Is a Stereo Integrated Amplifier better choice than an AV Receiver? - Page 8 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 168Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #211 of 362 Old 02-28-2016, 10:52 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,630
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1331 Post(s)
Liked: 816
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacodutaco View Post

The bulk of my friends use the built-in speakers in their LCD TV's.
I know a shocking number of people who swallowed the Bose pill, and therefore have 5.1. Almost all of them are now tech-challenged because they are 8-10 years old, don't handle HDMI, and are SD/composite, but they still feed TV audio to them and get 5.1, even if it's extracted. One guy even has a quasi-whole-house system built around a Lifestyle thingy. Very proprietary, and expensive, but it works.

The two things Bose did right was make tiny little speakers that are easy to place (originating the HTiB), and marketed their system in airports, in-flight magazines, dedicated stores, and dedicated displays in big-box stores. My hat is off to their marketing dept. But they got 5.1 into a whole lot of homes, even if it is Bose-style.
jaddie is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #212 of 362 Old 02-28-2016, 10:58 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 18,428
Mentioned: 214 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8587 Post(s)
Liked: 5787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osamede View Post
Funny part about all this stuff about scale efficiencies, is the underlying waste. I know very few people that have even 5.1 in their living rooms, let alone atmos or whatever number of channels. Typically I see them with 2.0, 2.1 if they have tiny speakers, or 3.1 sometimes.

And their main music source is typically a disc spinner with HDMI output, which doubles as video source. With the younger people you see some sort of PC variant with an optical out

I'd say a the industry would serve customers (and the environment) better if the standard integrated amp they offered was a simple 50 watt per channel 3.1 or 2.1 channel integrated amp with HDMI and optical in and simple channel level and time delay settings. You'd save the waste of all those channels of amplification that people dont use, while providing what people actually do want.
I read somewhere that two thirds of younger adults listen to music as well as video entertainment via a soundbar.

My 30 year old daughter went from 2.1 to 3.1 and was hugely impressed with the improvement, especially for things like debates...obviously using an AVR.

I have a 5.1 system in my HT room and have no intention of adding more than the 5 speakers as you say; my daughter has a small house and zero interest in adding rear speakers.

In my front room I have my 30 year old NAD receiver for listening to music in stereo, (feeds audio to the kitchen and garage also) and to watch mostly ESPN3 in that room via the Roku, (works great BTW...excellent picture and audio quality). I have a TT hooked up to it but use it mostly to digitize vinyl. Music is sent to the stereo receiver via the PC.

For watching the Roku in the front room I have a bridged amp connected to the receiver via pre out/main in that sends a mono signal to a matched center channel which is far superior to stereo for listening to video sources as it really helps center dialogue; so quasi 3.1 if you will.

So there are many ways to skin a cat and achieve satisfying sound.

I think the idea of 3.1 receivers is a good one but not sure they'd be any cheaper than 5.1 receivers to be honest.

Last edited by gajCA; 02-28-2016 at 11:05 AM.
gajCA is offline  
post #213 of 362 Old 02-28-2016, 11:15 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 18,917
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2161 Post(s)
Liked: 2010
I had a Kenwood integrated amp for years (starting in the late 70's). It sounded wonderful!
I changed to an AVR because I wanted a 5.1 system (early 90's).
It still sounds wonderful with Dolby or DTS and stereo. (BTW... since it's quite a few years old, it doesn't have Audessey or other fancy stuff. )
Ratman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #214 of 362 Old 02-28-2016, 12:11 PM
Advanced Member
 
KJSteward's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 622
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacodutaco View Post
I tend to agree with this. Everyone and I mean everyone I know uses one of three things:

1. Built-in speakers on their TV.
2. Some sort of 2-channel setup including ones using AVR's.
3. Sound Bars.

The bulk of my friends use the built-in speakers in their LCD TV's. I don't have a single friend who has or uses a multi-channel system. Most houses aren't designed with multi-channel audio in mind and are less than ideal to add it to. Most people don't want to bother with the complexity of setting one up or learning to use one either. They are all content with mediocre 2.0 or 2.1 sound. Also, something to remember, this site isn't a good judge of how audio/video is or should be used by the common person. If you're posting on this site you probably already are ahead in this department to start with.
I recently found a smoking deal on a Martin Logan Vision soundbar. Had no place in my system for it, so asked my wife if she wanted it for her television. "No. TV speakers are fine!"

You're right on the mark. At least part of discussions like this one are due to the fact that people who salivate over the kind of things we do are thin on the ground in real life.

At the end of it, no-one (in the world outside hifi and theatre forums) really gives a rodent's rectum about whether there is actually a "right" answer to the questions framed here. It's just good that there are others out there with similar interests with whom to chat.

Spoiler!
KJSteward is offline  
post #215 of 362 Old 02-29-2016, 06:22 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bluewizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,686
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2281 Post(s)
Liked: 1507
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony_Montana View Post
Thanks for your comment.
I just realized that Denon & Pioneer do not produce Stereo Amps anymore!
Last models were Denon PMA-50 and Pioneer A-20.
Actually, though an insignificant point, Denon and Pioneer do make Stereo equipment, they simply don't sell it in the USA.

If you check their UK websites you will see the both make Stereo Amps, CD Player, and Network Players.

But, nothing on the respective USA websites.

Again, just a minor side note.

Steve/bluewizard
bluewizard is offline  
post #216 of 362 Old 02-29-2016, 09:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
Alanlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Northern California
Posts: 791
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Liked: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
I had a Kenwood integrated amp for years (starting in the late 70's). It sounded wonderful!
I changed to an AVR because I wanted a 5.1 system (early 90's).
It still sounds wonderful with Dolby or DTS and stereo. (BTW... since it's quite a few years old, it doesn't have Audessey or other fancy stuff. )
You are bringing back memories of something I had not remembered: my early NAD days.In the 80's I bought two Klipsch Cornwalls, which I still have, an NAD amp, and an NAD pre-amp. They were good for almost ten years when I started buying surround sound equipment. I also bought other NAD used equipment such as a couple of two channel receivers. I have fond memories of that NAD stuff. I passed it on to my son-in-law. I recently bought two NAD 275's to work with the Denon 5200. My audio sophistication is not that well developed. It all sounds good to me: the stuff from the 80's and stuff now. It's true, I don't buy high end devices, so maybe I am not hearing high end sound. I live in California; I also drink $10/bottle wine. It's all good.

7.4.6 system with Denon 8500, Additional Amps: Emotiva (front and center) and NAD (wide), classic Klipsch speakers.
Alanlee is offline  
post #217 of 362 Old 02-29-2016, 09:26 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Tony_Montana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 437
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 46 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluewizard View Post
Actually, though an insignificant point, Denon and Pioneer do make Stereo equipment, they simply don't sell it in the USA.

If you check their UK websites you will see the both make Stereo Amps, CD Player, and Network Players.

But, nothing on the respective USA websites.

Again, just a minor side note.

Steve/bluewizard
And Denon`s japanese site has even more stereo amps...
Maybe they do not update all the sites at the same time.
The Denon DRA-100 is interesting, too.
Tony_Montana is offline  
post #218 of 362 Old 03-01-2016, 07:26 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Pacodutaco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 1,391
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 433 Post(s)
Liked: 2106
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaddie View Post
I know a shocking number of people who swallowed the Bose pil

I hate to admit this but I was one too. In 2000 I purchased a set of Bose Acoustimass 6 Series II (5.1) to set up my first home theater. After about 6 months or so, I took them down, stuck them in storage and went back to the 2.0 sound I had originally. I was never happy with the sound they produced in my home. Those damned displays at Circuit City and Best Buy make them sound great but in reality they are crap. I chalked it up to another of life's lessons that include a steep price tag.

Marantz PM5005 Integrated Amplifier | Marantz CD5005 Compact Disc Player | Music Hall USB-1 Turntable | Audio-Technica AT95E Cartridge
Denon DRW-830 Cassette Tape Player | Monitor Audio Bronze BX2 Bookshelf Speakers | AudioQuest Evergreen Interconnects
Pacodutaco is offline  
post #219 of 362 Old 03-03-2016, 06:49 PM
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 966
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by A9X-308 View Post
Ignore him, he just has a hate on the brand. I own, and have owned a lot of Yamaha amplifiers over the years and have worked on thousands of different amps in a myriad of brands and to describe them as poorly designed or made, is just to show his ignorance. There are plenty worse out there in high end brands. Linear amp design has been my hobby for many years and a part of my profession for nearly as long. As for them sounding bad and amps having a sonic signature, have a read of this.



It's the final paragraph of a letter found starting on page pdf7 of this magazine.
RTWT.
This reminds me of John Atkinson's mistake. He fell pray to the same deceptions, and later realized it, reverting to his original amplifier.

Jady and I (my wife) have been listen to the same integrated combo for over 17 years. We once substituted it with an AVR, which is now in our family room, and we were both very dissatisfied with the differences. We then obviously reinstalled our integrated unit. So based on our experience, I would have to suggest going with an integrated product.
Jady Jenkins is offline  
post #220 of 362 Old 03-03-2016, 07:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Farmington Hills, MI
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 459 Post(s)
Liked: 325
How did we get to a discussion on AVR receivers when talking about 2 channel receivers vs integrated amps. Back in the day (I know, I'm an old guy) the only reason to get a receiver over an integrated was for the tuner. It just makes sense that for the same price an integrated amp gives you at the least more power. Since most two channel listeners in 2016 are not using a tuner section, it makes little sense to buy a receiver unless you can find a nice vintage receiver.
DaverJ and lovinthehd like this.
MSchott is offline  
post #221 of 362 Old 03-03-2016, 07:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
KJSteward's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 622
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 213 Post(s)
Liked: 693
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchott View Post
How did we get to a discussion on AVR receivers when talking about 2 channel receivers vs integrated amps. Back in the day (I know, I'm an old guy) the only reason to get a receiver over an integrated was for the tuner. It just makes sense that for the same price an integrated amp gives you at the least more power. Since most two channel listeners in 2016 are not using a tuner section, it makes little sense to buy a receiver unless you can find a nice vintage receiver.
According to the thread title we are discussing stereo integrated amplifiers and AV receivers.
Jady Jenkins likes this.

Spoiler!
KJSteward is offline  
post #222 of 362 Old 03-03-2016, 07:47 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
cel4145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 16,705
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2668 Post(s)
Liked: 3015
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchott View Post
How did we get to a discussion on AVR receivers when talking about 2 channel receivers vs integrated amps. Back in the day (I know, I'm an old guy) the only reason to get a receiver over an integrated was for the tuner. It just makes sense that for the same price an integrated amp gives you at the least more power. Since most two channel listeners in 2016 are not using a tuner section, it makes little sense to buy a receiver unless you can find a nice vintage receiver.
Well, it might seem to make sense, but just a few years ago, the HK 3390 & 3490 were probably the most popularly recommended "amps" in their price bracket on this section of the forum and they have tuners
postrokfan and Jady Jenkins like this.

Your questions are answered: Speaker FAQ
Living room HT: Energy RC-50, Ascend Sierra Horizon w/RAAL, Ascend Sierra 1, PSB Imagine XA | PSA V1500 and CHT SS 18.1 | Denon X4200W | modified Dayton SA1000
Other rooms: CBM-170 SE | SVS SB-1000 | Audio-GD NFB-11 | Parasound Zamp | JBL LSR305
Headphone & Portable AKG K7XX | HE-400i | NAD HP50 | Sony MDR-1A | Soundmagic E50 & E80 | X5ii | DX50 | E12
cel4145 is offline  
post #223 of 362 Old 03-04-2016, 05:07 AM
FMW
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,480
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1653 Post(s)
Liked: 1708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jady Jenkins View Post
This reminds me of John Atkinson's mistake. He fell pray to the same deceptions, and later realized it, reverting to his original amplifier.

Jady and I (my wife) have been listen to the same integrated combo for over 17 years. We once substituted it with an AVR, which is now in our family room, and we were both very dissatisfied with the differences. We then obviously reinstalled our integrated unit. So based on our experience, I would have to suggest going with an integrated product.
Not a deception. Just the removal of bias from the comparison.
cel4145 and Greenwood Ave like this.
FMW is offline  
post #224 of 362 Old 03-04-2016, 06:14 AM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Farmington Hills, MI
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 459 Post(s)
Liked: 325
Quote:
Originally Posted by KJSteward View Post
According to the thread title we are discussing stereo integrated amplifiers and AV receivers.
You are correct, my mistake.
MSchott is offline  
post #225 of 362 Old 03-04-2016, 10:16 AM
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 966
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post
Not a deception. Just the removal of bias from the comparison.
Well I can agree that something was removed.

I garnered the adjective from John's own words.
Jady Jenkins is offline  
post #226 of 362 Old 03-06-2016, 08:26 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
cel4145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 16,705
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2668 Post(s)
Liked: 3015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jady Jenkins View Post
This reminds me of John Atkinson's mistake. He fell pray to the same deceptions, and later realized it, reverting to his original amplifier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jady Jenkins View Post
Well I can agree that something was removed.

I garnered the adjective from John's own words.
Given that Atkinson's career is so heavily built around an industry and a publication that heavily depend on a belief in subjective evaluation of audio equipment, I don't expect him to embrace ABX testing any more than I would expect a BP exec of twenty-five years to believe in man induced climate change if confronted with similar evidence.

Note that you don't have to belief in ABX testing (or climate change) to acknowledge that it's human to resist/deny an epistemological paradigm shift that would negate much of what one has believed throughout a long life. It's too much to expect that people will accept something that calls into question much of the career legacy that they leave behind.

BTW: You might be interested in this piece from Business Insider that talks about the many types of cognitive biases that influence decisions: http://www.businessinsider.com/cogni...cisions-2015-8

Your questions are answered: Speaker FAQ
Living room HT: Energy RC-50, Ascend Sierra Horizon w/RAAL, Ascend Sierra 1, PSB Imagine XA | PSA V1500 and CHT SS 18.1 | Denon X4200W | modified Dayton SA1000
Other rooms: CBM-170 SE | SVS SB-1000 | Audio-GD NFB-11 | Parasound Zamp | JBL LSR305
Headphone & Portable AKG K7XX | HE-400i | NAD HP50 | Sony MDR-1A | Soundmagic E50 & E80 | X5ii | DX50 | E12

Last edited by cel4145; 03-06-2016 at 08:29 AM.
cel4145 is offline  
post #227 of 362 Old 03-06-2016, 09:04 AM
FMW
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,480
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1653 Post(s)
Liked: 1708
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchott View Post
How did we get to a discussion on AVR receivers when talking about 2 channel receivers vs integrated amps. Back in the day (I know, I'm an old guy) the only reason to get a receiver over an integrated was for the tuner. It just makes sense that for the same price an integrated amp gives you at the least more power. Since most two channel listeners in 2016 are not using a tuner section, it makes little sense to buy a receiver unless you can find a nice vintage receiver.
Not really, because of economies of scale, AV receivers cost less than integrated amps. That is why we recommended them. The AV receiver, costs less and does more.
m. zillch and Greenwood Ave like this.
FMW is offline  
post #228 of 362 Old 03-06-2016, 09:06 AM
FMW
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,480
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1653 Post(s)
Liked: 1708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jady Jenkins View Post
Well I can agree that something was removed.

I garnered the adjective from John's own words.
It doesn't matter who said it. Bias controlled comparisons aren't a deception. They are a way of determining whether audible differences occur in the equiment or the bias of the listener. Atkinson is as biased as anyone.
jaddie and Pacodutaco like this.
FMW is offline  
post #229 of 362 Old 03-06-2016, 11:57 AM
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 16,231
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4588 Post(s)
Liked: 4791
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchott View Post
How did we get to a discussion on AVR receivers when talking about 2 channel receivers vs integrated amps. Back in the day (I know, I'm an old guy) the only reason to get a receiver over an integrated was for the tuner. It just makes sense that for the same price an integrated amp gives you at the least more power. Since most two channel listeners in 2016 are not using a tuner section, it makes little sense to buy a receiver unless you can find a nice vintage receiver.
The word receiver has multiple definitions obviously. The modern avr with internet capabilities beats hell out of my old 2ch receivers but either way both are just integrated amps with one more feature. You won't usually get any more amp when those features are dropped....
Greenwood Ave likes this.
lovinthehd is offline  
post #230 of 362 Old 03-07-2016, 03:04 PM
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 966
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post
It doesn't matter who said it. Bias controlled comparisons aren't a deception. They are a way of determining whether audible differences occur in the equiment or the bias of the listener. Atkinson is as biased as anyone.
He is as God made him, human. He experiences life on earth as a human, and that includes acoustic events. Bias is a valid part of the experience, it isn't an evil. My wife is beautiful, I would hate to be told that I am biased, because that would have a negative implication. It's a polite way (or is it?) of some one telling me I wrong, that she's ugly, and they can provide it to me, by adjusting the lighting or some such thing. And heck, in a certain lighting we can all be made to look ugly. So I like my wife and music with biases, and if you search yourself out, you might just discover that deep down you do to.

Removing bias, outside of controlled lab experiments, well that's not a good idea. It's especially bad to overlay, over everyday listening experiences. Why, well, they cannot be removed from everyday settings such as peoples homes. Therefore the use of an unnatural, unrelated form of audition is illogical, for determining a persons personal preferences, bias and all.

To put it another way, from the consumer standpoint, the best possible means of determining a systems suitability, is almost identical to that of buying clothing, one must try it on. Home based auditions of a complete system, in the intended room, from the intended seating position, is by far and away the best audition format.

If you wish to temporarily remove ones ever present biases and other influencers, you will only produce a temporary result, one only occurring within that setting. Put one back into the real-world, and they will likely become dissatisfied, with any choices (buying decisions) that were made, from within that unnatural setting. Look, many have, John Atkinson being the most notable, in our circles.

John's opinion is as valid as your own, he finds them deceptive. He has also referred to them as being misleading.

Now the use of the metric that your alluding to (DB ABX), in controlled scientific experiment, is quite another matter altogether. And to be sure there is some very valuable data to be mined.

Last edited by Jady Jenkins; 03-07-2016 at 06:15 PM.
Jady Jenkins is offline  
post #231 of 362 Old 03-07-2016, 07:27 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
cel4145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 16,705
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2668 Post(s)
Liked: 3015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jady Jenkins View Post
Removing bias, outside of controlled lab experiments, well that's not a good idea. It's especially bad to overlay, over everyday listening experiences. Why, well, they cannot be removed from everyday settings such as peoples homes. Therefore the use of an unnatural, unrelated form of audition is illogical, for determining a persons personal preferences, bias and all.
This is a rationalization that works for those who can't let go of the belief in the superiority of subjective evaluation of audio equipment. Once the veil is lifted, things are different.

For instance, just today, I tried my new Galaxy S2 9.7" with my AKG K7XX. If I had let confirmation bias seep in, I'm sure I would have thought it had to be much worse than my Audio-GD NFB-11 dedicated DAC and headphone amp. Instead, I thoroughly enjoyed listening to my K7XX with the S2, contrary to what a high end audio industry would want me to experience. Can't sell better equipment if the perceived difference is negligible.

However, if you truly believe what you wrote, I suggest reading a lot of Bose marketing literature and talking to a lot of Bose owners. Then visit a Bose store. Buy into what Bose consumers believe and what Bose is selling, and you'll come to enjoy Bose speakers better than anything else on the planet!
Transmaniacon likes this.

Your questions are answered: Speaker FAQ
Living room HT: Energy RC-50, Ascend Sierra Horizon w/RAAL, Ascend Sierra 1, PSB Imagine XA | PSA V1500 and CHT SS 18.1 | Denon X4200W | modified Dayton SA1000
Other rooms: CBM-170 SE | SVS SB-1000 | Audio-GD NFB-11 | Parasound Zamp | JBL LSR305
Headphone & Portable AKG K7XX | HE-400i | NAD HP50 | Sony MDR-1A | Soundmagic E50 & E80 | X5ii | DX50 | E12
cel4145 is offline  
post #232 of 362 Old 03-07-2016, 07:43 PM
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 966
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 554 Post(s)
Liked: 331
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post
This is a rationalization that works for those who can't let go of the belief in the superiority of subjective evaluation of audio equipment. Once the veil is lifted, things are different.
Is it? I did not know that. - Thanks

Quote:
For instance, just today, I tried my new Galaxy S2 9.7" with my AKG K7XX. If I had let confirmation bias seep in, I'm sure I would have thought it had to be much worse than my Audio-GD NFB-11 dedicated DAC and headphone amp. Instead, I thoroughly enjoyed listening to my K7XX with the S2, contrary to what a high end audio industry would want me to experience. Can't sell better equipment if the perceived difference is negligible.
Sorry, i didn't understand much of what you wrote here, but I can confirm that I love the AKG K7XX, very nice!

Quote:
However, if you truly believe what you wrote, I suggest reading a lot of Bose marketing literature and talking to a lot of Bose owners. Then visit a Bose store. Buy into what Bose consumers believe and what Bose is selling, and you'll come to enjoy Bose speakers better than anything else on the planet!
Again you lost me! But I will confirm that I like some Bose products. My Bose iPhone Dock is very satisfying in the bathroom.

Thank you for your replies.
Jady Jenkins is offline  
post #233 of 362 Old 03-07-2016, 09:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Alex F.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,256
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 870 Post(s)
Liked: 468
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post
This is a rationalization that works for those who can't let go of the belief in the superiority of subjective evaluation of audio equipment. Once the veil is lifted, things are different.

For instance, just today, I tried my new Galaxy S2 9.7" with my AKG K7XX. If I had let confirmation bias seep in, I'm sure I would have thought it had to be much worse than my Audio-GD NFB-11 dedicated DAC and headphone amp.
In summation, you made a purely subjective evaluation and noted that bias can be avoided simply through willpower.
Jady Jenkins likes this.

Music room: Cary SLI-80 tube integrated amplifier, McIntosh MA6500 integrated amplifier, Quad 99 preamp, Quad 909 power amp, Acoustic Research AR9 loudspeakers, Yamaha CD-N500 CD player, Teac UD-503 DSD DAC, Phase Linear 8000II linear-tracking turntable.
Theater room: Panasonic 65S60 plasma television; Yamaha RX-A2020 (preamp section); Adcom GFA-5503 and GFA-5400 amplifiers; Polk LSi25, LSiC, and LSiF/X loudspeaker system; Velodyne FSR-18 servo-subwoofer.
Alex F. is offline  
post #234 of 362 Old 03-08-2016, 05:34 AM
FMW
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,480
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1653 Post(s)
Liked: 1708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jady Jenkins View Post
He is as God made him, human. He experiences life on earth as a human, and that includes acoustic events. Bias is a valid part of the experience, it isn't an evil. My wife is beautiful, I would hate to be told that I am biased, because that would have a negative implication. It's a polite way (or is it?) of some one telling me I wrong, that she's ugly, and they can provide it to me, by adjusting the lighting or some such thing. And heck, in a certain lighting we can all be made to look ugly. So I like my wife and music with biases, and if you search yourself out, you might just discover that deep down you do to.
I'm not against bias. I really don't have a problem with choosing audio components with it. My goal was simply to understand which audible differences were in the equipment and which were in the bias. I don't buy equipment based on bias controlled comparisons. It isn't necessary. I already know where the equipment-based audible differences are. I buy what I like just like you do.

Quote:
Removing bias, outside of controlled lab experiments, well that's not a good idea. It's especially bad to overlay, over everyday listening experiences. Why, well, they cannot be removed from everyday settings such as peoples homes. Therefore the use of an unnatural, unrelated form of audition is illogical, for determining a persons personal preferences, bias and all.
I suppose that is true if you were actually doing the comparisons in a lab. Our tests were done in home listening rooms and one dealer showroom, the very places people do biased comparisons.

Quote:
To put it another way, from the consumer standpoint, the best possible means of determining a systems suitability, is almost identical to that of buying clothing, one must try it on. Home based auditions of a complete system, in the intended room, from the intended seating position, is by far and away the best audition format.
No doubt about it. Absolutely critical in judging speakers.

Quote:
If you wish to temporarily remove ones ever present biases and other influencers, you will only produce a temporary result, one only occurring within that setting. Put one back into the real-world, and they will likely become dissatisfied, with any choices (buying decisions) that were made, from within that unnatural setting. Look, many have, John Atkinson being the most notable, in our circles.
No unnatural settings involved.

Quote:
John's opinion is as valid as your own, he finds them deceptive. He has also referred to them as being misleading.
His opinion is as valid as mine but his test results aren't.

Quote:
Now the use of the metric that your alluding to (DB ABX), in controlled scientific experiment, is quite another matter altogether. And to be sure there is some very valuable data to be mined.
Yes blind tests are also valuable for testing preference. I have never done such a test but others have.

As a note, I have decided you are argumentative for the sake of argument. No need to respond further. I answered your questions and will answer no others from you. You can read the answers to all future questions by searcing me on the forum. Believe me, I've answered all of them.

Last edited by FMW; 03-08-2016 at 05:39 AM.
FMW is offline  
post #235 of 362 Old 03-08-2016, 06:45 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
balky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,231
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 289 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Oh dear... the sweet part of the thread was a good read while it lasted...

Our scientific lord masters are back on the ground with yet another cycle of the same arguments we have been hearing like forever...

my gut feelings saw this coming anyway... looks like it is time to abandon the thread... ciao...
balky is offline  
post #236 of 362 Old 03-08-2016, 09:33 AM
Senior Member
 
JaytheDreamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Chicago, IL.
Posts: 443
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Find your taste

Interesting thread. Initially I was also thinking why should one compare an Integrated Stereo Amp with an AVR since both serve really different things for dedicated users in each class though AVR seems more practical as an "all purpose" amp. But it really matters what you listen and how you want to listen. If you want an all purpose, good for both movies and music, enjoy the surround feel of movies, have plans to expand the number of speakers etc it might be better to go for an AVR. For me, I am a 2 channel stereo guy (2.1 to be exact with a small sealed sub to support the low end of the spectrum). I give much more importance to music and I like it the two channel way (I don't like listening multi-channel music). Though I have a really good SUHD panel I use it as a supporting device (for music videos and all, occasional movies or shows). So what I did was building my music setup with an SACD player, an HTPC, a DAC, an integrated amp, two towers and a sub then with some acoustic panels and positioning getting the desired sound stage and imaging and finally placing a nice TV in the setup . This is what I wanted and I am happy with it. But if you think you are more into the 5.1 or 7.1 category, tweaking with surround speakers, Dolby technologies, adding speakers, changing them, interested in positioning them etc go with an AVR. It is rather what you are more passionate about. Then you will never loose interest and would be always experimenting. That's the best part!
DaverJ, abd1 and KJSteward like this.

Last edited by JaytheDreamer; 03-08-2016 at 09:46 AM.
JaytheDreamer is offline  
post #237 of 362 Old 03-08-2016, 10:41 AM
FMW
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,480
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1653 Post(s)
Liked: 1708
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaytheDreamer View Post
For me, I am a 2 channel stereo guy (2.1 to be exact with a small sealed sub to support the low end of the spectrum). I give much more importance to music and I like it the two channel way (I don't like listening multi-channel music).!
Are you aware than at AVR can handle two channel music as well as an integrated? It costs less and does much more.
Ratman and lovinthehd like this.
FMW is offline  
post #238 of 362 Old 03-08-2016, 10:43 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
cel4145's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 16,705
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2668 Post(s)
Liked: 3015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex F. View Post
In summation, you made a purely subjective evaluation and noted that bias can be avoided simply through willpower.
LOL

"Willpower" implies an active resistance of the type of confirmation bias being discussed. It's actually a different state of mind.
lovinthehd likes this.

Your questions are answered: Speaker FAQ
Living room HT: Energy RC-50, Ascend Sierra Horizon w/RAAL, Ascend Sierra 1, PSB Imagine XA | PSA V1500 and CHT SS 18.1 | Denon X4200W | modified Dayton SA1000
Other rooms: CBM-170 SE | SVS SB-1000 | Audio-GD NFB-11 | Parasound Zamp | JBL LSR305
Headphone & Portable AKG K7XX | HE-400i | NAD HP50 | Sony MDR-1A | Soundmagic E50 & E80 | X5ii | DX50 | E12
cel4145 is offline  
post #239 of 362 Old 03-08-2016, 10:48 AM
Senior Member
 
JaytheDreamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Chicago, IL.
Posts: 443
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post
Are you aware than at AVR can handle two channel music as well as an integrated? It costs less and does much more.
I am well aware that an AVR or mutli channels can do 2 channel audio. I also know that they are more multi-purpose and do much more (in terms of functions) for less. But I really like some particular amps with a signature sound and I like to tweak them (for examples valves in the input section etc). It is not always the functionality that everyone is looking for. I could get a really top line AVR and surround speakers with the money I spent for just my integrated but the music coming from that amp is enough to make my knee weak. I love it, simple!
JaytheDreamer is offline  
post #240 of 362 Old 03-08-2016, 11:02 AM
FMW
AVS Forum Special Member
 
FMW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,480
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1653 Post(s)
Liked: 1708
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaytheDreamer View Post
I am well aware that an AVR or mutli channels can do 2 channel audio. I also know that they are more multi-purpose and do much more (in terms of functions) for less. But I really like some particular amps with a signature sound and I like to tweak them (for examples valves in the input section etc). It is not always the functionality that everyone is looking for. I could get a really top line AVR and surround speakers with the money I spent for just my integrated but the music coming from that amp is enough to make my knee weak. I love it, simple!
OK. Good luck with the weak knee.
Ratman likes this.
FMW is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 2-Channel Audio

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off