Yank
Bulbous Also Tapered
I'm always suspicious that the switching device which allows level matching is at least partly responsible for the absence of differences?
Are differences just in our heads or just mine?
- Thread starter Avonessence
- Start date
I'm always suspicious that the switching device which allows level matching is at least partly responsible for the absence of differences?
dave
Plywood King
I've heard a cheap cassette deck sound exactly like an LP-12 when someone synched the two and switched back and forth between them quickly. For me, the differences are most apparent when you play ten seconds of music on one device and then repeat the same ten seconds on the other device. Repeat in any order thereafter.
Personally i think this is a poor way of comparing setups as my experience is that the brain is poor at picking out instantaneous differences. It is especially flawed as you would be hearing consecutive sections of music on the different amps, not the SAME segment as just played on the previous amp. In my experience you need at least 30 seconds to a minute or so on one setup to get into the music and then repeat the same segment on the other gear.
FWIW when there was a poll a few months ago comparing 256 kb/s AAC coding against CD quality I was one of the few that got the identity correct ( and I didn't do it by guessing, I heard genuine consistent differences). I did this by playing the whole track in it's entirety (or at least in 2 minute segements) for each version for about 6-8 times over. The first couple of plays just familiarised myself with the music, then after that I just listened out for recording ambience and following the groove/flow and timbre/texture of individual instruments or voices. Assuming that the amps are reasonably capable I wouldn't expect there to be major differences in frequency response between them and that would be the most obvious thing to spot with a switching box. Therefore the method I just described would be more appropriate IMO for discerning the differences.
So the usual protagonists with their usual fixed opinions 
Here's mine.
Amps do sound different , no idea if this only applies to ones that measure differently but I am certain that you cannot measure two amps and consistantly say which will sound better. From most sighted and blind tests I have heard you can't get everyone to agree which is better consistantly and it is often dependent on the material the amp is trying to reproduce.
I have taken part in only one DBT of amps , it was for SE , Triode, Pentode and transformer less Valve amps with a SS amp as a reference. It was not difficult to identify differences and most of those attending could consistantly identify the different amps. The only surprise was how good and close the sound from the low cost SS amp was to the esoteric valve amps.
The use of DBT is not the standard in scientific tests, most have an absolute result. DBT is a test that relies on statistical data where an absolute cannot be measured. IMO DBT in audio is a poor test as it relies on audio memory and for this reason can just as easily produce false negatives and false positives. It will produce sucessful results for gross differences but is poor at identifying subjective differences that most people find enhance their listening experience.
Here's mine.
Amps do sound different , no idea if this only applies to ones that measure differently but I am certain that you cannot measure two amps and consistantly say which will sound better. From most sighted and blind tests I have heard you can't get everyone to agree which is better consistantly and it is often dependent on the material the amp is trying to reproduce.
I have taken part in only one DBT of amps , it was for SE , Triode, Pentode and transformer less Valve amps with a SS amp as a reference. It was not difficult to identify differences and most of those attending could consistantly identify the different amps. The only surprise was how good and close the sound from the low cost SS amp was to the esoteric valve amps.
The use of DBT is not the standard in scientific tests, most have an absolute result. DBT is a test that relies on statistical data where an absolute cannot be measured. IMO DBT in audio is a poor test as it relies on audio memory and for this reason can just as easily produce false negatives and false positives. It will produce sucessful results for gross differences but is poor at identifying subjective differences that most people find enhance their listening experience.
darrylfunk
Banned
all listening relies on audio memory....the weakness in all tests is that our memory is always bad.
that is why using a logical test will always statistically reveal a more accurate choice.
darrylfunk
Banned
unfortunately it is essential that volume is matched so use of a volume control is pretty sensible, most hi fi systems actually come free with one when you buy them.
darrylfunk
Banned
so what benefit do you get from using only ten seconds of a track that completely negates the meaning of the song?
that means you are listening to sounds, not music.
darrylfunk
Banned
most interesting post, because your last three words.....
Yank
Bulbous Also Tapered
Depends on where in the signal path the switch box puts the volume control.
Greg
2t5b
are you sure about this?
darrylfunk
Banned
how is it not the same for both signals and why would it degrade the signal so much as to obliterate any differences when they are pretty much the same as any normal volume control....????
Hi Greg.
The EL84 valve is really a guitar amp valve. Gutarists use it to enhance sound. Gives that crisp tone etc. They are interested in effect and embellishment.
Obviously the transformers have effect on sound too. It is possible that people got tired of amps sounding neutral and not influencing sound just as they got tired of tone controls.
You can't be sure about anything in hi fi as you dont' sit with the master tape for comparison. So having seen a few phases and trends come and go, it is just an idea that has possibilities in this somewhat daft hobby
darrylfunk
Banned
the el84 was designed by mullard for audio use - where do you get this notion that it's for guitar amps?
Was it designed purely for high fidelity in the way that GEC KT 88 was?. More of a multi-purpose valve the EL84 don't you think?
darrylfunk
Banned
have you not heard of the mullard 5-10 amp.
darrylfunk
Banned
similar in the amount of distortion they produce
Steven Toy
Accuphase newbie
Yawn. (the thread itself is not boring)