Chris,
"If you listen objectively..."
What does that mean? Nothing more than tasting or smelling objectively, where the best science can do is devise repeatable tests. Sorry, but saying you're objective doesn't count.
"When I do get a second opinion I don't tell people what I think I hear... that's as good a blind test as anything right?"
Nope, only if they're not aware of what piece of equipment they're listening to.
"As per the hook line and sinker thing... why would you be inclined to believe that I even did the test as I claimed.... I probably just made it all up to convince you.... sad to see it worked so easily."
I'd be convinced only that *you* heard the difference.
It would only be enough for me to make the effort to see if *I* could hear the difference, which at this point I'm not.
Sorry, but what I see here are a lot of extremely bright and knowledgeable people, but who have just as much reason (though a more noble one) to deceive themselves as do reviewers in the industry, and just as susceptible to the known psychological pitfalls of audio perception as anyone.
There's not much reason for you to give a damn what I think, but why not settle the debate and take home some cash from that $10K amplifier challenge, which I believe remains unclaimed?
"If you listen objectively..."
What does that mean? Nothing more than tasting or smelling objectively, where the best science can do is devise repeatable tests. Sorry, but saying you're objective doesn't count.
"When I do get a second opinion I don't tell people what I think I hear... that's as good a blind test as anything right?"
Nope, only if they're not aware of what piece of equipment they're listening to.
"As per the hook line and sinker thing... why would you be inclined to believe that I even did the test as I claimed.... I probably just made it all up to convince you.... sad to see it worked so easily."
I'd be convinced only that *you* heard the difference.
It would only be enough for me to make the effort to see if *I* could hear the difference, which at this point I'm not.
Sorry, but what I see here are a lot of extremely bright and knowledgeable people, but who have just as much reason (though a more noble one) to deceive themselves as do reviewers in the industry, and just as susceptible to the known psychological pitfalls of audio perception as anyone.
There's not much reason for you to give a damn what I think, but why not settle the debate and take home some cash from that $10K amplifier challenge, which I believe remains unclaimed?
Chris,
Your speakers are very high efficiency, some 12db above normal, so you're listening to a relatively low power level at normal listening conditions. Can you test/compare them at high power level to listen to differences? I don't know if that is an insane loud level with your speakers? I know my speakers with 92db sens. need a lot of power to get loud to a level where it starts distorting. You're speakers are difficult(for your ears) to use at max. power I asume?
Your speakers are very high efficiency, some 12db above normal, so you're listening to a relatively low power level at normal listening conditions. Can you test/compare them at high power level to listen to differences? I don't know if that is an insane loud level with your speakers? I know my speakers with 92db sens. need a lot of power to get loud to a level where it starts distorting. You're speakers are difficult(for your ears) to use at max. power I asume?
noah katz said:
I should think the answer here is pretty obvious - he means: effectivly listening without emotion or personal bias.
People do this all the time.
Are they *completely* without emotion or personal bias? No, but anyone can be sufficiently so as to be indifferent to the outcome.
So yes, it does in fact count - at the very least to him. Moreover reasonable people will conclude that:
A: He isn't lying about this, and
B: He is capable of "divorcing" his emotions and bias for the limited time neccesary to at least determine *moderate differences.
This means that in fact *most* people would conclude that his assertion "counts".
..it isn't a difficult concept.
*of course anytime some says the difference is small - THATS when a reasonable person would question validity (..or if they have a personal "stake" in the observations outcome, OR if they are known to be a liar/gross exagerater and/or emotionally unstable).
None of this of course is to say that there actually is a valid assertion, but rather that its *likely* there is one.
"Moreover reasonable people will conclude that:
A: He isn't lying about this, and
B: He is capable of "divorcing" his emotions and bias for the limited time neccesary to at least determine *moderate differences.
This means that in fact *most* people would conclude that his assertion "counts"."
Yes, but these reasonable people are uninformed about what studies and tests have shown to be true.
A: He isn't lying about this, and
B: He is capable of "divorcing" his emotions and bias for the limited time neccesary to at least determine *moderate differences.
This means that in fact *most* people would conclude that his assertion "counts"."
Yes, but these reasonable people are uninformed about what studies and tests have shown to be true.
You mean this amp "challenge"
http://www.talkaudio.co.uk/vbb/showthread.php?t=24880&goto=nextoldest
Looks like a statistical scam to me. Yes let's normalize everything and take out every possible factor that would normally make an amp sound different from another, and then bombard you under duress with decision after decision.
Let's do on the basis that any idiot would actually make the claim to be able to name the actual amp .... as opposed to simply defining the audible differences heard..
Only an idiot would go for that.
Noah, I'm not even sure what your argument is anymore, or why you've chosen to turn this into a debate about hearing ability.
If all amps sound the same why do you even care which one you buy, why must you experience it yourself?
You see in the real world not everyone has such an oppertunity so they in fact have to rely on descriptions of others. For some people it's PMPO that turns their crank for others the lowest possible THD at 1kHz 10W just because they don't know any better better. While probably the vast majority do in fact have to rely on verbal descriptions of feelings/experiences brought on from listening to it.
Based on such descriptions I was pushed into building my own UCD based amp in order to hear it for myself... not many would go that far.
It's become alot more popular now so you can weigh any one review /description against all the others to help discern what's true or not.
If you should get the oppertunity to audition someone else's UCD based amp yourself.... will you insist on a double blind test just so you dont' fool yourself... is it realistic to expect that of someone who's just trying to do you a favor in the first place.... or all of a sudden will your own ears be good enough to make a judgement.... but what about all those papers that have proven true... 🙄
There's no clear winners to this argument but a little common sense can take you a long way.
http://www.talkaudio.co.uk/vbb/showthread.php?t=24880&goto=nextoldest
Looks like a statistical scam to me. Yes let's normalize everything and take out every possible factor that would normally make an amp sound different from another, and then bombard you under duress with decision after decision.
Let's do on the basis that any idiot would actually make the claim to be able to name the actual amp .... as opposed to simply defining the audible differences heard..
Only an idiot would go for that.
Noah, I'm not even sure what your argument is anymore, or why you've chosen to turn this into a debate about hearing ability.
If all amps sound the same why do you even care which one you buy, why must you experience it yourself?
You see in the real world not everyone has such an oppertunity so they in fact have to rely on descriptions of others. For some people it's PMPO that turns their crank for others the lowest possible THD at 1kHz 10W just because they don't know any better better. While probably the vast majority do in fact have to rely on verbal descriptions of feelings/experiences brought on from listening to it.
Based on such descriptions I was pushed into building my own UCD based amp in order to hear it for myself... not many would go that far.
It's become alot more popular now so you can weigh any one review /description against all the others to help discern what's true or not.
If you should get the oppertunity to audition someone else's UCD based amp yourself.... will you insist on a double blind test just so you dont' fool yourself... is it realistic to expect that of someone who's just trying to do you a favor in the first place.... or all of a sudden will your own ears be good enough to make a judgement.... but what about all those papers that have proven true... 🙄
There's no clear winners to this argument but a little common sense can take you a long way.
Bgt said:
Hi,
Yeah, interesting question. "normal" listening levels for me are somewhere around 1/4 power, give or take 1/8 depending on the time of day... with a ~200watt supply. Put it this way, on my main mixer volume of the soundcard it would say -60dB at night and -40dB during the day..which is getting potent. I can play it at -10dB cleanly, and at -5dB it's clipping by a few percent (purely guestimating here).
Those last few aren't healthy, so I take it up there but don't keep it there long at all and my ears don't end up ringing for it so that's a pretty telling sign I think?
I know some advocate only auditioning at the lowest levels possible.. they're not used to amps with alot of clean power. I don't particularly enjoy having to strain to hear the little things so comfortable listening levels are just less tiring, and I seem to appreciate it alot more when able to get the full effect of the dynamics that are in better recordings without ever having to strain to hear the little nuances. Basically the middle ground is best for me. Also at high power levels... eeeeverything is dancing (15' woofers), so you can't really comment on cleanlyness or quality.
You're right, testing towards full power is insane... vision blurrs etc.... fun stuff, I love it, in moderation.
I'll think it will be a smart move to test the NewClassD at the usual "comfortable" levels for the most part, so this is what any comments will be based on. Why? Because it's part of my effort to remain impartial and give it as fair a chance as possible by listening objectively.
I honestly don't think that can hold true at high power levels.
This amp has a 250VA transformer with 40Vac secondaries, and only one 5 000uF per rail per channel (or a single 10 000uF per rail between both channels) for my 4ohm loads. The reference system has 31Vac secondaries at 500VA, with a static screen, and two 15 000uF Jensen 4 poles paralleled on each rail between both channels. A much stiffer supply, even at only half the power capability, I think it will without doubt have the edge even at medium power levels.
This is exactly what I was referring to many posts back when I said Lars has to be a man of great faith.
All the same, it was after all his dollar, spent where I couldn't myself.. and it did get shipped a long way. I appreciate the oppertunity to be the very first with my hands on it too, DIYer's dream wouldn't you agree? What an honor.
So I'll try to repay that favor by being as fair as possible, and I can't honestly base any type of comparison between them at higher power levels, where it will no doubt fall on its face given the weak supply.
Next month I might also be in a little bit better position to spend some money .... so I might go crazy at Plitron.... it is tempting. If not though, I'll likely at least try the NewClassD with the transformer of my reference amp eventually. These are the kinds of things I"ll try to address on the amp as time goes on, right alongside balanced inputs. I trust this mentality is agreeable with everyone? If not speak your peace, but just remember that I don't care (hahaha).
I was too braindead yesterday to be wanting to try and tackle any grounding issues (which I of course try to avoid in the first place), so I decided to sleep on it and I'll be working on it tonight, hopefully ready to wake the neighbours by morning.
I'm as anxious to hear it as you guys. I also took some pictures but I need to make a tired old floppy drive work again in order to get them uploaded so I'll play with that tomorrow.
Cheers,
Chris
Listening comparison
Chris,
Just thinking about some of your comments and it brings a question to mind. Do the 2 amps have the same overall gain? If not does your sound card volume control have enough resolution to correct for this accurately? I know pretty basic stuff but details like this can easily get lost in the excitement of doing the comparison. I don't need to tell you how important having the same levels is for accurate results.
This could be very interesting, if the differences are significant we will have a lot more to discuss.
Roger
Chris,
Just thinking about some of your comments and it brings a question to mind. Do the 2 amps have the same overall gain? If not does your sound card volume control have enough resolution to correct for this accurately? I know pretty basic stuff but details like this can easily get lost in the excitement of doing the comparison. I don't need to tell you how important having the same levels is for accurate results.
This could be very interesting, if the differences are significant we will have a lot more to discuss.
Roger
Hi,
Roger, another shootout based question. I keep saying it isn't that. Isn't it interesting people complain when they think it's a shootout, others complain of the method... I have to laugh really, there's obviously no pleasing everybody, which is why I'm not even attempting to cater to any one crowd.
I'm not doing any A/B type testing at all! Again, t'is an evaluation more so than a comparison, but there will be some comparative remarks I'm sure, hell, for all anyone knows right now, I might just tell you I couldn't hear a difference between them. In which case I'll say so, and probably add "go for the cheaper/easier to use one".
All remarks can be taken for what they're worth at the discretion of the reader based on the information I've already given them..... such as all the wiring differences (when I'm not comparing wires or even care about them much wich such a difference in power supplies) and PSU shortcommings. In order to help them decide I've been perfectly honest and open about all these details.
So with that in mind yeah sure, if the gain of the NewClassD turns out to be vastly different, I've no doubt my soundcard has the resolution required to cleanly compensate for what I deem to be a comfortable listening level. Bare in mind given them being different amps with different components and different power supplies, there stands a good chance that what I consider to be a comfortable level for the NewclassD is somewhat different than that of my UCD based amp.. depends how good it is. I won't be basing that level on what my volume control is set to anyway, but more at the point my coffee cup starts to dance off the table, or I start to feel my spine rattle.
BTW I think I said something about using the main mixer volume, sorry. With the outputs set to pro audio +4dB for balanced connections, increasing the main mixer beyond 0dB leads to strong aliasing as I've experienced. So for that reason I always leave that set to 0 and just use the monitor volume control, which goes from 0 to -132dB, as opposed to the main mixer which has +12dB additional gain if so inclined.
There's no loss of resolution at all in using this soundcard as the main volume control, anyone currious enough can look up the EMU 1820M. Also in using it as the main volume control, any additional volume controls such as in media player or media center or whatever, is always set to full.
So my aim here is to describe how it performs based on my impressions of it. I guess that is more stereophile than scientific.. I don't even have the equipment required to take decent measurements or anything so I'm left to that anyway. You can look towards Sander for the measurements.
However, I'm not the sort of ******** artist with ulterior motives you'll find in the typical review from stereophile or six moons or whatever. I've even been known to bite the hand that feeds on occasion. So if I think it sucks I will tell you so, and you might be wise to listen. I think Lars new this much of me and expects it from me as well.. which is also why he's a man of faith..in his product. I've already mentioned a few things I didn't like about it.
BTW, you'll have to read the results on my new blog, accessible after passing through paypal with a small donation of your choosing.
Roger, another shootout based question. I keep saying it isn't that. Isn't it interesting people complain when they think it's a shootout, others complain of the method... I have to laugh really, there's obviously no pleasing everybody, which is why I'm not even attempting to cater to any one crowd.
I'm not doing any A/B type testing at all! Again, t'is an evaluation more so than a comparison, but there will be some comparative remarks I'm sure, hell, for all anyone knows right now, I might just tell you I couldn't hear a difference between them. In which case I'll say so, and probably add "go for the cheaper/easier to use one".
All remarks can be taken for what they're worth at the discretion of the reader based on the information I've already given them..... such as all the wiring differences (when I'm not comparing wires or even care about them much wich such a difference in power supplies) and PSU shortcommings. In order to help them decide I've been perfectly honest and open about all these details.
So with that in mind yeah sure, if the gain of the NewClassD turns out to be vastly different, I've no doubt my soundcard has the resolution required to cleanly compensate for what I deem to be a comfortable listening level. Bare in mind given them being different amps with different components and different power supplies, there stands a good chance that what I consider to be a comfortable level for the NewclassD is somewhat different than that of my UCD based amp.. depends how good it is. I won't be basing that level on what my volume control is set to anyway, but more at the point my coffee cup starts to dance off the table, or I start to feel my spine rattle.
BTW I think I said something about using the main mixer volume, sorry. With the outputs set to pro audio +4dB for balanced connections, increasing the main mixer beyond 0dB leads to strong aliasing as I've experienced. So for that reason I always leave that set to 0 and just use the monitor volume control, which goes from 0 to -132dB, as opposed to the main mixer which has +12dB additional gain if so inclined.
There's no loss of resolution at all in using this soundcard as the main volume control, anyone currious enough can look up the EMU 1820M. Also in using it as the main volume control, any additional volume controls such as in media player or media center or whatever, is always set to full.
So my aim here is to describe how it performs based on my impressions of it. I guess that is more stereophile than scientific.. I don't even have the equipment required to take decent measurements or anything so I'm left to that anyway. You can look towards Sander for the measurements.
However, I'm not the sort of ******** artist with ulterior motives you'll find in the typical review from stereophile or six moons or whatever. I've even been known to bite the hand that feeds on occasion. So if I think it sucks I will tell you so, and you might be wise to listen. I think Lars new this much of me and expects it from me as well.. which is also why he's a man of faith..in his product. I've already mentioned a few things I didn't like about it.
BTW, you'll have to read the results on my new blog, accessible after passing through paypal with a small donation of your choosing.
I don't want to be the victim of a joke if it is one 😉
But, if it isn't a joke then you should be aware we don't allow promotion of commercial sites such as this
The Chief Moderator
I think we all owe the Chief Moderator and all of his crew a vote of appreciation for keeping this forum to such high quality!
Roger
I think we all owe the Chief Moderator and all of his crew a vote of appreciation for keeping this forum to such high quality!
Roger
Hello Chris, sorry for my ignorance -this thread is big too much for me, but you have already measured any standard specs, e.g. THD@max-3db, IMD, S/N, where i can see it?
noah katz said:
I don't think they are (..but I could be wrong).
..rather I think that they understand where bias and emotion can effectivly "tip the scale", and view the majority of such tests as *"self limiting", and also overly generic.
*I.E. most of these tests are taken to the threashold of "small differences" to conclude that double blind testing is required to have any merit. In its own way this reminds me of labratory testing of sweet'n'low/sacharine on rats. The tests were pushed just far enought to show that it has some correlation with increased rates of cancer in rats. Of course what they neglected emphazise was just how much of it was required to induce this (..relative to the size of the rat). In this case then they were feeding the rats MASS doses to push the findings far enough to conclude that sacharine was a cancer causing agent.
btw, I apoligize to others for feeding this tangent noah has produced. I was looking forward to more information on Lar's modules and found what appeared to be an effective thread "de-railment", and figured I'd offer an opposing argument so that such "subjective" discussions would still be found "worthy" by some readers who may start placing gross emphasis on the "absolute neccesity" for blind testing.
Hi Ivan,
I have measured nothing and also had no intention to. I could take measurements with my soundcard I suppose, I'm not sure what good they'd be after making my own I/O amps to make that happen though?
I'm looking into getting some sort of a scope in the not so distant future.
Regards,
Chris
I have measured nothing and also had no intention to. I could take measurements with my soundcard I suppose, I'm not sure what good they'd be after making my own I/O amps to make that happen though?
I'm looking into getting some sort of a scope in the not so distant future.
Regards,
Chris
ScottG said:
Were those tests sponsored by sugar farmers?? If not I fail to see the relevance to your typical stereophile review 🙂
It's not surprising to hear though, statistics can make anything look like anything if you work the numbers right. Always question and always doubt. Personally I don't ever read audio reviews from magazines unless it's just for a laugh.
classd4sure said:
In fact I think they were, indirectly. I.E. the standard procedure is create a foundation, fund the foundation for the tax write-off, the foundation has an independent trustee with strict trust rules for granting grants, etc...
Chris, If i remember correctly, your sound card EMU1212M (my too) even better vs Lars's ESI Juli@.. However, if no intention, ok, but why not spend one hour? 🙂
IVX said:
Nope it's "better" still, 1820M. At this point it remains stock, I'd like to clean up the power going to it though.
What is your setup for useful measurements with it? I'm thinking you'd need two sets of differential buffers with adjustable gain that would need to have distortion and noise at least an order of magnitude below that expected of the amp I'd want to measure.
I'd also need my own little AES type filter as well would I not?
Wouldn't anything less make the measurements utterly useless?
classd4sure said:
I used to use the 1820M, it was OK but the overall impression was "hmm". I had been using a Lynx 2B and RME Fireface 800 with an Apogee DA16x just prior to that though.
Would almost certainly benefit from tweaks - the more the better. Actually its probably its easier/cheaper to sell and buy into something decent.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.