Tizman Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 4 hours ago, ODS123 said: Yes, this is true. But don't you think the 1000+ people who failed in Richard Clarks $10k challenge were just as confident in their hearing as you? Really? Again? Is this a mantra? A ridiculously difficult test is just that. It’s not proof of anything. If he was so confident about his assertions, he would have created a more reasonable test, and/or the prize would have been bigger. It’s like betting on football games. Pick the winner for 24 games instead of 2 games. It’s a flawed test, just as the test referred to in post 1 was flawed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khornukopia Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Many "beginners" already own a device that will perform a hearing test and then Adapt their personal playback device to their hearing characteristics. It can also modify the signal to "Simulate the soft timbre of a tube amplifier". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tizman Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Wow. I really need to hear this myself. If it works, I can save myself a truckload of money and effort. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS123 Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 10 minutes ago, Tizman said: Really? Again? Is this a mantra? A ridiculously difficult test is just that. It’s not proof of anything. If he was so confident about his assertions, he would have created a more reasonable test, and/or the prize would have been bigger. It’s like betting on football games. Pick the winner for 24 games instead of 2 games. It’s a flawed test, just as the test referred to in post 1 was flawed. Dean just said he knows of an amp so bad it will shred your hearing!! ..I can't see how it would be hard to pick such an amp from a good amp 100 straight times, let alone 2 sets of 12. Anyway, from the RC $10k Amp Challenge wiki Q&A:: Is two sets of 12 correct responses a stringent requirement? Yes. Richard Clark intentionally made the requirements strict because with thousands of people taking the test, even random guessing would eventually cause someone to pass the test if the bar was set low. Since he is offering his own $10,000 to anyone who will pass the test, he wants to protect against the possibility of losing it to random guessing. However, if the listener is willing to put up their own money for the test as a bet, he will lower the requirements from 12 correct down to as low as 6 correct. Richard Clark has said “22 out of 24 would be statistically significant. In fact it would prove that the results were audible. Any AVERAGE score more than 65% would do so. But no one has even done that”.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason str Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 4 minutes ago, ODS123 said: Dean just said he knows of an amp so bad it will shred your hearing!! ..I can't see how it would be hard to pick such an amp from a good amp 100 straight times, let alone 2 sets of 12. A bad amp/preamp combo can be just as brutal on the ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tizman Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Interesting. I will reread the conditions of the test. It’s been a while since I looked at it. The stringency of the test, however, is unreasonable. A winner is highly unlikely even if there are obvious differences. Statistical relevance is another matter and different from winning. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS123 Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 6 minutes ago, jason str said: A bad amp/preamp combo can be just as brutal on the ears. Again, make and model please!! I'm dying to know. ..If not too expensive, I'll buy it and will play it for my family and friends and see if any complain of SES (Shreded Ear Syndrome) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS123 Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 5 minutes ago, Tizman said: Interesting. I will reread the conditions of the test. It’s been a while since I looked at it. The stringency of the test, however, is unreasonable. A winner is highly unlikely even if there are obvious differences. Statistical relevance is another matter. No, it's not unreasonable. ..Just two posts above yours Deang claimed to know of an amp SO BAD that is Shreds ears when paired with Klipsch speakers.. That sounds like a pretty easy amp to pick from a group, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason str Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 7 minutes ago, ODS123 said: Again, make and model please!! I'm dying to know. ..If not too expensive, I'll buy it and will play it for my family and friends and see if any complain of SES (Shreded Ear Syndrome) From a previous post of yours it looks as though you already own one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_kc Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Has anyone proven that various testing methodologies (e.g., ABX, DBT) are effective for evaluating the sound quality of a hi-fi system? What I think would make sense is to have a test wherein the sound is deliberately altered by various known degrees, and then determine what the listening test yields. If the listening test consistently yields correct results to a statistically significant degree, then that would seem to support the validity of the test methodology. If not, then it’s time to go back to the drawing board, and devise a better listening test. Have the test methodologies (e.g., ABX, DBT) been proven accurate when applied to the sound quality of a hi-fi system (i.e., human perception of sound), vs. when applied to some completely unrelated field? I think that several considerations are relevant to this issue: Consider all of the different variances in the design of different amplifiers. Doesn’t it seem unlikely that they would all sound exactly the same? Regardless of the speakers being driven (i.e., given the varying nature of the load that various speakers present to an amp)? And consider the complexities of human perception. The brain can be tricked. (E.g., The Invisible Gorilla. Speech-to-Song Illusion. Etc.) How much do we know about the fallibilities of the mind’s perception of sound (psychoacoustics), and auditory illusion, and how these affect listening tests of the sound quality from a hi-fi? And consider that some audio engineers have questioned the validity of procedures such as ABX for testing the audio quality of hi-fi systems. And most importantly, consider the fact that many experienced hobbyists report hearing differences in amps. What’s the probability that these are all dishonest people, or they are all being deceived? Don’t these considerations raise a concern about a testing methodology that indicates “all amps sound the same”? Weighing all of these considerations, isn’t it just as likely that the people participating in ABX tests are being deceived, vs. the hobbyists who report that they hear differences? Bottom line: Have the listening tests been tested (validated, calibrated) – specifically when used for evaluating the sound quality of a hi-fi system? At this point in the evolution of hi-fi, it seems to me that each individual must decide if they want to think and hear for themselves (using their own simple listening comparisons), or trust ABX or DBT test results. P.S. I think that the late 1950s and early ‘60s was a good era for hi-fi amps. And I specifically agree with the following statements by an amplifier manufacturer in the 1950s: “Don’t all amplifiers sound pretty much the same? Nothing could be further from the truth.” “Can I tell the difference by looking at performance curves? No, the listening quality of an amplifier is not revealed by its performance specifications.” “Simple listening tests reveal readily discernable differences in the reproduced sound.” Has the state-of-the-art advanced from the 1950s? Undoubtedly. At the same time, I suggest the following rhetorical question: 100 years from now will audio experts say: Back in 2019 the audio engineers understood every facet of human hearing, and how to measure every facet of audio quality that is relevant to the enjoyment of reproduced music, and amplifiers in 2019 “exceeded human hearing capability” – i.e. they were sonically perfect? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 I should probably avoid hyperbole with you. I didn't realize you'd get so emotional. :-) At lower volume levels, tolerable, but not really enjoyable - but most listen much louder than they should. But yeah, some stuff can inflict pain at higher volume levels. Surely your McIntosh or Onkyo sounds better at livelier levels than that Audiosource 100 you have. Never mind, I already know your answer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS123 Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 19 minutes ago, jason str said: From a previous post of yours it looks as though you already own one. The AudioSource AMP100? ..No, not something I own that you haven't heard. Please recommend something you (or another gold-ear in the thread) has heard w/ Klipsch speakers that was so bad, so awful, so offensive, that you would call it ear-shredding? ..What? Pyle? Crown? Behringer? Onkyo? Pioneer? Please.... Even an AVR would be fine. I'm sure Best Buy sells a handful of such components . If not, then I'll get it online from Sweetwater or B&H, etc.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_kc Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 4 hours ago, TubeHiFiNut said: Your zeal, certainly supports my assertion. Let me make myself perfectly clear: I do not care what technology an amp uses, only how it sounds. I determine how an amplifier sounds by listening to that amp in my own rooms and in my systems. There are some amps that sound so out of place that the audition can be mercifully short. Subtle differences can take longer to assess - and are any differences positive or negative. When I find an amplifier that connects me to the music I love and I listen to more music, it stays. This is my primary assessment criteria. And, from 47 years of experience, this observational method best suits my needs. If you choose a different path, that's great and I sincerely wish you the best. We hear, respond to that aural stimulus and interpret that stimulus into an emotional response differently. Just please stop telling those of us who have found the ABX/DBT process to be of limited, if any, benefit to us and use a different method (one that works for us) that we are WRONG. Just my OPINION. I agree with this approach. I’ve moved amps between my 5 hi-fi systems so that each is installed in the system where it produces the best sound quality. (My criterion for the audio quality from my hi-fi systems is a pleasant simulacrum of what I remember hearing in the symphony hall.) Following are my systems. (Each amp has been electronically restored, and is in good working order.) These systems (plus numerous other amps that have come and gone over the years) represent my “test bed” for hi-fi. IME, amps sound different. Living room: Stereo speakers are Snell Type CV. Subwoofer: Klipsch P-312W. The source components are Oppo BDP-105 (used to play SACD, Pure Audio Blu-ray, Blu-ray, and equipped with USB hard drive containing high-res FLAC recordings), and Dual 1249 with Stanton 681EE. Amps include a pair of McIntosh MC30s, Scott 296, McIntosh MX110Z / McIntosh MC275, a pair of Pilot HF-56 mono receivers, an NAD pre-amp and Acurus A250 power-amp for movies, and a McIntosh 2155 driving JBL L830s in the kitchen / dining room. A patch panel (banana plugs) allows me to connect the speakers to whichever amp I want, and a Niles AXP-1 RCA selector switch connects the Oppo to the amp. Chromecast Audio for internet radio and Spotify Premium. TV room: Stereo speakers are Klipsch Palladium P-37F. Subwoofer: Klipsch P-312W. The source is an Oppo UDP-205 (used to play SACD, Pure Audio Blu-ray, Blu-ray, and equipped with USB hard drive containing high-res FLAC recordings). The amps are Scott 399, McIntosh MC225, Kenwood KR-9050, Fisher 800B, Fisher X-1000, Scott 299C, McIntosh MC240, and an NAD C375BEE. The tube amps are for music. The solid-state amps are for movies. A patch panel (banana plugs) allows me to connect the speakers to whichever amp I want, and Niles AXP-1 RCA selector switches connect the Oppo to the amp. Chromecast Audio for internet radio and Spotify Premium. Basement: Front, center, and left speakers are Klipsch RF-7 II. A single rear speaker is a Klipsch RF-7. Subwoofers: SVS SB16-Ultra, Klipsch R-115SW. Source: Oppo UDP-205 (used to play SACD, Pure Audio Blu-ray, Blu-ray, and equipped with USB hard drive containing high-res FLAC recordings). Amps: Scott 272, Inspire “Fire Bottle” SE Stereo Tube Amplifier HO, Scott 222C, McIntosh MX110Z tuner/preamp, Fisher KX-200, Scott 296, Pilot SA-260, Scott LK150. A patch panel allows me to connect the speakers to whichever amp I want, and F/F RCA cables enable me to connect an amp to the Oppo, and a power amp to the MX110Z. Chromecast Audio for internet radio and Spotify Premium. Office: Stereo speakers are JBL L880. Sources: Oppo DV-980H SACD/CD/DVD, and my Windows 10 laptop with Music Streamer II DAC. Amps: Fisher 500C, Scott 299B, Altec 353A, and an NAD D 3020 for general internet use (and summertime). Banana jacks allow me to connect the speakers to whichever amp I want, and a Niles AXP-1 RCA selector switch connects the Oppo to the amp. Bedroom: The speaker is a single Klipsch WF-35. Source is an older CD player. Fisher TA 500 (AM/FM mono receiver). Chromecast Audio for internet radio and Spotify Premium. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_kc Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 57 minutes ago, ODS123 said: Please tell me the make and model of an amp or CD player that is so horrendous that it will "absolutely shred my hearing." I'm dying to see it's specifications. I have a little bit of disposable money these days, I might actually buy this amp and see how it sounds with my Cornwalls. Even if my room and setup will soften some of it's "shreddiness" (as you did say setup is a factor) I'm sure it will still sound much much poorer than my Mac, my Onkyo AVR or my $130 AudioSource Amp100, right?? I mean you did say "shred" so it should be plainly obvious. If only for my edification, I would be happy to spend a few hundred bucks on a modern amplifier which is SO nasty that even a hardened skeptic such as my self can hear the difference. I'd treat it w/ kid gloves and would sell it on agon when I'm through being disappointed w/ its sound. Make, and model please. IME, an important factor is synergy between the speaker and amp. My modern NAD D 3020 sounds OK for general PC use (e.g., youtube) in my office system (speakers are JBL L880). (However, the NAD D 3020 does not sound as good as one of my tube amps for playing classical music in this system.) When connected to my Klipsch RF-7II, the NAD D 3020 does not sound good. “Shred my ears” might be an over-statement, but I would describe the NAD D 3020 as unlistenable with RF-7II. (Playing hi-res recordings of classical music.) Consider my modern single-ended-pentode amp: Inspire “Fire Bottle” SE Stereo Tube Amplifier HO. (Hand made in the USA a few years ago.) When equipped with certain tubes (I like 6L6GC), it sounds great with my RF-7II for music that doesn’t have much dynamic range. However, my Inspire “Fire Bottle” SEP amp doesn’t sound as good with my Klipsch Palladium P-37F. IME, synergy (e.g., between an amp and speakers) is not “audiophoolery”. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TubeHiFiNut Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Don Richard said: That is a true statement for any properly designed DBT. I actually participated in the design and construction of equipment used in an ABX/DBT for a university research project. I can assure you that bias removal was a goal in the method we employed. You were the one who called ABX/DBT a religion and, as far as that goes, you are the one who is wrong. It is a testing protocol totally without supernatural overtones. (Disclaimer: when properly designed.) The fervor with which DBT/ABX proponents proselytize can easily be described as an almost religious fervor. THAT IS MY OPINION! Or is anyone who disagrees with you no longer entitled to an opinion? DBT/ABX is far from settled science so you are also doing nothing more than stating your OPINION. And you are very welcome to that opinion. But you are 100% NOT WELCOME to dismiss my opinion as "wrong" when your only retort is to restate your own opinion. And that, kind sir, is my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 14 minutes ago, ODS123 said: The AudioSource AMP100? ..No, not something I own that you haven't heard. Please recommend something you (or another gold-ear in the thread) has heard w/ Klipsch speakers that was so bad so awful that you would call it ear-shredding? ..What? Pyle? Crown? Behringer? Onkyo? Pioneer? Please.... Even an AVR would be fine. I'm sure Best Buy sells a handful of such amps. If not, then I'll get it online. I've heard Audiosource before. Pretty pedestrian stuff. Have no idea how it sounds at live levels though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TubeHiFiNut Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 40 minutes ago, ODS123 said: The AudioSource AMP100? ..No, not something I own that you haven't heard. Please recommend something you (or another gold-ear in the thread) has heard w/ Klipsch speakers that was so bad, so awful, so offensive, that you would call it ear-shredding? ..What? Pyle? Crown? Behringer? Onkyo? Pioneer? Please.... Even an AVR would be fine. I'm sure Best Buy sells a handful of such components . If not, then I'll get it online from Sweetwater or B&H, etc.. Phase Linear 4000 plus 400 on La Scalas. Was unbelievably unpleasant and, since we were being told even way back then that all modern transistor amps sounded the same, caused me to blame the La Scalas - until I listened to a pair on a beautiful SET amp. Bought the La Scalas on the spot. Just my opinion. That detailed enough for you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Never had that one, but they don't all sound the same. You might want to question things that you are told. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave A Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 23 minutes ago, ODS123 said: The AudioSource AMP100? ..No, not something I own that you haven't heard. Please recommend something you (or another gold-ear in the thread) has heard w/ Klipsch speakers that was so bad, so awful, so offensive, that you would call it ear-shredding? ..What? Pyle? Crown? Behringer? Onkyo? Pioneer? Please.... Even an AVR would be fine. I'm sure Best Buy sells a handful of such components . If not, then I'll get it online from Sweetwater or B&H, etc.. You done went an made ODS NPC right mad Dean. Now you get to hear about it for the next 6 pages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODS123 Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 5 minutes ago, TubeHiFiNut said: Phase Linear 4000 plus 400 on La Scalas. Was unbelievably unpleasant and, since we were being told even way back then that all modern transistor amps sounded the same, caused me to blame the La Scalas - until I listened to a pair on a beautiful SET amp. Bought the La Scalas on the spot. That detailed enough for you? I mean something currently available . Again, a present day S/S amp, stereo receiver, or AVR renowned for sounding horrendous. 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.