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

[lugbutz]

It sounds to me like everyone else is missing the point, which is that we listen to music with our mind and emotions engaged. Emotions don't 'colour' response; they are absolutely inherent to response.

Could not agree with you more... Music is Emotion, and I am sure that Shaw et al.. would agree as well. But what is happening is that the emotional response is being used to sell technology with no basis in fact, Marketing 101

When you want to determine whether amp A actually sounds better then amp B, you need to eliminate those variables.

 

[spxy]

Hey, spxy, that's not my post you've quoted!

(I think we are probably in agreement, but best you clarify)

yes i think we agree

 

[Mescalito]

It sounds to me like everyone else is missing the point, which is that we listen to music with our mind and emotions engaged. Emotions don't 'colour' response; they are absolutely inherent to response.

But the emotions are overlaid onto what is coming out of the speakers. If that is driven by a megabucks audiophile design or a cheap & cheerful Richer sounds special, as long as both have flat FRs, distortion <0.1 are level matched & not clipping, your emotions will have exactly the same raw material to work with. That will probably change once you know which one you are listening to, though.

Chris

 

[spxy]

Could not agree with you more... Music is Emotion, and I am sure that Shaw et al.. would agree as well. But what is happening is that the emotional response is being used to sell technology with no basis in fact, Marketing 101

When you want to determine whether amp A actually sounds better then amp B, you need to eliminate those variables.

yes but quick AB testing alone?

Not sure thats too helpful unless differences are gross.

Thats not to say ' do quick AB tests, I just believe this should be used in conjunction with more long term listening that will highlight more subtle differences , if they exist...

 

[Mescalito]

yes but quick AB testing alone?

Not sure thats too helpful unless differences are gross.

Thats not to say ' do quick AB tests, I just believe this should be used in conjunction with more long term listening that will highlight more subtle differences , if they exist...

Aural memory is horribly short lived, I am told.

Chris

 

[lugbutz]

Thats not to say ' do quick AB tests, I just believe this should be used in conjunction with more long term listening that will highlight more subtle differences , if they exist...

There is considerable evidence to suggest that quick AB is the recommended approach because of human's shortterm memory wrt sound. Essentially, the longer you leave between comparison, the greater the opportunity of coluration to occur.

Check the Harbeth Site, there are a pile of documents posted in the thread that speak to DBT.

 

[Elephantears]

AARGH spx, you've quoted him but cited me again!

Really though, I don't want to get in to an argument about what is the most 'accurate' method of testing. All I'm saying is that I don't do 15 second switch listening, and have no interest in doing so. I trust the complete emotional response, and that's how I would want to do any test. If what you say is true, then I'm at a disadvantage, but that's ok with me.

 

[spxy]

There is considerable evidence to suggest that quick AB is the recommended approach because of human's shortterm memory wrt sound. Essentially, the longer you leave between comparison, the greater the opportunity of coluration to occur.

Check the Harbeth Site, there are a pile of documents posted in the thread that speak to DBT.

you are not necessarily doing a memory test when you listen long term, only judging how a piece of equipment makes you respond to your music over a long term.

If you listen to a piece of equipment over a few weeks, and you find you want to keep listening more and more, or with another piece of equipment you just loose interest , that could indicate subtle difference are at play.

You also have to consider that our brains will be drawn to certain more obvious aspects of musical replay in a short term test that may be different to those focused on in more long term listening

there will also be more more volume variations and source material variations over the long term that a short test can possibly allow...

 

[sergeauckland]

you are not necessarily doing a memory test when you listen long term, only judging how a piece of equipment makes you respond to your music over a long term.

If you listen to a piece of equipment over a few weeks, and you find you want to keep listening more and more, or with another piece of equipment you just loose interest , that could indicate subtle difference are at play.

You also have to consider that our brains will be drawn to certain more obvious aspects of musical replay in a short term test that may be different to those focused on in more long term listening

there will also be more more volume variations and source material variations over the long term that a short test can possibly allow...

Or it could indicate that you just like one piece of kit more than the other because of looks, feel, knowing its price, reputation and so on, nothing to do with what it sounds like. In summary, you are happier with one rather than the other. That may be how you buy audio equipment, it's not how I buy it, and more to the point, it's not why Alan Shaw proposed this test. It's to eliminate all the emotional reasons for buying equipment, leaving just any sonic differences. When listened to blind and level matched, are there real audible differences between similar amplifiers?

S.

 

[spxy]

Or it could indicate that you just like one piece of kit more than the other because of looks, feel, knowing its price, reputation and so on, nothing to do with what it sounds like. In summary, you are happier with one rather than the other. That may be how you buy audio equipment, it's not how I buy it, and more to the point, it's not why Alan Shaw proposed this test. It's to eliminate all the emotional reasons for buying equipment, leaving just any sonic differences. When listened to blind and level matched, are there real audible differences between similar amplifiers?

S.

big assumption that you prefer the looks of the amp etc that sounds better, most of the stuff i've bought is not the best looking....also you are assuming emotional responses to music are not related to sound quality, er i think they are....

 

[Brian]

That's the whole point Brian.
Most amplifiers in use sit between the cheap Behringer and the expensive Krell, and in use they cannot be differentiated via listening unless you clip them or use silly loads.

So no, we shouldn't have to give a damn and should actually be focussing on the things that matter. That's the whole point of the argument, certainly from my POV.

Wires and digital (certainly in recent years) fall into the same category. The science required to understand these things is relatively simple and we should be able to move on and tackle the real problems in audio.

Just how many decades do we need to understand these simple things?

Well I personally don't give a damn. Why do you?

Thanks for the constructive post, lugbutz. Sadly still beyond my technical capabilities, but perhaps I could get someone to do it.

However I still don't like the switching approach. I think the only satisfying way to do a comparison is by sitting down and listening to a piece of music - not a 15 second section - in a relaxed manner. Then listening to it again on the next piece of equipment. Switching in the middle of a piece just goes against the grain of the listening experience and doesn't allow any kind of holistic response, where emotions and intellect are working together.

So is it possible to make some kind of volume equalizing system where I can do proper comparative listening? All it needs to do is make sure that the gain is the same on the different amps before the track starts.

I think you maybe missing the point... The idea is to remove the emotions and intellect. These, while still very imporatnt serve to colour our impressions and lead us to make subjective assessments, that go beyond the pure technical capabilities of the amp.

The question we are try to answer and understand is that all other things being constant (emotions, intellect, speakers, wiring, volume, room setup, THD,Watts, Frequency Range etc etc ) is there a audible difference between amp A and amp B.

What we are attempting to see is if there is a qualitative acoustical difference between two amplifers. I think what Shaw and others are saying is that the wholistic emotional response is what is being tapped by the advertisers at the expense of true innovations in high end audio. A beautifully construct amp is a wonderful thing, but it is still bound by the laws of physics and the board of electrical standards.

You're missing the point. The only reason for being interested in any of this is to get pleasure from listening to music in the home.

It sounds to me like everyone else is missing the point, which is that we listen to music with our mind and emotions engaged. Emotions don't 'colour' response; they are absolutely inherent to response.

That's it. The sound of a nail being hit on the head.

Could not agree with you more... Music is Emotion, and I am sure that Shaw et al.. would agree as well. But what is happening is that the emotional response is being used to sell technology with no basis in fact, Marketing 101

So what? A problem I can see in this thread and others is that people fully signed up to your agenda appear to think everyone else is taken in by foo and guff. They aren't.

When you want to determine whether amp A actually sounds better then amp B, you need to eliminate those variables.

No, you don't. It is a fundamental part of the whole thing.

 

[paskinn]

For goodness sake: people can either hear a difference or they can't. All this endless rabbiting on....'I trust my emotional response' etc. That's the whole point....don't assume you can 'trust' any perception. do the test, stop waffling. Me? reading the sheer intellectual dishonesty manifest in this thread I now suspect that even subjectivists know very well that they are talking nonsense.....andI'm a bit of a subjectivist!

 

[Brian]

you are not necessarily doing a memory test when you listen long term, only judging how a piece of equipment makes you respond to your music over a long term.

If you listen to a piece of equipment over a few weeks, and you find you want to keep listening more and more, or with another piece of equipment you just loose interest , that could indicate subtle difference are at play.

You also have to consider that our brains will be drawn to certain more obvious aspects of musical replay in a short term test that may be different to those focused on in more long term listening

there will also be more more volume variations and source material variations over the long term that a short test can possibly allow...

Or it could indicate that you just like one piece of kit more than the other because of looks, feel, knowing its price, reputation and so on, nothing to do with what it sounds like. In summary, you are happier with one rather than the other. That may be how you buy audio equipment, it's not how I buy it, and more to the point, it's not why Alan Shaw proposed this test. It's to eliminate all the emotional reasons for buying equipment, leaving just any sonic differences. When listened to blind and level matched, are there real audible differences between similar amplifiers?

S.

Absolute rubbish. You're wrong to assume people are dimwits if they don't buy something based on your particular methodology.

 

[sergeauckland]

Absolute rubbish. You're wrong to assume people are dimwits if they don't buy something based on your particular methodology.

Nothing to do with being dimwits. People can buy on whatever methodology they like. If you want to buy on how the equipment makes you feel, that's fine, but just accept that it may have nothing to do with what it sounds like.

S.

 

[darrylfunk]

ok - the soul of music is in the listener....

we know this, it's how music 'works' it's why we all like different things.

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=117780

amplifiers do not add or subtract 'soul'

 

[sergeauckland]

Well I personally don't give a damn. Why do you?




You're missing the point. The only reason for being interested in any of this is to get pleasure from listening to music in the home.



No, you don't. It is a fundamental part of the whole thing.

Think about what Alan Shaw is trying to achieve. People keep asking him what's the best amplifier to use with his 'speaker. He's asking us, those with an interest in HiFi to help him to find if there's any one amplifier that's better than any other. The first step in that is finding if any amplifier is actually different to any other, for which he's willing to give away a nice pair of 'speakers to anyone able to distinguish two technically equally good amplifiers under blind conditions. It seems a perfectly sensible way of going about things. Why hasn't there been a path beaten to his door by HiFi enthusiasts willing and able to distinguish two amplifiers that everyone knows are different? Why are so many so reluctant to test what they have been saying on these Fora?

S.

 

[sergeauckland]

big assumption that you prefer the looks of the amp etc that sounds better, most of the stuff i've bought is not the best looking....also you are assuming emotional responses to music are not related to sound quality, er i think they are....

No, I see it as the other way round, the amplifier you prefer the looks of will sound better. It could of course be inverse snobbery, one feels that the uglier amplifier must be better, just like the more horrible medicine must be better for you. If one buys sighted, without blind listening and level matching, then every purchase is an emotional purchase.

S.

 

[lugbutz]

Nothing to do with being dimwits. People can buy on whatever methodology they like. If you want to buy on how the equipment makes you feel, that's fine, but just accept that it may have nothing to do with what it sounds like.

S.

Here!! Here!!

 

[Yank]

A-B testing is fine for making quick judgements about frequency response related issues. But it takes long term listening to suss out changes in texture and microdynamics.

 

[dave]

No, I see it as the other way round, the amplifier you prefer the looks of will sound better. It could of course be inverse snobbery, one feels that the uglier amplifier must be better, just like the more horrible medicine must be better for you. If one buys sighted, without blind listening and level matching, then every purchase is an emotional purchase.

S.

Serge, it sounds you're forcing the pieces to fit the puzzle.

For example, I have two different mains cables both distributed by my gear manufacturer who I trust implicitly when it comes to SQ recommendations.

The current, larger AWG cable has been deemed slightly better in every area of performance by my manufacturer vs the older, thinner, less expensive mains cable it replaced due to supplier problems.

Forgetting for a moment your belief that all cables sound the same with similar L-C-R characteristics, why is it I found the older thinner less expensive cable sounds considerably better than its replacement and against the advice of my manufacturer ? As well, it has more bass than the thicker cable which goes against accepted audiophile doctrine altogether.

All of this goes against every theory surrounding expectation bias that I'm aware of. If we are hopelessly influenced by external factors my experience couldn't be true.

Sorry but I believe self-preservation kicks in for all of us when it comes to spending any sum of money (or little in the case of both my inexpensive cables) and protects us all. In other words, we buy what we buy because we like it.

regards,

dave