Controversy of ABX testing

[Mark Powell]

40,000 dollars for a pair of speaker cables (Transparent) And what's the stupid box in the middle for?

 

Same as the daft things you used to see in motor magazines to reduce the fuel consumption of your car. Not that they cost twice what your car did.

 

Nice amplifier you've got. Had one on demo. Sent it back when my wife tried to weigh herself on it.

 

 

[4est]

What's with the conspiracy theories anyway? Do you need others ABX approvals or listening experiences to feel good about your purchases? The idea that we are all lemmings is ignorant at best.

 

I always find it suspect when someone pulls out an outrageously priced example for cabling, as if that is the norm or something...

 

I'll go crawl back under my rock now and hide. Heaven forbid that I might spend money on something un approved like a USB cable or worse- a Bybee device!

 

Sacrilege, best start heating that tar and pluck some chickens before I get away!

 

[Paul R]

(Snort!)

 

Best post of the month I think Forrest.

 

Now I am going to have the image of a person using a big rock for shelter from a mob of hostile villagers armed with the pitchforks, tar, and feathers in my head.

 

I can just see this person pelting said mob with USB cables, power cords, smooth stones, and oddball crystals...

 

 

 

-Paul

 

 

[Paul R]

Change the question a little and see if it still makes sense to you.

 

Should a BMW, a Mercedes, an Audi, and a Rolls Royce all drive the same? Feel the same to ride in?

 

That's pretty much equivalent to what you are saying. Electronics is at least as individual as automobiles. They all sound good, but they all sound different.

 

-Paul

 

 

[4est]

I feel safer knowing that half of them will be hot on your tail, and not just after mine!

 

[Jud]

[M]y 'customer satisfaction' will be higher because all you guys have told me that I will be on the right track if I spend 5000 dollars plus. I am happy with that.

 

So we've made up your mind, while not trying to, living half a world away, and disagreeing with each other much of the time? Neat trick. Reminds me of the old skeptic's jape: "All those who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand."

 

'Good' equipment must, by definition, reproduce the sound on the recording as perfectly as possible. No 'added character' no 'sounding warm' or whatever. Just similar to the recording.

 

Thus the closer we get to the 'High End' the more the various brands of equipment should sound similar to each other.

 

Does that make sense?

 

Yes, excluding for the sake of this discussion those who want a particular type of sound ("tube" or "warm" or "detailed" or whatever). I don't want a "one trick pony" because I'll inevitably tire of it. I do want something as true to the music as possible. The more various items of equipment approach that ideal, the more similar to each other they should sound.

 

From that I conclude that 'blind' testing, or any other form of testing, should not show up any differences. Because there should not be any.

 

Well, no. You've left out a necessary step:

 

(A) The more various items of equipment approach the ideal of being true to the music, the more similar to each other they should sound.

 

-> (B) We have reached the ideal, and thus the various items of equipment all sound similar.

[Mark Powell]

But I did not say 'Perfect' I said as perfectly as possible.

 

I did not say 'Does sound the same' But should sound the same.

 

Similarly 'Should not show up any difference'.

 

Therefore there was not a (B) for me to overlook. I certainly did not say we have reached the ideal.

 

But I genuinely believe that as we move up the sound that the boxes make should get closer and closer.

 

Regarding Salaams - audio engineers, when we have reached the ideal, may well note that many of the middle East mosques use British (now Chinese) 'Quad' equipment to call the believers to prayer!

 

My amplifier choice has been delayed for several weeks. I knew it all, would make the 'correct and wise' decision, and was familiar with the sound of the brand I had decided on so did not need a demo. Such is pedantry. You guys have caused me to think again and widen my choice, though it is still not large - I will not spend a dealers time auditioning something I am unlikely to buy. It has broadened from only Naim, to Naim, Audio Research, and the McIntosh 275. All somewhat of a 'safe choice', but there it goes.

 

This all started because someone said "Why do the (expensive) Naim and the (hugely expensive) KSL Kondo sound so different?"

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mark Powell]

Don't know. Will have my dearly beloved wife try a blind test!

 

[Jud]

I did not say 'Does sound the same' But should sound the same.

 

Similarly 'Should not show up any difference'.

 

Should sound the same only if they've reached the ideal. But paradoxically, the folks who contend all equipment sounds similar seem to be those who consider even (or especially) the expensive stuff bollocks, which hardly sounds like saying we've reached the ideal.

 

I've heard the uber-expensive Transparent stuff. Did not like the sound of the system (Ayre amps, Audio Research pre-amp and DAC, Wilson Sasha Watt/Puppy speakers). OTOH, I have heard differences among cables during the approx 30 years I've been into high end audio. I am quite happy when I find less expensive cables that produce better sound from a system than more expensive ones. The ones I have wound up consistently preferring are not nearly in the price range of the Transparents, though they aren't the least expensive available, either.

 

Interesting about the Quads. Odd, since the speakers were never famous for playing very loud.

 

Hope you enjoy the amp you choose. Whichever it is, it should sound, umm, similar, right? ;-)

 

[4est]

They make other speakers than ESLs.

 

If I thought they all amps sounded similar, I'd pocket 4k and buy something cheaper, but that is just me.

 

[Mark Powell]

Don't think they use the speakers, I believe (no pun intended) that they use the 'Tannoy type' PA trumpets. But certainly the Quad amps are common.

 

To Jud - on an umlimited budget I would go for KSL Kondo amps. Never heard them and probably never will.

 

But only because they appear to be made with fanatical (good at fanatical, the Japanese) attention to detail that they used to put into the ancient swords.

 

[heycarlos]

I think what is telling about this whole debate around ABX testing is where the debate DOES NOT seem to be. Why are we not hearing spirited debate about the inability to tell the difference between a pair of B&W 801 vs KEF 105/3? Or even a 128K MP3 vs a 320K AAC?

 

Well I suppose the reason no one is debating these things is that we all (or nearly all) agree on the answer. There *are* audible differences in those sorts of things that will show up in statistically significant numbers in an ABX test. This has been done many times for audio bit rates.

 

Anyone here familiar with MUSHRA scores? A reference here:

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=14237

 

Anyway, in my job I was peripherally involved in a large scale audio quality test on mulit-channel codecs at different bit rates that was conducted by the European Broadcasters Union (EBU) - it's pretty interesting:

http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3324.pdf

 

Bottom line is that at 192K+ AAC 95% of people cannot tell the difference on any of the selected material.

 

Also, of all the material you can put through a codec applause is one of the hardest to compress without audible artifacts.

 

 

 

[Sri]

Don't you know that this is the Lake Wobegon of listening. Everyone here has hearing that make german shepherds jealous.

 

There have been many studies that have confirmed audible differences between speakers and various compression techniques and bit rates. The various high end mimes, high res, speaker cables, power cords, are the areas where people's beliefs fly in the face of evidence.