AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Audio theory, Setup and Chat › Are audio companies all involved in a huge conspiracy?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Are audio companies all involved in a huge conspiracy? - Page 64

post #1891 of 3048
3/7/13 at 7:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by josh6113 View Post

And here is a quote from Arny from post 1765:

""Ten Years of A/B/X Testing", Clark, David L., Presented at the 91st AES Convebntion, Oct 91, Print #3167.

This AES paper covers 100s if not thousands of trials and tests with negative results.

From this post sounds like Arny is speculating...doesn't sound like he has read it either...what's a matter?...can no one speak the truth here?...smile.gif
I seriously doubt that he is speculating. Not sure how you are drawing this conclusion from that quote.
Reply
Reply

AVS Top Picks

post #1892 of 3048
3/7/13 at 8:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi2 View Post

Cool... full circle from a couple of weeks ago.

To quote myself from back then...

"For me music is also partly science and partly an art form. Artists perform music - not scientists. Reproducing music in my listening room is also partly an art form. If something sounds better to me one way or another... It doesn't matter if someone on an interweb forum doesn't think there is a scientifically proven and measured reason for it or not."

"Personally I couldn't care less what the guy at the mixing desk heard. I prefer real life to be my reference and goal. A real human's voice. A real violin etc."

... only to have people jump on me with their soulless "there's only one true way to reproduce audio" "reproducing audio is a science and that is a FACT!" outlook on life... or words to that effect.
If no-fi is what you are into, go ahead, knock yourself out. There is hi-fi though in case you ever become curious.
Reply
Reply
post #1893 of 3048
3/7/13 at 8:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

Great, now I need to be a member and pay to see the results. Things just get better and better. Were those results independently verified? You know ... someone else verified to make sure the results were legitimate? Someone who does not have a bigoted view on the subject ... whose opinions are perhaps not prejudiced? How do we know the results were all legit? Must I take it based on the authors word? Nothing behind the scenes I need to worry about? No shenanigans ... of any kind?

You guys just blindly accept the purported evidence without further investigation. That seems like quite a comprehensive method of analysing the evidence. Just cite it and forget about it. eek.gif
If you are that skeptical of DBT published, DIY. I've sat through DAC comparisons. When properly level matched and bias controlled, the results are consistent with published DBT that adhered to the proper setup. I've also sat through levels unmatched and bias uncontrolled comparisons. The results match the ones published / posted on forums by the typical subjective types.
Reply
Reply
post #1894 of 3048
3/7/13 at 8:20pm
Wow, this is great, I haven't seen the ABX crew back pedal like this ever!
edit spelling error
Edited by K Shep - 3/7/13 at 9:38pm
Reply
Reply
post #1895 of 3048
3/7/13 at 8:49pm
Backpedal?
Reply
Reply
post #1896 of 3048
3/7/13 at 8:52pm
I've got my petal to the meddle. biggrin.gif
Reply
Reply
post #1897 of 3048
3/7/13 at 8:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by andyc56 View Post

I've got my petal to the meddle. biggrin.gif
Don't you mean metal?...smile.gif
Reply
Reply
post #1898 of 3048
3/7/13 at 9:48pm
These evangelists are spinning their wheels making positive claims and then not supporting those claims! Extraordinary claims bear the burden of proof. Those thousands of negative DBTs just vanished into the ether in a blink of an eye .... biggrin.gif I'm sure they will turn up at some point in this discussion...
Reply
Reply
post #1899 of 3048
3/7/13 at 9:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

Those thousands of negative DBTs just vanished into the ether in a blink of an eye.
I think you are absolutely right to be irritated at being told of massive evidence but then not being shown any. Now, can we all move on?
Reply
Reply
post #1900 of 3048
3/7/13 at 10:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregLee View Post

I think you are absolutely right to be irritated at being told of massive evidence but then not being shown any.
They've been shown alright. Some just don't want to look or unable to understand it.
Quote:
Now, can we all move on?
It has moved on and this is just a rerun. Read from first page of this thread and you'll (if able) see.
Reply
Reply
post #1901 of 3048
3/7/13 at 10:14pm
Its been an interesting discussion.....both sides have their hackles up, makes for good debate.
As someone who has been trying to educate himself on this subject by reading prob a thousand posts
over the last year, and trying to find the truth, this is what I've taken from this and other threads on the subject.

I agree that the AES group prob didnt know enough about the psych aspect....that makes sense, why should they?
Like someone said earlier....plumbers talking about electrical. I've read enough posts to know that bias comes to play as well.
Thats the reason most of the "all sound the same group" wouldnt make good ABX participants....right?
They would have a bias to not hear a slight difference, even if they were told the amps were the same but in realty
they had very slight audible differences, they would have a bias to not hear a difference....they believe so the brain
wouldnt let them hear the difference...it works both ways I assume. BUT they were not the subjects in these 100 or more
verified tests, so I'll have to agree that the participants heard no difference because there was none....makes sense....done deal.

What i have a problem understanding is the "why" is that the perfect amp.... at least for me....the one with flat response.

Ok, so heres the thing, I spend many thousands of dollars on high end SS gear, it sounds great. I also spend many thousands of dollars
on good speakers.....its really nice. Then I come here do a bunch of reading and am told that yep my amp is good, but I've overpaid.
What?...ok be open minded, lets check.....I get my bells and whistles $1000 avr out and do some serious listening...over a period
of time I see.....there really is no difference, I try to hear one, nope its just not there. Theyre correct, I've overpaid, on the bright
side I've been educated, and I sell my high price gear, take a small loss....now I'm in the know.

Then a while back I decide to buy a small 15w tube amp, very inexpensive....if I remember under $600. I hook it up to my
speakers and audition it out. Its sounds very nice....wtf? So off I go and do more reading, its a crappy amp.....I've been told
it wont measure correct....its low fi.....but....I really like it. Is it bias?.....cant be that, my bells and whistle avr....the expensive one...
cost me much more, if anything I should have a bias towards that. Ok so It must be that I prefer the harmonic distortion...
Puts me in a bad position.....I dont like it cause its more pricey, its much cheaper, its kinda plain looking compared to my big dollar gear I had
before....that was impressive looking. I've compared it many times to the avr, even had the avr at higher levels....nope I dont like that sound.
I prefer the less accurate amp....so now I'm not a hi-fi enthusiast....according to some I'm a no-fi guy......ok, guess thats me.

Wait.....why cant I prefer, and many others that have compared the two systems, be just as correct in my "tastes" with this system?
Why am I labeled for my preferences? I've experienced the no difference test, know its true, why cant I enjoy the sound I...and many others...like?
Why does it have to measure flat to be correct, or maybe it should be asked why does it have to measure flat for me to enjoy it
when I simply dont. Why are you correct and I'm wrong? Why am I correct and you wrong?

This thread has opened my eyes....you guys almost had me there, I still believe in the ABX testing, I'm just not sure what it proves.
I guess It proves all amps that are built to the correct specs sound the same......maybe a lot of people just dont enjoy that sound.
If you do thats great, doesnt mean a thing except you enjoty it, and others enjoy some thing else...why is one right and the other wrong??

This debate reminds me of that star trek episode where 2 aliens were fighting because each had a black and white half to their face.
They fought because the black was on different sides.....
Reply
Reply
post #1902 of 3048
3/7/13 at 10:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by diomania 
They've been shown alright. Some just don't want to look or unable to understand it.

That is the crutch you have no choice but to fall back on when you can't actually deliver on the fantastical claims you make! Face it, your position isn't nearly as iron-clad as you make it out to be. Either you provide the actual evidence or rather just keep quiet. No one else should have to do your homework for you.
Reply
Reply
post #1903 of 3048
3/7/13 at 10:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S 
These evangelists are spinning their wheels making positive claims and then not supporting those claims!
You've made this "positive claim" statement a few times now. Care to explain? No matter how you reword the claim, the objectivist argument remains that of a negative.
Quote:
Extraordinary claims bear the burden of proof.
Yes, absolutely. Of course, there is nothing at all extraordinary about claiming that amplifiers designed to perform transparently within human limits of audibility sound the same as other such amplifiers. That is quite the boring claim.

On the other hand, claiming that two amplifiers which measure well within established audibility limits can be easily sonically differentiated by a wife in the next room... is extraordinary. Claiming that our auditory memory works best when two events are separated by hours, days, years... is extraordinary. Claiming that there is undiscovered science involving ordinary copper wire that makes them wildly audibly different while measuring the same to amazing precision... is extraordinary. Claiming that somehow knowing or not knowing the brand of an audio component during evaluation can cause ones ears to work properly or improperly, respectively... is extraordinary. Claiming that one can voluntarily turn off all sources of conscious and unconscious bias during an evaluation... is extraordinary.


Btw, I've asked you a few simple and direct questions during this thread. You answered the first couple, thanks for that. Did you catch the last two?
Reply
Reply
post #1904 of 3048
3/7/13 at 10:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perry R View Post

I guess It proves all amps that are built to the correct specs sound the same......maybe a lot of people just dont enjoy that sound.

One big problem is that you can't do a paradigm-shift in steps. If you've had a subjectivistic view while setting up a system, there's good reason to believe that replacing the amp with one that has the objectivistic 'correct specs' will not be a hit. It's not the amp that's the problem, though. It's that it highlights the mistakes the previous one did. So it's not at all surprising if the old amp would go back and the tested one would be labled bad.

The correct way to do it is to get rid of ALL previously subjectively selected electronics in favor of 'correct spec' gear... and if that's not enough... then start looking for new speakers.

The change has to be done on system level to be properly evaluated.

If people still don't like the sound, that's when I'm bound to agree with you. I don't believe they would be as many of them after they'd had to do a full system replacement, though.
Reply
Reply
post #1905 of 3048
3/7/13 at 10:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus 
You've made this "positive claim" statement a few times now. Care to explain? No matter how you reword the claim, the objectivist argument remains that of a negative.

Keeping spinning those wheels... goodness gracious. eek.gif
Reply
Reply
post #1906 of 3048
3/7/13 at 10:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S 
No one else should have to do your homework for you.
Quoted for truth!

I've conducted several controlled blinded comparisons of audio components myself over the years, and participated in several more. I've read the details of other's similar tests from time to time, read summaries or secondhand reports of still more. I've learned about the field of psychoacoustics, as well as studied about human bias and perception in non-audio fields as it applies to my current career. I studied electronics, transducers, and acoustics extensively as it applied to my former career. I have studied the literature on human audibility out of curiosity, as well as necessity to design competent speakers for paying customers. I have seen the issue we are discussing now become so widely accepted as proven as reasonably possible that it is now included in basic textbooks on the subject. All of these endeavors, every single bit if it, point in a perfectly coherent nature towards the same conclusion.

In other words, I've done my homework thus the conclusion is not surprising at all. But I'm not about to try and distill a lifetime of experience and education into a few forum posts so you can continue your charade of ever increasing requirements for proof, citations, "third party verification" and other such nonsense you toss out as a pure diversionary tactic.

On the other hand, I would reconsider the conclusion I and many others have reached, and entertain that a lifetime of knowledge is incorrect, if you could provide but one singular reliable counter example proving the positive. Just one. Out of the many such examples you alluded to knowing of, and were asked to provide but have not, it only takes one.

You insist on thousands of third party verified examples, though even that would not satisfy you. I ask for but one.

Who refuses to do his homework? Who brushes off his burden of proof?
Reply
Reply
post #1907 of 3048
3/7/13 at 10:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus 
You've made this "positive claim" statement a few times now. Care to explain? No matter how you reword the claim, the objectivist argument remains that of a negative.

Keeping spinning those wheels... goodness gracious. eek.gif

ie, you can't explain it. This is simply you being intellectually dishonest as you have no other recourse at this point. You have now turned to blatant lies, and even turn a blind eye when called to the mat about it. It is in keeping with the dishonesty you displayed earlier so at least you have consistency.
Reply
Reply
post #1908 of 3048
3/7/13 at 10:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post

One big problem is that you can't do a paradigm-shift in steps. If you've had a subjectivistic view while setting up a system, there's good reason to believe that replacing the amp with one that has the objectivistic 'correct specs' will not be a hit. It's not the amp that's the problem, though. It's that it highlights the mistakes the previous one did. So it's not at all surprising if the old amp would go back and the tested one would be labled bad.

The correct way to do it is to get rid of ALL previously subjectively selected electronics in favor of 'correct spec' gear... and if that's not enough... then start looking for new speakers.

The change has to be done on system level to be properly evaluated.

If people still don't like the sound, that's when I'm bound to agree with you. I don't believe they would be as many of them after they'd had to do a full system replacement, though.

What correct specs are we seeking? I bet most high-end gear measures good enough to be correct specs.
Reply
Reply
post #1909 of 3048
3/7/13 at 11:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perry R View Post

Its been an interesting discussion.....both sides have their hackles up, makes for good debate.
As someone who has been trying to educate himself on this subject by reading prob a thousand posts
over the last year, and trying to find the truth, this is what I've taken from this and other threads on the subject.

I agree that the AES group prob didnt know enough about the psych aspect....that makes sense, why should they?
Like someone said earlier....plumbers talking about electrical. I've read enough posts to know that bias comes to play as well.
Thats the reason most of the "all sound the same group" wouldnt make good ABX participants....right?
They would have a bias to not hear a slight difference, even if they were told the amps were the same but in realty
they had very slight audible differences, they would have a bias to not hear a difference....they believe so the brain
wouldnt let them hear the difference...it works both ways I assume. BUT they were not the subjects in these 100 or more
verified tests, so I'll have to agree that the participants heard no difference because there was none....makes sense....done deal.

What i have a problem understanding is the "why" is that the perfect amp.... at least for me....the one with flat response.

Ok, so heres the thing, I spend many thousands of dollars on high end SS gear, it sounds great. I also spend many thousands of dollars
on good speakers.....its really nice. Then I come here do a bunch of reading and am told that yep my amp is good, but I've overpaid.
What?...ok be open minded, lets check.....I get my bells and whistles $1000 avr out and do some serious listening...over a period
of time I see.....there really is no difference, I try to hear one, nope its just not there. Theyre correct, I've overpaid, on the bright
side I've been educated, and I sell my high price gear, take a small loss....now I'm in the know.

Then a while back I decide to buy a small 15w tube amp, very inexpensive....if I remember under $600. I hook it up to my
speakers and audition it out. Its sounds very nice....wtf? So off I go and do more reading, its a crappy amp.....I've been told
it wont measure correct....its low fi.....but....I really like it. Is it bias?.....cant be that, my bells and whistle avr....the expensive one...
cost me much more, if anything I should have a bias towards that. Ok so It must be that I prefer the harmonic distortion...
Puts me in a bad position.....I dont like it cause its more pricey, its much cheaper, its kinda plain looking compared to my big dollar gear I had
before....that was impressive looking. I've compared it many times to the avr, even had the avr at higher levels....nope I dont like that sound.
I prefer the less accurate amp....so now I'm not a hi-fi enthusiast....according to some I'm a no-fi guy......ok, guess thats me.

Wait.....why cant I prefer, and many others that have compared the two systems, be just as correct in my "tastes" with this system?
Why am I labeled for my preferences? I've experienced the no difference test, know its true, why cant I enjoy the sound I...and many others...like?
Why does it have to measure flat to be correct, or maybe it should be asked why does it have to measure flat for me to enjoy it
when I simply dont. Why are you correct and I'm wrong? Why am I correct and you wrong?

This thread has opened my eyes....you guys almost had me there, I still believe in the ABX testing, I'm just not sure what it proves.
I guess It proves all amps that are built to the correct specs sound the same......maybe a lot of people just dont enjoy that sound.
If you do thats great, doesnt mean a thing except you enjoty it, and others enjoy some thing else...why is one right and the other wrong??

This debate reminds me of that star trek episode where 2 aliens were fighting because each had a black and white half to their face.
They fought because the black was on different sides.....

Your way is correct because you enjoyed the outcome, only arrogant know-it-all would critisize your preferences. Enjoy the music!
Edited by Todd68 - 3/7/13 at 11:07pm
Reply
Reply
post #1910 of 3048
3/7/13 at 11:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus 
ie, you can't explain it. This is simply you being intellectually dishonest as you have no other recourse at this point. You have now turned to blatant lies, and even turn a blind eye when called to the mat about it. It is in keeping with the dishonesty you displayed earlier so at least you have consistency.

Pot, Kettle, Black. Blatant lies? Thousands of DBTs doesn't qualify as a positive claim? You are going to reword that positive claim as a negative claim? It is YOU who is lying to yourself. You spin the same BS because you have nothing salient to offer and now ... you have been backed into a corner so you spin some more BS.

You aren't qualified to make judgment calls in this thread.
Reply
Reply
post #1911 of 3048
3/7/13 at 11:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus 
In other words, I've done my homework thus the conclusion is not surprising at all. But I'm not about to try and distill a lifetime of experience and education into a few forum posts so you can continue your charade of ever increasing requirements for proof, citations, "third party verification" and other such nonsense you toss out as a pure diversionary tactic.

Taking the life experience from a bigoted individual who is highly prejudiced on this particular topic or .... hard evidence that would confirm the veracity of the claim being discussed and thrown about nonchalantly? Hmmm, I wonder which I would consider to be the more logical option. rolleyes.gif Present the thousands of negative DBT results as claimed. Don't worry about independent verification, but just show me all those results. I will give you some time to gather this mountain of evidence. If you could perhaps get back to me by the end of the day it would be most appreciated.
Reply
Reply
post #1912 of 3048
3/7/13 at 11:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todd68 View Post

What correct specs are we seeking? I bet most high-end gear measures good enough to be correct specs.

This line of discussion is in the context of "As close to straight-wire as we can get". Equipment that just does it's prime job without putting any 'personal signature' on it.

Most gear can be found some coloration from if tested/measured enough. High-end included. There's also A LOT of high-end gear that's definitely not trying to do their best in this particular regard, which makes it an odd thing to claim.
Reply
Reply
post #1913 of 3048
3/7/13 at 11:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perry R 
I've read enough posts to know that bias comes to play as well.
Thats the reason most of the "all sound the same group" wouldnt make good ABX participants....right?
Quite right my friend. Scientists may claim to be objective, but we aren't immune from all manner of uncontrollable biases, the most concerning as you mention the possibility that they will call everything the same even if isn't quite. The best test candidate is the one who claims to hear such differences routinely from across the room.
Quote:
What i have a problem understanding is the "why" is that the perfect amp.... at least for me....the one with flat response.
This has been discussed and misrepresented in this thread. From one angle is the semantics. It may be correct that some terms like "high fidelity" have more rigorous and accepted definitions that require the output to mimic the input, but you are free to define "good" or "perfect" for you however you wish. The other angle is pragmatic: if non flat is what you prefer, the cheaper route is quite likely the inexpensive sonically transparent component paired with the device purposefully designed to modify the sound according to taste. It is also likely the simplest and quickest route to achieve the sonic flavor you are after, as well as being the most flexible. So the cheap transparent amp or other gear is an indispensable part of the vast majority of cases, so it is recommended to the vast majority of people. It isn't a "mandate" but rather simply good advice.
Quote:
I prefer the less accurate amp....so now I'm not a hi-fi enthusiast....according to some I'm a no-fi guy......ok, guess thats me.

Wait.....why cant I prefer, and many others that have compared the two systems, be just as correct in my "tastes" with this system?
You are free to prefer anything you like. If you like it, I see no reason you shouldn't conclude it is good for you. And the price you mention may be high for 15 watts, but certainly isn't exorbitant. None of that negates the recommendation of a cheap transparent amp as being good advice. Even in your case, you may have achieved the sound you like less expensively by combining a cheap (very cheap at that power level) amp and dedicated eq or other device, though it isn't guaranteed that would necessarily be the case. It is possible though that such a combination could arrive at a sound you like even better than your current tube amp, by allowing you to systematically isolate the quality responsible for your preference, and perhaps enhancing or intensifying that quality in a manner your current rigid solution does not allow for. So it still remains good advice, even in your case.
Reply
Reply
post #1914 of 3048
3/7/13 at 11:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightlord View Post


The correct way to do it is to get rid of ALL previously subjectively selected electronics in favor of 'correct spec' gear... and if that's not enough... then start looking for new speakers.

.

The avr that was used for comparison is a common mid range Yamaha......according to many here they spec fine.
The speakers are a open baffle Co-ax on the top combined with open baffle "H" frame dual 12" servo subs driven by a Rythmik SS servo amp.
Its not my design,but of a very competent successful designer. They reside in a dedicated treated room.
They can be seen here http://www.avsforum.com/t/1446691/diy-super-v

I dont understand......I have to get rid of all previous gear and start with a $200 avr that specs well, or a pro amp, and maybe new speakers
and that will level the playing field?.......that will change my mind?
I said I buy into the all properly spec amps sound the same, they did in my system.....I get that.
The lesser amp....to me, and maybe many others......sounds better to me.
Your saying I have a bias cause.....well, I'm not sure......you assume the other 2 original amps were not accurate?
Or maybe I have poor speakers?
Reply
Reply
post #1915 of 3048
3/7/13 at 11:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S 
Thousands of DBTs doesn't qualify as a positive claim?
That is the claim you're so bent out of shape about? Sheesh. So if no one here bothers to prove that there have been that many negative DBT's to your satisfaction, what? You will keep your head in the sand. I wager that you will do that regardless, so why waste my time entertaining you? Besides, if you have read many of my prior posts over the years, you would know it isn't my style to jump through hoops digging up link after link after link to support a statement I have made when there is plenty of information out there on the web for all interested parties to read. That is especially true when the dude holding the hoop is as dishonest as you.
Quote:
and now ... you have been backed into a corner so you spin some more BS.
A legend in your own mind! I'd love to hear what you think this corner is, but I'm really wondering who you think backed me into it... you or those guys you plagiarized? Right.
Reply
Reply
post #1916 of 3048
3/7/13 at 11:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigus View Post

It is possible though that such a combination could arrive at a sound you like even better than your current tube amp, by allowing you to systematically isolate the quality responsible for your preference, and perhaps enhancing or intensifying that quality in a manner your current rigid solution does not allow for. So it still remains good advice, even in your case.

Ok, I understand that. I was going to try other combinations, and perhaps I have some work to do in understanding why I prefer what I do.
Thats what is so intriguing about this hobby.. Looks like some more education is in order.
Reply
Reply
post #1917 of 3048
3/7/13 at 11:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heinrich S 
Taking the life experience from a bigoted individual who is highly prejudiced on this particular topic…
Bigot? Hollow insults are the hallmark of desperation.
Reply
Reply
post #1918 of 3048
3/8/13 at 12:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perry R View Post




Then a while back I decide to buy a small 15w tube amp, very inexpensive....if I remember under $600. I hook it up to my
speakers and audition it out. Its sounds very nice....wtf? So off I go and do more reading, its a crappy amp.....I've been told
it wont measure correct....its low fi.....but....I really like it. Is it bias?.....cant be that, my bells and whistle avr....the expensive one...
cost me much more, if anything I should have a bias towards that.

There can be many sources of bias, both conscious and unconscious and not all relating to price. You may very well prefer the sound you are getting from the less technically accurate tube amp. Then again, I recall there being a blind comparison of vinyl to digital, and some of the hardcore vinyl people participating ended up preferring the digital when divorced from their associated vinyl playback ritual and pre-knowledge of the source. So it is also possible, despite being of lesser cost, that there might be some other conscious or unconscious element in play in your preference for the tube amp sound and it's not entirely you coming to a correct conclusion that you enjoy it more strictly based on its sound.

Regardless, I don't think anyone in this thread will begrudge you or your enjoyment of the tube amp. All that is being said from a critical perspective is that, in terms of being transparent or faithful to the original signal, your tube amp is probably lacking. That in no way means you cannot enjoy the sound. I know some hardcore "objectivist" types who enjoy tube amps too. Whether it be for reasons of nostalgia or for being somewhat exotic or for a change-of-pace sound, or combination of all.

EDIT: I see Bigus has just responded ahead of me. Haven't read his post yet, but I suspect some of what I've written here might be redundant or will pale in comparison to his typically outstanding posting contributions.
Edited by CruelInventions - 3/8/13 at 12:08am
Reply
Reply
post #1919 of 3048
3/8/13 at 12:15am
Heinrich, what specifically are you looking for corroborating proof of?
Reply
Reply
post #1920 of 3048
3/8/13 at 12:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perry R View Post

The avr that was used for comparison is a common mid range Yamaha......according to many here they spec fine.
The speakers are a open baffle Co-ax on the top combined with open baffle "H" frame dual 12" servo subs driven by a Rythmik SS servo amp.
Its not my design,but of a very competent successful designer. They reside in a dedicated treated room.
They can be seen here http://www.avsforum.com/t/1446691/diy-super-v

I dont understand......I have to get rid of all previous gear and start with a $200 avr that specs well, or a pro amp, and maybe new speakers
and that will level the playing field?.......that will change my mind?
I said I buy into the all properly spec amps sound the same, they did in my system.....I get that.
The lesser amp....to me, and maybe many others......sounds better to me.
Your saying I have a bias cause.....well, I'm not sure......you assume the other 2 original amps were not accurate?
Or maybe I have poor speakers?

I'm not saying anything about that. I replied to this, and this only: "I guess It proves all amps that are built to the correct specs sound the same......maybe a lot of people just dont enjoy that sound." It had nothing to do with you and what you have done, I answered it as a general statement.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Audio theory, Setup and Chat

AVS Top Picks

AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Audio theory, Setup and Chat › Are audio companies all involved in a huge conspiracy?