Seeking education about those ultra-expensive interconnects - Page 16 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #451 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 08:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hd_newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Metro DC
Posts: 2,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Doesn't look like you understand what I said any more than some of the other posters have. So once again, just because a test is run double blind, it doesn't mean it has useful scientific data. At the same time, just because a test is single blind, it doesn't mean it doesn't have scientific value. As to sighted, I didn't say a word about that having scientific value although it can also be demonstrated to have some. Recall AJ saying that anyone with half a brain can hear amplifier coloration "at limit." Do you say his defense of sighted testing in that regard is wrong?

Sighted, single or double blind tests can ALL yield non-scientific results. Usage of any of the techniques does NOT assure you of its scientific value.

For example, you claim Ing's tests are faulty because they were not double-blind. If I take that at face value, how was it that it yielded design changes and improvements in fidelity that was also backed by measurements?


Did not do that. I gave very specific results out of professionally and interdependently run double-blind tests which costs $20,000+ to conduct. If that falls in the category of "typical golden-ear sales hack technique" then your definition of such tests is different than mine.

This doe show that you will argue invalidity of a test without any due knowledge of it. This is what sets the two of us apart. You act like my late grandfather in law, may he rest in peace, who would look at food that was served to him, and say it needed salt! Take the time to understand something and then call it invalid. You asked me no questions about the test and all of a sudden it became an audiophile test? How many audiophiles test compressed music for transparency with the general public?

The only other test I have talked about here length has been Ing's and that certainly is not an audiophile test.

So you have something to say against my test data, then talk about them specifically. Don't make them something else and then claim they are not valid. It is illogical and waste of forum of time and raises the noise floor for no reason whatsoever.

What is your position on level-matching? Do you feel it is needed?
hd_newbie is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #452 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 08:51 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,016
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 691 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiophilesavant View Post

The reason I ask is this: if the claim is: "most if not all pro amps sound like a wire", and the counter to the claim is: "9 out of 10 amplifiers The Ing has tested have coloration", but The Ing has not tested any pro amps, then the results of The Ing's tests are irrelevant to counter the claim. Hence amirm's desire to shift the focus of the discussion to consumer amps.

They are only irrelevant if you can show that pro amps as a category of product, have nothing to do with consumer amps. I asked this question before but got no answer. And notice that Arny did not either. If you want to keep addressing this point, then please answer my question.

I will give you the answer since it is probably not forthcoming. Answer has to be no. If you believe so categorically that pro amps sound like wire, then you better also believe the same applies to consumer amps. If you do not, then by definition you are saying that consumer amps are more prone to color the sound which is not good for your argument.

Let's see if we can get you concede one way or the other so that we can make forward progress in your mind.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #453 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 08:54 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,016
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 691 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd_newbie View Post

What is your position on level-matching? Do you feel it is needed?

I will ask you a question in the context of this thread which hopefully hints at the answer .

Do you think I should level match cables when I am testing them against each other?

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #454 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 08:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hd_newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Metro DC
Posts: 2,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I will ask you a question in the context of this thread which hopefully hints at the answer .

Do you think I should level match cables when I am testing them against each other?

come on now. do we really need to do this? it was a simple question in the general ABX context.
hd_newbie is offline  
post #455 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 09:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,016
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 691 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd_newbie View Post

come on now. do we really need to do this? it was a simple question in the general ABX context.

What you mean? You can ask questions and I cannot? Where is it written? Where can I read about your contributions to this thread so that I know you are entitled to more than me asking you to think about what you asked me?

Was my question too hard for you to answer? Or do you think we should not talk about them in the context of what this thread was about?

Hint: I am hoping that by answering my question, you also answer yours .

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #456 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 09:20 AM
 
AJinFLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Take a guess
Posts: 1,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd_newbie View Post

come on now. do we really need to do this? it was a simple question in the general ABX context.

You ever watch "Dancing with the Stars"?

cheers,

AJ

p.s. The king who wears the crown is here...and his name is Amir
AJinFLA is offline  
post #457 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 09:21 AM
Senior Member
 
hevi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by diomania View Post

Can you post English version of it?

Google translate sucks for Swedish->English, but you may be able to understand most of it anyways:
http://translate.google.se/translate...%26start%3D300

hevi is offline  
post #458 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 09:27 AM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Sighted, single or double blind tests can ALL yield non-scientific results. Usage of any of the techniques does NOT assure you of its scientific value.

The usual strawman card again.

Quote:


For example, you claim Ing's tests are faulty because they were not double-blind. If I take that at face value, how was it that it yielded design changes and improvements in fidelity that was also backed by measurements?

Were those design changes and improvements audible? If they were, how was it noticed, via subjective listening test?

Quote:


Did not do that. I gave very specific results out of professionally and interdependently run double-blind tests which costs $20,000+ to conduct.

Was it DBT of amplifiers?

Quote:


So you have something to say against my test data, then talk about them specifically.

Then first you would have to tell us about it specifically.
diomania is offline  
post #459 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 09:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hd_newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Metro DC
Posts: 2,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post

You ever watch "Dancing with the Stars"?

cheers,

AJ

p.s. The king who wears the crown is here...and his name is Amir

if you want to know why he won't answer, just read the thread I linked. very enlightening.
hd_newbie is offline  
post #460 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 09:29 AM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Do you think I should level match cables when I am testing them against each other?

Why do you ask?
diomania is offline  
post #461 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 09:30 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Chu Gai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: NYC area
Posts: 14,756
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Liked: 441
This Bryston Memo seems to be an interesting read. It's short.

"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 #462 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 09:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

***Did not do that. I gave very specific results out of professionally and interdependently run double-blind tests which costs $20,000+ to conduct. If that falls in the category of "typical golden-ear sales hack technique" then your definition of such tests is different than mine.***
***So you have something to say against my test data, then talk about them specifically. Don't make them something else and then claim they are not valid. It is illogical and waste of forum of time and raises the noise floor for no reason whatsoever.

Are you talking about the Levinson Class-D amp propaganda sheet here? I didn't see anything else to which you may have been referring, though I didn't read the thread too closely.

But if you are relying on the Levinson propaganda to make your point, that only shows Harman's copywriters did an excellent job of planting misconceptions-by-association in the heads of sloppy readers. Which, of course, is what they are paid to do, so Harman got their money's worth out of them. (We can also surmise from this document that the output of Harman's copywriters are well vetted by competent IP lawyers, because the text scrupulously avoids expressly making falsifiable claims.)

Generally, a good rule for getting through propaganda (be it for political/ideological or marketing purposes) is to clearly note what is not said.

Here, a reading of the Levinson propaganda material by any reasonable person moderately proficient in the art of critical reading leads to the conclusion that nothing in that material expressing stating the new Levinson tower (possibly a derivative of a $600 Crown pro amp under the metal-work...) to sound different, let alone "better," than any other amp in controlled blind listening. (Note that even the most prominent use of the phrase "blind...testing" contains "and sighted" within the ellipsis.) Since sonic difference (let alone sonic "superiority") in any real sense (which is to say, a sonic difference reliably and repeatably detected under controlled subjective listening tests) is not a claim expressly advanced in the material itself, one cannot use that material in support of such a claim.

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #463 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 09:41 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,016
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 691 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus View Post

amirm, what a load of jibberish you just posted. And from someone claiming to have conducted numerous blind tests in the past?

Look, at least in the context of this thread topic, the single most important purpose of a DBT is detecting audibility of differences. Whether it is wires, or amps, or green pens vs purple ones. Listener preference is NOT the first question to be settled, and NOT the most important.

I do as you say I should and now there is a problem? Ing's test was not about preference. It was a binary answer of if the amp colors the sound relative to its input (although reading between the lines, it seems that they also characterize the coloration although not in that way you are objective since nothing is being compared to another gear).

The other test I mentioned last night which I assumed triggered this outburst was the same. I said that 90% of the general population thought the 128k sample was the same as the source. But that 0% of the expert listeners did. So again, in neither case we are trying to determine preference or differential characterization.

Your comment however, provides another super strong reason why double-blind test can be non-objective. The only way your assumption can be correct would be the presumption that vast majority of the outcomes are negative. If the reverse is true, say in the case of speakers, then clearly worrying about whether there is a difference or not is not important as we know that difference exists so the characteristics become paramount.

Likewise, Ing's tests, if taken at face value says that vast majority of amplifiers do color the sound. Unless you are buying the rare exceptions like Bryston, then you better care about which colors the sound worse than others.

In that sense then, you have already prejudged the outcome. And in doing so, you have created an improper environment for learning the true facts. You make an assumption that differences are not going to be there, therefore if your blind tests didn't show any, you go and celebrate and don't wonder for a moment, if you indeed tested the right things.

Me? I become grumpy if a test finds no difference . I am left pondering if my test was wrong or I really didn't hear a difference. When I can show with math and engineering the difference could not have been there, then I can resolve the quandary. If I cannot and the engineering shows there could be a difference, then I keep thinking of ways to improve the test. This is why I like Ing's efforts. He managed to come up with a better way to detect differences.

Experimenter bias (conscious or otherwise) can be deadly. Again, take AJ's point of view. If I want to prove there is coloration (i.e. that is my bias), I run the amps at clipping and what do you know, I find differences even in double blind tests. At the other extreme, I run the amp at 0.5 watts and walk away with no difference (due to clipping). You can be as objective as you want in the rest of the test and it would not matter one bit. I had a bias, I found what I wanted, and I stopped there. And created no scientific value as a result.

Contrast that to Ing's test of the Byston. He did not go dancing in the street that the amp colored the sound. He went searching to learn why. And found the filter issue. Worked with the manufacturer to retest and then gave it the opposite verdict -- against vast body of experience to the contrary from his own testing that amps should as a rule color the sound. This is a man who is not driven by personal bias to arrive at one conclusion of the other. Your stance above is the exact opposite. That is not the scientific mind as Terry might put it.

Quote:


But the random subjective opinion stuff you went on and on about is a load of crap. You have no idea what you are talking about, and it's scary. You acuse others of having no engineering credentials, and it's scary. You fabricate whatever explanations (and I suspect 'blind test results') are necessary to defend your opinion, and it's scary.

Scary because people pay you hard earned money for advice.

Hard earned? What if someone spent gambling money on a copy of Windows? Would that still be hard earned?

It is a hobby folks. Not a presidential decision to bomb some place. Don't keep saying stuff like this. Besides, if folks saying I worked in a fictitious part of Sony or that I am unemployable had no effect on me, do you really think the above random accusations would? As I said, the list of people who insult me personally is long. Thankfully, the list of people who disagree professionally is even longer so I will keep posting.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #464 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 10:04 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,016
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 691 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

Are you talking about the Levinson Class-D amp propaganda sheet here? I didn't see anything else to which you may have been referring, though I didn't read the thread too closely.

Well, it does require reading the thread carefully . See my previous post for repeat of the same.

Quote:


But if you are relying on the Levinson propaganda to make your point, that only shows Harman's copywriters did an excellent job of planting misconceptions-by-association in the heads of sloppy readers. Which, of course, is what they are paid to do, so Harman got their money's worth out of them. (We can also surmise from this document that the output of Harman's copywriters are well vetted by competent IP lawyers.)

Again, all covered earlier and at length. I have said that there is one piece that stands out there which is them creating an emulation model of the amp using mostly passive logic and then performing differential audibility tests. That is a powerful tool if it can be created as they seem to have done so. As with Ing, based on the tidbits there, it seems that they worked hard to coming up with new ways to perform objective evaluations of the amp rather than measuring THD and calling it done.

You want to call this marketing? Then show me anything, from any other amplifier manufacture about any about blind testing whatsoever. No matter which way you read that marketing material, it points to them having performed blind tests. You all believe blind test yet you buy equipment that has never been tested that way. Blind testing by Ing led to improvement of Byrston amp.

If I had said that guy selling $200 amplifiers had done all of this, it would have been accepted with open arms and praised left and right that they did blind test. But say that about a company who builds high-end gear, and it must be all marketing? If you want to damn the companies who at least try to pay attention to objective testing and evaluation of amplifiers (to whatever degree), where do you hang your hat?

Quote:


Generally, a good rule for getting through propaganda (be it for political/ideological or marketing purposes) is to clearly note what is not said.

That's right. And what does your amplifier manufacture say about blind testing? Nothing.

Quote:


Here, a reading of the Levinson propaganda material by any reasonable person moderately proficient in the art of critical reading leads to the conclusion that nothing in that material expressing stating the new Levinson tower (possibly a derivative of a $600 Crown pro amp under the metal-work...) to sound different, let alone "better," than any other amp in controlled blind listening. (Note that even the most prominent use of the phrase "blind...testing" contains "and sighted" within the ellipsis.) Since sonic difference (let alone sonic "superiority") is not a claim expressly advanced in the material itself, one cannot use that material in support of such a claim.

First of all, you are wrong as a matter of objective data. The Mark Levinson 53 is not a Crown pro amp underneath. It does share the patented Class I interleaving method but takes that concept to an extreme. Instead of using 2-way interleaving, it pushes it up to 8-way. That means the effective switching frequency of the amp is now a whopping 4 Mhz!

Here is the difference in output when you do that (prior to output filter stage):





Pretty impressive, no? Further, the much higher switching rate allows a far gentler filter to remove the remaining high frequencies. Due to high power requirements, such filters must be passive which makes their design quite challenging if you want to keep the audio pass band without ringing.

Further, unlike the switching unit in crown amps, the Mark Levinson 53 uses the massive linear power supply from the Mark Levinson Reference 532 amplifier. I have looked into both Crown and ML 53 and I assure you there is nothing like the former in this box:



Now tell me, is there anything more manly than this?

Really, no one is trying to elevate the marketing material beyond what they are. Actually that is wrong. You all try to elevate it to proof point and then argue that it can't be proven . All Terry and I ask you to consider is that a company like Harman wouldn't talk about blind testing if they had done none.

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #465 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 10:23 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,279
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post

hmmm..when you don't understand it, attack. Typical.

No, just dealing with yet another KIA who wants me to waste my time solving a non-existent problem.

Quote:


So for the last 20 years, the audio world has had ground loop and emc problems because people like you refuse to look??

No, its because people like you have zero instances of you having solved those problems on your own nickle.

Actually, we have a number of workable solutions to ground loop and EMC problems. Show me a real world working example of something better.
arnyk is offline  
post #466 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 10:45 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,016
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 691 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by diomania View Post

Why do you ask?

Same reason I ask you. To make you learn and think about the topic. You know, the same technique teachers use in a classroom....

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #467 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 10:47 AM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Instead of using 2-way interleaving, it pushes it up to 8-way. That means the effective switching frequency of the amp is now a whopping 4 Mhz!

Who cares. Unless it makes audible difference in level matched DBT. If you know of such case, it would make a fantastic endorsement for your store which carries Mark Levinson 53 amp, wouldn't it?
diomania is offline  
post #468 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 10:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

No, just dealing with yet another KIA who wants me to waste my time solving a non-existent problem.

Actually, I've not requested you spend your time solving anything.. Learning what you do not know yes, but if you have no desire to understand, such is life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

No, its because people like you have zero instances of you having solved those problems on your own nickle.

You crack me up.

Run an unbalanced line level 125 feet in an auditorium with 15kW of dimmer controlled light, a quarter mile from a 12 phase 5 Mw power supply, and 20 feet from a quarter million volt van de graph.. And no hum, no noise.. It's easy once you understand..

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Actually, we have a number of workable solutions to ground loop and EMC problems. Show me a real world working example of something better.

Yah, I know, I've seen some of your "solutions". Pin 1 lift switches, input transformers, rf breaks..hum x...Random attempts at fixing what you do not understand well..

You probably think the pin1 problem is only an input problem, and only at 60 hz...

As I've said, I can either show you, or provide a source you can peruse to learn..either way is no problem. I do this for systems you will not understand...what audio needs is only a subset.

Cheers, John

btw...it's not you, Arny..it's the genre...those who believe they know it all so are closed to further knowledge..your experience is invaluable in my opinion, but your attitude sucks..

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #469 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 10:51 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,279
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amir View Post

Doesn't look like you understand what I said any more than some of the other posters have.

No, it speaks to the utter lack of reasonableness and credibility that those statements had.

Quote:


So once again, just because a test is run double blind, it doesn't mean it has useful scientific data.

IOW, just because you start out with a great piece of steak doesn't mean that some idiot can't burn it to a frazzle.

Therefore, according to your pattern Amir, there's no purpose served in trying to cook steak right.

Quote:


At the same time, just because a test is single blind, it doesn't mean it doesn't have scientific value.

True, single blind amplifier tests have scientific value as examples of how to screw up a DBT.

Quote:


As to sighted, I didn't say a word about that having scientific value although it can also be demonstrated to have some.

True, sighted amplifier evaluations have scientific value as examples of how to screw up what might otherwise be a good test. They also have commercial value as a means for separating those who are poorly-informed from their money.

Quote:


Recall AJ saying that anyone with half a brain can hear amplifier coloration "at limit."

I don't recall a formal definition of "at limit", so I can make no comment.


Quote:


Do you say his defense of sighted testing in that regard is wrong?

Given your track record for reliable reading comprehension Amir, I'd have to see more than one of your paraphrases before commenting on that.

Quote:


Sighted, single or double blind tests can ALL yield non-scientific results.

Right, nobody has ever created anything that is totally fool-proof.

Quote:


Usage of any of the techniques does NOT assure you of its scientific value.

Doing sighted or single blind power amp listening tests virtually ensures that what you do has no value except as the millionth rerun of how to do a fatally flawed test, and a good example of something to avoid ascribing any global value to.

Quote:


For example, you claim Ing's tests are faulty because they were not double-blind.

Based only on his lack of a positive statement to the contrary. I also said that they were seriously flawed for two other reasons. I guess you have forgotten them, Amir?

Quote:


If I take that at face value, how was it that it yielded design changes and improvements in fidelity that was also backed by measurements?

All undocumented or very poorly documented anecdotes. There is no evidence that an audible advantage was obtained. Can you show that the improved amplifier sold any better and that the improved sales, if they happened, were due to the alleged improvements?


Quote:


Did not do that. I gave very specific results out of professionally and interdependently run double-blind tests which costs $20,000+ to conduct. If that falls in the category of "typical golden-ear sales hack technique" then your definition of such tests is different than mine.

Interesting that I invented ABX with a budget of maybe $200.



Quote:


This does show that you will argue invalidity of a test without any due knowledge of it.

No it doesn't. It shows that I found fatal flaws and moved on.


Quote:


This is what sets the two of us apart. You act like my late grandfather in law, may he rest in peace, who would look at food that was served to him, and say it needed salt!

You are speculating wildly, Amir. Have you ever seen me eat? I seriously doubt it.

In fact Amir you seem to be acting exactly like your grandfather in that you are damning how I eat but you have never ever seen me actually eat.
arnyk is offline  
post #470 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 10:52 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,279
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 674 Post(s)
Liked: 1142
Quote:
Originally Posted by jneutron View Post


Run an unbalanced line level 125 feet in an auditorium with 15kW of dimmer controlled light, a quarter mile from a 12 phase 5 Mw power supply, and 20 feet from a quarter million volt van de graph.. And no hum, no noise.. It's easy once you understand..

I've done it. I do it whenever I need to.

Next.
arnyk is offline  
post #471 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 10:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hd_newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Metro DC
Posts: 2,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Same reason I ask you. To make you learn and think about the topic. You know, the same technique teachers use in a classroom....

all i want to learn is your position on "level-matching". yet i am not able to learn since you refuse to share.
hd_newbie is offline  
post #472 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 11:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jneutron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,879
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I've done it. I do it whenever I need to.

Next.

Like you've done dbt tests and writeups on the ITD delay? Where's the paper?

You claimed so many things recently, yet have proven only that you can claim much yet produce nothing.

Details my friend...details.

Hey, I've flown by flapping my arms...I do it whenever I need to...next?

Cheers, John

ps..I know you are far more accomplished than what you have shown here...It would be nice to see it.

Some discuss because they can. Others attack because they cannot. (unknown attribution)
A good man knows his own limitations...(Dirty Harry)
Lead, follow....or get out of the way..
jneutron is offline  
post #473 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 11:02 AM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by hevi View Post

Google translate sucks for Swedish->English, but you may be able to understand most of it anyways:
http://translate.google.se/translate...%26start%3D300

What do you think about this picture (from the link) in terms of acoustics?
http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u...o/IMG_3348.jpg
diomania is offline  
post #474 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 11:11 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
amirm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Washington State
Posts: 18,016
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 691 Post(s)
Liked: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd_newbie View Post

all i want to learn is your position on "level-matching". yet i am not able to learn since you refuse to share.

I am not refusing anything. I am fully prepared to discuss the topic. And that discussion starts with you telling me what you think. If that is not possible, then I don't know why I should share what I think either.

You have contributed nothing to the thread whatsoever. The last thing I want is to reward another guy who asks one-liner questions yet answers none himself. We already have Mr. Mania doing that. We don't need another despite how much you want to copy his non-constructive behavior...

Amir
Founder, Madrona Digital
"Insist on Quality Engineering"

amirm is offline  
post #475 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 11:17 AM
AVS Special Member
 
hd_newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Metro DC
Posts: 2,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I am not refusing anything. I am fully prepared to discuss the topic. And that discussion starts with you telling me what you think. If that is not possible, then I don't know why I should share what I think either.

You have contributed nothing to the thread whatsoever. The last thing I want is to reward another guy who asks one-liner questions yet answers none himself. We already have Mr. Mania doing that. We don't need another despite how much you want to copy his non-constructive behavior...

that's ok amir, no problem. i didn't expect you would answer anyway. i think everyone should read that thread i linked so they can also learn from your years of experience how level matching is not required in an ABX. I bet Arnyk doesn't even know that ABX can be also be conducted "sighted". I personally learned a lot and I am sure he would too.
hd_newbie is offline  
post #476 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 11:19 AM
Senior Member
 
audiophilesavant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiophilesavant View Post

The reason I ask is this: if the claim is: "most if not all pro amps sound like a wire", and the counter to the claim is: "9 out of 10 amplifiers The Ing has tested have coloration", but The Ing has not tested any pro amps, then the results of The Ing's tests are irrelevant to counter the claim. Hence amirm's desire to shift the focus of the discussion to consumer amps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

They are only irrelevant if you can show that pro amps as a category of product, have nothing to do with consumer amps. I asked this question before but got no answer. And notice that Arny did not either. If you want to keep addressing this point, then please answer my question. I will give you the answer since it is probably not forthcoming. Answer has to be no.

I will answer your question for the third time:

"I do not believe that all audiophile amplifiers sound the same. That being said, I believe that the differences among solid-state amplifiers operating within their design parameters are vastly overstated by audiophiles, and that most audiophiles would be hard pressed to detect such differences in a properly conducted blind test. Tube amplifiers are a different story. I do not have sufficient experience with pro amplifiers to have an informed opinion with respect to them."

Did you take an introductory or higher level logic course when you were in college? If you did, it appears that you have forgotten anything you might have learned. I will walk you through this.

Arny said: "most if not all pro amps sound like a wire." That is a claim. It may be true or it may be false. I do not know whether it is true or false. To repeat: "I do not have sufficient experience with pro amplifiers to have an informed opinion with respect to them."

You believe the statement to be false, and offered up the results of The Ing's tests that 9 out of 10 amplifiers color the sound. Let's set aside the problems that may exist with his testing procedure and blind testing methodology for the time being. I asked you if The Ing has tested any pro amps. You dodged the question, but the answer is you don't know. If he hasn't, then the results of his tests do not prove anything about pro amps.

Maybe he has tested pro amps. Maybe the results were that pro amps all fall within the 90% category that color the sound. If so, then the results of The Ing's tests would support your assertion. Maybe the results were that some pro amps color the sound and some don't. We would then have to look at the percentage of pro amps that color the sound and the percentage that don't color the sound and make a determination whether "most" do or don't. Maybe the results were that pro amps all fall within the 10% category that do not color the sound. If so, then the results of The Ing's tests would not support you assertion. Maybe, maybe, maybe, if, if, if. We don't know.

You have assumed that pro amplifiers and consumer amplifiers behave identically when subjected to The Ing's testing methodology. Not only is it a hidden assumption, it is an unfounded one.

In short, while the results of The Ing's tests may be interesting, they are not dispositive one way or the other on the issue of whether or not "most if not all pro amps sound like a wire." Note: that you have failed to disprove Arny's claim does not make the claim true. It may be false. Based on what has been presented, we still don't know. But we do know that we can't rely on The Ing's test results to answer the question. We must look elsewhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

If you believe so categorically that pro amps sound like wire, then you better also believe the same applies to consumer amps. If you do not, then by definition you are saying that consumer amps are more prone to color the sound which is not good for your argument.

I have not said that I categorically believe that pro amps sound like wire. To the contrary, I have said that: "I do not have sufficient experience with pro amplifiers to have an informed opinion with respect to them."

Query: are consumer amps more prone to color the sound than pro amps? I don't know. Do you?
audiophilesavant is offline  
post #477 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 11:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
DS-21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Well, it does require reading the thread carefully . See my previous post for repeat of the same.

There was nothing about distinguishing amplifiers reliably and repeatably from one another under controlled conditions in the post prior to the one to which I'm replying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Again, all covered earlier and at length. I have said that there is one piece that stands out there which is them creating an emulation model of the amp using mostly passive logic and then performing differential audibility tests.

That's old-school audiophool propaganda that goes back to "Sideshow Bob" Carver and his various "amp challenges," of course. The only difference is now there's a computer involved, with all of the fun technobabble words that result.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

You want to call this marketing? Then show me anything, from any other amplifier manufacture about any about blind testing whatsoever.

Why would they? "Our amp sounds the same!" hardly makes good advertising copy. And it would get people not normally inclined to do so to start thinking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

No matter which way you read that marketing material, it points to them having performed blind tests.

Ah, here's what separates a critical thinker from a drone.

Yes, they performed blind tests. But...what result?

Note that they don't say, making no claims about performance with the meaning-stripping "and sighted" caveat inserted between "blind" and "test." It's a really well-crafted piece of propaganda, gotta admit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

If I had said that guy selling $200 amplifiers had done all of this, it would have been accepted with open arms and praised left and right that they did blind test.

That is an assumption without basis.

Besides, Harman sells $200 amplifiers. Even cheaper ones, if you count some of their car stuff or iPod docks. It's fair to assume that they don't limit their use of blind testing to Levinson baubles, no?

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

That's right. And what does your amplifier manufacture say about blind testing? Nothing.

"My amplifier" is out of the scope of the argument.

That said, I used to own a pair of Harman-manufacturered amps (Crown XTi2000) that (if one was allowed to adjust each amp in any way s/he wished, using its feature set to the fullest) would definitely sound different and result in more accurate in-room response (note that I do not write "better," which is a matter of opinion) than the Levinson baubles in the hands of anyone competent. Why? Six bands of onboard parametric EQ.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

First of all, you are wrong as a matter of objective data. The Mark Levinson 53 is not a Crown pro amp underneath. It does share the patented Class I interleaving method***

Oh, so it's more closely related to an obsolete Crown pro amp (K2) underneath than it is one of their newer (Drivecore-chip) amps. Gotcha.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Due to high power requirements, such filters must be passive which makes their design quite challenging if you want to keep the audio pass band without ringing.

Has anyone done a blind test between a modern cheap Class D amp (say, a Peavey IPR-series or Crown XLS Drivecore-series) and a standard amp to see if the filters in less expensive amps are an issue? Would you even dare to complete such a test using an ancient class D amp such as a Crown K2 and a pair of the Levinson baubles? Probably not, because apparently learning something (i.e. finding no difference) makes you sad.

But for a rational music lover, it all comes down to audibility in the end.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

Further, unlike the switching unit in crown amps, the Mark Levinson 53 uses the massive linear power supply from the Mark Levinson Reference 532 amplifier.

In other words, it needlessly weighs more and is less efficient than an SMPS. But I suppose it makes a prettier "guts" picture, and impresses people who judge amplifiers on their weight and the number of big, brawny parts they can't identify inside.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post



Now tell me, is there anything more manly than this?

Yes. Trillions of things, actually. Quadrillions, even.

Frankly, both of my four month old kittens are more manly than that...and one of them is a girl.

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

All Terry and I ask you to consider is that a company like Harman wouldn't talk about blind testing if they had done none.

And if it was relevant to anything except for scoring a marketing point, we'd know the results. A thoughtful person knows that merely "doing" blind testing and finding an audible difference in the course of blind testing are very different things. Since they don't even claim the latter in their propaganda, a reasonable person must infer from their silence on the issue that they did not find any such difference.

Harman does science, don't get me wrong. They make a bunch of great products based on that science. They're also not above throwing in their reputation for doing science around as an aside for propaganda purposes. Nor should they be.

I'm sure this Levinson thing is perfectly adequate as an amplifier, though I would never buy one because I've always hated the Levinson aesthetic. (They look like like the design brief was to target the customer who was too poor to afford Transformers as a kid, and never got over it. I prefer audio gear be heard and not seen.) Does it sound any different under controlled conditions than Harman's XLS 2500 Drivecore? Considering they make about the same power and are both rated to drive low-z loads...at the very least, the burden of proof shifts to the person making a claim of sonic difference to show it in a controlled subjective same/different listening test.

Otherwise, the claim simply cannot be made in good faith.

PS: Your store sells Lexicon. Have good success with those BD-30 Blu-Ray players? Those look pretty darn manly inside too, don't they?

--
"In many cases there aren’t two sides unless one side is 'reality' and the other is 'nonsense.'" - Phil Plait
Serious Audio Blog 
Multichannel music (and video) urban loft living room system 
DS-21 is offline  
post #478 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 11:33 AM
Senior Member
 
hevi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by diomania View Post

What do you think about this picture (from the link) in terms of acoustics?
http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u...o/IMG_3348.jpg

That it is a fairly "normal" room with minimal acoustic treatment. Which is exacty what the owner of the room mentions in the thread -that the room currently is stripped from most of the surface acoutic treatments since he is about to rebuild the walls and ceiling. All-in-all, not optimal for critical listening in its present state, but that wasn't what they where doing, was it

hevi is offline  
post #479 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 11:34 AM
Senior Member
 
audiophilesavant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by hevi View Post

That it is a fairly "normal" room with minimal acoustic treatment. Which is exacty what the owner of the room mentions in the thread -that the room currently is stripped from most of the surface acoutic treatments since he is about to rebuild the walls and ceiling. All-in-all, not optimal for critical listening in its present state, but that wasn't what they where doing, was it

Why are they all sitting way over to the left?
audiophilesavant is offline  
post #480 of 2598 Old 06-22-2011, 11:38 AM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by DS-21 View Post

the burden of proof shifts to the person making a claim of sonic difference to show it in a controlled subjective same/different listening test.

You mean this following quote?
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I have not blind tested amplifiers. I have however found them in bass performance to be differentiated in amount of power they convey. This is not an audiophile observation. I am not talking about vague things you can't decisively feel. I find that all the switching amps I have tested including the pro unit from Crown, sans the Mark Levinson 53 to have less clean highs. This is a subjective experience and am happy to be told is wrong . But it is my observation and I use it to make my equipment choices. You are welcome to do otherwise.

diomania is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

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