"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 23:28:39 -0400, "Robert Morein"
wrote:


wrote in message
.net...
Mike:

Another example of ABC (With hidden reference ) is attached below. In
this
test Bang & Olufsen's spin-off amplifier company "ICE Power" used this
method to determine whether there was an audible difference with a
filter
removed from their class D amplifier. They found that listeners could
not
tell the difference.

The fact is that very few audio companies do controlled double-blind
tests
period... ABX or any other method for that matter. Harman is one of
the
very few companies that do valid controlled listening tests, which is
the
reason I work here.


Thanks to Sean for PROVING that ABX is not widely used in hifi design.
Thanks to Mikey the mckelviphbian, WHO HAS NEVER USED ABX, for posting
this.

3) The standard specifications (amplifiers and loudspeakers) given by
manufacturer's are largely misleading indicators of performance and
sound quality.
Making a purchase decision based on these specifications is like
rolling the dice in Las Vegas..

So it would appear that specs do not define the sound quality of amps.
Thus all well-designed, similarly measuring amps do not sound the
same. Or am I mis-reading here?

They don't, because the measurements used are antiquated, and not
insightfull designed. All the quoted measurements are things an E.E. could
do back in the 60's and 70's with a couple of test-tone oscillators, and
some filters. It reminds me of the story about the drunk who lost his
wallet, and spent the night circling a street lamp, staring at the ground.
When asked why he spent all night looking in one location, he replied,
"Because that's where the light is."

There is a tendency of the engineering contingent of this group to be
captured by what they consider "revealed truths"? It's as if they've grabbed
a live wire; the electricity caused their hand to contract, and they can't
let go. Of course, the cream of the profession evades this, but they are
seldom represented here. Some of these people are not engineers at all; some
are technical workers, and some are poseurs.

Yet there is truth to the notion of the "engineering mentality". Part of
this is due to self-selection; part is due to the way the curricula is
taught. In fact, one of the things engineering students are taught is that
it is simply impossible to think about every choice you have to make. It is
better to know, than to "reinvent the wheel." But this has a bad effect.
Minds that have a cosmic grasp can get beyond this, and become originators.
Those who cannot can still be very good engineers, but as with any
mechanistic frame of mind, sometimes end in ruts they cannot themselves
perceive.