Saying that different mp3 players can sound different is in no way analogous to claiming a low bitrate lossy track sounds different to a lossless track.  I don't understand that particular point, but never mind.

dfkt at anythingbutipod tested Player A.  Its frequency response is nowhere near as flat as other players.  He can also ABX Player A, as can several other people.  He also mentions several times that in subjective listening he perceives that the treble rolls off.  Different mp3 players can sound different.

As far as I can tell you're using the TOS8 just to bash me because you don't like me, and it wouldn't be the first time that you've hit me with bullying tactics and an official warning simply out of spite.

Takla - Do people prefer certain players only in a sighted test?  If so, that's placebo.

Same with the Hifiman vs other players.  Do people prefer the Hifiman only in sighted tests?  It's easy to say player X and player Y measure differently and and I prefer X.  If you really did prefer X then you would prefer it in a blind test as well.

Nobody is saying all players sound the same if measurements are different.  If you read back, people pointed out the bass roll off from the Cowon would be audible, but not very much so.

It may well be that the hifiaman is a really poor value and low grade product, but the people making claims about its sound quality without ever actually hearing it are not being objective.

On the one hand people are claiming that the sound sucks because the measurements are not as good as other players.

But  people are also claiming that measurements don't translate to audible differences

but that the player sounds bad.  And that it can't be ABX'd  but that it sounds worse than the players from which it can't be distinguished.  None of this is rational or objective.  It is reactionary and more closely resembles religion than science.

You made a personal claim of audible differences between specific pieces of hardware that you own which go beyond those which people contesting your claims concede (noises when changing tracks, pressing pause, etc.)  You are being asked to provide objective evidence to substantiate this claim in accordance with TOS #8.  That you could be right does not meet the requirement.

My use of the words personal and specific is intentional.  This isn't about players you've never heard or anything else you can conjure as a means to evade or obfuscate.

You asked me about which point I had an issue and then proceeded to childishly defend everything but that point.

Quote from: greynol on 2011-01-13 05:35:23

I suppose my previous post should have been in green.  I am trying to avoid a drawn out argument over subjective statements about sound quality.

Until vpa is ready to produce objective evidence let the dead dog lie.

If you have any idea how to messure the difference, I will do.

I'm an musican, I notice the difference

If I had made a new thread "Hey folks my Player A sounds better than my Player B" fair enough.  It should be supported with data derived from repeatable method.  But I didn't.  I just tried to anecdotally illustrate a point

You didn't choose to add anything to the debate about the hifiman.

You used the TOS not to maintain the board's preference/requirement for reason but to bash and disrupt someone who was actually bringing some clarity and reason into a debate that had been characterised by numerous clearly contradictory and false claims about a product none of the protaganists had ever tried.

You can call me childish, I couldn't care less.  But we all know that any 4 year old would just love the ability to edit everything they ever said, delete the stuff other people said that they don't like, privately penalise people and threaten them with sanctions if they complain.  If I'm childish at least it's not my full time occupation.

Quote from: greynol on 2011-01-14 20:10:47

You asked me about which point I had an issue and then proceeded to childishly defend everything but that point.

If I had made a new thread "Hey folks my Player A sounds better than my Player B" fair enough.  It should be supported with data derived from repeatable method.  But I didn't.  I just tried to anecdotally illustrate a point, actually two points:

a) not all mp3 players sound the same
b) the hardware with the best measurements isn't necessarily the one people might prefer.

Neither point is even slightly contentious, but people had been taking irrational and polarised positions so it was worth stating those points explicitly.

If this is the extent of your contribution, then you're probably better off not contributing until you can come up with something actually worth saying.

I suppose there's no possibility that you might actually be wrong or even guilty of the very things you're accusing others of doing. 

Having your friend Saratoga join in with some truly thick headed insult doesn't make you look any better.

So other people can read the thread and make up their own minds on who did what and why (depending on the use of the magic edit and delete buttons).

There are lots of reasons why some people will like that player.  That's their freedom.  We can laugh and wonder but what we can't legitimately do is say they are stupid or wrong to prefer it, or wrong to prefer their vinyl collection over their CDs.

Quote from: takhama on 2011-01-14 17:09:40

Quote from: Takla on 2011-01-14 14:56:37

I'm not sure it's possible to say that "the SQ sucks" unless one has heard it.

If you read the whole ABI thread, dkft has a very good idea to make a ABX test, and nearly nobody can ear a big difference with other players.
So for a 800$ player with such a bad interface and battery life (what could be accepotable if the sound was incredibly wonderful compared to any other player), yes, the sound sucks !

I don't see that battery life is a factor in sound quality.  Nor is the interface.  Obviously it's a big issue in choosing a player, but try as I might I can't hear the difference when my player has 10 hours left and when it has 10 minutes.  And when I change theme (interface) on my rockboxed players they don't sound any different.

I wasn't claiming that the sound is good, bad or indifferent.  I'm saying I can't tell because I didn't hear it, and also that I know that the player with the best measurements is not always the one whose sound is preferred.  That's because a preference arises from individual taste, expectation, perception and so on and is not related in a direct linear manner to the numbers.  We all know that a CD can offer a more faithful record than a vinyl LP but what we can't do is tell someone they are wrong to prefer one or the other.  We can call people out if they can only assess sound quality by seeing the hardware, but where there is a difference between two items we can't tell someone they are right or wrong to prefer one or the other.

If people can't ABX Player A from Players B,C & D how is it possible to claim "the sound sucks!" for Player A while maintaining that the others sound great?

Again I'm not advocating this player (I've never seen or heard it) but I'm at least as suspicious of people who can say it sounds bad without hearing it as I am of audiofools who hear differences between 1 metre lengths of coax.  The fact that someone brought up placebo despite there being measurable differences (and several people able to ABX the player) shows me that one doesn't have to be an audifool to be irrational and reactionary.  Simply assuming oneself to be objective doesn't make it so.

What I mean is just that it could be acceptable to sacrify everything but the SQ for that price.
I don't say the sound sucks in an absolute way, I just say it sucks in front of what is promised :
The marketing pitch of this player is "We put everyhting on the sound quality, so if you buy our very expensive player, you'll have a poor battery lifetime, a poor interface, a poor usability BUT the sound is absolutely wonderfull"
And the result is nobody is able to ABX this player in front of a 50$ player or even a 100$ player...