advertisement


who on the forum thinks all amps sound the same?

it has to involve changing the electrical value of something, you obviously no zilch about the physics of electronics.
Click to expand...

As the subjective and objective in audio are quite separate entities this is irrelevant.

I'm the listener.

When I go to a restaurant I don't work in the kitchen.
 
What's wrong with subjectively loving your hi fi sound while also knowing it measures extremely well as it was designed by objective engineers? It almost seems like Steve doesn't think this could not happen. My system would be in the "objective" ground but I LOVE the sound.
 
Darryl your first question was:

steven, how do think a capacitor maker makes a capacitor....how do they make sure it meets it's specifications?
or do you think it's magic?
Click to expand...

This was my answer:


If a capacitor has been changed for one of a different value (measured of course) what would be the final test?
Click to expand...
 
It almost seems like Steve doesn't think this could not happen.
Click to expand...

I'm somewhat thrown by the double negative here.

There's a straw man under construction here I suspect as well as a possible failure to grasp the idea that one can follow another but this may not necessarily be the case.

If something measures well it will likely sound good but this is by no means certain so subjective listening is still necessary.

Is this really so difficult to grasp or have some folks really got their heads stuck up their arses?

To conceptualise the notion that one thing should follow another but this is by no means automatic:

http://vlex.co.uk/vid/utral-citation-number-2000-ewhc-admin-52635173
 
S-Man said:
No, that is exactly why I made this pint hic, sorry point:

"So we should all be using HT stuff, then we can be more easliy fooled into thinking we are hearing the voices and instruments we see on the screen.

Ditch your 2 ch everyone! "
Click to expand...

Yeh but when I see that i know the sound and sight of his mouth don't match so I use the video to supplement and override the audio.
 
Darryl, it is a double negative. There are two verbs, both in the negative in the sentence. You are right about the ambiguity though.
 
Steven Toy said:
I'm somewhat thrown by the double negative here.

There's a straw man under construction here I suspect as well as a possible failure to grasp the idea that one can follow another but this may not necessarily be the case.

If something measures well it will likely sound good but this is by no means certain so subjective listening is still necessary.

Is this really so difficult to grasp or have some folks really got their heads stuck up their arses?

To conceptualise the notion that one thing should follow another but this is by no means automatic:

http://vlex.co.uk/vid/utral-citation-number-2000-ewhc-admin-52635173
Click to expand...

are you having some kind of mental breakdown?
 
sq225917 said:
Yeh but when I see that i know the sound and sight of his mouth don't match so I use the video to supplement and override the audio.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean and maybe I didn't make my point clear...

If the mind is so easily inluenced by visual input then maybe we are all wasting our time trying to extract a bit more info/detail/pleasure from a 2-ch system and it would be much easier to "hear" the extra stuff by seeing it at the same time (i.e. with no attempt by the visuals to fool us, but rather to help us).

To be honest, this is not my POV. I don't want the distraction of the visual input. Of course this preference is most likely based on a lifetime of 2-ch conditioning.
 
Norman Green said:
‘All amps sound different’.

It would be easy to find just 2 amps which sound the same and thus the above statement would be disproved.



‘All amps sound the same’

It would be easy to find just 2 amps which sound different and thus this statement is also disproved.



Given, of course, common listening conditions, ears, and ancillary equipment.

I don’t think an extensive listening test is needed!
Click to expand...

your opening questions are opposites obviously but kind of miss the point i was making.....

i asked a simple question regarding the common assumption that a few posters on pfm think that some other posters believe 'all amps sound the same' .....now as far as we have gone in this topic not a single user has said all amps sound the same....some have even postulated that it is possible for 2 identical amps to sound and even possibly measure different due to component level variables.

the only point of me asking the question was to find out if people who accuse others of blindly believing all amps sound the same then we would find out who they were.
but there are not any pfm members who agree with the premise in my opening question.

i do hope this clears up any confusion.

regards.
d.
 
extraneous apostrophe notwithstanding.
Click to expand...
There's no extraneous apostrophe, it's a close quote...

When is a subjective test not a "subjective test"?
Click to expand...
It's very simple. Steven does subjective tests, he doesn't do "subjective listening test"s.

It is perfectly valid to do holistic testing and form a preference, the mistake is to take what you experience doing this and ascribe it to the sound of the amp. It is straightforward to listen subjectively, you just need to remove the confounding inputs and use your ears. Listen to Jackal's cartridge needle drops in another thread, that's a "subjective listening test".

Personally I think that if you are pursuing hifi then subjectivity (in the literal sense) isn't appropriate. It also leads people into mazes of choice and confusion. But to many that's a valid hobby and there's nothing wrong with it, it just has little to do with the pursuit of fidelity.

Paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top