeded in a BT and it turns out the person actually could identify (not only separate) the DUT's?
I have and therefore I know!
edit: clarification. Several times I have heard differences between various audiogear and a very sceptical friend of mine told me. "Yea right, pick them out in a blind test".. well we did some BT and I could pick them out. Not one single time have I failed to identify or separate DUT's in a BT if I felt that I heard a diference open. I don't doubt that there are amps and stuff that are so close in performance that they can not be detected but I have never had two poweramps, two CD players, two microphone preamps that sounded the same.
Simple as that.
/Peter
wakibaki said:
Some times trivial some times significant. The wise man investigate the particular amp of interest instead of being dogmatic about it.
Well maybe not. That is, of course there are many manufacturers and customers that wants hifi performance. But a large part of the biz is about hype, status symbols and stuff like that. That is something that will never go away and there are a lot crap (IMO)out there.
But sure, if someone wants big fancy stuff (with medioker or poor performance) that in their eyes signals luxuary itäs up to them. Some participants in this thread seems to believe that all people are equal and fall into that group of customers/listeners.
Repositioning speakers...performance neutral..ok!
Well that's the problem.. people that do not understand acoustics and psychoacoustics try to tell the rest how things work. You don't put a good system into a container and get god sound.
Yup, there are people like that. Prestige. And there are prestigeless people that only want hifi... and of course 149 levels in between those extremes. 😀
That's great and shows exactly what it's about. The performance of audiogear comes from engineering and benchperformance, not a huge pricetag and fancy looks.
You question if differences are trivial or significant first, and then you go on telling about your new system smokes your old and that you hear words that you didn't hear earlier..?
That's funny. Oh well.. I love the Man by the way.
/Peter
- Status
- Not open for further replies.