Seeking education about those ultra-expensive interconnects - Page 6

Thank you for the interesting links.

They seem to apply to an electrical S/PDIF (i.e. coax) connector, but do they also apply to optical S/PDIF connector?

And to what extent does length based reflection apply to an optical S/PDIF connector? I mean is it equal to that of electrical S/PDIF?

I mean, isn't optical S/PDIF connector more problematic in the way that the light bounces from side to side of the cable?

Hence the shorter max length of an optical S/PDIF cable.

amirm, the 'bypass' methodology is simply not representative of how we use the devices in practice. It tests conditions which are not encountered in normal listening. It introduces too many confounders to begin counting. Aside from that exactly what was tested and under what controls is anything but clear. My impression is that for the most part controls were seriously lacking.

And the conflict of interest, coming from a magazine reviewer or whatever, who has a vested interest in maintaining that amps sound different (or else his musings would all be hogwash) is self evident. I have serious concerns about the validity of 'blind' tests he uses elsewhere in his reviews.

Simply put, if this is the gold standard you hold up as scientific proof of the audibility of amplifier differences, well, you still haven't offered up any credible evidence at all.

Hi bigus,

thanks for that. Can you please explain/show/elaborate what exactly those problems are??

I'll make it easier for you, pretend I am a dummy haha...well TBH I have never fully understood that test methodology anyway so yeah, it would be great if you could show how and why it was flawed.

It would be a welcome relief from 'it's wrong cause all amps sound the same'.

I thought you were a Dunny...hehe


What detestable individual or group says that? Seems like a pretty outrageous position. It's in quotes, so please provide a direct link to the statement.
Thanks Du....Terry .

cheers,

AJ

p.s. sewer talk 101 in 3,2,1....

Unlike you have with Ing's audio club, nobody attempted to elevate the Boston Audio Society to the stature of the AES, and then attach additional credibility to the results of the test conducted by individuals who happen to be members of it.


.

The focus of the discussion concerning the audibility of high res audio was on the tests themselves without regard to the membership affiliations of the individuals who conducted them.

The fact that I *invented* ABX should give you a clue, Amir. ;-) If you had ever studied the basic papers that set forth the ABX methodology, you would have seen my name.

As far as my hearing ability goes, again if you had studied the work I'm partially responsible for, you'd know relying on the listening capabilities of others is a hall mark of my work.

Keep digging that hole deeper, Amir. You keep telling us what you don't know, you keep telling us about how you've never done your homework, and it starts with the basics.



And where is your evidence, Amir? Where is even the most basic information about your alleged tests? What is just the make and model of non-transparent professional power amplifiers that you have tested?

To be on topic any test results that you offered would have to involve power amplifiers, which for example excludes any coder tests or other non-power amplifier tests that may have been done by others in your employ at say, Microsoft, for example.

Amir, we all know that when you worked at Microsoft you employed one Jim Johnson, who is a well-known DBT authority. (BTW if you wish, you can ask JJ about my credentials and track record for doing DBTs. Ask Ethan. Ask the guys at Harman. Ask John A.)

In reality, JJ could do the tests off in some lab while you were sitting in your office sipping coffee, and by virtue of your employment of him you could be a little deceptive and say "I have conducted dozens of DBTs" with the hidden caveat that you conducted them using his expertise, and his sweat. Is that what you are talking about, Amir?

So far Amir all you have done is repeatedly try to foist off this pathetic Swedish report with at least 3 grievous flaws in it. Add that to your demonstrated lack of familiarity with the literature of audio DBTs, and this just doesn't look good for you.



What is there to count? Got the names of any equipment that failed, Amir? So far all you're selling is one lame example of some other person's work, and what you've shown from him misses the mark, as I have previously described with technical details.

"Too many confounders to begin countring" seems very vague and dismisive.

How about some details?

Yes, but that is following the rules of classic, outdated, old fashioned "logic".
Amir is a subscriber to "new age" logic (replete with power bracelets, etc), that dictates that we focus on the arguer, not the argument:


Entire post here. That should clarify why it's more important to focus on Ing Ohman, not the void of test specifics.

cheers,

AJ

p.s. anyone remember this claim from back in april??

Hi Oxy,

Not sure if I have it right, but you have asked me to provide you with something?

Maybe I'd even start to consider it when and if you ever started answering things directed at you.

An old one to start with, what do you say to ethan when he gets on the forum and promotes himself or his website? Remember that one? Of course you do, you just avoid those questions. You constantly have a go at amir 'for promoting his business'.

Let me help you here.


[note to ethan if he reads this. I am glad you do give advice and am glad you get in and help here. None of this is directed at you. YOU contribute, unlike Oxy]

Ps, wanna make the claim you do NOT continually assert amir is here to shill his products? Please make my day and try would ya?

Whilst I have asked you (and arny) that in the past, I'll ask diomanina for his answer to that question as well.



Another question I have asked and you continually avoid, how many forums HAVE you been banned from Oxy?

Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say:

"When I was managing R&D at Sony Microsystems, a division of Sony – America, located in San Jose, California, and in charge of workstation development, we were designing a new laptop."

You wouldn’t want anyone to misunderstand and think that you were managing research and development at Sony itself, would you?

I've seen a lot of measurements that show apparent differences between different amps, cables and some other audio stuff.

But I'm still waiting to see a single study or measurement that can stablish with absolute certainty the audibility of those apparent differences.

So for the time being (or until the evolution of the human being take us to the point of developing the listening capabilities of bats), IMO it is more reasonable to accept cable interconnects make no audible differences...

Cable vendors usually maintain the opposite position

To me that seems like a useful and prudent position similar to advising people to eschew spending their monies on lottery games for longterm financial gain. Neither is 100% because every now and then one wins but the reality is that almost always the other guy wins. Would you rely upon contraception that was advertised as effective a fractional of a percent?

My group was funded and managed by the Japanese Workstation group led by Dr. Toshi Doi. Since you are an expert in Sony organization, I am sure you know that Dr. Doi was the executives in charge of development of CD with Philips: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_Disc

"Sony executive Norio Ohga, who later became the CEO and chairman of Sony, was convinced of the format's commercial potential, and pushed further development despite widespread skepticism.[7] Later in 1979, Sony and Philips Consumer Electronics (Philips) set up a joint task force of engineers to design a new digital audio disc. Led by Kees Schouhamer Immink and Toshitada Doi, the research pushed forward laser and optical disc technology that began independently by Philips and Sony in 1977 and 1975, respectively.[4]"

In honor of this accomplishment, Dr. Doi was then given staff and resources to do something new which led to development of a successful workstation business in Japan. Running out of expertise to hire there, I was brought in together with my boss to create the American workstation R&D division, reporing directly to them, not to Sony America (our paychecks and such came from Sony America). We picked the name you mentioned for our group.

I suspect the implication you want to make is that Sony Microsystems was part of the sales company. As I said, that was not the case but even if it were, that is still part of "Sony."

Among the feathers in our cap, we proposed that Sony build portable laptops and got management approval to that. This, at a time, when the VAIO business was not yet born and Sony had no PC business anywhere outside of Japan (even there, it was a tiny, specialized business). We introduced Sony to a number of first, including use of Magnesium Alloy to build thinner laptops, which became the very first laptop material Sony used to get into Vaio business with then, one of the thinnest and lightest laptops. Another feather in our cap was at the time, being the first American R&D people to ever be invited to present to Sony Board in Japan on our innovative way to do software development which reduceed bug rate and increased confidence in developing software on time. And introducing the company to then unknown Windows NT operating system, begging them to move on from Unix to it, even though I had built an entire career working and developing Unix (granddaddy of Linux).

BTW, during the last three months or so I was there, I reported to Ando-san who at the time was running Sony Manufacturing group who built the Sony TVs and monitors. Ando-san was a few years later promoted to President of Sony Japan although by then I had left the company. I had the occasion to meet with him in his new role on a visit with Steve Ballmer and the reception I received from him goes beyond words. Everyone on Microsoft side was wondering how he knew me .

As a warm and funny story, in Japanese culture, the visiting company sits on one side of the table and their counterparts sit on the other side. As part of working for Microsoft, anytime I would go to visit Sony, I would of course do that and sit with the rest of Microsoft people. Once I was there, visiting them together with Sony Music people from US who also sat on our side of the table. Before the meeting started though, the executive in charge on the Sony side said, "Amir-san, what are you doing on that side, you should sit with us!" That has happened in a number of meetings since then with Sony, no matter how tough the topic. They would treat me as if I still worked for them – unheard of for any foreigner let alone one that doesn't work there anymore. I am always invited to friendly dinners after the meetings in Japan, again regardless of how well or not well the meetings had gone earlier with my then employer.

I have had the privilege of meeting many Sony executives form Kutaragi-san to Howard Stringer, Idei-son, Kimura-san (who used to sit next to me at Sony Micorsystems working on MPEG hardware, only to move to head up major portion of Sony including PC development), etc. Working there and learning about the Japanese ways has become part of who I am. It helped advance my career at Microsoft as I managed to build relationships with Japanese companies no other Microsoft employee or executive had.

All of the above came not from working in a random corner of Sony, but by reporting to the heart of one.

Can you imagine Sony supporting Microsoft technology like WMA in PS3 and PSP while we were fiercely competing with them with Xbox? That is what happened after a personal meeting I had with Kutaragi-san. He gave me a free PSP and a handshake that our technology would go into those boxes and we would get royalties from them! Imagine Microsoft selling audio technology to Sony. It wasn’t fast or easy to get there but it finally did.

Anyway, you now have a better taste of what I did there. Not everything I have done in my working life has been great. But working at Sony has been a highlight of my career and one of the most important and influential positions one could hold in a Japanese company. There is a reason I highlight it in my bio .

The difference is, while Ethan posts about real appreciable sonic benefits of products he designed and backs it up with evidence, amirm posts bunch of outrageous claims about the products his store carries and dances around when asked for evidence. Don't get that already? Guess not...

Check this out then in this very thread:

If being all of these amps acting like a "straight wire" don't sound the same, then sound like we have proof that wires do sound different!

Seriously, you all back off when put in the corner but never explain your position. Tell us if Arny''s position is different than "most if not all" pro amps sounding the same.

If there is someone who doesn't get it, it is you. We picked products from Harman companies because of the fact that they are one of a handful of companies who believe and conduct objective blind testing of products.

We could carry any high-end gear we wanted. In this tough economy, folks are begging us to do that. But you don't see us going there. We carry no tube products. We don't carry any speaker designed by one gray-haired guy in the corner. Our two speaker brands are Revel and Paradigm both of which have their roots at NRC and research into what consumers prefer. And by the people who have literally written the book on objective evaluation.

Do you know any audio company who spends a day of their two-day dealer training, having likes of Floyd Toole and Sean Olive explain objective and blind testing including having said dealers sit through one, evaluating different speakers? That is Harman for you. You would learn more about this topic in that one day, than a lifetime you spend reading tea leaves in these forums.

And what do you do given this data? Chastise the one dealer in the world that does follow the objective route to pick products? And because he dares to show your fortune-cookie knowledge of audio is incomplete? And that the science of these products is more complex than you gleaned from reading forums without proper foundation in engineering design and education or spending the time to really learn what makes these systems and our ears tick?

As to Ethan, there are people like Floyd Toole who disagree with the products he sells. Does that we mean we should drive him out of town in daring to challenge one of the top authorities on sound reproduction? Of course not. Ethan is a gift to this forum and elsewhere where he posts and should he have some indirect commercial interest in what he says, that is to expected and accepted with open arms.

Of course, as Terry tried to tell you, if I were promoting the same message, I would be your hero too. That gets me to what I said before: you all don't practice objectivity. What you practice is everyone agreeing with you so that you are not proven wrong. Losing face is more important than learning something. The answer for any test or data must be what you want or else, it is not right. You worship Ethan but even he was open enough to accept some of the audibility notions I have challenged.

All of this is quite ironic. You know who introduced to to Ing Ohman? It was an Swedish member of this forum who like you, practices objectivism to a fault. He would keep talking about this Swedish AES organization which had proved everything sounded the same but would refuse to tell us his name or the web site. I finally managed to get Ing's name and spent weeks researching what he had written. I learned that he ranks way up there in his search for audio truth and removal of bias from equipment evaluation. I became a fan even if I did not agree with everything he said. Fortunately for me, and reason the other poster didn't want me to know about him, he did not subscribe to the same school you all do.

Instead of assuming certain outcome, he used his engineering background to build the Before/After fixture we are talking about, and brought about this new understanding about amplifiers potentially coloring sound.

So put aside your gut motivation to have a fight and see what you can learn even if you ultimately don't agree with it.

amirm, people wouldn't have problem with your posts if you don't shill for snake oil.

These issues don't specifically apply to optical interfaces however optical interfaces have their own set of unique problems.

The 1.5m issues stems from poorly designed SPDIF interfaces. As Arnyk pointed out, these tend to be rare and most SPDIF interfaces work quite well to spite less than optimum cable impedancs.

IOW, for short lengths under 3 feet just about any RCA cable will work. I prefer to use a true 75ohm coaxial cable myself however these are not expensive either. A good 6 foot RG59 RCA cable can be found for less than $5.

I wouldn't make that assumption. I have debated this topic with Arny and the only person who had measurement pictures to post, was me, not him. He will surely claim that you say but he lacks the body of measurement data to back it. The fact that a CD player puts out audio over that link is no proof that it is doing so with best fidelity.

S/PDIF output quality is not a review criteria either so there is scant data about its fidelity in mass market products. What we do know is that it is easier to get FCC certification if you increase the rise time of the output waveform. Unfortunately this is the opposite of what you want to have if you are trying to extract precise timing out of that stream.

So better use a cable that minimizes that effect rather than assuming all the interfaces are perfect when in reality we don't know without measuring them.

As evidenced by...? Amir said so? Again?

"most if not all" is not the same as "all".
Amir, it would be an obvious impossibility to determine if all amps sound the same.
However, it wouldn't be very difficult to determine if two amplifiers "sound" different/same under test conditions. You claim not only that several do, but also that you have "independent" DBT confirmation. An all too familiar claim of yours to support a spurious argument.
The question is, why would an adult resort to such childish behavior, as to fabricate stories to support specious claims? HDMI secret data, SPDIF secret tests....and now amplifier DBTs? What's next?

cheers,

AJ

No, I quoted you precisely what was said.


Wonderful. Now tell us if you agree "most if not all" are like wires.

Keep that in mind next time someone says they evaluated a new amp and it was better than another.

What two amplifiers? Arny said amps sound like wires. How do I determine one amp is like a wire? I always have to compare it to another? Not finding a difference between two amps is not the same thing.

I didn't use the words "DBT." You and Arny are. I said it was a blind test and provided ample references.

It is not my claim. It is the claim of the head of the Swedish audio society who worships people like Floyd Toole. You have a beef with him saying 9 out of 10 amps he has tested color the sound, let's see you challenge that. Until then, you are the same guy who asks for DBTs, but doesn't believe enough in them to apply it to his own speaker tests.

More comprehension problems on your part. See above.

Look, enough if this crap!

The OP or somebody back there asked if expensive cables are worth it. Then somebody, I think it was you, brought up the 1.5m SPDIF problem. I explained how that could be possible with a poorly designed SPDIF interface. I also suggested to treat SPDIF like analog video and you will avoid most problems. So I was supporting your claims as well as offering a technical explination as to why this seemingly impossible claim of a "too short cable" to a layman is in fact possible.

Then Arnyk comes along and says any old crappy RCA cable will transport SPDIF without issues. He thinks sticking to broadcast analog video standards to spite the minimal cost is overkill. Well to some extent that's true but if you have one of those problem SPDIF interfaces, you could be in trouble. And without at least a basic oscilloscope, you can't really tell.

In the above post I gave him credit for the accuracy in his claims yet a I still cautioned about problems with poor SPDIF interfaces. In that sense I also supported your claims which I still agree are accurate.

All either of you want to do is argue over petty details. The OP simple wanted some advice on high priced cables. He didn't ask for all this pointless highly technical bickering over issues that are for the most part inaudible and insignificant to even the above average AV enthusiast.

Amrim, ever wonder why nobody in the electronics or computer industry will hire you anymore? Just look at this thread and I think it's obvious!

You know, I wonder about a few things in life. Like how long congressman Weiner was going to keep his job. That ended this morning when he resigned . I also wondered about the Japanese victims of Tsunami as I was writing about my career at Sony in an early shot at my past employment. But thankfully, I don't have to wonder about what you are claiming.

This being AVS where even the Pope doesn't get a pass for being truthful without providing evidence , I guess I am compelled once more to talk about me, rather than the topic at hand.

I joined Microsoft after we sold our start-up to them in 1997. I left around 2007. As you can see from my join date of this forum, for the bulk of my employment at Microsoft I have been posting here, under my real name with just about everyone knowing precisely who I am and where I work.

At the time I joined, I probably had 20 to 40 people working in my group. Despite being a member here and speaking my mind, I rose up through the ranks, becoming a company officer and executive, with some 1000 people reporting to me during the height of our new OS release.

Everyone from PR people to my boss who was the SVP of Windows Client Division knew about my posts and activities there. Reporters who followed the company read them too and some of whom have become good friends as a result of seeing how I conduct myself here. Today, my company employees, relatives, friends, you name it, will contact me from time time, seeing my name pop up from posts here due to Google indexing this site.

I left Microsoft after some 30+ years of working hard to start my own company. One of them is in my signature. The other I can't talk about. Suffice it to say, I am extremely fortunate to not have to go looking for a job.

So no, I don't have to "wonder" if I can get a job because I enjoy interacting with fellow hobbyists on topics of interest to both of us. I get nothing but praise when the topic comes up with industry people and they say, "are you the amirm on AVS?" I let you think why I have that track record, and why. The world has voted with their feet and it is the opposite of what you claim (putting aside the fallacy of you knowing factually what you claimed anyway).

You talked about "crap" going on here. No discussion of technology is "crap." What is crap is what what you said above and what I have to do to answer it. We are here as hobbyist and in the case of you and I, two industry professionals. What's so hard about talking about the technical topics? You have to shoot the messenger instead of the message? To what end? Was your logic otherwise too weak?

You are not a moderator here. This is a debate thread. No one came to ask advice to buy a new AVR. It is a controversial topic and it always garners enthusiastic discussion. It is the nature of such topics. The thread has 3,000 views. That tells you that people do want to see the discussion and people challenging the data, hoping to learn something and if not that, at least be entertained . So please don't call us out of order. If you think what we are doing is wrong, report us. Don't self moderate by throwing my career under the bus. I can fight back as you can tell from above .

Back to crap, I am constantly begging manufacturers to come on these forums to discuss their products. Wouldn't be wonderful to have the designer of Mark Levinson amplifiers come and talk their design and testing instead of me? It would be. But they won't set foot here. They tell me "Amir, we have no idea how you put up with all the grief. We won't come because people just drag the discussion into the gutter and nothing good comes out of it." And here we are, proving them absolutely right.

The other day I was looking for something and landed on a 70 page thread on subwoofer placement involving Dr. Geddes technique. I was shocked and horrified about what went on there. People literally stripped him and stoned him for daring to set foot here to discuss *his* technique! His qualifications were put in doubt, where he worked, etc., etc. Just like you all doing here.

For good or bad, I am used to this stuff. You have to get up much earlier in the morning to get a rise out of me with these bullying tactics. Folks are way ahead of you in how far they have gone, including sending me implied death threats. Still, I keep saying what is on my mind. If something is not accurate, as was the statement that no data on S/PDIF translates to essentially all being good, you are going to get me to speak up. You don't like that, don't make sweeping generalizations. Throwing unfounded accusations don't work.

I love AVS and will keep posing. There are lot of smart people here who I learn from so this is a small price to pay. But for good of the industry, and ability to attract world class experts here who are the employable type let's cut out the crap, err, personal remarks.

I'm not smart enough to hang with the dogs here, but let me just say this....like the other threads where amirm is challenged...the dude holds his own(as in, elan), and does it well. Nobody can question that point.

Carry on.......

LOL! Yeah, he sure dances well.

Show me a quote where I said that? You said short interconnects on SPDIF can cause problems in some cases. I agreed and offered an explination as to why. Arnyk basically said SPDIF is fairly robust and immune to such problems. I agreed with that too cautioning that there are exceptions.

I see nothing inaccurate with either of those statements and as broad as they are, I see no need for specific test data.

Wrong. You don't quote blind test data, you fabricate it's existence to bolster you always feeble, baseless argument:


You haven't conducted any DBT's, nor do you have independent blind testing data of amps that points to most majority of them failing the so called "wire test." It's all a fabrication, a bluff, like your always empty poker hand. That fact was exposed long ago, yet here we are, Amir continuing to pretend having these trump cards for your spurious audiophile beliefs.


No one claims "all" wires "sound the same" either. Except your new logic crowd of straw.


Sure. Just like I'll keep in mind the ignorance of the audiophile mind to psychology and hearing.


The ML and any Crown you sell. I beg your pardon...your associates sell.


No, but it would certainly call into question your claims about the bass "sound" of the ML observations being soundwave related and not just another figment of Amirs imagination. It would also put you in an awkward position explaining the (10x?) price difference being justifiable due to cosmetics and sighted bias delusions.


Right, because you know they aren't,, but in desperation, still want to use them to bolster your par for the course specious argument. You also provided par for your course zero data. But we already know that is synonymous with Amirm. The zero data blind test guru.


Indeed.

cheers,

AJ

AJ, once more, you are having serious comprehension problems or are your usual self, using empty words hoping to get ahead. So you don't play that ball game again, here it is for you in black and white:

What part of that is hard for you to understand? I then said I have independent data of blind tests. If I had run them, I would have said it that way and not said the above.

So quit tap dancing. Do you or do you not agree with the following test results: http://www.sonicdesign.se/amptest.htm

"This method to test amplifiers is very effective. Of the vast number of amplifiers tested by me over the years, it has been easy enough to hear colorations from 9 out of 10 amplifiers, and then, the majority have been amplifiers of well repute. This has led me to present viewpoints where not only the magnitude but also the character of the coloration is taken into account."

Now there is an example of a dude who holds his own. Only question is, holds his own what? ;-)

Arny, what did Amir do to make you so diametrically opposed to him, even to a point of you ruining your past reputation to argue his point?