wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:30:50 GMT, wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
m...
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 07:48:13 GMT, wrote:

When the juice is there, the sound is there. Just
because there are models that don't have the good design required,
doesn't
mean that all tube amps are bad.

I would never say all are bad, but their cost vs. performance ration
is
not
good, and there are many really expensive ones that are just awful.
WAVAC.

When you listened to this amp, what was it about the sound that made
you think that is was awful? And what speakers did you use when you
auditioned it?

I have not auditioned it and never will, I already know what distortion
sounds like and I want no more of it.

Well then, isn't it reckless, nay, foolish, to judge a piece of gear
without doing a DBT/ABX on it? At least according to your spirited
defense of DBT/ABX.

He read that a person did a DBT on items A and B and they sounded the
same,
to maybe one, two or three listeners, so he assumes tha D,E,F,G,H
I,J,K,L,M,N,
O,P,Q,R,S,T,U.V.W.X.Y.and Z all sound the same to everyone.
Quite the scientisit!!!!

Not a scientist, just somebody waiting for someone to show that the
evidence from the DBTs done so far have errors. The people who use ABX
and ABC/HR have shown repeatedly that there is a threshold for what is
audible and once that threshold is met, differences in measurements can be
found but not heard.

Yes, not a scientisit, and not one to trust his own senses, either.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:30:50 GMT, wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
om...
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 07:48:13 GMT, wrote:

When the juice is there, the sound is there. Just
because there are models that don't have the good design required,
doesn't
mean that all tube amps are bad.

I would never say all are bad, but their cost vs. performance ration
is
not
good, and there are many really expensive ones that are just awful.
WAVAC.

When you listened to this amp, what was it about the sound that made
you think that is was awful? And what speakers did you use when you
auditioned it?

I have not auditioned it and never will, I already know what distortion
sounds like and I want no more of it.

Well then, isn't it reckless, nay, foolish, to judge a piece of gear
without doing a DBT/ABX on it? At least according to your spirited
defense of DBT/ABX.

He read that a person did a DBT on items A and B and they sounded the
same,
to maybe one, two or three listeners, so he assumes tha D,E,F,G,H
I,J,K,L,M,N,
O,P,Q,R,S,T,U.V.W.X.Y.and Z all sound the same to everyone.
Quite the scientisit!!!!

Not a scientist, just somebody waiting for someone to show that the
evidence from the DBTs done so far have errors. The people who use ABX
and ABC/HR have shown repeatedly that there is a threshold for what is
audible and once that threshold is met, differences in measurements can
be found but not heard.

Yes, not a scientisit, and not one to trust his own senses, either.

Not when it's a matter of scientific fact that human hearing is easily
fooled by non-sonic influences.

On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 06:41:28 GMT, wrote:

Yes, not a scientisit, and not one to trust his own senses, either.

Not when it's a matter of scientific fact that human hearing is easily
fooled by non-sonic influences.

You mean like reading instead of listening, right?

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 06:41:28 GMT, wrote:

Yes, not a scientisit, and not one to trust his own senses, either.

Not when it's a matter of scientific fact that human hearing is easily
fooled by non-sonic influences.

You mean like reading instead of listening, right?

Would that be reading "specs", hehehe?

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:30:50 GMT, wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
news:9gj6o1hhd2kgrsi5ug08q9v4p2ujqvp0m3@4ax. com...
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 07:48:13 GMT, wrote:

When the juice is there, the sound is there. Just
because there are models that don't have the good design required,
doesn't
mean that all tube amps are bad.

I would never say all are bad, but their cost vs. performance ration
is
not
good, and there are many really expensive ones that are just awful.
WAVAC.

When you listened to this amp, what was it about the sound that made
you think that is was awful? And what speakers did you use when you
auditioned it?

I have not auditioned it and never will, I already know what
distortion
sounds like and I want no more of it.

Well then, isn't it reckless, nay, foolish, to judge a piece of gear
without doing a DBT/ABX on it? At least according to your spirited
defense of DBT/ABX.

He read that a person did a DBT on items A and B and they sounded the
same,
to maybe one, two or three listeners, so he assumes tha D,E,F,G,H
I,J,K,L,M,N,
O,P,Q,R,S,T,U.V.W.X.Y.and Z all sound the same to everyone.
Quite the scientisit!!!!

Not a scientist, just somebody waiting for someone to show that the
evidence from the DBTs done so far have errors. The people who use ABX
and ABC/HR have shown repeatedly that there is a threshold for what is
audible and once that threshold is met, differences in measurements can
be found but not heard.

Yes, not a scientisit, and not one to trust his own senses, either.

Not when it's a matter of scientific fact that human hearing is easily
fooled by non-sonic influences.

As it is at home, during everyday listening.
I'll pick what sounds best in that environment.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:30:50 GMT, wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
news:9gj6o1hhd2kgrsi5ug08q9v4p2ujqvp0m3@4ax .com...
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 07:48:13 GMT, wrote:

When the juice is there, the sound is there. Just
because there are models that don't have the good design
required,
doesn't
mean that all tube amps are bad.

I would never say all are bad, but their cost vs. performance
ration is
not
good, and there are many really expensive ones that are just awful.
WAVAC.

When you listened to this amp, what was it about the sound that
made
you think that is was awful? And what speakers did you use when you
auditioned it?

I have not auditioned it and never will, I already know what
distortion
sounds like and I want no more of it.

Well then, isn't it reckless, nay, foolish, to judge a piece of gear
without doing a DBT/ABX on it? At least according to your spirited
defense of DBT/ABX.

He read that a person did a DBT on items A and B and they sounded the
same,
to maybe one, two or three listeners, so he assumes tha D,E,F,G,H
I,J,K,L,M,N,
O,P,Q,R,S,T,U.V.W.X.Y.and Z all sound the same to everyone.
Quite the scientisit!!!!

Not a scientist, just somebody waiting for someone to show that the
evidence from the DBTs done so far have errors. The people who use ABX
and ABC/HR have shown repeatedly that there is a threshold for what is
audible and once that threshold is met, differences in measurements can
be found but not heard.

Yes, not a scientisit, and not one to trust his own senses, either.

Not when it's a matter of scientific fact that human hearing is easily
fooled by non-sonic influences.

As it is at home, during everyday listening.
I'll pick what sounds best in that environment.

You have the right to be wrong.

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:30:50 GMT, wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
news:9gj6o1hhd2kgrsi5ug08q9v4p2ujqvp0m3@4a x.com...
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 07:48:13 GMT, wrote:

When the juice is there, the sound is there. Just
because there are models that don't have the good design
required,
doesn't
mean that all tube amps are bad.

I would never say all are bad, but their cost vs. performance
ration is
not
good, and there are many really expensive ones that are just
awful.
WAVAC.

When you listened to this amp, what was it about the sound that
made
you think that is was awful? And what speakers did you use when
you
auditioned it?

I have not auditioned it and never will, I already know what
distortion
sounds like and I want no more of it.

Well then, isn't it reckless, nay, foolish, to judge a piece of gear
without doing a DBT/ABX on it? At least according to your spirited
defense of DBT/ABX.

He read that a person did a DBT on items A and B and they sounded
the same,
to maybe one, two or three listeners, so he assumes tha D,E,F,G,H
I,J,K,L,M,N,
O,P,Q,R,S,T,U.V.W.X.Y.and Z all sound the same to everyone.
Quite the scientisit!!!!

Not a scientist, just somebody waiting for someone to show that the
evidence from the DBTs done so far have errors. The people who use
ABX and ABC/HR have shown repeatedly that there is a threshold for
what is audible and once that threshold is met, differences in
measurements can be found but not heard.

Yes, not a scientisit, and not one to trust his own senses, either.

Not when it's a matter of scientific fact that human hearing is easily
fooled by non-sonic influences.

As it is at home, during everyday listening.
I'll pick what sounds best in that environment.

You have the right to be wrong.

And you DON'T have the right to assume
whether I do or do not hear differences between various equipment.

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:30:50 GMT, wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
news:9gj6o1hhd2kgrsi5ug08q9v4p2ujqvp0m3@4 ax.com...
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 07:48:13 GMT, wrote:

When the juice is there, the sound is there. Just
because there are models that don't have the good design
required,
doesn't
mean that all tube amps are bad.

I would never say all are bad, but their cost vs. performance
ration is
not
good, and there are many really expensive ones that are just
awful.
WAVAC.

When you listened to this amp, what was it about the sound that
made
you think that is was awful? And what speakers did you use when
you
auditioned it?

I have not auditioned it and never will, I already know what
distortion
sounds like and I want no more of it.

Well then, isn't it reckless, nay, foolish, to judge a piece of
gear
without doing a DBT/ABX on it? At least according to your spirited
defense of DBT/ABX.

He read that a person did a DBT on items A and B and they sounded
the same,
to maybe one, two or three listeners, so he assumes tha D,E,F,G,H
I,J,K,L,M,N,
O,P,Q,R,S,T,U.V.W.X.Y.and Z all sound the same to everyone.
Quite the scientisit!!!!

Not a scientist, just somebody waiting for someone to show that the
evidence from the DBTs done so far have errors. The people who use
ABX and ABC/HR have shown repeatedly that there is a threshold for
what is audible and once that threshold is met, differences in
measurements can be found but not heard.

Yes, not a scientisit, and not one to trust his own senses, either.

Not when it's a matter of scientific fact that human hearing is easily
fooled by non-sonic influences.

As it is at home, during everyday listening.
I'll pick what sounds best in that environment.

You have the right to be wrong.

And you DON'T have the right to assume
whether I do or do not hear differences between various equipment.

It's not an assumption. You just said in another post that you heard gross
differnces in CD players, something that AFAIK is not possible, at least in
any CD player I've ever seen reviewed. IOW you heard differnces that did
not exist.

said:

It's not an assumption. You just said in another post that you heard gross
differnces in CD players, something that AFAIK is not possible, at least in
any CD player I've ever seen reviewed. IOW you heard differnces that did
not exist.


Some CD players are engineered to sound different, e.g. players with
tube output stages.
Compared with generic players, differences *can* be significant.

Also, the various methods of decoding D to A may lead to at least
measurable differences.

--

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

wrote in message
ink.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
nk.net...

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message
...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 21:30:50 GMT, wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
news:9gj6o1hhd2kgrsi5ug08q9v4p2ujqvp0m3@ 4ax.com...
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 07:48:13 GMT, wrote:

When the juice is there, the sound is there. Just
because there are models that don't have the good design
required,
doesn't
mean that all tube amps are bad.

I would never say all are bad, but their cost vs. performance
ration is
not
good, and there are many really expensive ones that are just
awful.
WAVAC.

When you listened to this amp, what was it about the sound that
made
you think that is was awful? And what speakers did you use when
you
auditioned it?

I have not auditioned it and never will, I already know what
distortion
sounds like and I want no more of it.

Well then, isn't it reckless, nay, foolish, to judge a piece of
gear
without doing a DBT/ABX on it? At least according to your spirited
defense of DBT/ABX.

He read that a person did a DBT on items A and B and they sounded
the same,
to maybe one, two or three listeners, so he assumes tha D,E,F,G,H
I,J,K,L,M,N,
O,P,Q,R,S,T,U.V.W.X.Y.and Z all sound the same to everyone.
Quite the scientisit!!!!

Not a scientist, just somebody waiting for someone to show that the
evidence from the DBTs done so far have errors. The people who use
ABX and ABC/HR have shown repeatedly that there is a threshold for
what is audible and once that threshold is met, differences in
measurements can be found but not heard.

Yes, not a scientisit, and not one to trust his own senses, either.

Not when it's a matter of scientific fact that human hearing is easily
fooled by non-sonic influences.

As it is at home, during everyday listening.
I'll pick what sounds best in that environment.

You have the right to be wrong.

And you DON'T have the right to assume
whether I do or do not hear differences between various equipment.

It's not an assumption. You just said in another post that you heard
gross differnces in CD players, something that AFAIK is not possible, at
least in any CD player I've ever seen reviewed. IOW you heard differnces
that did not exist.


It most certainly is an assumption.
I heard differences you are neither able to hear nor to measure.
Buy a hearing aid, or come up with some better ways to measure.