Surely you've heard about the "coathanger wire vs high-end speaker wire test".
The listening panel judged that the coathanger wires sounded better than the fancy expensive "audiophile" wires.
What is important to point out is...
Electrons do not have a "preference" or brain as humans do.
All they know or care about is being able to travel through a conductor of some kind, be it copper, steel, aluminum, carbon, etc.
Yet, humans (fanatics, so-called golden ears, obsessive, eccentrics) insist that there are clearly audible differences in the way the electrons travel.
In addition to the above, look at those whacked-out audiophiles that use heavy, thick, garden-hose type wiring from the amps to the speakers, and similarly fat interconnecting cables.
But... that amp's internal fuse is just a thin sliver of metal, hardly thicker than a human hair in some cases.
And the amp's internal wiring is at best only reasonable sized too.
One could say that those things are a bottleneck in the electron flow.
What cracks me up is the fact that marketing hype and hear-say is to blame for this sickness planted in the mind.
Think about "Mass Formation Psychosis"
It's sadly a real thing.
Last edited:
Well, here's more details for anyone interested....since the internet cannot replicate actually being there.
I told my listener initially that I was going to switch the amps by the switch, which he knew was installed beforhand.
And it was a heavy-duty 4PDT toggle that obviously makes a noticable SNAP sound.
You can hear it SNAP across the room, even with music playing, but with absolutely no interruption to the music playing.
The dummy switch, identical, was also "wired", but the wires were not connected to anything, just tucked into the component cabinet.
Both of these switches were behind the cabinet, so he could not know about the 2nd switch.
I'd reach behind the cabinet, and throw "a switch".
He was to tell me what amp was playing..... tube, or solid state, because he CLAIMS he can tell a difference - likely because of his other friends having both types of amps, and likely that they sound quite different.
The music selections were varied - vocals, orchestra, etc.
His wrong selection answers amused me of course, I knew the real answer, but kept a straight face naturally.
And at 42, he does have great hearing, I'll give him that.
He just adheres to his other friends advice a bit too much about "high end is the only way".
I've met some of them, they're nice enough, but they've "bought into" the hype, as so many have done.
And for me to build a simple tube amp with remarkable quality that is not discernable from a good solid state amp (rated 0.008 distortion) just reinforces my feelings about hype, high price, and all the goony rhetoric that goes with it.
Did you know that Mark is at least in his mid 70's? He did state that it's been nearly 10 years since he retired and that was couple years ago so given that typical retirement age is 66 in the US, that gives you an idea.
Is it a coincidence that silver wire has a reputation for sounding bright, and copper a reputation for sounding warm?
And I'm 68, going to be 69 next Sunday (March 20).Did you know that Mark is at least in his mid 70's? He did state that it's been nearly 10 years since he retired and that was couple years ago so given that typical retirement age is 66 in the US, that gives you an idea.
Closed the shop in 2016, and retired shortly after.
Being 65+ does have some nice perks though.
All tha babble over wire types - nonsense.
And coathanger wires sound steely..... LOL!
Now there is something to ponder because that phrase could mean at least 2 different things. I wonder if you did what Eagles did when they sang, "They stab it with their steely knives"...
The test was to see if there was a perceptible difference between a tube amp and a solid-state amp...an "A" or "B", a one or the other. It is known as a placebo...expectations, anticipations, the brains role in perceptions. By having a third null condition, the whole precept of "differences" can & often invalidate the whole experiment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick...
My "experiment" was mainly to see if the guy with the Golden Ears really could notice a difference between amps.
Which, I found out, he could not.
Previous to this, our discussion led to his persistance that he "could"... "for sure" hear a difference.
To me, I can't tell a difference, yet I wanted to prove to him my findings.
I learned a long time ago....... not to believe in some things just because "someone" praises them.
Besides, all the decades of experience at the shop confirms that.
And thanks for the b-day note.
@wiseoldtech, Guess I didn't explain well enough the fatal error in your experimental design. In general terms experiments need to be designed to minimize confounding factors. Instead of that your design introduced an unnecessary confounding factor.
In other words, if your test subject failed to differentiate amplifiers, a well designed experiment would allow for only one explanation for the failure. Your design added another possible explanation.
This is your error: You designed your experiment so that it induced cognitive dissonance into the test subject. That is a known way to make people confused and perform more poorly on tests than they normally would if not in a confused state.
The other thing is that you failed to realize is that you didn't need to add the confounding factor. You did need to switch the outputs though. To remove the switch sound as confounding you need to make sure the test subject is NOT confused and NOT influenced by it. That could easily of been done by telling him to ignore the switch because some false switch sounds would occur at times. With that information he need not be abnormally confused. He could be in a more normal listening state of mind.
Does that make sense at all? Maybe it doesn't. Experimentation on humans has had a long learning curve in science, and still holds challenges.
In other words, if your test subject failed to differentiate amplifiers, a well designed experiment would allow for only one explanation for the failure. Your design added another possible explanation.
This is your error: You designed your experiment so that it induced cognitive dissonance into the test subject. That is a known way to make people confused and perform more poorly on tests than they normally would if not in a confused state.
The other thing is that you failed to realize is that you didn't need to add the confounding factor. You did need to switch the outputs though. To remove the switch sound as confounding you need to make sure the test subject is NOT confused and NOT influenced by it. That could easily of been done by telling him to ignore the switch because some false switch sounds would occur at times. With that information he need not be abnormally confused. He could be in a more normal listening state of mind.
Does that make sense at all? Maybe it doesn't. Experimentation on humans has had a long learning curve in science, and still holds challenges.
I can understand where you're going with this, but I think you're adding confusion where it really isn't.
I'll clarify the situation a bit more, since it's obvious that discussing this over the internet is more difficult than actually being there.
1) - The test subject was invited on a specific day and time.
2) - The system was operating, playing a CD, with the tube amp, at the time that the subject walked in.
3) - He sat down in the advised "sweet spot" for a few minutes, listening.
4) - He did not know which of the amps was initially connected when he walked in.
5) - After settling in, and the song playing was ended, I re-played the same song, and moments into it, switched the fake switch. (and noted the subject's silent response) -Tube amp still connected.
6) - Halfway into the song, I switched the real switch. (and noted the subject's silent response again). SS amp now inline.
7) - I then asked him to tell me which amp was inline when I switched the real switch at that moment.
8) - He said "SS amp" which was wrong.
9) - I then switched the fake switch - He said "tube". - correct.
10) - Then I switched the fake switch again -he said "SS amp" - wrong again.
This went on several times and with different types of music, including LP records.
The results were clear to me that he really could not really tell which amp was playing, perhaps wrong 75% of the time.
When done with this test, I explained the fake/real switch arrangement, and the results he gave, and he just shook his head and couldn't give an answer.
He stated that several of "his friends" various systems had a definite tonality between amp types, which naturally was the result of less-than-optimal performance, coloring the sound.
And of course, like us humans, not every system is or will be identical in its "DNA".
I built my EL84 amp to careful standards, and testing, to basically compete with the already fine performance of the SS amp that I like so much.
Yet, the Technics SS amp at 60W/ch and the EL84 amp at 17W/ch, at normal room-filling volume can fool people.
You need to account for where he is coming from. He shills for jam's boutique audio business and as they all do, DBT is the thorn in the (marketing) flesh that they try hard to remove it by discrediting it to any degree they can muster. No matter how much you explain, they will try to take it down with stunning level of persistence. Why? It's a business.
Indeed, "mindset" about something is like a drug addiction.
When someone believes for a substantial period of time a particular thing, it's difficult or impossible to make them believe anything else.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.