Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

---

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

RE: those preferences fall in line with measurements

Posted by AJinFLA on December 18, 2007 at 16:42:28

In Reply to: RE: those preferences fall in line with measurements posted by Analog Scott on December 17, 2007 at 23:35:39:

who says there is no scientific measurable explination

Please do tell us, we're still waiting while you obfuscate. What is the rational, scientific explanation why your tubes amps sound better than "Cheap solid state"? Why do your "expensive" wires "sound" better than cheap wires?

I have tried a few cheap SS amps.

Is that statistically significant? Given the vast number of "cheap" SS amps? A "few"?You don't hesitate to question DBTs based on statistical data. Hmmm, talk about grossly insufficient sampling for a so called champion of science

None of them were even in the ball park.

Yes, one would expect that. When an emotion driven audiophile has prior knowledge (price) and prior expectations (poor sound), the results are very predictable. Bravo for your confirmation.

How many times do you have to bang your head against different walls before you figure out it's going to hurt each time?

You tell me. I have no knowledge of such habits.

If someone thinks they have one that will do the job I may give it a try.

Unless your tubes seriously distort/eq the signal (always a possibility), Dr. Geddes RMAF Costco Pioneer receiver would "do the job". Blind and without prior knowledge that is.

There does come a point where an appparent trend comes into play.

Based on "a few"? If you had basic knowledge of statistics you might realize how wrong you are.

Don't know anything about pixie dust content of wires.

Then tell us what makes your expensive wire "sound" better than cheap?

How many are there?

Far more than you have "listened" to

I know that. What is your point?

What was your point about CDs/LPs?

When have you actually followed the scientific method?

Since I learned it in high school

I have tried the "objectivist" method.

No. You "believe" and "say" as a subjectivist, that you have "tried" the "objectivist" method. That is no more likely than "Objectivists" here suddenly "trying" the "subjectivist" method. Our minds have been programmed differently through education from an early age. I could no more become highly religious this week then revert back next week than you could suddenly become objective. Lets be realistic here and not try to fool one's self.
The scientific method is taught in high school onwards. It is not learned from stereo magazines. You learned from stereo magazines, then attempt to blame science for not liking what you heard.

I did pay less but I also got less. It was the path to mediocre sound.

The sound you got was a fruition of your science education and understanding. Blaming the price, others, etc. is an attempt to scapegoat rather than accept the consequences of your understanding of science and how it relates to sound.

If that works for you fine.

science works for me the same way it does for everyone, even if you don't understand that. My system sounds as good as it does based on the same laws of physics that govern your system, even if you are unaware of it.

I'd be quite happy to take that challenge.

No, you wouldn't. I've heard your Soundlab A3's remember?
Plus, this would be a group session, not a he said she said. You would still claim the A3's more accurate vs recorded instruments after they were embarrassed. Peer oversight/input would be a must. Your own comments preview the results. But it is not (just) more amplifier power that is needed, as you wrongly suggest. It is volume displacement limitations. Simple physics. More power would help - drive them into non-linear operation - distortion/compression.

Recorded in my room? Live instruments recorded in my room would sound like crap.

Exactly how else are you going to compare your reproduction system accuracy vs live instruments? A recording must be used for system playback. The constant will be your room. Comparing a live instrument vs your stereo playing back instrument X, recorded in room Y, possibly mixed/mastered on Z will not do. Now there would be limitations, such as microphone placement, stereo/mono, HRTF, the speakers occupying different space than the instrument, room modes, etc, etc., but they would affect both systems. Far from perfect, but there have been live vs instrument demos before, Dunlavy IIRC. My test made me realize why Tom Danley uses high power amps with his highly efficient loudspeakers. Headroom and linear volume displacement is key. Once again, I have heard your acoustically large panel A3's. You would not want to do a comparison vs my system in front of other audiophiles. Irregardless of what silly cables and amplifier you used.

Must have been interesting. you had a live drum set in your listening room? You got a similar sound from your system?

I learned enough where I would not use anything but a frequency dependent directional (dipole/cardioid/monopole) bass system with large SD, low inductance, low distortion linear high displacement drivers for bass and compression driver/highly optimized waveguides for reproducing cymbals and high hats. Not perfect, but reasonably close. I'm looking forward to comparing vs the piano. When I'm not sure.

cheers,

AJ



This post will last approximately 2 minutes. 120,119,118,117...

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Parts Connexion

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---