[Sonnova]

On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 15:48:44 -0800, Serge Auckland wrote
(in article ):

"Sonnova" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 15:38:31 -0800, Serge Auckland wrote
(in article ):

"c. leeds" wrote in message
...
Steven Sullivan wrote:

In fact I rarely audition gear;... any such auditions are prone to
sighted bias effect.

It's a pity to forsake listening entirely simply because a dubious
result
is possible.

I put as much or more effort into speaker placement and room treatment.
It stands to both reason and practice that choice of loudspeaker, and
attention to room conditions, makes *BY FAR* the most difference in
sound
quality. It really is just that simple, once you jettison all the
nonsense promulgated by audiophile culture.

You don't cite an example, so I don't know what "nonsense" you're
talking
about. It's certainly nonsensical to buy audio equipment without
listening. But, some people buy a new car without driving it first,
others
buy clothes without trying them on. There's simply no accounting for
preference, which is all that you are stating.

Why is it nonsensical to audio equipment without listening first? There's
only a point in listening to electromechanical transducers that "can"
sound
different, and then, in the case of loudspeakers, only in one's own
listening room. Electronics of modern competent design do not sound
different so why listen?

A point of view not supportable. I say that electronics of modern,
competent
design DO sound different. The only question is do those differences mean
anything to you, personally? If not, fine, but to many they mean a great
deal, your scoffing notwithstanding.

How can they?

Easy. I have three sets of amplifiers at my disposal: a pair of VTL tube
monoblocks, a pair of Denon transistor monoblocks made under license from
Nelson Pass using his "Stasis circuitry" and a pair (used to have 4) of
Rockford/Hafler TransNova 1500 power amps. The VTLs are 140 watts each, the
Denons 220, the Haflers 150 watts/channel. When I replace my "reference" VTLs
with the Denons (after using my trusty Hewlett-Packard 400D audio VTVM to
match output levels EXACTLY) I notice three things: The Denons have a much
more grainy sounding top end than the VTLs that's very noticeable on massed
strings. Live massed strings have this silken effortlessness to them that's
all but impossible to reproduce exactly. Any audiophile who attends live
symphonic concerts regularly, has surely noticed this sense of effortless
ease with a smooth resinous quality as a secondary sonic signature. My VTLs
approximate this sound much better than do the Denons or the Haflers. The
upper register of all instruments sounds smoother and more real. Whether the
VTLs accomplish this by being more accurate or by injecting some euphonious
colorations is not the point. The point is that they sound different. Also
with the Denons in the system, the sound stage collapses somewhat. The image
doesn't sound as wide or as deep as do the VTLs but the image specificity
doesn't seem to change appreciably. And finally, The Denons (and the Haflers)
have a bit more taut low bass than do my VTLs, but that's OK because in
actual listening (as opposed to auditioning amplifiers), I have a pair of
subwoofers with their own solid state amplifiers doing those honors.

What aspect of modern design allows for a sound quality
difference?

Surely you jest? The stiffness of the power supply, the quality of the
components, even the number of stages in the amp all have an effect on sound.
Don't believe me (of course you don't)? Try this play a CD player through
your regular preamp into your power amp and listen for a while. Now, remove
the preamp and run the CD player DIRECTLY into the power amp (after matching
levels, of course using instrumantation) without the preamp. If the removal
of the preamp doesn't sound IMMEDIATLY cleaner and better, then I suggest
that you can't hear.

Is the difference between distortion figures sufficient to cause
a sound quality difference?

Not that can be measured, no.

Is the difference in frequency response
sufficient to cause a sound quality difference?

Not in an of itself, no.

Is the difference in
residual noise sufficient to cause a sound quality difference?

No.

I suggest
not, as the differences in all these is well below the threshold of hearing
for modern well designed equipment. If it's not any of those, then what can
it be?

You tell me. I don't pretend to know. I'm just the messenger as it were.

If there's a difference, then it has to be quantifiable, otherwise
it's down to imagination.

I assume that if it's audible, it's quantifiable. But where we diverge is
that you think that everything quantifiable has been quantified. I'm not so
sure. The amps sound different. Load differences (both input and speakers)? I
dunno. But the effects aren't subtle.