Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ODS123

  1. 1 hour ago, Dave A said:

    In the thread "Best Cornwall....?" starting on page 4 and on for a while. Page 4 is also where you basically said Roy does not know what he is doing. It was worth digging that old thread up and re-reading it was fun.  Invitation accepted.


    please...  Copy/ paste this comment to which you refer.  And you're now adding a new misquote, that I said "Roy does not know what he is doing".  Again, either post the comment you're referring to or apologize.  I NEVER said EITHER of those things you allege.


    Btw, the new CW4 is made w/ MDF.

  2. 1 hour ago, Dave A said:

    Absolutely. Somehow his what he thinks trumps what everyone else thinks and I remember his Pro Klipsch Gear is junk meant only for train stations diatribe.  MDF too was quite fun.


    Wow! In all of my years of participating in online forums I have never had my views more grotesquely mischaracterized.  I don’t believe Klipsch pro gear is junk, so I never said it, and I have never implied it.  


    It was you who said modern Klipsch heritage speakers made with MDF are junk.  In brief I said the pro Klipsch gear is made with plywood because it is meant to be mounted and used in PA settings.  You persisted saying the MDF gear is junk because it is difficult to repair or refinish if it gets wet. Which is a ridiculous criticism because none of the other gear in my, or anyone else’s, system is waterproof.


    I invite you to find any of my comments that suggest the Pro gear is junk.



  3. It's laughable the audiophile world treats these beliefs - like break-in, audibility b/w cables, interconnects, etc - as though they are simply and forever unknowable.  ..Like the matter must always remain a topic of interesting and spirited debate. 


    That is BS


    Take break-in:  It would be SO easy for Klipsch to take a pair of Cornwalls - maybe a blemished pair so as to not put hours on a pair a customer is waiting for - play one of them for one full day (24hrs), and the other for 8 full days (192hrs) and compare them side by side playing a mono song.  Can people HEAR a difference - ie., can they distinguish the one speaker from the other more often than mere chance?  ...No need for measuring driver excursions or electrical resistance or any of that -  It just boils down to whether a difference is AUDIBLE.  Klipsch has the means to do blinded testing, so this would be EASY.


    Unfortunately this will never happen and the reason is break-in and the other myths have profit implications for gear companies and their retailers.


    I've already said I've done the above w/ my last four speaker purchases.  To date, not one person has expressed an interest in doing it with theirs.  Heck, I can't even convince ONE person to wire one channel of their system w/ pricey interconnects and compare to it the FOB (free-in-the-box) used on the other.  Nope.  So it may be that people DON'T really want to know the truth.  Hence, I think subjectivist audiophiles are as goofy and astrologists.


    • Like 2
  4. So, as I see it, this discussion can be summarized as following:


    Break-in that is barely measurable and barely audible in 20 HRs or more: MAYBE.


    >20+ hours of Break-in that can take a speaker from "Unimpressed" to "Love it":  MYTH.


    If you don't love your new speakers right out of the box, don't expect "break-in" to change this.

  5. 46 minutes ago, richieb said:

    ZU Audio out of Utah touts a 600 hour break in on complete speakers and/or their nanotechnology, and “sanctified” 10 inch full range driver. That’s a bunch o’ hours - 


    Right.. ..And this doesn't trip your internal BS alarm??


    600 hours is 75 days @ 8 hours/day.  ..So what do they tell retailers?  "Don't let customers hear them for 15 weeks  Break them in in a storage closet first before putting them on the showroom floor!"  C'mon people.  This is redic.


    Again...  No speaker company would ship a speaker that sounds less than it's best simply b/c they couldn't find a way to exercise the drivers prior to assembly.


    I'll say it one more time, speaker companies benefit from perpetuating the break-in myth b/c it reduces the number of speakers being brought back to a retailer.

  6. 41 minutes ago, Chief bonehead said:

    Whether it takes 20 minutes or 200 hours, they break in. I will tell you that I don’t have 200 hours to waste.


    Ok... but you're being vague - saying 20 min to 200 hours is quite a spread.  So let's cut to the chase.  ..In your opinion, do Klipsch speakers speaker sound different after, say, 20 hours and then 40 hours??


    After unboxing my CWIII's and giving a quick listen to make sure both were functioning, I played music through just one speaker for the night and late into the next morning (>12hrs).  The next day I played a mono song and switched back and forth b/w the two using the balance control. ...Neither I nor ANYONE in my family could hear one IOTA of difference b/w the two speakers.  ..They sounded identical. 


    I find it remarkable that we treat this question about Break-in as though it's some sort of an unknowable.  ..I suggested to others that they do as I did w/ my CWIII's with their next speaker purchase and literally NO ONE else has done this.  I think people don't really want their self-annointed golden-ear qualifications debunked. 

  7. 1 hour ago, Khornukopia said:


    A few percent improvement in performance is usually classified as success in most technical and athletic aspects of our lives, and the reason many people establish goals and try harder to achieve them.


    A few percent increase in taxes would be considered a significant burden to most taxpayers. 


    So, if a new loudspeaker might sound 2% better after xx hours of use, what is so difficult with accepting that as a distinct probability?



    Claude said  "I've not measured anything that drifted from specifications more than a few percent", not "sound 2% better".  


    The "Myth" that is being called out isn't that there MAY be a tiny, minuscule change in measurements, it's the notion that speakers will go from sounding "meh" right out of the box to "Wow!!" after 10, 20, 200 hours of use (..or "break-in" if you must).  


    If this were true, Klipsch would surely find a way to add break-in to the mfg process so that every speaker left the factory sounding "Wow!" 


  8. 32 minutes ago, Crankysoldermeister said:

    Wouldn’t surprise me.

    Wasn’t  there an article years ago about world-class violinists not really being able to reliably hear a difference between a Stradivarius and cheap knockoff?


    connoisseurship is a fascinating phenomena.  

    What is the rarest phrase you’ll ever hear spoken by an audiophile?

    Answer: “I don’t hear any difference’

  9. 15 minutes ago, Edgar said:


    You'll find that many of those early stereo recordings don't mix down to mono well at all, because some of the stereo content was out-of-phase.

    What I know is that is that the resulting mono - imperfect though it may be - is still preferable to the goofy stereo

  10. 1 hour ago, Crankysoldermeister said:

    I can see where that would be a deal breaker. 


    Comes in handy more often that you'd think. ..Many of the songs back in the very early days of stereo had really bad stereo imaging. ..Like some early Beatles songs where all the voices come from one channel, and the instruments from the other. I'd much rather hear those songs in mono.  

  11. 2 hours ago, Crankysoldermeister said:

    Don’t worry, it has tone controls. 


    Right.. but does it have a Mono switch??  ..Sadly, mono switches, which used to be on nearly every pre-amp, integrated amp, and receiver, have all but disappeared.  Only Luxman, Accuphase, McIntosh and Anthem offer integrated amplifiers w/ mono switches.  


    Which brings to mind another myth.


    Mono switches, even when not engaged, have a negative audible impact on the signal b/c they introduce additional signal breaks.  ...This is pure nonsense.   or should I say MYTH!

  12. 52 minutes ago, Crankysoldermeister said:

    We've had this conversation before, where I pointed out that DBT was once used to show that there were no audible differences between a Pioneer receiver and $14K Mark Levinson monoblocks. I was using Dahlquist DQ10's and a Dynaco 400 back then, and anyone in that camp thought the results were just silly. 


    What?!  Are you saying that DBT doesn't work b/c it failed to reveal audible differences b/w a cheap pioneer receiver and a $14k ML amp??   ..I'll stick with the more scientific conclusion, which is:  ...They didn't sound sufficiently different for people to consistently distinguish one from the other.  Sheesh :)   You can't discredit DB testing just because it failed to produce the result you wanted.


    And I never said there were no performance differences b/w amplifiers.  But differences that can be measured (for ex., 05% vs .025% THD) are not necessarily differences that can be heard.   DBT is useful b/c it can help sort out REAL audible differences from IMAGINED differences.



    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  13. 1 hour ago, Shakeydeal said:

    Cmon guys, answer the question. Are people that hear significant bass improvement after hours of use liars or delusional? You made the claim, now support it!


    Liars? No...  Just susceptible to expectation bias. 


    As I have described countless times here and on other forums, I did the following with my last four pairs of speakers, which were: PSB Stratus Minis; Vandersteen 3A Sigs; Paradigm S8v2; Klipsch Cornwall III....


    I placed the speakers beside each other, and played music through one speaker during the first night (>12 hours).  ..I then played a mono song and switched back and forth b/w the two speakers using the balance control.  ..Not ONE IOTA of difference was audible between the speakers.  None. 


    For YEARS i've encouraged others to do the very same w/ their next speaker purchase and have not been able to convince one person.  Ditto with doing same w/ expensive speaker cables, and interconnects (ie., hook one channel w/ pricey cable then use balance control to compare).


    Sadly, it seems most audiophiles would rather tirelessly defend their belief in imaginary differences than take one small step in the direction of empirical testing.  That is why I fear for this hobby.  There is little to no interest in any sort of validity testing.

    • Like 1
  14. 1 minute ago, henry4841 said:

    Basically you are correct with most mass produced electronic products. It is just when you get into serious discussions among audiophiles does warming up comes into play. I would say 90% of the population will never know the difference. 


    Well... and I would submit that with the other 10%, it's likely all in their heads.  

  15. 1 hour ago, mikebse2a3 said:

    I can assure you that some amplifiers like the First Watt F3 takes from 30 minutes to an hour (yes I have measured this)t


    Well, I humbly stand corrected.  If there are measurable changes in THD, S/N, Channel Separation, etc.  that take place during the first 60 min. - that are within the threshold of our hearing - then I can understand.  ..But as for any audio component that takes hours of time to stabillze (longer than what you're referring to) that would be an example of poor electrical engineering, imho..  

  16. sheesh...  Breakin-in (beyond a few minutes); Amp warm up (beyond a few moments) are pretty much acknowledged myths.  What I see from break-in believers above are quasi sciency-esque but largely nonsensical or anecdotal accounts where no effort is made to account for bias.


    From the break-in believers, please explain why CT scan, MRI, and ultra-sound imagining devices - all of which have tons and tons of electronic components - don't require break-in' ? ...Ask technicians who operate these if their images get better as these incredibly complex machines break-in?  ..I'm not talking about stress-testing sub-assemblies during manufacturer to assure reliability, i'm talking about break-in after it's manufactured, passes quality/operational tests, then arrives to a radiology dept.


    Or how about electronic components and sub-assemblies in aircraft? Again, not talking about stress testing during manufacture, but "break-in".  Do you ever hear aircraft manufactures say, "the aircraft is not going to be maximally responsive to pilot input until the thousands of micro-controllers, relays, switches, servo-motors, capacitors, wire, etc.. break-in.  ..So expect a slightly sugglish aileron roll-rate, yaw from rudder input and even pitch response from the elevator will be a bit slow for a few hundred hours. ...You know, Mr. pilot... It just needs to break-in!  ..So don't expect maximum precision as you fly this aircraft - along w/ it's 200 passengers - for maybe 1000 hours."


    C'mon people..  don't be so gullible.

    • Like 1
  17. 51 minutes ago, Curious_George said:

    "I" challenge the idea of audible differences below a certain level... you can't believe your ears and brain, they lie to you. In the end, people have their favorite equipment and to argue about it is pointless. 


    No argument from me on this.  I've long maintained that all modern amplifiers that are engineered to be linear  (notable exceptions might be low-watt tube amps) will be largely indistinguishable from each other when not driven into distortion.  These days even cheap AVR's have F/R, S/N, THD, Channel Separation, etc.. that exceed the threshold of our hearing.

    • Thanks 1
  18. 34 minutes ago, Curious_George said:

    Paul could have cared less if he was welcomed in audiophool circles. The term is somewhat self-deprecating today. 


    I think you meant to say "Paul couldn't have cared less.."  Anyway, I think I would have very much liked him.  


    Let's assume for argument that he would have found pricey speaker cables, interconnects, DACs, amplifiers, etc.. to be BS AND was very outspoken in his belief (ie., pointing to his BS button whenever visiting retailers).  He would have a hard time lining up a retail network to carry his speakers.  HiFi retailers are heavily reliant on income from all that BS nonsense and couldn't abide one of their brands telling people HiFi is 95% about speaker choice.

    • Like 1
  19. 4 hours ago, Travis In Austin said:

    Paul W. Klipsch on the subject:


    As long as man brags of conquest, man will claim his great discoveries. To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people.


    I believe that quote is from the late 1950s

    Did he really say that? Omg, he definitely would not be welcomed in most audiophile circles.  I  suspect he would challenge the very idea of audible differences between modern low THD amplifier’s.  

  20. 7 hours ago, Chief bonehead said:

    So you think I said this because of dealers?  Too many assumptions made……


    What I'm saying is I don't think it serves the interest of a speaker company that relies on a dealer network to go on the record calling BS on things like the audibility of differences b/w speaker cables, interconnects, DACs, tuning rocks, cable lifters, hours-long break-in' periods, amplifiers, etc....  


    All of these things help dealers stay in business. 


    IMHO, speakers - their proper placement and room acoustics - account for >95% of how a system sounds.  ..But dealers desperately need to sell ALL the components and accessories to be viable.  So a speaker company engineer isn't about to say anything that interferes with that.

    • Like 1
  21. 1 hour ago, Travis In Austin said:


    @Chief bonehead would have to give the details


    I don't it's fair to expect CBH to weigh in on these Myths.  After all, his dealers benefit from them and probably need them to help keep their doors open. And most rely on the "break-in" myth to help reduce returns.  ..I don't think they'd be happy with Klipsch if their chief engineer is on the internet calling all that stuff BS.  


    I think PWK would have an even harder time.  If he went in to a retailer nowadays and pointed to his BS button every time he heard a salesman talk about power conditioners, speaker cords and cables, etc...  The owner would probably say "Get out... and take your speakers with you"

  22. 14 hours ago, Schu said:

    Precisely my point... blind testing doesn't test whether something is better or worse. as you said, in this context, it only tests whether or not a listener can discern a difference...

    Of course - and what’s wrong with that?!

    I think most people would find it hugely enlightening to learn that a group of people, when blinded, can’t reliably distinguish one cable from another.  Or one amp. Or one DAC., etc….   Preferences are subjective and can’t be debated. But the ability to actually hear a difference can be objectively determined.  

    • Like 3
  • Create New...