When to Add External Amplification to an A/V Receiver

[Goliath]

You are assuming a speaker is a simple resistor. It is NOT. You are assuming an audio signal is a simple steady state tone. It is NOT. There are many factors that affect sound quality. I am not in the camp that ALL amps sound the same if not driven beyond their linearity.

I have made no such assumptions. No where in my post did I claim that music was steady state nor have I claimed that speakers are simple resistors. What's going on here, Gene? You really need to resort to straw man arguments?

No one is even talking about blind tests! Why bring it up???

We are discussing amplifier power. The applied voltage and the load impedance define the power and define what gets sent to the speaker terminals. It's not really mystery meat. The laws of the universe are quite fixed in this regard.

If an amp was a perfect voltage source and a speaker was a linear device then and ONLY then would I agree with most of your statements.

None of this has anything to do with what I posted. You apply a voltage, its load impedance will draw a current up until the limit the amplifier can provide. If the load requires 10W to hit 70 dB then you could add 500W and it would still draw 10W. You seem to be implying that the extra headroom would somehow result in better sound.

Tell me something, if the load can only 'see' the voltage applied to its terminals, then how could it take notice of any additional power reserves? Unused power is ... unused. How does the speaker become cogisant of the additional reserves? Please explain.

If you truly believe that all amps sound the same when not over driven than more power to you. It certainly saves you a lot of money in the long run. I really don't care to convince you otherwise as I stand behind my testing, measurements and analysis to formulate my own opinions.

Since you are making a big deal out of this 'all amps sound the same' myth, let me clarify and say that I don't think all amps sound the same. However the overwhelming evidence points in that direction, like it or not.

 

[Goliath]

How the F*CK does it matter if an amp test is sighted or blind? If someone else is doing the switching, and its level matched, there is no way for the listener to know which amp is playing.

Then its clearly not sighted. If it was sighted, you would know which amp was playing at all times.

It blows my mind how one can over generalize with little or no real world experience or analysis rather than to keep an open mind and understand the complexity of an audio system.

You don't know what my experience is, nor do you know what I've tested or not tested. You are just making assumptions here.

This is why the whole DBT thing often frustrates me. It allows people to dumb down the whole audio experience into generalizations like:

Gene, the minute you said that power amps could drive speakers better at lower levels is the minute you opened up this can of worms! You basically turned this into mystical discussion.

MP3 is similarly good as CD

• All amps sound similarly good
• $200 speakers sound similarly good to $2k speakers
• etc

The Harmon tests show that large groups of people prefer speakers that measure well on-axis with a flat response curve. They compared speakers ranging from several hundred dollars to several thousand. If you disagree with actual evidence conducted over at Harman then why not contact Floyd Toole and Sean Olive and tell them that they're wrong and you're right!

Is there anything inherently wrong about good amps sounding similar? Where is your evidence to the contrary, other than your strongly opinionated anecdotal reports?

 

[gene]

I have made no such assumptions. No where in my post did I claim that music was steady state nor have I claimed that speakers are simple resistors. What's going on here, Gene? You really need to resort to straw man arguments?

No one is even talking about blind tests! Why bring it up???

We are discussing amplifier power. The applied voltage and the load impedance define the power and define what gets sent to the speaker terminals. It's not really mystery meat. The laws of the universe are quite fixed in this regard.



None of this has anything to do with what I posted. You apply a voltage, its load impedance will draw a current up until the limit the amplifier can provide. If the load requires 10W to hit 70 dB then you could add 500W and it would still draw 10W. You seem to be implying that the extra headroom would somehow result in better sound.

Tell me something, if the load can only 'see' the voltage applied to its terminals, then how could it take notice of any additional power reserves? Unused power is ... unused. How does the speaker become cogisant of the additional reserves? Please explain.



Since you are making a big deal out of this 'all amps sound the same' myth, let me clarify and say that I don't think all amps sound the same. However the overwhelming evidence points in that direction, like it or not.

Again you assume a speaker will only draw a fixed wattage. It doesn't. Amplifiers can and do current limit. If an amplifier output impedance is high, the resultant frequency response when driving a complex load impedance will vary compared to one that has a low output impedance. Even if both amps aren't running outside of their linearity, they can sound different. If you don't believe me than I encourage you to buy the Class D Panasonic receiver audiophiles were going nuts over about 7 years ago. When ran a controlled listening test between this receiver, a Pioneer Receiver ICE amp and a Yamaha AV Receiver with a linear amp. Our listening tests were done at low listening levels (70dB calibrated). Everyone on the listening panel unanimously preferred the Yamaha over the Panasonic while some preferred the Yamaha over the Pioneer. This was especially true when driving low impedance speakers that the Pioneer was unable to handle b/c of ICE limitations above 3kHz. Again on paper all of the amps were capable of delivering 100wpc but in reality only the Yamaha did it cleanly and into a 4 ohm load.

Until you hear a speaker system that is virtually free of dynamic compression on an amplifier that is able to deliver massive amounts of clean power, you likely won't understand this and I certainly can't understand it for you. I can only hope to explain it.

 

[gene]

Then its clearly not sighted. If it was sighted, you would know which amp was playing at all times.



You don't know what my experience is, nor do you know what I've tested or not tested. You are just making assumptions here.



Gene, the minute you said that power amps could drive speakers better at lower levels is the minute you opened up this can of worms! You basically turned this into mystical discussion.


The Harmon tests show that large groups of people prefer speakers that measure well on-axis with a flat response curve. They compared speakers ranging from several hundred dollars to several thousand. If you disagree with actual evidence conducted over at Harman then why not contact Floyd Toole and Sean Olive and tell them that they're wrong and you're right!

Is there anything inherently wrong about good amps sounding similar? Where is your evidence to the contrary, other than your strongly opinionated anecdotal reports?

Now you're playing with semantics regarding sighted vs blind. The listeners can still see the amps in the room so in the strictest sense, its sighted. They just can't identify which is playing.

My assumption of your knowledge/experience is based on your prior statements and lack of understanding how an amp can at the very minimum behave differently than another amp when not being over driven.

Good amps can and often do sound similar. Now just how do we define "good"?

Have you read the Harman Tests? The only expensive speaker they tested was a $4k MartinLogan ESL vs conventional dome speakers. They do their tests in mono, single speaker. ML's project more direct sound with narrower dispersion than conventional dome speakers and are at a disadvantage when only one is playing center of the room. The beaming effect that they offer and people often love was nullified in mono. I often disagree with Sean Olive and Dr. Floyd Toole. You must have missed NOT only my article but my video as well which BTW they peer reviewed!

I even reviewed their precious Infinity P363 speakers which are a good speaker for $400/pr but not "similarly good" to ANY speaker I've every measured or reviewed costing significantly more, certainly not in the $4k/pr range like their "research" has claimed.

Loudspeaker Myths: Separating the Scientific Facts from Science Fiction | Audioholics

BTW its Harman, not Harmon. May be a good idea to spell the company name right that you are quoting.

 

[Goliath]

Again you assume a speaker will only draw a fixed wattage. It doesn't. Amplifiers can and do current limit.

Amplifiers current limiting at low levels? Well it stands to reason current would be low at low levels. Not a problem if you're driving a load within the limits that the amplifier can provide.

If an amplifier output impedance is high, the resultant frequency response when driving a complex load impedance will vary compared to one that has a low output impedance.[/QUOTE]

I never disputed that. How many solid state amplifiers have a high enough output impedance for this to be a problem? I've never been a fan of Class D.

When ran a controlled listening test between this receiver, a Pioneer Receiver ICE amp and a Yamaha AV Receiver with a linear amp. Our listening tests were done at low listening levels (70dB calibrated). Everyone on the listening panel unanimously preferred the Yamaha over the Panasonic while some preferred the Yamaha over the Pioneer.

So you compared a receiver that is known to have a high output impedance and therefore a variable frequency response depending on the load connected to it, and compared this with other receivers that had a low output impedance. Well clearly we know why the differences existed! No mystery involved.

Until you hear a speaker system that is virtually free of dynamic compression on an amplifier that is able to deliver massive amounts of clean power, you likely won't understand this and I certainly can't understand it for you. I can only hope to explain it.

And you seem to think that being dynamically free of compression is somehow contingent on massive amounts of clean power. That's just an assumption gene. If I took the same speakers, turned the volume down to a reasonable level, the power requirements would be significantly lower. How would adding massive amounts of clean power change anything at a lower level?

 

[gene]

Amplifiers current limiting at low levels? Well it stands to reason current would be low at low levels. Not a problem if you're driving a load within the limits that the amplifier can provide.

If an amplifier output impedance is high, the resultant frequency response when driving a complex load impedance will vary compared to one that has a low output impedance.

I never disputed that. How many solid state amplifiers have a high enough output impedance for this to be a problem? I've never been a fan of Class D.



So you compared a receiver that is known to have a high output impedance and therefore a variable frequency response depending on the load connected to it, and compared this with other receivers that had a low output impedance. Well clearly we know why the differences existed! No mystery involved.



And you seem to think that being dynamically free of compression is somehow contingent on massive amounts of clean power. That's just an assumption gene. If I took the same speakers, turned the volume down to a reasonable level, the power requirements would be significantly lower. How would adding massive amounts of clean power change anything at a lower level?

Massive power for transients. Yes I am a BIG believer of this.

Most high power amps (with the exception of some shoddy Class D amps) have lots of output devices, lots of current capability and very low output impedance. They act more like an ideal voltage source than lower power amps, especially the ones found in receivers.

When we tested the 3 receivers at the time, I didn't measure them. I just did sound comparisons to see if we could hear differences. It was afterwards that I discovered why. The Pioneer ICE has a low output impedance but it massively current limits above 3kHz as you can see here:

Pioneer Elite SC-07 A/V Receiver Review | Audioholics

When I wrote this review, I received tons of hate mail from AVS Pioneer ICE fanboys saying I didn't know how to test an amp. At the same time, I received praising emails from loudspeaker manufacturers thanking me for revealing a real weakness in some ICE modules used in receivers that were causing field problems with their 4 ohm speakers. This is something that was missed in print magazines b/c they only test power at 1kHz. Pioneer engineers even thanked me at CEDIA that same year. ICE was removed from their receiver line just 1-2 short years thereafter, coincidence? I think not.

And I would agree with you about the high dynamic speaker playing at low level sounding just as good on all amps but my experiences have changed that belief. When I switched from the Classe CT-2300 to the Axiom A1400 amp on my Status 8T speakers, everyone (myself included) preferred the sound of the Classe. The bass was much tighter and more controlled on the Classe which boggled my mind b/c the Axiom amp was more powerful on the bench. However the Classe distortion profile was much cleaner and the output impedance much lower and not varying Frequency response depending on load conditions. The Classe was the better voltage source, not to mention it was also much lower in noise.

 

[Goliath]

Now you're playing with semantics regarding sighted vs blind. The listeners can still see the amps in the room so in the strictest sense, its sighted. They just can't identify which is playing.

Goodness gene! That's what a sighted test is! We aren't talking about literal blind ... as in putting on a blind fold. The entire point is not knowing which amp is being compared - the knowledge of knowing or not knowing is what differentiates between sighted or blind. If sighted, you are fully aware at all times which amplifiers are playing. It's not difficult to understand!

My assumption of your knowledge/experience is based on your prior statements and lack of understanding how an amp can at the very minimum behave differently than another amp when not being over driven.

Sure, with a high output impedance. Good thing that most good amplifiers don't have a high enough output impedance to cause frequency response variations that are large enough to be audible, like your Panasonic example.

Good amps can and often do sound similar. Now just how do we define "good"?

An amp that has a flat response, low output impedance and is not over-driven into clipping could be considered 'good'.

Have you read the Harman Tests? The only expensive speaker they tested was a $4k MartinLogan ESL vs conventional dome speakers. They do their tests in mono, single speaker. ML's project more direct sound with narrower dispersion than conventional dome speakers and are at a disadvantage when only one is playing center of the room. The beaming effect that they offer and people often love was nullified in mono. I often disagree with Sean Olive and Dr. Floyd Toole. You must have missed NOT only my article but my video as well which BTW they peer reviewed!

They should bow down to you then, because you appear to be so incredibly knowledgeable! : (

I even reviewed their precious Infinity P363 speakers which are a good speaker for $400/<acronym title="Google Page Ranking">pr</acronym> but not "similarly good" to ANY speaker I've every measured or reviewed costing significantly more, certainly not in the $4k/<acronym title="Google Page Ranking">pr</acronym> range like their "research" has claimed.

You seem to have a problem with evidence that you don't agree with. Did you compare the P363 to other speakers in double blind conditions?

BTW its Harman, not Harmon. May be a good idea to spell the company name right that you are quoting.

Watch out! The spelling police are here!

 

[gene]

Goodness gene! That's what a sighted test is! We aren't talking about literal blind ... as in putting on a blind fold. The entire point is not knowing which amp is being compared - the knowledge of knowing or not knowing is what differentiates between sighted or blind. If sighted, you are fully aware at all times which amplifiers are playing. It's not difficult to understand!



Sure, with a high output impedance. Good thing that most good amplifiers don't have a high enough output impedance to cause frequency response variations that are large enough to be audible, like your Panasonic example.



An amp that has a flat response, low output impedance and is not over-driven into clipping could be considered 'good'.



They should bow down to you then, because you appear to be so incredibly knowledgeable! : (



You seem to have a problem with evidence that you don't agree with. Did you compare the P363 to other speakers in double blind conditions?



Watch out! The spelling police are here!

This is becoming tiresome. Like arguing with the Black Knight of Monty Python.

Harman are strict followers of blind testing and will disagree with you. A Blind test literally means you CAN'T see or know the products tested in the room.

I never proclaim to be as knowledgeable as Olive/Toole. I respect their knowledge but I also know the politics of working for a large company and how science is often massaged and used/abused for marketing. I've been involved in standards work back in my telcom days.

Yes I have compared the P363s to MANY speakers that were the same price and more expensive. We get in dozens of products/mo. NO DBT was done nor needed. Let's not go there again please. Next time you test drive a car please do it as a DBT to make sure you prefer one over the other without the bias of visual preference and see where that gets you

OK now please show me the measurements you made to validate your amplifier claims. How do you measure clipping? Is this done steady state or for dynamic peaks? What is the crest factor/duty cycle? What about distortion level? What kind of load are you testing the amp in? Have you done a stability analysis and 4 quadrant testing?

Where is your website and database of info so I can hop on your forums and criticize your findings?

 

[Goliath]

OK now please show me the measurements you made to validate your amplifier claims. How do you measure clipping? Is this done steady state or for dynamic peaks? What is the crest factor/duty cycle? What about distortion level? What kind of load are you testing the amp in? Have you done a stability analysis and 4 quadrant testing?

Where is your website and database of info so I can hop on your forums and criticize your findings?

I don't have a website or a database of info. I'm just questioning your claims. It's becoming increasingly clear that you don't like being questioned. Frankly I think you're arrogant and clearly feel self-enlightened. After all, this is your forum, so continue to use that defense in your arguments in future.

Continue to believe in the myth that amps all sound different, despite the evidence to the contrary. But please, don't talk crap about amplifiers needing HUGE power at low volumes. There is nothing that irritates me more. This is supposed to be a forum that sheds light on the truth, but you just appear to be misleading people.

 

[gene]

I don't have a website or a database of info. I'm just questioning your claims. It's becoming increasingly clear that you don't like being questioned. Frankly I think you're arrogant and clearly feel self-enlightened. After all, this is your forum, so continue to use that defense in your arguments in future.

Continue to believe in the myth that amps all sound different, despite the evidence to the contrary. But please, don't talk crap about amplifiers needing HUGE power at low volumes. There is nothing that irritates me more. This is supposed to be a forum that sheds light on the truth, but you just appear to be misleading people.

I never claimed all amplifiers sound different but that doesn't mean they all sound the same when not being overdriven. I have given you plenty of reasons including measurements, and personal experiences why amps can sound different even when operating at lowish steadystate power levels. My article was written to give people a good guideline on when they may need to upgrade their amp based on their conditions. If that doesn't work for you, then ignore the article and enjoy the amps in your receiver even if you score was above a 4.

Yes this is my forum and I don't have to pay for you to continue hearing you especially when you make claims that I am misleading people. Both my staff and I work our collective asses off to provide free content and a free a platform for people to share their love of this hobby.

Banning you is one of the FEW luxuries I have as a site owner. I think you need a week vacation. Enjoy the ban and hopefully you can come back with a cooler head.

 

[RichB]

Continue to believe in the myth that amps all sound different, despite the evidence to the contrary. But please, don't talk crap about amplifiers needing HUGE power at low volumes. There is nothing that irritates me more. This is supposed to be a forum that sheds light on the truth, but you just appear to be misleading people.

So how low is low and how loud is loud
You do realize that you are arguing but not saying much.

I am a big believer in measurements, but I do not want reviews that contain only measurements nor do I want reviews that are only subjective. Since I have heard amps sound different in my system, naturally, I believe they do and can sound different.

- Rich

 

[big2bird]

I rely on my ears, and the educated ears of others. Measurements are also helpful. I thought I had a good ear until I met a transducer engineer. He makes me feel deaf at times. LOL

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

How the F*CK does it matter if an amp test is sighted or blind? If someone else is doing the switching, and its level matched, there is no way for the listener to know which amp is playing. It blows my mind how one can over generalize with little or no real world experience or analysis rather than to keep an open mind and understand the complexity of an audio system.

This is why the whole DBT thing often frustrates me. It allows people to dumb down the whole audio experience into generalizations like:

• MP3 is similarly good as CD
• All amps sound similarly good
• $200 speakers sound similarly good to $2k speakers
• etc

OK I'm off my soap box now. Time to do some "sighted" listening tests

I don't think it has to be double-blinded. Single-blinded is good enough here. As long as the listener isn't being told the exact amp that is being played. If we are comparing a Krell to a Classe, the person doing the amp switching should not tell the listener, "You are now listening to the Krell amp".

 

[PENG]

I don't think it has to be double-blinded. Single-blinded is good enough here. As long as the listener isn't being told the exact amp that is being played. If we are comparing a Krell to a Classe, the person doing the amp switching should not tell the listener, "You are now listening to the Krell amp".

The way I see it, Goliath was being difficult and Gene wasn't quite helping (well he didn't need to either..). Step back and re-read this:

Originally Posted by gene:How the F*CK does it matter if an amp test is sighted or blind? If someone else is doing the switching, and its level matched, there is no way for the listener to know which amp is playing.

Goliath's Resp: Then its clearly not sighted. If it was sighted, you would know which amp was playing at all times.

In his earlier post he had responded similarly. IOW, he was playing (I doubt that was intentional but...) with words but he clearly agreed with Gene that Gene did his test "blind" by definition.

I read through their back and forth and I could see he actually was not contradicting Gene much if at all in matter of facts related to amps sounding different or not, rather he got hung up on the way things were communicated if you kow what I mean.

When he returns in a week, he may tell me I guessed wrong, but maybe not.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The way I see it, Goliath was being difficult and Gene wasn't quite helping (well he didn't need to either..). Step back and re-read this:

Originally Posted by gene:How the F*CK does it matter if an amp test is sighted or blind? If someone else is doing the switching, and its level matched, there is no way for the listener to know which amp is playing.

Goliath's Resp: Then its clearly not sighted. If it was sighted, you would know which amp was playing at all times.

In his earlier post he had responded similarly. IOW, he was playing (I doubt that was intentional but...) with words but he clearly agreed with Gene that Gene did his test "blind" by definition.

I read through their back and forth and I could see he actually was not contradicting Gene much if at all in matter of facts related to amps sounding different or not, rather he got hung up on the way things were communicated if you kow what I mean.

When he returns in a week, he may tell me I guessed wrong, but maybe not.

Yeah, wires are crossed and people get offended, but it shouldn't be like this.

Everyone has a point.

Goliath started out by saying that most typical cases don't require anymore than the AVR, which is the point of the article, isn't it? Not every situation requires an external amp. I think everyone agrees with that.

I don't use an external amp in my 18' x 20' x 10' family room that is open to 3 sides. I just use my Denon 3312, which can power Phil3 or Focal 826 or Dynaudio X32 or ATC SCM7 just fine to very loud volume in 2.0 pure direct mode.

So it seems to me that most cases don't require an external amp. But "most" cases don't mean "all" cases. And Goliath agrees.

So as you stated, after all is said and done, everyone pretty much agrees.

 

[RichB]

I don't think it has to be double-blinded. Single-blinded is good enough here. As long as the listener isn't being told the exact amp that is being played. If we are comparing a Krell to a Classe, the person doing the amp switching should not tell the listener, "You are now listening to the Krell amp".

Sure if looking for subtleties between excellent amps but often times the comparison is between very different product and power levels.

My friend and I compared inexpensive outlaw M2200 monoblocks to a Parasound A21 at spirited volume levels the differences were obvious.
We level matched wrote notes played the same tracks at the and reviewed our notes. There were tracks that sounded great with the A21 that we did not want to listen to with the M2200's at that level. At lower levels the M2200s sounded good.

These two amps have similar ratings into 8/4 ohms: 200/300 for the M2200 and 250/400 for the Parasound but those ratings were not indicative of the performance in his system. He has Revel F206's, different speakers/sources/listening preferences yield different results.

i also find that I have to live with a product to fully appreciate it.

- Rich

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Sure if looking for subtleties between excellent amps but often times the comparison is between very different product and power levels.

My friend and I compared inexpensive outlaw M2200 monoblocks to a Parasound A21 at spirited volume levels the differences were obvious.
We level matched wrote notes played the same tracks at the and reviewed our notes. There were tracks that sounded great with the A21 that we did not want to listen to with the M2200's at that level. At lower levels the M2200s sounded good.

These two amps have similar ratings into 8/4 ohms: 200/300 for the M2200 and 250/400 for the Parasound but those ratings were not indicative of the performance in his system. He has Revel F206's, different speakers/sources/listening preferences yield different results.

i also find that I have to live with a product to fully appreciate it.

- Rich

How long did it take you guys to unplug the amp, level match with SPL meter, change speaker trim levels?

 

[gene]

The way I see it, Goliath was being difficult and Gene wasn't quite helping (well he didn't need to either..). Step back and re-read this:

Originally Posted by gene:How the F*CK does it matter if an amp test is sighted or blind? If someone else is doing the switching, and its level matched, there is no way for the listener to know which amp is playing.

Goliath's Resp: Then its clearly not sighted. If it was sighted, you would know which amp was playing at all times.

In his earlier post he had responded similarly. IOW, he was playing (I doubt that was intentional but...) with words but he clearly agreed with Gene that Gene did his test "blind" by definition.

I read through their back and forth and I could see he actually was not contradicting Gene much if at all in matter of facts related to amps sounding different or not, rather he got hung up on the way things were communicated if you kow what I mean.

When he returns in a week, he may tell me I guessed wrong, but maybe not.

Your assessment makes a lot of sense. I probably could have been a bit more tactful in my responses but the whole DBT/Blind argument is often a point of contention for me. I see that term being abused or manipulated too often by manufacturers or consumers alike to make too many sweeping generalizations. I hate seeing the whole audiophile experience being dumbed down or over analyzed as it often is. I think there should be a healthy balance of science and personal experience to formulate a more balanced perspective.

I do hope Goliath comes back in a good mood as I don't hold grudges and look forward to his contributions.

Off to shoot some videos about amplifiers with Hugo. This discussion sparked some ideas in me which is always a good thing.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Since you are making a big deal out of this 'all amps sound the same' myth, let me clarify and say that I don't think all amps sound the same. However the overwhelming evidence points in that direction, like it or not.

This statement is really the crux of the debate. And, the statement is largely correct; the overwhelming *documented* evidence would lead one to believe all properly functioning amplifiers with flat frequency response, low noise, and reasonably low output impedance sound the same to humans.

Moreover, there are other cases of products where the overwhelming evidence is that they must sound the same, yet many people believe they don't. Like cables. If humans can't be trusted to be objective with cables, why should we trust our judgment with amplifiers and other electronics? Just because they have active circuitry in the signal path?

I've never had a problem believing that well-designed and constructed cables were audibly neutral, but for some reason over a period of decades I've never been able to shake the feeling that I have legitimate preferences in electronics. I don't want to, but I do. I feel like an atheist who doesn't quite believe that the universe could have sprung into existence from nothingness.

The tests for audibility must be flawed.

 

[gene]

This statement is really the crux of the debate. And, the statement is largely correct; the overwhelming *documented* evidence would lead one to believe all properly functioning amplifiers with flat frequency response, low noise, and reasonably low output impedance sound the same to humans.

Moreover, there are other cases of products where the overwhelming evidence is that they must sound the same, yet many people believe they don't. Like cables. If humans can't be trusted to be objective with cables, why should we trust our judgment with amplifiers and other electronics? Just because they have active circuitry in the signal path?

I've never had a problem believing that well-designed and constructed cables were audibly neutral, but for some reason over a period of decades I've never been able to shake the feeling that I have legitimate preferences in electronics. I don't want to, but I do. I feel like an atheist who doesn't quite believe that the universe could have sprung into existence from nothingness.

The tests for audibility must be flawed.

Very true though its much easier to analyze a piece of wire than all of the complex nuances of an amplifier and how it interacts with a loudspeaker.

Quantum Mechanics still baffles me to this day despite my studies of it in college and now through the great educational experiences of the Wormhole show hosted by Morgan Freeman. A Universe from nothingness while certainly seemingly plausible is still so mysterious. What should we define as nothingness? Perhaps that too needs to be looked into further?