What is it about 300+ dollar cd players that makes them sound better?? (I want detail - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 269 Old 01-09-2008, 11:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,241
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeHudetz View Post

Pulliamm, until you can produce a test of today's technology, sorry but you are just another subjectivist. You have your opinion and others have theirs.
.

You mean yesterdays technology is not good enough to test? Why not? If anything, it is where audible differences would be at.
CharlesJ is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 269 Old 01-09-2008, 11:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
CharlesJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,241
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeHudetz View Post

I hate to ask an obvious question, but are there good, double-blind tests out there that compare various CD players? I'm aware of this one:

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_cd.htm

Which is interesting, but does not give a lot of detail in terms of the setup (electronics, speakers, room setup, etc) used, and also seems a bit dated.

Perhaps we need to wait for Stereomojo to do a shootout?

Masters, Ian G 'Do All CD Players Sound the Same?' Stereo review, Jan 1986, pg 50-57.

Pholmann, Ken C. '6 Top CD Players: Can You Hear the Difference?' Stereo Review, Dec 1988, pg 76-84.

Phollmann, Ken C. 'The New CD Players: Can You Hear the Difference?' Stereo Review, Oct 1990, pg 60-67.

CD Player Comparison, The Sensible Sound, # 75, Jun/Jul 1999.

CD Player Comparison, The Sensible Sound, # 74, Apr/May 1999.

These are what the objectivists have. So far, nothing from the other camp that is at least comparable.
Perhaps this is not enough for you but that is your burden. Many are satisfied with these.
And, minds can be changed with new DBTs showing something different?
I guess in the end, we'll just disagree what is and what isn't.
CharlesJ is offline  
post #93 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 04:18 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 458
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

Do you have a citation for this, or just another urban legend?

Ask anyone whose driven with his wife

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #94 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 05:39 AM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
There are a number of good reasons for people to buy expensive CD players. These include looks, build quality, longevity, and matching their other components. For some reason, after buying a player for these reasons, some still insist on "justifying" the expenditure with bogus claims of better sound quality.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #95 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 07:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ssteel01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Boston Area, MA
Posts: 1,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Well, sure Scott, I don't hail each study as a definitive answer. I look at them as examples that provide a practical illustration of the researcher's works that I mentioned earlier. Yes, they're imperfect and some are better than others.

I know you don't. And looking at them as data points rather than answers, is IMO, the right way to do it. Of course, as evidence mounts, it becomes harder and harder to dismiss whether or not you like what it's telling you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

I think this has been a relatively good natured discussion and I know that when discussions get heated and barbed then sides are taken that are difficult to retreat from. What may seem obvious to me and to others isn't to others. Perhaps it's because the explanation just hasn't been clear enough. Maybe it's because people have based purchases over time on subjective matters that can be proven to be wrongly thought out. They may feel that calls into question something like their choice in speakers. Maybe it's insecurity and a feeling that you'll no longer belong to the 'club' or that you're not a discerning type of fellow. It's a tough thing explaining the reasons why two amps can be determined to be indistinguishable from each other while at the same time getting people to understand that doesn't mean that each amp can drive your speaker without distress and that one amp is the better choice.

I agree. It's a regular hippie style love-in right now compared to where these threads usually end up. I think it has to do in part with the fact that nobody has tried to apply their definition of "better" to someone else's (if you'll pardon the pseudo-Clintonism here). What is "better" for me, might not be "better" for someone else. Even if some sort of rock-solid, indisputable study proved that CDP A was audibly indistinguishable from CDP B, one or the other might still be better suited to one's application. More expensive doesn't always mean better, but neither does cheaper.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

But then, what do you expect from a person who's an admitted Reiki practioner, believes that whistling heals people, and has remote sessions with other 'gifted' individuals in order to bring some sort of aid to people.

Hey...some people swear by that stuff. Me...I'm a penicillin kind of guy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Now, just so's we clear things up, I simply mentioned alien probing. You're the one who ventured into the nether regions beyond the sphincter!

Sorry. I thought it was implied. I mean, if you're an alien here to collect data on humans, what would you probe? Well, maybe not you....pervert.



Scott
ssteel01 is offline  
post #96 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 07:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ssteel01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Boston Area, MA
Posts: 1,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

There are no peer reviewed Journal publications. If that is what you are looking for, case is closed for your inquiry.
There are a number of other publications in the 80s and 90s. In the end, there were a good number of listeners in total and certainly any is repeatable, or just do some new ones. Don't forget, this is not a medical drug trial as each listener gets at least 10 trials to guess right.

What, no Journal of the Comparitive Studies on Audibility Between "Hi-end" and "mass-market" CD Players? Just imagine the widespread readership on that one...No, I don't expect that as it's a completely unreasonable expectation. But, in as much as people expect someone to be open to the findings of a given DBT, I expect that people will also be open to the discussion of the relative merit of a given DBT.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles J View Post

These are what the objectivists have. So far, nothing from the other camp that is at least comparable.
Perhaps this is not enough for you but that is your burden. Many are satisfied with these.
And, minds can be changed with new DBTs showing something different?
I guess in the end, we'll just disagree what is and what isn't.

Subjectivists don't "publish" findings because, well, they're subjectivists and measuring, analyzing, etc. is an objective process. Besides...let's be honest, if say Meridian (or any other "hi-end" mfr.) published the results of a DBT listening test they hosted where listeners reported hearing a difference between their CDP and some other CDP, most people would call bull***t on that study, whether or not the data was obtained in a manner similar to other frequenty cited DBTs.

Just for the record, even if there was such a journal, as someone who's spent most of thier professional life up to their neck in peer reviewed journals, I can very confidently say that just because it's published, doesn't make it true (necessarily).


Scott
ssteel01 is offline  
post #97 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 07:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JorgeLopez11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: MEXICO CITY
Posts: 1,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
IMO the basic difference is that we "objectivists" usually have a technical background (many of us are engineers), so it is highly probable that to some extent we're more qualified to understand, interpret and analyze the subjective testing methodology and results. At least from the rigorous technical point of view. Psycoacoustics is a different animal that also plays a big role here.

On the other side, the subjectivists in many cases see the experimental methodology (and ultimately the science itself) as a confuse, threatening subject, so it is much easier to call into question something that its not so easy to understand, particularly if the results challenge their beliefs.

Everyone has a different perception and the opinions vary a lot... But there's only one way to address the phenomena. One way or another, science still is the best reference.

Mr Hirvonen's Tesis is still available BTW. It's reading is easy cake.
JorgeLopez11 is offline  
post #98 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 08:40 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ssteel01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Boston Area, MA
Posts: 1,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by JorgeLopez11 View Post

IMO the basic difference is that we "objectivists" usually have a technical background (many of us are engineers), so it is highly probable that to some extent we're more qualified to understand, interpret and analyze the subjective testing methodology and results. At least from the rigorous technical point of view. Psycoacoustics is a different animal that also plays a big role here.

On the other side, the subjectivists in many cases see the experimental methodology (and ultimately the science itself) as a confuse, threatening subject, so it is much easier to call into question something that its not so easy to understand, particularly if the results challenge their beliefs.

Well, that's a pretty sweeping generalization. I'd guess that I'm probably considered one of the subjectivist heretics around and I do have an advanced degree in science (albeit not in engineering). I'd say that I'm at least as comfortable/qualified to interpret and analyze data and/or methodology as some (and probably more comfortable/qualified than most with respect to understanding what it takes to set up a good, controlled experiment). I know I'm not the only scientific saavy "subjectivist" out there. Wanna hear something REALLY crazy? I recently found out that my udergradute advisor (also a scientific sort of guy) is a reviewer for....I almost hate to say it....6moons, though I'm proud to say that he's not the guy that reviewed the Shakti stones.

EDIT: And if we're splitting into camps based on technical background, "you guys" get PULLIAM.


Scott
ssteel01 is offline  
post #99 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 08:52 AM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssteel01 View Post

EDIT: And if we're splitting into camps based on technical background, "you guys" get PULLIAM.

Obviously so, since I am both an objectivist and a mathematician.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #100 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 09:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,114
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 301
Quote:


On the other side, the subjectivists in many cases see the experimental methodology (and ultimately the science itself) as a confuse, threatening subject, so it is much easier to call into question something that its not so easy to understand, particularly if the results challenge their beliefs.

I think a much better explanation is that it is really hard to discount one's own observations, even if the textbooks tell you the conclusions you're drawing from your observations are wrong. It's very easy to "hear" differences between CD players. And that's as far as subjectivists get--or perhaps want to get.

Objectivists, OTOH, ask themselves why the players sound different. Once you start probing that question, it quickly becomes clear that there are a few easily identified physical possibilities, and the rest is psychological.

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

mcnarus is offline  
post #101 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 09:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 458
Yeah, I see all these threads about best or what's better and I usually don't bother responding. It's really very much of a personal assessment that's constrained by the amount of discretionary funds you want to toss at it. I'm thinking, this year or maybe next, when I finish with sundry remodelling projects floating around here, of taking my son's former room, and seeing if I can construct that absolute bare bones, cheap as I can go HT. Not HTIB but seeing if garage sales, craigslist, whatever provide unique opportunities.

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #102 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 09:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
JorgeLopez11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: MEXICO CITY
Posts: 1,887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSteel01 View Post


Well, that's a pretty sweeping generalization.

Yes Scott, I know perhaps I'm assuming too much. It's just that I'm also a member of mexican audio forum and it is very rare to see a tech guy in the subjective camp. I've noticed this tendency in avsforum, but I still may be wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mcnarus View Post


I think a much better explanation is that it is really hard to discount one's own observations, even if the textbooks tell you the conclusions you're drawing from your observations are wrong. It's very easy to "hear" differences between CD players. And that's as far as subjectivists get--or perhaps want to get.

Objectivists, OTOH, ask themselves why the players sound different. Once you start probing that question, it quickly becomes clear that there are a few easily identified physical possibilities, and the rest is psychological.

Agreed.
JorgeLopez11 is offline  
post #103 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 10:56 AM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
The rich have always liked conspicuous consumption because it makes them feel superior. They don't like to admit the fact that a CP player we peons can afford performs just as well as their megabuck machines.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #104 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 11:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
smitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 1,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

The rich have always liked consicuous consumption because it makes them feel superior. They don't like to admit the fact that a CP player we peons can afford performs just as well as their megabuck machines.

Interesting comment. I have always suspected that this kind of feeling (neurosis?) lies behind the comments of some of those who are so adamant that more expensive equipment cannot possible sound better. You know, there are lots of therapists out there who charge pretty reasonable hourly rates.
smitty is offline  
post #105 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 11:06 AM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty View Post

Interesting comment. I have always suspected that this kind of feeling lies behind the comments of some of those who are so adamant that more expensive equipment cannot possible sound better. You know, there are lots of therapists out there who charge pretty reasonable hourly rates.

Why would the rich people who need therapy care about the hourly rates being reasonable?
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #106 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 11:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
smitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 1,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Zzzzzzing! What a comeback!
smitty is offline  
post #107 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 11:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
schticker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The AVS Echochamber
Posts: 2,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssteel01 View Post

Well, that's a pretty sweeping generalization. I'd guess that I'm probably considered one of the subjectivist heretics around and I do have an advanced degree in science (albeit not in engineering). I'd say that I'm at least as comfortable/qualified to interpret and analyze data and/or methodology as some (and probably more comfortable/qualified than most with respect to understanding what it takes to set up a good, controlled experiment). I know I'm not the only scientific saavy "subjectivist" out there.

Right. There is a perception that there are scientists (or reasonable substitutes) and morons that are easily duped. Good scientists realize their work is never done. The lazy ones with a ton of time to post on internet forums probably feel it's easier to box it up and chalk the issue up as solved.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PULLIAMM View Post

The rich have always liked conspicuous consumption because it makes them feel superior. They don't like to admit the fact that a CP player we peons can afford performs just as well as their megabuck machines.

Conversely, peons like to think their stuff is "just as good"--with the caveat being "for them"--as a replacement for the conspicuous consumption they would partake in as well if placed in a similar financial state.

The First Clarke Law states, 'If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible he is almost certainly right, but if he says that it is impossible he is very probably wrong.'
schticker is offline  
post #108 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 11:55 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,114
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 301
Quote:


There is a perception that there are scientists (or reasonable substitutes) and morons that are easily duped. Good scientists realize their work is never done.

But some work is done--until somebody discovers a phenomenon that can't be explained by the work so far. That's the problem with this debate. One side wants to argue with the scientists without having a shred of scientific evidence behind it.

BTW, I don't think you're a moron. I think you're willfully uninformed about the basic science behind the hobby you profess to be interested in.

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

mcnarus is offline  
post #109 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 12:07 PM
 
PULLIAMM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oklahoma City
Posts: 8,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by schticker View Post

Conversely, peons like to think their stuff is "just as good"--with the caveat being "for them"--as a replacement for the conspicuous consumption they would partake in as well if placed in a similar financial state.

Depends on the age when the shift in fortunes occurs. Some of us have developed enough common sense not to be duped into wasting money on things that don't matter.
PULLIAMM is offline  
post #110 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 01:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
smitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 1,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by schticker View Post

Right. There is a perception that there are scientists (or reasonable substitutes) and morons that are easily duped.

Yes, I find that this issue is increasingly painted in black and white terms by certain folks and, in that regard, the characterizations that are employed to describe the "evidence" that exists on each side of the issue is rather interesting, and I think quite unfair.

For example, on the one hand, you have reports of DBT's that yield certain results. These are typically characterized as "scientific evidence" and viewed as evidence or data that is unassailable and of a quality that cannot be questioned or criticized, even in a constructive manner. Any evidence that does not arise in the context of a DBT is not evaluated for what it is worth (even if it may be worth only a little), but is completely disregarded.

On the other side, you have what I would refer to as "observations" by people who have had actual experience with certain components and who believe they have heard audible differences. These observations are generally disparaged as not constituting "scientific evidence" (which is just a way of trying to label something to avoid the issue) or not "evidence" at all, which is just silly.

There are faults on both sides of the argument with the methods and terms that are employed when this issue is debated, but I think it is pretty easy to convince yourself that you are right when you consider only the facts that support your conclusions. An intelligent person considers all the facts, evaluates all the evidence, and then reaches a conclusion. Could one evaluate all the evidence and conclude that, for example, all CDP's sound the same? IMO, yes. I have reached a contrary conclusion, but a judgment that all CDP's sound the same is a judgment I think a reasonable person could make after evaluating all the evidence. Therefore, I don't why some seem to feel they have to stack the deck, so to speak, and characterize as "evidence" only that which supports the conclusion you want to reach. Frankly, it undermines their argument, rather than supporting it.
smitty is offline  
post #111 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 01:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,284
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post

Well, of course not, because all CD players don't sound identical.

But certain 'subjectivists' will apparently never stop using that as a straw man.

It's one reason why that particular one you replied to, is in my ignore list.
krabapple is offline  
post #112 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 01:50 PM
Moderator
 
PooperScooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Leominster MA
Posts: 19,802
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 73
Just a reminder to some folks. There's a feature of the forum software called an "ignore list". It can come in handy.

larry

Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. -- Thomas Alva Edison
PooperScooper is offline  
post #113 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 01:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
schticker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The AVS Echochamber
Posts: 2,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The thing that sends up a red flag for me in any debate is the use of absolutes. There really is no such thing in this case. To say "all" CDPs sound the same smacks of lazy assumptions based on research that is thin (to be PC). I think it may be asking too much for any serious work to be done on the matter by a group NOT predisposed to a certain conclusion--that is, one that science would take seriously. It isn't that those findings don't exist, but science has a way of blocking out input from those outside of the club as it were.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PooperScooper View Post

Just a reminder to some folks. There's a feature of the forum software called an "ignore list". It can come in handy.

larry

Indeed. It is the virtual sand that some choose to bury their head in.

The First Clarke Law states, 'If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible he is almost certainly right, but if he says that it is impossible he is very probably wrong.'
schticker is offline  
post #114 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 02:00 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 458
Quote:


On the other side, you have what I would refer to as "observations" by people who have had actual experience with certain components and who believe they have heard audible differences. These observations are generally disparaged as not constituting "scientific evidence" (which is just a way of trying to label something to avoid the issue) or not "evidence" at all, which is just silly.

Well sometimes the evidence is reasonable although the rationalizations may be incorrect. Sometimes the evidence is questionable because of the methodology employed. It's a case by case basis but sometimes the cases are pretty large in size.

Smitty, if you've got a VOM laying around, why not burn a few test tones and measure the output at the speaker terminals using whatever players you've got laying around?

So, schticker, you never replied when I asked you why is it that world records are set under conditions of extreme duress?

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #115 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 02:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
smitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 1,744
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu Gai View Post

Well sometimes the evidence is reasonable although the rationalizations may be incorrect. Sometimes the evidence is questionable because of the methodology employed. It's a case by case basis but sometimes the cases are pretty large in size.

Perhaps, but as we like to say it the court room, it goes to the "weight of the evidence," not it's "admissibility."
smitty is offline  
post #116 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 02:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,284
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

There are no peer reviewed Journal publications.

Papers published in the JAES (as opposed to JAES convention preprints and presentations) are peer-reviewed.

So that gives us at least these JAES papers up through Nov 2007 that discuss or use DBT methods:


The Great Debate: Subjective Evaluation
Volume 29 Number 7/8 pp. 482-491; July/August 1981
Authors: Lipshitz, Stanley P.; Vanderkooy, John
A polarization of people has occurred regarding subjective evaluation, separating those who believe that audible differences are related to measurable differences in controlled tests, from those who believe that such differences have no direct relationship to measurements. Tests are necessary to resolve such differences of opinion, and to further the state of audio and open new areas of understanding. We argue that highly controlled tests are necessary to transform subjective evaluation to an objective plane so that preferences and bias can be eliminated, in the quest for determining the accuracy of an audio component. In order for subjective tests to be meaningful to others, the following should be observed. (1) There must be technical competence to prevent obvious and/or subtle effects from affecting the test. (2) Linear differences must be thoroughly excised before conclusions about nonlinear errors can be reached. (3) The subjective judgment required in the test must be simple, such as the ability to discriminate between two components, using an absolute reference wherever possible. (4) The test must be blind or preferably double-blind. To implement such tests we advocate the use of A/B switchboxes. The box itself can be tested for audibly intrusive effects, and several embellishments are described which allow double-blind procedures to be used in listening tests. We believe that the burden of proof must lie with those who make new hypotheses regarding subjective tests. This alone would wipe out most criticisms of the controlled tests reported in the literature. Speculation is changed to fact only by careful experimentation. Recent references are given which support out point of view. The significance of differences in audio components is discussed, and in conclusion we detail some of our tests, hypotheses and speculations.



High-Resolution Subjective Testing Using a Double-Blind Comparator
Volume 30 Number 5 pp. 330-338; May 1982
David Clark
A system for the practical implementation of double-blind audibility tests is described. The controller is a self-contained unit, designed to provide setup and operational convenience while giving the user maximum sensitivity to detect differences. Standards for response matching and other controls are suggested as well as statistical methods of evaluating data. Test results to date are summarized.


On the Magnitude and Audibility of FM Distortion in Loudspeakers
Volume 30 Number 10 pp. 694-700; October 1982
Authors: Allison, Roy; Villchur, Edgar
Beers and Belar, in their 1943 paper on Doppler effect in loudspeakers, recognized and pointed out limitations in the scope of their analysis. They also suggested simple methods for keeping FM distortion products below the level of audibility, such as dividing the spectrum among at least two drivers. Recent work is described which extends Beers and Belar's analysis along lines they suggested, and which, by means of double-blind listening tests, provides confirming evidence that Doppler distribution in practical multidriver systems is indeed inaudible.


A New Method for the Design of Crossover Filters
Volume 37 Number 6 pp. 445-454; June 1989
Author: Aarts, R. M.
A new method is presented for the design and evaluation of loudspeaker crossover filters. The desired system characteristic can be prescribed by a (complex) acoustic transfer function rather than an electrical one only. It may be derived from conventional filters or based on a measured filter from a reference (favorable) system. Double blind listening tests are performed to verify subjectively the similarity between the reference system and its experimental counterpart. The drivers of the experimental loudspeaker are preceded by digital filters, enabling the limitation of several different favorable loudspeakers. Multidimensional scaling techniques are applied to represent the results of the listening tests. These results affirm the strength of the design method.

Observations on the Audibility of Acoustic Polarity
Volume 42 Number 4 pp. 245-253; April 1994
Authors: Greiner, R. A.; Melton, Douglas E.
A number of experiments are described which show that absolute acoustic polarity is clearly audible in certain select cases of reproduced sound from acoustical instruments. The nature of the audible differences and the characteristics of the temporal signals which lend themselves to audibility are described. A large double blind listening experiment using varied musical program material is described as well.

The Sound of Midrange Horns for Studio Monitors
Volume 44 Number 1/2 pp. 23-36; January/February 1996
Authors: Holland, Keith R.; Fahy, Frank J.; Newell, Philip R.
A blind listening test is described in which 16 loudspeakers are compared with four reference loudspeakers under anechoic conditions. The test is concerned with the perceived sonic similarity between midrange horn loudspeakers and direct radiators and is intended to pinpoint the physical cause of a "characteristic sound" attributed to many studio monitor systems equipped with midfrequency-range horns. Comparisons are made between the listening test results and measurements of on-axis frequency response. The results indicate that short horns sound more similar to direct-radiating loudspeakers than long horns.It is concluded that the reflections from the mouth termination of long horns is responsible for the characteristic sound and that for studio monitor applications, a midrange horn should have a length not exceeding 340 mm and should be free of flare discontinuities.

Analyzing Listening Tests with the Directional Two-Tailed Test
Volume 44 Number 10 pp. 850-863; October 1996
Authors: Leventhal, Les; Huynh, Cam-Loi
Researchers typically analyze double-blind listening tests with a one-tailed significance test, which provides for deciding whether performance is better than chance. But the little-known directional two-tailed test, which provides for deciding whether performance is better or worse than chance, may be more useful to some investigators. This paper compares the tests, discusses when to use them, and provides statistical tables for conducting the tests without calculation.

Subjective Evaluation of State-of-the-Art Two-Channel Audio Codecs
Volume 46 Number 3 pp. 164-177; March 1998
Authors: Soulodre, Gilbert A.; Grusec, Theodore; Lavoie, Michel; Thibault, Louis
The results of double-blind subjective tests are reported, which were conducted to examine the audio quality of several state-of-the-art two-channel audio codecs against a CD-quality reference. Implementation of the MPEG Layer 2, MPEG Layer 3, MPEG AAC, Dolby AC-3, and Lucent PAC codecs were evaluated at the Communications Research Centre in Ottawa, Canada, in accordance with the subjective testing procedures outlined in ITU-R Recommendation BS.1116. The bit rates varied between 64 and 192 kbit/s per stereo pair. The study is unique in that this is the first time that these codecs have been compared in a single test. Clear results were obtained for comparing the subjective performance of the codecs at each bit rate. All codecs were software based and constituted the most current implementations at the time of testing. An additional hardware-based MPEG Layer 2 codec was included in the tests as a benchmark.


Subjective Testing of Compression Drivers
Volume 53 Number 12 pp. 1152-1157; December 2005
Authors: Geddes, Earl R.; Lee, Lidia W.; Magalotti, Roberto
[Engineering Report] A subjective test was devised and performed in order to assess the factors that influence the perception of sound emitted by compression drivers. A musical passage was high-pass filtered and played through three compression drivers of similar characteristics, loaded by a plane-wave tube, and recorded. To obtain different levels of nonlinear distortion, the passage was played at three different voltage levels on each driver. The resulting sound files were recombined with the low-pass-filtered portion, yielding nine complete sound pieces whose only differences from the original passage were caused by the drivers’ behavior. The nine stimuli were then presented, in a double-blind test, to 27 subjects, who were asked to rate audible differences when compared to the original passage. Analysis of the results shows that the differences in frequency response between drivers are statistically significant, whereas differences in playing level, and therefore nonlinear distortion, were not significant. This unexpected result implies that nonlinear distortion is not audible under these test conditions, and it leads to important conclusions regarding the design objectives of compression drivers.


Add to these any of Toole and Olive's papers on loudspeaker preference in the JAES.

There's a reason many of these deal with loudspeakers. It's because loudspeakers really are likely to sound DIFFERENT -- you can predict that just from how they work, and how they measure. So it becomes a study of audible determinants of preference -- arguably a more fruitful and interesting topic than 'can people hear a difference between CD players?'.
krabapple is offline  
post #117 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 02:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mcnarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,114
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked: 301
Quote:


On the other side, you have what I would refer to as "observations" by people who have had actual experience with certain components and who believe they have heard audible differences. These observations are generally disparaged as not constituting "scientific evidence" (which is just a way of trying to label something to avoid the issue) or not "evidence" at all, which is just silly.

On the one hand, we have scientific evidence that the earth is round. On the other hand, many people have observed that the earth looks flat to them. These observations are generally disparaged as not constituting "scientific evidence" (which is just a way of trying to label something to avoid the issue) or not "evidence" at all, which is just silly.

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

mcnarus is offline  
post #118 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 02:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,284
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

Masters, Ian G 'Do All CD Players Sound the Same?' Stereo review, Jan 1986, pg 50-57.

Pholmann, Ken C. '6 Top CD Players: Can You Hear the Difference?' Stereo Review, Dec 1988, pg 76-84.

Phollmann, Ken C. 'The New CD Players: Can You Hear the Difference?' Stereo Review, Oct 1990, pg 60-67.

That would be Pohlmann.
krabapple is offline  
post #119 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 02:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 458
Who're you gonna call as your experts on issues of audibility, smitty? Harley, Serinus, Fremer?

"I've found that when you want to know the truth about someone that someone is probably the last person you should ask." - Gregory House
Chu Gai is online now  
post #120 of 269 Old 01-10-2008, 02:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,284
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 115 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by JorgeLopez11 View Post


Mr Hirvonen's Tesis is still available BTW. It's reading is easy cake.


I'd like to read it -- or at least see the bibliography.
krabapple is offline  
Closed Thread CD Players & Dedicated Music Transports

User Tag List

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