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 4

post #46 of 2508
Thread Starter 

If only hifi dealers had blind testing rooms and you could see if you could pick out that new DAC from your existing one and a control!

 

I wonder why they don't do that 

post #47 of 2508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

If only hifi dealers had blind testing rooms and you could see if you could pick out that new DAC from your existing one and a control!

 

I wonder why they don't do that 


That sure as hell doesn't help sell $10,000 amps and DACs now does it?

post #48 of 2508


Nick, don't you think you are begging the question here by using the word 'guessing' ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_charles View Post




 there were two sets of tests a first run of 8 where everyone guessed correctly (8/8) 

post #49 of 2508

Quote:

Originally Posted by fzman View Post


Nick, don't you think you are begging the question here by using the word 'guessing' ?


------------------------Guess--------------------------------


guess (gs)
v. guessed, guess·ing, guess·es
v.tr.
1.
a. To predict (a result or an event) without sufficient information.
b. To assume, presume, or assert (a fact) without sufficient information.
2. To form a correct estimate or conjecture of: guessed the answer.
3. To suppose; think: I guess he was wrong.
v.intr.
1. To make an estimate or conjecture: We could only guess at her motives.
2. To estimate or conjecture correctly.
n.
1. An act or instance of guessing.
2. A conjecture arrived at by guessing.
-------------------------------------------------------------

post #50 of 2508
Thread Starter 

The most recent edition of What Hifi magazine has a blind test between a £250 stereo amp and a £1k plus AV amp for music only. The Stereo amp wins easily.

 

But all amps sound the same, don't they!?

post #51 of 2508
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

The most recent edition of What Hifi magazine has a blind test between a £250 stereo amp and a £1k plus AV amp for music only. The Stereo amp wins easily.

 

But all amps sound the same, don't they!?



I did reference the Carver Stereophile challenge - where a $600 Carver amp is nulled by Bob Carver (with RadioShack parts overnite in his hotel room) against a "five figure tube amp"

 

after adjusting frequency response and output impedance to match, Stereophile's "Golden Ears" couldn't tell the difference in blind listening

 

so the literal "all amps sound the same" is a strawman - amps can differ in frequency response and output damping by enough to be audibly distinguished under DBT conditions

 

but as a understood and controllable difference it is "uninteresting" in an engineering sense - it means designers just build in EQ to give their amps unique "voices" - not that there is some mysterious superiority of audiophile tweaks, parts or tubes vs SS in amplifiers


Edited by jcx - 5/11/10 at 5:27pm
post #52 of 2508
Thread Starter 

The doctoring of amps so that they sound the same, and then exclaiming after a blind test that they sound the same, does seen somewhat pointless and odd.

post #53 of 2508

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post

The doctoring of amps so that they sound the same, and then exclaiming after a blind test that they sound the same, does seen somewhat pointless and odd.


The point became very clear when the prices of the amps involved were compared.    Very revelatory indeed, but us audiophiles tend to shy away from such potential slander.   We use cables as the punching bag to ventilate on this pesky issue of value for money.

post #54 of 2508
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post





I did reference the Carver Stereophile challenge - where a $600 Carver amp is nulled by Bob Carver (with RadioShack parts overnite in his hotel room) against a "five figure tube amp"

 

after adjusting frequency response and output impedance to match, Stereophile's "Golden Ears" couldn't tell the difference in blind listening

 

so the literal "all amps sound the same" is a strawman - amps can differ in frequency response and output damping by enough to be audibly distinguished under DBT conditions

 

but as a understood and controllable difference it is "uninteresting" in an engineering sense - it means designers just build in EQ to give their amps unique "voices" - not that there is some mysterious superiority of audiophile tweaks, parts or tubes vs SS in amplifiers

 

I understood the Carver challenge as a demonstration that the "tube sound" could be easily replicated in an SS amp.  The real strawman is reducing the statement "all solid state amps built in compliance with minimum performance standards sound the same" to the statement "all amps sound the same".  Nobody who expects to be taken seriously makes the second statement, while the first claim is supported by some empirical evidence. 
 

post #55 of 2508
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post





I did reference the Carver Stereophile challenge - where a $600 Carver amp is nulled by Bob Carver (with RadioShack parts overnite in his hotel room) against a "five figure tube amp"

 

after adjusting frequency response and output impedance to match, Stereophile's "Golden Ears" couldn't tell the difference in blind listening

 

so the literal "all amps sound the same" is a strawman - amps can differ in frequency response and output damping by enough to be audibly distinguished under DBT conditions

 

but as a understood and controllable difference it is "uninteresting" in an engineering sense - it means designers just build in EQ to give their amps unique "voices" - not that there is some mysterious superiority of audiophile tweaks, parts or tubes vs SS in amplifiers

 

I understood the Carver challenge as a demonstration that the "tube sound" could be easily replicated in an SS amp.  The real strawman is reducing the statement "all solid state amps built in compliance with minimum performance standards sound the same" to the statement "all amps sound the same".  Nobody who expects to be taken seriously makes the second statement, while the first statement is supported by some empirical evidence. 
 


Edited by terriblepaulz - 5/12/10 at 3:03pm
post #56 of 2508
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post





I did reference the Carver Stereophile challenge - where a $600 Carver amp is nulled by Bob Carver (with RadioShack parts overnite in his hotel room) against a "five figure tube amp"

 

after adjusting frequency response and output impedance to match, Stereophile's "Golden Ears" couldn't tell the difference in blind listening

 

so the literal "all amps sound the same" is a strawman - amps can differ in frequency response and output damping by enough to be audibly distinguished under DBT conditions

 

but as a understood and controllable difference it is "uninteresting" in an engineering sense - it means designers just build in EQ to give their amps unique "voices" - not that there is some mysterious superiority of audiophile tweaks, parts or tubes vs SS in amplifiers



It begs the question that if the carver $600 amp can beat *five figure tube amps" then WHY is carver building and selling near five figure tube amps on ebay.

post #57 of 2508

for Profit?

 

the Challenge didn't change the market, he couldn't sell his SS for what he can a tube amp given "High End Audiophile" expectations

 

 

a few years ago I was at a BAS talk where a US manufacturer offering what they felt were good value power amps said they came to the conclusion they would have to close the doors or appeal to "High End" predjudices

 

he went on about the machined Al case, careful matching of anodizing, "jewelry" connectors, exotic attenuator - but never once said anything about upgrading the amp circuitry

 

they are now very sucessful, selling more product - and charging 4x more per watt 

post #58 of 2508
Quote:
Originally Posted by ford2 View Post





It begs the question that if the carver $600 amp can beat *five figure tube amps" then WHY is carver building and selling near five figure tube amps on ebay.

Because people will buy them.

post #59 of 2508

Interesting thread this.  After much experimentation myself, I'm leaning towards the thought that tonal differences are easy to spot, but differences in detail are somewhat harder, so a short blind test of two tonally-identical components could easily result in people not being able to tell the difference.

 

I'd have to find the thread, but a kid single-blind-tested his father on cables and his father picked them every time, but that was gear he was intimately familiar with.  With what I know now, I'm willing to bet I could probably set up DBTs myself which would guarantee a negative or positive result for different types of components by deliberately matching or mis-matching components respectively, eg: a grossly under-powered amp for large speakers that require a lot of power tested at a moderately loud volume with orchestral works against a much more powerful amp.

post #60 of 2508

^I'll just add one thing. If/when you DBT cables, be sure to volume match. It's easy to overlook, but is an extremely important variable to eliminate.

 

P.S. I like the quote you've got in your signature.

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