Is hifi worth what it costs

[Gaz37]

I believe they were 38 audiophiles: "The human testers were all trained ears and used to extensively listening to high end equipments"

In that case, I don’t believe it. Any details on the systems used?

Easier to give you the link: http://matrixhifi.com/ENG_marco.htm

I remember ripping the piss out if that one last time it was mentioned. So I don’t need to this time round.

Such tests would be bad for business otherwise lol

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

You’d have to use the word test advisably. And you don’t have to be in a retail hi Fi business like David to realise that ‘test’ shows you absolutely nothing.

 

[Gazzip]

You’d have to use the word test advisably. And you don’t have to be in a retail hi Fi business like David to realise that ‘test’ shows you absolutely nothing.

+1

That test is a laughing stock.

 

[davidf]

Such tests would be bad for business otherwise lol

Not really, it just looked a badly set up test anyway. For starters, it looked like they found the first room they could fine, which looks like a storage room of some sort.

 

[lindsayt]

I’d agree on the percentages Lindsayt but if you upgrade within a range I’d say it’s more like 95% certainty a more expensive item is better than a cheaper one. Providing of course you are making big jumps, the stuff is good quality, and the brand is a good one.

Yes, I agree with what you've said too.

The 5% being unusual situations like Coincident where their best sounding power amp is the Frankenstein 300b. Going for their more expensive 211 amp gives you more power but slightly worse sound.

 

[Gaz37]

 

Such tests would be bad for business otherwise lol

Not really, it just looked a badly set up test anyway. For starters, it looked like they found the first room they could fine, which looks like a storage room of some sort.

It was intended as a joke hence the "lol"

However the fact remains the budget system sounded better to more people, store room or not, "wrong amp" or not.

 

[Gazzip]

Such tests would be bad for business otherwise lol

Not really, it just looked a badly set up test anyway. For starters, it looked like they found the first room they could fine, which looks like a storage room of some sort.

It was intended as a joke hence the "lol"

However the fact remains the budget system sounded better to more people, store room or not, "wrong amp" or not.

*lol* You slay me! The “high end” amplifier was over 50-fecking-percent underpowered for the loudspeakers, whereas the budget amp was in their sweet spot. Do you not realise how fundamentally that would effect the resultant sound those those ATC’s would make on the end of each of them? Read your post again and try to understand how stupid you have just made yourself sound in posting that kind of drivel on a hifi forum.

 

[Gazzip]

Edit - double post

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

Now now, it’s his opinion which he is entitled to, no matter it rightly doesn’t make sense to us. There is always a split of opinion between people who own cheap and expensive hi Fi and the reasons are normally very human ones.

 

[Gazzip]

Now now, it’s his opinion which he is entitled to, no matter it rightly doesn’t make sense to us. There is always a split of opinion between people who own cheap and expensive hi Fi and the reasons are normally very human ones.

It is thick is what it is.

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

Now now, it’s his opinion which he is entitled to, no matter it rightly doesn’t make sense to us. There is always a split of opinion between people who own cheap and expensive hi Fi and the reasons are normally very human ones.

It is thick is what it is.

thats not really on. It may be to you or me, but we can keep it to ourselves to try and make this a more pleasant place surely.

 

[Gazzip]

Now now, it’s his opinion which he is entitled to, no matter it rightly doesn’t make sense to us. There is always a split of opinion between people who own cheap and expensive hi Fi and the reasons are normally very human ones.

It is thick is what it is.

thats not really on. It may be to you or me, but we can keep it to ourselves to try and make this a more pleasant place surely.

Sorry Quest but I am not particularly interested in spending time in a place which is kept “serene” by allowing the terminally ignorant an unchallenged platform from which to spout their bollocks. Let him have his platform and then I shall challenge him from mine. That is free speech. That is healthy. That is both sides of the fence.

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

It may be ignorant to you and others but I don’t think that entitles anyone to imply another person is thick, ignorant, or they talk boll—ks. That’s not nice. To be honest I think the argument for the test being a bad one has more than been made, but if you want to challenge him, Fairplay I’d do that. But may I respectfully suggest the way for you to show you think his view is a bad one (which I agree on too) would be to engage him in constructive debate and then others can take their own view and you can see where he is coming from. Or if not just ignore. I normally do the former when someone has, what I think, a poorly arrived at view.

 

[Gazzip]

It may be ignorant to you and others but I don’t think that entitles anyone to imply another person is thick, ignorant, or they talk boll—ks. That’s not nice. To be honest I think the argument for the test being a bad one has more than been made, but if you want to challenge him, Fairplay I’d do that. But may I respectfully suggest the way for you to show you think his view is a bad one (which I agree on too) would be to engage him in constructive debate and then others can take their own view and you can see where he is coming from. Or if not just ignore. I normally do the former when someone has, what I think, a poorly arrived at view.

You can respectfully suggest what you like Quest. If you want to feed the trolls with your constructive debate then you are free to do so. I shall however deal with it in my own way.

 

[Gaz37]

Name calling, because somebody doesn't agree they're stupid.

It could be argued both ways.

One system was judged, by a majority, to sound better than another system, this is a fact.

The "losing" system cost considerably more than the other one, this is also a fact.

Yet still people argue that expensive is better?

And I'm ignorant?

OK if you say so.

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

Im happy to do that as first off i like a good debate and i kind of think too if I debate and other regular people see that there is nothing in the others view, or that they are doing it as trolling, then the trollers get worked out anyway.

but I don’t like it when forums become personal or retaliatory as really if a troll is a troll and someone tries to get their own back, they arent exactly showing themselves as better. I’ve learnt that one. I’ve got no problem with anyone being a troll against me, my policy is to just ignore it against me, but if it’s bad to someone else like being called a pr—k or thick, it’s not right in any case. If this is to be a self moderating forum we should call it as it is.

 

[Gazzip]

Name calling, because somebody doesn't agree they're stupid.

It could be argued both ways.

One system was judged, by a majority, to sound better than another system, this is a fact.

The "losing" system cost considerably more than the other one, this is also a fact.

Yet still people argue that expensive is better?

And I'm ignorant?

OK if you say so.

The expensive system was demonstrably setup to be intentionally beaten by the budget system. If you cannot see that with all the evidence laid out before you then I’m afraid you must be either a little slow or trolling for an argument.

Had the Matrix team just run a fair test with an equally powerful amplifier in the high end system then the results may still have been the same. ...but they didn’t. They manipulated the test and cheated the participants to get the result they wanted.

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

Name calling, because somebody doesn't agree they're stupid.

It could be argued both ways.

One system was judged, by a majority, to sound better than another system, this is a fact.

The "losing" system cost considerably more than the other one, this is also a fact.

Yet still people argue that expensive is better?

And I'm ignorant?

OK if you say so.

can you consider the points gaz37 to add Further and come back. What are your counter points to these?

1) gazzips power point, what do you say to this

2) not a very big sample so not statistically significant

3) no controls as I mentioned

4) Ellis point re seating position and frequency response

5) don’t know where sitting and the same as in my point, where are the others?

6) hearing quality not tested and don’t know if audiophiles or not.

7) unfamiliar room re room effects on the sound

8) did you read the website where they said they are criticised for not creating equal performing systems.

9) do you believe this is a scientific test. For reasons I gave.

 

[Oldskool1976]

If this is to be a self moderating forum we should call it as it is.

That's as maybe but self moderation is like self medicating but without the fun.

 

[Gaz37]

My other hobby is cars.

Let's use that as an analogy.

Is a £47k BMW 530d Msport better than a £25k Skoda Octavia VRS tdi?

I recently did a track day driving both cars & was faster in the VRS than I was in a 530d Msport by an average of 1.5 secs per lap, doing 20 min sessions in both cars.

BMW owners would be screaming that Thruxton doesn't suit the Beemer or that the Skoda was lighter or some other excuse.

The fact is that on that day, on that track, the Skoda was the better car & it cost half the price.

Will BMW owners change to Skodas as a result?
No probably not.

Will Skoda owners feel slightly smug knowing they saved £22k and have a faster car?
I would if I owned one.

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

Your analogy is a bad one for me as you aren’t concentrating on the issues at hand. It’s unsurprising that a bmw is more expensive. It’s a bigger car isn’t it? not least quality of materials and design. That’s what you pay for in a better amp, design and materials. But if you compared a bmw with a 1.8 litre engine to a cheaper Ford with a v6 3litre engine, would be more comparable to the hi Fi situation. The more power would show it as being better in the sense of how fast it is around a track.

What do you say to the points I raised?

 

[Oldskool1976]

The more power would show it as being better in the sense of how fast it is around a track.

But the fastest cars in the world, that go round a track, only use a 1.6 engine.

So not sure thats a great analogy.

 

[QuestForThe13thNote]

That’s not really the point I’m making.

 

[BigH]

The more power would show it as being better in the sense of how fast it is around a track.

But the fastest cars in the world, that go round a track, only use a 1.6 engine.

So not sure thats a great analogy.

Thats because they limit them, does not mean 1.6l is the fastest engine.

It just shows how underpowered some expensive amps are, I would go with Lindsayt and buy by weight with amps. This test shows that more money does not always mean better.

 

[ellisdj]

I was a little harsh on that test - I read through all the text that accompanies it again - they say only 2 testers at a time was doing it - so thats pretty much the sweetspot situation 1 at a time would be better obviously.

Interestingly they say they treated the ceiling but didnt show any photos of that?

They say they put some stuff in the room to mimic a home environment - put some extra effort in there - fair play.

I still think powering the whole lot off one extension was a poor choice considering what they are trying to demonstrate.

Also they say they used 9 acoustics panels - you can see 7 on the front wall, you dont really need much on the front wall - rear wall would have been a lot better

I am also thinking how was they changing the CDs on request of the listeners because the CD players are at the front and the hardest to get to component under the sheet - that was a stupid move?

I also think the cheap system had the advantage being on the chair - wood would be better vibration isolator than a metal stand - thats just coincidence but made me chuckle when I thought of it.