"S888Wheel" wrote in message
From: "Arny Krueger"
Date: 7/15/2004 6:50 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
"Don Pearce" wrote in message
I don't think anyone around here has any kind of problem with
consumer audio. That is a market-led business where you get pretty
much what you pay for.
Or less.
As for the con games of the high-end, I've really not a great deal
of sympathy for anyone who cons himself over some fanciful
"improvement".
It's not really about sympathy, its about heading people off from
going down the wrong path.
The wrong path? Whatever path one chooses for themselves and enjoys
is not the wrong path in any hobby.
Horsefeathers. Scotty, you said *any hobby* so I'll run with your ball.
Let's pick the hobby of skiing. Left to one's own choices one might pick
equipment that is a safety hazard. So, now one finds oneself in the
hospital, perhaps permanently disabled. Nothing wrong with that you say?
GMAB!
The best systems I have heard
have been wrought by what you seem to consider the wrong path.
There's no accounting for taste or a lack of it. Scott, if you prefer
listening to tics and pops, flutter and wow, gratuitous noise and
distortion, what does that say about your appreciation for the natural sound
of music? Do the live concerts in your LA home area have LP-style noise and
distortion generators on stage? Are they part of the equipment inventory at
the Hollywood Bowl?
But as for the unscrupulous dealer who gives the volume control a
subtle tweak when demonstrating some expensive fix, he need
kneecapping.
In the case of a cable swap, it's easy to see how a person can psych
himself into perceiving a change, even when there is none.
Doesn't mean one has to imagine a difference.
Since I never made that claim, I feel no need to respond your straw man,
Scott.
That doesn't really
prove anything at all in any particular case other than there is a
possibility of such a mistake.
Practical experience suggests that there is a near-certainty of making a
mistake in judgment, if the difference is small and the test is
poorly-designed.
First off, small level changes don't sound like just louder or
softer. In fact most people don't know what say a 0.5 or 1 dB level
shift actually sounds like because they haven' heard one as an
isolated change.
How often do line level cables in short runs create such a change?
Please see later comments about corrosion and dirt on connectors.
Secondly, the time built-in time delay implied by cable swapping
puts up to a dB or more perceived level shift ambiguity into the
comparison. IOW if you put in a time delay of more than a few
seconds into the swap, you may not be able to reliably detect a 0.8
dB level shift. This suggests that if I also add a 0.8 dB level
shift, you might not be able to reliably detect it, either.
The randomizing effect of time delays is one reason why for example
Stereophile's insistence that its reviewers use the single
presentation method turns every subject review they publish into an
extremely questionable situation.
But that is how most people actually use their systems.
Most people use their systems to listen to music for pleasure, not judge
audio components. Stereophile represents that their review staff is properly
trained and well-equipped for a different mission than just listening to
music for pleasure.
Most hobby and professional magazines that review products don't restrict
themselves to just the things that people do when they put the products to
normal use. Popular Photography does technical resolution and distortion
tests on lenses. Car and Driver does timed tests relating to top speed,
acceleration, and cornering. PC Magazine runs a variety of real world and
synthetic benchmarks. Why should audio hobbyist or professional magazines
play by a different set of rules?
they sit down
and listen to music with the full awareness of what equipment is in
play and they just listen to that setup without making any quick
changes.
Which is a fine thing to do if someone wants to do their equipment reviews
the dumbest possible way. As soon as audio magazine editors say "Read my
magazine, we do our equipment reviews as stupidly, naively, and as
poorly-informed as we can" you'll have a market for your proposed
procedures, Scott.
Publications like audiophilia, though are simply (as far as I'm
concerned) here to give us a laugh - like the PWB newsletter.
Ah yes, Belt's religious tract. LOL!
I find it ironic that Middius rants and raves about how scientific
approaches to audio product evaluation are religious, and says nothing about
faith-driven bozos like Belt.