You could have asked.

Answer is that I don't use any program while running ABX files.  I drag the files into foobar playlist and select them to perform the ABX.  That is it.

If I need to perform software analysis, I use Adobe Audition CC.

Oh you did ask by implying that my company is in the business of selling high-end gear and that biases my views.

Reinventing the Audio Power Amplifier: Mark Levinson No 53

By Amir Majidimehr

In comparison testing I have done, switching amplifiers using the classic class D configuration always sport incredible low frequency control and power. They beat out linear class AB amplifiers almost regardless of price. What they give up though is high frequency fidelity which I find somewhat harsh. The distortion is highly non-linear and challenging to spot but it is there. The Mark Levinson No 53 is the first switching amplifier I have heard which does not have this compromise. Its bass is amazingly authoritative: tight and powerful. Yet the rest of the response is absolutely neutral and pleasant.

If you have not heard these unique amplifiers, I highly encourage you to come into our showroom for a listen. We have a pair on hand driving our Revel speakers. I am confident that they will improve the sound of your current speakers given the ease with which they can drive any load regardless of how difficult they might be (and many high-end speakers are difficult to drive). We are happy to let you evaluate them with your own system to see the benefits of this technology.  Hearing this amplifier was an eye-opener for me.  I think it will be for you too.

While you're looking up the meaning of the word "claim" in the dictionary, please also look up "imply".

We've "asked" for an entire thread about Audibility of Audio Power Amplifier Distortions, for you to show your claimed tests of Audibility of Audio Power Amplifier Distortions...

Quote from: ajinfla on 2014-12-05 17:58:34

We've "asked" for an entire thread about Audibility of Audio Power Amplifier Distortions, for you to show your claimed tests of Audibility of Audio Power Amplifier Distortions...

Claimed tests?  This is not a claim:



You doubt the "indisputable proof" that solid state amplifiers can sound different from each other?  If so, let's have you and Arny go at it.

Or perhaps you doubt this from our esteemed double blind tester, Mr. Meyer:



Please confirm if you believe or doubt the validity of above.  Because if you do, we will stay here forever with respect to your requests.

Quote from: ajinfla on 2014-12-05 17:58:34

We've "asked" for an entire thread about Audibility of Audio Power Amplifier Distortions, for you to show your claimed tests of Audibility of Audio Power Amplifier Distortions...

Claimed tests?  This is not a claim:

You doubt the "indisputable proof" that solid state amplifiers can sound different from each other?

Reinventing the Audio Power Amplifier: Mark Levinson No 53

By Amir Majidimehr

In comparison testing I have done, switching amplifiers using the classic class D configuration always sport incredible low frequency control and power. They beat out linear class AB amplifiers almost regardless of price. What they give up though is high frequency fidelity which I find somewhat harsh. The distortion is highly non-linear and challenging to spot but it is there. The Mark Levinson No 53 is the first switching amplifier I have heard which does not have this compromise. Its bass is amazingly authoritative: tight and powerful. Yet the rest of the response is absolutely neutral and pleasant.

If you have not heard these unique amplifiers, I highly encourage you to come into our showroom for a listen. We have a pair on hand driving our Revel speakers. I am confident that they will improve the sound of your current speakers given the ease with which they can drive any load regardless of how difficult they might be (and many high-end speakers are difficult to drive). We are happy to let you evaluate them with your own system to see the benefits of this technology.  Hearing this amplifier was an eye-opener for me.  I think it will be for you too.

Or perhaps you doubt this from our esteemed double blind tester, Mr. Meyer:

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/86-ultra-hi-...ml#post16216826
The comparison was then conducted without knowing which input is which, sitting in front of the headphone amp and toggling back and forth. When necessary, I would go back and re-listen. Once I found which one sounded worse, I would then repeat the exercise by randomizing the inputs and seeing if I could still identify which one was worse. My success rate was 100% in the second test (i.e. could always verify that the first result was not by chance). This testing was repeated a number of times comparing the different sources against each other and the ML.

I did not level match anything. However, once I found one source was worse than the other, I would then turn up the volume to counter any effect there. Indeed, doing so would close the gap some but it never changed the outcome. Note that the elevated level clearly made that source sound louder than the other. So the advantage was put on the losing side.

The results above were later objectively shown to be backed by some science in Stereophile magazine. In reviews of said players and Mark Levinson, it was shown that the former would only resolve to 14 or 15 bits of audio samples. Turning off the front panel pushed some up to 16 bits or so. The ML on the other hand, was tested to have equiv. of 19.5 bits. This is contrast to all the DACs being rated at "24 bits."

Now this testing is a few years old (probably circa 2001 to 2002). Maybe DACs have improved so much that the $20 part in the player is just as good as my then $8000 Mark Levinson DAC (which was hand tuned). If so, then I like to know who has tested the new ones and details of their methodology.

There you have it. Was it worth the wait?

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.p...Audio-Alpha-USB
Note 1: This is a purely subjective review. It is entirely possible that my conclusions are wrong. Certainly the power of placebo is far higher than the small differences I hear. In my short testing, and the way these devices work, it is hard to set up the type of objective tests I like to have to reduce the effects of bias.

Note 2: My company carries the Berkeley audio products and in previous life, I acquired Pacific Microsonics/HDCD which was founded by the same people behind this product.

What did I hear? First, on many tracks nothing. As I mentioned, on a lot of material the difference is either not there or if it is, it is too small to rely on it existing in such an ad-hoc test. Where it did surface, it was predictable. The high frequencies were slightly cleaner. And ambiance and decay more pronounced which impacts the perceived soundstage of music/instruments. I hate to use this word but I can’t think of any other to way that the overall experience was more “analog like” in the sense of it sounding more pleasant.

I found the difference easiest to hear on my audiophile A-DVD 24-bit, 96 Khz tracks. Perhaps due to higher sampling rate, jitter reduction matters more. Or else, these are just better recordings so the difference is easier to hear.

For the objectivists in the crowd, the difference was never night and day. All three interfaces were dynamic, and were enjoyable to listen. The Berkeley and Audiophilleo simply added a bit more fidelity on top. It is like putting some pepper on a good stake .

Please confirm if you believe or doubt the validity of above.

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 16:09:57

You doubt the "indisputable proof" that solid state amplifiers can sound different from each other?

No. We doubt your "indisputable proof" that the ML53 Class D amplifier sound different from other Class D and AB solid state amplifiers, as you claim here to have done/proven:
Reinventing the Audio Power Amplifier: Mark Levinson No 53

Quote from: ajinfla on 2014-12-06 19:57:37

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 16:09:57

You doubt the "indisputable proof" that solid state amplifiers can sound different from each other?

No. We doubt your "indisputable proof" that the ML53 Class D amplifier sound different from other Class D and AB solid state amplifiers, as you claim here to have done/proven:
Reinventing the Audio Power Amplifier: Mark Levinson No 53

Ah we are getting some place.  So to confirm, you accept that two high power solid state amplifiers in double blind ABX tests with turntable no less, were found to sound different in two out of three tracks.  Right?

If that test was not run and you didn't know said outcome, what would have been your position?  That they can or cannot sound different?

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 21:14:01

Quote from: ajinfla on 2014-12-06 19:57:37

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 16:09:57

You doubt the "indisputable proof" that solid state amplifiers can sound different from each other?

No. We doubt your "indisputable proof" that the ML53 Class D amplifier sound different from other Class D and AB solid state amplifiers, as you claim here to have done/proven:
Reinventing the Audio Power Amplifier: Mark Levinson No 53

Ah we are getting some place.  So to confirm, you accept that two high power solid state amplifiers in double blind ABX tests with turntable no less, were found to sound different in two out of three tracks.  Right?

If that test was not run and you didn't know said outcome, what would have been your position?  That they can or cannot sound different?

Amir, please confirm that you actually understand the irrelevancy of the above comments to our discussion of your proud flaunting of bogus sighted evaluations of power amplifiers.

Quote from: ajinfla on 2014-12-06 19:57:37

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 16:09:57

You doubt the "indisputable proof" that solid state amplifiers can sound different from each other?

No. We doubt your "indisputable proof" that the ML53 Class D amplifier sound different from other Class D and AB solid state amplifiers, as you claim here to have done/proven:
Reinventing the Audio Power Amplifier: Mark Levinson No 53

Ah we are getting some place.  So to confirm, you accept that two high power solid state amplifiers in double blind ABX tests with turntable no less, were found to sound different in two out of three tracks.  Right?

If that test was not run and you didn't know said outcome, what would have been your position?

That they can or cannot sound different?

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2014-12-06 21:26:04

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 21:14:01

Quote from: ajinfla on 2014-12-06 19:57:37

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 16:09:57

You doubt the "indisputable proof" that solid state amplifiers can sound different from each other?

No. We doubt your "indisputable proof" that the ML53 Class D amplifier sound different from other Class D and AB solid state amplifiers, as you claim here to have done/proven:
Reinventing the Audio Power Amplifier: Mark Levinson No 53

Ah we are getting some place.  So to confirm, you accept that two high power solid state amplifiers in double blind ABX tests with turntable no less, were found to sound different in two out of three tracks.  Right?

If that test was not run and you didn't know said outcome, what would have been your position?  That they can or cannot sound different?

Amir, please confirm that you actually understand the irrelevancy of the above comments to our discussion of your proud flaunting of bogus sighted evaluations of power amplifiers.

Arny, why do you keep answering on his behalf over and over again?

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 21:36:35

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2014-12-06 21:26:04

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 21:14:01

Quote from: ajinfla on 2014-12-06 19:57:37

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 16:09:57

You doubt the "indisputable proof" that solid state amplifiers can sound different from each other?

No. We doubt your "indisputable proof" that the ML53 Class D amplifier sound different from other Class D and AB solid state amplifiers, as you claim here to have done/proven:
Reinventing the Audio Power Amplifier: Mark Levinson No 53

Ah we are getting some place.  So to confirm, you accept that two high power solid state amplifiers in double blind ABX tests with turntable no less, were found to sound different in two out of three tracks.  Right?

If that test was not run and you didn't know said outcome, what would have been your position?  That they can or cannot sound different?

Amir, please confirm that you actually understand the irrelevancy of the above comments to our discussion of your proud flaunting of bogus sighted evaluations of power amplifiers.

Arny, why do you keep answering on his behalf over and over again?

Amir, please confirm that you actually understand the irrelevancy of the above comments to our discussion of your proud flaunting of bogus sighted evaluations of power amplifiers.

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2014-12-07 01:18:15

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 21:36:35

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2014-12-06 21:26:04

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 21:14:01

Quote from: ajinfla on 2014-12-06 19:57:37

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 16:09:57

You doubt the "indisputable proof" that solid state amplifiers can sound different from each other?

No. We doubt your "indisputable proof" that the ML53 Class D amplifier sound different from other Class D and AB solid state amplifiers, as you claim here to have done/proven:
Reinventing the Audio Power Amplifier: Mark Levinson No 53

Ah we are getting some place.  So to confirm, you accept that two high power solid state amplifiers in double blind ABX tests with turntable no less, were found to sound different in two out of three tracks.  Right?

If that test was not run and you didn't know said outcome, what would have been your position?  That they can or cannot sound different?

Amir, please confirm that you actually understand the irrelevancy of the above comments to our discussion of your proud flaunting of bogus sighted evaluations of power amplifiers.

Arny, why do you keep answering on his behalf over and over again?

Amir, please confirm that you actually understand the irrelevancy of the above comments to our discussion of your proud flaunting of bogus sighted evaluations of power amplifiers.

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-07 05:05:35

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2014-12-07 01:18:15

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 21:36:35

Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on 2014-12-06 21:26:04

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 21:14:01

Quote from: ajinfla on 2014-12-06 19:57:37

Quote from: amirm on 2014-12-06 16:09:57

You doubt the "indisputable proof" that solid state amplifiers can sound different from each other?

No. We doubt your "indisputable proof" that the ML53 Class D amplifier sound different from other Class D and AB solid state amplifiers, as you claim here to have done/proven:
Reinventing the Audio Power Amplifier: Mark Levinson No 53

Ah we are getting some place.  So to confirm, you accept that two high power solid state amplifiers in double blind ABX tests with turntable no less, were found to sound different in two out of three tracks.  Right?

If that test was not run and you didn't know said outcome, what would have been your position?  That they can or cannot sound different?

Amir, please confirm that you actually understand the irrelevancy of the above comments to our discussion of your proud flaunting of bogus sighted evaluations of power amplifiers.

Arny, why do you keep answering on his behalf over and over again?

Amir, please confirm that you actually understand the irrelevancy of the above comments to our discussion of your proud flaunting of bogus sighted evaluations of power amplifiers.

Then why bother posting on a forum where one is expected to confirm and affirm their claims?

Not sure how you can confuse the two of us.

You seriously holding me accountable for what Bart Simpson wrote on a chalkboard?