Powercords

LOL now i'm really wondering what systems some of you have. i'm imagining:

$100 dvd player from best buy ---> the cables that came with the dvd player ---> nad 3020 ---> electrcal cord ---> wilson watt puppies
(though youre probably concerned over maybe having spent a bit too much on the nad, after all, it got many good reviews which would have irrevocably biased you towards it. )

seriously though, i'm genuinely interested in what your systems are?

but i'm betting some of you would be francis bacons have covered your arses with some slightly more expensive cables and components?(just in case you might be wrong about all this...)

...though i'm sure you could justify it by saying you couldnt find a lesser priced component or cable that didnt have an 'engineering flaw'...

now i admit i dont know as much about the science of hifi as most of you, but i stake my position, which is more on the fence than either side, on what seem to me to be two obvious truths:
most db abx tests dont prove differnces are indistinguishable, just that we cant remember them very long,
and secondly, on many occasions have i (and many others) had girlfriends comment on the new component. and while obviously mine would expect it to sound better knowing that i dont downgrade, she discribes the almost the exact same changes over the old system that i also hear. and she has never read a hifi magazine or website in her life and has no idea what sound qualities different systems can/should have. how'd you explain that?

b

Well, she's biased too. No reason for it. She might even be mad at you for buying something for you and not her, but she still thinks it sounds better because she's biased. If you blindfolded her and then made her listen, then she wouldn't be biased anymore.

See? Simple.

The same theory that says all amplifiers are the same also says that all transports are the same, so its certainly possible. A $49.99 wal-mart DVD player is supposed to sound exactly the same as a product like a Simaudio Moon Orbiter or Linn Unidisk. In theory a Sony Discman with an optical out should sound the same as the Simaudio. And of course, whether that optical cable connecting the discman is glass or not doesnt matter, because digital is digital, so all digital cables sound exactly the same as they are just pushing bits.

Don't stop there!

Even that is only partially realized potential. The ideally optimized system for every application is:

Cheapest source you can possibly find with acceptable features, cheapest integrated amp or receiver with sufficient watts, cheapest wires (included with cheap gear is perfect), spend ALL the rest on big-time speakers and acoustic treatments. Only speakers and room matter. Everything else is window dressing, i.e. of no sonic significance. If you think anything else, you are a hapless automaton of the audiophile market and press.

If you think anything else, we weep for you and your wallet. Your decisions must follow this one golden road or you are lost. If you do not choose willfully, you will be forcefully assimilated.

I've often heard the criticism that DB testing must be flawed because it "never reveals an audible difference".That statement is simply not true.

DB testing can and does reveal differences when they actually exist. Look for articles by Floyd Toole. His tests show that most listeners can easily hear the difference between a decent speaker and a really good speaker in a DBT.

To experience for yourself how ABX testing can display differences that you can hear with your own ears, check out this website

This website also a good place to learn how hard it is for human ears to detect alterations in a signal that are less than 1%. Once you learn how hard this is, you may believe an audio engineer when he tells you that you can't hear the difference between, for example, 0.05% THD and 0.03% THD.

Why this aversion blind testing? How many times have you seen someone who is intently focussed on music close their eyes? Anyone who claims that seeing a component is necessary to evaluate it's SOUND has an agenda that they're trying to hide.

Nobody is seriously saying that you should go out and buy the cheapest electronics you can find. We all know that there is a lower limit below which shoddy engineering and construction DO degrade sound quality. Even when you reach the point at which decent quality, new components sound the same, there are plenty of reasons to buy a better-engineered, better-built component-- it will last longer, look better, be more reliable, and continue to sound great year after year.

Bevan said:

LOL now i'm really wondering what systems some of you have. i'm imagining:


seriously though, i'm genuinely interested in what your systems are?

Click to expand...

Bevan said:

It is really irrelevant what I have, isn't it? But, I do have 2 boomboxes, for your curiosity

And, if I have something fancy, it would be because I like fancy, not because I was fooled by something that looked fancy, or pretended to be fancy, or was claimed it was fancy.

but i'm betting some of you would be francis bacons have covered your arses with some slightly more expensive cables and components?(just in case you might be wrong about all this...)

Not to worry, if the evidence indicates we are wrong, so be it. This is not religion, is it?


now i admit i dont know as much about the science of hifi as most of you, but i stake my position, which is more on the fence than either side, on what seem to me to be two obvious truths:
most db abx tests dont prove differnces are indistinguishable, just that we cant remember them very long,

Well, if you cannot remember them long enough, why is it you remember them long enough when you can see the components you compare? Or others? Or, why is it that other self proclaimed 'golden ears' need a very long time to hear differences? They would disagree with you about memory.
But, on this memory, we agree



and secondly, on many occasions have i (and many others) had girlfriends comment on the new component. and while obviously mine would expect it to sound better knowing that i dont downgrade, she discribes the almost the exact same changes over the old system that i also hear. and she has never read a hifi magazine or website in her life and has no idea what sound qualities different systems can/should have. how'd you explain that?

She hasn't been around you long enough to pick up the audio lingo??? No, she has no bias immunity certification card; I guarantee it.

How often doe she miss? Maybe you forget those non hits???

Click to expand...

DaveOCP said:

The same theory that says all amplifiers are the same also says that all transports are the same, so its certainly possible.

Click to expand...

DaveOCP said:

Obviously that cannot be a theory, not a scientific one as it is not supported by data, required for it to be such a theory. But, what non scientist are really saying by a 'theory' is that they are guessing, speculating.

A $49.99 wal-mart DVD player is supposed to sound exactly the same as a product like a Simaudio Moon Orbiter or Linn Unidisk.

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. You are biased from the outset because you think the expensive one must sound different and better.

Guess again. The $ensible $ound compared an RCA $80 Cd player, carousel one at that, with ones costing in the $1000s. You don't really want to know the outcome.


In theory a Sony Discman with an optical out should sound the same as the Simaudio. And of course, whether that optical cable connecting the discman is glass or not doesnt matter, because digital is digital, so all digital cables sound exactly the same as they are just pushing bits.

You just need to show some credible evidence that it does matter. Speculating is easy, isn't it? Having the facts is not.

Click to expand...

Kurt C. said:

Why this aversion blind testing? .

Click to expand...

Someone might have to recant and renounce their belief system
If they all did that, what would happen to the audio marketplace? Lots of folks unemployed, so the marketeers are working overtime

Nobody is seriously saying that you should go out and buy the cheapest electronics you can find. We all know that there is a lower limit below which shoddy engineering and construction DO degrade sound quality. Even when you reach the point at which decent quality, new components sound the same, there are plenty of reasons to buy a better-engineered, better-built component-- it will last longer, look better, be more reliable, and continue to sound great year after year.

Click to expand...

...or in the third hour of a DBT when an inferior 100 watt amp starts to break down due to cheap power supplies and lack of heat sinks. Very few talk about how these units hold up after hours of use, or when high temperatures make units too hot to handle...

something that occured to me today regarding the 'placebo effect',

if subjective bias is so powerfull that it can make someone hear something that is not there(which i know it can), wont it also be able to make someone hear 'the same' when infact there is an a provably audible difference?

how do we know that the participants in the dbabx test didnt all go into the experiment thinking like mtrycrafts at al?

You dont. Thats exactly why using ONLY a db abx test cannot conclusively prove or disprove that differences in transistor amps, transports, etc. are all figments of the imagination.

Another problem is that our ability to remember minute differences in audio detail is extremely short, usually just a few seconds. Personally, I do not believe that all amps sound identical, but I believe they sound close enough that I need to pick out a certain small detail and focus on it in order to determine which amp I feel reproduces it more to my liking. When I A\Bed the PS Audio cord, I picked out a 4 second clip, just a few drum hits and a cymbal crash. I listened to the same 4 second clip with the stock cord about 6 times in a row, and tried to remember the exact details as best I could. I then swapped AC cords, and did the same 4 second clip another 6 times. To me it sounded much better with the PS cord in place, so I kept it. That method is what works best for me, so thats what I use.

Bevan said:

if subjective bias is so powerful that it can make someone hear something that is not there(which I know it can), wont it also be able to make someone hear 'the same' when in fact there is an a provably audible difference?

Click to expand...

Yes...and no. If the "provably audible difference" is very very small, then yes. But an obvious difference should be obvious to all. Even the most stubborn.

DaveOCP said:

You dont. Thats exactly why using ONLY a db abx test cannot conclusively prove or disprove that differences in transistor amps, transports, etc. are all figments of the imagination.

Click to expand...

This is just wrong. While you don't need to do an abx test to prove or disprove something, you can use only an abx test to prove something. Want an example? ABX an old phonograph and a CD player. Bet 100% of the time even the least experienced listener will be able to tell you which is which.

Heck, if that statement was correct, then why has medical science used this type of protocol to test drugs all these years? If an ABX can't prove that differences in audio equipment exist, how can it prove that differences in drugs exist?

A/B/X tests prove conclusively that you cannot reliably distinguish between two different amps/receivers/cd players etc. given the usual caveats that the test is conducted properly by being truly double-blind and all levels are matched. It is precisely because auditory memory is so short. Ironically, the fact that auditory memory is so short is often the reason cited by the naysayers against such a test.

So if you listen sighted with all your normal human biases in play you may think you prefer one over the other. Then when the sight is removed and the abx test is conducted you cannot pick which one is the one you initially preferred. So why did you prefer it in the first place? Because you were biased by the knowlege of which one was actually playing.

Tom Andry said:

This is just wrong. While you don't need to do an abx test to prove or disprove something, you can use only an abx test to prove something. Want an example? ABX an old phonograph and a CD player. Bet 100% of the time even the least experienced listener will be able to tell you which is which.

Heck, if that statement was correct, then why has medical science used this type of protocol to test drugs all these years? If an ABX can't prove that differences in audio equipment exist, how can it prove that differences in drugs exist?

Click to expand...

Sure, any Joe average off the street would probably be able to tell the difference between a phonograph and CD. But would he be able to tell the difference between say, an mp3 at 128kbs and one at 192kbps? Probably not. Does that mean there is no sonic difference between the two? Absolutely not.

Bevan said:

if subjective bias is so powerfull that it can make someone hear something that is not there(which i know it can), wont it also be able to make someone hear 'the same' when infact there is an a provably audible difference?

how do we know that the participants in the dbabx test didnt all go into the experiment thinking like mtrycrafts at al?

Click to expand...

Actually, I would go into a DBT listening session like most humans, looking for differences as that is human nature thanks to evolution, not ID

And, you would not be testing me in the first place but you, and you do want to hear a difference, right? So, it would be you who would be in the hot seat responding to people who will say you have hearing problem if you couldn't hear differences To me, no big deal either way.

MDS said:

A/B/X tests prove conclusively that you cannot reliably distinguish between two different amps/receivers/cd players etc. given the usual caveats that the test is conducted properly by being truly double-blind and all levels are matched. It is precisely because auditory memory is so short. Ironically, the fact that auditory memory is so short is often the reason cited by the naysayers against such a test.

So if you listen sighted with all your normal human biases in play you may think you prefer one over the other. Then when the sight is removed and the abx test is conducted you cannot pick which one is the one you initially preferred. So why did you prefer it in the first place? Because you were biased by the knowlege of which one was actually playing.

Click to expand...

OR, why do people make a conscious differentiation between two test signals when no components are really switched but the same one presented twice??? Human nature to make selections, pick out difference.

DaveOCP said:

But would he be able to tell the difference between say, an mp3 at 128kbs and one at 192kbps? Probably not. Does that mean there is no sonic difference between the two? Absolutely not.

Click to expand...

An assumption not warranted. Proven in experioments that only extra training matters, not being a Joe6pack.

DaveOCP said:

Sure, any Joe average off the street would probably be able to tell the difference between a phonograph and CD. But would he be able to tell the difference between say, an mp3 at 128kbs and one at 192kbps? Probably not. Does that mean there is no sonic difference between the two? Absolutely not.

Click to expand...

If a tree falls in the forrest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound? If you can't hear it, for all intents and purposes, it made no sound to YOU.


Sure there is a difference between 128 kbps and 192 kbps. For one thing, at 128 kbps most encoders will sharply roll off all frequencies above 16 kHz. If you can easily hear higher than that you may be able to pick out which is which. But, that's not the point.

The point is whether or not you could tell which amp was amplifying the 128 kbps MP3. If a statiscally significant number of people cannot differentiate between the two amps then there is no difference. As you say, there very well could be measurable differences, but if they cannot be heard then again they are irrelevant - just like the tree.

MDS said:

If a tree falls in the forrest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

Click to expand...

.....MDS, along the same lines, if a man is standing DEEP in the woods by himself, and voices his opinion LOUDLY, and a woman is not there to hear his opinion, is he STILL wrong?.....