Islander Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Mark, you mentioned that we can hear only one slice of music at a time, so using our ears and memory to compare different components, recordings, or accessories is a futile effort right from the start. The analogy of looking at slices of two photos was helpful. However, what about looking at screen shots of the audio waveforms? With two screens, the waveforms of the two items being compared could be seen at once, and you could scroll back and forth until you see every frequency in the particular piece of music. A really good-sounding system could be used as the reference, and then other setups could be compared with it visually. That way, the deviation from the ideal, or state of the art, system would be easy to spot, even if the reviewer had clogged ears due to a cold. Has this been tried? If so, did it work or not work, and why? It has certainly been useful in detecting clipping in recordings. The ability of an amp to reproduce square waves is often seen as a measure of its performance, with higher slew rate and lower incidence of ringing being better. Is this kind of measurement applicable to other audio components? I seem to recall that speakers don't like square waves. Is that correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Islander Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 The famous selective attention video mentioned by Mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo Like many people, I focussed closely on the task. A little too closely, but I did get the number of passes right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fjd Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) However, he insisted DBT and ABX have nothing to with memory whatsoever - flip the switch, it either sounds different or it doesn't. The test itself changes what you experience. And it can't be said any simpler. The act of testing closes off other dimensions you would normally experience because it is searching for a simple difference. Before you say phooey, look into the "invisible gorilla" effect of Chabris and Simons. In short, it is an experiment that shows the following. When the brain is directed to a specific task, it will ignore totally the most obvious gross inputs in an effort to stay on task. Although this experiment is visual, it is generally applied to any task of the brain and any of our senses. Quote - Invisible Gorilla It is one of the most famous psychological demos ever. Subjects are shown a video, about a minute long, of two teams, one in white shirts, the other in black shirts, moving around and passing basketballs to one another. They are asked to count the number of aerial and bounce passes made by the team wearing white, a seemingly simple task. Halfway through the video, a woman wearing a full-body gorilla suit walks slowly to the middle of the screen, pounds her chest, and then walks out of the frame. If you are just watching the video, it’s the most obvious thing in the world. But when asked to count the passes, about half the people miss it. END QUOTE Asking the brain to find small sonic difference is much harder than counting passes of the basketball. So, the brain narrows even further allowing more and more "reality" to pass unnoticed. In that reality, is where the small sound changes are contained. Ergo, testing is a different kind of listening than listening for pleasure. If a group of people have never seen or heard about the video, the Invisible Gorilla test (actually called the selective attention test) is rather interesting. I don't remember the year; however, I originally saw the video on a large conference screen shown to a group of about 50 people during an introductory seminar we attended for a series of training course designed to help develop skepticism skills in relation to our work. Same situation, we were asked to count the number of aerial and bounce passes made by the team wearing white. I don't remember if they told us that the team wearing black was also passing a basketball; however, that aspect seemed to cause anxiety in a portion of the group. After the video the facilitator started to debrief the room by asking how many of the white team basketball pases people counted. Those results were interesting as many did not get the count correct. When the facilitator asked how many saw the gorilla, many thought it was a joke and did not see the gorilla. Overall, our group had similar results where maybe half saw the gorilla. There was still a portion of the group that saw the gorilla that did not get the pass count correct. Of course, when the video was played again, when everyone was looking for the gorilla, all in the room saw the gorilla. What was the reason as to why everyone could not determine the correct number of passes? What was the reason everyone did not see the gorilla walk through the group? It was all there on the screen for everyone in the room to see. It wasn't for lack of education as everyone in the room was college educated. It does seem that the conditions of the test did impact each individual's viewing experience in different ways. I see Islander provided a link; however, here is another link to the video. http://youtu.be/vJG698U2Mvo Edited January 30, 2014 by Fjd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 A guy buying wire other than Home Depot is suffering a disease of audio nervosa, but a guy buying $30,000 loudspeakers is simply fulfilling the "basic functionality" of a stereo system. As to the "objectivist," these behaviors would be identical, to what do you ascribe a difference? Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 http://www.avguide.com/forums/blind-listening-tests-are-flawed-editorial?src=Playback Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 The referenced published article is good, once free on the net -- but you now have to pay $20 to get it from the AES. Oh well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiser SET say Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Love this topic Mark, I just want someone to help me justify the cost of this 4 foot piece of copper http://www.musicdirect.com/p-62948-shunyata-anaconda-zitron-power-cable.aspx?source=igodigital& When for $596.00 less I could have this http://www.musicdirect.com/p-50381-luxman-sq-n10-tube-integrated-amp-d-100r-ipod-dock.aspx?source=igodigital& 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schu Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 hey... that luxman looks very nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiser SET say Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Yeah Schu, I'm about to sell the Jolida in favor of this Luxman combo for my Las. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiser SET say Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Yes and no, I know and have heard the Luxman is worth (IMHO) $2.5K more than the Jolida however I can't justify nor probably hear a $2.9K difference in those two wires. Heck I'd rather spend more money on tubes and rolling than over priced wire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaiser SET say Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Yessir, the key to all our toys is a balancing act between value and budget. If I hit the power ball and I might have that T-REX system from BAT but my common sense and wanting not to blow my fortune completely would still keep me from paying $3K for 4 foot of copper LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 In the past I visited a local audio friend and he a pair of 7000 dollar Dynaudio speakers with the stands sitting about. I even listened to them once with some Acurus amplifiers...wonderful sounding speakers. He eventually gave up on them because they basically need a DC arc welder to make them shine. I asked him if they were his. He said no, some guy in Texas owns them. He just left them here. Of course, I then asked why would someone just leave a pair of 7000 dollar speakers behind. He said, the guy is rich, he doesn't care. Uh...okay...I think the guy eventually just gave them to him. Imagine oneself with 6 billion dollars...that 3000 dollar power cord ain't nuthin' but a small drop in the bucket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 (edited) Imagine oneself with 6 billion dollars...that 3000 dollar power cord ain't nuthin' but a small drop in the bucket. That's pretty much what I thought. At that level, even one with a lot less would just say, "audio system, the best" to somebody. Once past a billion or so, why not a personal orchestra? Let's say, 15m or so a year, tax deductible. Chump change... I think there are a lot of people in this hobby mesmerized by price and convinced that it is relevant. If you are paying a Craig, or a Mark, to build it IS relevant as you are paying for a lifetime of experience and a guarantee of performance. If you build it yourself it is not relevant and you will still end up with an excellent listening experience if you follow instructions. If you learn to hear the difference in wires, then you may (or may not) have to spend a lot of money to assuage that ability. I think those who belong exclusively to one extreme or the other in our hobby are the exceptions rather than the rule. The bulk of us just want to kick back and listen to some tunes. Every now and again we may get the bug for something new...I'm jonsin' for a new cartridge...but I don't expect the designer to fly in and install it for me. Having heard excellent performance from the likes of a Shure M91 I do not see the need to spend a grand or more on anything and would not expect to hear enough difference to remotely justify it. As it is, I'll probably spend more than is really needed. My 50.00 Stanton 500Al puts me in direct contact with musicians of 80 years ago. That, my friends, is a MIRACLE beyond price. Dave Edited January 30, 2014 by Mallette Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babadono Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Many bookshelf speakers are made that are nearly ruler flat, or in any case, far flatter than a K-horn, and cost orders of magnitude less. who, what, when, where? "I'm sorry could you repeat that I think you were talking into my bum ear" (George Bailey- Its a Wonderful Life) but I thought you said or insinuated that a pair of $300 bookshelf speakers would out perform my or anybody's KHorns. C'mon. Now that is BS, Total BS. babadono Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Good grief, that's not what he said. Read it again. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Smith Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 What I want to know is why we spend so much time and energy on cables, drivers, transports, and amps but completely ignore the sound waves themselves? why are there no audiophile air purifiers to clean the air being pushed towards my ears? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 What I got from the discussion is that expensive wire are like ghosts--Some people are sensitive enough to appreciate them and some aren't. there's some genetic's to this. ancestors who lived in mountians, deserts, forest, open plains may have different perception abilities of hearing beyond frequency, level, adjacent order harmonic's. Our ears while in the same location, seem to have different curls, cartlige and skin formations...our ear canals also vary somewhat. Our brains are relatively the same HP buy have some mass differences. so maybe the decendents of forest dewellers (better are stereo imaging the location of threat or prey thru trianglation for things they can hear but not see) hear things differently from open plains decendents (can you feel which direction a running elephant is going based on low frequency sound, before he pops his tusks out of the woods in front of you). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZAKO Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Audio cables cause cancer,,,Use spaghetti... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaddeus Smith Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Cooked or uncooked? Cooked tends to add some warmth to the sound, at least for a little bit. But uncooked tends to be harsh and brittle sounding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Cooked is way too mushy and ill defined for me. Macaroni provides an air core that really opens up the sound. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.