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

[Automation_engr]

Psst... Consider re-reading the root posting for this thread? Whilst off-subject sidebars are of interest, the basic fact is that this is a challenge to the "Driveability" of the speakers.
So maybe the best way to challenge this opportunity would be to compare amplification between units such as one that is basically an Audio welding machine, i.e. one that can deliver 200W at 8 ohm load and 400W at 4 ohm load; or maybe one that has a killer damping factor and ultimate caps, transformers, limited feedback, etc.
Also I would challenge back to Allen Shaw:That the program material is as significant as the mechanics-E. Power Biggs organ vs. Gary Burton vibes. Ringing and bandwith, or voice and piano...
A-B switching Yank

 

[Yank]

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.

Expectation bias would predict that I'd always prefer the latest coupling capacitor substitution in my preamp, but sometimes the improvement I'm expecting turns out to be anything but, and out comes the soldering iron to undo the last change.

But surely all 10uF caps sound the same?

 

[iant]

Expectation bias would predict that I'd always prefer the latest coupling capacitor substitution in my preamp, but sometimes the improvement I'm expecting turns out to be anything but, and out comes the soldering iron to undo the last change.

But surely all 10uF caps sound the same?

So true.I've got a cupboard full of the darn things from cheapy generic caps to audiophile approved exotics.They all sound subtly different to each other.None sound as transparent as a straight wire bypass when used in SS input or feedback circuits.

 

[Teddy Ray]

you expect a difference because you think there is a difference. it is as simple as that.


there isn't actually any difference, but your ear is easily fooled. so, so easily

 

[iant]

you expect a difference because you think there is a difference. it is as simple as that.


there isn't actually any difference, but your ear is easily fooled. so, so easily

On the contrary,I'm quite dispassionate about outcomes.No expectations at all,just simple and non complicated observations that have been verified many times over and confirmed by disinterested third parties.

 

[cansav]

Whether Mr. Shaw is correct or not, he is still missing two important points.

If two amps perform identically in a complete set of measurements, they probably will sound the same. That taken to an extreme defines two examples of the same make and model of amp. However, it is still not clear whether we do have determined what constitutes a full set of measurements or whether we are looking for the right degree of precision, i.e. how close the measurements should be before we declare them to be identical.

It's not necessarily given that a technically flawless amp is the best for drawing enjoyment from music. Lyngdorf (IIRC) used to say that a perfectly linear frequency response was pretty boring. I suppose we can still endlessly discuss what imperfection we prefer best.

I did choose to forget all about equipment (as much as one can be having invested quite a sum into what I have), but that does not mean anyone who worries about it is delusional.

 

[onlyconnect]

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.

Not really, the only way to remove expectation bias is with blind testing.

The problem is that what we call hearing is a process involving sensors in our ears and processing by our brain, which does a fantastic job of interpretation.

You cannot remove the brain from the process (!) but you can remove information it may be using so that the only variable is the actual difference in soundwaves.

You cannot assume that just because you have "no expectation" that there is no expectation bias. It is not that simple. If you know about a difference, whether or not it affects the actual soundwaves, then the brain may hear a difference.

Tim

 

[sideshowbob]

You cannot assume that just because you have "no expectation" that there is no expectation bias. It is not that simple. If you know about a difference, whether or not it affects the actual soundwaves, then the brain may hear a difference.

Exactly. This is really well known and easily demonstrable. And, before Dave pulls his usual act of being all upset and pretending that to acknowledge this is to accuse him of being "deluded": we're all deluded, we're human beings, our brains fool us all the time. It's nothing to be anxious about. But acknowledging truths about how our brains work is an essential first step in curing ourselves of some silly audiophool myths.

 

[Mescalito]

Exactly. This is really well known and easily demonstrable. And, before Dave pulls his usual act of being all upset and pretending that to acknowledge this is to accuse him of being "deluded": we're all deluded, we're human beings, our brains fool us all the time. It's nothing to be anxious about. But acknowledging truths about how our brains work is an essential first step in curing ourselves of some silly audiophool myths.

+1

Chris

 

[sonddek]

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

Yes, great point, which I tried to make earlier. My experience is that listening often overturns my bias, in the sense that the result is not only the less expected one, but also puts one in the quandary of having to choose between the one he likes and the one which sounds better. If you devote a little time, an open mind and open ears to comparison you can be more objective in exercising taste than many objectivists seem prepared to accept.

 

[arthur]

Exactly. This is really well known and easily demonstrable. And, before Dave pulls his usual act of being all upset and pretending that to acknowledge this is to accuse him of being "deluded": we're all deluded, we're human beings, our brains fool us all the time. It's nothing to be anxious about. But acknowledging truths about how our brains work is an essential first step in curing ourselves of some silly audiophool myths.

Concisely put.

But it'll cut little dash with those who must be right and feel there is something special about there brain and ears.

 

[spxy]

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.

and the evidence for that is?

that logic is just too one dimensional, life is way more complex than that.
Doesn't work for me, thats why I have audiolab stuff....

By the way if a switching test is designed it also needs to include a test of measurably different amps, this will help determine whether or by what degree the test and test process itself is skewing any results.

 

[gassor]

Expectation bias is clear to me every time I wash the car. It always drives better afterwards. And the hifi sounds better after you tidy the listening room. So when you turn the fuse round in the plug, god its like night has turned into day.

 

[spxy]

expectation bias is when you skew or ignore test results to suit your beliefs, what you guys are describing is something different.

 

[sergeauckland]

and the evidence for that is?

that logic is just too one dimensional, life is way more complex than that.
Doesn't work for me, thats why I have audiolab stuff....

Yet for me the logic is inescapable. If one buys sighted, even with matched levels, the purchase is still influenced by emotional factors.

If one truly wants to buy what sounds best, regardless of price, brand, looks, reputation, then one should make the choice blind and level matched.

Unfortunately, no dealer that I know of sells that way, nor would many customers be willing to buy that way.

S.

 

[spxy]

Yet for me the logic is inescapable. If one buys sighted, even with matched levels, the purchase is still influenced by emotional factors.


S.

emotional factors ....one of which is sound....cant you not accept sometimes people simply buy what they think sounds better and don't care about anything else?

 

[Mescalito]

emotional factors ....one of which is sound....cant you not accept sometimes people simply buy what they think sounds better and don't care about anything else?

Sound is not an emotional factor. It is simply a stream of compressions and rarefactions in an elastic medium. As such it is totally and completely described and defined by well understood physics.

Chris

 

[BlueEyes]

Will anybody be putting down the, metaphorical, gauntlet to Mr Shaw?

 

[spxy]

Sound is not an emotional factor. It is simply a stream of compressions and rarefactions in an elastic medium. As such it is totally and completely described and defined by well understood physics.

Chris

not sure if you are being serious?
Of course its our response to sound that is emotional....that doesn't / shouldn't need explaining....

 

[Mescalito]

not sure if you are being serious?
Of course its our response to sound that is emotional....that doesn't / shouldn't need explaining....

In the context of this thread I am being perfectly serious. The point I was trying (and obviously failing) to make is that we overlay the emotional impact of the music after the kit has finished with it. So, if, within the usual caveats concerning low distortion, level matching et al), 2 amps play through the same speakers, the signal & the sound subsequently produced by the signal are functionally identical. The emotions are added by us and are not associated with the sound in any physical way..

Chris