Challenge From Harbeth... (part II)

[sergeauckland]

That's part of the reason I offered an alternate test. I found the suggestion of a rigged test absurd under the circumstances.

Either the original test or your modified test were fine as far as I was concerned. Both would have resulted in the same findings, as both were valid.

The original test was just so much more convenient, and anyone with half an iota of audio engineering knowledge would accept the original test as valid.

It's sad that some here don't have even that half-iota of technical knowledge, preferring blind faith.

s.

 

[Robert]

I'd say two things.

No switch means no level matched A/B, unless I've missed something as i stopped following the thread when it became obvious people weren't interested. So you eliminate a switch but introduce aspects which many will claim, with good evidence, invalidate the test. If whatever you proposed did allow for this, then you have my apologies.

Some things are just so barking bonkers that you have to put your foot down and stand firm.
Supporting a view that a switch used in the way suggested could possibly mask the test result is pandering to ignorance IMO.

all that you get is people throwing rocks at one another. For ever.

You'll get that regardless. It was never going to be any different!

 

[paskinn]

Page 43. And no sign of surrender on either (all) sides. Is this a record?
NB: If Harbeth have a pair of unclaimed speakers...could I have them ? (please).

 

[sergeauckland]

Page 43. And no sign of surrender on either (all) sides. Is this a record?
NB: If Harbeth have a pair of unclaimed speakers...could I have them ? (please).

Only if you can hear the difference between two otherwise decent amplifiers

S.

 

[Alan Sircom]

I'd say two things.

No switch means no level matched A/B, unless I've missed something as i stopped following the thread when it became obvious people weren't interested. So you eliminate a switch but introduce aspects which many will claim, with good evidence, invalidate the test. If whatever you proposed did allow for this, then you have my apologies.

Some things are just so barking bonkers that you have to put your foot down and stand firm.
Supporting a view that a switch used in the way suggested could possibly mask the test result is pandering to ignorance IMO.

The idea was to level match before the test, ensure the volume controls cannot be adjusted and swap from amp to amp at the speaker terminals.

And standing firm in this case could be seen as preserving ignorance, rather than pandering to it. My plan was to try to find a way that would structure the test so that both sides would find it agreeable, which would at least have (in theory, not as it transpired in reality) ended with the test being performed.

I still maintain that no test is a worse scenario than no switch. As it is, we ended up with both.

 

[MVV]

This is so silly. In a blind test no-one could hear if a switch was in one of two identical systems.

 

[sergeauckland]

This is so silly. In a blind test no-one could hear a switch in one of two identical systems.

You would think not, but there are those here who claim not only to hear switches, but the difference between equipment stands, capacitors, resistive attenuators, not to mention cables, there are even those loonies claiming to hear the difference between mains cables...go figure.

If such people claim things which are so outre, is it any wonder they claimed a switch would invalidate a test? There's nothing so strong as blind faith, however misguided.

S.

 

[MVV]

Scalford would be a good way to try it. Same room; am can you hear a switch? Pm can you hear a difference between three switched and level matched amps? We could bet on it, I would put a grand on two answers of no.

 

[dave]

INTERMISSION

Anyone have any details about The Harbeth Integrated Amplifier?

 

[merlin]

But, I say again, which is more constructive - no switch, or no test?

I'd say the latter - otherwise you are guilty of lowering your standards to pander to the lunatic fringe.

Many have tried and all have failed. An audiophile and his beliefs are, in truth, probably best left unchallenged.

 

[merlin]

INTERMISSION

Anyone have any details about The Harbeth Integrated Amplifier?

All I know Dave is it sounds exactly the same as all other amplifiers if used correctly within their performance envelope

 

[sideshowbob]

INTERMISSION

Anyone have any details about The Harbeth Integrated Amplifier?

Does it even exist? Last I heard about it Alan Shaw was considering it, but not much detail had been decided.

 

[dave]

All I know Dave is it sounds exactly the same as all other amplifiers if used correctly within their performance envelope

Which makes me wonder why he's bothering ;-)

 

[sideshowbob]

He answers that himself on the Harbeth forum:

We raised the subject of a Harbeth stereo remote controlled amplifier and discussed it in depth here (link to follow). I and my distributors here the the Far East have discussed this together in depth. We've also looked at the positive and negative (or let's rather say, cautious) comments the subject generated. My reading of the situation is this:

Those of us 'in' the business on the supply side unanimously believe that for Harbeth to offer an amplifier would benefit the Harbeth brand image and solve the anxious customer's concerns about what amplifier to use - even though I have stated many times that Harbeth speakers are a universal load. There is only approval for the idea from this side of the desk.
Some consumers are luke-warm to the idea citing anecdotal reasons why the Harbeth brand should not extend beyond its core loudspeaker products. None of these stand careful scrutiny, especially in China, where brand leverage is normal and expected; example Mercedes cars and Mercedes watches.

http://www.harbeth.co.uk/usergroup/showthread.php?872-The-Harbeth-integrated-amplifier

Mind you, that was 2 years ago and who knows if he's actually got any further with it.

 

[dave]

Does it even exist? Last I heard about it Alan Shaw was considering it, but not much detail had been decided.

IIRC it was in the works with with an outside firm contracted but I've heard nothing else about it.

Just curious more than anything to see what he'd specify and maybe why he'd even bother since there's allegedly so many competent or "sufficient" designs on the market.

FWIW, I do like his attitude that he's more interested in the bloke that walks into the shop just looking for some sort of system that will play his music in the most pleasing way vs some chap armed with magazines and a head full of the latest marketing crap.

P.S. thanks for the extra info Ian...reading now...

 

[sideshowbob]

Well, I think what he says, quoted above, is a pretty honest answer to that question.

 

[dave]

Another nice one from Alan:

" The true music lover
Let's not get too tightly focused on tone controls or any other specific feature of the amp. My point is that the user should be provided with as many features as will allow him to get the very best sound at home, in an environment a million miles from the money-no-object acoustics of the concert hall or recording studio. To deprive him of the very facilities which a professional sound engineer uses every day on every recording by default is just downright wrong whatever marketing BS has indoctrinated a generation that 'less is more'.

My first introduction to high fidelity sound at home was when I was about 11 years old. My school friend's father was the deputy headmaster, and head of the English department. At their home he has a study, lined floor to ceiling with books. In there he would spend his evenings in his Hush Puppy suede shoes, smoking a pipe with a glass of wine to hand. He had thousands of records, and marking homework or researching he always had classical music playing, and in later life taught musical appreciation too. His entire system was QUAD, initially the valve 22/II and later the 33/303. He could not be remotely called an 'audiophile'. He knew nothing about technical matters and cared even less about them. He was a true, 100% music lover. His encyclopaedic knowledge of English language, literature and drama (he was into amateur dramatics), and of art and of music was vast.

So when I said, a few posts ago,
... have always admired the QUAD marketing strategy of the 50-80s, where the true music lover pops into his hifi dealer and says, 'give me a system preferably from one credible brand .... I'm not interested in the technology, reviews, cosmetics, shape, size, colour or price - but I do expect tone controls that allow me to get the best from my listening room and source material' ...
... I have had in mind that very consumer.

I may be wrong of course, but I suspect that most true music lovers are ambivalent to hi-fi equipment. Certainly musicians are. So our marketing position would be, frankly, that the dedicated died-in-the-wool audiophile would never be a potential customer for a Harbeth amp. It wouldn't have the right name, colour, shape, size, technology, features, reviews, cult and would be too cheap. So let's not kid ourselves that we would ever sell a single piece to that group - we wouldn't.
Alan A. Shaw
Designer, owner
Harbeth Audio UK"

 

[Evil Emperor]

I'd say the latter - otherwise you are guilty of lowering your standards to pander to the lunatic fringe.

Many have tried and all have failed. An audiophile and his beliefs are, in truth, probably best left unchallenged.

So, precisely how do you get from your ivory tower to your high horse without getting your feet dirty?

 

[Evil Emperor]

Another nice one from Alan:

" The true music lover
Let's not get too tightly focused on tone controls or any other specific feature of the amp. My point is that the user should be provided with as many features as will allow him to get the very best sound at home, in an environment a million miles from the money-no-object acoustics of the concert hall or recording studio. To deprive him of the very facilities which a professional sound engineer uses every day on every recording by default is just downright wrong whatever marketing BS has indoctrinated a generation that 'less is more'.

My first introduction to high fidelity sound at home was when I was about 11 years old. My school friend's father was the deputy headmaster, and head of the English department. At their home he has a study, lined floor to ceiling with books. In there he would spend his evenings in his Hush Puppy suede shoes, smoking a pipe with a glass of wine to hand. He had thousands of records, and marking homework or researching he always had classical music playing, and in later life taught musical appreciation too. His entire system was QUAD, initially the valve 22/II and later the 33/303. He could not be remotely called an 'audiophile'. He knew nothing about technical matters and cared even less about them. He was a true, 100% music lover. His encyclopaedic knowledge of English language, literature and drama (he was into amateur dramatics), and of art and of music was vast.

So when I said, a few posts ago,
... have always admired the QUAD marketing strategy of the 50-80s, where the true music lover pops into his hifi dealer and says, 'give me a system preferably from one credible brand .... I'm not interested in the technology, reviews, cosmetics, shape, size, colour or price - but I do expect tone controls that allow me to get the best from my listening room and source material' ...
... I have had in mind that very consumer.

I may be wrong of course, but I suspect that most true music lovers are ambivalent to hi-fi equipment. Certainly musicians are. So our marketing position would be, frankly, that the dedicated died-in-the-wool audiophile would never be a potential customer for a Harbeth amp. It wouldn't have the right name, colour, shape, size, technology, features, reviews, cult and would be too cheap. So let's not kid ourselves that we would ever sell a single piece to that group - we wouldn't.
Alan A. Shaw
Designer, owner
Harbeth Audio UK"

Well at least he's consistent. He sounds as dreary as his loudspeakers.

I just don't get this Harbeth thing. Is everyone an insomniac or something? Do you all just hate bass and dynamic range? Were you bitten by a volume control as a boy and are now afraid to use one?

I can sort of understand the Japanese lapping up the whole Harbeth schtick. They love the idea of Jolly Old England, and Harbeth loudspeakers look and sound like they were made by people who drink tea and eat scones and listen to Down Your Way every Sunday on the Home Service.

 

[dave]

Well at least he's consistent. He sounds as dreary as his loudspeakers.

I just don't get this Harbeth thing. Is everyone an insomniac or something? Do you all just hate bass and dynamic range? Were you bitten by a volume control as a boy and are now afraid to use one?

I can sort of understand the Japanese lapping up the whole Harbeth schtick. They love the idea of Jolly Old England, and Harbeth loudspeakers look and sound like they were made by people who drink tea and eat scones and listen to Down Your Way every Sunday on the Home Service.

Perhaps Harbeth owners don't worry too much about dynamic range, bass or any of the other hifi jargon that others fret about.?