[ipeverywhere]

The Schiit manuals are well worth a read. If you've not read them you're missing a lot of entertainment that comes with being an owner. They are as good or better than their FAQs.

Although, one suggestion: If you could tag the "Written by lawyers" pages it would help me get to the good stuff a lot faster. Thank you.

People actually read those? Dang. Who knew.

No one ever reads those things anyway.

 

[Dogmatrix]

I think your definition is a bit too strict.

From Wikipedia:

"In a blind or blinded experiment, information which may influence the participants of the experiment is withheld (masked or blinded) until after the experiment is complete. Good blinding can reduce or eliminate experimental biases that arise from a participants' expectations, observer's effect on the participants, observer bias, confirmation bias, and other sources."

I think this qualifies.

I agree
I think it would be practically impossible to mount true blind tests in this scenario since anyone turning up at the "Schiitr" would already have a pretty good idea as to what was going on .
What Jason and crew are doing is clearly in the name of good fun and not meant as scientific data .

 

[johnjen]

Interesting...is this a thing now?

Neither the Linn or the Thorens turntables required a 'jump start" back in the day.

I own a Linn LP-12 and I ALWAYS gave it a shove when starting the platter spinning.
And when we were using the Thorens TD-125 we gave it a shove as well.

Why?
Because it took a 'long' time to get up to speed, and letting that band get stretched, repeatedly, was not good for it's longevity.

If you want the platter to start up and stabilize 'effortlessly', get a direct drive, or an idler drive table.

But if you want a TT that focuses on SQ then learn to give the platter a shove at start up.
It's been this way for more decades than probably either of us have been alive.

JJ

 

[vladpetric]

I agree
I think it would be practically impossible to mount true blind tests in this scenario since anyone turning up at the "Schiitr" would already have a pretty good idea as to what was going on .
What Jason and crew are doing is clearly in the name of good fun and not meant as scientific data .

I'm sorry, and really I am not looking to pick a fight here - but what do you mean by a true blind test? According to Wikipedia, if you hide critical information then it is a blind test.

 

[AndreYew]

All a blind test in audio means is that you don't know which device you're listening to at that moment. Eg. you don't know how A, B, and C map to Magni+, Heresy, or Vali 2. Double blind means the person giving the test doesn't know the mapping either, so he or she can't accidentally or intentionally affect your choice. A blind test doesn't mean you don't know what the test is about: usually you know very well what the test is trying to figure out since a good test also tries to select and/or train listeners who have the best chance of passing the test. Some test protocols even let you compare the things you're listening to to known things. Eg. A, B, and C are unknown, but you get to compare against a known Magni+, Heresy, and Vali 2. It all depends on what you're trying to determine with the test.

The goal of all these controls (and more that are not mentioned) is to eliminate causes of a positive result that may have nothing to do with the devices themselves. One thing a lot of audio objectivists don't seem to also consider is the elimination of factors that may cause a negative result, ie. how sensitive is the test itself? Can the test discriminate on known established threshold levels, like say a frequency response dip of a certain depth and width that is known to be audible? After all we calibrate our scopes and meters, so why aren't serious blind tests also calibrated? (This is a soapbox rant and not directed at Schiit's fun tests in particular.)

 

[GearMe]

I own a Linn LP-12 and I ALWAYS gave it a shove when starting the platter spinning.
And when we were using the Thorens TD-125 we gave it a shove as well.

Why?
Because it took a 'long' time to get up to speed, and letting that band get stretched, repeatedly, was not good for it's longevity.

If you want the platter to start up and stabilize 'effortlessly', get a direct drive, or an idler drive table.

But if you want a TT that focuses on SQ then learn to give the platter a shove at start up.
It's been this way for more decades than probably either of us have been alive.

JJ

I think you just like abusing your turntables!

Guess I never felt the need to do that with those tables...kinda figured the manufacturers knew what they'd designed and let it run accordingly.
Honestly, I don't remember it taking a 'long' time for any of my belt-drive turntables to get up to speed. Nor do I remember having to replace the belt that often.

 

[Dogmatrix]

I'm sorry, and really I am not looking to pick a fight here - but what do you mean by a true blind test? According to Wikipedia, if you hide critical information then it is a blind test.

No worries
By true I mean
"a scientific test in which either the people being tested or the person testing them, or both, do not know what is being tested"
Cambridge Dictionary
Since no one is pretending to be conducting science it is of no consequence

 

[vladpetric]

No worries
By true I mean
"a scientific test in which either the people being tested or the person testing them, or both, do not know what is being tested"
Cambridge Dictionary
Since no one is pretending to be conducting science it is of no consequence

That is fine.

Do keep in mind that if the question is "do you prefer a), b), or (n)either" pretty much rules out the strict form of blind testing (the one from the Cambridge Dictionary).

Not using the strict blind testing doesn't make such a test unscientific.

 

[David Aldrich]

No worries
By true I mean
"a scientific test in which either the people being tested or the person testing them, or both, do not know what is being tested"
Cambridge Dictionary
Since no one is pretending to be conducting science it is of no consequence

I was getting a bit drunk setting that up so I didn’t really know what was being tested.

Plus this is a subjective audio test, does anyone really know what’s being tested? If you do, drop me a line I want to start a company with you.

 

[earnmyturns]

Freya+/mono Aegir/KEF LS50

LS50s are rather inefficient, and their impedance can dip well below 8 Ohm (see https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/i...&catid=77:loudspeaker-measurements&Itemid=153). I used to have a pair that was underpowered with a Naim UnitiQute (45W pc into 4 Ohm) and just right with a BelCanto C7R (150W pc into 4 Ohm). If you want to stick with Aegir, other speakers might be better; if you want to stick with LS50s (which are lovely speakers if you like a clean, somewhat liquid sound), Vidar or Rag 2 might be better amp choices.

 

[Dogmatrix]

I was getting a bit drunk setting that up so I didn’t really know what was being tested.

Plus this is a subjective audio test, does anyone really know what’s being tested? If you do, drop me a line I want to start a company with you.

Of course you would need to experiment frequently to establish a base line so all participants achieve a similar level of incoherence , and one unfortunate soul would need to remain sober at all times as a control .

 

[EELawson]

88db speakers are well enough for Aegir 2x

I second this. Two Aejirs work great with my 88 db Paradigms (and a Freya+)

 

[Derrick Swart]

Some news: Jotunheim R boards are here.

Give us a few days, and we'll be shipping (assembly, burn-in, manuals...hilariously, I forgot to finish the manual.)

you're funny

 

[Derrick Swart]

People actually read those? Dang. Who knew.

in this case i would say RTFM because is replacing a power amp, that is not a joke with these things around your head

 

[johnjen]

I think you just like abusing your turntables!

Guess I never felt the need to do that with those tables...kinda figured the manufacturers knew what they'd designed and let it run accordingly.
Honestly, I don't remember it taking a 'long' time for any of my belt-drive turntables to get up to speed. Nor do I remember having to replace the belt that often.

A 'long' time is a relative term between shoving vs not.
And my LP-12 belt is 40+ years old, as is my spare belt, and it still functions.
But of course it does probably need to be replaced, but I don't use it so it just sits, waiting…
hahahahahahahahah

JJ