Are audio companies all involved in a huge conspiracy? - Page 5

Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that every time a post deals with high end audio gear, there is this group of "super heroes" that feel it necessary to save everyone from the "evils" of the high end industry.

So much so, serious discussion about the original post is lost.

Originally Posted by tamblers 

The notion that all amps sound the same given the vast differences in engineering and technologies involved is ridiculous. I thought Julian Hirsch had passed away, but he apparently lives on at AVS.

While I certainly agree with scientific principle

While I certainly agree with scientific principle, and certainly have seen snake oil presented (which I believe to be the exception to the rule - not the norm) Im always troubled by some of the things science has uncovered in all facets of audio.

Specifically the lack of people's ability To hear differences in MP3 128k and WAV formats.

Or blind test studies which have uncovered peoples inabilities to distinguish from SACD and PCM redbook standards.

I've read articles on lossy Dobly Digital vs TrueHD where people have been unable to hear the difference between either format.

either Blind Tests have to be examined further in the specific case of hearing (which to my understanding is a topic of debate with the likes of the AES as more and more DBT are revealing we can't hear many differences amongst anything let alone a compentantly designed solid state amplifier)

or the DBT is the ultimate method and audio was perfected many years ago and there's no point going forward - which make websites like AVS and a host of others redundant when it comes to audio,

As with the level matched, blind Swedish LTS tests I post before, the ultimate litmus test is whether an amplifier is transparent to its input. It is really strange to me that people don't spend energy conducting such tests as they appear to be more revealing of such differences. Instead we have some dusty tests of random selection of amps compared with each other that is being used as inductive proof that amps have that have never been tested must perform in a transparent way.

Personally I am always disappointed in negative outcomes here. The results are ambiguous since the cause may be that our test was not revealing enough. Deep knowledge of the equipment under test is necessary to know how to exercise the weak points. We don't test audio compression the same way we test speakers. The former is done with heavy insight into how the algorithm works. And it matters not that 90% of the time there is no audible distortion. We care about the 10% as to better the design and not make blanket assumptions of transparency.

Originally Posted by 2+2=5 

Mcnarus - please show me DBT results showing audible differences between my outlined formats thanks.

BTW - your first reaction and assumption was an is entirely wrong and frankly sir ignorant.

Originally Posted by tom_c 

Read the threads, when I tried to pin it down to a number, the threads went from being not worth it to it's subjective and a number can't be put on it.

Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that every time a post deals with high end audio gear, there is this group of "super heroes" that feel it necessary to save everyone from the "evils" of the high end industry.

So much so, serious discussion about the original post is lost.

The point about giving a monetary value to a perceived price point these posters seem to have was a sarcastic attempt to make a "sticky note" so we no longer will need these discussions. To pin it down, every time we a discussion like this comes up we can point to the sticky that says " Any speaker priced over this amount is a scam it says so in such and such article or blind test or whatever the proof is" Then we may be able to actually have serious discussions about audio and the "super heroes" will be free to take on more important matters like health care, politics and other important matters.

People this is capitalism, companies will charge what people are willing to pay. No one is forcing anyone to buy a Krell, Emotiva, Panasonic or any other device. There is no conspiracy, no one telling you have to buy a particular device, no government mandate. If a $100 set speakers makes you happy why can't a $20,000 set speakers make someone else happy, without the rhetoric.

Originally Posted by amirm 


Paul Frindle (chief designer of SSL and Sony Pro audio consoles) in his Audio Engineering Society paper titled, "ARE WE MEASURING THE RIGHT THINGS? ARTEFACT AUDIBILITY VERSUS MEASUREMENT" , has this to say about amplification (in this case, a very simple version of it called a "buffer"):
'A design [of ABX blind testing apparatus] we have used, consisted of a switching box utilizing mercury wetted relays and high quality stereo level controls to ensure good left right level matching. The internal amplifier for buffering the output from the inputs was specially designed using a hybrid OPAMP and transistor stage and was itself subject to ABX tests before we accepted it. After it took me 3 days to design a simple buffer amp that was transparent in an ABX test, I began to wonder if a transparent A/D [analog to digital] converter would ever be a realistic goal!”

Originally Posted by arnyk 


Doug Self has published some of his tests of discrete and hybrid op amps that show disappointing performance given the cost and hype.

Originally Posted by amirm 

blind Swedish LTS tests I post before,

Originally Posted by rock_bottom 

Samuel Groner has also published lots of distortion measurements of op-amps (mostly of the IC variety, but also some discrete ones) here.

Originally Posted by 2+2=5 

Says who?

Are you also an expert in psychology and or human behavior?

Perhaps the English language or verbal meaning.

Enough with the semantics.

I offered what I thought

you may disagree - I posed a very honest question, judging by your post count and passion for 'being right' I'll leave well enough alone sir.

Please ignore all further comments.

Originally Posted by diomania 

Oh, you mean the one that you couldn't answer a relevant question? http://www.avsforum.com/t/1340051/seeking-education-about-those-ultra-expensive-interconnects/2130#post_20732920

Are there any peer reviewed studies on the inaudibility of differences between amp designs or any papers published in JAES on this? I think it would be an important topic for AES to address if they haven't.

In summary, there has been no evidence to support the conclusion that factors other than linear response and output capability contribute to the sound of well designed power amplifiers...

This does not suggest that amplifiers are perfect and they will never be found to sound different. It does suggest to purchasers of today's audio amplifiers that as long as the product in question meets basic traditional measured performance standards, has enough output capability, and adequate quality of construction, it will be sonically indistinguishable from all others meeting those criteria.

The basic performance of even a moderately priced hi-fi amplifier is likely to be so good that improvements in technical specification would make little audible difference. For example, a moderately good amplifier will have a frequency response from 20 to 20,000 Hz +/– 1 dB, distortion less than 1% and a signal-to-noise ratio greater than 90 dB (for input signals with a reasonably high level, such as from a CD player). These values are better than the limits required by the ear.

Originally Posted by mrlittlejeans 

arnyk - Are there any peer reviewed studies on the inaudibility of differences between amp designs or any papers published in JAES on this?

I think it would be an important topic for AES to address if they haven't.

Originally Posted by 2+2=5 

This has lead be me down a fork in the road - either Blind Tests have to be examined further in the specific case of hearing (which to my understanding is a topic of debate with the likes of the AES as more and more DBT are revealing we can't hear many differences amongst anything let alone a compentantly designed solid state amplifier) or the DBT is the ultimate method and audio was perfected many years ago and there's no point going forward - which make websites like AVS and a host of others redundant when it comes to audio,

Originally Posted by arnyk 

No.
The last round of JAES papers about differences between amp designs related to the TIM/SID controversy. That controversy resulted in some papers with exceptional claims about audibility being published in the JAES. This happened because at the time the AES had no effective way judging them in an impartial way.
One reason that ABX was embraced so quickly by the AES because it provided a logical, impartial, scientific way out of the conundrum of what to publish.
Unfortunately the papers with the exceptional claims remain in the public record, largely unrebutted. At the time that was probably a good thing because the controversy needed to get settled out. But, long term the fact that they were never rebutted left some misapprehensions in place.
In the view of the AES review board, there have really not been any significant developments in amplifier designs since the SID/TIM controversy in the late 1970s, early 80s. That would be based on the record of articles published in the JAES. Either no such papers were ever submitted or given at conferences, or they were rejected.
Whether amp design variations are important or not would be a judgement call. The last truly scientific power amp tests that I know of were published in Stereo Review January 1987 (p. 78-84).
Any such tests need to be organized and performed by advocates of the superiority of one design over any and/or all others. The fact that nobody from the "pro differences" viewpoint has done so for at least 30 years would appear to tell us what we need to know: In reality, they have nothing to offer.
Again based on what is actually getting presented and published, the high rez controversy is probably the big current hot button.

Originally Posted by KidHorn 
I didn't do any level matching or double blind testing. I just plugged it in and played .If audyssey works as advertised, it should do all the required adjustments.

Originally Posted by goneten 

In both cases you ran Audyssey and in both cases you may have completely altered the in-room frequency response due to mic placement alone.

Originally Posted by KidHorn 

I have a denon 4311ci receiver. I wanted to run a 11.2 system, so I bought a NAD T955 5 channel amp. I originally only used 2 channels of the amp and all 9 internal channels of the receiver. I later used all 5 channels of the amp for LCR and 2 main surrounds and let the receiver handle the other 6. In both cases I ran audyssey. It sounds better using the 5 channels of the amp. I have an old 5.1 Marantz receiver with pre-outs. I hooked up the NAD amp and the NAD amp sounds better. I wasn't playing anywhere near loud enough to produce clipping.

I didn't do any level matching or double blind testing.

I just plugged it in and played .If audyssey works as advertised, it should do all the required adjustments.

I'm not imagining things

nor was I hoping the amp would sound better,

but it clearly sounds better to me. It sounds better to my wife too. Is the sound difference worth the extra cost for the external amp? No, but I can hear a difference.

Originally Posted by pottscb 

See Art Dudley's article "Skin Deep" in Stereophile this month...I think its Pulitzer level material...he brow beats audio companies for charging 500X more for something that performs 1% better, and rightly so.

Originally Posted by 2+2=5 

Specifically the lack of people's ability To hear differences in MP3 128k and WAV formats.

Or blind test studies which have uncovered peoples inabilities to distinguish from SACD and PCM redbook standards.

I've read articles on lossy Dobly Digital vs TrueHD where people have been unable to hear the difference between either format.

Originally Posted by tom_c 

the point I was trying to make is that every time a post deals with high end audio gear, there is this group of "super heroes" that feel it necessary to save everyone from the "evils" of the high end industry ... No one is forcing anyone to buy a Krell, Emotiva, Panasonic or any other device.