Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

[John Duncan]

So enlighten me. Is it possible for - eg - amps to be 'incompetent' and 'not incompetent', and, irrespective of how the methodology might skew the results, is it possible to tell them apart by sighted listening?

You are well aware I'm sure, of the influences affecting sighted listening and equally aware of the benefits of blind testing. The results of sighted listening will not be as acurate at determining differences that exist between equipment as blind testing will be. Differences can and do exist and at obviously different levels depending on what it is being tested, how easy it is to differentiate between equipment on a sighted test will depend a lot more on additional external factors not included in blind testing.

So yes then?

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Oh, to the person who mentioned "power chords making no difference" I can only guess you have not experimented with them and have no knowledge of the profound differences they make.

Yes I have tried a few power chords in shops and didn't hear any difference.

I for one was genuinly suprised at the degree of difference they do make - more than interconnects I found but are cost inhibited.

I bet you couldn't tell them apart in a blind A/B comparison.

I would wager 10,000pounds no joke...actually 20,000pounds.... I would test them in your house on your system (provided your amp as a removeable power chord ). Seriously I would drive upto wherever you live to take the money off you.

When I "upgraded" to the Rotel RA-1520 finding I was unable to get a sound I could live with changing interconnects I tried a power chord, the Audioquest NRG-X3 (60pounds) it made the amp sound worse than the cable supplied - what shocked me was the degree in difference the cable made to the sound

I'd take that A/B test anytime.

If you take that bet down to a more gentlemanly amount, I imagine you'd get the chance. But starting at 10 thousand is likely to put people off.

Why not call it £1, have some fun, a bottle of wine and chill? I'd be extremely interested to hear of a properly done test that gave a positive outcome for such an "upgrade".

Have you seen the price of petrol?

Plus I need A new car and a holiday and I know I'd win... £1 could'nt even by me a 500ml bottle of coke.

Problem is though these chords are more expensive than interconnects but if you can find the right one at a good price, seriously it can prove to be a great "upgrade" for a relative small outlay over buying a new amp/source or even speakers.

The thing is, Nobody on the objective side believes that you aren't simply hearing things that are not there (including me), and surely the pride of winning such a debate would be worth it. It's a pity you aren't in Sweden, I'd be willing to drive myself (and bring a good bottle of wine).

Lol.......

Sweden?....That really is a pity as your the 1st objectivist who as considered taking on such a challenge..... a real shame, not a great lover of drink though, I'll be honest

I always wonder what those who believe I'm hearing things systems sound like, I really do........

 

[matthewpiano]

Totally off-topic but good to see I'm not the only non-drinker round these parts.

 

[CnoEvil]

Sent them packing - check.

If specs and measurements are the be all and end all then becareful of what you wish for - cos you might just get it.

Same sort of thing happened to me, but with an amp.

The Moon i7 was perfect "on paper." It was at a very (very) good price; powerful; known for having a full bodied, punchy but refined sound; had a reasonable level of its wattage in Class A; and was very easy to integrate with my AV system (HT By-pass).

Had it over a long weekend........didn't greatly take to it, and much preferred my AVR600 (for 2 channel).....so back it went.

 

[John Duncan]

Totally off-topic but good to see I'm not the only non-drinker round these parts.

I used to be. Then I joined this forum.

 

[CnoEvil]

Totally off-topic but good to see I'm not the only non-drinker round these parts.

I tried that for a while...

....but now I suck Guinness through a cable.......probably explains for a lot.

 

[steve_1979]

Totally off-topic but good to see I'm not the only non-drinker round these parts.

+1

Me too.

 

[Overdose]

So enlighten me. Is it possible for - eg - amps to be 'incompetent' and 'not incompetent', and, irrespective of how the methodology might skew the results, is it possible to tell them apart by sighted listening?

You are well aware I'm sure, of the influences affecting sighted listening and equally aware of the benefits of blind testing. The results of sighted listening will not be as acurate at determining differences that exist between equipment as blind testing will be. Differences can and do exist and at obviously different levels depending on what it is being tested, how easy it is to differentiate between equipment on a sighted test will depend a lot more on additional external factors not included in blind testing.

So yes then?

Most things are possible, but the likelihood of success varies enormously.

Given your confidence in sighted testing, yourself and the Devialet might be ideal contenders for the Harbeth challenge then (see above for the same caveat)?

 

[John Duncan]

Given your confidence in sighted testing, yourself and the Devialet might be ideal contenders for the Harbeth challenge then (see above for the same caveat)?

As noted very far back on this thread, I think the Harbeth challenge was worded in such a way that it would be extremely difficult or impossible (for me, at least) to meet the prerequisites set by Mr Shaw. But yes, I stand by my contention that it is possible to differentiate between amplifiers. There are those out there who decry Naim amplifiers, for example, as 'incompetent'. Are they wrong?

So yes then?

Most things are possible, but the likelihood of success varies enormously.

Yes or no? It's quite a simple question.

 

[Overdose]

Given your confidence in sighted testing, yourself and the Devialet might be ideal contenders for the Harbeth challenge then (see above for the same caveat)?

As noted very far back on this thread, I think the Harbeth challenge was worded in such a way that it would be extremely difficult or impossible (for me, at least) to meet the prerequisites set by Mr Shaw. But yes, I stand by my contention that it is possible to differentiate between amplifiers. There are those out there who decry Naim amplifiers, for example, as 'incompetent'. Are they wrong?

So yes then?

Most things are possible, but the likelihood of success varies enormously.

Yes or no? It's quite a simple question.

Given the right circumstances, yes.

 

[John Duncan]

OK, good - see, we can agree on some stuff. What do you think the right circumstances are? Level matching and same source/speakers are a given.

 

[Overdose]

OK, good - see, we can agree on some stuff. What do you think the right circumstances are? Level matching and same source/speakers are a given.

.

Depends on whats being tested, I would consider level matching a given.

Amps and speakers are probably more difficult than other equipment, as they are largely dependant on one another for how they behave.

Some sort of reference equipment if testing individual items, but nothing to say that an entire system couldn't be tested.

 

[fr0g]

I must say I don't necessarily think level matching is needed.

As I can't easily do that myself other than for software, when testing anything I start with the volume at zero. Turn up to the level I like and listen.

This can easily be done blind.

Of course if one item is played louder then it can affect the outcome. But given enough trials that should be irrelevant...

 

[steve_1979]

I must say I don't necessarily think level matching is needed.

As I can't easily do that myself other than for software, when testing anything I start with the volume at zero. Turn up to the level I like and listen.

This can easily be done blind.

Of course if one item is played louder then it can affect the outcome. But given enough trials that should be irrelevant...

I disagree. If you have two music files (for example) which are identical in every way but you played one of them at a slightly higher volume most people will say that the louder one sounds better.

This would makes the data from these blind tests inaccurate and essentially useless. Level matching is a must in A/B or ABX comparisons IMO.

 

[Overdose]

It depends on how acurate you want/need to be. If you find that whatever it is you are testing reveals differences, you may need to find out why.

At this point level matching would need to be checked to be ruled out as the cause.

 

[fr0g]

I must say I don't necessarily think level matching is needed.

As I can't easily do that myself other than for software, when testing anything I start with the volume at zero. Turn up to the level I like and listen.

This can easily be done blind.

Of course if one item is played louder then it can affect the outcome. But given enough trials that should be irrelevant...

I disagree. If you have two music files (for example) which are identical in every way but you played one of them at a slightly higher volume most people will say that the louder one sounds better.

This would makes the data from these blind tests inaccurate and essentially useless. Level matching is a must in A/B or ABX comparisons IMO.

You miss the point.

I am not talking about a "single" comparison. If you repeat often enough then any discrepancy in volume will be evened out.

 

[TrevC]

OK, good - see, we can agree on some stuff. What do you think the right circumstances are? Level matching and same source/speakers are a given.

Plenty of alcohol to aid relaxation and enable one to sleep through the sheer tedium of it all.

 

[CnoEvil]

Plenty of alcohol to aid relaxation and enable one to sleep through the sheer tedium of it all.

Other than the misery of a bad back (which I suspect you have experienced), we finally agree on something. : :dance: :bounce: :cheer:

 

[Alec]

OK, good - see, we can agree on some stuff. What do you think the right circumstances are? Level matching and same source/speakers are a given.

Plenty of alcohol to aid relaxation and enable one to sleep through the sheer tedium of it all.

HA!

 

[JamesMellor]

Oh, to the person who mentioned "power chords making no difference" I can only guess you have not experimented with them and have no knowledge of the profound differences they make.

Yes I have tried a few power chords in shops and didn't hear any difference.

I for one was genuinly suprised at the degree of difference they do make - more than interconnects I found but are cost inhibited.

I bet you couldn't tell them apart in a blind A/B comparison.

I would wager 10,000pounds no joke...actually 20,000pounds.... I would test them in your house on your system (provided your amp as a removeable power chord ). Seriously I would drive upto wherever you live to take the money off you.

When I "upgraded" to the Rotel RA-1520 finding I was unable to get a sound I could live with changing interconnects I tried a power chord, the Audioquest NRG-X3 (60pounds) it made the amp sound worse than the cable supplied - what shocked me was the degree in difference the cable made to the sound

I'd take that A/B test anytime.

I'm new here and hate to dive into a some what heated discussion , and excuse me if I've got this wrong but you seem to have spent 700 quid on an ampilfier you don't like while saying people should blind test power cables and interconnects at 60 quid ?

Could I suggest a £ 700 A/B test on amp's before a 10k wager on copper cable <S>

James