Originally Posted by Mr.SoftDome
Hey, reply by IPad now works. I don't need DBT. Like I said I was able to test two set-ups at two different levels with same cables and with my own gear.
But odds are excellent that level-matching, time synching, fast switches, and bias control wasn't invited to your so-called tests. If you did your homework, do tell. How did you match levels, and how did you accomplish the prerequisite gain adjustments? What did you do to control listener bias?
You guys wanna throw DBT but I also ask if you have tried the test in your own home with two systems at two ends of the spectrum with gear you know. Most of the doubters no but want to pretend they are experts and follow in what they read. I'm okay with that but there is another side.
What makes your claims any better than mine since many of the non- believers try their tests on one system and not two at different levels?
I've tried the test in my own home with my own equipment, and I've done many tests in other people's homes and with other people's equipment.
One of the best demos around is to get invited to a true believer's home, set up a comparison that according to the high end ragazines should be a slam dunk, and actually let people listen with their ears and not just their preconceived notions.
Been there, done that first starting over 30 years ago. The sonic accuracy of home audio gear has only improved since then. If sonic accuracy is the goal, then logic says that sound quality should converge, and experience says that it has. In 2012 a Pioneer is much more like a Classe than a Dyna was like a MacIntosh in 1975. That's what the test bench says, but even the 1975 comparison was too close to call in many cases.
And we wont go into the they all sound the same. That's for a different debate
No, its your straw man. Nobody with a brain is saying that *everything* sounds the same. What we are saying is that the audible differences between the average piece of mid fi (e.g. $400 AVR) and a megabuck high end system composed of the finest separates may be non existent. Or not. Often are.
Let's throw $3k cables on a $399 AVR.
Check out the analog section on a Classe SSP-800 and compare to an AVR. I have both. No comparison when I use the dacs, software and yes probably BOM component quality in both. Not the same stereo experience.
Here are the innards of a ca. $8K SSP-800:
And here are the innards of a < $700 Denon AVR3311:
What's wrong with the AVR?
It's a fact. Your welcome to come over and demo. I still believe in the weakest link theory and that's my audio religion. I have performed many changes in my own systems in my own house.
The above is a gross abuse of principle that that you are claiming. Once audio equipment reaches a certain now readily achievable level, it stops being the weakest link. The weakest link in most systems is the listener, because we can prove as many times as we are allowed to, that there can be substantial differences in measured technical performance, and all listeners cannot detect them. We can prove that the next weakest link is the room/speaker and the interface between them. We can prove that the inherent imperfections in the original recording are far more audibly signficiant than those that exist between an AVR and the best separates in many if not most cases.
Finally, what you don't seem to understand is the fact that in many cases the same basic chips end up in high end gear and middle-of-the-road AVRs. The production volume of high end AV gear is insufficient to warrant the production of a special line of signal processing chips for them. The high end designer must either use the same parts as the AVR designer, or resort to the use of an unmanagable array of discrete parts that he probably lacks the technology to even conceive of, let alone design. In the two pictures above, there is a high probability that the largest chip with the 4 big dots on it is the same chip in both products.
That makes me an expert with my own set-up. No blindfold required.
Your desire to make your personal biases the focal point of any comparison are noted. It's good to be chauvinistic about your own AV system, but preferring or conforming to your biases is not something that the rest of us are interested in doing. If you haven't noticed, you don't rule us! But, science rules us all.
Your claims are no better than mine. All you have is do a DBT that is repeated like parrots.
I did the DBTs myself. If it were feasible I'd be happy to come over to your house and show you what you don't seem to want to know.
You seem to be telling me to salute your outdated ideas about what constitutes a valid test, when I've known better for over 30 years.
We will call the debate even for now,
No, in any factual evaluation of the relevant facts, your viewpoint suffers from not conforming to reality.
if some folks are happy and love their system with lamp cord awesome!
The above is just more high end audiophile chest-thumbing with a little excluded middle dropped in. "Lamp cord" is usually restricted to 18 or 16 gauge wire. We recommend the use of 12 gauge, which is never used for powering household lamps. You appear to be distorting the relevant facts in order to please your own ego and demean others.
I'm happy with my own tests!
Good for you. Because they are inherently biased they are relevant only to your preferences.
We can all debate this forever.
This appears to be because of your lack of willingness to be factual and honest. You seem to just want to stand up, moon us all with your ignorance, and tell us that you are right and we are wrong. That is very insulting and self-serving.
I hope the point is enjoy your system!
The point is that I can enjoy my system without demeaning your system, but you don't appear to be able to enjoy your system without insulting me, my intelligence, that of my friends, my ability to work with audio technology, etc., etc.
I have friends who are content with an iPod.
Right up to the headphone jack, and in accordance with an extant Stereophile review, IPods are technically very good. Since they can play uncompressed .wav files quite accurately, they are within their obvious limits about as sonically effective as the most expensive 2 channel media players. Why do you feel compelled to be insulting about other people's audio gear when by many reliable sources, it is actually quite good?
Folks on this forum you would think would appreciate the hobby weather you are into all aspects of equipment down to cable but there is a difference (-:
The difference is about perceived value, not actual sound quality.
What scientist invented the blindfold?]
Irrelevant and insulting.
The many insults and apparent false claims in the post above make a sham out of the word peace. :-(