Home 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 ]

Gotta hand it to ya Pat. you never have been one to let facts get in your way

"Well, when you want to discuss an article, it behooves you to know who wrote it, what the title is, and what it said."

Really one has to know the title? No Pat, all one needs to know in this case were the relevant facts. I'll list them for you.
1. It was ABX DBTs
2. The results as reported were a null
3. Given the presence of a 50 watt OTL amp with the load presented by the speakers used this is a very unlikely result.
4. The methodologies were a mess.
5. One can not find any scrutiny of this test anywhere online by any objectivists despite being one of the highest profile tests of it's kind.

I knew those 5 points from memory and rereading the article confirms those points were accurately remembered. And that is all I needed to make my point in the OP.

"You showed no sign of knowing anything of the sort."

Then you can't read the signs Pat.

" As for the flawed methodology and unlikely result, you haven't shown either one,"

Really? What aren't you getting about the problem with a 50 watt OTL not giving a positive result with the speakers used?


>> though I happen to agree it could have been more sensitive.>>


Clearly if it missed the obvious differences one would hear with a 50 watt Futterman and a cheap SS amp from the 80s.


" But since you did not know the particulars of the article, you could not possibly show that the 1987 SR amp test is high profile, and that it has not been criticized."

That is some pretty piss poor logic there Pat. again I would point you to the five key point above. they are all that matter in this case.



"I cited a 1991 article in Stereo Review by E. Brad Meyer which showed audible differences existed between a SS amp and a tube amp, how audible depending on the speaker loads. Moreover, he showed why they sounded different."

And this does what other than support my assertion that the results of the 1987 ABX DBTs wrought unlikely results?



>> The second thing? It is as I stated: You tried to illustrate that some objectivists, unnamed and unquantified, questioned the results of a positive DBT for no good reasons.>>

No I did not try to do that Pat. Again I suggest you read the article I cited on meta-analysis since this explains my actual point rather than the one you seem to be imagining here. I never commented on *the content* of these two threads that scrutinized the ABX DBTs that wrought positive results.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Atma-Sphere Music Systems, Inc.  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]