(Don Pearce) said:

So I ask the experts again: how relevant is double blind testing of
components for the end consumer?
And why has it to be forced upon people discussing audio gear in an
audio hobby- or opinion group?


It is of no relevance at all. Anyone is free to buy what he wants, for
whatever reason he wants.


I assume this means even when the thick faceplate is supposed to make
an amp sound "better"? g


But here we are on rec.audio.tech; we aren't typical end consumers and
we are discussing the technicalities of audio. So if someone claims
that A has a better sound than B, that becomes a valid topic for
discussion. That goes double when interesting side issues such as the
psychology of hearing make such enormous impacts on the wa we hear
things.


I'm sorry, I was reading this from RAOpinion, where people have a
slightly different outlook.

But nevertheless, even in RATech, there must be posts every now and
then from people who changed the coupling caps in their amp from stock
to Mundorf-Gate Wonderblack MITChateauRoux BumbleBees, with stellar
results.

One can hardly expect this to really be the case, unless something
else than just sound quality (!) enters the field .

So, the phenomenon we observed above is just as valid in designing,
building and modifying (existing) gear as it is in selecting complete
components for an audio system.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:10:42 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:55:52 +0300, Fella wrote:



Sorry - your tone is just far too rude for me to join this one. If you
can't be even a little civilized, I'm not interested.

Oh my! A fourth item to the list: I need to learn some manners too I
guess.

Here is a copy-paste of the ORIGINAL post, Mr Pearce, no cuss words
there, dig in:

-------------------------------------------------------------


Fella Jan 19, 8:25 am
Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
From: Fella -
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:25:56 +0200
Local: Wed,Jan 19 2005 8:25 am
Subject: James Randi: "Wire is not wire. I accept that."

I sent this email to: '

"Greetings,

I am an "audio quack" as you would put it. I can hear sonic differences
between amplifiers, CD players, even WIRE, speaker wire. Is your
challenge applicable to, for instance, speaker cables?

Mine certainly is - indeed, it's specifically *for* cables.

The self made
speaker cables I am currently using (you are free to measure and examine
these using pink noise, etc, prior to putting them to the test) against
radioshack lamp cords. I am claiming that I can hear the difference as
to which is employed each and every time. Since "wire is wire" this must
fall into the realm of your challenge.

No problem. Care to make it interesting by putting your own money
where your fat mouth is?

I do have my reservations though:

!) A revealing amplifier (densen beat b 100 mk5, for instance), high
quality speakers (sonus faber cremona floorstanders for instance) and a
decent CD player will be used to conduct the test.

No problem. And you can use any music you like, and any volume level
you like.

!!) No abx comparator boxes in between, the wires should be interchanged
manually.

No problem.

!!!) Someone I trust (but of course I will not have any sort of eye
contact, or any form of other contact with him/her duration of the test)
to actually observe that the wires are being changed (or not) and the
data recorded"

No problem, a third-party proctor acceptable to both parties is a
standard part of the deal.

James Randi replied that:

"There are big differences between lamp cord and larger-gauge cable.
That's not the question, at all. Wire is not wire. I accept that."

More on "challenging the million dollar challenge" later. This post,
on a FYI basis.

Randi failed to stipulate one simple condition - regardless of the
nature of the two cables, they must provide the same voltage level at
the speaker terminals +/- 0.1dB at 100Hz, 1kHz and 10kHz. No problem
for me to match any 'audiophile' cable of your choice in that regard,
with a few feet of cheap 'zipcord' and perhaps a few pennies worth of
capacitors for the really bizarre stuff like MIT and Transparent
cables with the 'network boxes'.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:10:42 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:55:52 +0300, Fella wrote:



Sorry - your tone is just far too rude for me to join this one. If you
can't be even a little civilized, I'm not interested.

Oh my! A fourth item to the list: I need to learn some manners too I
guess.

Here is a copy-paste of the ORIGINAL post, Mr Pearce, no cuss words
there, dig in:

-------------------------------------------------------------


Fella Jan 19, 8:25 am
Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
From: Fella -
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:25:56 +0200
Local: Wed,Jan 19 2005 8:25 am
Subject: James Randi: "Wire is not wire. I accept that."

I sent this email to: '

"Greetings,

I am an "audio quack" as you would put it. I can hear sonic differences
between amplifiers, CD players, even WIRE, speaker wire. Is your
challenge applicable to, for instance, speaker cables?

Mine certainly is - indeed, it's specifically *for* cables.

The self made
speaker cables I am currently using (you are free to measure and examine
these using pink noise, etc, prior to putting them to the test) against
radioshack lamp cords. I am claiming that I can hear the difference as
to which is employed each and every time. Since "wire is wire" this must
fall into the realm of your challenge.

No problem. Care to make it interesting by putting your own money
where your fat mouth is?

I do have my reservations though:

!) A revealing amplifier (densen beat b 100 mk5, for instance), high
quality speakers (sonus faber cremona floorstanders for instance) and a
decent CD player will be used to conduct the test.

No problem. And you can use any music you like, and any volume level
you like.

!!) No abx comparator boxes in between, the wires should be interchanged
manually.

No problem.

!!!) Someone I trust (but of course I will not have any sort of eye
contact, or any form of other contact with him/her duration of the test)
to actually observe that the wires are being changed (or not) and the
data recorded"

No problem, a third-party proctor acceptable to both parties is a
standard part of the deal.

James Randi replied that:

"There are big differences between lamp cord and larger-gauge cable.
That's not the question, at all. Wire is not wire. I accept that."

More on "challenging the million dollar challenge" later. This post,
on a FYI basis.

Randi failed to stipulate one simple condition - regardless of the
nature of the two cables, they must provide the same voltage level at
the speaker terminals +/- 0.1dB at 100Hz, 1kHz and 10kHz. No problem
for me to match any 'audiophile' cable of your choice in that regard,
with a few feet of cheap 'zipcord' and perhaps a few pennies worth of
capacitors for the really bizarre stuff like MIT and Transparent
cables with the 'network boxes'.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 20:01:02 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

Fella said:

http://www.media.uio.no/personer/arn...k_english.html

eyes shut or open all I heard was some dude saying "da da da da"..


Strange.....all I heard was "BaBaBaBa", either with my eyes open or
closed.

Is there a conclusion to draw from this?

You are unusually wired? :-)

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Stewart Pinkerton said:

Is there a conclusion to draw from this?

You are unusually wired? :-)


Make that unusually weird and I'll agree with you!

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 20:38:40 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

(Don Pearce) said:

So I ask the experts again: how relevant is double blind testing of
components for the end consumer?
And why has it to be forced upon people discussing audio gear in an
audio hobby- or opinion group?


It is of no relevance at all. Anyone is free to buy what he wants, for
whatever reason he wants.


I assume this means even when the thick faceplate is supposed to make
an amp sound "better"? g


Particularly so! Add a few blue LEDs and the sound becomes mega hi fi.


But here we are on rec.audio.tech; we aren't typical end consumers and
we are discussing the technicalities of audio. So if someone claims
that A has a better sound than B, that becomes a valid topic for
discussion. That goes double when interesting side issues such as the
psychology of hearing make such enormous impacts on the wa we hear
things.


I'm sorry, I was reading this from RAOpinion, where people have a
slightly different outlook.


Ah! It is always the first on the list that counts.

But nevertheless, even in RATech, there must be posts every now and
then from people who changed the coupling caps in their amp from stock
to Mundorf-Gate Wonderblack MITChateauRoux BumbleBees, with stellar
results.


That would be inventors bias rather than sighted bias. It is even
stronger and more pernicious.

One can hardly expect this to really be the case, unless something
else than just sound quality (!) enters the field .

So, the phenomenon we observed above is just as valid in designing,
building and modifying (existing) gear as it is in selecting complete
components for an audio system.

One would hope that a commercial designer wouldn't fall for such
novice errors, and would blind test all major design steps after
having checked by measurement that the thing is doing what he wants.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:31:44 GMT, (Don Pearce)
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:26:46 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:22:55 +0300, Fella wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Nobody argues that wire is wire.


Absolutely nobody, yes.

I certainly do argue that, but the basic premise is the same as that
for any other DBT - the voltage level at the speaker terminals must be
matched to +/- 0.1dB at 100, 1k and 10kHz. I'll happily match fifteen
feet of Kimber Black Pearl (or pick your favourite loony cable)
against however many feet of lampcord it takes to achieve that level
matching.

This is where we disagree. It might not be possible to level-match
lamp cord and - for example - 8 ohm Goertz Litz cable at those three
frequencies to 0.1dB if long enough. What do you do about that? Hence
my requirement that the cable be at least competent and suitable for
the job.

It's not a real problem - you just use a shorter length of thinner
zipcord, so that the inductive treble drop of the zipcord falls within
the required tolerance band, while maintaining reasonably equal loop
resistance to the longer, thicker cable.

FYI, I have compared fifteen feet of highly inductive Naim NACA5 (my
own speaker cable, as it happens), with a similar length
low-inductance construction made from multistrand computer cable,
using my own low-impedance Apogee speakers. Despite a 1.2dB difference
at 20kHz, no audible difference was heard by five listeners, even on
acoustic jazz with lots of cymbal work. I'm pretty confident that
such basic LC differences aren't a problem in practice - but I expect
that Fella will come up with plenty of ingenious excuses to avoid his
pet fantasies being blown away...............
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:51:32 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:

It's not a real problem - you just use a shorter length of thinner
zipcord, so that the inductive treble drop of the zipcord falls within
the required tolerance band, while maintaining reasonably equal loop
resistance to the longer, thicker cable.

FYI, I have compared fifteen feet of highly inductive Naim NACA5 (my
own speaker cable, as it happens), with a similar length
low-inductance construction made from multistrand computer cable,
using my own low-impedance Apogee speakers. Despite a 1.2dB difference
at 20kHz, no audible difference was heard by five listeners, even on
acoustic jazz with lots of cymbal work. I'm pretty confident that
such basic LC differences aren't a problem in practice - but I expect
that Fella will come up with plenty of ingenious excuses to avoid his
pet fantasies being blown away...............
--

I see that, but think of it this way. Frequency response errors caused
by cable impedance should be part of the difference that the listener
is trying to identify - they shouldn't be ironed out by equalization.
I would suggest that levelling be done only at 1kHz, and allow
whatever frequency response errors may result to stand.

As you say, with any reasonable length of cable they just aren't going
to be audible anyway.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Stewart Pinkerton said:

FYI, I have compared fifteen feet of highly inductive Naim NACA5 (my
own speaker cable, as it happens), .......


Please stop your silly naim-dropping. Thank you.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

(Don Pearce) said:

It is of no relevance at all. Anyone is free to buy what he wants, for
whatever reason he wants.


I assume this means even when the thick faceplate is supposed to make
an amp sound "better"? g


Particularly so! Add a few blue LEDs and the sound becomes mega hi fi.


I just *love* blue LEDs. They're all over the place, even in my CD
transport :-)


But nevertheless, even in RATech, there must be posts every now and
then from people who changed the coupling caps in their amp from stock
to Mundorf-Gate Wonderblack MITChateauRoux BumbleBees, with stellar
results.


That would be inventors bias rather than sighted bias. It is even
stronger and more pernicious.


I've heard this described as "constructor's ear" .
Something I'm particularly prone to, you will note.
See below.


One would hope that a commercial designer wouldn't fall for such
novice errors, and would blind test all major design steps after
having checked by measurement that the thing is doing what he wants.


Umm......yes and no.
I have polypropylen coupling caps in my tube and hybrid amps, and
found them to be sounding vastly better after mounting them.
I did a (single) blind listening test with ordinary Siemens MKTs,
heard no difference.

I took IM, THD, S/N and F measurements, no difference.

Then I mounted them again, it sounded vastly better.

So, while it is proven that there are no differences in sound quality,
my *knowing* they're in there makes it so.

And since that is the way I listen to music, fully knowing what's in
my home made boxes, I left them in.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:24:39 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

Umm......yes and no.
I have polypropylen coupling caps in my tube and hybrid amps, and
found them to be sounding vastly better after mounting them.
I did a (single) blind listening test with ordinary Siemens MKTs,
heard no difference.

I took IM, THD, S/N and F measurements, no difference.

Then I mounted them again, it sounded vastly better.

So, while it is proven that there are no differences in sound quality,
my *knowing* they're in there makes it so.

And since that is the way I listen to music, fully knowing what's in
my home made boxes, I left them in.

Coherently put. But at what point during an evening would you let a
visitor in on the secret so he could enjoy the better sound too?

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

(Don Pearce) said:

Coherently put. But at what point during an evening would you let a
visitor in on the secret so he could enjoy the better sound too?


Ah, there we have it!
I make stuff just for myself, and in the event that I sell the thing,
I'm sure to let the future buyer know what's in the box.

From there, 2 things can happen:
#1. The poor victim actually knows what a polypropylen cap is, and
knows how to determine its value (if not parrots the HE magazines
*grin* ) , or:
#2. The poor victim is so intimidated by the sheer look of the things
(the size of beer cans) that he won't ask any questions.

:-)

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:05:50 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

(Don Pearce) said:

Coherently put. But at what point during an evening would you let a
visitor in on the secret so he could enjoy the better sound too?


Ah, there we have it!
I make stuff just for myself, and in the event that I sell the thing,
I'm sure to let the future buyer know what's in the box.

From there, 2 things can happen:
#1. The poor victim actually knows what a polypropylen cap is, and
knows how to determine its value (if not parrots the HE magazines
*grin* ) , or:
#2. The poor victim is so intimidated by the sheer look of the things
(the size of beer cans) that he won't ask any questions.

:-)

Now here's a question. Suppose you told a listener which type of cap
was in each of a pair of amps, but he wasn't aware of the significance
- didn't know which was "supposed" to sound better, that is.

He would be listening fully sighted, but would he hear a difference?
And if he did, would he be statistically more likely to identify the
"correct" amplifier as being better?

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 19:00:13 GMT, (Don Pearce)
wrote:

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:51:32 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
wrote:

It's not a real problem - you just use a shorter length of thinner
zipcord, so that the inductive treble drop of the zipcord falls within
the required tolerance band, while maintaining reasonably equal loop
resistance to the longer, thicker cable.

FYI, I have compared fifteen feet of highly inductive Naim NACA5 (my
own speaker cable, as it happens), with a similar length
low-inductance construction made from multistrand computer cable,
using my own low-impedance Apogee speakers. Despite a 1.2dB difference
at 20kHz, no audible difference was heard by five listeners, even on
acoustic jazz with lots of cymbal work. I'm pretty confident that
such basic LC differences aren't a problem in practice - but I expect
that Fella will come up with plenty of ingenious excuses to avoid his
pet fantasies being blown away...............
--

I see that, but think of it this way. Frequency response errors caused
by cable impedance should be part of the difference that the listener
is trying to identify - they shouldn't be ironed out by equalization.
I would suggest that levelling be done only at 1kHz, and allow
whatever frequency response errors may result to stand.

As you say, with any reasonable length of cable they just aren't going
to be audible anyway.

It's my personal opinion that you're quite right, and for cables, the
100Hz levelling point is of no value. I would keep the 10kHz point,
but only to remove some clown who'd try to cheat the test by using a
pathological rolloff that no commercial cable would attempt. You could
certainly build a special cable that would be flat to 0.1dB at 1kHz,
but 3dB down at 10kHz. I do believe that just might be audible....
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

(Don Pearce) said:

Now here's a question. Suppose you told a listener which type of cap
was in each of a pair of amps, but he wasn't aware of the significance
- didn't know which was "supposed" to sound better, that is.


If this is of any significance:
My wife, who is affected by my love for music and its reproduction,
serves as some kind of proxy listener for me.
I always let her listen first after I've modified something.


He would be listening fully sighted, but would he hear a difference?


She sometimes hears differences, but no doubt she's influenced by the
(subconscious) clues I give her.
I already taught her the difference btw. a ECC88 and a KT88......
Size matters! *grin*


And if he did, would he be statistically more likely to identify the
"correct" amplifier as being better?


She mostly dislikes what I've done, it is seldom that she values a mod
as an improvement.
Although if my (subconscious) clues were solely responsible for her
judgement, she would cry "hallelujah!" after every modification I've
made :-)

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:16:46 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton said:

FYI, I have compared fifteen feet of highly inductive Naim NACA5 (my
own speaker cable, as it happens), .......

Please stop your silly naim-dropping. Thank you.

Ah, you remember those classic adverts from the '70s? Those were the
days. Personally, I preferred the Gale speaker adverts.... :-)

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 22:42:10 +0200, Sander deWaal
wrote:

(Don Pearce) said:

Now here's a question. Suppose you told a listener which type of cap
was in each of a pair of amps, but he wasn't aware of the significance
- didn't know which was "supposed" to sound better, that is.


If this is of any significance:
My wife, who is affected by my love for music and its reproduction,
serves as some kind of proxy listener for me.
I always let her listen first after I've modified something.


He would be listening fully sighted, but would he hear a difference?


She sometimes hears differences, but no doubt she's influenced by the
(subconscious) clues I give her.
I already taught her the difference btw. a ECC88 and a KT88......
Size matters! *grin*


And if he did, would he be statistically more likely to identify the
"correct" amplifier as being better?


She mostly dislikes what I've done, it is seldom that she values a mod
as an improvement.
Although if my (subconscious) clues were solely responsible for her
judgement, she would cry "hallelujah!" after every modification I've
made :-)

Not quite the scenario I had in mind. You told her which was your mod,
and I guess it would depend on how many brownie points you had earned
with her that day whether she voted for or against.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

In article ,
says...

#1. The poor victim actually knows what a polypropylen cap is, and
knows how to determine its value (if not parrots the HE magazines
*grin* ) , or:
#2. The poor victim is so intimidated by the sheer look of the things
(the size of beer cans) that he won't ask any questions.

:-)


A cap as big as a beer
Is found in hi-end gear
Makes the bass sound neat
And the mids so sweet..
And the highs are a lot more clear.

Hammingaway Inc.

(Don Pearce) said:


Not quite the scenario I had in mind. You told her which was your mod,


Actually, no.
Only after the listening session I tell her what was changed and why.
She has a half-understanding of electronics, which is probably more
than most frequent posters in this newsgroup (RAO) :-)
She's one of the very few females I know who can think logically and
understand science and math (within borders).

But this is useless anyway, since it's a variation of the "wife in the
kitchen" story.

I have no friends, so I can't tell what happens when another person
would listen before and after. :-)

My father thinks it sounds terrific, but he's 75 years old and his
hearing is shot, so...............


and I guess it would depend on how many brownie points you had earned
with her that day whether she voted for or against.


Ohhh! That's below the belt!

Actually, and I'm being serious for a change, she's very critical
about her music and the gear, and I suspect her hearing abilities are
somewhat better than mine.........

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

(jclause) said:

#2. The poor victim is so intimidated by the sheer look of the things
(the size of beer cans) that he won't ask any questions.


A cap as big as a beer
Is found in hi-end gear
Makes the bass sound neat
And the mids so sweet..
And the highs are a lot more clear.


But using the wrong kind, at least
Will put an end to that feast.
With caps it is clear
That, unlike the beer
A Black Gate will unleash the beast.

Let it be known all over the nation
With tweaking comes the realization
Selecting the right cap
Puts an end to the crap
Or was it a figment of imagination?

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

In article ,
says...


FYI, I have compared fifteen feet of highly inductive Naim NACA5 (my
own speaker cable, as it happens), with a similar length
low-inductance construction made from multistrand computer cable,
using my own low-impedance Apogee speakers. Despite a 1.2dB difference
at 20kHz, no audible difference was heard by five listeners, even on
acoustic jazz with lots of cymbal work.


With hi-dollar wire some are obsessed...
With its cost and looks they are impressed
But I'd like to suggest
They do a blind test..
Then with savings of money they'll be blessed.

Hammingaway Inc.

In article ,
says...

(jclause) said:

#2. The poor victim is so intimidated by the sheer look of the things
(the size of beer cans) that he won't ask any questions.


A cap as big as a beer
Is found in hi-end gear
Makes the bass sound neat
And the mids so sweet..
And the highs are a lot more clear.


But using the wrong kind, at least
Will put an end to that feast.
With caps it is clear
That, unlike the beer
A Black Gate will unleash the beast.

Let it be known all over the nation
With tweaking comes the realization
Selecting the right cap
Puts an end to the crap
Or was it a figment of imagination?


With our fantasies we all become pleased
An' our wallets are sometimes squeezed.
But the cold-hearted guys
Trim us down to size :-(
With offers to prove 'em we are teased.

Hammingaway Inc.

There once was a man named Jack
He went down to the Radio Shack
He bought cheap wire..
But it failed to inspire
So should we label him a quack?

Hammingaway Inc.

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

As to why it must be forced on people discussing audio gear - it
isn't.Nobody is obliged to read the thread, and most news readers have
the facility to ignore a thread. On the other hand, as it is an audio
group and not a music group, it is a topic which is very much central
to the ethos of the group, and if you think otherwise, then in all
probability you would do well to consider unsubscribing from it.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

You STILL haven't figured out that this thread is
crossposted.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:55:05 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

As to why it must be forced on people discussing audio gear - it
isn't.Nobody is obliged to read the thread, and most news readers have
the facility to ignore a thread. On the other hand, as it is an audio
group and not a music group, it is a topic which is very much central
to the ethos of the group, and if you think otherwise, then in all
probability you would do well to consider unsubscribing from it.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

You STILL haven't figured out that this thread is
crossposted.



Yes I have, but I never change the crossposting status of somebody
else's thread, and I always post from the point of view of the primary
group.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:55:05 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
.. .

As to why it must be forced on people discussing audio gear - it
isn't.Nobody is obliged to read the thread, and most news readers have
the facility to ignore a thread. On the other hand, as it is an audio
group and not a music group, it is a topic which is very much central
to the ethos of the group, and if you think otherwise, then in all
probability you would do well to consider unsubscribing from it.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

You STILL haven't figured out that this thread is
crossposted.



Yes I have, but I never change the crossposting status of somebody
else's thread, and I always post from the point of view of the primary
group.


To you, the primary group is the one you usually post in.
to me, the primary group is the one I usually post in.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 01:46:43 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 18:55:05 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
. ..

As to why it must be forced on people discussing audio gear - it
isn't.Nobody is obliged to read the thread, and most news readers have
the facility to ignore a thread. On the other hand, as it is an audio
group and not a music group, it is a topic which is very much central
to the ethos of the group, and if you think otherwise, then in all
probability you would do well to consider unsubscribing from it.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

You STILL haven't figured out that this thread is
crossposted.



Yes I have, but I never change the crossposting status of somebody
else's thread, and I always post from the point of view of the primary
group.


To you, the primary group is the one you usually post in.
to me, the primary group is the one I usually post in.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Which appears first in your headers? That is the primary group,
whichever you may be posting in. That is a decision by the OP the
other groups are essentially for information, just in case they are
interested.

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Sander deWaal wrote:
Fella said:


http://www.media.uio.no/personer/arn...k_english.html


eyes shut or open all I heard was some dude saying "da da da da"..



Strange.....all I heard was "BaBaBaBa", either with my eyes open or
closed.

Is there a conclusion to draw from this?


The conclusion is that we should never listen to music from our gear
with our eyes open.

Why all this anger you pukey cocksucker?



Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:00:55 +0300, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 15:24:45 +0300, Fella wrote:



Don Pearce wrote:



Exactly. If a listener claims to hear a difference, we must presume he
has the ability to hear that difference - we must take that for
granted. When we do the DBT on that claim, we are testing whether what
he hears is an audible difference, or a psychosomatically generated
internal difference based on sighted bias

"psychosomatically generated internal difference based on sighted bias"
you say.. Is there any academic paper, study, book, etc, that examines
whether or not such a phenomenon exist (in the *audio* realm!). Or is
this "bias" the invention of the borg?

I *see* something and it affects how I hear it.. Hmmm.. No wonder they
make those high-end gear so good looking.


Never mind academic papers,


Just beleive you me, eh, Mr. Pearce? Sure. Never mind academic papers,
science says that you shouldn't beleive what you hear if you see it. Ok.


Academic papers are not written about the bleedin' obvious!


experience it for yourself


Been there, done that. I did quite a few amp abx tests. Amps that
sounded HUGELY different in the real world sounded confusingly similar
when subjected to an ABX. I, in a sincere manner, relayed my
observations to RAO also.


That's because what you hear in an ABX test *is* the real world. What
you *think* you hear in a sighted comparison is mostly happening
*inside* your head.


In the *real* world music lovers use amps on a variety of volume levels,
in a variety rooms, with varying speakers of reactionary loads.


Indeed they do - so what?


And
THERE ARE NO thousand and one banana connections, level matching boxes,
ABX relay boxes, etc in between the amps and the speakers.


Nor need there be in an ABX test. Indeed, for a cable test you don't
usually need any level-matching at all, you can simply swap the cables
over. What's 'confusing' about that?


So when you
guys effectively *make* the amps sound similar with the abx premise,


Utter bull**** - you're pathetically clinging to a baseless fantasy.


and
when you add memory effects, learning effects, and the strain of the
tested to the equation the amps that sound vastly different in the real
world sound similar in an artificial abx environment.


No, they simply sound as they always did. If they really *do* sound
different, then quick-switched DBTs are proven to tbe the *most*
sensitive method of revealing subtle, but *real*, sonic differences.

That brain-dead clowns like you imagine that they hear all kinds of
things in sighted comparisons, does not change reality.


I find it the least bit surprising that this phenomenon has confused you
"objectivist" types. And is still confusing to you..


We ain't the ones who are confused here, Fella! :-)


And why did you delete that
part of my post that told you how to achieve what you demand - scared
to find out, perhaps?

I opened a new discussion on the subject with the header:

Attn pinkerton, wire is not wire.


No, you didn't - and wire most definitely is just wire, you cretin.

You are cordially invited.

http://www.media.uio.no/personer/arn...k_english.html

eyes shut or open all I heard was some dude saying "da da da da"..


That proves that you're deaf, as well as an idiot.........

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:22:55 +0300, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:


Nobody argues that wire is wire.


Absolutely nobody, yes.


I certainly do argue that, but ..

Shove that but up your butt you cocksucker!

You got your ass handed to you on a platter and you are asking for more,
that's all. I don't have the time.

No academic papers about the bleedin obvious eh? You slimy cocksucker.
"We say it so it's bleedin obvious". You slimy slimy piece of ****
cocksucker!



Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 09:16:37 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


"Fella" wrote in message
et

Don Pearce wrote:


Exactly. If a listener claims to hear a difference, we

must

presume he has the ability to hear that difference - we

must

take that for granted. When we do the DBT on that claim,

we

are testing whether what he hears is an audible

difference,

or a psychosomatically generated internal difference

based on

sighted bias

"psychosomatically generated internal difference based on
sighted bias" you say.. Is there any academic paper,

study,

book, etc, that examines whether or not such a phenomenon
exist (in the *audio* realm!). Or is this "bias" the

invention

of the borg?

Great practical example suggested by a bright guy:

http://www.media.uio.no/personer/arn...k_english.html

Sighted bias can make you *hear* something that was never
said.


Fella claims to hear 'da da da da', eyes open or closed. There seem
only two logical choices:

a) He's a brain-dead troll

b) He's deaf

I guess (c) both of the above, is certainly a possibility........

Sander deWaal wrote:
(Don Pearce) said:


Strange.....all I heard was "BaBaBaBa", either with my eyes open or
closed.


Is there a conclusion to draw from this?


Fella has poor hearing and you have lousy eyesight?



:-))))


Can you _*believe*_ the arrogance in these fools?

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:14:34 +0300, Fella wrote:

So hearsay anecdotes like
this and non-applicable, faulty abx/dbt:ing made you people lose faith
in your own ears then? Am I correct?


No, it's clowns like *you* ..


NOW YOU BEHAVE YOU BRAINDEAD BORG! BE-HAVE!

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:10:42 +0300, Fella wrote:

The self made
speaker cables I am currently using (you are free to measure and examine
these using pink noise, etc, prior to putting them to the test) against
radioshack lamp cords. I am claiming that I can hear the difference as
to which is employed each and every time. Since "wire is wire" this must
fall into the realm of your challenge.


No problem. Care to make it interesting by putting your own money
where your fat mouth is?


FAT MOUTH? EITHER YOU START TO BE-HAVE!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU COCKSUCKER OR
I'LL COME AND KICK THE LIVING **** OUT OF YOU!

LOOK YOU PUKEY PIECE OF ****! I AM READY ANYTIME TO TAKE WHATEVER
TWO-BIT CHALLENGE YOU HAVE. YES I CAN PUT MY OWN MONEY ON THIS. AND YES
I HAVE DONE BLIND TESTING WITH CABLES AGAINST MY (EVEN SOME OF THE
HIG-END STUFF) CABLES.

ITS JUST THAT IF YOU DON'T BEHAVE I'LL KICK YOUR 60 YEAR OLD BUTT BEFORE
AND AFTER THE TEST ALSO. SO BEHAVE YOU COCKSUCKER!




Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:10:42 +0300, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:55:52 +0300, Fella wrote:



Sorry - your tone is just far too rude for me to join this one. If you
can't be even a little civilized, I'm not interested.

Oh my! A fourth item to the list: I need to learn some manners too I
guess.

Here is a copy-paste of the ORIGINAL post, Mr Pearce, no cuss words
there, dig in:

-------------------------------------------------------------


Fella Jan 19, 8:25 am
Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
From: Fella -
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:25:56 +0200
Local: Wed,Jan 19 2005 8:25 am
Subject: James Randi: "Wire is not wire. I accept that."

I sent this email to: '

"Greetings,

I am an "audio quack" as you would put it. I can hear sonic differences
between amplifiers, CD players, even WIRE, speaker wire. Is your
challenge applicable to, for instance, speaker cables?


Mine certainly is - indeed, it's specifically *for* cables.


The self made
speaker cables I am currently using (you are free to measure and examine
these using pink noise, etc, prior to putting them to the test) against
radioshack lamp cords. I am claiming that I can hear the difference as
to which is employed each and every time. Since "wire is wire" this must
fall into the realm of your challenge.


No problem. Care to make it interesting by putting your own money
where your fat mouth is?


I do have my reservations though:

!) A revealing amplifier (densen beat b 100 mk5, for instance), high
quality speakers (sonus faber cremona floorstanders for instance) and a
decent CD player will be used to conduct the test.


No problem. And you can use any music you like, and any volume level
you like.


!!) No abx comparator boxes in between, the wires should be interchanged
manually.


No problem.


!!!) Someone I trust (but of course I will not have any sort of eye
contact, or any form of other contact with him/her duration of the test)
to actually observe that the wires are being changed (or not) and the
data recorded"


No problem, a third-party proctor acceptable to both parties is a
standard part of the deal.


James Randi replied that:

"There are big differences between lamp cord and larger-gauge cable.
That's not the question, at all. Wire is not wire. I accept that."

More on "challenging the million dollar challenge" later. This post,
on a FYI basis.


Randi failed to stipulate one simple condition - regardless of the
nature of the two cables, they must provide the same voltage level at
the speaker terminals +/- 0.1dB at 100Hz, 1kHz and 10kHz. No problem
for me to match any 'audiophile' cable of your choice in that regard,
with a few feet of cheap 'zipcord' and perhaps a few pennies worth of
capacitors for the really bizarre stuff like MIT and Transparent
cables with the 'network boxes'.

Sander deWaal wrote:
(Don Pearce) said:


It is of no relevance at all. Anyone is free to buy what he wants, for
whatever reason he wants.



I assume this means even when the thick faceplate is supposed to make
an amp sound "better"? g



Particularly so! Add a few blue LEDs and the sound becomes mega hi fi.



I just *love* blue LEDs. They're all over the place, even in my CD
transport :-)



But nevertheless, even in RATech, there must be posts every now and
then from people who changed the coupling caps in their amp from stock
to Mundorf-Gate Wonderblack MITChateauRoux BumbleBees, with stellar
results.



That would be inventors bias rather than sighted bias. It is even
stronger and more pernicious.



I've heard this described as "constructor's ear" .
Something I'm particularly prone to, you will note.
See below.



One would hope that a commercial designer wouldn't fall for such
novice errors, and would blind test all major design steps after
having checked by measurement that the thing is doing what he wants.



Umm......yes and no.
I have polypropylen coupling caps in my tube and hybrid amps, and
found them to be sounding vastly better after mounting them.
I did a (single) blind listening test with ordinary Siemens MKTs,
heard no difference.

I took IM, THD, S/N and F measurements, no difference.

Then I mounted them again, it sounded vastly better.

So, while it is proven that there are no differences in sound quality,

I woudn't be too sure about this. I don't think these borgs *know* just
what to measure and how to measure it yet.

jclause wrote:
In article ,
says...



FYI, I have compared fifteen feet of highly inductive Naim NACA5 (my
own speaker cable, as it happens), with a similar length
low-inductance construction made from multistrand computer cable,
using my own low-impedance Apogee speakers. Despite a 1.2dB difference
at 20kHz, no audible difference was heard by five listeners, even on
acoustic jazz with lots of cymbal work.



With hi-dollar wire some are obsessed...
With its cost and looks they are impressed
But I'd like to suggest
They do a blind test..
Then with savings of money they'll be blessed.

Hammingaway Inc.



Hi jclause, our regular poet hemmingway..

Actually, one of the only blind tests that *worked* that I did was with
wires.

Send an email to you puke. Let's arrange the
details.



Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 17:10:42 +0300, Fella wrote:


Don Pearce wrote:

On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:55:52 +0300, Fella wrote:



Sorry - your tone is just far too rude for me to join this one. If you
can't be even a little civilized, I'm not interested.

Oh my! A fourth item to the list: I need to learn some manners too I
guess.

Here is a copy-paste of the ORIGINAL post, Mr Pearce, no cuss words
there, dig in:

-------------------------------------------------------------


Fella Jan 19, 8:25 am
Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
From: Fella -
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:25:56 +0200
Local: Wed,Jan 19 2005 8:25 am
Subject: James Randi: "Wire is not wire. I accept that."

I sent this email to: '

"Greetings,

I am an "audio quack" as you would put it. I can hear sonic differences
between amplifiers, CD players, even WIRE, speaker wire. Is your
challenge applicable to, for instance, speaker cables?


Mine certainly is - indeed, it's specifically *for* cables.


The self made
speaker cables I am currently using (you are free to measure and examine
these using pink noise, etc, prior to putting them to the test) against
radioshack lamp cords. I am claiming that I can hear the difference as
to which is employed each and every time. Since "wire is wire" this must
fall into the realm of your challenge.


No problem. Care to make it interesting by putting your own money
where your fat mouth is?


I do have my reservations though:

!) A revealing amplifier (densen beat b 100 mk5, for instance), high
quality speakers (sonus faber cremona floorstanders for instance) and a
decent CD player will be used to conduct the test.


No problem. And you can use any music you like, and any volume level
you like.


!!) No abx comparator boxes in between, the wires should be interchanged
manually.


No problem.


!!!) Someone I trust (but of course I will not have any sort of eye
contact, or any form of other contact with him/her duration of the test)
to actually observe that the wires are being changed (or not) and the
data recorded"


No problem, a third-party proctor acceptable to both parties is a
standard part of the deal.


James Randi replied that:

"There are big differences between lamp cord and larger-gauge cable.
That's not the question, at all. Wire is not wire. I accept that."

More on "challenging the million dollar challenge" later. This post,
on a FYI basis.


Randi failed to stipulate one simple condition - regardless of the
nature of the two cables, they must provide the same voltage level at
the speaker terminals +/- 0.1dB at 100Hz, 1kHz and 10kHz. No problem
for me to match any 'audiophile' cable of your choice in that regard,
with a few feet of cheap 'zipcord' and perhaps a few pennies worth of
capacitors for the really bizarre stuff like MIT and Transparent
cables with the 'network boxes'.

EddieM wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote

EddieM wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote




If they really could hear a difference under other conditions, then
they'd hear it under DBT. History tells us that these claimed 'night
and day' differences mysteriously vanish when the listener doesn't
actually *know* what's connected.

As you know, you and Don Pearce are both contradicting one another
here who stated earlier that the DBT is a test about identified differences
only and NOT a test about the ability to identify.

This a very good point.



Time to change the meds, Eddie....................



No rebuttal ? "Koward."


Well when pukey has no rebuttal it will be so that it's "bleedin
obvious" and that the other side has a "fat mouth" or "take their
medicine" etc.. you know, the usual pukey-borg ****tyness.

Fella wrote
EddieM wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote
EddieM wrote:
Stewart Pinkerton wrote




If they really could hear a difference under other conditions, then
they'd hear it under DBT. History tells us that these claimed 'night
and day' differences mysteriously vanish when the listener doesn't
actually *know* what's connected.

As you know, you and Don Pearce are both contradicting one another
here who stated earlier that the DBT is a test about identified
differences
only and NOT a test about the ability to identify.

This a very good point.


Thanks Fella.