or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › blind test high end/low end (same speakers)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

blind test high end/low end (same speakers) - Page 2

post #31 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Most of the people heard a difference between the two sets of electronics and expressed a preference.

Well, I am not sure what they heard, very high probability that no differences, but this was not the same/difference testing that should have been conducted with each participant trying to identify the unknown X as either A or B. Now that would have told you if they heard a difference or not.
This, I doubt it can.
post #32 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Planescape View Post



This is a better view, funny thing is that the closest component to the speakers is that of the "cheap" system, Behringer A500, Sony DVP-NS355, so would that not have made it even easier to pick out the sonic differences?

It should have been a 'slam dunk' as some have said this elsewhere
but I guess those pesky gear in the middle just improved the sound when the Behringer was in play and denigrated the sound when the expensive gear was in play. WOW, an Intelligent, self aware system
post #33 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

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

Click on blind test...I wish more people would do this!! Its all in the speakers, I have said that forever!!

Tom Nousaine did something very similar to this, but then, it is not on line nor does it have such telling pictures

Nousaine, Tom "To Tweak, or Not to Tweak?" Stereo Review, Jun 98, pg 79-81.

Same results. Golden ears failed, again
post #34 of 616
appreciate the posting of some experimental data you found penn.
helps us all learn
post #35 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

Tom Nousaine did something very similar to this, but then, it is not on line nor does it have such telling pictures

Nousaine, Tom "To Tweak, or Not to Tweak?" Stereo Review, Jun 98, pg 79-81.

Same results. Golden ears failed, again


Tom used a pair of $200/pr speakers (PSB Alphas) to compare the systems. Many familiar with that speaker would say those loudspeakers handicap the "Tweaked" system.
post #36 of 616
What would by not be interesting (instead of proving the current thing in multiple ways over the last 30 years) is comparing speakers before and after a EQ system as audyssey is used. What i mean to say if speakers are the most biggest factor of change and they are clearly voiced what does that mean that after a EQ, how close will they all get to the 'wanted' or 'predefined' curve and sound the same again.

Daniel.
post #37 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by CETA1 View Post

Some interesting comments especially near the end in regards to cables. I also agree that hearing music that you know inside and out makes for better testing. What did these testers listen to? What if it were RAP in which I do not care for? How could I concentrate on differences in electronics when I don't know the music?

http://www.stereophile.com/news/050905debate/

Just like I feel that there are differences to be heard in electronics, I am another who enjoys aftermarket cables.

My IC's and speaker cables are not really high end (Nordost Blue Heaven) but I have upgraded all of my power cords to Synergistic Research and the cord to my Rega Saturn CDP in particular just sounds better to me with the SR Cord.

This battle will never be won. I guess it does not matter in the long run. I have built a set-up that impresses me and that's what counts.

Rick

How can a power cord possibly make a difference? Are you going to rewire 1000's of miles of wire between the power company generator and your power cord? And replace all the transformers used by the power company with audiophile transformers?

What's another few feet of copper going to fix?

I know, now you might say I should have an open mind. And I think keeping an open mind is a good thing. But the audibility of after market power cords is SO outrageous, I have to insist that the burden of proof is on the shoulders of the seller. For me to accept their product does anything helpful, they need to hire a reputable laboratory which will assert on their good name that they found evidence of positive audible differences.
post #38 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by CETA1 View Post

My IC's and speaker cables are not really high end (Nordost Blue Heaven)

I had the Blue Heaven, if you don't consider it high end especially with the good capacitance, what is?
post #39 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

I should not use "ALL" but I would hope you wouldnt be so literal in interpetting my posts
.

I have to this is a science forum.








post #40 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJHuman View Post

How can a power cord possibly make a difference? Are you going to rewire 1000's of miles of wire between the power company generator and your power cord? And replace all the transformers used by the power company with audiophile transformers?

What's another few feet of copper going to fix?

I know, now you might say I should have an open mind. And I think keeping an open mind is a good thing. But the audibility of after market power cords is SO outrageous, I have to insist that the burden of proof is on the shoulders of the seller. For me to accept their product does anything helpful, they need to hire a reputable laboratory which will assert on their good name that they found evidence of positive audible differences.

Power cords are the biggest rip-off in this hobby bar none and what I don't understand is how people can be so easily fooled. You could put a gold plated titanium power cord between the wall and any unit, and guess what? The power still has to go through the $1.00 AC socket and it's connecting wires and then through the units' power supply to be converted to DC?

How in hell is a power cord going to make a difference? Well it isn't, plain and simple.

It doesn't surprise me in the least that this test had the results it did, at best the differences between most audio equipment is miniscule assuming that accuracy is the design goal. If there's a huge difference in play IMO it means that one or both of the comparators is altering the signal, either on purpose or by bad design.
post #41 of 616
I did read in one place, where a power cord maker explained that the power cord filtered out RF or frequencies like that (it behaved like a capacitor). I would expect that the power supply would do a better job of that than any power cord even if that was the case.
post #42 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnrgagne View Post

Power cords are the biggest rip-off in this hobby bar none

Equal contender would have to be the connectors and wallplates.
http://www.wattgate.com/
http://www.oyaide.com/e_audio/audio_...a_products.htm

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJHuman View Post

I did read in one place, where a power cord maker explained that the power cord filtered out RF or frequencies like that (it behaved like a capacitor).

Sure the cable has capacitance, but that does not mean it will make an effective RF filter. I was an EE in RF for about 20 years before moving into the power side of things.
post #43 of 616
I have no dog in this fight, and did not study the article in detail, so maybe I missed something. I thought there were multiple trials, assumed there was an effort to correlate the results between trials. I think it is a little odd that people want to pump up part of the conclusion and then assume away part of what the article reports (people expressed a preference). None of this matters much. It's a pretty interesting little "study" for a friendly get together. I don't think they intended it to be publishable in a scientific journal, and it wouldn't.

Imperfect as it was, I would have liked to participate. I have no idea whether I'd be able to hear a consistent difference between the two systems.
post #44 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by JHAz View Post

Imperfect as it was, I would have liked to participate. I have no idea whether I'd be able to hear a consistent difference between the two systems.

That would be fun wouldn't it.

It think DBT's like this scare the snot out of the so called "golden ear" audiophiles. The mind is a powerful thing and is probably more influenced by pre-conceived notions or assumptions than they would like to admit.
post #45 of 616
No question. It's everywhere. You see similar arguments to what appear around here about speaker absolute polarity, which capacitors sound best (resistors, too), etc, etc, in the boutique guitar amp realm. Fascinating to watch, but I don't know how more than a very few hardened tweakers really can know the difference in the sound of 2 capacitors in one circuit, especially when, in the guitar example, you are guaranteed never to have EACTLY the same input, just because you'll pick a little differently every time. But people swear by orange colored caps, because that's what's in the great-sounding 1950s Fender amps . . .
post #46 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by joquito View Post

Tom used a pair of $200/pr speakers (PSB Alphas) ....

Is that another name for the PSB Stratus Mini?

If it handicapped only one, it would have showed a difference, no?
post #47 of 616
I liked this bit off of the web site

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

Quote:


Paradoxes and Ironies of the Audio World: The Doctor Zaius Syndrome

By Peter Aczel
Editor
(Abbreviated and edited version of a still timely article first published ten years ago.) http://www.theaudiocritic.com

When the truth is so terrible that admitting it would surely make the whole system crumble, ape logic demands denial and coverup.

Have you ever seen that marvelous 1967 science-fiction movie The Planet of the Apes? If you have, you will recall that it depicts a planet of the future where English-speaking anthropoid apes are the rulers and humans are speechless beasts of burden, enslaved by the apes and despised as a totally inferior species. The apes have horses and guns but no real technology. Doctor Zaius, the subtle and highly articulate orangutan who is this society's "Minister of Science and Defender of the Faith" (he is played by the great Maurice Evans), knows something the other apes do not: that humans in a past era possessed not only speech but superior technology, flying machines, powerful weapons, and so forth, all of which served only to bring about their eventual downfall and reduce them to their present condition. Doctor Zaius fervently believes that any knowledge of this truth about humans would totally destabilize the society of apes and result in the end of their world. The ape dogma he fanatically protects, even though he knows better, is a blatant denial and coverup of the actual history of the vanished human civilization and a paean to the eternal superiority of the ape.

I won't give away the rest of the plot to those of our readers who haven't seen the movie and may want to, but doesn't Doctor Zaius resemble certain key figures in the high-end audio community? He knows the truth but it's bad for the establishment. The system would come crashing down if the truth were revealed. To pick an obvious example, consider John Atkinson, the subtle and highly articulate editor of Stereophile. Don't you think he knows? Of course he knows. But if he admitted that $3000-a-pair speaker cable is a shameless rip-off or that a $7000 amplifier sounds no different from a $1400 one, the edifice of high-end audio would begin to totter-or so he thinks (and may quite possibly be right). Consequently, he spouts convoluted scriptural arguments and epistemological sophistries, just like Doctor Zaius, in order to pervert the obvious, uncomplicated, devastating truth.

There is a perfect illustration of this process in the August 1994 issue of Stereophile, where Zaius-Atkinson once again bashes blind listening tests in an "As We See It" editorial. Such tests are of course considered extremely threatening by a publication that reports night-and-day differences in sound which absolutely nobody can hear when the levels are matched and the brand names concealed. He brings up all kinds of intricate flaws and drawbacks that may very well exist in some blind tests but turns his back on the large number of blind tests in which all of his objections have been anticipated and eliminated and which nevertheless yield a no-difference result every time. He knows very well, for example, that no one has ever, ever proved a consistently audible difference between two amplifiers having high input impedance, low output impedance, and low distortion, when operated at matched levels and not clipped-but like Doctor Zaius he conceals that knowledge. He'd rather collect rare case histories of screwed-up blind tests than deal with the vast body of correctly managed blind tests that undermine the Stereophile agenda. (Just for the record, I'll state for the nth time that there are only two unbreakable rules in blind testing: matched levels and no peeking at the nameplates. To eliminate "stress," take a week or a month for each test, send everybody else out of the room, operate the switch yourself at all times, switch only twice a day-whatever. The results will still be the same.)

Our columnist Tom Nousaine, in a recent conversation with me, stated his belief that any longtime audio reviewer who has tested hundreds of different audio components over the years knows exactly what the truth is about soundalikes because it is utterly impossible to escape that truth after so much hands-on experience. It asserts itself loud and clear, again and again. Therefore, he argued, the audio journalists who invariably report important sonic differences are most likely a bunch of hypocrites, i.e., exhibit the Doctor Zaius Syndrome. I was strongly inclined to agree with him...

Why do I even bother to tell you all this? All of our readers who have been with us for more than just one or two issues are aware of my enormous frustration on the subject of scientific truth in audio. The very idea of a Doctor Zaius Syndrome, even it's only a parody, suggests the existence of antiscience in audio as a tradition, not just a momentary aberration-and a tradition it is, going back to the early 1970s, at the very least. In the late '40s and throughout the '50s and '60s, whatever the most highly qualified and experienced engineers said about audio was the accepted truth. Then came postmodern irrationalism, post-Watergate anomie, fortune tellers in high places, pyramid power, Jesus-haired record-store clerks as self-proclaimed audio experts, untutored high-end journals, pooh-poohing of engineering societies, derision of degreed academics-the B.S. era of audio (and I don't mean Bachelor of Science). Today, the melancholy truth is that tweako cultism has become mainstream audio, at least above a certain price range, and engineering facts are regarded as disturbingly radical or at least eccentric. The scientific audio community has been marginalized.
post #48 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielo View Post

What would by not be interesting (instead of proving the current thing in multiple ways over the last 30 years) is comparing speakers before and after a EQ system as audyssey is used. What i mean to say if speakers are the most biggest factor of change and they are clearly voiced what does that mean that after a EQ, how close will they all get to the 'wanted' or 'predefined' curve and sound the same again.

Daniel.

That would be interesting, yes, but I would posit that speakers have just too much other characteristics differences that an EQ may not be able to correct, hence still audibly different? Like, I am not sure if one EQed how that would affect the speakers polar responses an important characteristics.
post #49 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesJ View Post

That would be interesting, yes, but I would posit that speakers have just too much other characteristics differences that an EQ may not be able to correct, hence still audibly different? Like, I am not sure if one EQed how that would affect the speakers polar responses an important characteristics.

Well my point was not would they be 100% the same but wouldn't it be more interesting . Really in 5 or 6 years who would want to run a good system without room changes and EQ ? If that is the case would it not make more sense to compare stuff with these 2 things involved ?

Daniel.
post #50 of 616
I like the Planet of the Apes analogy. Some of those movies are quite good. I find them to be more true to the sci-fi I read as a kid than some sci fi movies. They start with a premise, and see where that premise takes you - a classic sci-fi paradigm.

The movies are quite dark. They really offer no hope for mankind. Sometimes you wonder if sci-fi which presents a bleak future is a truer prediction than positive sci-fi. Hopefully mankind will prevail!
post #51 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJHuman View Post

I like the Planet of the Apes analogy. Some of those movies are quite good. I find them to be more true to the sci-fi I read as a kid than some sci fi movies. They start with a premise, and see where that premise takes you - a classic sci-fi paradigm.

The movies are quite dark. They really offer no hope for mankind. Sometimes you wonder if sci-fi which presents a bleak future is a truer prediction than positive sci-fi. Hopefully mankind will prevail!

Read some Mark Steyn books. He will brighten up your day!

http://www.amazon.com/America-Alone-.../dp/0895260786
post #52 of 616
Wow. His book does look interesting. I have always worried America is a part of this pyramid scam where a lot of us are living well off the labors of others in other countries.

But AVS is probably a bad place for politics. Besides, it's Friday, it's summer and everyone should have a positive day!
post #53 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJHuman View Post

Wow. His book does look interesting. I have always worried America is a part of this pyramid scam where a lot of us are living well off the labors of others in other countries.

But AVS is probably a bad place for politics. Besides, it's Friday, it's summer and everyone should have a positive day!

As you write, this is not a political forum so we can end the discussion of course. If you have the opportunity to read this book, I would strongly suggest the novel. I am a fercious reader of all content and this one caught my eye due to my wife holding a gun to my head suggesting I read it. My wife is very politically involved in her daily life. It's a bit dry, full of statistics and can be repetitive. However, the demographics, statistics and outlook he presents IF factual do not present a positive future for many of us "Head in Sand" Americans.

As Alvin Lee once sang, the guitarist and leader of Ten Years After, "I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I'll leave it up to you."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUokMbJC3P8
post #54 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by penngray View Post

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

Click on blind test...I wish more people would do this!! Its all in the speakers, I have said that forever!!

So by that mentality if I have 10,000 to spend on a system I should spend over $9,500 on speakers and the rest on an entry level (pioneer 519 or equivalent ) amp and an insignia Blu-ray player?
post #55 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkSmith View Post

So by that mentality if I have 10,000 to spend on a system I should spend over $9,500 on speakers and the rest on an entry level (pioneer 519 or equivalent ) amp and an insignia Blu-ray player?

Obviously some speakers demand amps or power levels beyond that which most AVRs can deliver and if you are spending 8k or 9k on speakers you are probably talking about at least mains that are going to need something more than your typical $500 AVR can deliver.

But over all, yes. Spending say $1,000 or $1,500 on the electronics and the remainder on the speakers is going to get you a much better system than spending 50/50 or something in that ballpark.
post #56 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by TPnBobcats View Post

Obviously some speakers demand amps or power levels beyond that which most AVRs can deliver and if you are spending 8k or 9k on speakers you are probably talking about at least mains that are going to need something more than your typical $500 AVR can deliver.

But over all, yes. Spending say $1,000 or $1,500 on the electronics and the remainder on the speakers is going to get you a much better system than spending 50/50 or something in that ballpark.

I guess that may be your opinion, I just disagree. I have Paradigm Monitor 7 speakers (about $700 a pair) and can hear distinct obvious differnces when connected to different electronics and these speakers are relatively easy to drive.
post #57 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkSmith View Post

I guess that may be your opinion, I just disagree. I have Paradigm Monitor 7 speakers (about $700 a pair) and can hear distinct obvious differnces when connected to different electronics and these speakers are relatively easy to drive.

Did you even read the link at the start of the thread?

The hard cold fact is that people are not reliable judges of subjective experiences.

I've absolutely no doubt that you honestly and sincerely believe there are differences, but DBTs time and time again show that these differences are either wildly exaggerated or non-existent.

People are easily influenced and highly suggestible when it comes to subjective experiences. Just youtube "Penn & Teller Bottled water" for a prime example of this.

It's also an incontrovertible fact that if your speakers can't recreate the signal, you aren't going to be able to hear it. DSP and computer processing can't change the laws of physics.
post #58 of 616
I can swear my three integrated amps sound different when cycling them every 3-4 weeks.
But when i A/B them with the same speakers i can swear they sound the same.
post #59 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by TPnBobcats View Post

Did you even read the link at the start of the thread?

The hard cold fact is that people are not reliable judges of subjective experiences.

I've absolutely no doubt that you honestly and sincerely believe there are differences, but DBTs time and time again show that these differences are either wildly exaggerated or non-existent.

People are easily influenced and highly suggestible when it comes to subjective experiences. Just youtube "Penn & Teller Bottled water" for a prime example of this.

It's also an incontrovertible fact that if your speakers can't recreate the signal, you aren't going to be able to hear it. DSP and computer processing can't change the laws of physics.

I wish more people watched Penn & Teller bottled water episode
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfPAjUvvnIc

It is right on the money and it is sooo relevant to this entire debate on audio.
The sad part is that many here would say, Oh but I am not like that, I really do hear the differences and therefore they are real and there is no need to do a blind test.
post #60 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJHuman View Post

I like the Planet of the Apes analogy. Some of those movies are quite good. I find them to be more true to the sci-fi I read as a kid than some sci fi movies. They start with a premise, and see where that premise takes you - a classic sci-fi paradigm.

The movies are quite dark. They really offer no hope for mankind. Sometimes you wonder if sci-fi which presents a bleak future is a truer prediction than positive sci-fi. Hopefully mankind will prevail!

Here is the future of mankind.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/

"As the 21st century began, human evolution was at a turning point. Natural selection, the process by which the strongest, the smartest, the fastest, reproduced in greater numbers than the rest, a process which had once favored the noblest traits of man, now began to favor different traits. Most science fiction of the day predicted a future that was more civilized and more intelligent. But as time went on, things seemed to be heading in the opposite direction. A dumbing down. How did this happen? Evolution does not necessarily reward intelligence. With no natural predators to thin the herd, it began to simply reward those who reproduced the most, and left the intelligent to become an endangered species. "

"The years passed, mankind became stupider at a frightening rate. Some had high hopes the genetic engineering would correct this trend in evolution, but sadly the greatest minds and resources where focused on conquering hair loss and prolonging erections. "

Quote:
Originally Posted by VladP View Post

I wish more people watched Penn & Teller bottled water episode
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfPAjUvvnIc

It is right on the money and it is sooo relevant to this entire debate on audio.
The sad part is that many here would say, Oh but I am not like that, I really do hear the differences and therefore they are real and there is no need to do a blind test.

I laughed so hard the first time I saw that. You are correct re typical audiophile responses.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › blind test high end/low end (same speakers)