Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Testing audiophile claims and myths
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Testing audiophile claims and myths - Page 3

post #31 of 2956
Thread Starter 

Thanks for all the thanks! Up to 10 now, including the alleged one where wire coat hangers were used along with cables and another where the founder of Linn gets his comeuppance! 

post #32 of 2956


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Erik View Post

There are wide differences in amplifier build quality. A lot of the cheap ones are, well, cheap. If you're cool with a third world el discounto power transformer smoking off after a few years (and assuming you have proper insurance coverage and, hopefully, a sprinkler system and fresh batteries in your smoke alarm), then you can save plenty of money. If you want an amp built correctly with reliable parts, you will have to spend some money. Further, the cheap tube amps are on PCBs, which can be difficult or impossible to repair if something goes wrong.

 

You make valid points about a basis other than sound for selecting an amp.  Features, reliability, cost, appearance are all good reasons to select one amp over another.
 

post #33 of 2956

Good collection in the opening post there Prog Rock Man.

 

 

On the subject of amps the quality is indeed important; I was lurking over at DiyAudio.com earlier and there is a thread there that is very sad about the quality of a UK designed / Taiwan manufactured amp (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/166250-musical-fidelity-p150-owners-take-note.html).

post #34 of 2956

The Spanish Website matrixhifi.com has a whole load of blind tests, pruebas ciegas as they call them...


Edited by nick_charles - 5/7/10 at 12:58am
post #35 of 2956

Null tests could be interesting. Something like the following . . .

 

http://web.mac.com/davewronski/audio/null.html

 

"Better sounding" cable to the positive terminal of a transducer and stock cable connected to the negative terminal. Feed both cables the same signal--music, whatever. (This can/is done with amplifiers.) The resulting sound is the difference.

 

Can anyone think of the shortcoming(s) of such a test?

 

 

.


Edited by JohnFerrier - 5/7/10 at 3:04am
post #36 of 2956

I like the idea of a null test!

post #37 of 2956
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnFerrier View Post

Null tests could be interesting. Something like the following . . .

 

http://web.mac.com/davewronski/audio/null.html

 

"Better sounding" cable to the positive terminal of a transducer and stock cable connected to the negative terminal. Feed both cables the same signal--music, whatever. (This can/is done with amplifiers.) The resulting sound is the difference.

 

Can anyone think of the shortcoming(s) of such a test?

 

 

.


My understanding of that test is that with the first two cables you can actually hear the difference, but with the second two you cannot hear a difference. Is that correct?

post #38 of 2956
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leny View Post

Good collection in the opening post there Prog Rock Man.

 

 

On the subject of amps the quality is indeed important; I was lurking over at DiyAudio.com earlier and there is a thread there that is very sad about the quality of a UK designed / Taiwan manufactured amp (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/166250-musical-fidelity-p150-owners-take-note.html).


My Musical Fidelity X-CANV2 turned out to have the insides from an X-CANS, the original version. I received a personal apology from Antony Michealson and a free X-CANV8P. Result!

post #39 of 2956
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_charles View Post

The Spanish Website matrixhifi.com has a whole load of blind tests, pruebas ciegas as they call them...


Thanks, test added to the list.

post #40 of 2956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post




My understanding of that test is that with the first two cables you can actually hear the difference, but with the second two you cannot hear a difference. Is that correct?



Probably not a great example for this thread, but you have to look carefully at what he is doing. Notice that he clicks a button that turns white when he is doing the comparison. It's also when you don't hear anything.

post #41 of 2956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

12 - AVReview. Blind cable test. April 2008

 

Some of AVR's forum members attended at a Sevenoaks hifi shop and listened to the same kit with two cheap Maplins cables at £2 and £8 and a Chord Signature at £500. They found the cheaper Maplins cable easy to differentiate  and the more expensive harder to differentiate from the Chord. Their resident sceptic agreed he could hear differences. The final conclusion was;

 

....from our sample of 20 near-individual tests, we got 14 correct answers. That works out at 70 per cent correct....

 

So that is the second ABX to join What Hifi which suggests there is indeed a difference.

 

http://www.avreview.co.uk/news/article/mps/uan/1863#ixzz0nGpGRfCB

 


The article states that the results were not statistically significant. Also if you read the article there were two sets of tests a first run of 8 where everyone guessed correctly (8/8) then a set of 12 with a different low end cable - the results of this was 6/12 or 50% or exactly chance.

 

To lump these results together is misleading as they were 2 different conditions. The first results being very close to significant, you really need 10 trials, but it would appear very likely that the cheapo *was* different, and a second which was 50% or completely random suggesting no audible difference between the £500 and £8 cable.

post #42 of 2956
Thread Starter 

I agree that the AVReview tests is the weakest and most obviously flawed. I put it in because it is interesting that two businesses which rely on reviews have found differences, but other more independent reviews have not.

post #43 of 2956
Thread Starter 

Here is a nice picture of Harman's blind testing room.........

 

200906_harman.jpg

 

....with its automatic speaker shuffling system! 

post #44 of 2956
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

Here is a nice picture of Harman's blind testing room.........

 

.

.

.

 

....with its automatic speaker shuffling system! 



Wow!

 

Double-blind testing of Ipod Music Stations at Harman International 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEEozn2tpAg

 

tonmeister86's Channel

http://www.youtube.com/user/tonmeister86

 

Nice to have a DBT section at Head-Fi ! ! !

post #45 of 2956

Very nice meta-study. Now if only I could get that irrational urge to upgrade my DAC away :)

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Testing audiophile claims and myths