"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in message
oups.com
From: Arny Krueger
Date: Mon, Mar 6 2006 6:36 am
Email: "Arny Krueger"

If all amps sound the same, and all CD players sound the
same, and all preamps sound the same, and all wire
sounds the same, why would one even bother to test them?

Not all of them do.

Please provide a list of those currently-manufactured CD
or DVD players, preamps, and amps that do not, excluding
PC-based amps, speakers, etc.

Since you have a proven bias against tubed equipment,
let's limit this to SS gear.

Asked and answered.

If the
measurements are within 'audible limits' as has been
discussed in other threads, it seems very pointless for
hobbyists to bother with. Just read the spec sheet.

Common spec sheets are far from sufficient to determine
from measurements
that the piece of equipment is sonically blameless.

So where is the compendium from you, nob, 124, and
Sullivan showing those that 'don't make the grade'?

I don't think it exists.

Do us all a *real* service and show us those that
'failed.'

I manage to avoid them.

We know that tubes and LP can sound different from SS
and CD.

To say the least.

Whatever that means.

Huh?

We know that some people have preferences both ways.

Currently its about 99.99% prefer SS, and the rest
either don't know or prefer toobs.

So all this effort that you expend is to 'educate' the
.01% that want to use tubed equipment on the 'error' of
their ways.

You brought the issue up.

Brilliant.

Actually like almost all RAO debates, its pretty stupid.

We know that speakers sound different. We know that
speaker selection is a preference. There is no need to
blind test.

Not so fast. Even though hearing differences between
speakers is generally pretty easy, there's still the
matter of preference. Preferences can be affected by
sight. For example, if you know that a certain speaker
is highly regarded and another is unknown, will your
evaluation be guided by just sound quality or will it be
affected by the reputation of the
highly-regarded speaker?

Who cares? It's a preference.

Presumably, preference for sound quality.

I prefer to have name-brand gear in the absence of other
knowledge. I'll buy a Nikon or a Canon camera over a
no-name every time. The odds are far better that I'll get
quality.

Since my family and myself happen to primarily own and recommend Canons,
moot point.

However a comparison between say Souns Faber and Behringer is not a
comparison between no-name equipment. Both are recognized brands with
lengthy track records.

Yet another straw man argument.

And I cannot be wrong in doing things that way.

Huh?

For the record - I can be wrong and have been wrong. Just not a lot of the
time.

I do not claim to be an 'audio researcher' or a
manufacturer. Are you? And if you are, I think that you
should use whatever test protocol suits your purposes as
an audio researcher or manufacturer. Personally, I get
the impression that most of us here are hobbyists, and
NOT 'audio researchers' or 'manufacturers.'

It's all about how badly you want to reliably know which
audio products sound best.

I already made that decision: I bought whatever sounded
best to me.

Based on what critera - just listening or were you highly biased while
listening?

If you want an evaluation that is colored by your
preconceived notions, or the appearance or reputation
of the products being compared, then by all means do
sighted evaluations.

Thanks for your permission.;-)

By the way, if I do it that way and say that I think my
Bryston amp sounds great compared to the Krell gear that
I compared it to, are you still going to tell me how
wrong that I am? LOL!

Yet another straw man argument. Yawn.

BTW Mr. Shhh! where do you get all that straw? Your head?

If you want to know which is best based solely on sound
quality, then do bias-controlled evaluations.

And as I said, to most hobbyists it's a waste of time.

Just another unsupported assertion. Yawn.

It's a matter of personal choice - the means to achieve
either outcome are well-known and can be used with only
a reasonable amount of difficulty.

DBTs are not 'reasonably' difficult. I look at the
threads about Jenn's willingness to DBT LP vs. a CD of an
LP. Suddenly, there were pages about how to properly set
it up which were *very* difficult to set up.

And, you don't understand how special the reasons why are, do you Mr. Shhh!?