On an audio related list I mentioned the cash prize offered here to
identify wire in a controlled listening test and got the below. Is anyone
familiar with the person mentioned and his challenge?

"You could be talking of Richard Clark from car audio fame. He did
the best Mr. Wizard audio presentation ever seen at the Atlanta
Audio Society.

When I saw the offer first hand it was 10K to tell any amp from
some cheesy Yamaha amp in a double blind ABX test as many times
as you would like to try it within reason. I thin Noussien was
somehow involved in administering one."

wrote:

On an audio related list I mentioned the cash prize offered here to
identify wire in a controlled listening test and got the below. Is anyone
familiar with the person mentioned and his challenge?

"You could be talking of Richard Clark from car audio fame. He did
the best Mr. Wizard audio presentation ever seen at the Atlanta
Audio Society.

When I saw the offer first hand it was 10K to tell any amp from
some cheesy Yamaha amp in a double blind ABX test as many times
as you would like to try it within reason. I thin Noussien was
somehow involved in administering one."

Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put
up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own
amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched
and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have
been intentionally changed.)

The Yamaha integrated amplifier was part of the Sunshine Trials (which I did
proctor) between Steve Zipser anf Steve Maki.

There is also a $5K wire challenge.

In article a2Kgc.165684$K91.425151@attbi_s02,
(Nousaine) wrote:

wrote:

On an audio related list I mentioned the cash prize offered here to
identify wire in a controlled listening test and got the below. Is anyone
familiar with the person mentioned and his challenge?

"You could be talking of Richard Clark from car audio fame. He did
the best Mr. Wizard audio presentation ever seen at the Atlanta
Audio Society.

When I saw the offer first hand it was 10K to tell any amp from
some cheesy Yamaha amp in a double blind ABX test as many times
as you would like to try it within reason. I thin Noussien was
somehow involved in administering one."

Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put
up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own
amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched
and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have
been intentionally changed.)

The Yamaha integrated amplifier was part of the Sunshine Trials (which I did
proctor) between Steve Zipser anf Steve Maki.

There is also a $5K wire challenge.

Seems like its a no brainer to do just transform into the digital
domain, retard high frequencies by 1 second per octave say and here you
have and amp with the proper frequency response steady state and
obviously different.

On 21 Apr 2004 19:53:47 GMT, Walter Bushell wrote:

In article a2Kgc.165684$K91.425151@attbi_s02,
(Nousaine) wrote:

wrote:

On an audio related list I mentioned the cash prize offered here to
identify wire in a controlled listening test and got the below. Is anyone
familiar with the person mentioned and his challenge?

"You could be talking of Richard Clark from car audio fame. He did
the best Mr. Wizard audio presentation ever seen at the Atlanta
Audio Society.

When I saw the offer first hand it was 10K to tell any amp from
some cheesy Yamaha amp in a double blind ABX test as many times
as you would like to try it within reason. I thin Noussien was
somehow involved in administering one."

Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put
up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own
amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched
and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have
been intentionally changed.)

The Yamaha integrated amplifier was part of the Sunshine Trials (which I did
proctor) between Steve Zipser anf Steve Maki.

There is also a $5K wire challenge.

Seems like its a no brainer to do just transform into the digital
domain, retard high frequencies by 1 second per octave say and here you
have and amp with the proper frequency response steady state and
obviously different.

Seems like a no-brainer for Richard to do the same with his amp (see
the 'ringer' rules above), and then you're back to square one. There
will always be clowns who'll try to cheat on such a test, but so far
not one single person has been able to *prove* that e.g. a Halcro
sounds better than a Rotel.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On 4/22/04 1:43 PM, in article WuThc.3943$YP5.358919@attbi_s02, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote:

Seems like its a no brainer to do just transform into the digital
domain, retard high frequencies by 1 second per octave say and here you
have and amp with the proper frequency response steady state and
obviously different.

Seems like a no-brainer for Richard to do the same with his amp (see
the 'ringer' rules above), and then you're back to square one. There
will always be clowns who'll try to cheat on such a test, but so far
not one single person has been able to *prove* that e.g. a Halcro
sounds better than a Rotel.

I have found that you need a reasonably flat amp, and given that, the
largest sound difference would be the amount of oomph a speaker needs to
open up.

I had an ARCAM AVR200 powering 2 Thiel 2.4's - and ended up getting another
amp because the current demands of the Theils in the bass region really
needed reenforcement - the low end was kind of boomy and light. With the
extra power (NAD S200) the Thiels really do sound better - and to me, this
is the most probable reason. I don't know about the amplifier's "inherent"
characteristics or anything - but the amount of power required by the
speakers seems to make a difference.

And Tubes do sound different than the solid state amps I have heard -
perhaps it is amp - speaker as a system that makes the difference, no?

On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 23:11:41 GMT, Bromo wrote:

On 4/22/04 1:43 PM, in article WuThc.3943$YP5.358919@attbi_s02, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote:

There
will always be clowns who'll try to cheat on such a test, but so far
not one single person has been able to *prove* that e.g. a Halcro
sounds better than a Rotel.

I have found that you need a reasonably flat amp, and given that, the
largest sound difference would be the amount of oomph a speaker needs to
open up.

Irrelevant, since both amps are required to operate *below* clipping,
hence it doesn't matter which is more powerful.

And Tubes do sound different than the solid state amps I have heard -
perhaps it is amp - speaker as a system that makes the difference, no?

No, it's the microphony and non-linearity of tube amps............ :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

When I saw the offer first hand it was 10K to tell any amp from
some cheesy Yamaha amp in a double blind ABX test as many times
as you would like to try it within reason. I thin Noussien was
somehow involved in administering one."

Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll
put
up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own
amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are
blind/switched
and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that
have
been intentionally changed.)

How about getting some Magnepan 20.1's as the speaker? I am sure that the
differences between low and high power amps would be in sharp relief with
that one, eh?

Regarding the 10 k prise if amps can be differentiated:

"How about getting some Magnepan 20.1's as the speaker? I am sure that
the
differences between low and high power amps would be in sharp relief with
that one, eh?"

Probably not, one of the stipulations is that the amp be used within it's
designed range. Power draw enough to cause one amp audible distress would
violate that. I think it is expressed as x percent of clipping for x
amount of time not to be exceeded.

On 22 Apr 2004 23:55:15 GMT, Bromo wrote:

Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll
put
up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own
amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are
blind/switched
and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that
have
been intentionally changed.)

How about getting some Magnepan 20.1's as the speaker? I am sure that the
differences between low and high power amps would be in sharp relief with
that one, eh?

The amps are required to operate *below* clipping. No one is
suggesting that you can't hear differences due to one amp running out
of power.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:WuThc.3943$YP5.358919@attbi_s02...
Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put
up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own
amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched
and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have
been intentionally changed.)

The Yamaha integrated amplifier was part of the Sunshine Trials (which I did
proctor) between Steve Zipser anf Steve Maki.

Ooohhh... thet takes me back to my days reading rec.audio.opinion

Seems like a no-brainer for Richard to do the same with his amp (see
the 'ringer' rules above), and then you're back to square one. There
will always be clowns who'll try to cheat on such a test, but so far
not one single person has been able to *prove* that e.g. a Halcro
sounds better than a Rotel.
I presume the test is to prove one sounds different from the other in
repeated blind trials. 'Better' would be hard to quantify.

Hmmm... what are rules on speakers? Something like an Apogee Scintilla
could tax the Yamaha amp into distortion. (depends on the Yamaha amp
in question of course)

I would also have thought some valve amps (low power SETs?) might
sound recognizably different to the Yamaha on repeated trials
particularly with low-impedance speakers.

Or use early Naim amps with something like Transparent cable with its
network circuit and send the Naim into oscillation.

Or how about Redgum amps which are designed with a sharply rising bass
response?

Jeremy

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 03:52:31 GMT,
(Jeremy) wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:WuThc.3943$YP5.358919@attbi_s02...
Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put
up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own
amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched
and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have
been intentionally changed.)

The Yamaha integrated amplifier was part of the Sunshine Trials (which I did
proctor) between Steve Zipser anf Steve Maki.

Ooohhh... thet takes me back to my days reading rec.audio.opinion

Seems like a no-brainer for Richard to do the same with his amp (see
the 'ringer' rules above), and then you're back to square one. There
will always be clowns who'll try to cheat on such a test, but so far
not one single person has been able to *prove* that e.g. a Halcro
sounds better than a Rotel.

I presume the test is to prove one sounds different from the other in
repeated blind trials. 'Better' would be hard to quantify.

Correct, but of course you cannot make a pronouncement on 'better', if
you can't tell a difference.

Hmmm... what are rules on speakers? Something like an Apogee Scintilla
could tax the Yamaha amp into distortion. (depends on the Yamaha amp
in question of course)

Irrelevant, as the amps are used *below* the clipping point - so you
*can* compare a 5-watt SET to a 1,000 watt pro-audio amp - up to 4
watts.

I would also have thought some valve amps (low power SETs?) might
sound recognizably different to the Yamaha on repeated trials
particularly with low-impedance speakers.

That's possible, but I don't know if it's been tried. Besides, do you
know any SETs that are flat from 20Hz to 20kHz? :-)

Or use early Naim amps with something like Transparent cable with its
network circuit and send the Naim into oscillation.

Dead amps don't count! :-)

Or how about Redgum amps which are designed with a sharply rising bass
response?

Amps are required to be level-matched to +/- 0.1 dB across the audio
band. That sort of basic cheating has nothing to do with the claims
made by 'high end' amp manufacturers.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

(Nousaine) wrote in message news:a2Kgc.165684$K91.425151@attbi_s02...
wrote:

On an audio related list I mentioned the cash prize offered here to
identify wire in a controlled listening test and got the below. Is anyone
familiar with the person mentioned and his challenge?

"You could be talking of Richard Clark from car audio fame. He did
the best Mr. Wizard audio presentation ever seen at the Atlanta
Audio Society.

When I saw the offer first hand it was 10K to tell any amp from
some cheesy Yamaha amp in a double blind ABX test as many times
as you would like to try it within reason. I thin Noussien was
somehow involved in administering one."

Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put
up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own
amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched
and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have
been intentionally changed.)

The Yamaha integrated amplifier was part of the Sunshine Trials (which I did
proctor) between Steve Zipser anf Steve Maki.

There is also a $5K wire challenge.

How many have tried? 10,000 is quite some money. Now, I myself have
not been part of amp trials. A blind test published in the Swedish
MoLT issue 4 2002 revealed a difference of the Halcro dm 68 amp (7/7
correct guesses made twice) using the normal input (the Halcro dm58
has -1 dB at about 15 Hz, according to Stereophiles measurements). A
before/after test was used with music with bass information down to 5
Hz (Sound track to the "Fifth element").

T