|
|
|
|
Thoughts on the DBT/ABX debate and relevance of RAHE
Bruce Abrams wrote:
I've often thought that if we eliminated (primarily because they've become
too predictable and boring) the discussions that invariably devolve into DBT
debates, ie. cables, equipment "burn-in", amplifiers, green pens, etc.,
there would be precious few threads worth following.
Actually if the subjectivist proponents would stop insisting that some
differences that have no evidence of even existing are subjects worthy of
pursuit and would get about validating the claims instead of continuing to
endlessly 'argue' there are plenty of worthy topics.
According to the
regular DBT proponents, most (if not all) CD players, cables (of all kind)
and amplifiers are indistinguishable one from another, so if you heard a
difference and want to discuss it, you first have to validate your
observation via some form of DBT.
Why would you wish to discuss inaudible differences when there are interesting
things that make real differences?
This yields two possible responses to a
new equipment related thread. One is that since very few (if any) posters
bother to set up a DBT for product evaluation, there is no point of
discussion, since your new "x" defacto, sounds the same as your old "x"
because you can't prove otherwise.
But one CAN employ many forms of bias controls in listening evaluation. Many of
us do and have done this. That's why I don't start threads about the 'sound' of
my amplifiers. I've already determined they have no sound of their own.
Just because one chooses not to doesn't automatically make his observations
useful to anyone else.
The second possible response is that
based on the DBTs that have been done, your old "x" must sound the same as
your new one because it's been established that all "x's" are
indistinguishable. The third possibility which used to occupy most of this
group was the discussion about what the equipment itself sounded like, but
those conversations rarely happen anymore, either because such differences
no longer exist, or because the DBT camp redirects them as DBT discussions
(perhaps because those differences no longer exist.)
It's a good thing. Why waste time discussing inaudible differences when
sujectivists can devolve the discussion with endless arguments about why ALL
existing evidence about the sound of amps amd wires must be wrong and why there
isn't a shred of evidence otherwise?
Either way,
meaningful discussion over audio equipment is becoming increasingly rare.
I don't think that meaningful discussion about the sound of wires is possible.
My initial thinking (and boredom) was that since current generation CD
players sound virtually identical, "properly engineered" amplifiers and
pre-amplifiers sound virtually identical, and cables make no difference;
this NG, indeed all audio discussions should be limited to speaker
discussions. After all, they're all different sounding and no one pair is
perfect and while some may argue, we really have progressed to the point
where we've achieved near perfection upstream. So the discussions that used
to be very important back when amplification wasn't quite as mature of a
technology as it is today, have simply lost their relevance.
So that leaves us with a quandry. What do we who love music and the
science/art of musical reproduction have to talk about? Surely there must
be more than just speakers.
Acoustic treatment, room setup and recordings anyone? I'd be very
interested to hear thoughts from the group as to other possibilities, as
it's clear that we're close to exhausting other equipment's potential for
discussion.
Other topics of interest to me are new release formats, alternative surround
playback, data reduction, programs useful for evaluation, evaluative listening
methods and styles, bass managment, speaker placement, effects of differing
room sizes, and small room acoustics.
|