Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: What exactly "Audiophile" want? (Read 60347 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #50 –
Quote from: Pio2001 on
Quote from: Martin Colloms on
Those who appreciate quality in any field know from experience what it is worth to them. It is their choice whether to eat fine cuisine , drink better wine, read better literature, listen to great music.


Yes, but high end audiophile amplifiers or CD players don't sound any better than low end ones. Quality is completely subjective. And if someone would sell 500 € steaks claiming that they taste much better than ordinary ones while they are in fact just ordinary ones, but inside fancy packagings, we would as well say that it is a shame.



Martin, would you agree that at least some audiophiles also are in search of something that will give them the illusion of something better, at least for some time, and agree that they are willing to resort to placebo to do it?

Also, will you be at the NY AES?
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #51 –
I'm not Martin...

I agree that some people might willingly resort to placebo, but according to Internet discussions in various forums, they don't seem to be more than 10 % of the audiophiles.

I personally don't understand why one would keep the placebo effect and have to go through tens of hifi systems, never to be satisfied, while some blind tests can just eliminate the placebo effect, thus the need for special hifi equipment.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #52 –
Quote from: Pio2001 on
Quality is completely subjective.
Completely????  Would you say the lack of quality is also completely subjective?

Most people would agree that my home theater system sounds better than my boom-box.  Many of the differences (and defects) could be measured quantitatively an objectively.  Most audio enthusiasts could also detect that my home theater is a bit lacking in the subwoofer area...

I don't drink wine, but I do believe that some wines are truly better than others.    When it comes to which particular wine is absolutely the best and which is the absolutely the worst, I would agree that's very subjective.  But, a wine connoiseur isn't going to confuse any of the worst with those acclaimed as the best.  (When the differences are greater, it becomes much less subjective.)  I guess it's subjective to say that fresh bread tastes better than 3-week old bread, but most normal, rational, people would agree with that subjective statement.  It is also quite reasonable to ask if the bread is fresh or 3-weeks old before you buy it.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #53 –
Quote from: Night Surfer on
Wow. So much narrow-minded judging snobbery going on in this thread.
Usually people ridicule what threatens them. Are you somehow threatened by these people?
I am surprised to find this here.


Well, how should one react if someone from the Flat Earth Society were to post here, with all the "scientific" justifications they have to offer? (e.g. that the earth's gravity warps light to make the earth seem round)

Perhaps i've been in school for too long, but well-reasoned critique constitutes an essential part of the process of investigation in any field of learning, and is crucial to the advancement of civilization. To advocate some "all subjective belief is equally valid" agenda smacks of nihilism.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #55 –
Quote from: Martin Colloms on
Sound quality is not a mystery. High quality sound reproduction should be reasonably close to the original sound given the perspective of what is possible and the baseline of mediocrity which is generally served the public.

Those who appreciate quality in any field know from experience what it is worth to them. It is their choice whether to eat fine cuisine , drink better wine, read better literature, listen to great music.

If you love music, then hearing it at its best from the convenience of your lounge is possible with high fidelity sound reproducing equipement chosen with care and well installed, and has inestimable emotional and intellectual value.

What many are noting here is the fact that music can have the same profound impact on the cheap (relatively speaking!). Indeed, it often seems that many audiophiles spend more time on soul-deadening audio perfectionism (a possible effect of the tedious process of before/after comparison) than on the soul-enriching discovery of great music they haven't yet heard. Kind of a loss of perspective about what's important, perhaps?

The stuff about finer cuisine, wine, and even vehicle handling seems off-topic, not to mention elitist and sometimes condescending (cf. your mention of the masses and "mediocrity"). This blurs the mostly clear distinction between audio reproduction and music appreciation. Accusing the naysayers here of dismissing what they don't understand only makes this sense of superiority and disdain for the tastes of the masses more obnoxious.

Quote
How far you pursue the goal of hearing still more hall ambience, still more subtley from the musicianship, still more layers of orchestral performers,  still more natural timbre and detail,  is up to you. Some appreciate powerful cars with exquisite handling.

Why can't this hall ambience and musical subtlety be perceived on a relatively modestly-priced modern hi-fi system that doesn't have any of the strange audio juju? I have perfect pitch, and am already driven to distraction by niggling pitch problems that are reproduced only too well on my lo-fi $40 headphones, driven by the headphone jack from a $40 set of speakers. (Granted, the sound is far from ideal.)

Quote
I continue to wonder, with much amazement, at the tendency for users in one speciality to ridicule others in another speciality.

All "specialties" are not equally valid. No less a genius than Isaac Newton wasted a couple of decades on the "science" of alchemy (after the publication of Principia Mathematica) before concluding that it had led nowhere -- as i seem to recall, he had the courage to admit to himself that he'd largely wasted all those years chasing rainbows.


Quote from: greynol on
Maybe they didn't teach you in school that it's a fallacy to marginalize your opposition?

mmm, a straw man, and a sarcastic one at that? besides, my rhetorical weakness doesn't constitute a "fallacy".
point taken, but i found the sense of loftiness ("fine cuisine" and fine wine, anyone?) more than a little distasteful.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #56 –
Quote
No, it isn't: for example, a SLI system will give you only a lot of compatibility problems and worse reliability, more than a better enjoyment of the games.


Oh come on. SLI is a very new technology compare to audio. It's does work. but still have some problem. that's is what i see.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #57 –
Quote from: Pio2001 on
Quote from: Martin Colloms on
Those who appreciate quality in any field know from experience what it is worth to them. It is their choice whether to eat fine cuisine , drink better wine, read better literature, listen to great music.


Yes, but high end audiophile amplifiers or CD players don't sound any better than low end ones. Quality is completely subjective. And if someone would sell 500 € steaks claiming that they taste much better than ordinary ones while they are in fact just ordinary ones, but inside fancy packagings, we would as well say that it is a shame.


You really think that the circuit, board lay out and parts in my Pass amplifier are identical to a midfi receiver...except for the "fancy packaging" of course????

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #58 –
Quote from: Lashiec on
Quote from: Whelkman on
By the way, is your handle a Phantasy Star reference?

Yup.

I see you liked the documentary, good thing I bookmarked it. We can analyze audiophiles' motivations, but after seeing the video, with that guy using a pistol to eliminate all electrostatic energy for disrupting the LP playback,



Back when vinyl ruled, those 'Zerostat' spark guns  used to be pretty popular among conscientious LP users -- and they worked.  At least temporarily, they did dissipate the static buildup on a record.  Whether that actually improved the sound, I don't know, but it did seem to help keep dust from being attracted to the surface, for awhile.

Also good for annoying one's siblings.


As for ganging up on audiophiles, for me, an atheist , they're like religious people -- I find their beliefs silly, and I'd be happy to ignore them, but they have an unwarranted influence on stuff that affects *me* (in this case, by setting terms of the discourse in the audio hobby).  So until they stop spouting crap about digital, about mp3, about how to do comparisons, and about scientific methods, they're fair game.  (Actually, if they'd accompany their endless sighted reports with a sign of recognition of the significant possibility that they could be  dead wrong, I'd give them a free pass...but IME that's rarer than summer snowstorm.)

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #59 –
Quote
You really think that the circuit, board lay out and parts in my Pass amplifier are identical to a midfi receiver...except for the "fancy packaging" of course????


The question is. Does it's sound better?

If it does, then why?

I actually ask this to someone else before. and he said "IT JUST DID!!"

Quote
As for ganging up on audiophiles, for me, an atheist , they're like religious people -- I find their beliefs silly, and I'd be happy to ignore them, but they have an unwarranted influence on stuff that affects *me* (in this case, by setting terms of the discourse in the audio hobby). So until they stop spouting crap about digital, about mp3, about how to do comparisons, and about scientific methods, they're fair game. (Actually, if they'd just allow right off the significant possibility that their inferences about audio cause and effect could be dead wrong, I'd give them a free pass...but IME that's rarer than summer snowstorm.)


Same here.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #60 –
Quote
Oh come on. SLI is a very new technology compare to audio. It's does work. but still have some problem. that's is what i see.

The question is. Does it give you a better game experience?

Quote
If it does, then why?

This is very easy to answer: you can use more quality (and expensive) materials, more quality (and expensive) components, a more tuned layout and research that give you a theoretical (and objectively measurable) advance.

Quote
The question is. Does it's sound better?

This is the only real question here. If you split a theoretical advance from *real* benefit and cost, then audiophile are right: why shouldn't you use a superconductor for a cable?
If you have the money buy it: you will have a minor power loss thought the cable. And yes, aluminum is a shield for RFI, an audio CD with better reflective coefficient will surely give you less errors, a DVD-A can store ultrasonic frequencies while a CDA can't, and with a better SNR. 

But do they sound better?

Most of audiophile "snakeoil" I saw comes from real engineering problematics, but used in a context where it is so worthless to be false.

Quote
As for ganging up on audiophiles, for me, an atheist , they're like religious people

Be careful here: too often an atheist is just a follower of a different religion.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #61 –
Quote from: buktore on
The question is. Does it's sound better?

If it does, then why?

I actually ask this to someone else before. and he said "IT JUST DID!!"


This is when you need to have him ABX and come to some realizations. It really frees you when you learn that a $350 Panasonic receiver, $150 DVD player and zip cord sounds as nice as your $2500 amplifier, $3000 pre-amp, $1200 CD player and your $600 worth of cables to connect it all. When you sell all that stuff off you have all this extra money to devote towards speakers where the money is actually worth spending. I won't even go into the money you save on your electric bill by choosing a 90% efficient class D amplifier.

High end audio should be about nice sounding speakers and  and fancy digital front ends like Sonos with great user interface enhancements. But instead its all this weird crap and you end up embarrassed to take your wife there to even listen.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #62 –
Quote
The question is. Does it give you a better game experience?


Yes. Far better than choppy framerate don't you think?

But then you will probably say.. "it's not stable, have lot of problem" like i said. it's still very new technology so you will have to wait and see 

Quote
This is very easy to answer: you can use more quality (and expensive) materials, more quality (and expensive) components, a more tuned layout and research that give you a theoretical (and objectively measurable) advance.


Well... actually the guy that i ask answer this too. But i don't find this a good or even an answer at all. It's like you said "it made of good thing so it's must sound good" Doesn't it sound unacceptable to you?

I mean.. this is the only that kind of hardware have some marketing slogan like "Military grade _____(fill with something)" as far as i can see. what does it actually do anyway? maybe you can enlighten me and some of us. feel free to do so.

Quote
But do they sound better?


I want to know too. 

for me DVD-A is useless. why do i need a whopping 96Khz when i think the sound at 18k+ is irritate to my ear?

I do want to say more. but with my bad english i can't find a word to describe what i want to say. and i just can't just say it and have some misunderstood either because this is quite a delicate thing. too bad.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #63 –
Quote
Well... actually the guy that i ask answer this too. But i don't find this a good or even an answer at all. It's like you said "it made of good thing so it's must sound good" Doesn't it sound unacceptable to you?
I mean.. this is the only that kind of hardware have some marketing slogan like "Military grade _____(fill with something)" as far as i can see. what does it actually do anyway? maybe you can enlighten me and some of us. feel free to do so.


I can give you an idea of the matter, I hope you don't ask to know all the problematics you can find for each single piece ^^''
Each component and material has some physical limitation, that make them to work outside the ideal behavior, or change their behavior through the time or temperature.

Also 2 same components of the same type and of the same factory always behave each in a different way. When you use just a simple resistor in your project, you know that the value of that resistor will be different on each product, and you need to model these differences with a statistical approach.

Last, you must consider the price for each piece. Sure, a metallic case is a shield for EMI, but it costs much more than a plastic one, and if it doesn't have appreciable effect on the product, you will use the plastic one  .

You can always find a better material for a use, the limit is only the price. 

Military-grade components, for example, are component that guarantee better reliability over their lifetime, better resistance to temperature, better tolerances on the value and better ideal behavior.

There are also problematics related to circuit layout, dimension, and testing.

The word "perfection" is outside here, what exists is only "good enough". 
Sadly all the marketing strategies for audiophile products want to move this "good enough" well above the threshold of audibility, (because you have much more gain margin on "quality" products) and worse, only accounting the direction of the product itself: Pio2001 said that 75% of the sound come from the rooms, but firms who sell amps don't make houses, they try to sell amps 

Btw this is only an aspect of the matter... there are also the audiophiles' belief "old stuff is better" and their search for the "warm" sound. Indeed you can sell "warm" sound without using military-grade components 

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #64 –
Quote from: DVDdoug on
Completely????  Would you say the lack of quality is also completely subjective?

Most people would agree that my home theater system sounds better than my boom-box...


That's right. I said that sound quality is completely subjective for CD players and amplifiers, and I should have said solid state amplifiers, because objectively, they basically all sound the same.

Quality of speakers is not completely subjective. They sound objectively different.

Quote from: Dawnrazor-age on
You really think that the circuit, board lay out and parts in my Pass amplifier are identical to a midfi receiver...except for the "fancy packaging" of course????


No, that's right. This is a limit of my analogy. The point is that all of this circuitry has no objectively audible effect on the sound.

For example, look at this comparison between two hifi systems, save speakers. http://www.matrixhifi.com/contenedor_ppec_eng.htm
This is a blind comparison, low end versus high end... Some people prefered the high end system, some people prefered the low end system, some people didn't find any audible difference...

Very interesting also is the ABX test between an old school low end CD player from 1987 and the dCS Verdi La Scala / dCS Delius system (30,000 €).
Start from the page http://www.matrixhifi.com/marco.htm
Go to "Pruebas ciegas", and choose "dCS Verdi La Scala, dCS Delius vs Denon DCD-920"
This test is very well made. Listeners agreed that it was run in good listening conditions. One of them, in their forum, even told me that the listening conditions during the test were better than what most of them can have at home.
But no one could hear any sonic difference between the two, under blind listening conditions, and after equalisation of the output level of the two players.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #65 –
No, that's right. This is a limit of my analogy. The point is that all of this circuitry has no objectively audible effect on the sound.

For example, look at this comparison between two hifi systems, save speakers. http://www.matrixhifi.com/contenedor_ppec_eng.htm
This is a blind comparison, low end versus high end... Some people prefered the high end system, some people prefered the low end system, some people didn't find any audible difference...

Very interesting also is the ABX test between an old school low end CD player from 1987 and the dCS Verdi La Scala / dCS Delius system (30,000 €).
Start from the page http://www.matrixhifi.com/marco.htm
Go to "Pruebas ciegas", and choose "dCS Verdi La Scala, dCS Delius vs Denon DCD-920"
This test is very well made. Listeners agreed that it was run in good listening conditions. One of them, in their forum, even told me that the listening conditions during the test were better than what most of them can have at home.
But no one could hear any sonic difference between the two, under blind listening conditions, and after equalisation of the output level of the two players.

These "tests" don't prove anything that doesn't fit into my audiophile sensibilities:  Long signal chains sound worse than short ones.  The first one wasn't an apples to apples comparison, it was a cdp and amp vs.  a transport, a pre/ dac, and an amp.  I figured out long ago that ditching the pre and doing away with long spdif runs can improve things dramatically.  A much fairer test would have been to run a wadia CDp direct into an amp. 

The 2nd test I can't comment on as much since it is in some language i don't speak.  Anyhow, it really does look like if you can stack enough components on top of each other you can muck up the sound so bad that no one can tell any difference.

The point is that all of this circuitry has no objectively audible effect on the sound.

I am betting that this is a tough sell even on this forum.  All you are saying is that the onboard sound is just the same as any sound card that you could possibly add, and that there is no reason to add any additional sound card.  All that computer manufacturer snake oil

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #66 –
wow, i read most of this thread at work last night and to say the least, most of these posts are pretty far off and ignorant as to what an audiophile is. most people seem to be confusing an audiophile with an idiot. an audiophile is not a person who throws frivolous amounts of money away to have the most expensive audio experience, nor is an audiophile a person who only listens to their equipment as opposed to the music; its actually quite the opposite. if your an audiophile, you dont want to hear your equipment at all!

an audiophile is a person who has exceptional hearing. an audiophile is a person who's profession or hobby is music (or any audio), and also to achieve the most undistorted reproduction of of said audio. a true audiophile is a person who spends more money on their audio collection as opposed to their equipment. most importantly, an audiophile is a person who is educated in music, sound and electronic/electrical devices.

i understand that analog devices are vulnerable to RF, and poor electricity. but with a clean power source and proper configuration, it can be far superior to digital. after all, all sounds are originally analog and there WILL be loss if converted to digital audio so having an accurate A/D converter is key. but high-end gear can be made quite cheaply when using quality materials. simplicity is essential when constructing analog devices since the more circuits the signal has to go through, the more the waveform can be distorted.

i know the theory of diminishing returns, and to an extent, it is flawed. i will admit , i used to read stereophile and a couple other magazines when i was a kid and i was fascinated by all of these high-end components they reviewed. i've read reviews of these "cd blacklight" mats, high-end digital interface cables, and the like. i was skeptical then, but now i realize they were just advertisement whores and anything they say can be taken with a grain of salt. it makes me wonder now how many of these high end audio companies are frauds. they certainly aren't worthy of any real audiophiles attention.

i know that a cheap cd drive can read data of a cd with 100% accuracy at at least 24 times the speed required to read cd-da. what is it about some people that can hear how much better $15,000 cd transport sounds over a $1,000 transport? they must have their cd transport sitting on top of their washing machine if they can hear the sonic variations between the stabilization of one transport over the other. i believe these people are crackpots, not audiophiles.

there may appear to be a thin line between a crackpot and an audiophile, but a real audiophile will know that you don't have to blow your salary to have an exceptional listening experience.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #67 –
Quote from: gob on
there may appear to be a thin line between a crackpot and an audiophile, but a real audiophile will know that you don't have to blow your salary to have an exceptional listening experience.


In my experience, which is, politely put, extensive, with audiophiles and their claims and beliefs, I have to respectfully disagree with you.

The last sentence "not blow your salary..." describes me, to a degree that I can't even begin to explain here.

None the less, I've been told time after time after time after time after time that I am a crazy SNR-worshiping believer in the stale, luddite religion of science by many people, not just a few, who call themselves audiophiles, and who repeatedly, relentlessly, have told me I'm not.
I didn't make up the adjectives above, they have all been used. Oh, and I left out "tin-eared", "idiot" and quite a few other nasty pejoritives.

The people who SPEAK for audiophiles, for a great part (I except Martin, John Atkinson, and a few others to some extent), exactly fit the 'crackpot' description, in my opinion, including the conspiracy theories, the alternative belief systems, and such.  On one audiophile site I've been banned from, the most active forum at least used to be the one where all of the conspiracies on how the left was going to try to create "one world government" was just as popular as arguing audio.

These are anecdotal experiences, to be sure, based on my own personal experience. However, there is a lot of experience involved, and enough that I can often successfully extrapolate a conversation before it even occurs. (And hence usually don't have it in the first place.)
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #68 –
Quote from: gob on
wow, i read most of this thread at work last night and to say the least, most of these posts are pretty far off and ignorant as to what an audiophile is. most people seem to be confusing an audiophile with an idiot. an audiophile is not a person who throws frivolous amounts of money away to have the most expensive audio experience, nor is an audiophile a person who only listens to their equipment as opposed to the music; its actually quite the opposite. if your an audiophile, you dont want to hear your equipment at all!

an audiophile is a person who has exceptional hearing. an audiophile is a person who's profession or hobby is music (or any audio), and also to achieve the most undistorted reproduction of of said audio. a true audiophile is a person who spends more money on their audio collection as opposed to their equipment. most importantly, an audiophile is a person who is educated in music, sound and electronic/electrical devices.

The thing is, as with much else in life, there's now a huge difference between the literal dictionary meaning of "audiophilia" (which is part of the point of this board in the first place) and the kind of real-world stuff some folks have gotten into (cue nasty killjoy sceptic, "self-delusion").

Quote
i understand that analog devices are vulnerable to RF, and poor electricity. but with a clean power source and proper configuration, it can be far superior to digital. after all, all sounds are originally analog and there WILL be loss if converted to digital audio...

Digital is at its very essence just a different representation of analogue, so--all else being equal--there should be no difference between signal degradation in A->A->A and A->D->A as far as the conversion process goes (DSP aside). However, by its very nature, modern digital tech makes it easier and somewhat more likely that high fidelity has been maintained during the mastering process.

Quote
i know that a cheap cd drive can read data of a cd with 100% accuracy at at least 24 times the speed required to read cd-da.

Indeed--a fact that is so often overlooked along with the whole nature of error detection, viz. all the stuff about the effects of CD-R reflectivity on SQ (those that are supposedly subtler than obvious skipping and static).

Quote
there may appear to be a thin line between a crackpot and an audiophile, but a real audiophile will know that you don't have to blow your salary to have an exceptional listening experience.

Perhaps that link to that fascinating short film has helped to polarize perspective in this regard, in that there's rather more rational basis behind "audiophile" claims than those guys would indicate. Actually i think we have to give some of them more credit where it comes to their sense of irony and self-awareness, as their nervous laughter would indicate, especially the guy with the English accent who refers to the "lunatic" who initiated him into the cult, and the other one who invokes the worship of Poseidon.

It's really quite touching to see those folks trying to recreate the same sort of impact that familiar pieces of music would have had at first hearing. The first time one hears something special is always the best, isn't it?

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #69 –
Quote from: Dawnrazor-age on
The first one wasn't an apples to apples comparison, it was a cdp and amp vs.  a transport, a pre/ dac, and an amp.  I figured out long ago that ditching the pre and doing away with long spdif runs can improve things dramatically.  A much fairer test would have been to run a wadia CDp direct into an amp.


So in your opinion, there should be no difference between the DVD Sony DVP-NS355 + Behringer A500 and the Wadia 6 + Classe CAP-80 + YBA 2A, but the difference should become obvious if the Classe preamp is removed ?
But measurments, that so far have never predicted otherwise than what double blind tests show (except with audio encoders), indicate that there should be no difference either between the DVD Sony DVP-NS355 + Behringer A500 and the Wadia 6 + YBA 2A, because their distortion is negligible.
What makes you think that it should be otherwise ?

Quote from: Dawnrazor-age on
The 2nd test I can't comment on as much since it is in some language i don't speak.  Anyhow, it really does look like if you can stack enough components on top of each other you can muck up the sound so bad that no one can tell any difference.


There is another, more probable, explanation : the players sound the same.

Imaginary differences have been reported countless times. They are very common, especially among audiophiles. So the result of the comparison is not surprising.

If the problem is indeed the fact that the high end player was on top of an amplifier, how do you explain that no one in the audience, including the owner of the dCS player, realized that it didn't work properly at all, and how do you explain that when it is on top of an amplifier instead of a hifi stand, it suddenly sounds exactly like a Denon DCD-920, and not, for example, like a Sony DVP-NS355 ?

Quote from: Dawnrazor-age on
The point is that all of this circuitry has no objectively audible effect on the sound.

I am betting that this is a tough sell even on this forum.  All you are saying is that the onboard sound is just the same as any sound card that you could possibly add, and that there is no reason to add any additional sound card.  All that computer manufacturer snake oil


No, I'm only talking about standalone CD players and solid state hifi amplifiers.
Onboard soundcards have an audible background noise, and thus sound different than optional soundcards.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #70 –
Quote from: gob on
all sounds are originally analog and there WILL be loss if converted to digital audio so having an accurate A/D converter is key.


The problem is that sounds are vibrations that evolve in time, and there will be losses if we try to store them on a static medium. It just happens that digital media are lossless, and the process that consists in storing audio onto digital introduces losses in the A/D and D/A proccesses, while analog storage media are not lossless. So the point is not comparing A/D/A conversion versus no A/D/A conversion, but comparing A/D/A conversion versus analog storage, like magnetic tape recording / playback, or microgroove cutting / playback.

The shortest path is not the better either.
For example, gramophone is the conceptually shortest way to store audio. Vibrations are directly cut into the medium, then you listen to the vibrations of the medium.
According to the "shorter is better" theory, gramophone should sound superior to both CD and vinyl, since it does not involve unnecessary mechanic-to-electric microphone conversion, then electric-to-mechanic speaker conversion, that can only introduce losses.

This is the same flawed logic, because it does not take into account the problems caused by the recording and the playback of the storage medium.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #71 –
Quote from: Pio2001 on
The point is that all of this circuitry has no objectively audible effect on the sound.

For example, look at this comparison between two hifi systems, save speakers. http://www.matrixhifi.com/contenedor_ppec_eng.htm
This is a blind comparison, low end versus high end... Some people prefered the high end system, some people prefered the low end system, some people didn't find any audible difference...
Exactly what is the relevance of this test to your argument?

This test indicates that some people believed they could tell the difference between the two systems and you left out the part that some people would not say which sounded better which is not the same thing as them not believing they could tell the difference.

It would be one thing if they were asked to pair up the systems like with a proper ABX test, but it wasn't conducted this way and as such the results cannot be used to demonstrate that the two systems sounded identical.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #72 –
Quote from: Pio2001 on
So in your opinion, there should be no difference between the DVD Sony DVP-NS355 + Behringer A500 and the Wadia 6 + Classe CAP-80 + YBA 2A, but the difference should become obvious if the Classe preamp is removed ?
But measurments, that so far have never predicted otherwise than what double blind tests show (except with audio encoders), indicate that there should be no difference either between the DVD Sony DVP-NS355 + Behringer A500 and the Wadia 6 + YBA 2A, because their distortion is negligible.
What makes you think that it should be otherwise ?


I for one don't believe as you seem to that all amps and cdp's sound the same.  So I wouldn't say that there is no difference between the systems. 

Quote from: Pio2001 on
There is another, more probable, explanation : the players sound the same.


Sure, if you muck up the sound as they did in the test, they sure could sound the same.  But seriously, you seem to be saying that no matter how you design a Cdp or an amp, it all sounds the same.  Talk about flawed logic.


Quote from: Pio2001 on
If the problem is indeed the fact that the high end player was on top of an amplifier, how do you explain that no one in the audience, including the owner of the dCS player, realized that it didn't work properly at all, and how do you explain that when it is on top of an amplifier instead of a hifi stand, it suddenly sounds exactly like a Denon DCD-920, and not, for example, like a Sony DVP-NS355 ?

Who said it wasn't working properly at all???  I am saying that stacking components on top of each other like that can veil the sound enough that it is hard to tell them apart.  It wouldn't matter what cdp was involved in the test.

Quote from: Pio2001 on
No, I'm only talking about standalone CD players and solid state hifi amplifiers.
Onboard soundcards have an audible background noise, and thus sound different than optional soundcards.


But the standalone soundcards all sound the same right??

Quote from: greynol on
Quote from: Pio2001 on
The point is that all of this circuitry has no objectively audible effect on the sound.

For example, look at this comparison between two hifi systems, save speakers. http://www.matrixhifi.com/contenedor_ppec_eng.htm
This is a blind comparison, low end versus high end... Some people prefered the high end system, some people prefered the low end system, some people didn't find any audible difference...
Exactly what is the relevance of this test to your argument?

This test indicates that some people believed they could tell the difference between the two systems and you left out the part that some people would not say which sounded better which is not the same thing as them not believing they could tell the difference.

It would be one thing if they were asked to pair up the systems like with a proper ABX test, but it wasn't conducted this way and as such the results cannot be used to demonstrate that the two systems sounded identical.


Totally agree.  And did you notice the question was something like 'which one do you like".  That could  mean that the 14 people expressing no difference just couldn't decide which they preferred, not that they heard no difference.

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #73 –
Quote from: Dawnrazor-age on
Totally agree.  And did you notice the question was something like 'which one do you like".  That could  mean that the 14 people expressing no difference just couldn't decide which they preferred, not that they heard no difference.


Well, once we get over a certain price threshold, and differences in the more objectively measurable of criteria (e.g. DAC quality, or frequency response / SNR within the range of audibility) start to become indistinguishable, differences in sound quality can indeed become more a matter of personal taste. Natural imperfections and differences in setup might affect the sound enough to make a (barely perceptible) difference. But then the test results also imply that, in general, someone can't conclude that an 'audiophile-orientated' system is more transparent, or demonstrably better, and surely not better because of factor X, since the test subjects as a whole couldn't conclude that either setup was better, and were hard-pressed to discern any difference in the first place.

Also, subjects in a well-structured blind test tend to err on the side of caution and be careful about jumping to conclusions about having detected a difference, lest their hunches subsequently prove to be without basis. And unlike the subset of audiophiles being criticized, they wouldn't jump to wildly speculative conclusions about the reason why a hot-rodded piece of equipment sounds better than something else.

Part of what constitutes 'healthy scepticism' concerning any kind of subjective response (e.g. carefully assessing whether somebody is a good/bad person) is to always look within first, and ask if one's prejudices, personal failings, etc. could be skewing perception at a particular moment, before starting to consider that external factors (e.g. the use of souped-up audio components) may be causing the effect. In the context of subjective tests of 'hi-fi' audio quality, subtle variation in the state of what's between the ears can affect quality assessments far more than what goes into them. Stuff that has been well-documented by psychologists in studying human reactions to external stimuli, from political speeches to encountering members of the opposite sex, but perhaps not yet applied to the perception of differences in audio equipment.
(but I am not a psychologist, or any sort of authority)

What exactly "Audiophile" want?

Reply #74 –
Quote from: euphonic on
Well, once we get over a certain price threshold, and differences in the more objectively measurable of criteria (e.g. DAC quality, or frequency response / SNR within the range of audibility) start to become indistinguishable, differences in sound quality can indeed become more a matter of personal taste. But then the test results also imply that, in general, someone can't conclude that an 'audiophile-orientated' system is more transparent, or demonstrably better, and surely not better because of factor X, since the test subjects as a whole couldn't conclude that either setup was better,
As you said, it's a matter of personal taste; there is no better.  The results imply nothing of the sort.

Quote from: euphonic on
and were hard-pressed to discern any difference in the first place.
Show me exactly where it says they were hard pressed to find a difference.

Quote from: euphonic on
Also, subjects in a well-structured blind test tend to err on the side of caution and be careful about jumping to conclusions about having detected a difference, lest their hunches subsequently prove to be without basis.
This was not a well-structured blind test.

Quote from: euphonic on
And unlike the subset of audiophiles being criticized, they wouldn't jump to wildly speculative conclusions about the reason why a hot-rodded piece of equipment sounds better than something else.
This is funny since you seem more than willing to speculate about their behavior.