Yes I got that. Perhaps not clear from my mentioning class A before it. But your suggestion should show if PSSR is important.
You have conflated being able to detect something and being bothered by it. People who like vinyl are likely to be able to detect the massive distortion, but they like it unlike you who doesn't. Nothing to do with hearing acuity. Otherwise women would be avid audiophiles and in many cases they really don't care about SQ, or if they do not in the OCD rabid way their men do. (I have a keeper in that sense but that's another story).
but compare hearing to colour vision. I have typical man colour vision, so a slight red/green deficiency. Not enough to really bother me, but I wouldn't have been able to be a cameraman at the BBC and my daughters laugh over my inability with some of the Ishihara plates. But a rare few people are tetrachromic and can see colours in a way none of the rest of us can. This can be and is tested. I have no way of understanding what the world would look like to them, but accept the science. It's a bitch we don't have IR or UV sensors like other animals, but that's the hand evolution cast us as best able to deal with global warming on the plains of Africa x million years ago.
The corollary with hearing has yet to be found, and yet still audio writers, who are generally white and grey haired claim to have super hearing. Rather telling is that the only member of stereophile staff who has had the balls(or lack of) to publish their hearing tests is a 23 year old female, who it turns out is 40dB down in one ear at 6KHz! A Visit to the Audiologist | Stereophile.com
In summary I have no issues with preference or people being more sensitive (in terms of not liking) certain distortions or other assorted non-linearities. But sensitive in terms of detecting I remain skeptical of.
Best not rehash this much since the text exists back in the thread.
The summary goes approximately like this:
Mooly posted a test.
I objected that he mixed different opamps.
Most said in essence that there was no diff between opamps that could be heard, related or unrelated to Mooly's test.
SY among others presented themselves as "highly skeptical", and then SY mentioned his article as an exemplar regarding test methods (the nominal topic of the article).
However in the article SY left himself a landmine of sorts, as he claimed to be able to hear >6 buffers in series, and the the threshold of audibility was between 5 - 6 buffers in series.
Thereupon the landmines went off, as did SY.
I had already proposed the series test, and as I have about 3 times suggested a group cooperation to put together the engineering/design/hardware - and then to come up with how to proceed after that.
No takers.
Since I'm thin on free time, I can't begin to tackle it except perhaps in terms of oversight/management.
_-_-
There is a native american language with some sounds very few of us could hear but the native speakers can easily hear and repeat. Its an interesting comment on average hearing amd learned hearing.
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
I remember a program on that back in the 70s where they were testing children and proved that, under 18 months (ISTR) younguns minds are open to all sounds until they decide what is needed for the language(s) they are exposed to and then that part of the brain gets hardwired. But are you suggesting that we start audiophiles young?
(aside. Native Finnish speakers who are not also Swedish speaking have huge problems with 'the' and 'Ian' which come out respectively 'De' and 'Iron'. Non native Finnish speakers other than hungarians of course have no chance pronouncing anything in Finnish correctly as the language is such an outlier. ).
(aside. Native Finnish speakers who are not also Swedish speaking have huge problems with 'the' and 'Ian' which come out respectively 'De' and 'Iron'. Non native Finnish speakers other than hungarians of course have no chance pronouncing anything in Finnish correctly as the language is such an outlier. ).
Ed, I had hoped to discuss this with you privately.
Somewhat disappointed that you chose to do it this way, out of the start gate. 🙁
Anyhow, are you proposing to run a *single* opamp per type of opamp in a sealed box? So, not a series of opamps in a string??
Also, I have some interest in the effect of the "regulator". But, that could be considered separately, assuming that everyone - that being only you as of now - does not quit after the first pass.
I'll put it on the line right now - IF I hear no differences, I'll say so.
Also I'd suggest that it might be best to start out with only 2 or three examples. Seat-of-the-pants, the 5534, the 797 and a wildcard. Of course there is no way to know which one is which in a sealed box. 😀
_-_-bear
PS. we do need TWO of everything for stereo?
Last edited:
The noise for one is very different opening the opportunity for even unintended "cheating". There can't be a straightforward LP/CD comparison, the noise and artifacts of LP can not be ignored objectively. In fact I have given up on this whole idea, there are too many subtle factors.
BTW it doesn't work that way if you hear no differences in a proper test it shouldn't matter, you can't know.
Bear
Thank you for your reply and synopsis. Would you please point me to the timeframe where the explosion occurred?
Jay
Thank you for your reply and synopsis. Would you please point me to the timeframe where the explosion occurred?
Jay
I don't think I have super anything. I may be better than average at hearing distortion, but nothing more than that. And at my age, I know my hearing isn't as good as it used to be, but I still notice bad cymbals that most people are completely oblivious to. That's primarily because I focus attention on them and other people don't, that's all. Not because of special hearing.
Regarding testing, and certain potential behaviors of concern following an unfavorable result, if I agree to a take a test then I will accept the results. However, I may engage in discussion beforehand to reach mutual agreement on both sides of the scientific issue that the test is well designed.
That being said, an unfavorable result on either side should not preclude further research later by any party.
It was hard for me to understand spoken English language until I decided to train my accent. I repeated after actors on a tape for half an hour, and the next morning suddenly realised that I can understand the language without mentally translating! Why? Because understanding of speech is based on micro-movements of own muscles. You are right about "hear and repeat"
Not conflation exactly. You need to detect something at some level first, so you can then be bothered. Once bothered, further attention is likely then focused on the source of irritation. With focused attention, finer details become increasingly apparent.
The being bothered stage can be skipped. One can go directly to ear training to develop proficiency at learning to hear the details. Perhaps similar to learning musical transcription skills, or recognition of the subtleties of some languages. They can all be viewed from the perspective of learning, or forming neurological connections for, what is essentially some type of pattern recognition.
Last edited:
Assuming you are refering to the opamp test, noise is part of the diffferences! The issue is opamps not distortion.
Probably should include one or two with FET inputs. If I go really over the top a MUSE01 or 02 and the standard lead frame version.
I'd say about 3 weeks back, look for SY's last post in this thread?
Scott, could you rephrase that so I can understand the thrust of your comments?
Sorry, but I don't...
Scott, could you rephrase that so I can understand the thrust of your comments?
Sorry, but I don't...
Gnobyddy - intersting. I like this placebo debate. I'm actually one of these subjectivists.
First of all, isn't it sad that if you ( and other objectivists ) are right, then this whole Diyaudio site is quite meaningless. If a normal "blameless" type of power amplifier, for example, is impossible to be distinguished from any other well designed amplifier, then why discuss the matter at all? Why not let the state manufacture blameless amplifiers for the people and we can carry on without this forum.
I know the placebo effect, as a matter of fact, at least 50% of all hifi digestion is placebo, just like wine tasting. But that doesn't refrain us from drinking expensive wines.
There have been numerus blind tests that all demonstrates the impossibility of differentiating between different stuff. Cables, DAC's, preamps, yes even power amps have been reported to be impossible to tell apart at blind tests. To me, A/B tests are unsuitable for human hearing, it takes time to get an impression.
Regard a blind test where you are supposed to differentiate two women you are both in love with and try to figure out which one you will marry. First you will hug Sandra in 30 seconds, then Monica for 30 seconds and from that you have to make a decision.
OK, some will argue that if a gear distorts 0.001% fron 20-20khz, then the amp is perfect.
But what is distortion? Some dist is simple such as 2:nd order ( or that 3:rd order in the subwoofer) and is almost impossible to detect. But human hearing has evolved under a long time and is obviously a master of finding subtle and most likely very weak patterns. That's why "complex" distortion is more disturbing ( even though it is very weak)since our brain really can't put those "interesting" patterns away, and our attention is draw from the music.
Some moths can detect the smell of a female from several hundred meters and are able to detect even a single molecule. Why can't it be so that our hearing is mindblowingly sensitive when it comes to certain complex patterns? And also totally uninterested in simple 2:nd or third order harmonics, since the brain so easily can detect those simple harmonics.
Then, why can't we hear difference in AB tests? Probably because we are uncertain, we can't really trust our senses and we tries to compensate that with using our intellect. We can't use the intellect to judge sound quality.
Obi-One: "Luke, trust your feelings"
May the force be with you.
First of all, isn't it sad that if you ( and other objectivists ) are right, then this whole Diyaudio site is quite meaningless. If a normal "blameless" type of power amplifier, for example, is impossible to be distinguished from any other well designed amplifier, then why discuss the matter at all? Why not let the state manufacture blameless amplifiers for the people and we can carry on without this forum.
I know the placebo effect, as a matter of fact, at least 50% of all hifi digestion is placebo, just like wine tasting. But that doesn't refrain us from drinking expensive wines.
There have been numerus blind tests that all demonstrates the impossibility of differentiating between different stuff. Cables, DAC's, preamps, yes even power amps have been reported to be impossible to tell apart at blind tests. To me, A/B tests are unsuitable for human hearing, it takes time to get an impression.
Regard a blind test where you are supposed to differentiate two women you are both in love with and try to figure out which one you will marry. First you will hug Sandra in 30 seconds, then Monica for 30 seconds and from that you have to make a decision.
OK, some will argue that if a gear distorts 0.001% fron 20-20khz, then the amp is perfect.
But what is distortion? Some dist is simple such as 2:nd order ( or that 3:rd order in the subwoofer) and is almost impossible to detect. But human hearing has evolved under a long time and is obviously a master of finding subtle and most likely very weak patterns. That's why "complex" distortion is more disturbing ( even though it is very weak)since our brain really can't put those "interesting" patterns away, and our attention is draw from the music.
Some moths can detect the smell of a female from several hundred meters and are able to detect even a single molecule. Why can't it be so that our hearing is mindblowingly sensitive when it comes to certain complex patterns? And also totally uninterested in simple 2:nd or third order harmonics, since the brain so easily can detect those simple harmonics.
Then, why can't we hear difference in AB tests? Probably because we are uncertain, we can't really trust our senses and we tries to compensate that with using our intellect. We can't use the intellect to judge sound quality.
Obi-One: "Luke, trust your feelings"
May the force be with you.
Do you really not understand? The comment below is totally irrelevant in a properly controlled test, there is no I know which is which but I'm going to be honest and say I can't hear a difference. This opportunity does not present itself.
As for the rest, I think it's virtually impossible to do these things without inadvertently leaving clues. Frankly I don't care what you can or can't hear, if Ed built 20 op-amp boxes and you lined them up in the same order every Monday for three months in a row, cool, good for you.
Last edited:
That's like comparing 44.1/16 to 96/24 and turning the volume up all the way between cuts to ID which was which. Why waste everyone's time?
And if you did that you would rank the quiet one the best. But noise is not the only issue.
I can send you the test box and you are welcome to see if at normal gain you hear differences.
The idea is to rank the circuits and ones that are indistinguishable should be grouped.
The point is simply once you gimmick the test why bother it's just sighted listening.
Would a proctored test satisfy concerns about intentional or unintentional cheating?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.