Mcintosh integrated amp MA6600 for B&W 803D - Page 3 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 1Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #61 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 09:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
syd123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: mid-atlantic region of US
Posts: 515
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post

Quite happy here thankyouverymuch

Fine... But you should then expect people to express considerable skepticism about your claims of hearing vast differences b/w amps . This is (thankfully) one of the view audiophile web-forums where most posters embrace the concept of validity testing.

McIntosh MA6600 Integrated amp (for 2-ch) | Onkyo TX-NR1030 AVR (TV/ Movies) | Paradigm Sig S8 v2's (front) | Paradigm Prestige 55C (Center) | Boston Acoustics Bravo 20 speakers (rear) | 2010 Technics SL-1200mk2 Turntable w/ AudioTechnica 440mla cartridge | Mac Mini Music Server | Emotiva XDA-2 DAC | Logitech Touch SB | Samsung PN58B860 Plasma TV
syd123 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 01:17 PM
Member
 
sh25ep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The output of 2 of the same model amps will be the same. The tolerances in parts in high end amplifiers are not 20%. And any intolerance is compensated for.

If you move your head a little bit during a sound test at the dealer, it is not going to make a large enough impact on the sound for someone to not be able to tell the difference in amplifiers.

diomania, what was your experience and result on the DBT?

akhter, thank you so much for posting your experiences about the 8 ohm taps. I was running on the 4 ohm but tried the 8 ohm, based on what you said, and the sound really cleared up. More clarity, detail, and higher output. And it wasn't just a small difference. I thought something wasn't right for the longest time but just couldn't put my finger on it. This fixed it.

And thank you kiwi2 for explaining the power difference from 8 ohm to 4 ohm. This seems confirmed since I do have higher output on the 8 ohm taps. There is more going on, though, since the clarity and detail are higher also.

The speakers are rated at 8 ohms. I wonder if the speakers were rated at 4 ohms, would it not be better (for the clarity and detail) to be on the 4 ohm taps. Alas, I do not have speakers rated at 4 ohms to test with.

akhter, about your speakers. Have you tried moving them away from the wall a few feet? Also have you tried any room treatment?
sh25ep is offline  
post #63 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 04:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
akhter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 View Post

Fine... But you should then expect people to express considerable skepticism about your claims of hearing vast differences b/w amps . This is (thankfully) one of the view audiophile web-forums where most posters embrace the concept of validity testing.

Actually, I had mentioned that the differences are quite subtle (but real)--not vast differences.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep View Post

The output of 2 of the same model amps will be the same. The tolerances in parts in high end amplifiers are not 20%. And any intolerance is compensated for.

If you move your head a little bit during a sound test at the dealer, it is not going to make a large enough impact on the sound for someone to not be able to tell the difference in amplifiers.

diomania, what was your experience and result on the DBT?

akhter, thank you so much for posting your experiences about the 8 ohm taps. I was running on the 4 ohm but tried the 8 ohm, based on what you said, and the sound really cleared up. More clarity, detail, and higher output. And it wasn't just a small difference. I thought something wasn't right for the longest time but just couldn't put my finger on it. This fixed it.

And thank you kiwi2 for explaining the power difference from 8 ohm to 4 ohm. This seems confirmed since I do have higher output on the 8 ohm taps. There is more going on, though, since the clarity and detail are higher also.

The speakers are rated at 8 ohms. I wonder if the speakers were rated at 4 ohms, would it not be better (for the clarity and detail) to be on the 4 ohm taps. Alas, I do not have speakers rated at 4 ohms to test with.

akhter, about your speakers. Have you tried moving them away from the wall a few feet? Also have you tried any room treatment?

I cannot explain the reason for difference in sound between the 4ohm and 8ohm taps. The signal path should more or less the same, and only different parts of the transformer coils are used. power output is increased, but i never use more than 40-50watts ant the 4ohm also guarantees 450watts so not sure the increased headroom is the reason for the change in sound. however, atleast with my speakers, and to my ears, the sound is sweeter/smoother (for lack of a better word). the difference is clearer in mid to lower volumes.

I cannot have the speaker any further from the walls. the listening room is not that big. already the wife wasn't happy about such huge speakers (although she loved the sound).
akhter is offline  
 
post #64 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 04:57 PM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep View Post

The MC302 and MC452 will not have "different output levels for a given volume setting". The output is matched at Mcintosh.
How closely are they matched at McIntosh?
diomania is offline  
post #65 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 05:06 PM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep View Post

The output of 2 of the same model amps will be the same.
How did you find that out?
Quote:
The tolerances in parts in high end amplifiers are not 20%.
Then what percentage are they? High end amplifier? Which brand and model were you referring to?
Quote:
And any intolerance is compensated for.
What do you mean any intolerance? What do they do to compensate for it and how did you find out about that?
Quote:
If you move your head a little bit during a sound test at the dealer,
What do you mean by "little bit"? Are you talking an inch, half an inch, a foot or something else? What was the dealer room like? I'm asking because not all dealer rooms are the same. In fact, they vary quite a bit from dealer to dealer.
Quote:
it is not going to make a large enough impact on the sound for someone to not be able to tell the difference in amplifiers.
So you know this by having done it yourself? Did you compare it to fixed position versus altered position?
diomania is offline  
post #66 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 07:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
akhter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 17
I find it laughable that the double blind advocates call out on people who believe in auditions for minute details on the auditions like minute changes in head positions, and precise level matching etc. however, the double blind testers are free to test a handful of amps and then interpolate the results to across "ALL" amps in the world. That's right--every friggin amp whether is vacuum tube, class A, AB, D, G, hybrid A-D (like devialet) or something else entirely (NAD digital amps) if driven clip free will sound exactly the same. on top of this, many of the amps are integrated with completely different types of pre (analog/digital/processed with room eq) and different power supplies (switching/transformer etc.)

I am not even mentioning the quality of different internal components like caps or circuitry or quality of manufacturing, but ofcouse. all the differences between all pre/integrated/power amps are brushed asked and generalized based on a limited test (with components that might very well sound the same) and then the burden of proof is placed on people 'auditioning' almost always different gear under different circumstances to prove the inverse of what they believe.

its a very persuasive i must say.
akhter is offline  
post #67 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 07:31 PM
Senior Member
 
kraut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Quote:
That's right--every friggin amp whether is vacuum tube, class A, AB, D, G, hybrid A-D (like devialet) or something else entirely (NAD digital amps) if driven clip free will sound exactly the same. on top of this, many of the amps are integrated with completely different types of pre (analog/digital/processed with room eq) and different power supplies (switching/transformer etc.)

That is what basically just about every blind test confirms that was done with audiophiles as the ones participating and following certain test procedures (level matching, time to familiarize with the equipment by being permitted to repeat listening, only one component being changed during the test, i.e. the amp itself, everything else being constant) : that they, the audiophiles under conditions where the amps under question were not known and were driven within their non clipping parameters could not differentiate between amps. Not even between SS and tube amps in most (if not all) cases provided that the distortions of the tube amps where within non audible limits.

Before you mouth off utter inanities maybe familiarize yourself with the tests that were done on forums from Europe to NA, and then supply a proper critique why you think that those tests were either done incorrectly, the statistical analysis was wrong or any other reason why you think the null hypothesis was not confirmed.
kraut is offline  
post #68 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 08:16 PM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post

I find it laughable that the double blind advocates call out on people who believe in auditions for minute details on the auditions like minute changes in head positions, and precise level matching etc. however, the double blind testers are free to test a handful of amps and then interpolate the results to across "ALL" amps in the world. That's right--every friggin amp whether is vacuum tube, class A, AB, D, G, hybrid A-D (like devialet) or something else entirely (NAD digital amps) if driven clip free will sound exactly the same. on top of this, many of the amps are integrated with completely different types of pre (analog/digital/processed with room eq) and different power supplies (switching/transformer etc.)

I am not even mentioning the quality of different internal components like caps or circuitry or quality of manufacturing, but ofcouse. all the differences between all pre/integrated/power amps are brushed asked and generalized based on a limited test (with components that might very well sound the same) and then the burden of proof is placed on people 'auditioning' almost always different gear under different circumstances to prove the inverse of what they believe.

its a very persuasive i must say.
It's laughable to see a guy criticizing level matched DBT when he's never done one himself. rolleyes.gif
diomania is offline  
post #69 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 08:25 PM
Member
 
sh25ep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
diomania, I did not post that in bold.
What is your definition of "matched"? The outputs are matched.

The output of 2 of the same model amps will be the same. I have had 2 of the same model stereo amplifiers used in bi-amping and also bridged to mono and they matched. I did this with NAD and Rotel amplifiers and they matched.

Tolerances for parts in quality amplifiers are 1-10% and/or 1-5%. Examples would be Rotel, NAD, Mcintosh, Krell, Audio Research, and others.
The "intolerance", when considering the context of the discussion, referred to the parts such as resistors and capacitors.
The "intolerance" line was also a little joke; a play on words.....
The manufacturers compensate for the slight deviation of tolerances throughout the entire amplifier system by using compensation potentiometers. One for each channel. These pots, on some older amplifiers, have sometimes been made accessible to the end user by way of a flat head screwdriver on the back of the unit or sometimes even with knobs on the front of the unit.
Quote:
What do you mean by "little bit"?
I meant the same thing you meant by "tiny bit" by which you mentioned "at least a quarter of an inch ". If you're looking for a maximum number, well, just how far do you think a listener's head can move if the listener sits in the same spot as he was before? Whatever number you come up with, is not going to make a large enough impact on the sound for someone to not be able to tell the difference in amplifiers.
Quote:
So you know this by having done it yourself? Did you compare it to fixed position versus altered position?
I have moved an inch side to side with no difference in sound quality and the only alteration in the sound was the balance.

kraut, would you be so kind as to post some links of the blind tests that you are referring to? I'm beginning to think that it's coming down to 2 possibilities. Either
1. The tests were, in fact, done incorrectly or
2. Some people just really can't hear a difference or
3. I'm crazy and imagining that I can hear differences.

It's got to be one of those two....
sh25ep is offline  
post #70 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 08:47 PM
Advanced Member
 
akhter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by kraut View Post

That is what basically just about every blind test confirms that was done with audiophiles as the ones participating and following certain test procedures (level matching, time to familiarize with the equipment by being permitted to repeat listening, only one component being changed during the test, i.e. the amp itself, everything else being constant) : that they, the audiophiles under conditions where the amps under question were not known and were driven within their non clipping parameters could not differentiate between amps. Not even between SS and tube amps in most (if not all) cases provided that the distortions of the tube amps where within non audible limits.

Before you mouth off utter inanities maybe familiarize yourself with the tests that were done on forums from Europe to NA, and then supply a proper critique why you think that those tests were either done incorrectly, the statistical analysis was wrong or any other reason why you think the null hypothesis was not confirmed.

Anyone can call himself an audiophile (even a deaf person) so other than a lame attempt at adding illogical credibility to you statements, it means nothing. Was a hearing test performed on all the people?

Europe to NA? Why do European and NA based audiophiles have more credibility than those based somewhere else?

How is it not bias to expect all amps to sound the same and then then 'huge surprise'--they all sound the same? Oh wait--they (the selfproclaimed audiophiles) all came with an open mind so there you go!

For every double blind test there are equal (if not more) number of 'audiophiles' from all over the world (not just Europe and NA) who also claim to hear differences between amps. This is why the only opinion I believe are ones that I make up myself based on my own listen in conditions that are available to me. And I encourage other to do the same rather then trust faceless forum trolls who could make up any test any hypothesis and other who can create a test to prove the opposite.

So excuse me for being a skeptic since I was there myself (since I am not a european or american audiophile)--just are you are well within your rights to be skeptical of my claims wink.gif
akhter is offline  
post #71 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 09:35 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MarkHotchkiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Long Beach, California
Posts: 1,470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post

. . . That's right--every friggin amp whether is vacuum tube, class A, AB, D, G, hybrid A-D (like devialet) or something else entirely (NAD digital amps) if driven clip free will sound exactly the same. on top of this, many of the amps are integrated with completely different types of pre (analog/digital/processed with room eq) and different power supplies (switching/transformer etc.)
That's right. And the reason that most amps sound the same is that they were designed to sound the same.

The engineers use the same metrics when designing any type of amplifier: Flat frequency response, minimum harmonic distortion and IM distortion, low noise, linear phase-shift and others quantifiable parameters. These parameters are accepted as measures of quality, and when the designer meets these standards, she has created a device whose output is a faithful representation of the input. That is the goal, and if it sounds different from that, then there is something wrong with the design.
CruelInventions likes this.
MarkHotchkiss is offline  
post #72 of 195 Old 07-22-2013, 10:45 PM
Senior Member
 
kraut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Here are some links:

http://www.hometheaterfocus.com/receivers/amplifier-sound-quality.aspx
unfortunately, the original pdf by Clark is not longer available

http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm

Amplifiers :
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=82777


unfortunately, some links seem to be broken.

http://www.head-fi.org/t/486598/testing-audiophile-claims-and-myths

a test in German from Austria
http://www.hififorum.at/forum/showthread.php?t=4482
and the results
http://www.hififorum.at/forum/showthread.php?t=6882
Quote:
"Eindeutiges Fazit: bei Geräten, die sich messtechnisch im "grünen Bereich" bewegen - und das schließt mindestens 95% aller Produkte der bekannten und bewährten Markenhersteller mit ein -, ist es nicht möglich, Unterschiede zu "erhören".
Bei Zubehörartikel kann man mit gutem Gewissen von 100% sprechen, denn hier gibt es nie etwas das messbar ist (schon gar nichts Relevantes). Zwischen unkomprimierten und komprimierten Dateiformaten wird es selbst schon bei relativ hohen Kompressionsraten (MP3 ab 128kBit aufwärts) schwierig bis unmöglich, Unterschiede zu erkennen."
short translaton: between products that are in the "green" zone (distortion FR and noise measurements show that any variations are below audibility) no differnces can be discerned.

From my own experience, not blind, just a sighted comparison: at >95 dB at listening position I could not differentiate between a Bryston 4BST, a 40 year old quad 405 and a hypex DS2.100 amp driving a pair of kef 104/2. Not a valid test by any means, just anecdotal like any of those by akhter

Other links: http://www.roger-russell.com/truth/truth.htm#goodamplifiers
Quote:
I have personally completed several blind A-B listening tests over the years between good amplifiers, tube or transistor. Although I thought I could hear a difference each time, my choice was only correct about 50% of the time. I have also conducted blind listening tests for other people. I have learned how important it is to set the amplifier gains to be exactly equal and that the amplifiers should not be seen or identified for the listener. The slightly louder amplifier often is preferred. Comparison must be instantaneous or the listener forgets. If the identity of the amplifiers is known, the listener often gets preoccupied with identifying which amplifier is playing instead of the sound quality. The questions asked of the listener about the sound quality are also very important. I even hide the speakers as well as the amplifiers behind an acoustically transparent
Quote:
Europe to NA? Why do European and NA based audiophiles have more credibility than those based somewhere else?

Excuse me while I kiss...maybe the reason could be that articles in Chinese or Japanes or Russian do not show up when googling in English or German?
Could that be the reason oh wise one? Maybe, oh wise one, you could supply us with some pertinent translations from said sources?
Quote:
For every double blind test there are equal (if not more) number of 'audiophiles' from all over the world (not just Europe and NA) who also claim to hear differences between amps.

multiple anecdotes do not make evidence, and when those with the anecdotes are put to the test...they usually fail pathetically.
kraut is offline  
post #73 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 02:04 AM
Advanced Member
 
akhter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkHotchkiss View Post

That's right. And the reason that most amps sound the same is that they were designed to sound the same.

The engineers use the same metrics when designing any type of amplifier: Flat frequency response, minimum harmonic distortion and IM distortion, low noise, linear phase-shift and others quantifiable parameters. These parameters are accepted as measures of quality, and when the designer meets these standards, she has created a device whose output is a faithful representation of the input. That is the goal, and if it sounds different from that, then there is something wrong with the design.

First of all most engineering exercises are compromised of some kind. So while the end goal is the same, the compromises (usually due to cost) result in sub optimal designs.

If it was as simple as the way you suggest, mcintosh/krell/classe/linn/naim etc. engineers would just say, alright, the amp issue has been solved 40 years when we met all our design goals however, we need to make some money from the fools, so, lets spend four years designing a fancy new case and spend another 4 years redoing the internals which meet the same parameters we already met 40 years ago and success?

Now do above for every hifi amp engineer in the world. Damn that is a great conspiracy. And in 40 years, not one of these engineers spilled the beans? infact, many of them left their firms to start their own companies to make other fancy but different cases, and come up with new internal designs which meet exactly the same design criteria?

when d'agustino left krell to start his own amp company, he basically left to make a fancy case that meets the same criteria of his amps from 20 years ago? then his son started his own company brett said wow after working all these years, i want to start my own company to make fancy cases and let me make an amp that sounds exactly the same as my dad.

http://hometheaterreview.com/the-bully-sound-company---a-new-company-from-dan-dagostinos-son/

so all these engineers are con-men case designers who like to unnecessarily make new circuit designs to do the same thing over and over again (or fools), all the dealers are con-men, all the buyers are fools, and the dbx'ers have cracked this great conspiracy. damn no doubt you feel special to have figured all this out and share this brilliant insight. must feel very special.
akhter is offline  
post #74 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 03:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
syd123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: mid-atlantic region of US
Posts: 515
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post

so all these engineers are con-men case designers who like to unnecessarily make new circuit designs to do the same thing over and over again (or fools), all the dealers are con-men, all the buyers are fools, and the dbx'ers have cracked this great conspiracy. damn no doubt you feel special to have figured all this out and share this brilliant insight. must feel very special.
.

Subjectivists such as yourself must find it quite deflating that not a single amplifier, cd player, or cable mfg. has ever cited in their advertisements tests in which blinded subjects picked their gear over a competitors? ..If their amp truly sounded better than a handful of competitors, then why not state this in your ads? What could possibly be more compelling?

And I still don't understand why you believe that because two different amps come from the same manufacturer (e.g., the McIntosh MC302 and MC452) they will automatically have precisely the same output levels for a given gain setting on the pre-amp. This may be true if they had the same wattage output and same input sensitivity, but the MC302 and 452 do NOT have the same specs!!! ..They differ by 150w/ ch. and have different input sensitivity ratings!! Please explain why you feel they're "volume-matched".

McIntosh MA6600 Integrated amp (for 2-ch) | Onkyo TX-NR1030 AVR (TV/ Movies) | Paradigm Sig S8 v2's (front) | Paradigm Prestige 55C (Center) | Boston Acoustics Bravo 20 speakers (rear) | 2010 Technics SL-1200mk2 Turntable w/ AudioTechnica 440mla cartridge | Mac Mini Music Server | Emotiva XDA-2 DAC | Logitech Touch SB | Samsung PN58B860 Plasma TV
syd123 is offline  
post #75 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 04:15 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
kiwi2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 1,652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 160
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post

so all these engineers are con-men case designers who like to unnecessarily make new circuit designs to do the same thing over and over again

Why not. If there is a market for them and can make some money, why wouldn't they..??

Kind of like all those fancy watches in the jeweller's window that just only tell the time.
kiwi2 is offline  
post #76 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 07:19 AM
Member
 
sh25ep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Thank you kraut for posting those links. I'm beginning to see the problem as being not the results of the ABX test, but rather the conclusions drawn from the ABX tests.

In the first article (http://www.hometheaterfocus.com/receivers/amplifier-sound-quality.aspx) it was said that the pool of test subjects were "an equal number of hi-fi objectivists who believed there would be little to no perceptible difference between amplifiers, and audiophiles who believed there was a huge difference between expensive or tube amps and their cheaper counterparts." Yet later in the article the author grouped them all together as audiophiles by saying "audiophiles not able to tell the difference between a $200 Pioneer receiver and a $12,000 separate mono-block tube amp array". Not that that matters much. Its just interesting to note the author's bias tone.
Also, why pick an equal number of people that believed either way? A more controlled test would be to pick people that didn't believe one way or the other. Like they try to do at a jury trial.
Another interesting note is that the author said "only 114 of 212 listeners could tell the difference". What does he mean "only"? That's over half the people.

Then, the author's general conclusion is that there is no audible difference in amplifiers. Well, over half the people in the test could tell the difference.


In the Matrix HiFi test (http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm) the result was the following:
38 persons participated on this test
14 chose the "A" system as the best sounding one
10 chose the "B" system as the best sounding one
14 were not able to hear differences or didn't choose any as the best.

24 of 38 people could hear a difference in amplifiers. Over half again.
Is the conclusion to be drawn to be there is no audible difference in amplifiers? Over half the people could hear a difference.


syd123, I explained in an earlier post as to why the MC302 and MC452 would be volume matched. I stated the following:

"The input sensitivity is the maximum input signal voltage that the amplifier would need to produce maximum output. In this example, the MC452 has a higher maximum input sensitivity than the MC302. That means that you can put more signal into it and thus get more power out of it. The actual input voltage level would be coming from the preamp. And as such, the volume would be the same from both amplifiers at identical volume settings up to the 3.4 input of the MC302. After 3.4, the MC302 would begin to clip and the MC452 would still go louder up its 4.2 input."

To put another way, the input sensitivity specification is the maximum amount of input voltage that the amplifier can handle. The actual input voltage is varying with volume setting and coming from the preamp.
sh25ep is offline  
post #77 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 07:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
akhter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 567
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by syd123 View Post

.

Subjectivists such as yourself must find it quite deflating that not a single amplifier, cd player, or cable mfg. has ever cited in their advertisements tests in which blinded subjects picked their gear over a competitors? ..If their amp truly sounded better than a handful of competitors, then why not state this in your ads? What could possibly be more compelling?

And I still don't understand why you believe that because two different amps come from the same manufacturer (e.g., the McIntosh MC302 and MC452) they will automatically have precisely the same output levels for a given gain setting on the pre-amp. This may be true if they had the same wattage output and same input sensitivity, but the MC302 and 452 do NOT have the same specs!!! ..They differ by 150w/ ch. and have different input sensitivity ratings!! Please explain why you feel they're "volume-matched".

Actually I never look at advertisements for hifi gear so don't find it deflating at all. Strange comment but ok.

I never said anything about them being level matched. Infact I said I tried all songs at different levels and hence I said volume matching wasn't relevant for the way I was auditioning.
akhter is offline  
post #78 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 07:41 AM
Senior Member
 
kraut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Quote:
so all these engineers are con-men case designers who like to unnecessarily make new circuit designs to do the same thing over and over again (or fools), all the dealers are con-men, all the buyers are fools, and the dbx'ers have cracked this great conspiracy. damn no doubt you feel special to have figured all this out and share this brilliant insight. must feel very special.

There are only so many basic circuit design to amplify a signal within measurable parametres that have been found to be audible above certain levels and have negative influence on the SQ.
Playing around and tweaking those circuits might achieve a few percent either way on threshold levels that are already below audibility in almost all modern amps, be it tube or SS.
The purchase of high priced items is no longer about sound quality, but about purchasing luxury items, a legitimate choice if one makes his purchasing decision also based on aesthetics, perceived build quality and brand loyalty.

I have however doubts according to my own and others experience over many years in the pursuit of hifi that those luxury items are standing the test of time better than good quality mass produced items.
One cannot compare the mechanical quality of the drive train of a vehicle like a Range Rover that can endure severe stresses or the care which with a car like the Ferrari is put together and tested and the influence that has on performance expectations and longevity with the live expectancy of electronic active or passive parts.
Those are with a few exceptions (some electrolytic caps, i.e) all mass produced and wind up in those luxury electronics whereas the drive train, suspension etc. of a Ferrari are produced all in house and perform all within tight specs..
Quote:
Infact I said I tried all songs at different levels and hence I said volume matching wasn't relevant for the way I was auditioning.

Are you too dense to understand? Signals of different sound levels will be perceived being of different quality, the louder signal usually will be perceived as the better quality signal. That is why your whole listing "test" is absolutely bogus and you only fool yourself into thinking that you hear quality differences. Man oh man....
CruelInventions likes this.
kraut is offline  
post #79 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 07:55 AM
Senior Member
 
kraut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 371
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 61
Quote:
Well, over half the people in the test could tell the difference.


If 50% say they hear a difference, and 50% say there is no perceivable difference the statistics call that not statistically significant. It is a signal without any peak that would indicate that there really is a difference. It is of the same value as rolling a dice. Statistics also put tight limits on results over 50%, with the so called p-value.

One should also keep in mind the tests that were done with the same amp and presented one time as an expensive amp and the next time as a cheap knock off. In almost all cases I heard of the same amps was deemed better subjectively when presented as a high priced item.
kraut is offline  
post #80 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 08:33 AM
Senior Member
 
Brownstone322's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: The Old Dominion
Posts: 249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep View Post

Another interesting note is that the author said "only 114 of 212 listeners could tell the difference". What does he mean "only"? That's over half the people.

Then, the author's general conclusion is that there is no audible difference in amplifiers. Well, over half the people in the test could tell the difference.

OK, you do realize that 114 of 212 (54%) is statistically meaningless, right? The starting point is 50%, because you or I could be "right" 50% of the time without even being there. A distribution of 114/98 is only eight outcomes off from what we'd expect from blind guessing, and at this sample size small deviations from a 50/50 distribution are not unusual.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep View Post

In the Matrix HiFi test (http://www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm) the result was the following:
38 persons participated on this test
14 chose the "A" system as the best sounding one
10 chose the "B" system as the best sounding one
14 were not able to hear differences or didn't choose any as the best.

24 of 38 people could hear a difference in amplifiers. Over half again.
Is the conclusion to be drawn to be there is no audible difference in amplifiers? Over half the people could hear a difference.

That's absolutely not true (or at least isn't demonstrated by the data).

Unlike the Stereo Review test, which used an A/B/X methodology, this test was flawed to begin with -- it asked listeners to select which system "sounded best" without first demonstrating that those same listeners could actually hear differences to begin with. In this context, we don''t care what people think sounds "better"; but we do care if they can detect what sounds "different."

The only way that experiment would have been valid would have been if the test had been repeated over and over and the listeners made the same selections over and over. (Again, with one trial, I could have picked the system I "liked better" without even being there; but I couldn't pick that system 10 times in a row.) So we have this:

37% / 26% / 37%, which is close to a random distribution of even thirds, which is what we might expect from random guessing with a small sample size.

Then, when we toss the 14 who claimed they couldn't hear a difference, we have this:

58% / 42%, which is, again, what we might expect from random guessing with a small sample size.

Nothing in that data supports the hypothesis that the listeners could hear differences.
Brownstone322 is offline  
post #81 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 09:26 AM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep View Post

The outputs are matched.
And I asked you how closely they are matched which you still haven't answered.
Quote:
The output of 2 of the same model amps will be the same. I have had 2 of the same model stereo amplifiers used in bi-amping and also bridged to mono and they matched. I did this with NAD and Rotel amplifiers and they matched.
How closely are they matched and what method did you use to figure that out?
Quote:
Tolerances for parts in quality amplifiers are 1-10% and/or 1-5%. Examples would be Rotel, NAD, Mcintosh, Krell, Audio Research, and others.
Who told you that? Did you look or measure any of the parts to see if that's true?
Quote:
The manufacturers compensate for the slight deviation of tolerances throughout the entire amplifier system by using compensation potentiometers. One for each channel. These pots, on some older amplifiers, have sometimes been made accessible to the end user by way of a flat head screwdriver on the back of the unit or sometimes even with knobs on the front of the unit.
Which Rotel or NAD amp model fit that description?
So you set the knob to lets say 12 o'clock for 2 of the same model amps and play a tone and they both put out same level? What did you use to measure, your ears or something else?
Quote:
I meant the same thing you meant by "tiny bit" by which you mentioned "at least a quarter of an inch ". If you're looking for a maximum number, well, just how far do you think a listener's head can move if the listener sits in the same spot as he was before?
Did you move a quarter of an inch or half an inch? And how did you measure that? Or are you just making a wild guess?
Quote:
Whatever number you come up with, is not going to make a large enough impact on the sound for someone to not be able to tell the difference in amplifiers.

I have moved an inch side to side with no difference in sound quality and the only alteration in the sound was the balance.
So you do admit that something is altered. In that case, it may not be large enough for you but for those with better hearing than yours, it certainly is enough to tell the difference even when no components are changed.
diomania is offline  
post #82 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 09:34 AM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,366
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post

Anyone can call himself an audiophile (even a deaf person) so other than a lame attempt at adding illogical credibility to you statements, it means nothing. Was a hearing test performed on all the people?

Europe to NA? Why do European and NA based audiophiles have more credibility than those based somewhere else?

How is it not bias to expect all amps to sound the same and then then 'huge surprise'--they all sound the same? Oh wait--they (the selfproclaimed audiophiles) all came with an open mind so there you go!

For every double blind test there are equal (if not more) number of 'audiophiles' from all over the world (not just Europe and NA) who also claim to hear differences between amps. This is why the only opinion I believe are ones that I make up myself based on my own listen in conditions that are available to me. And I encourage other to do the same rather then trust faceless forum trolls who could make up any test any hypothesis and other who can create a test to prove the opposite.

So excuse me for being a skeptic since I was there myself (since I am not a european or american audiophile)--just are you are well within your rights to be skeptical of my claims wink.gif
As I've mentioned, you aren't the first to try this.
I'll quote my reply to another one like you:
Quote:
Originally Posted by diomania View Post

I know you think you can debunk the proven science in electronic audio and you are trying. You aren't the first on this forum and you will fail just as many others who have tried it before. The reason for the failure is that you (and others before you) are armed with subjective opinions and myths, trying to fight the cases based on objectivity and facts.
diomania is offline  
post #83 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 10:03 AM
Member
 
sh25ep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The author stated "only 114 of 212 listeners could tell the difference -- thats a 54% correct guess!" Well which one is it? Could they tell the difference or were they guessing? And why did they pick people that already had an opinion one way or the other?

Yes I understand that the results could possibly be not statistically significant. What is interesting is that the author didn't mention this. What conclusions can be drawn from a test that is not statistically significant? Yet the author still drew the conclusion that people can't tell the difference between amplifiers.

Does the absence of statistically significant numbers mean that nobody can hear the difference in amplifiers?

Brownstone322, I did not post that in bold.
On the Matrix HiFi test, yes they were asked to pick the best sounding one. In order for someone to pick one amplifier as better than the other, they would have heard differences which would give them a basis of comparison. Then they would pick the "better" one based on those differences. It is not random guessing since they are picking the one they like better. And since they had the option to choose "neither", as opposed to just A or B, this would make the statistics more significant than the Stereo Review test.
sh25ep is offline  
post #84 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 10:51 AM
Senior Member
 
Brownstone322's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: The Old Dominion
Posts: 249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Liked: 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep 
The author stated "only 114 of 212 listeners could tell the difference -- thats a 54% correct guess!" Well which one is it? Could they tell the difference or were they guessing? And why did they pick people that already had an opinion one way or the other?

It doesn't matter whether or not they were actually guessing. They can in fact be guessing when they think they're not. It's semantics. With this data, there's no evidence that they were doing anything other than guessing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep 
Yes I understand that the results could possibly be not statistically significant. What is interesting is that the author didn't mention this. What conclusions can be drawn from a test that is not statistically significant? Yet the author still drew the conclusion that people can't tell the difference between amplifiers.

You're not following the scientific process. Since we don't have evidence that modern solid-state amplifiers have audible differences, then the valid methodology is to assume we can't hear differences and test to see if we can. The conclusion from a test like this would be that the data does not support the claim that the amplifiers had audible differences. That is what the data shows us, nothing more or less.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep 
Does the absence of statistically significant numbers mean that nobody can hear the difference in amplifiers?

We only need one flying saucer to land on the White House lawn to prove the existence of space aliens, but until that happens we have no evidence of such beings. As for hearing differences among amplifiers, I've never seen such data, even for a single individual, but I don't portend to know whether such a guy exists somewhere on earth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep 
Brownstone322, I did not post that in bold.

The emphasis was mine, not yours. It was to indicate, for clarity, the specific statement to which I was replying (that "over half the people could hear a difference," which was a bogus conclusion). Emphasis is a fairly common technique for that kinda thing, but I won't repeat it, and I've removed it from my previous post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep 
On the Matrix HiFi test, yes they were asked to pick the best sounding one. In order for someone to pick one amplifier as better than the other, they would have heard differences which would give them a basis of comparison. Then they would pick the "better" one based on those differences. It is not random guessing since they are picking the one they like better. And since they had the option to choose "neither", as opposed to just A or B, this would make the statistics more significant than the Stereo Review test.

OK, here we go again. This is completely wrong, so I'll try one more time. We have no evidence that the users heard differences to begin with. Just because they claimed they could (in a single trial) doesn't mean anything. I could have chosen "System A" or "System B" without equipment, without music, without even being there. That single data point would be statistically meaningless unless and until I made the same selection repeatedly, which I could not do through guessing (or outright absence). How is that not clear?

In contrast, the Stereo Review test used an A/B/X methodology, which works like this (assuming level matching):

1. User hears one source at random (described as A).

2. User hears second source at random (described as B).

3. User hears source X, which is A or B repeated at random.

4. User switches among A, B and X and attempts to match X to A or B.

5. Test repeats, although the user won't know whether the sources are the same or have swapped between A and B.

That methodology sets a high bar, and it will expose random guessing every time. Matrix HiFi didn't do any of that. I could've walked into their test drunk, wearing headphones and cranking Appetite for Destruction from my iPod and said System B "sounded better." What would that have proven? But show me the guy making the same selection 10 times straight.
Brownstone322 is offline  
post #85 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 10:55 AM
Member
 
sh25ep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 30
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
diomania, you said the the "Same 2 amps don't put out exact same voltage at the output either."

How do you know this? Did you have 2 of the same amps? How old were they? What kind were they? What did you use to measure the outputs? How old was the measuring device? Had it been recently calibrated? How far off were they?

How closely do you need them to match? How did you come up with that tolerance figure? What method did you use to figure out that "Same 2 amps don't put out exact same voltage at the output either."?
Quote:
Those are what we call "tolerance" and they generally vary 20%.
Who told you that? Did you look or measure any of the parts to see if that's true?
Quote:
Which Rotel or NAD amp model fit that description?
So you set the knob to lets say 12 o'clock for 2 of the same model amps and play a tone and they both put out same level? What did you use to measure, your ears or something else?
I never said that I ever had one. You can go and look up the model numbers yourself.
Quote:
Did you move a quarter of an inch or half an inch? And how did you measure that? Or are you just making a wild guess?
Measure what? Head movement? How? Why?
A wild guess? It was an educated guess. Are you unable to move you head about an inch without breaking out the tape measure?
Quote:
So you do admit that something is altered. In that case, it may not be large enough for you but for those with better hearing than yours, it certainly is enough to tell the difference even when no components are changed.
I never said it wasn't altered. If you move your head a little bit, it is not going to make a large enough impact on the sound for someone to not be able to tell the difference in amplifiers.
Quote:
proven science in electronic audio
????
Audio is subjective. There is no proven science on subjective topics.
sh25ep is offline  
post #86 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 11:03 AM
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,420
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 851 Post(s)
Liked: 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post

For every double blind test there are equal (if not more) number of 'audiophiles' from all over the world (not just Europe and NA) who also claim to hear differences between amps.

Because of the fact that doing a double blind test is non-trivial, only a tiny percentage of all listening tests are DBTs. Even doing a quick-switched level matched sighted evaluation is too much trouble for the vast majority of audiophiles. Since there are so many more sighted, slow-switched, non-level matched evaluations, there are obviously going to be far more reports of the results of them.

There is virtually no possibility that audiophiles are going to actually match levels unless they try to match levels. If they don't actually match levels, the amplifiers are guaranteed to sound different due to the fact that the levels are different.

Therefore your true observation that "For every double blind test there are equal (if not more) number of 'audiophiles' from all over the world (not just Europe and NA) who also claim to hear differences between amps." does not shed any light on whether amplifiers sound different, let alone prove it.

For the record, there are amplifiers that are so poorly designed or otherwise flawed that they sound different. The good ones sound the same.
Quote:
This is why the only opinion I believe are ones that I make up myself based on my own listen in conditions that are available to me.

It is guaranteed that amplifiers will be perceived to sound different even if they are the identical same amplifiers unless a adequately controlled listening test is used. This means level matching, time synchronization and double blind. I have demonstrated this to audiophiles dozens of times over the past 40 years. Just because a comparison is available doesn't mean that it is going to produce reliable results. That's like saying that all food is gourmet food because it is available to you.
Quote:
And I encourage other to do the same rather then trust faceless forum trolls who could make up any test any hypothesis and other who can create a test to prove the opposite.

I am not a faceless troll. You can see my face here: http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/ I'm the guy on the right. This was about 8 years ago and I am a little worse for wear but you would probably still recognize me from that picture. Where might we find a picture of you?



I believe that every point you made has been falsified. Wanna try again? ;-)
arnyk is offline  
post #87 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 11:19 AM
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,420
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 851 Post(s)
Liked: 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by sh25ep View Post

diomania, you said the the "Same 2 amps don't put out exact same voltage at the output either."

How do you know this?

It's true of even the different amplifiers in one stereo amplifier or AVR. I've measured it.
Quote:
Did you have 2 of the same amps?

At times II've had up to 4 copies of the same stereo amps on hand to test.
Quote:
How old were they?

Brand new or close to it. Some legacy amps as well.
Quote:
What kind were they?

Bryston, Crown, NAD, Marantz, Yamaha, Behringer, Parasound, etc.

Quote:
What did you use to measure the outputs?

Fluke and Hewlett Packard meters, Audio Precision test sets.
Quote:
How old was the measuring device? Had it been recently calibrated?


You don't understand the question. Nether calibration nor age matter when you are testing power amps to see how closely they match. The meter can be 10% off in terms of calibration (huge and unlikely) but you can still accurately determine how closely they match with a decent degree of accuracy.
Quote:
How far off were they?


Various amps were tested, the results varied.
Quote:
How closely do you need them to match?

0.1 to 0.3 dB 20-20 KHz.
Quote:
How did you come up with that tolerance figure?

Testing of the sensitivity of the human ear to variations in loudness as a function of frequency.
Quote:
What method did you use to figure out that "Same 2 amps don't put out exact same voltage at the output either."?

Seems obvious if you know anything about measuring amps at all. Hook all amps to be tested to the same signal source and measure the voltage across all of the speaker terminals with the same meter. A $25 meter from a big box home improvement store can work, because the nature of the test is just a comparison, not knowing the precise value.
Quote:
Audio is subjective. There is no proven science on subjective topics.

Audio is both a science and an art. That is generally agreed upon by most if not all professional audio-related associations (AES, IEEE, ASA, etc.) and most if not all accredited audio educational facilities (many universities, trade schools, etc.) You appear to be tacitly admitting that you lack professional standing and/or relevant education.

https://www.google.com/search?q=audio+science+art&oq=audio+science+art&aqs=chrome.0.69i57j69i60j69i65j0l3.3649j1&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
arnyk is offline  
post #88 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 11:28 AM
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,420
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 851 Post(s)
Liked: 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post


so all these engineers are con-men case designers who like to unnecessarily make new circuit designs to do the same thing over and over again (or fools), all the dealers are con-men, all the buyers are fools, and the dbx'ers have cracked this great conspiracy. damn no doubt you feel special to have figured all this out and share this brilliant insight. must feel very special.

No, many people are in some state of denial or ignorance including any number of well-known designers and reviewers (Examples: John Curl, John Atkinson).

Believing false claims does not make you a liar or a conspirator. It simply means that you are incorrect about that matter. Errors are is common among human beings. People who admit no errors are often narcissists. I'm sure I've got a few things wrong, just not so much related to this topic. There are many things in audio that are not just subjective perceptions or opinions, but are reliably discernible findings of science that have remained the same for decades, if not longer.
arnyk is offline  
post #89 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 11:33 AM
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,420
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 851 Post(s)
Liked: 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post


First of all most engineering exercises are compromised of some kind. So while the end goal is the same, the compromises (usually due to cost) result in sub optimal designs.

The human ear is so accepting of errors that very sub optimal designs are still good enough to be sonically blameless. The fact that rooms, speakers and recordings generally contain or add relatively massive errors facilitates this.
arnyk is offline  
post #90 of 195 Old 07-23-2013, 11:44 AM
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,420
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 851 Post(s)
Liked: 1242
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhter View Post


All I am claiming is I can hear a difference.

You may be right or wrong depending on the circumstance.
Quote:
This is a public forum and I have every right to claim it

You surely do. Freedom of speech and all that.

You also get to be corrected with superior evidence.
Quote:
so your demand to ask me to stop claiming without some made up rule about requiring support data to post such a claim is a pathetic joke that i will gladly lol to.

If you have no reliable data to support your claims or if your claims are flawed or irrelevant, we have a right to be able to question that and point it out where relevant.
Quote:
please go enjoy your 10k 803d speakers with a $50 5 year old used onkyo avr with a built in dac that im sure can play clip free till till the 45wpc needed to drive 803d clip free.

I discern from the above that you believe that price is a reliable determiner of sound quality and that speakers and amplifiers need to be priced about the same to be suitable with each other.
Quote:
I am sure it will sound perfectly same as a mcintosh 6600.

Ever actually do a reliable listening test of such things?

It sounds like you would never even try such a thing due to a closed mind.
Quote:
please keep telling yourself (and your buddies who seem to only exist in these forums) that over and over again. i am sure after a few hundred posts you will convince a few people as well.

Its all starts out with doing reliable listening tests. Know how to do them? Experienced any?
Quote:
for others who buy hifi goods via auditions, using their ears (my oh my how can one audition hifi gear with just ears?), well they will find out for themselves and vote with their wallet won't they?

Most audiophile auditions are very poorly set up and performed. One of my hot buttons is auditions of loudspeakers due to the fact that the sound quality of loudspeakers can be so profoundly affected by the room. You must not believe that, right?
Quote:
yes there is a great con game going on with hifi manufacturers where every dac and amp and avr produce identical sound.

...just the good ones...
Quote:
even the manufacturer of the cheapest onkyo/denon whatever is in on it, and is making a 200 dollar avr and charging 4k while selling it for 200$ at the same time to the fools with money (some of whom are smart enough to make loads of it but are out of this joke).

The steady stream of anecdotes about fraudlulent behavior of audio manufacturers suggests that you have some unconscious or even conscious doubts in the matter....
Quote:
i am sure everytime you buy a piece of hifi gear, you get every manufacturer to donate every item you are considering towards a scientifically conducted double blind abx that is perfectly level matched in a fixed chair with a vice to hold you head at the exact same angle (lol) so you can tell them what they it all sounds the same even though by your same logic, it is impossible to even record to the same voltage output from the same amp.

You don't seem to have yet realized that if most audio electronics sounds the same or very similar you don't need to audition it at all.
Quote:
meanwhile, many grownups are enjoying music with gear they bought with their own money evaluated by 'listening'. you should try it sometime wink.gif

You don't seem to have yet realized that if most audio electronics sounds the same or very similar you don't need to audition it at all and you get to the listening to music for enjoyment part more quickly. ;-)
arnyk is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 2-Channel Audio

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