But of course.
My apologies for asking.
I didn't. It's the lack of controls/blind, where the comedy begins.
The only one who has mentioned anything about rules....is you.
cheers,
AJ
I thought it was science that dictates the rules
I'm just one of those who claim they brake themAs for the ironic points of your post,you don't expect a reply I guess.You seem to still have that itch that almost killed this thread?Bad boy
So even with system synergy sorted, expensive is the way to go! Damn!
Unfortunately yes.Experience will help a lot to set up a top sounding system at a price,that will expose all overpriced offerings.For me that's where it all stops.Still,that will be the "best" systemfor me,and many will either like it or not.
Last edited:
panikos, I'm afraid that was MY point!!
Ok (BTW, I am one of those who detests and scorns the use of the word synergy, what a w@nk word) for the sake of argument what we tested had no synergy ...(puke)
Where was the reference to that in the quote from TG?? Did TG himself bring up that point? Nope, like *most* cable believers he jumped onto something...anything...that *might* explain why no-one has successfully tested cables.
In any case, leaving aside synergy or lack of it...barf... is it NOT true that all audiophiles KNOW that the technology has moved on and is FAR better now than it was twenty/thirty years ago???
THAT is the point I am highlighting. So, if that were even close to being true, why was not the difference between modern and dated technology immediate?? Forget price. My system did not cost much. Like yours, more than a few are stunned when they hear it.
Rather than price/cost, lets look at the **fact* that the first cdps were flawed...(they WERE were they not???haha) ....according to audiophiles..how is it then that even from that point alone most struggled to hear a difference, and ALL admitted to being extremely surprised at how similar they sounded???
Ahh, of course. Synergy. Lack of it.
sigh.
But as you have seen, TG has jumped onto this supposed life raft with phrases like 'no wonder those thirty year old tests proved nothing, zip cord vs zip cord, and the equipment of those days is rubbish compared to now'...paraphrased of course but not too wrong I hope.
Nope. (What HAS improved is speaker/driver technology. Add in DSP etc and now we are talking worthwhile audio advances.)
Man, it really is amazing when you think about it. Why can I not have the same luck on the gee-gees or the lottery??
Throw any old crappy system together without planning and wow!! the synergy magically happens by pure luck and more than holds it's own against a system put together with application of accepted audiophile knowledge...we know modern cdps are better than the first generation, we know seperates are better than integrated, we know calls A just ****'s all over class AB, we know we need good cables instead of house wiring.....
goddamn I am out to buy a lotto ticket right now!
Ok (BTW, I am one of those who detests and scorns the use of the word synergy, what a w@nk word) for the sake of argument what we tested had no synergy ...(puke)
Where was the reference to that in the quote from TG?? Did TG himself bring up that point? Nope, like *most* cable believers he jumped onto something...anything...that *might* explain why no-one has successfully tested cables.
In any case, leaving aside synergy or lack of it...barf... is it NOT true that all audiophiles KNOW that the technology has moved on and is FAR better now than it was twenty/thirty years ago???
THAT is the point I am highlighting. So, if that were even close to being true, why was not the difference between modern and dated technology immediate?? Forget price. My system did not cost much. Like yours, more than a few are stunned when they hear it.
Rather than price/cost, lets look at the **fact* that the first cdps were flawed...(they WERE were they not???haha) ....according to audiophiles..how is it then that even from that point alone most struggled to hear a difference, and ALL admitted to being extremely surprised at how similar they sounded???
Ahh, of course. Synergy. Lack of it.
sigh.
But as you have seen, TG has jumped onto this supposed life raft with phrases like 'no wonder those thirty year old tests proved nothing, zip cord vs zip cord, and the equipment of those days is rubbish compared to now'...paraphrased of course but not too wrong I hope.
Nope. (What HAS improved is speaker/driver technology. Add in DSP etc and now we are talking worthwhile audio advances.)
Man, it really is amazing when you think about it. Why can I not have the same luck on the gee-gees or the lottery??
Throw any old crappy system together without planning and wow!! the synergy magically happens by pure luck and more than holds it's own against a system put together with application of accepted audiophile knowledge...we know modern cdps are better than the first generation, we know seperates are better than integrated, we know calls A just ****'s all over class AB, we know we need good cables instead of house wiring.....
goddamn I am out to buy a lotto ticket right now!
I am using a turntable,a 15w/ch tube integrated amp,and a pair of small speakers.
So,it is "my point" too
Before,I was using a turntable,a 250w/ch class A tube pre/ ss power amp,and a pair of large speakers.My system now costs less than the previous one,and I like it more.
TG can reply to your points about him.Remember,he has decided to accept the test,so,I will wait as you are
hello again TG. I would imagine that as long as you provide a link to the actual post it should be OK to duplicate it here. Why not?
I wanna call shenanigans on the other point. Can you admit the smallest possibility that maybe that is simply more audiophile beliefs??
I have (at least twice?, but then again it is a long thread so maybe more) given my account of a 'dbt' a few of us undertook.
Very quick recap....a constant pair of speakers fed by two completely different source chains.
One we deliberately hobbled as much as we could (from an audiophile perspective). tHE CDP WAS THE first (grrr caps lock)..try again, the FIRST generation cdp from the late 80's..cannot even remember the brand now (can look it up if it is needed) so of course it must have been from the mainstream guys, none of this boutique crap! I would need to check, we even had the manuals and AFAIR it was a sales pitch that it was fourteen bit!! (or something like that)
Using the crappy interconnects from tandy etc (I'm sure you know the ones I mean) we hooked that up to an 80's integrated amp, again can look up brand etc if needed, then using house wiring from home here (am renovating, so just grabbed offcuts) we hooked up the speakers.
The other chain was a 10k cdp (shanling) using a couple of grand interconnects to twin xindak class A monoblocks, thru a 6k pre (again cannot recall the name) and again expensive name speaker cables to the same set of speakers.
Who knows the value of the first set, the second was at least twenty grands worth.
I am NOT going to say the sound was identical, it wasn't. BUT, there WERE some that could NOT tell them apart even after an hours audition, and most others needed at least twenty min to half an hour before they could even begin to distinguish differences.
Obviously this was not each persons own system, so they were evaluating with a new sound etc etc.
But the essential point still stands...the sonic difference was minor at best, and to some non existant.
Yet, all the audiophiles know that 'the first generation cdps were atrocious', all audiophiles know that..., oh heck I cannot be bothered wasting any more time typing audiophile illusions.
So as I said, am not saying they all sound the same, but I am saying that the differences are NOT to the degree that audiophiles think they are.
Even tho it will be latched on as in your quotes.
Re your listening habits when doing the test...just do the test exactly as you normally would when you change cables! Sheesh.
You are able to tell cables apart are you not? Then do it exactly as you normally would. No one here wants you to do it differently, after all we do not want another litany of reasons why your abilities just happened to leave you the same day you did the test
The only thing we want is that you do not know which cable is which. Everything else you do exactly as normal.
Hello Terry!
Either you have told about this test of the expensive vs cheap components on another site or else someone read it here and did so, because I've heard this same story before. First I want you to know I believe you're telling the truth but, in all honesty I have as much of a hard time believing this as many people here have with believing I hear differences in wires.
Without trying to start a he said, she said sort of debate. Do I realise that we can be fooled? ABSOLUTELY! Just like there are optical illusions there has to be aural illusions. That said, I'm sure you believe in both of these as well, no? Then let me ask you something, ok? Knowing that optical & aural illusions exist why do you trust your eyes and ears in daily living situations? Audio is just hobby and you want my hearing verified, yet, while there are many situations in our daily lives that could potentially be dangerous, I question, are you constantly checking your eyes and ears and verifiying what you see and hear, to be sure you're safe?
Terry I can tell you I've made enough tests both sighted and blind to have convinced myself these sonic differences I hear really exist. That's good enough for me. Terry I'll give even more insight into my past audio experience. I've previously told the story about my first attempt at blind testing of wires here at diyAudio. Now I'll embarrass myself further and tell you all about my very first sighted test of wires. You all should get a real kick out of this but, at least it will give you an idea of what I've done and how I've gone about proving to myself that sonic differences in wires exist.
When I didn't believe wires could possibly have a sound what my friend Rick Carpenteri and I did was get 8 IIRC the number correctlydifferent sets of interconnects. Now I know that to you and many others here, this will be an invalid test because we could see the cables in question, but keep in mind that Rick and I didn't believe cables made a difference and so we expected to hear no difference. Which according to the objectivist mantra should have prevented Rick and I from hearing differences no? Afterall if objectivists are correct and two of the reasons subjectivists hear differences is because they:
1) see the component
2) EXPECT to hear a difference and in expecting to hear a difference they DO hear a difference!
Then following that logic, because we:
1) seeing the cables
2) EXPECTED not to hear a difference thus in expecting not to hear a difference we should NOT hear a difference! But I digress...
This is how our first sighted wire experiment went.
1) Rick and I would always:
a) use the same song
b) use the same volume (we simply shut the system off between different interconnects to assure the volume remained the same. We had no SPL meters and this seemed a reasoanble approach. Especially considering we expected to hear no differences.)
2) We labled the interconnects 1-8.
3) At no time during the process were we allowed to say if we did or didn't hear any differences.
4) We'd insert the interconnect, turn on the system, play the song, and while the song played we'd sit at opposite sides of a couch. We did this to be sure we didn't see what the other wrote --not that this mattered because Rick is almost blind after a 2 foot distance Then we'd simultaneously wrote down what we heard.
5) Steps 1-4 were repeated for all 8 interconnects.
6) After all the interconnects were listened to and we were done writing we compared notes.
Not only did we hear differences but we were shocked to discover many more times than not we commented on EXACTLY SAME THINGS! Also much to our amazement we never conflicted completely i.e. one said the bass got better and the other said the bass got worse. Instead it turned out that most likely that in addition to both agreeing the bass was better or worse, one of us might have made an additional comment like the soundstage got bigger/smaller, the other didn't notice or hear.
This was the results of two guys who didn't believe wires sounded different and set out to prove it! If there were any influences they had to be against hearing a difference because that's what we both believed. This test along with other circumstances eventually led to my very crude attempts a DBTs with friends.
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom Scata)
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
1) is correct.
2) would be correct if you were concious of all your expectations. The subconcious is vast and very powerful.
cheers.
Hi Terry,
Some historic synergystic systems.Some maybe better known in Europe but I'm sure you know most of them.
1.A good source,NAD 3020A amp,AR 18 speakers
2.Ariston RD80 TT,A&R Cambridge A60(arcam)amp,Hebrook HB2 speakers
3.Heybrook/Ariston TT,Audiolab 8000a amp,Rogers LS6/Spendor SP2 speakers
4.Linn/NAIM various combinations(The epitomy of synergy
)......and the list has no end.Some of the above combinations can teach a thing or two to many......more than many new comers.
very quickly TG, work to do!!
I can give you the quotes from the guys themselves if you wish! Hang on, I can't now...been banned from that site haha, and so the gtg section is closed to non members.
Anyway, one of the guys must be a bit like you (I mean completely assured of cable differences etc etc) and he turned up with a bag chock full of cables....how much we ask? Oh, around 40g's worth of cables he just happened to throw in his bag!! That's putting your money where your mouth is!! heh heh
He admitted to me later that he was very surprised at how close they actually sounded. (he was one of the ones that could reliably hear a difference, but he was honest and had the integrity to admit they sounded very close. Would have been easy to just say 'tons of difference'. I admire him for his integrity)
I will tell you a funny story about it tho. (think I have mentioned this before...I love studying people and the 'human reaction'). It was hard to tell them apart, tho I can imagine that once you grasped the difference then it becomes easier and quicker to clock it.
BUT, downstairs with a few beers, and everybody chatting about it, what was fascinating was how (slowly and slowly, bit by bit...no doubt in a direct correlation between amount of discussion and alcohol consumed) the story became that it was easy to tell them apart!!
I had watched them struggle upstairs listening, but when all together and pissed it was easy!! I just watched and observed a fascinating human trait.
Bit like fish tales I suppose.
Anyway, re your example. For sure. But again, you were TWO together. It is not uncommon for 'group' think to occur! I just gave an example above. I am not saying you did not hear a difference, but I am saying the *fact* that the both of you thought one thing etc etc and found the opposite is not very convincing. Sorry, just does not carry that much weight.
We WILL listen if you do it DOUBLE blind. That means that not only can you not be influenced by knowledge of the cable, you cannot be influenced by another person.
Do not underestimate the ay we can all be influenced.
Whats with the rubbish about not trusting your senses in life!! Geez louise, at least come up with GOOD points.
I trust my senses to the degree that suits the situation. Ask me if I saw a car on the way to work and I'll say yeah. Ask me what colour was it I might then say 'maybe blue, black, something like that'. In other words I would naturally temper my statements with appropriate error bars.
Hi panikos. synergy is a crap word. means jackshit. has connotations of 'unknown and UNKNOWABLE factors'. think it cannot be explained?
just an audiophile buzzword to use whilst stroking your goatee and looking deep and meaningful over your pince nez glasses.
we call it being a w@nker in my neck of the woods haha
I can give you the quotes from the guys themselves if you wish! Hang on, I can't now...been banned from that site haha, and so the gtg section is closed to non members.
Anyway, one of the guys must be a bit like you (I mean completely assured of cable differences etc etc) and he turned up with a bag chock full of cables....how much we ask? Oh, around 40g's worth of cables he just happened to throw in his bag!! That's putting your money where your mouth is!! heh heh
He admitted to me later that he was very surprised at how close they actually sounded. (he was one of the ones that could reliably hear a difference, but he was honest and had the integrity to admit they sounded very close. Would have been easy to just say 'tons of difference'. I admire him for his integrity)
I will tell you a funny story about it tho. (think I have mentioned this before...I love studying people and the 'human reaction'). It was hard to tell them apart, tho I can imagine that once you grasped the difference then it becomes easier and quicker to clock it.
BUT, downstairs with a few beers, and everybody chatting about it, what was fascinating was how (slowly and slowly, bit by bit...no doubt in a direct correlation between amount of discussion and alcohol consumed) the story became that it was easy to tell them apart!!
I had watched them struggle upstairs listening, but when all together and pissed it was easy!! I just watched and observed a fascinating human trait.
Bit like fish tales I suppose.
Anyway, re your example. For sure. But again, you were TWO together. It is not uncommon for 'group' think to occur! I just gave an example above. I am not saying you did not hear a difference, but I am saying the *fact* that the both of you thought one thing etc etc and found the opposite is not very convincing. Sorry, just does not carry that much weight.
We WILL listen if you do it DOUBLE blind. That means that not only can you not be influenced by knowledge of the cable, you cannot be influenced by another person.
Do not underestimate the ay we can all be influenced.
Whats with the rubbish about not trusting your senses in life!! Geez louise, at least come up with GOOD points.
I trust my senses to the degree that suits the situation. Ask me if I saw a car on the way to work and I'll say yeah. Ask me what colour was it I might then say 'maybe blue, black, something like that'. In other words I would naturally temper my statements with appropriate error bars.
Hi panikos. synergy is a crap word. means jackshit. has connotations of 'unknown and UNKNOWABLE factors'. think it cannot be explained?
just an audiophile buzzword to use whilst stroking your goatee and looking deep and meaningful over your pince nez glasses.
we call it being a w@nker in my neck of the woods haha
I am better on turntables,so give me a couple of weeks and I'll show you the one I'm finishing soon
No,the speakers are not DIY,I couldn't have done them so good myself,although I have made some in the past,using mostly Focal drive units.Sorry if I disappoint youI'll try to get the LP when I have some time.I hope to be lucky to find it here.
think it cannot be explained?
just an audiophile buzzword to use whilst stroking your goatee and looking deep and meaningful over your pince nez glasses.
we call it being a w@nker in my neck of the woods haha
Yes,it can be explained
As a Greek spoken,I always use the word in its true meaningAs a non English spoken,can I ask you to explain in simpler English your last sentence?Hahahahaha
My only disappointment is that I still don't know what they are.
Especially given how they are wowing folks.
Let us know if you do (recommended for hearing cable differences - the thread topic).
cheers,
AJ
What are all these 'advancements' in cable that make them so much better than a generic item available then and now?
......................................................
The test Terry described was posted about before and after on another forum. It was intended to be a local performance of the Matrix test. I intended to attend, but IIRC I got called to work ($). Also from what I remember there was a reasonable balance between sceptics and believers.
I am no longer a member and don't have access to the member's area to post to get a link. Maybe terry can.
I'm also firmly of the opinion that system 'synergy' is hand waving w@nkery.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.