Which Amp

[DMK]

Not all experiences are created equal or of equal value, right? Just like opinions, some are much better than others.
And the implied suggestion is also fatally flawed since no mention is made of biase, its affect on perception, and the subsequent reliability of the experience.

Right. that's why you and I have the ultimate judgment of whether we choose to believe the opinions and experiences. And it's highly unlikely the poster will care either way we go. To him, his experience is highly valuable.

The implied suggestion is "try it for yourself". Very few audiophiles find anything more powerful than their own perceptions, including bias - right or wrong. But then, I'm not telling you anything you don't already know!

[RobotCzar]

Right. that's why you and I have the ultimate judgment of whether we choose to believe the opinions and experiences. And it's highly unlikely the poster will care either way we go. To him, his experience is highly valuable.

The implied suggestion is "try it for yourself". Very few audiophiles find anything more powerful than their own perceptions, including bias - right or wrong. But then, I'm not telling you anything you don't already know!

I just want to say that I do not find a lot to disagree with in DMKs comments in this area. I disagree with his notion that there are "subtle" differences in amps, but what I really object to is his standards of proof and evidence. We have been over this a lot, but the scientifically correct view is that it is up to those making an assertion to prove it. Scientific investigation never tries to find all instances of a phenomina (e.g., all listeners). The philosophical postion that "not everyone has been tested" is merely a dodge to get the onus of proof off of those making a claim. This could be said about any scientific law or principle (e.g., not all matter has been check to see if gravity is the same for it as other matter).

The other thing that bugs me is this notion that we should all be "fair" and "accept" the views of others as they have a right to their beliefs and opinions. That is all well add good, but there is such a thing as evidences and that evidence is being ignored by a large number of "audiophiles", so much so that the extreme subjectivist magazines are now the mainstream in audio publications. Many ridiculous and unsupported concepts are taken as fact in the audio world and I find that detrimental to the hobby (or whatever you want to call it).

Perhaps the worst notion in home audio is that idea that you can simply listen and compare components. The number of variables affecting what you here is very large and a listener cannot control them all. Perhaps the most ignored variable is the listener's own expectations--one's expectations are PROVEN to effect ones perceptions therefore you can never get control of that variable unless you blind yourself. The second variable most ignored is level, but there are many, many other factors that make it impossible to get a comparison that, for example, removes all audible variables except the current from the amp. Audiophiles' "own perceptions" ARE powerful, they just happen to be very unreliable. (This unreliabity has been established in several listening tests that I AM aware of.)

I'd really like to talk about skeptic's idea that our standard measurements are lacking. There are two problems with his position at this point:

1) he merely criticizes by saying that frequency response measurements into 8 ohms of resistive impedance is inadequre, instead of giving some evidence that frequecy response changes into 4 ohms (or non-resistive loads) with typical amps. In other words, he needs some evidence other than his opinions.

2) he keeps saying he hears difference in amps, but there is no credible evidence (I am aware of) that anyone has demonstated this. If he can he should share the details with us (and not use old amps that may not be performing up to spec).

[rb122]

Perhaps the worst notion in home audio is that idea that you can simply listen and compare components. The number of variables affecting what you here is very large and a listener cannot control them all. Perhaps the most ignored variable is the listener's own expectations--one's expectations are PROVEN to effect ones perceptions therefore you can never get control of that variable unless you blind yourself. The second variable most ignored is level, but there are many, many other factors that make it impossible to get a comparison that, for example, removes all audible variables except the current from the amp. Audiophiles' "own perceptions" ARE powerful, they just happen to be very unreliable. (This unreliabity has been established in several listening tests that I AM aware of.) ).

Robot,

We've heard all of this many times in the past. However, I don't think it really hit home for me until I read the above. Your comments were succinct but thorough. I think every audiophile owes it to him/herself to read this and take heed. Thanks.

[RobotCzar]

Robot,

We've heard all of this many times in the past. However, I don't think it really hit home for me until I read the above. Your comments were succinct but thorough. I think every audiophile owes it to him/herself to read this and take heed. Thanks.

Hey rb, how are you doing? I have taken a part time job at an instructor and my class uses a computer-lab with fast Internet access, so I have some time to read and respond in AR (while they are working on projects). Find any good LPs lately? Have I ever asked you about your views on direct-to-disc LPs?

Thanks for your kind comment. As you know, I think there are many factors that are important in getting a good (i.e., realistic) result in home audio. Too bad so many people are attending to the wrong ones (in my opinion). Pehaps it is simply easier for some people to spend a lot of money on snobby equipment rather than to learn what really matters.

[mtrycraft]

[QUOTE=RobotCzar] Have I ever asked you about your views on direct-to-disc LPs?

QUOTE]

I had some before the CD was affordable. They sounded nice. Those vinyls have long been sold

[DMK]

[QUOTE=mtrycraft]

Have I ever asked you about your views on direct-to-disc LPs?

QUOTE]

I had some before the CD was affordable. They sounded nice. Those vinyls have long been sold

When did the CD become affordable? I missed that! I was buying new vinyl in 1989 for about $8 just before I bought my first CD player and gasped at the $14 price tag for CD's. By the time I realized that the CD was a sonic step backward, new vinyl had all but disappeared. But maybe some of your LP's are now in my collection!

I never heard a CD (to my knowledge) until 1989. Did you adopt the format pretty early? I've heard the very early players were pretty awful. They've seemed to stabilize these days and my current experiences are much better than those I had in my early digital days.

[mtrycraft]

When did the CD become affordable? I missed that! I was buying new vinyl in 1989 for about $8 just before I bought my first CD player and gasped at the $14 price tag for CD's. By the time I realized that the CD was a sonic step backward, new vinyl had all but disappeared. But maybe some of your LP's are now in my collection!

I never heard a CD (to my knowledge) until 1989. Did you adopt the format pretty early? I've heard the very early players were pretty awful. They've seemed to stabilize these days and my current experiences are much better than those I had in my early digital days.

I meant the CD palyer was affordable to switch. CD was about what the direct to disc were. I never saw then at $8 but closer to $15 so I had a few to try.
Now that you ask, I don't remember when I changed but I heard it by 1985 or so. I doubt I paid $1k for the new stuff so the price had to have come down a lot.
I had no problems with the early players what I heard. Sounded great, better than vinyl, so I started to save for the day of the coming

[rb122]

Hey rb, how are you doing? I have taken a part time job at an instructor and my class uses a computer-lab with fast Internet access, so I have some time to read and respond in AR (while they are working on projects). Find any good LPs lately? Have I ever asked you about your views on direct-to-disc LPs?

Thanks for your kind comment. As you know, I think there are many factors that are important in getting a good (i.e., realistic) result in home audio. Too bad so many people are attending to the wrong ones (in my opinion). Pehaps it is simply easier for some people to spend a lot of money on snobby equipment rather than to learn what really matters.

I am well, sir! It's good to see you back on the forum, albeit somewhat sporadically. I trust things are going well for you.

Have I found any good LP's lately? Yes, indeed! I had to pass over a fairly large cache of 1950's and 1960's jazz because the price was prohibitive but I've found a number of Concord Jazz discs from the '70's and quite a fair amount of classical. I've purchased only a very few CD's this year. I'll have to check and see if I own any direct-to-disc LP's. I'm really a poor excuse for an audiophile! As you know, I take a purely personal stance on audio i.e what sounds proper to me is proper. I'm not too concerned about accuracy as it is measured. My system is modest by audiophile standards and it was all purchased on the used market. I have a day job to help support my family and my "play" money comes from my gigs which are few and far between these days! My point is that I purchased my system almost at once and I have no desire and no means to go through the arduous upgrade process that consumes my audiophile brethren

I believe most audiophiles don't really want to know how the equipment does what it does, assuming it does anything different. If the mystique goes, the interest might wane.

As always, it's a pleasure chatting with you. Best wishes!

Rob

[DMK]

I am well, sir! It's good to see you back on the forum, albeit somewhat sporadically. I trust things are going well for you.

Have I found any good LP's lately? Yes, indeed! I had to pass over a fairly large cache of 1950's and 1960's jazz because the price was prohibitive but I've found a number of Concord Jazz discs from the '70's and quite a fair amount of classical. I've purchased only a very few CD's this year. I'll have to check and see if I own any direct-to-disc LP's. I'm really a poor excuse for an audiophile! As you know, I take a purely personal stance on audio i.e what sounds proper to me is proper. I'm not too concerned about accuracy as it is measured. My system is modest by audiophile standards and it was all purchased on the used market. I have a day job to help support my family and my "play" money comes from my gigs which are few and far between these days! My point is that I purchased my system almost at once and I have no desire and no means to go through the arduous upgrade process that consumes my audiophile brethren

I believe most audiophiles don't really want to know how the equipment does what it does, assuming it does anything different. If the mystique goes, the interest might wane.

As always, it's a pleasure chatting with you. Best wishes!

Rob

...let me see if I have the facts straight and then I'll add one or two of my own:

1) You found a bunch of '50's and '60's used jazz LP's for sale somewhere.
2) You did not purchase same, meaning they were, at least for a short time after you found them, still available.
3) You dishonored your A/R brothers by not telling us where they were.
4) I'm going to have to hurt you! I'm sorry, but you deserve nothing less!

I just found a bunch of the same era jazz LP's about two months ago. The price was high and it cost me the Sota Cosmos turntable I was saving up for but they were worth it! That Roy DuNann at Contemporary Records in particular could sure record! Absolutely stunning sound.

[rb122]

...let me see if I have the facts straight and then I'll add one or two of my own:

1) You found a bunch of '50's and '60's used jazz LP's for sale somewhere.
2) You did not purchase same, meaning they were, at least for a short time after you found them, still available.
3) You dishonored your A/R brothers by not telling us where they were.
4) I'm going to have to hurt you! I'm sorry, but you deserve nothing less!

I just found a bunch of the same era jazz LP's about two months ago. The price was high and it cost me the Sota Cosmos turntable I was saving up for but they were worth it! That Roy DuNann at Contemporary Records in particular could sure record! Absolutely stunning sound.

As much as I enjoy my "A/R brothers", I would be silly to even breathe a hint of where this vinyl be reside if I ever wanted another chance at it. I believe I've mentioned before that you, in particular, are gluttonous when it comes to LP's. I would not want to add to that. It is, after all, a sin!

Roy is still around! I don't think he's recording much anymore, though. Have you heard "Way Out West" by Sonny Rollins or any of the old Hampton Hawes LP's? THAT, my friend, is what small band jazz sounds like in a club. Good luck finding that quality on CD.

[DMK]

I just want to say that I do not find a lot to disagree with in DMKs comments in this area. I disagree with his notion that there are "subtle" differences in amps, but what I really object to is his standards of proof and evidence. We have been over this a lot, but the scientifically correct view is that it is up to those making an assertion to prove it. Scientific investigation never tries to find all instances of a phenomina (e.g., all listeners). The philosophical postion that "not everyone has been tested" is merely a dodge to get the onus of proof off of those making a claim. This could be said about any scientific law or principle (e.g., not all matter has been check to see if gravity is the same for it as other matter).

The other thing that bugs me is this notion that we should all be "fair" and "accept" the views of others as they have a right to their beliefs and opinions. That is all well add good, but there is such a thing as evidences and that evidence is being ignored by a large number of "audiophiles", so much so that the extreme subjectivist magazines are now the mainstream in audio publications. Many ridiculous and unsupported concepts are taken as fact in the audio world and I find that detrimental to the hobby (or whatever you want to call it).

Perhaps the worst notion in home audio is that idea that you can simply listen and compare components. The number of variables affecting what you here is very large and a listener cannot control them all. Perhaps the most ignored variable is the listener's own expectations--one's expectations are PROVEN to effect ones perceptions therefore you can never get control of that variable unless you blind yourself. The second variable most ignored is level, but there are many, many other factors that make it impossible to get a comparison that, for example, removes all audible variables except the current from the amp. Audiophiles' "own perceptions" ARE powerful, they just happen to be very unreliable. (This unreliabity has been established in several listening tests that I AM aware of.)

I'd really like to talk about skeptic's idea that our standard measurements are lacking. There are two problems with his position at this point:

1) he merely criticizes by saying that frequency response measurements into 8 ohms of resistive impedance is inadequre, instead of giving some evidence that frequecy response changes into 4 ohms (or non-resistive loads) with typical amps. In other words, he needs some evidence other than his opinions.

2) he keeps saying he hears difference in amps, but there is no credible evidence (I am aware of) that anyone has demonstated this. If he can he should share the details with us (and not use old amps that may not be performing up to spec).

I did not say that there are subtle differences in power amps, at least not one SS to another. I said it's possible. You are not even allowing for the possibility that you could be wrong. I'm certainly no scientist but that doesn't sound very scientific to me.

I wasn't aware that I had standards of proof and evidence! I guess if I do, they are pretty simple. I don't require proof of any kind when it comes to someone's perceptions. If they say they heard it, that's fine with me. I may believe that they merely perceived something and it had nothing to do with the different amp or whatever and that is my right. In most cases, all these people are stating is an opinion of what their perception lead them to believe. You are free to discount it. If you do (and you obviously do in each and every case), why not just leave it at that? The bigger question is, what makes you think that anyone on this board or in any remote corner of the globe owes you any proof of what they perceive???? Put another way, who cares if you want proof? And how is the fact that some people ignore evidence detrimental to the hobby, particularly if their experiences fly in the face of that evidence?

I agree with rb's assessment of your paragraph regarding simple listening and comparing. I subscribe to it myself and it was very well written. I'm not trying to piss you off; I'm just asking how you can be so positive that there are no sonic diffs in amps simply because you've seen no evidence to support the contrary view. It helps your case but it doesn't prove it. For all you know, some guy who doesn't give a rat's behind what the scientific world thinks has performed successful DBT's with SS power amps with identical specs and he just hasn't bothered or cared to come forward.