do speaker cables make a difference???

[mtrycraft]

Hi Fi CHoice magazines reviews and has been reviewing for over a decade in a panel of listeners blind and levels matched. It is not a DBT because differences are assumed so the panelists simply sit and review what they like and or dislike about componant A, B, C, D E etc.

.

So, in reality they are making a selection of preferences, not audible differences as this protocol is not designed for that. In the end, it says nothing about audible differences really.

[mtrycraft]

I must have missed that point and it is well taken. I suspect there are many on this board who think that most all good amps sound alike. It has been my experience that virtually all amps have a characteristic sound, regardless of otherwise similar specifications. This test bears out my assertion.

rw

Well, an old $300 Yam integrated sourely was not different from a Pass Alphen to 3 audiophiles. So, yes, you are correct, well designed amps are just that.
I guess you have no idea about such sounds though without DBT protocol.

[mtrycraft]

Terrific! Has anyone constructed one yet? When will it be on the market? Are you talking active preamps or passive as E-Stat mentioned. I have yet to hear a perfectly transparent active preamp so I'm on the edge of my seat! The closest I've heard to transparent cost $8K. Hopefully, they can figure out a way to make them transparent AND reduce the cost dramatically. I certainly can't afford $8K!

I wouldn't trust e-stat for the time of day, let alone pre amp transparency.
Passive preamps are just an audio abortion. Best to deep six them yesterday.

I guess you need to start DBT on preamps, or read TAC on them, especially one of the recent issues.

[mtrycraft]

Unlike dialtones like mtry and zapped, I have no problem discussing my systems. I use a pair of VTL MB-450s with JPS Labs Power AC+ cords in the primary system and a Threshold Stasis 3 in the garage system. I share your feelings concerning preamps as well. Although I do not consider it to be a "transparent" preamp, I use an Audio Research SP-9 MkIII for phono playback. Of all the preamps I've heard, I greatly prefer the Conrad Johnson ART II to the Burmester 808, the Aesthetix, and the Hovland. (I have not had the pleasure of hearing the ARC Ref II). It is supremely musical and lends a very large soundstage.

System details

rw

You have no idea if it is audibly different from any other, do you? You are just speculating of course. You are hoping after spending all that $$$$.

[skeptic]

How telling it is then that the manufacturers of audio equipment are utterly incompetent in their jobs by omitting ANY and all means for adjusting their equipment to compensate for variations in the parameters most affecting their performance in actual use. Even the most modest means such as tweeter and midrange level controls and tone controls have been almost universally deleted from middle and high priced equipment.

Why have they omitted them? Because they don't understand them and their customers haven't taken them to task for it. And what is their customers' solution to the problem? Shop for and experiment endlessly with unproven expensive unpredictable fixes like speaker cables.

Is it acceptable for no consideraton to be given to the conditions of actual use but for designers to build their equipment for measurement in a laboratory and then tell the customer any problems due to acoustics are his problem alone? What if your car wasn't designed with the different kinds of roads it was likely to be driven on in mind? What if your television set wasn't designed for the different kinds of signals it was likely to be fed? What if your home wasn't designed for the different kinds of weather it would be exposed to? You wouldn't consider any of them but when it comes to audio equipment designed for performance in a lab or anechoic chamber alone and not in YOUR home with YOUR acoustic and YOUR other equipment, you not only embrace it, you can't wait to pay out ever more money than you already have for equipment which objectively is no better than what you already own. So is it any wonder why some people like me think most audiophiles are *%^$)??? Your loss. I'm just too happy to buy second hand excellent equipment you no longer want at bargain basement prices. It is also interesting that at least some audiophiles grow up to the point where they have seller's remorse thinking fondly of some old equipment they wish they still had.

[E-Stat]

For example, how many have systems able to reproduce signals down to 10 Hz at high SPL with low distortion?

Given the paucity of recordings that have any musical content in the sub octave range, that is not terribly important to me in the big picture. I have heard, however, a very nicely driven pair of Alon Grand Exoticas that is flat to 16 hz. I find accuracy in the midrange to be far more valuable.

rw

[E-Stat]

I don't need as much power. The 25 watts from my tubed MaxLine Trimax monoblocs are more than sufficient to drive my 103 db/w Brentworth Sound Labs single point source speakers. My preamp is the Wyetech Labs Jade since I can't afford the Opal which is about as close to transparent as I've heard in a preamp, more so to my ears than the CJ ART (although I hasten to add that I haven't heard its latest iteration). I recently downgraded my turntable rig to a VPI HW-19 jr with upgraded platter and clamp/Rega RB300 and Ortofon Kontrapunkt B. My former rig was a Basis 2500/Graham 2.2/Benz Reference.

Intriguing sysem. I've never heard of the BSL speakers. The Wyetechs are gorgeous - HP had an Opal on one of my visits.

This system brings me frighteningly close to live music on occasion. I never understood the word "soundstage" until I heard the BSL speakers. I also liked the one pair of 'stats I heard - the upper echelon Maggies. All speakers have compromises and I preferrred those of the BSL's. Different strokes.

Indeed. One minor correction is that Magneplanars use planar magnetic drivers and ribbons. Strictly speaking they are not electrostats. The 20.1s do sound nice though. One thing in common with your speakers and mine is that they are both full range. They just go about it very differently.

Enjoy!

rw

[E-Stat]

Well, an old $300 Yam integrated sourely was not different from a Pass Alphen to 3 audiophiles. So, yes, you are correct, well designed amps are just that.
I guess you have no idea about such sounds though without DBT protocol.

Ah yes, our language impaired ditch digger arises to join the party.

I "sourely" doubt that you have any details of this test using the Pass Labs Aleph.

rw

[E-Stat]

You are just speculating of course. You are hoping after spending all that $$$$.

No, speculation comes from lack of direct experience. Actually, I just enjoy hearing all that expensive gear available to my reviewer friends. I bought my preamp used for a third of it's retail value.

rw

[996turbo]

http://www.transparentcable.com/prod...s/thepros.html

Check out the link here.

[rb122]

So under more realistic conditions I would kindly disagree with you and say that many amps sound similar.T

I agree. But I would emphasize the word "similar" and not "the same". All amps have a sound that resembles the sound of another amp. The differences are somewhat subtle to most ears. But they may be crucially different to some people.

[Thomas_A]

I agree. But I would emphasize the word "similar" and not "the same". All amps have a sound that resembles the sound of another amp. The differences are somewhat subtle to most ears. But they may be crucially different to some people.

Perhaps, but difference between amp to amp in an A-B test remains to be proven. Thousands of trials have been made during many years, all with nulls. You are perhaps aware of the 10,000 dollar price sum challenge where the tester took his Yamaha amp to Pass Labs (if I remember correctly), and returned with his money? No difference.

T

[E-Stat]

Perhaps, but difference between amp to amp in an A-B test remains to be proven.

To what do you attribute the glaring contradiction of results between the "9 out of 10 amps sound different" using the bypass switch and the alleged lack of any diffferences using A-B testing?

rw

[Resident Loser]

...and Ford Explorers are the biggest selling SUVs on the market...'cept the don't tell you a big chunk are fleet sales of the 2WD versions...

...and 9 out of 10 doctors recommend this or that drug du jour...'cept they don't tell you what goodies the salesmen give the drs. for writing prescriptions for said drugs...and how that practice and all the adverts impacts the drugs' price...in fact some provide pre-printed 'scrips for the drug in question...all the busy doc hasta' do is sign it...

...and this(insert item of your choice here) is the official whatzis for the Olympics, or the NFL, or whoever wants some freebies...

...no diff for wire or other gear...if I recall, some east coast ball player was shill, a...er, spokesperson for the high end gear named after the extinct species on the "Forbidden Planet"...

jimHJJ(...lotsa' people will say lotsa' things...)

[Thomas_A]

Given the paucity of recordings that have any musical content in the sub octave range, that is not terribly important to me in the big picture. I have heard, however, a very nicely driven pair of Alon Grand Exoticas that is flat to 16 hz. I find accuracy in the midrange to be far more valuable.

rw

Agreed that accuracy in the midrange is more important than around 10 Hz for most people. I just say that the word transparency and the test method/criteria used will affect the outcome of the test results from ta DBT. Testing against a bypass cable with the combination of using very low and very high output power from the test object while at the same time listening to the same comfortable level could in principle reveal more than just A-B comparisons between amps at same output levels.

There is still no evidence of differences during A-B comparisons of amps, except tube amps or e.g. amps with deliberately built-in high distortion. Some amps, like the new MkII versions of the Audio Analogue power amps have however -1 dB at 20 kHz, 0.3 dB at 10 kHz and 0.1 dB at 5 kHz. This could be audible.

Correction was that audible difference do exist between amps. It is just amps like a Rotel and Halcro and similar that I refer to. That is, amps made with the purpose to be amps but where huge price differences exist.

T

[Thomas_A]

To what do you attribute the glaring contradiction of results between the "9 out of 10 amps sound different" using the bypass switch and the alleged lack of any diffferences using A-B testing?

rw

Lack of possibility to reproduce down to 10 Hz signals at high SPL and lack of using both very low and very high power levels of the test object while still listening to the same comfortable level. Lack of controls using a "reference", i.e. the bypass cable. The best equipment/setup/room must be used (like the Ino Audio system) critical listeners may be important. Also source music and test signals are important.

T

[E-Stat]

Lack of possibility to reproduce down to 10 Hz signals at high SPL and lack of using both very low and very high power levels of the test object while still listening to the same comfortable level. Lack of controls using a "reference", i.e. the bypass cable. The best equipment/setup/room must be used (like the Ino Audio system) critical listeners may be important. Also source music and test signals are important.

I'd say you summarized pretty well why most tests results are useless.

rw

[Thomas_A]

I'd say you summarized pretty well why most tests results are useless.

rw

Well, I don't agree the tests are useless. I think useless tests are those which don't follow any scientific procedures. Results need to put into perspective for what is needed for the specific situation, and whether it is critical or not.

The fact remains that there is no positive results published of DBTs using A-B methods (or ABX) with reasonable amps (i.e. those that are made to be just amps). Fact is also that transparent amps and CD players can be found rather cheap and there is no need for "high-end" equipment IF transparency is the goal of the system.

If we should move further into the discussion, there need to be some data that shows that amp to amp differences are audible for normal use, i.e. at home during normal music listening.

The thread started with cables though...

T

[E-Stat]

The thread started with cables though...

supported by a litany of tests subject to the same foibles you identified.

rw

[Thomas_A]

Going back to cables.

Many claims of audbility are made with no proper tests and no controls and there is no measurable evidence of any audible phenomenon in cables. If such a claim is made, then it should be backed up with a proper test with controls.

Nobody has ever done that and those who have performed such a test, have failed. Even if they were able to choose the equipment they wanted and claiming to hear big differences before the test was made.

So E-stat, I have provided some tests of amps that may be questioned in light of the other many tests that have been made. As I mentioned, the different results can perhaps be explained by the different test methods and the definitions of "transparency".

So we are still waiting for anybody to confirm similar tests with cables or e.g. pre-amps, using proper controls. In my mind, the search for the truth should be constructive. Since you apparently claim hear such differences, why do you not conduct such tests? In light of the many null results, you have an opportunity to prove your claims.

T

[DMK]

So we are still waiting for anybody to confirm similar tests with cables or e.g. pre-amps, using proper controls. In my mind, the search for the truth should be constructive. Since you apparently claim hear such differences, why do you not conduct such tests? In light of the many null results, you have an opportunity to prove your claims. T

I'm not E-Stat and I don't even play him on the internet. But I'd like to answer this question and the other one you posed to me waaaaaay back when on this thread. I don't get to post during the day so I'm often behind!

You asked about the data of the blind testing I and three cohorts did back in 1998 or so on preamps (we also did integrateds and power amps). On preamps and integrateds, we did very well in single blind tests and on power amps we did poorly. The data that I had was lost in the Great Computer Crash of 2002, along with the data for our cable tests. I think one of the participants has it in hard copy and I tried reaching him today without success. The calibration was done by the tester and I don't recall how it was done. I do recall that we did a total of 16 trials each and 16 between 6 different preamps. Each preamps and integrated had basically the same specs but slightly different sounds.

I performed my FINAL series of blind tests a few years ago and I have zero intention of repeating them. Life is too short, they were a pain in the a** and, quite frankly, I don't care if they prove or don't prove anything to naysayers. It proves something to me and, as selfish as that sounds, that's the extent of my concern. And I won't mind a bit if people question the validity of my tests or if I even took them at all. The reason E-Stat doesn't perform DBT (if I may be so bold as to answer for him!) is for the same reason - he's comfortable with the protocol he's used in the past and doesn't feel the need to prove anything to anybody.

I differ a bit. I was NOT comfortable with simple listening in light of the scientific evidence against sonic differences in components so I performed tests on amplification, cables (no differences), CD players (very slight diffs but only through headphones) and a few turntables (diffs mostly came from better isolation). These tests, while not scientific because they were single blind as opposed to double blind, have allowed me to see through the bs on BOTH sides of the argument. Blindly following either camp, yea or naysayer, has not worked for me. I will say that, based on my experiences, I feel the naysayer POV is by far the more accurate, but it isn't completely so. Once you have your speakers and their positioning, your music software and your room acoustics in line, you're 90% of the way to getting the best sound you can get. Where I agree with E-Stat to the letter is that I believe in my experiences rather than a party line. As he said, you can speculate (with or without evidence) or you can experience for yourself - those two states are mutually exclusive. With the bias controls in place, I proved to myself what does and doesn't sound different - no speculation necessary. I don't expect everyone to agree with me but to those who ask me to perform DBT to prove sonic differences, I would respectfully ask them to do it for themselves if they feel they have something they need proven.

[mtrycraft]

Perhaps, but difference between amp to amp in an A-B test remains to be proven. Thousands of trials have been made during many years, all with nulls. You are perhaps aware of the 10,000 dollar price sum challenge where the tester took his Yamaha amp to Pass Labs (if I remember correctly), and returned with his money? No difference.

T

Tom Nousaine did such a test in Florida about 1998. A golden ear, his golden ear wife and friend could not differentiate the two amps. I am not aware of the 10g offer, unless there was another such test someplace else But, now that I remember the other amp was a Pass Alphen.

[mtrycraft]

No, speculation comes from lack of direct experience. Actually, I just enjoy hearing all that expensive gear available to my reviewer friends. I bought my preamp used for a third of it's retail value.

rw

Flawed and unreliable experience is worthless. Yes, speculation is very much a part of that experience.

[mtrycraft]

The reason E-Stat doesn't perform DBT (if I may be so bold as to answer for him!) is for the same reason - he's comfortable with the protocol he's used in the past and doesn't feel the need to prove anything to anybody.

.

That is fine. But then he needs to stop claiming what he cannot support when taken to task for testable claims. If he enjoys his singular reality, that is his business. He cannot expect it to have meaning for anyone else. It doesn't and cannot.

[mtrycraft]

Ah yes, our language impaired ditch digger arises to join the party.

I "sourely" doubt that you have any details of this test using the Pass Labs Aleph.

rw

It was published in TAC a number of years ago. But it has no meaning for you. Why would it? It doesn't support any of your claims. Oh, th espeakers were the top Dunlavy but I guess they are junk too, as far as you are concerned. Everything was the self proclaimed golden ears components except the yam.
But then you will never know if there are differences untill you sit down for a DBT, level matched listeing which will never happen, right. So, everything is moot.