advertisement


Challenge From Harbeth - Free M40.1 For Those Who Can Identify Amplifier Differences

Status
Not open for further replies.
Are you saying then that the test should be blind and the person undergoing the test must not know what gear is being used so the only parameter that can influence their decision will be the....sound?
 
Are you saying then that the test should be blind and the person undergoing the test must not know what gear is being used so the only parameter that can influence their decision will be the....sound?

Very concisely put. Yes.

Chris

I would have thought this was an obvious requirement. It may be acceptable to know at the beginning of the test what the two amplifiers being compared are, but my feeling is that it would be better if that wasn't known, so as to reduce the emotional pressure on making the "right" choice. Imagine if the choice was between a Behringer A500 and a Krell, or between Naim and Quad, or any pair which one might expect to sound different.

S.
 
So, in a blind test one can say that I am more emotionaly involved with the sound from component A than I am with the sound from component B.
Errol.

You can be sure that any emotional involvement in the music is not being triggered by any pre-conceptions you may or may not have had.

But all you can really do is express a preference if you perceive one,

Chris
 
I would have thought this was an obvious requirement. It may be acceptable to know at the beginning of the test what the two amplifiers being compared are, but my feeling is that it would be better if that wasn't known, so as to reduce the emotional pressure on making the "right" choice. Imagine if the choice was between a Behringer A500 and a Krell, or between Naim and Quad, or any pair which one might expect to sound different.

S.

What emotional pressure on making the "right" choice? they either sound different to the listener or they don't.
Errol.
 
You can be sure that any emotional involvement in the music is not being triggered by any pre-conceptions you may or may not have had.

But all you can really do is express a preference if you perceive one,

Chris

Exactly, if you have the ability to perceive a difference then you will hear it, if you do not have this perception then you probably won't.
Errol.
 
A similar test has been done before no one could guess which was the supposedly best equipped system.

ppecTD.gif
 
I want the M40's but can't be arsed doing the test. I'll say anything Mr.Shaw wants just to get them.

No, you can't do that you have got to sit through 100 blind tests!
All darstedly designed to deem you demented!
Errol.
ps, and there is a queue!
 
...It may be acceptable to know at the beginning of the test what the two amplifiers being compared are, but my feeling is that it would be better if that wasn't known

At formal EBU tests, in which I have participated, they go to great pains (as far as the thing* under test will allow) not to divulge any details, at least until after the test programme is complete.

A typical test programme will include attempts to 'calibrate' the reliability of individual testers.

A high degree of anonymity is also attempted; the test subjects (selected by administrators) are known to the test team by numbers to avoid the possibility of any testers (who are supposed to be skilled, professional listeners) being embarrassed by an apparently poor showing, thus minimizing the so-called 'stress' of taking part in such a test.

'Stress' is the primary objection placed by audiophiles against the ABX methodology. It seems to me that participation in such a test is only stressful if, for whatever reason, you have a vested interest in the outcome. The only stress-factor, as I see it, in the proposed Harbeth test is based on the desire to win the prize!

* 'Thing' might be a piece of equipment or the result of a process.
 
Not so long ago I had a £5k (ish) pre-power combination driving my system. It was a well-known brand and, on a short-ish audition, I'd liked it very much. After a month or so, I noticed that I was listening to my system a lot less than previously, and when I did sit down to listen to music, I did so for a shorter time.

I changed the amps for another, less powerful, £5k-ish pre-power combination. All of a sudden, I found I could hardly wait to get home from work to listen to music. 6 months on, I still feel the same.

I doubt that I'd be able to pass Harbeth's test in a series of 100 A/B dems using both those amps, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind which one I prefer.
 
Not so long ago I had a £5k (ish) pre-power combination driving my system. It was a well-known brand and, on a short-ish audition, I'd liked it very much. After a month or so, I noticed that I was listening to my system a lot less than previously, and when I did sit down to listen to music, I did so for a shorter time.

I changed the amps for another, less powerful, £5k-ish pre-power combination. All of a sudden, I found I could hardly wait to get home from work to listen to music. 6 months on, I still feel the same.

I doubt that I'd be able to pass Harbeth's test in a series of 100 A/B dems using both those amps, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind which one I prefer.

But of course you're using it sighted, so you know exactly what amplifier you're using. You can see it, touch it, and know it's there, so the enjoyment you get from it may be more than just what it sounds like, it's the whole emotional package that goes with your purchase, which can't be separated from just what it sounds like.

The problem for Alan Shaw is that when asked what's the best amplifier for his 'speakers, there's no answer as it depends what one likes. That's the essence of this test:- Is there any amplifier that on sound alone, no sight, no knowledge of what it is, is better than any other? He suspects not, I agree with him, but it would be good to have a definitive test that shows this to be the case.

S.
 
Not so long ago I had a £5k (ish) pre-power combination driving my system. It was a well-known brand and, on a short-ish audition, I'd liked it very much. After a month or so, I noticed that I was listening to my system a lot less than previously, and when I did sit down to listen to music, I did so for a shorter time.
I suspect you found it a bit harsh, less enjoyable?

I changed the amps for another, less powerful, £5k-ish pre-power combination. All of a sudden, I found I could hardly wait to get home from work to listen to music. 6 months on, I still feel the same.
So possibly less harsh and more enjoyable?

I doubt that I'd be able to pass Harbeth's test in a series of 100 A/B dems using both those amps, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind which one I prefer.
I totally agree, there are differences however subtle that make all the difference no matter how small, sighted or unsighted the human senses will measure the difference in some manner or on some level and it's those difference that make or break a quality music reproduction system
 
so now people can tell they will hear an improvement between 2 amps blind even without hearing them or measuring them.....it's getting better....

anyway how can an amplifier add or subtract 'the soul'?
 
there are differences however subtle that make all the difference no matter how small, sighted or unsighted the human senses will measure the difference in some manner or on some level and it's those difference that make or break a quality music reproduction system

yes, this is utter fantasy....no offence.

our ears are easily fooled and so are our other senses.

the senses are the problem not the amplifiers.
 
I suspect you found it a bit harsh, less enjoyable?


So possibly less harsh and more enjoyable?

So what if I like "harsh". I would then presumably prefer the amplifier that was "harsher" and so, for me that would be the better amplifier?

This is the whole problem with the subjective approach. Firstly, we have the problem of definitions. For example, how do we define "harsh" that has the same meaning to someone who likes "harsh" and someone who doesn't?

Then, even assuming we can define the terms, how do we cope with those who like one particular attribute, and one who doesn't. How, then with a subjectivist approach, can we ever define good, better, best?

Is it not then a more universally useful approach to define performance in terms of the measurements and facilities and allow readers to decide if amplifier A suits their needs better than amplifier B? It's how I've bought my HiFi and anything else technical, like camera, TV, car etc for the past 40+ years

S.
 
So what if I like "harsh". I would then presumably prefer the amplifier that was "harsher" and so, for me that would be the better amplifier?

Yes of course, hence the question mark. Nowhere did I write better, just different or more precisely, difference, seeing as we're getting a little pedantic
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top