How many necessary pieces of equipment we need in an hi - end system? - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 141 Old 06-06-2013, 12:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,273
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

No, the science isnt clear on the subject. You and others insistence that your claim is open and shut, and that the rest of us must be ignorant or in denial is fatiguing. I provided several links to articles that question your scientific claims, and could provide 100 more if put to the task.


The science is extremely clear on the need for controls when testing for sensory/perceptual difference. See for examples the topics listed for chapters 3 through 6 of this textbook:


http://books.google.com/books?id=XX9xwk9G0EUC&pg=RA1-PA68#v=onepage&q&f=false


Anecdotes from audiophiles simply don't constitute good evidence for what they claim, sorry.
krabapple is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 141 Old 06-06-2013, 12:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by krabapple View Post

The science is extremely clear on the need for controls when testing for sensory/perceptual difference. See for examples the topics listed for chapters 3 through 6 of this textbook:


http://books.google.com/books?id=XX9xwk9G0EUC&pg=RA1-PA68#v=onepage&q&f=false


Anecdotes from audiophiles simply don't constitute good evidence for what they claim, sorry.

OK, the theory of the science is clear, but not universally accepted.

Its not that I disagree with the science per say, its I dont feel its the only framework or approach that works for audio evaluation for amps.

Additionally, the scientific method isnt science at all until proven by experiment. And in this case, the experiment isnt 100% consistent or accepted. So where the experiment doesnt verify the theory consistently, it isnt science.

My Room
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html

My Music
http://rateyourmusic.com/~jim1961

My Equipment

Rega - Apollo
Rega - DAC
Goldpoint Passive
(2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next ( http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Jenzen-NEXT.htm )
...
jim19611961 is offline  
post #93 of 141 Old 06-06-2013, 01:07 PM
Member
 
Wayne Highwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

Its not that I disagree with the science per say, its I dont feel its the only framework or approach that works for audio evaluation for amps.

In lieu of evidence-based framework, what do you propose? The marketing based approach? That's what we've got now, and one of the reasons this particular forum is so helpful.

It's boring as ****, but you really need to subject yourself to a properly controlled comparison. Since you view your experience as infallible, maybe try to have an experience that challenges your assumptions. You seem impervious to reason, maybe a real life demonstration could help.
Wayne Highwood is offline  
post #94 of 141 Old 06-06-2013, 01:25 PM
Advanced Member
 
G-Rex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

I have listened to audio gear for 50 years (and designed and built some of my own amplifiers and speakers).

People who say that a cheap AVR is just as good as amplifiers and preamps built with superior components and lower distortion are either simply too inexperienced to know the difference or are
trying to justify the cheap crap they own to themselves.

I learned the hard way.

For example, in 1981 i bought the first set of Polk RTA 12 speakers (the demo units from the Las Vegas CES that year) for around $800. They sounded fabulous in the store, but sounded like crap in my home.

After some experimentation, it became clear that my 120 watt Yamaha integrated amplifier was making everything sound like crap.

I replaced it with a much less expensive NAD 3020 integrated amplifier (which only put out 30 watts per channel), and they sounded wonderful.

So much for the clowns who say "all amplifiers sound pretty much the same". They are completely out of touch with reality They need to have someone do a good A/B demo for them between their cheap AVR and a good amplifier.

A good integrated amplifier or preamp and power amplifier will sound better because it can do a better job of driving speakers, because it has a larger power supply that can minimize the effect of speaker impedance variations.

Speaker impedance and current drive phase angles very from frequency to frequency in the audio band, and these cheap AVRs do not have the muscle to drive speakers without significant distortion.

A large capable power supply costs a lot of money to build, and the cheap ones in most AVRs are feeble; they don't cut it. Anyone who thinks a $600 receiver has five capable amplifiers and an adequate power supply to run them is living in la-la land. Any engineer who designs this kind of gear for a living knows that. Hell, a good 2-channel amplifier costs over $1000 to build.

I have listened to and owned lots of gear over the last 40 years, and I only trade up when I CAN CLEARLY HEAR AN IMPROVEMENT IN THE SOUND QUALITY!!!!!

I do not waste money; I don't have THAT much to waste...lol.

My current system consists of an Audio Research LS-26 preamp, a Bryston 3BSST2 power amplifier, and Vandersteen Treo speakers, all of which cost around $20,000 (including the turntable and OPPO BDP-95).

If I could have found cheaper gear that could deliver the same sound quality, I would own it. I tried, believe me. I have owned a lot of other good amplifiers and speakers over the years, but this system sounds better.

If something cheaper floats your boat, that is great.

But don't try to tell me that it sounds as good as my system, because i've been there and heard it, and it doesn't sound as good.

Well said...I couldn't agree more.
G-Rex is offline  
post #95 of 141 Old 06-06-2013, 01:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne Highwood View Post

In lieu of evidence-based framework, what do you propose? The marketing based approach? That's what we've got now, and one of the reasons this particular forum is so helpful.

It's boring as ****, but you really need to subject yourself to a properly controlled comparison. Since you view your experience as infallible, maybe try to have an experience that challenges your assumptions. You seem impervious to reason, maybe a real life demonstration could help.

What assumption?

I sit in front of another amp, and I can tell the difference? I simply trust what my senses are telling me.

Not infallible, but trustworthy enough. Do I get it right and gauge every nuance completely every time? Probably not.

I am starting to tire of having to repeat myself. If I say I can hear the difference in a sighted test, cant you guys just agree to disagree? Must you resort time and time again to basically telling me my perceptions are not trustworthy? Do you think the 12th time will suddenly change my mind?

Again, those of you wanting to use the method you are describing, fine with me. If you feel your AVR receiver cant bettered, thats fine with me also.

Whats not fine with me is the endless assuming going on that someone elses claims cant be right because they dont agree with yours.

None of you can make the claim that in every single blinded test without exception, differences couldnt be discerned in some cases. Or that sighted tests fail in every case. Without air tight cases on both counts, you cant make exclusive claim to a single truth.

My Room
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html

My Music
http://rateyourmusic.com/~jim1961

My Equipment

Rega - Apollo
Rega - DAC
Goldpoint Passive
(2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next ( http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Jenzen-NEXT.htm )
...
jim19611961 is offline  
post #96 of 141 Old 06-06-2013, 02:39 PM
Member
 
Wayne Highwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

...If I say I can hear the difference in a sighted test, cant you guys just agree to disagree?

Of course you perceive differences, because you expect to. Perception is tricky that way, or so mountains of evidence strongly suggest, but you're exceptional.rolleyes.gif

If you want to use self-deception to McGurk your way into audio nirvana, knock yourself out. Whatever gets your toes a tappin.
Wayne Highwood is offline  
post #97 of 141 Old 06-06-2013, 02:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,273
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

OK, the theory of the science is clear, but not universally accepted.

No, the need for controls is a *given* in science in this point. It's not a theory (although a 'theory' i n science is actually a very strongly model, not some flimsy hunch.)
Quote:
Its not that I disagree with the science per say, its I dont feel its the only framework or approach that works for audio evaluation for amps.

Well, you can 'feel' that all you like. But your method is notoriously prone to false results. That's why scientists don't use it.

Quote:
Additionally, the scientific method isnt science at all until proven by experiment. And in this case, the experiment isnt 100% consistent or accepted. So where the experiment doesnt verify the theory consistently, it isnt science.

What 'experiment; are you talking about? The 'experiment' of sighted vs blind evaluation has been 'done' in many contexts. Whether or not amps sound different or sound the same, the way to tell is NOT by sighed comparison! Yet that is what you and your cohort are basing their confidence on.
krabapple is offline  
post #98 of 141 Old 06-06-2013, 02:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
krabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: in a state bordered by Kentucky and Maine
Posts: 5,273
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Liked: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

What assumption?

I sit in front of another amp, and I can tell the difference? I simply trust what my senses are telling me.

Not infallible, but trustworthy enough. Do I get it right and gauge every nuance completely every time? Probably not.

Trustworthy enough for....what? Claims that the two amps really are making different sounds? Nope, they aren't trustworthy enough for that. You may want to believe they are...but they aren't.

That doesn't mean you have to set up a blind test. What it means is you should consider the possibility that you're wrong, consider what other evidence might support or contradict your senses, and then adjust your claims accordingly.

Quote:
None of you can make the claim that in every single blinded test without exception, differences couldnt be discerned in some cases. Or that sighted tests fail in every case. Without air tight cases on both counts, you cant make exclusive claim to a single truth.

Except, no one is claiming that amps CANNOT EVER sound different.
krabapple is offline  
post #99 of 141 Old 06-06-2013, 03:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 80
smile.gif

My Room
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html

My Music
http://rateyourmusic.com/~jim1961

My Equipment

Rega - Apollo
Rega - DAC
Goldpoint Passive
(2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next ( http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Jenzen-NEXT.htm )
...
jim19611961 is offline  
post #100 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 05:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
bo130's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 519
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

smile.gif
smile.gif
bo130 is offline  
post #101 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 08:00 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bigus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The South
Posts: 4,258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

I think the crux of the matter is both my point of view and YOURS rely on ones individual subjective impression of music. And that which is subjective in nature cannot be hard science by definition.

People have tried to use measurements to determine what sounds good. Whether it be FR, ETC, Decay, Waterfalls, RT-60, Room mode analysis, Wavelet Spectrograms, Golden Ratios, or whatever, measurement alone cant tell you objectively if a room sounds good or not. The most that can be said is certain data in certain forms is preferable.

You are confusing the situation quite a bit. Preference is a personal opinion and I can no more prove or disprove that than I can disprove your claim to prefer red colored cars. However, a claim that A is perceptibly different from B is a statement of fact, and can be objectively tested just as all such claims of fact potentially can.

You may prefer amp A if you like, for nearly any reason you like, but logically that reason can't be for its "sound" if you can't demonstrate that it in fact has a unique sound.

And instrumented measurements aren't the gold standard way to establish individual or population preference. Subjective impressions, ie human assessments and scorings, are. But you'd be mistaken yet again if you believe controls aren't necessary to remove bias if differences have already been established. Just ask Harman.

Bigus is offline  
post #102 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 08:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Bigus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The South
Posts: 4,258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
[quote name="jim19611961"

Additionally, the scientific method isnt science at all until proven by experiment. And in this case, the experiment isnt 100% consistent or accepted. So where the experiment doesnt verify the theory consistently, it isnt science.[/quote]


The experiments are consistent, and don't require acceptance from golden ears to be factual. If a "DBT" shows a difference between amplifiers, one of two things is responsible. There may be a flaw in the study design, which is quite common. This could be anything from improper matching, to poor bias controls, to inadequately powered statistics. Conducting a properly controlled comparison like this isn't easy, and many supposed DBT's claiming differences have been discussed on this forum and their methodology found lacking or in some cases poorly documented (a huge red flag). The other possibility is a difference was reliably detected and accurately reported. In every such case, measurements of the equipment in question would reveal differences known to fall within the bounds of human audibility, thus the test did its job and the outcome was expected.

And BTW, were you to undergo controlled testing, your results would be consistent with known limits of human hearing too, though you may choose not to accept those results.

Bigus is offline  
post #103 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 08:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus View Post

You are confusing the situation quite a bit. Preference is a personal opinion and I can no more prove or disprove that than I can disprove your claim to prefer red colored cars. However, a claim that A is perceptibly different from B is a statement of fact, and can be objectively tested just as all such claims of fact potentially can.

You may prefer amp A if you like, for nearly any reason you like, but logically that reason can't be for its "sound" if you can't demonstrate that it in fact has a unique sound.

And instrumented measurements aren't the gold standard way to establish individual or population preference. Subjective impressions, ie human assessments and scoring, are. But you'd be mistaken yet again if you believe controls aren't necessary to remove bias if differences have already been established. Just ask Harman.

The bolded is my point. Amps do have a unique sound if you listen carefully. Here is a checklist I use when listening:

1) Soundstage
A) How wide
B) How deep
C) Image resolution and broadness
D) Detail
E) "Air" and "Bloom"
F) Location of images and forwardness
G) Distribution of images vertically
2) Tonality/Coloration/Timbre
3) Dynamics
4) Transparency
5) Smoothness vs graininess

IMO, where amps vary the most is in soundstage presentation. How easily images can be discerned and their point of emanation and character in a 3D plane.
Often times, subjective preference plays a part here in terms of how you like the presentation to begin with. A pricier amp doesnt necessarily mean its better.

As pointed out in a earlier post, the room and the speakers certainly have a greater bearing on these things than the amp generally. Every component in the chain has some character of its own, some more than others.


I dont intend to carry my argument further on the point of what test criteria are valid for who. But perhaps we can talk about what differences can be discerned in the listening experience, and which ones are paramount to whom.

My Room
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html

My Music
http://rateyourmusic.com/~jim1961

My Equipment

Rega - Apollo
Rega - DAC
Goldpoint Passive
(2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next ( http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Jenzen-NEXT.htm )
...
jim19611961 is offline  
post #104 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 09:56 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,174
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 631 Post(s)
Liked: 1122
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne Highwood View Post

In lieu of evidence-based framework, what do you propose? The marketing based approach? That's what we've got now, and one of the reasons this particular forum is so helpful.

It's boring as ****, but you really need to subject yourself to a properly controlled comparison. Since you view your experience as infallible, maybe try to have an experience that challenges your assumptions. You seem impervious to reason, maybe a real life demonstration could help.

What assumption?

The assumption that you know about all relevant changes and can separate and rank their effects.
Quote:
I sit in front of another amp, and I can tell the difference?

Do you think that any and all differences that you hear are due to the fact that a different component is being used?

Is it possible that the difference that you hear is due to the fact that:

(1) You are listening to a different piece of music?

(2) You are listening to a different part of the same musical selection?

(3) Inadvertent changes in equipment volume controls?

(4) Equipment has different amounts of gain even though the volume control setting is the same?

(5) Hidden tone control settings?

(6) You know that you are listening to different pieces of equipment, so you auto-suggest to yourself that the sound quality is different?
Quote:
I simply trust what my senses are telling me.

I see that you use the word senses, so you admit that several senses may be affecting your perceptions, but isn't this about audio sound quality so only your sense of hearing is relevant?
Quote:
Not infallible, but trustworthy enough.

Not according to what you just seem to have said.
Quote:
Do I get it right and gauge every nuance completely every time? Probably not.

How do you know what percentage of the time you are right?
Quote:
I am starting to tire of having to repeat myself.

As are some of the rest of us.
Quote:
If I say I can hear the difference in a sighted test, cant you guys just agree to disagree?

If you want blind affirmation regardless of other facts, of course we can provide that. I guess I was wrong when I thought that you wanted us to tell you what we actually believed.
Quote:
Must you resort time and time again to basically telling me my perceptions are not trustworthy?

Do you want our best understanding, or do you want us to pat you on your back and tell you are correct regardless of what we may know by other, more reliable means?
Quote:
Do you think the 12th time will suddenly change my mind?

I am wondering if you ever change your opinion regardless of what new evidence is presented.
Quote:
Again, those of you wanting to use the method you are describing, fine with me. If you feel your AVR receiver cant bettered, thats fine with me also.

I know for sure that most good AVRs, when adjusted for the same gain and frequency response and operated within their ratings sound the same. Why should they sound any different?
Quote:
Whats not fine with me is the endless assuming going on that someone elses claims cant be right because they dont agree with yours.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it possible that some of us possibly examined this situation more thoroughly than you?
Quote:
None of you can make the claim that in every single blinded test without exception, differences couldnt be discerned in some cases.

Single blind tests are just defective double blind tests. Why should I ignore the results of the more reliable double blind test?
Quote:
Or that sighted tests fail in every case.

Sighted tests are just even more defective double blind tests. Why should I ignore the results of the more reliable double blind test?

Quote:
Without air tight cases on both counts, you cant make exclusive claim to a single truth.

I just cut to the chase and do the double blind test. What's wrong with that?
bo130 likes this.
arnyk is offline  
post #105 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 10:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 80
One thing I think we can agree on is that both sides of the debate are fixed in their position. Can we just move along?

My Room
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html

My Music
http://rateyourmusic.com/~jim1961

My Equipment

Rega - Apollo
Rega - DAC
Goldpoint Passive
(2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next ( http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Jenzen-NEXT.htm )
...
jim19611961 is offline  
post #106 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 10:18 AM
Member
 
Wayne Highwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 35
Your checklist sounds suspiciously like a SET amp's bag of parlor tricks. Are you a tube amp user?
Wayne Highwood is offline  
post #107 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 10:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayne Highwood View Post

Your checklist sounds suspiciously like a SET amp's bag of parlor tricks. Are you a tube amp user?

No

My Room
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html

My Music
http://rateyourmusic.com/~jim1961

My Equipment

Rega - Apollo
Rega - DAC
Goldpoint Passive
(2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next ( http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Jenzen-NEXT.htm )
...
jim19611961 is offline  
post #108 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 12:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bigus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The South
Posts: 4,258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 

The bolded is my point. Amps do have a unique sound if you listen carefully.

By all means, I want to encourage people to listen carefully. You can use whatever checklist of sound qualities you like... yours appears pretty comprehensive.

The difference in beliefs comes down to what constitutes listening carefully. You believe that means thoughtful extended listening in a similar manner as how you would listen casually, is that close? That may seem reasonable and common sense, but decades of research has told us that is actually being careless, not careful. We know that to be careful, we must account for and control many factors which have been repeatedly shown to confound perceptions.

Now, the cool part is that you can set up a test that lets you use your equipment in your room, your music, listening for as long as you like, with your checklist of sound attributes, etc. A few technical factors, such as level matching, need to be addressed, but otherwise the listening can be as relaxed, thoughtful, and extended as any peaceful Sunday afternoon. With a big caveat... you can't know what amp you are listening to. Your eyes don't literally have to be closed, unless that is your standard and preferred method.

If hearing differences is as easy and repeatable as you claim, you should be able to demonstrate this ability by simply listening as you otherwise would and noting a difference enough times that it becomes statistically unlikely you are guessing. That doesn't really require much. A series of ten correct would convince me... should be able to handle that in one short afternoon.

Yet among the thousands of claims to be able to hear these differences, we have an absence of data obtained when he listener isn't cheating. Why? What is it about 'not knowing the result beforehand' that utterly ruins your ability to hear? I might suggest that the extended more casual listening sessions aren't optimal. It has also been found that quick switching with comparison to a reference gives our short auditory memory the best chance to identify a subtle difference. You can use that method to your advantage if you'd like.

But you would have me believe that robbing you of the knowledge of the answer ruins your ability to fairly answer the question. Please, in what world is that logical?

Interestingly, a test can also be constructed to provide evidence hat you are immune to certain known biases, if in fact you really are. That would be interesting information and I would welcome such evidence as any advancement in our understanding is great. It would of course necessitate that part of the test follows traditional controlled methods to compare with your more casual method.

Interested?
CruelInventions and bo130 like this.

Bigus is offline  
post #109 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 01:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus View Post

By all means, I want to encourage people to listen carefully. You can use whatever checklist of sound qualities you like... yours appears pretty comprehensive.

The difference in beliefs comes down to what constitutes listening carefully. You believe that means thoughtful extended listening in a similar manner as how you would listen casually, is that close? That may seem reasonable and common sense, but decades of research has told us that is actually being careless, not careful. We know that to be careful, we must account for and control many factors which have been repeatedly shown to confound perceptions.

Now, the cool part is that you can set up a test that lets you use your equipment in your room, your music, listening for as long as you like, with your checklist of sound attributes, etc. A few technical factors, such as level matching, need to be addressed, but otherwise the listening can be as relaxed, thoughtful, and extended as any peaceful Sunday afternoon. With a big caveat... you can't know what amp you are listening to. Your eyes don't literally have to be closed, unless that is your standard and preferred method.

If hearing differences is as easy and repeatable as you claim, you should be able to demonstrate this ability by simply listening as you otherwise would and noting a difference enough times that it becomes statistically unlikely you are guessing. That doesn't really require much. A series of ten correct would convince me... should be able to handle that in one short afternoon.

Yet among the thousands of claims to be able to hear these differences, we have an absence of data obtained when he listener isn't cheating. Why? What is it about 'not knowing the result beforehand' that utterly ruins your ability to hear? I might suggest that the extended more casual listening sessions aren't optimal. It has also been found that quick switching with comparison to a reference gives our short auditory memory the best chance to identify a subtle difference. You can use that method to your advantage if you'd like.

But you would have me believe that robbing you of the knowledge of the answer ruins your ability to fairly answer the question. Please, in what world is that logical?

Interestingly, a test can also be constructed to provide evidence hat you are immune to certain known biases, if in fact you really are. That would be interesting information and I would welcome such evidence as any advancement in our understanding is great. It would of course necessitate that part of the test follows traditional controlled methods to compare with your more casual method.

Interested?

I do appreciate your civil presentation and lack of accusation and presumption.

But like I said earlier, I dont have another amp on hand to test, and am not in the market for a new one (situation unlikely to change in foreseeable future)

But I will tell you this. IF I get in the market for another amp, or if some friend decides he wants to hear what his sounds like in my environment (unlikely), then I will consider doing a test that better conforms to the standards to which you speak (cant do ABX in any case) (may not be able to match perfectly since my pre amp is stepped attenuated in 2db increments).

My Room
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html

My Music
http://rateyourmusic.com/~jim1961

My Equipment

Rega - Apollo
Rega - DAC
Goldpoint Passive
(2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next ( http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Jenzen-NEXT.htm )
...
jim19611961 is offline  
post #110 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 02:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,228
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 66 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Bigus explained the testing well above. In the link, starting at the end of page pdf7 is the result of a similar test between a Pass amp and a Yamaha integrated done under a well controlled regime. Posted for your amusement/edification.
http://www.theaudiocritic.com/back_issues/The_Audio_Critic_24_r.pdf
A9X-308 is offline  
post #111 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 06:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
bo130's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 519
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus View Post


Yet among the thousands of claims to be able to hear these differences, we have an absence of data obtained when he listener isn't cheating.

Which is why I would be surprised, no - knocked over (as I am sure many would) if Jim were suddenly to contrast the lack of data that has been gathered on this subject time and time again.
bo130 is offline  
post #112 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 08:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Bigus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The South
Posts: 4,258
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 

I do appreciate your civil presentation and lack of accusation and presumption.

But like I said earlier, I dont have another amp on hand to test, and am not in the market for a new one (situation unlikely to change in foreseeable future)

But I will tell you this. IF I get in the market for another amp, or if some friend decides he wants to hear what his sounds like in my environment (unlikely), then I will consider doing a test that better conforms to the standards to which you speak (cant do ABX in any case) (may not be able to match perfectly since my pre amp is stepped attenuated in 2db increments).

Well, that's about all I could hope for. The first step is always entertaining the possibility that our perceptions aren't sacrosanct. I like to think mine are, but that fantasy was exposed long ago. From that first seed of curiosity it may still be a long road to fully accept just how strong of an influence biases and other uncontrolled factors can be. Perhaps after decades, you're at least willing to entertain the possibility that you could be mistaken. Not admit as much, just entertain the possibility.

I know it seems like objectivists aren't willing to entertain the possibility that we are mistaken, especially with some of the strong language myself and others use such as truth, fact, proven, etc. But we actually are. We may be nowhere near saying we are mistaken when a mountain of evidence says otherwise, but we are always open to the possibility, however remote, that we could be. And for myself at least, it wouldn't take much to convince me I was. A single well conducted, well documented test with credible oversight would be enough. It would actually be exciting... proof that there is something fundamentally wrong with how we understood perceptions could open the door for a suite of improvements we didn't think of or think were necessary. Historically, any challenges to the status quo have come at the fringes... at the utter threshold of audibility, nudging that line back and forth as new data is incorporated into our overall understanding. A test that stepped well over that line would be cool.

But to be honest, I don't really care if you ever come to fully believe in the fallacy of our senses. Even being a bit more open to that possibility might help you understand that I and others aren't trying to make it a personal attack (though unfortunately, sometimes when a "wife can hear it from the other room" line is used, it starts out in that direction). I actually keep posting on this topic because there are plenty of people who read these forums that haven't had the decades of time to form opinions and beliefs that you may have. These readers are much more impressionable, and the story you and others tell seems like common sense. Why wouldn't complicated expensive electrical devices full of different components and with different circuit designs sound different? But that belief can translate into lots of money that could be more effectively spent on the room, speakers, music and movies, etc. And it isn't just (or even primarily) amplifiers. This way of thinking includes preamps, source units, cables, and a host of odd lifters, rocks, and other audio jewelry. The cost can tally up quickly if you follow the advice of some 'audiophiles'.

Since it is a common sense, if mistaken, perspective, it takes a fair amount of deliberate counterpoint to make the case for science. And sometimes that does come across harshly. Sometimes I'm sure it even is intentionally harsh, after all objectivists are still humans.
CruelInventions likes this.

Bigus is offline  
post #113 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 08:57 PM
 
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 Bigus View Post

A few technical factors, such as level matching, need to be addressed
You are telling that to a guy who posted the following without ever having done a level matched listening test (he concluded something out of thin air). What benefit do you think it will bring? frown.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

Its actually insulting to suggest that someone might be fooled into liking one amp over another simply because the volume levels are not within 0.5db of each other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

But the other pieces in the chain count (have clearly audible differences) also is my claim. And that level matching within 0.5db isnt necessary to discern what difference there is.
diomania is offline  
post #114 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 09:08 PM
 
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 jim19611961 View Post

One thing I think we can agree on is that both sides of the debate are fixed in their position. Can we just move along?
We shouldn't move along, at least not yet because you just made another false statement. Both sides are not fixed. There are forum members who thought like you do but changed after a brief debate on this forum. This member went from this http://www.avsforum.com/t/1430393/amp-choice-for-kef-r300#post_22514062
to this http://www.avsforum.com/t/1430393/amp-choice-for-kef-r300/30#post_22521017
diomania is offline  
post #115 of 141 Old 06-07-2013, 10:44 PM
Advanced Member
 
bo130's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 519
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

I do appreciate your civil presentation and lack of accusation and presumption.

Yet, you have provided plenty of lack of accusation and presumption in this discussion yourself, right? biggrin.gif

Bigus is telling you everything that everyone else has been telling you all along, just in a slightly (yes slightly) nicer way. Perhaps he will be the one who enables some enlightenment for you.
bo130 is offline  
post #116 of 141 Old 06-08-2013, 03:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,174
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 631 Post(s)
Liked: 1122
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post

One thing I think we can agree on is that both sides of the debate are fixed in their position. Can we just move along?

Since the viewpoints disagree so thoroughly, at most only one side is based on reliable facts.
arnyk is offline  
post #117 of 141 Old 06-08-2013, 03:16 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 14,174
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 631 Post(s)
Liked: 1122
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim19611961 View Post


But like I said earlier, I don't have another amp on hand to test, and am not in the market for a new one (situation unlikely to change in foreseeable future)

I thus find it difficult to understand how you feel you can logically contradict people who have had a dozen or more amps on hand at a time to compare, and have done blind, level-matched tests of them.
arnyk is offline  
post #118 of 141 Old 06-08-2013, 07:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

I thus find it difficult to understand how you feel you can logically contradict people who have had a dozen or more amps on hand at a time to compare, and have done blind, level-matched tests of them.

You know, I used to sell stereo equipment where I had DOZENS of amps on hand. And guess what? They didnt sound the same to me. Again, someone presuming what my experience(s) is/has been.

My Room
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html

My Music
http://rateyourmusic.com/~jim1961

My Equipment

Rega - Apollo
Rega - DAC
Goldpoint Passive
(2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next ( http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Jenzen-NEXT.htm )
...
jim19611961 is offline  
post #119 of 141 Old 06-08-2013, 08:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Since the viewpoints disagree so thoroughly, at most only one side is based on reliable facts.

No, one side accepts hearing as a fact only when the visual fact is removed (blind testing). Where the other side accepts that sight doesnt emasculate what we hear (sighted testing).

My Room
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html

My Music
http://rateyourmusic.com/~jim1961

My Equipment

Rega - Apollo
Rega - DAC
Goldpoint Passive
(2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next ( http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Jenzen-NEXT.htm )
...
jim19611961 is offline  
post #120 of 141 Old 06-08-2013, 08:16 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jim19611961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,316
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by bo130 View Post

Yet, you have provided plenty of lack of accusation and presumption in this discussion yourself, right? biggrin.gif

Bigus is telling you everything that everyone else has been telling you all along, just in a slightly (yes slightly) nicer way. Perhaps he will be the one who enables some enlightenment for you.

I am perfectly aware Bigus message is basically the same. But I am more apt to discuss the subject when someone doesnt refer to me as ignorant (same meaning as unenlightened).

My Room
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/studio-building-acoustics/817205-my-listening-room.html

My Music
http://rateyourmusic.com/~jim1961

My Equipment

Rega - Apollo
Rega - DAC
Goldpoint Passive
(2) Classe CA-100 bridged power amps (350w)
Jenzen Next ( http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Jenzen-NEXT.htm )
...
jim19611961 is offline  
Reply Audio theory, Setup and Chat

Tags
Yamaha Rx A3020 9 2 Channel Network Aventage Av Receiver
Gear in this thread - A3020 by PriceGrabber.com

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