First cycle distortion - Graham, what is that?

[Markw4]

Debate isn't going to resolve the dispute. The mistaken understanding needs to be replaced by a more proper explanation. It could be true in some cases that a faster amp sounds better than a slow one, for reasons I explained in Bob Cordell's thread.

There may be another factor at work here too: There is something called, "The Focusing Illusion." https://www.princeton.edu/~ceps/work...125krueger.pdf

We have someone who is deeply focused on a particular yet mistaken explanation for why a faster amplifier sounds better than a slower one. The focusing, the thinking about it, the trying to find a way to convince others of its supposed correctness all serve to make it seem much more of an important realization than it actually is.

To hammer the point home once more, debate that first cycle distortion, etc., can't be possibly be a correct explanation is far off the mark since that does not resolve the need for a better and more accurate explanation.

[jan.didden]

And there's even a step before that: an objective, controlled listening test to establish that the amps do actually sound different!

Jan

[Markw4]

Jan,
A proper listening test would be great. However, its not something EEs are trained in or typically have expertise at. How many here have studied the books and papers on the subject of sensory testing that were recommended by Jakob2? My guess would be: Nobody.

Also, who that has expertise is located close enough to the amplifier in question to organize and supervise the sensory testing?

[scottjoplin]

Is this still the first cycle or rinse and repeat?

[Markw4]

This type of thing has been going on around here for decades, would be my understanding. Nobody ever figures out what is really going on.

[jan.didden]

Originally Posted by Markw4

Jan,
A proper listening test would be great. However, its not something EEs are trained in or typically have expertise at. How many here have studied the books and papers on the subject of sensory testing that were recommended by Jakob2? My guess would be: Nobody.

Also, who that has expertise is located close enough to the amplifier in question to organize and supervise the sensory testing?

I know, but that also means that reports that an amp sounds better than another by someone who holds wrong views are anyway worthless.

Jan

[minek123]

> reports that an amp sounds better than another by someone who holds wrong views are anyway worthless.

I would go even further:
Reports that an amp sounds better than another by someone who holds RIGHT views are worthless too.

[scottjoplin]

It's like when a politician says "we are doing such and such because it's the right thing to do", it's an oft repeated phrase in the UK, and.......worthless.

[Markw4]

Originally Posted by jan.didden

...that also means that reports that an amp sounds better than another by someone who holds wrong views are anyway worthless.

Hmmm. Seems to me someone could be good at listening and much less good at theorizing. Don't know why the two abilities or skills would necessarily have to be correlated.

What does make me suspicious that there is likely something to the fast amplifier thing is that lots of people from different cultures and different places in the world seem to report similar subjective listening experiences. I don't think it can so easily be attributed entirely to humans and not at all to amplifiers. Nothing new of course, plain old physics at work in real world conditions, would be my guess.

[TNT]

Originally Posted by Markw4

....How many here have studied the books and papers on the subject of sensory testing that were recommended by Jakob2? My guess would be: Nobody. ....

Still, not a few here are very sure about their "facts"... no?

//