Originally Posted by JHAz
Just to be difficult, and for fun
It's interesting that they say they're high end types but they placed the electronics in front of and between the speakers where it could be expected to interfere to some degree with the performance of the speakers. Of course both the A and B systems suffered from the same constraints, so it either zeroes out the "problems" caused by electronics placement or some may argue indicates that reflectsions caused by the equipment masked and/or confused differences between the A and B systems.
Most of the people heard a difference between the two sets of electronics and expressed a preference.
Yes, the point here isnt about ZERO deference overall, its about almost no difference in SQ.
Its funny you talk about electronics placement, some of the most expensive systems I have seen on Audiogon seem to have the electonics between the speakers. If go to any Audio show, Audiofest or look online at the Dozens of audio get togethers around the US I see pictures with cool looking speakers and equipment between them. Those are the guys building speakers systems, Those are the guys showing off 10K speakers, etc, those are the experts I would think know if electronics sitting between speakers actually has an impact.
It is just one test but its a good primer to realize how much of audio is truely subjective and how little SQ changes from a $500 to $10K electronics setup. Im still a huge believer in speakers being +90% of the equation...add room acoustics and I know electronics does little improvement over top of those first requirements. Yet, people buy AVRs and Amps that cost the same or more then their speakers for only SQ reasons....maybe features/powers/dimension should be their first priority and then if costs are still high so be it (Like in my case).