Why are blind equipment tests bad?

[chebby]

I read 'Selfish Gene' and 'Blind Watchmaker' and got through a fair portion of 'The Extended Phenotype' (more technical and little harder going). I think we still have his Royal Institution Cristmas lectures transferred onto DVD from VHS somewhere too.

I lost interest in what he had to say once he found more money in god bashing than popular explanation of science (he was good at that).

 

[matthewpiano]

Mr Modesty:
"I don't care if my amp is exhibiting 'character' or has been imbued
with qualities that might make some guy with a signal
generator/anechoic chamber and oscilloscope wince a bit".

The big question is whether that "character" is purely attributable to different frequency response or if there are other factors involved.

The number of failed participants in the Clark test suggests the former, in which case, good news, one amplifier of a certain power output is likely to sound very similar to another, regardless of price.

But that is absolutely meaningless because you can only judge an amp on the way it is, as the manufacturer produced it. There is absolutely no point in modifying it with filtering etc. just to prove that had it been engineered with a different frequency response it would have sounded just like any other amp.

 

[Clare Newsome]

Mr Modesty:chebby:
Had they been cleverer they could have spent 32 years berating God and religious faith in print like Richard Dawkins (a total bore

The God Delusion is very interesting and very witty.

Have you read it?

I've read The God Delusion (great in parts IMO). I've also read the Three Billy Goats Gruff.....

 

[chebby]

Clare Newsome:Mr Modesty:chebby:
Had they been cleverer they could have spent 32 years berating God and religious faith in print like Richard Dawkins (a total bore

The God Delusion is very interesting and very witty.

Have you read it?

I've read The God Delusion (great in parts IMO). I've also read the Three Billy Goats Gruff.....

"...Fol-de-rol"

 

[Anonymous]

matthewpiano:

But that is absolutely meaningless because you can only judge an amp on the way it is, as the manufacturer produced it. There is absolutely no point in modifying it with filtering etc. just to prove that had it been engineered with a different frequency response it would have sounded just like any other amp.

Why is there no point? It's exactly the point.

 

[Anonymous]

chebby:
"...Fol-de-rol"

Are you trying to say something?

 

[idc]

Mr Modesty:matthewpiano:

But that is absolutely meaningless because you can only judge an amp on the way it is, as the manufacturer produced it. There is absolutely no point in modifying it with filtering etc. just to prove that had it been engineered with a different frequency response it would have sounded just like any other amp.

Why is there no point? It's exactly the point.

This is the bit I am missing. What is the point in making amps sound the same? (Apart from using them to show in blind tests that audiophiles cannot tell the difference between sounds that are the same!)

 

[Anonymous]

idc:Mr Modesty:matthewpiano:

But that is absolutely meaningless because you can only judge an amp on the way it is, as the manufacturer produced it. There is absolutely no point in modifying it with filtering etc. just to prove that had it been engineered with a different frequency response it would have sounded just like any other amp.

Why is there no point? It's exactly the point.

This is the bit I am missing. What is the point in making amps sound the same? (Apart from using them to show in blind tests that audiophiles cannot tell the difference between sounds that are the same!)

If it's possible to make amplifiers sound the same using simple equalization then Mr Clark is correct in his assertions. If there is more to it than that then Mr Clark is wrong.

 

[John Duncan]

Mr Modesty:If it's possible to make amplifiers sound the same using simple equalization then Mr Clark is correct in his assertions. If there is more to it than that then Mr Clark is wrong.

If I turn down the treble on all the amps I have that have treble controls, they all sound sh-t. Is that what you mean?

 

[matthewpiano]

Well guys, it looks like we've been getting this hi-fi lark badly wrong all along.

It seems we should all have purchased any powerful amplifier and partnered it with a good quality equaliser. Then we could achieve the same performance as any other similar amplifier out there. Just think - it would be like having a different amp every week!!!!

Utter b*******.

 

[Anonymous]

JohnDuncan:Mr Modesty:If it's possible to make amplifiers sound the same using simple equalization then Mr Clark is correct in his assertions. If there is more to it than that then Mr Clark is wrong.

If I turn down the treble on all the amps I have that have treble controls, they all sound sh-t. Is that what you mean?

That's an extreme example but yes. To really tell what an amplifier sounds like and for comparison purposes you need to apply equalization so that the lack of a flat response doesn't affect the outcome. If you have the best amp in the world and turn the treble down it will automatically become the worst one in the test.

 

[Anonymous]

matthewpiano:Well guys, it looks like we've been getting this hi-fi lark badly wrong all along.

It seems we should all have purchased any powerful amplifier and partnered it with a good quality equaliser. Then we could achieve the same performance as any other similar amplifier out there. Just think - it would be like having a different amp every week!!!!

Utter b*******.

Yet that's what the outome of Mr Clark's testing seems to suggest.

 

[John Duncan]

Mr Modesty:
JohnDuncan:Mr Modesty:If it's possible to make amplifiers sound the same using simple equalization then Mr Clark is correct in his assertions. If there is more to it than that then Mr Clark is wrong.

If I turn down the treble on all the amps I have that have treble controls, they all sound sh-t. Is that what you mean?

That's an extreme example but yes. To really tell what an amplifier sounds like and for comparison purposes you need to apply equalization so that the lack of a flat response doesn't affect the outcome. If you have the best amp in the world and turn the treble down it will automatically become the worst one in the test.

How can there be a "best amp in the world" if they all sound the same?

 

[Anonymous]

JohnDuncan:How can there be a "best amp in the world" if they all sound the same?

Very good, but I'm sure you get the point.

 

[idc]

Mr Modesty:idc:Mr Modesty:matthewpiano:

But that is absolutely meaningless because you can only judge an amp on the way it is, as the manufacturer produced it. There is absolutely no point in modifying it with filtering etc. just to prove that had it been engineered with a different frequency response it would have sounded just like any other amp.

Why is there no point? It's exactly the point.

This is the bit I am missing. What is the point in making amps sound the same? (Apart from using them to show in blind tests that audiophiles cannot tell the difference between sounds that are the same!)

If it's possible to make amplifiers sound the same using simple equalization then Mr Clark is correct in his assertions. If there is more to it than that then Mr Clark is wrong.

Thanks Mr Modesty, I've got that part now.

But I now don't get 'To really tell what an amplifier sounds like and for comparison purposes you need to apply equalization so that the lack of a flat response doesn't affect the outcome'. By applying equalisation to an amp are we not just finding out what the equaliser sounds like? So how do we then 'really tell what an amplifier sounds like'?

 

[John Duncan]

Mr Modesty:
JohnDuncan:How can there be a "best amp in the world" if they all sound the same?

Very good, but I'm sure you get the point.

I so, like, todally don't...

 

[Anonymous]

idc:
But I now don't get 'To really tell what an amplifier sounds like and for comparison purposes you need to apply equalization so that the lack of a flat response doesn't affect the outcome'. By applying equalisation to an amp are we not just finding out what the equaliser sounds like? So how do we then 'really tell what an amplifier sounds like'?

You apply eq so that the amps in the test have the same flat frequency response and then you can compare the actual quality of sound without minor response differences clouding the issue.

 

[Anonymous]

matthewpiano:Well guys, it looks like we've been getting this hi-fi lark badly wrong all along.

It seems we should all have purchased any powerful amplifier and partnered it with a good quality equaliser. Then we could achieve the same performance as any other similar amplifier out there. Just think - it would be like having a different amp every week!!!!

Utter b*******.

Matthew....Thats a departure from your usuall calm and reasoned response im shocked! Good man

 

[idc]

Mr Modesty:idc:

But I now don't get 'To really tell what an amplifier sounds like and for comparison purposes you need to apply equalization so that the lack of a flat response doesn't affect the outcome'. By applying equalisation to an amp are we not just finding out what the equaliser sounds like? So how do we then 'really tell what an amplifier sounds like'?

You apply eq so that the amps in the test have the same flat frequency response and then you can compare the actual quality of sound without minor response differences clouding the issue.

OK , I understand that, apart from since the EQ is now the last bit of kit that the signal passes through and not the amp, why is the case that we are listening to the amp? Are we not actually listening to the EQ instead?

 

[chebby]

You could probably turn a Ferrari into a VW Beetle (performance wise) with a roof rack full of cement bags, a rev limiter and a giant caravan hooked on the back!

Why would anyone want to?

(Unless they were a rich builder who hates hotels and cant stand going fast!)

 

[idc]

I am keeping this going only to see if Matthew swears again!

 

[Andrew Everard]

If he, or anyone else, does, the thread gets locked.

 

[Anonymous]

idc:
OK , I understand that, apart from since the EQ is now the last bit of kit that the signal passes through and not the amp, why is the case that we are listening to the amp? Are we not actually listening to the EQ instead?

The eq will be applied to the input, not the output. As I said earlier, most amplifiers are already engineered for a flat response using negative feedback so won't need to be equalized at all.

 

[Anonymous]

chebby:
You could probably turn a Ferrari into a VW Beetle (performance wise) with a roof rack full of cement bags, a rev limiter and a giant caravan hooked on the back!

Why would anyone want to?

I don't think you could, any more that you can turn a 50W amp into a 500W one.

 

[RodhasGibson]

Andrew Everard:

If he, or anyone else, does, the thread gets locked.

Can"t believe the things being said on this thread Andrew. Bizarre at the very least. Can"t, won"t say any more than that I"m afraid.