Was a $1000 CD Player Better than a $150 one? My view. - Page 14 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #391 of 413 Old 12-24-2008, 01:26 PM
 
geekhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcan View Post

Upon first reading this thread I wondered if I made a mistake ordering a 2-channel SACD player over a multi-channel universal player because I originally thought that I would hear better 2 channel performance.

Volcan, if your existing CDP is having problems then go ahead, get whichever CDP you want. If you are having a hard time deciding between the two then flip a coin and settle it at once. You will not be missing out on sonic quality.

By the way, as for the sonic quality, do you or have you spent this much time and effort on studying room modes? If you have, would you mind sharing with us?
geekhd is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #392 of 413 Old 12-24-2008, 01:41 PM
 
geekhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DulcetTones View Post

So yes feel free in your opinion that all products sound alike and DBT show this but the caveat is they are not necessarily the same design-topology-blah.
Do not beat down on people until you take the time and respect to fully understand the hardware you want to make basic generalisations about (this applies to everyone) as I was reminded this is a science forum.

DT, if you are not trying to beat down on people discussing the lack of audible difference between CDP when level matched by interjecting the physical differences of CDP, then why do you bother posting it? You are essentially trying to discredit them by suggesting that since they are physically different, the audible difference must exist as well. Say so if I'm wrong.
geekhd is offline  
post #393 of 413 Old 12-24-2008, 01:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,190
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Someone who uses the phrase "secular religion" raises doubts about his understanding of either word. It's not "religious" in the least to demand empirical support for an assertion. And empirical support requires that you account for all known confounding variables.

In fact, by demanding such evidence, we are admitting that we may be proved wrong, and even setting a clear standard for what will convince us. I've never known a religion that included in its tenets a willingness to be refuted.

If you want to see religion in action, OTOH, ask someone who believes CD players generally sound different what would convince him otherwise.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is online now  
post #394 of 413 Old 12-24-2008, 03:59 PM
Member
 
Volcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

With all due respect, how would you know? Please share with us your background in psychoacoustic testing and statistical analysis thereof. The people who have been responding to your questions the last few days are, at the very least, familiar with the relevant literature. You are not. Aren't you being a little presumptuous here?


Oh, come on:
*all of the tests reported on the ABX Web site, including those listed on its bibliography page
*all of the tests reported on the matrixhifi site.
*Many of the amp tests reported by Tom Nousaine (the ones that weren't weresurprise, surprisethe ones that reported audible differences in amps).

You've raised a lot of red herrings, but that's all they are, just the typical ill-informed excuses of people who don't want to accept what in the scientific world is accepted fact.


Please provide an example of a poorly conducted DBT, and explain what was wrong with its execution.

This should be fun.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcan View Post

mcnarus - thanks for getting things back on a more friendly level. I don't claim to be an expert on any subject, but I am sharing my honest opinion and am eager to be educated by those who know more. If you or someone else believe I am mistaken, please by all means explain the error of my ways. I do know a little about testing and perception from a mostly unused degree in psychology from years ago. Not impressive I know, but enough to make me want to see how the subjects were screened, controlled for variations, how bias was avoided in the conduct of the test and whether the sample size is meanigful. I'll look over the ABX website

For your amusement and my edification, I will gladly attempt to critique what you believe to be a particularly well conducted DBT, if there is a specifc one that you would like for me to take a crack at. Please make it one that I don't have pay $20 to look at.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

I have no illusions about being able to make DBT results "meaningful" for people who have neither the necessary knowledge nor any honest interest in taking meaning from them. But "signifcantly large sample size" is nonsense. The sample size doesn't matter; it's whether you get a statistically significant result that matters. A single person who does 20 trials and gets 16 correct is enough to settle the issue of whether a difference is audible or not.

But I should point out that some of the tests referenced in the sources I cited involved hundreds of samples.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcan View Post

mcnarus - You asked me to critigue a poorly designed DBT (thought it would be fun) and I offered to do one better - critique a what you believe to be a very well designed DBT. I asked that I not have to pay for the study and I also ask that it be written in English so that we can figure out what the heck they are talking about.

My offer still stands. I am ready to learn from you and others about this matter which seems to be the basis of the belief in "no difference".

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

No, I asked you to cite a poorly designed DBT, because you claimed they were legion. Thanks for admitting that was bull****.



I'm really not interested in what you think is wrong with good DBTs.


Level-matching means that the levels of both players is identical. If you want to listen at different levels, that's fine (though in practice it will probably do more to confuse you than anything else), but you have to be able to adjust the level for both units equally and simultaneously. Otherwise it will always be easy to tell them apart (and that won't tell you anything about sound quality differences).

All - sorry to have to repost these but it seems that mcnarus's memory has failed him. I thought that it was pretty clear that when mcnarus said "Please provide an example of a poorly conducted DBT, and explain what was wrong with its execution." that this was asking for a critique of a DBT. Apparently mcnarus only wanted me to cite a bad DBT. I offered instead to critique a good DBT, thinking that would surely be of more value and a greater source of amusment to mcnarus. I think mcnarus is displaying very poor logic here - it really makes me wonder a bit about his ability to draw logical conclusion to be honest. But I do not mean to make a personal attack and so will give him the benefit of the doubt that this was simply a problem of miscommunication.

Since mcnarus is unwilling to offer up a good DBT I'll ask anyone who is willing. I don't want to hear about the legion of DBTs - I am asking for some one to post one very well conducted DBT relating to CD players, one of the best if you will. I will attempt to critique it just as you all so ably critique any specific test that anyone conducts and posts here.

I notice that no one has posted a reply to another poster's request for a "more subtantial ABX test regarding CD players". Rather than reply he is asked why he thinks they sound different. For a clue - please check my "work-in-progress-soon to be updated list of myths regarding CD players. many listeners are surprised to learn that some of you regard these as myths.

Really guys - can you point to one good specific DBT of CD players? It seem that this should be so easy for you. Your failure to do so makes it hard for one to be convinced of your position.
Volcan is offline  
post #395 of 413 Old 12-24-2008, 04:10 PM
Member
 
Volcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by RWetmore View Post

Yes, but you'd have to start out with the volume completely minimized for each trial. To prove it at the scientific level though you really need to precisely level match. It's the only way to properly do an ABX test.

But your wasting your time here with these people - it's secular religion to them. Even if you did everything carefully (level matching, double blind, etc.), no one would believe the results if you heard and reported a difference between players because they have already decided it's not possible.

If you want to do it for your own edification fine, but don't be fooled into thinking you are going to convince any of them.

RWetmore - I don't really think that I will convince any of them to change their minds. Frankly, my goal has been to learn for myself and I have been open to accepting there position if the reasoning was compelling. And perhaps someone else would learn from this dialogue and be more informed when they go to purchase a CD player.

I have been rather surprised by the angry reaction that I have been getting from some when I ask for evidence. It is very obvious that these people feel very strongly about their belief. In spite of such fervor, no one has stepped up to take your challenge. Back in my old neighborhood such reticence would be met with "Put up or shut up". Frankly, I don't want that - I sincerely want to learn from these guys but they are reluctant to produce a single DBT that they feel was sufficiently well done. In the logic and words of another poster in this thread, the failure to do so speaks volumes.

I am going to settle my brain for a long winter's nap - Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all and to all a good night.
Volcan is offline  
post #396 of 413 Old 12-24-2008, 04:18 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,190
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:


I have been rather surprised by the angry reaction that I have been getting from some when I ask for evidence. It is very obvious that these people feel very strongly about their belief. In spite of such fervor, no one has stepped up to take your challenge. Back in my old neighborhood such reticence would be met with "Put up or shut up". Frankly, I don't want that - I sincerely want to learn from these guys but they are reluctant to produce a single DBT that they feel was sufficiently well done. In the logic and words of another poster in this thread, the failure to do so speaks volumes.

This is just so much horse manure. We've cited a substantial number of DBTs of CD players, all of them performed well enough to draw reasonable conclusions from them. Your response has just been to deny what's right before your eyes.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is online now  
post #397 of 413 Old 12-24-2008, 04:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 177 Post(s)
Liked: 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by DulcetTones View Post

No, it is in response to Will saying "OK I will bite..."
And going on in a non-technical way about the design of the CD mechanism, or the error correction that does not need reading up on because once you understand the general principle it must be the same for CD.
And also the point of his questioning telecom expertise in PCM-DACs, which if you follow even those summaries will show again that discrete signalling is the domain of telecoms so expertise can reflect CD PCM and DACs.

Here is the simplest way I can put it.
Now I do not bother listening to vinyl, however I would never make assumptions or general comments saying a 75 pound cartridge is equal to an 800 pound cartridge due to being only a small box with a needle on the end.
If I want to make that comment I would take the time and effort to actually investigate how and why they work, and also look at other principles such as vertical alignment of the cartridge and if it can affect the sound quality (therefore also changing sound quality between identical cartridges).
It could be piffle but I would take the time to look into this such as that offered by Dr Feickert's Analogue Adjust +

So yes when I read basic general comments that all CD mechanisms are equal, CD error control same as others, all DACs are identical, all amps designed the same unless comparing tubes to SS,etc I do feel it needs to be corrected.

A stunning display of apples vs oranges misdirection. Bravo.

Cartridges, like loudspeakers, are electromechanical transducers. Of all the gear in a home audio repro chain, these sorts of devices are BY FAR the most likely to sound different from model to model. This is even before you get into thinks like differences in adjustment of the devices -- vertical alignment, tracking force, antiskate setting for the cart, and loudspeaker placement and environment for the loudspeakers -- which also massively affect the sound (relative to things like changing CDPs and cables and amps).


Quote:
Originally Posted by MoltenLava View Post

Level matching goes hand in hand with DBT. When fast switching between two components slight difference in the volume level will affect the subject. Usually sightly louder component will be perceived as better sounding.

Proponents of DBT also don't believe in extended listening sessions, as auditory memory is believed to be very short. i.e. You can't reliably compare what you heard 10 mins ago with what you are hearing now.

I 'believe in' them, I just don't think there's much good evidence that it puts the listener at an advantage. But hey, if the listener *wants* to lower their chances of correctly identifying X in this way, they're free to...as long as they don't complain about it later if their results don't exceed chance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RWetmore View Post

But your wasting your time here with these people - it's secular religion to them. Even if you did everything carefully (level matching, double blind, etc.), no one would believe the results if you heard and reported a difference between players because they have already decided it's not possible.

Wrong. "They" know it's possible. And in every case where such differences have been indicated with DBT, there's been a measurable correlate. So go ahead an do your ABX, and if you 'pass', don't complain if you're asked to bench test your gear.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcan View Post


Really guys - can you point to one good specific DBT of CD players? It seem that this should be so easy for you. Your failure to do so makes it hard for one to be convinced of your position.


And I should give a hoot whether you are convinced, exactly *why*?

Fact is, the evidence that 'sighted' evaluations of audio gear are deeply prone to serious error, is overwhelming. The existence of a less than perfect DBT does not indicate a fundamental flaw with the need for DBT -- and the lack of a DBT does not mean that sighted anecdotes thereby gain weight. Sighted evaluations , unlike DBT methods, *are* fundamentally, irreducibly flawed. Think about that when you tout '1000 reports' versus one DBT.

Your priorities of evidentiary concern, are seriously out of whack..which is typical for a subjectivist 'skeptic' of DBTs.
krabapple is offline  
post #398 of 413 Old 12-24-2008, 05:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,190
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 125 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:


the lack of a DBT does mean that sighted anecdotes thereby gain weight

Did you leave a "not" out of this clause?

Quote:


Think about that when you tout '1000 reports' versus one DBT.

One DBT outweighs a million sighted evaluations, in part because there's no way to know whether the sighted evaluations were independent.

If you can't explain how it works, you can't say it doesn't.—The High-End Creed

mcnarus is online now  
post #399 of 413 Old 12-24-2008, 06:04 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by RWetmore View Post

Yes, but you'd have to start out with the volume completely minimized for each trial. To prove it at the scientific level though you really need to precisely level match. It's the only way to properly do an ABX test.

It is not just ABX testing. Level matching is the only way to compare components. If you don't match levels, you're just comparing music at different levels. Even the Golden Ears at Stereophile agree with this - read Harley's "Listener's Manifesto".

Quote:


But your wasting your time here with these people - it's secular religion to them. Even if you did everything carefully (level matching, double blind, etc.), no one would believe the results if you heard and reported a difference between players because they have already decided it's not possible.

OK so you think that me personally, all the people I worked with when we invented ABX, the AES, the ITU, MPEG, Dolby Labs, etc, etc, and the mainstream audio establishment are all liars and thieves.

Well have a Merry Christmas!

Quote:


If you want to do it for your own edification fine, but don't be fooled into thinking you are going to convince any of them.

That's twice now you called the above liars and a thieves. Will it make you feel better if you repeat it several more times? What is it with you people?
arnyk is online now  
post #400 of 413 Old 12-24-2008, 09:05 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 177 Post(s)
Liked: 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

Did you leave a "not" out of this clause?

fixed

krabapple is offline  
post #401 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 06:33 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by DulcetTones View Post

Will it is worth understanding what the difference is between the standard Philips mechanism and the Pro2, then you will start to look into servo co-efficients,etc and who and why develop their own mechanisms instead of using the off the shelf cheaper models of Philips (Pro2 is not cheap).
And this may then lead you to the Philips technical review volumes (seems not many here have read them) that discusses detailed aspects of the CD Error Control mechanism amongst other things.

Interesting factoid. Some DIY enthusiasts looked inside a
> $1,000 Shigaraki CD Player and found that its transport was identical to the transport in the JVC RC-EZ31 boombox.
arnyk is online now  
post #402 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 09:50 AM
 
geekhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by RWetmore View Post

Even if you did everything carefully (level matching, double blind, etc.), no one would believe the results if you heard and reported a difference between players

You mean this one?

Quote:


no one would believe

Well, I believe it.
geekhd is offline  
post #403 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 09:58 AM
 
geekhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

Your priorities of evidentiary concern, are seriously out of whack..which is typical for a subjectivist 'skeptic' of DBTs.

I see two possibilities with Volcan's identity.
1. He really is a newbie and has a long way to go.
2. He is a pretender trying to troll.
geekhd is offline  
post #404 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 12:26 PM
Member
 
EdanT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 83
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by geekhd View Post

I see two possibilities with Volcan's identity.
1. He really is a newbie and has a long way to go.
2. He is a pretender trying to troll.

I really feel this comment is out of line. Volcan's posts have demonstrated a high degree of genuity and respect for fellow posters, and he is certainly no fool. Things have been getting heated within the last few posts and people are starting to get personal - this does not aid any scientific cause, whatever you believe your science to be.
EdanT is offline  
post #405 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 04:08 PM
Member
 
Volcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by geekhd View Post

Volcan, are you really a newbie looking at this from the center? Looks to me, you are already favoring one side based on your reply like “the very few tests offered to support their opposing point of view were not conducted to strict double blind standards either”. It would’ve been different if you stated “after an exhaustive research done over last few months, I drew a conclusion that there aren’t enough tests offered to…” To me it's little fishy.

I have a question for you Volcan. Why did you order a new CDP? Was it an effort to improve the sound quality of your stereo system?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcan View Post

geekhd - back in my first post I described a listening test that I conducted in which I believed that I heard differences in CD players. When I stumbled upon this thread, I was intrgued to learn that that there are some people who believe very strongly that there are no differences in sound quality. Since then I have learned a great deal about related issues that these same people believe. I had decided to replace the CD player which I preferred in my listening test because it is acting up. Spefically I have to punch the drawer open button numerous times to get it to open, it doesn't always read the disc I feed it (sometimes does or doesn't with the same disc).

I did not claim that my test met DBT standards. I thought the level matching was very very close and will not argue that it was not exact, but I beleived I heard a tonal differences, along with differences in resolution. I jumped into this thread to learn what I can but have not yet been convinced. I think I am being open minded, but it is my nature to ask questions or to state what I think I have heard so that I may be corrected if I have misspoken. I have gotten some feedback on my laundry list of myths and will update it shortly to reflect what others have said and to make isure it includes the provisos that I thought were understood but as this thread grows are prudent to include.

Upon first reading this thread I wondered if I made a mistake ordering a 2-channel SACD player over a multi-channel universal player because I originally thought that I would hear better 2 channel performance. Obviously, the "no difference" group believes that I could have saved some $, while prehaps the "differences are audible" crowd might believe that I made a reasonable decison for my objectives. And concerning a question from another poster, I guess I don't really expect anyone else to care, except maybe others who may be considering a purchase. It is not too late for me to return the 2 channel SACD player and purchase the universal player - I haven't even received the unit yet.

I beleive that the vast majority of people who are interested enough to post to these forums believe that CD players do sound different. Please correct me if you feel I am wrong, but I would guess that for every post from someone who has participated in a double-blind test comparing CD players, there are 1000 posts from people who report anecdotal evidence describing why they prefer the sound of one player over another.

Do you believe that one DBT carries more weight than 1000 anecdotal reports?

Quote:
Originally Posted by geekhd View Post

Volcan, if your existing CDP is having problems then go ahead, get whichever CDP you want. If you are having a hard time deciding between the two then flip a coin and settle it at once. You will not be missing out on sonic quality.

By the way, as for the sonic quality, do you or have you spent this much time and effort on studying room modes? If you have, would you mind sharing with us?

Quote:
Originally Posted by geekhd View Post

I see two possibilities with Volcan's identity.
1. He really is a newbie and has a long way to go.
2. He is a pretender trying to troll.


Sorry again all for the quotes, but geekhd's logic is failing him. Geekhd – I am not sure why you are suggesting I flip a coin if you read my sincere reply to your post. Perhaps you were hoping to set me up so you could post a clever reply? This seems to be the way you think others operate. There is a pattern to many of your posts in that they attack the poster, rather than contribute to the discussion. Your suspicions of other people’s motivation reveals more about you than the target of your suspicion – like the thief who accuses all others of being thieves. The logic in your reply doesn’t follow from my response to your question and if you think it does, your ability to reason must rank down there with that of mcnarus.

I appreciate your interest in what I have done regarding room modes. I would be very interested in sharing that information with you if you can be forthright in the discussion and share your experience with me as well. This thread is not the place for such a discussion however. Can anyone suggest to most appropriate sub-forum for this discussion to occur?
Volcan is offline  
post #406 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 04:10 PM
Member
 
Volcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

I have no illusions about being able to make DBT results "meaningful" for people who have neither the necessary knowledge nor any honest interest in taking meaning from them. But "signifcantly large sample size" is nonsense. The sample size doesn't matter; it's whether you get a statistically significant result that matters. A single person who does 20 trials and gets 16 correct is enough to settle the issue of whether a difference is audible or not.

But I should point out that some of the tests referenced in the sources I cited involved hundreds of samples.

Mcnarus - you question my qualifications to raise these questions, because I would be unable to understand your answers. You then go on to say that "significantly large sample size is nonsense. The sample size doesn't matter; it's whether you get a statistically significant result that matters. A single person who does 20 trials and gets 16 correct is enough to settle the issue of whether a difference is audible or not.

Since you won't believe me, I'll ask krabapple to explain to you why a larger sample size matters since in one of his posts he expressed clear understanding that small sample size limits the conclusions that can be drawn from a study. krabapple please explain this is simple terms so mcnarus is capable to grasp the point.

Mcnarus - at least I admit that I am no expert and I am aware of my shortcomings. You spout off like an expert but really haven't a clue. With each post your further degrade your standing - maybe you should sit out for awhile and see if you can learn a bit yourself.
Volcan is offline  
post #407 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 04:12 PM
Member
 
Volcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
All – Noone is willing to offer a single well conducted study for critique. If everyone of the DBTs of CD players referenced here was perfectly conducted, which I very seriously doubt, the very broadest, most generous conclusion that can be drawn is:

“For some listeners, in some settings, with some CD players there may be no perceived difference in sound quality during short term listening tests”.

Because of the very small sample size, any attempt to extrapolate these results to imply that for the general population there is no difference in sound quality is absurd and laughable. I think that any so called DBT experts here who propose otherwise need to do a little more homework.
Volcan is offline  
post #408 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 04:15 PM
Member
 
Volcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 160
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Happy holidays to all.

At this point, the thread is rapidly deteriorating, and no new information is being brought to light. Even though I feel that I have much to learn, I doubt that much further knowledge will be gained here, so I think that I will be checking out.

However I want to offer my sincere thanks to all who have taken time to respond to my questions. I’d like to show appreciation by giving back. In this regard for the benefit of the “No Difference” camp, I have started a new thread titled “The Official All CD Players Sound the Same Thread”. This will be a thread where references to the various DBTs can be collected and newbies can be directed. The veterans can post the arguments they have made repeatedly in the past and not be troubled to have to drag them out again. If we make it a sticky it will be prominently displayed for all to see, so when a newbie comes on to start a “Which CD Player Sounds Better, Denon Model X or a Rotel Model Y, he will be sure to see the thread.

For the “Yes There Are Differences” crowd, I ask that, in return, the “No Difference” camp refrain from hijacking threads discussing the sonic differences in CD players, as I understand that this has been a problem in the past.

I think that there is a need for such a thread and that both groups will benefit from its creation. My motivation is pure but if anyone is threatened by the creation of this new thread, I will have it removed.
Volcan is offline  
post #409 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 05:16 PM
 
geekhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Volcan, if you are truly interested in picking out the best suitable CDP for you then here's my recommendation. Get both of them (SACD & universal), listen to them yourself through your system, keep the one you want and return the other. That's the only way to be sure and it removes the doubt from your mind so you can listen to it happily ever after.
geekhd is offline  
post #410 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 07:01 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,387
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 763 Post(s)
Liked: 1178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcan View Post

All - Noone is willing to offer a single well conducted study for critique.

Define well-conducted study, and then explain who is going to pay for it. If you've got the deep pockets and are willing to pay, there people around who might be willing to re-invent the wheel for you, one more time.

Quote:
If everyone of the DBTs of CD players referenced here was perfectly conducted, which I very seriously doubt, the very broadest, most generous conclusion that can be drawn is:

For some listeners, in some settings, with some CD players there may be no perceived difference in sound quality during short term listening tests.

That is a truism that contrasts with what some people seem to be looking for:

For all listeners (billions and billions of them), in all settings (more billions and billions of them), , with all CD players (even more billions and billions of them), there will always no perceived difference in sound quality during listening tests involving all musical works ever recorded (even more billions and billions of them) of all possible durations (an infinitude of them)."

What actually happened is:

For a representative set of critical trained listeners, in settings designed to be diagnostic, with typical CD players, there were no reliably perceived differences in sound quality during the most sensitive listening tests that could be done.

Back here in the real world, it doesn't get a lot better than that.

Quote:
Because of the very small sample size, any attempt to extrapolate these results to imply that for the general population there is no difference in sound quality is absurd and laughable.

Wrong. It's whats known as critical case testing. It is the same basic means that is used to do the most important kinds of tests that are done today including situations where human life is at stake.

Quote:
I think that any so called DBT experts here who propose otherwise need to do a little more homework.

Please cite your professional qualifications to credibly make that accusation. Not liking the outcome of what's been done so far is not enough.

Please remember that the testing procedures you are criticizing were developed by degreed professionals including a number of PhDs, have passed a variety of high-level reviews by major professional organizations, and have been published in refereed scientific journals.

Demanding that tests whose results have caused them emotional trauma and/or financial loss be done again in accordance with impossibly tough standards is a well-known technique that is used by medical charlatans, for example.

I hear someone saying is that since the existing tests don't prove that his favorite horse is a winner, they want us to believe that the problem is obviously the fault of the tests, not the horse.
arnyk is online now  
post #411 of 413 Old 12-25-2008, 07:42 PM
 
geekhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdanT View Post

he is certainly no fool.

EdanT, I'm not sure how much you know about him but the reply (below) made by Volcan was foolish if he truly is a newbie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcan View Post

Because of the very small sample size, any attempt to extrapolate these results to imply that for the general population there is no difference in sound quality is absurd and laughable. I think that any so called DBT experts here who propose otherwise need to do a little more homework.


It's looking more like he is not a newbie in audio hobby and he is trolling.
geekhd is offline  
post #412 of 413 Old 12-26-2008, 09:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,360
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 177 Post(s)
Liked: 229
VOlcan wrote:
Quote:



All – No one is willing to offer a single well conducted study for critique. If everyone of the DBTs of CD players referenced here was perfectly conducted, which I very seriously doubt,

No scientific study is 'perfectly conducted' in the sense that it is absolutely immune from critique. Still, science manages to march on. It has something to do with tailoring the claims to the data, I think. For example, while Meyer and Moran reported that no subjects in their DBTS were typically able to identify SACD vs SACD--PCM better than chance would predict, , they also noted conditions under which SACD and SACD-->PCM could be differentiated (high playback level of quiet content) and also noted why actual SACDs might sound better than CDs (due to mastering differences).

This is a far cry from 'SACD sounds the same as CD" which is the sort of cartoon idea of objectivists claims that you are propagating with you 'new' threads.

Quote:


the very broadest, most generous conclusion that can be drawn is:

“For some listeners, in some settings, with some CD players there may be no perceived difference in sound quality during short term listening tests”.


That's true. And for the rest, the differences they hear during 'sighted' comparison could well be completely imaginary. They simply can't know without more data, either from measurement of the gear, or bias-controlled listening.

This would be trivial to mention, except that virtually all audio evaluation in the hobby -- from 'Stereophile' and "The Absolute Sound' on down to you in your listening room -- is done using a method that has a significant probability of 100% inaccurate results.

Ponder that and stop foolishly obsessing on a 'perfect' DBT.

Quote:


I’d like to show appreciation by giving back. In this regard for the benefit of the “No Difference” camp, I have started a new thread titled “The Official All CD Players Sound the Same Thread”


On second thought, don't ponder anything. Instead, might I suggest you find someplace else to troll?
krabapple is offline  
post #413 of 413 Old 12-27-2008, 04:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 190 Post(s)
Liked: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volcan View Post

All - Noone is willing to offer a single well conducted study for critique. .

How about you providing one such well conducted study between competently designed players that does show audible differences, or, most importantly that perhaps YOU were able to differentiate audible differences, be is short term or long term, although that 'long term' excuse is just that, an excuse, not an established fact that it matters.
CharlesJ is offline  
Reply CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off