Additional information will bias one to believe claims made

[esldude]

And sighted tests are even worse.........

 

Yep, they sure are. Plus Bob Stuart talks a bit out of both sides of his mouth. Read his technical papers and you almost think it is two different people.

 

His main objection to blind tests is the idea you never hear music the same way twice. Probably has some validity especially in quickly switched ABX testing. But he also has genuine academic training in psycho-acoustics. And guess where most of the principles and such for that is gathered? From blind testing of various acoustic parameters. From study of the physical aspects of our ears construction. From study of signal passed onto the brain. Usually not music. But distortion, levels, discrimination between test signals etc. So it isn't like he eschews blind test results or other objective approaches. Just doesn't like them much for music unless the listening panel has much repeated exposure to the music used before doing the blind testing.

 

He has spent much of his time creating hearing models to decide what level of fidelity is needed for completely audible transparency. Again much of that from information gathered by blind testing of test signals. Has pretty firm ideas about what is needed. 20 bits, maybe 60k sampling rates (with a proviso that might be needed though possibly not). It hardly is the case he thinks you just listen sighted and make evaluations. Far, far from that. Much more toward the objective side. I doubt from his technical writings he makes much if any design decisions on anything other than objective approaches.

[Paul R]

And sighted tests are even worse.........

 

Again, in your opinion.

 

Other people have different, and just as valid opinions.

 

Only in high end audio are people vigorously advised to make major buying descions with their eyes closed.

 

That is like buying a used car based upon nothing more than a CarFax report. Sure, it tells you the facts... And one is well advised to look at those facts when making a descision.

 

But in my opinion, one would also be a fool beyond measure to buy a car based only upon that report. Same with audio gear that you judge based only upon (arguably flawed) blind tests.

 

 

Paul

[mayhem13]

Again, in your opinion.

 

Other people have different, and just as valid opinions.

 

 

Paul

 

Only unreasonable people Paul............and those actively Dating!

[Julf]

Only in high end audio are people vigorously advised to make major buying descions with their eyes closed.

 

Only if what matters is the sound and not how the equipment looks...

[venkey]

Again, in your opinion.

Only in high end audio are people vigorously advised to make major buying descions with their eyes closed.

 

Actually, the unique aspect of high end audio as measurement equipment has improved the rejection of measurements has increased.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hey Chris,

 

Everything you are calling synergy here looks like fairly straightforward design issues. The Airport express has too much jitter, Peachtree designs an input around it. I might well sound better, and work better. If you are using an Airport express I still wouldn't call that synergy. Synergy would be if some aspect of high jitter and a special design made the Airport Express/Peachtree combo sound better than other properly made pieces of equipment. Sum is more than the parts. In this case, they are just polishing up a bad situation better, but not transcending the result one might get with a lower jitter source than the Airport Express.

 

Sure powered speakers are a good idea as you design amp and speaker specifically together. Lets you ring more performance out of it vs. designing for a wide variety of amp/speaker combos. Again, just simple design issue, though maybe this one is a bit of synergy. You would get better results than other things though by design.

 

The Constellation amp series looks like more of the same. Nothing they are doing new that I see. Apparently have a direct input that works with the gain structure of their pre-amp for one less gain stage in the pre-amp. The extra gain stage is no doubt for working with other amps that have a different gain structure. It probably pays some dividends, though I wouldn't call it synergy. Just good design.

 

What most seem to call synergy in audio is most times the results of happy accidents that ameliorate design deficiencies. You get a better than average pairing rather than suffering the full brunt of a design problem. Without those design deficiencies you would simply get the good result without feeling lucky about the outcome. A good example is tube amps and esl's. Design deficiencies of tube amps are lack of current output, and high output impedance. ESL's at least in lower frequencies have rather high impedances reducing the problems with an amp of high output impedance. This also reduces the need for high current at the range where most music needs the most power. Skipping over some more happy coincidences with this pairing, it seems lucky and works well. But it also works well with an amp of better performance all the way around. Audio in the past had more necessary compromises than it does now. Not that there are none. But we dont' have to get as lucky as we once did.

 

 

Hi ESL - Thanks for the response. I think we are talking about the same thing but we seem to name it differently. Your descriptions are full of synergies in my opinion, but hey that' just me :~)

[The Computer Audiophile]

Only if what matters is the sound and not how the equipment looks...

 

 

Hi Julf - You've touched on an important aspect of HiFi that many people are afraid to talk about for fear of being banished to the "you're not a real audiophile" group or whatever. I've always said looks matter to me. I want components that are not only designed well inside but outside. Of course I purchase a Spectral Audio system and have to settle for internal beauty and design, and sound quality over external looks :~)

 

Probably a topic for another thread as well.

[Paul R]

Actually, the unique aspect of high end audio as measurement equipment has improved the rejection of measurements has increased.

Not unexpected - as measurement technology improves, and what is being measured does not satisfactorily explain what is being heard, well - what would you expect? The measurement crowd tells everyone else they are imagining what they hear - the hearing crowd tells the measurement guys they are measuring the wrong thing, and whomever is left gets blasted from all 33.5 sides.

 

The real, objective, truth is out there still waiting to be discovered. It's fairly obvious that some folks, on all sides, are convinced they have already been granted a vision of the ultimate truth. Whether they have or not, remains to be seen. I don't think that we know all there is to know about this yet, and it is inappropriate to make many hard and fast calls about it.

 

Other than the most reliable and accurate judge of what you do and do not like is personally listening to the gear/cables/music whatever. Measurements mean little in this area.

 

-Paul

[sandyk]

Actually, the unique aspect of high end audio as measurement equipment has improved the rejection of measurements has increased.

Back in the November 2008 Current Mirror thread in DIYAudio, in which Nelson Pass was also a participant, my reports of an improved soundstage and sounding sweeter, when the already closely matched input pair (for both HFE and VBE) had it's collector currents almost perfectly matched,were confirmed. Although a typical Current Mirror was used, it does not correct for the base current drawn by the next stage's transistor.(the VAS stage)

A simple modification adjusted for that.Subsequently, various measurements including THD were made, but failed to reveal the reason why. With a typical Input pair and current mirror, the voltage difference betweenn the collectors of the input LTP is > several hundred mV.

Alex

[venkey]

what is being measured does not satisfactorily explain what is being heard

 

-Paul

 

Fine, lets say that's correnct. Tell us what should be measured and you propose to make that measurement.

[sandyk]

Fine, lets say that's correnct. Tell us what should be measured and you propose to make that measurement.

That is a typical response from many closed minded EEs. (grin.)

Throw it all back on the person making the subjective reports, knowing full well that they normally will not have the suitable technical expertise /background, or test equipment to do these measurements, let alone knowing what to look for!

[Paul R]

Fine, lets say that's correnct. Tell us what should be measured and you propose to make that measurement.

 

My my - did you read the rest of the post?

 

In any case, I would settle for 600 second runs with 20us resolution of a complete system playing music, with values for every power supply, conductor, cables, interface, component, and device in the system. Take a while to analyze that though.

[mayhem13]

That is a typical response from many closed minded EEs. (grin.)

Throw it all back on the person making the subjective reports, knowing full well that they normally will not have the suitable technical expertise /background, or test equipment to do these measurements, let alone knowing what to look for!

 

And rightfully so........as in any science, those who make the claims also assume the burden of proof. If unable to do so, best to keep it to yourself....unless your psyche 'needs' to share it for some 'reason'?. Viola........the creation, summation and paradox of the modern age audiophile. I like the term 'audio enthusiast' just for this reason.

[sandyk]

those who make the claims also assume the burden of proof. If unable to do so, best to keep it to yourself.....

 

That kind of garbage stifles progress. Luckily, consumers are able to vote with their wallets, and products designed by incompetent/closed minded EEs eventually fall by the wayside. Fortunately, there are still a few EEs around like Robert Pease, who actually follow up some subjective reports and find the answers.

[Paul R]

That kind of garbage stifles progress.

 

As it is meant to Alex. if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your... stuff.

[mayhem13]

Yes.....it's the close minded EE's that are responsible for the decline and ultimate collapse of the HiFi industry.........not the consumer's buying power and knowledge? Could you please then explain the success of the iPod and MP3?

 

yes.....we are a very small collective that desires more from our listening experience. I just don't care to be aligned with what remains.....fanatics and charlatans.

[sandyk]

[yes.....we are a very small collective that desires more from our listening experience./QUOTE]

Yep

That's why some of you try to convince everyone that ALL amplifiers meeting certain minimum specifications MUST sound the same, and that 16/44.1 CD is all that is needed, and high resolution files are a waste of time.Fortunately, we still have guys like Demian Martin and Gordon Rankin who still think outside the square, and aren't afraid to use their ears as well.

While I do agree that speakers and the room matter most, they aren't the be all, end all.(smile)

[Paul R]

Yes.....it's the close minded EE's that are responsible for the decline and ultimate collapse of the HiFi industry.........not the consumer's buying power and knowledge? Could you please then explain the success of the iPod and MP3?

 

Steve Jobs.

 

yes.....we are a very small collective that desires more from our listening experience. I just don't care to be aligned with what remains.....fanatics and charlatans.[/Quote]

 

Assuming that you are an EE or whatever you claim to be of course. Whatever "collective" you want to claim membership in, it definitely sounds a bit to me like Ferdinand and Isabella were your founders...

 

Lock up the heretics who dispute the masters!! The Inquisition is on baby!

 

The Inquistion, what a show (all amps sound the same you know)

The Inquistion, here we go (expensive DACs are a big no no)

We know you're wishing (it all sounded like a $100 set of speakers)

That we'd go away (cause only measurements matter anyway)

But the Inquistion's here and it's here to stay (we'll take your cables away)

The Inquistion, oh boy (we wanna take away your toys)

The Inquistion, what a joy (we get to take away your toys!)

The Inquistion, oy! ....My aching back...

[mayhem13]

The collective I refer to is the people that love music and the listening experience.

 

Sorry the real world principles of EE and how it applies to audio escapes you. Instead of responding with bogus claims of hearing prowess and obvious paranoia, take the time to actually understand acoustics as acoustics IS the core of this hobby. Heck...I bet if you search, you might even find a cable you can plug into one of your orifices that might aid with that. And if you choose the right orifice, at least the B.S. will stop leaking out. Would you prefer USB or balanced XLR?

[chg]

Along the lines of this discussion:

 

"TIM distortion in early solid state designs and jitter in digital playback would never have been discovered were it not for subjectivist engineers trusting their ears to find out what was wrong with equipment that measured perfectly yet sounded poor. I know there are other currently unknown distortions that have yet to be discovered, this is why many tweaks give an audible sonic improvement as they are lessening or curing a problem we haven't yet learned how to measure. Subjectivists are the pioneer's of audio because if and when the effect of the cure can be measured, objectivists may then be willing to listen and perhaps even trust their ears since science now allows them to."

 

The arrogance of some objectivists. Some tend to think that the time period in which they are living is the most significant and is the "we know all there is to know" point in human existence. This idea of self importance, and it only gets worse with each generation.

[Paul R]

Sticks and stones. The day you stop hiding who you really are is the day I think you might have some credibility to your opinions. Right now as far as I am concerned, you have none, and your opinions are offered for no purpose other than to stir up trouble. Occasionally, I see posts from you than could almost be brilliant, but then you post something that makes me think you are a 14 year old. (shrug)

 

To tell the truth, honest and straight up, I suspect I have forgotten more about acoustics than you will ever learn. And yet, there are plenty of people here who know a heck of a lot more about audio, audio gear, and how to make a system sound superb rather than mediocre than I ever will. I deeply respect their opinions. I learn a lot, even from the people I disagree with, and more, sometimes I even change my mind about things.

 

Moreover, you have, constantly and consistently, everywhere you post on the system, referred to people who make "bogus" claims of being able to hear things that cannot possibly exist. I don't remember anyone ever setting you up as an authority on anything, much less granting you the right to pass judgement on other people. Far less than that even, you are just flat wrong.

 

For the record, nobody was more amazed than I was when I started listening and was able to discern things. Check back on the system and notice where I pissed some people off when I naively assumed that all player software, for example, would sound the same. I would up putting out money to buy copies and listen to them. I was flabbergasted that there were audible differences.

 

Not only that, but there are plenty of other ordinary people who can easily pick out the differences between cables, amps, speakers, DACs and what have you.

 

If that happens to insult you in some way, or you don't want to believe that, well- it is what it is. It's real, people can, and that's a fact.

 

Why is open to plenty of question, but the fact of there being real, and easily discerned audible differences between equipment, including cables, DACs and even power cables, is a -->FACT<--. No amount of wailing, complaints, insults, or thinly veiled sarcasm is going to change that.

 

The real question is why such a simple fact, brings out the foaming at the mouth types. What possible agenda can they have to oppose something so simple and so easy to determine for themselves? Has to be money somewhere involved somewhere, if only in terms of trying to build a (false) reputation online.

 

As for paranoia- well, I live in Texas son - that dog don't hunt down here. I'm also a transplant from the Philly area, so in-your-face does not bother me one bit. I'll respect other folks personal opinions whether I agree with them or not. But I certainly have no problem with defending my own ideas or opinions either. Difference between you and me is I don't insist other people agree with me.

 

-Paul

 

 

 

The collective I refer to is the people that love music and the listening experience.

 

Sorry the real world principles of EE and how it applies to audio escapes you. Instead of responding with bogus claims of hearing prowess and obvious paranoia, take the time to actually understand acoustics as acoustics IS the core of this hobby. Heck...I bet if you search, you might even find a cable you can plug into one of your orifices that might aid with that. And if you choose the right orifice, at least the B.S. will stop leaking out. Would you prefer USB or balanced XLR?

[Jay192]

bogus claims of hearing prowess and obvious paranoia ... find a cable you can plug into one of your orifices that might aid with that. And if you choose the right orifice, at least the B.S. will stop leaking out

 

Mayhem13 - your language is shameful and disgusting.

 

Thank goodness for the creation of the Ignore list. You are the first one on mine so don't bother responding.

[The Computer Audiophile]

The collective I refer to is the people that love music and the listening experience.

 

Sorry the real world principles of EE and how it applies to audio escapes you. Instead of responding with bogus claims of hearing prowess and obvious paranoia, take the time to actually understand acoustics as acoustics IS the core of this hobby. Heck...I bet if you search, you might even find a cable you can plug into one of your orifices that might aid with that. And if you choose the right orifice, at least the B.S. will stop leaking out. Would you prefer USB or balanced XLR?

 

Mayhem - Your 30 day suspension from CA starts now.

[gbryant]

Mayhem - Your 30 day suspension from CA starts now.

 

 

Finally! Can you make that 30 years...

[venkey]

Along the lines of this discussion:

 

"TIM distortion in early solid state designs and jitter in digital playback would never have been discovered were it not for subjectivist engineers trusting their ears to find out what was wrong with"

 

If you google that quote, you will find its from a Positive Feedback column written by a well known fact free lunatic. Its wrong on both counts. Early solid state amplifiers suffered from a well understood problem that was particularly pronounced with transistors called crossover distortion. You can find discussions of jitter in a/d and d/a conversion in Bell System Technical Journal as far back as 1963.