Spkrdctr Posted May 17, 2005 Share Posted May 17, 2005 I copied this from the rec.audio.pro newsgroup. It was written by Tom Nousaine, one of the foremost experts on audio systems. No subject was able to demonstrate an ability to reliably distinguish expensive rca interconnects or expensive speaker wire from junk box rcas or zip cord purchased for18 cents a foot. In every case but one the subjects used cables that they personally owned. In some cases the test was performed using the subjects personal reference system. In the exception case I assembled a system to test the 'series tweak' idea (some single tweaks,like speaker wire, may not have audible effect by themsleves but when coupled with other tweaks they become audible) compared with a Geak system comprising of decidedly low-to-mid fi components that any high-ender would look down his nose at. The Tweak system used the digital output of a Marantz CD-63 cd player, special interconnects, special networked speaker cables, an audiophile-grade outboard DAC, a vacumn tube preamplifier, a high-end solid state power amplifier, speaker wire stand-offs, vibration absorbers, special wire dress throughout and a aftermarket AC cord. The Geak system took the analog output of the same cd player, junk box rca cables, zip cord sold for use in car stereo systems using a 6-foot section for one channel and a 25-foot section for the other (with the 25-foot cord wrapped around the AC cords for the other components. Speaker connections were made with Pamona brand dual bananas. The preamp was a 25-year old $99 Heathkit, the power amplifier was a 100-watt Parasound that I bought for $200 used several years prior. Speaker were the PSACS reference PSB Stratus Minis of which this particular pair had been measured in the actual NRC anechoic chamber. Subjects were tested individually and had been asked to bring with them those cds that MOST dramatically highlighted differences in audio systems. They were given as long as they felt necessary under open conditions to get a bead on differences. Most spent about 45 minutes to an hour. Afterward I asked the subject to leave the room while I flipped a coin and then connected one of the two systems to the speaker terminals and draped a visually opague but acoustically transparent over the rear of the speaker cabinet covering the terminals. Subjects then had aslong as they wished to decide which system was driving the speakers. They were also allowed an 'open' refresher anytime they felt necessary between any given pair of trials. The speaker connections (me) and scores (subjects) were made on business cards and dropped into a slot in a sealed cardboard box for each trial. Subjects were asked to verify the speaker connections visually after every trial. Inerestingly none of them wanted to. Subjects were either paid a straight $20 fee OR they could bet $20 of their own money against $100 of mine that they could identify systems a significantly significant amout of time. They were free to accept the $100 bet at any time; meaning if they were feeling confident midway or AFTER completing the session both payment alternatives were avialable up until the time I opened the box for scoring. They were also asked to agree to complete 10 trials at any given session BUT were allowed to complete any number of trials in any session or follow-up with any number of sessions they would like at any time within 3 weeks of completing a session. One subject extended his session to 16 trials. One subject bet the $20. No subject was able to reliably identify the systems. ( 9/10; or 12/16) Every subject initially said they felt they could tell the systems apart under open conditions but they showed that they were unable to do so with the simplest of bias-controls implemented. This is all documented in "To Tweak or Not toTweak" in the June 1998 Stereo Review. Please note that this experiment was no done on assignment from the magazine. I conducted it myself to test the series-tweaks idea. I took a lot of BS when I was initially skeptical about it. I repeatedly asked one proponent (on-line) to verify it with a controlled test. I even offered to travel to his place on my dime to watch the confirmation. He reluctantly 'agreed' but when it cam time to make travel arrangements he disappeared. So I began to implement dubious tweaks and soon found that I was unable to duplicate the series-tweak effects. Of course, knowing that proponents would just argue that my ears and/or system wasn't good enough. So I decided to assemble systems that would be 'different enough' that some/any benefits/changes of series-tweaks would have to be fairly obvious. And yes I did use ABX to validate my listening experience with these systems but chose not to do that for this experiment because I knew that would be the 1st objection from believers. Note there were no ways for me 'stop' listeners from hearing true differences. I remained at the rear of the listening room during each trial to make sure that no peeking was going on but I had no voice in the order/time of program presentations. If I were to have had an influence it would have been inadvertant clues delivered to the listeners and if i were to have purposely or inadvertantly given 'reverse' clues then subjects would have had 'reverse significant' results. Let me finnish (pun intended) by saying that no proponent has delivered a single replicable experiment that shows that commercially sold audio cables have any influence, positive or otherwise, on sound quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spkrdctr Posted May 17, 2005 Author Share Posted May 17, 2005 I was involved with this test and others. It is amazing how little the recievers/amps/interconnects/speaker wire effect the sound, but the speaker is a huge issue. Many can pick out a speaker quite easily, but all the other is very difficult to most times impossible. If nothing else, this makes you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spkrdctr Posted May 18, 2005 Author Share Posted May 18, 2005 No comments? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZAKO Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksonbart Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 Yeah, but the people here who claim to hear differences were not invited to those test, right? Well they must have better hearing or more susceptible marketing. Who can know for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rplace Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 I find this incredibly interesting. A long time ago when 100 dollars meant a lot more to me today then it does now (read college student working to pay his tuition and owning my first house) I had assembled a decent systemat least by my standards. Forte II, Carver separate pre amp/tuner/amp, Nakamichi CD player with Burr Brown DAC, etc. I went to my local high end store to buy a Klipsch Academy. I mentioned that I was just about done buying audio equipment for a while. We got to talking about cables. I shopped this place and trusted this place. They were not high pressure sales people. For about 20-30 minutes the guy did some A/B comparisons with standard out of the box interconnects and Audioquest Rubys. An AQ Ruby is not a super expensive cable but no run of the mill junk either. Same speakers same speaker wires. He had me close my eyes and he switched back and forth never telling me which ones they were. I would swear I heard a difference and have repeated that story to many of my friends a family. Needless to say over the next several months I bought a pair of AQ cables here and there until all my inner connects were Audioquest as well as my speaker wire. The guy steered me away from banana plugs and the like telling me the raw wire was the best connection to my binding posts. I still believe I heard a difference and a favorable one at that. I now wonder if I just WANTED to hear a difference or if there was something else going on with the sales person. I cant believe they would go to the trouble to make some sort of a/b comparison to rip me off. The difference has to be more mental. Could your brain trick you into thinking you hear a difference for some strange reason? While I do have an engineering degree for a decent school (go Big Ten!) at a basic electrical level I would think as long as you are getting a reasonably ok connection just about any thing that conducts electrons should give you the same resultsbut I tell you I honestly believe I heard a difference. The above test looks to be much more scientific and hard to argue against. I feel cheated by my brain or my urge to spend more money. That is just crazy who wants to spend money when they dont have/need to. Very interesting indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 "No subject was able to demonstrate an ability to reliably distinguish expensive rca interconnects or expensive speaker wire from junk box rcas or zip cord purchased for18 cents a foot." yes, but they weren't super-sensitve horns either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted May 18, 2005 Share Posted May 18, 2005 ---------------- On 5/18/2005 11:36:23 AM Colin wrote: yes, but they weren't super-sensitve horns either ---------------- Exactly! Yeah, little compressed-dynamics and tiny sound-stage direct radiating "tower" speakers lately in vogue are not the proper tool to determine the quality of ANYTHING in the signal chain IMO. I have a boxed pair of KEF 4's (the big ones, 1998)in rosewood that I'd be happy to sell to anyone ELSE. Yes, even I once bought into the BS being shoveled by the audio publications and sales community. The HORNS of my youth haunted me after my expensive purchases, I remembered things that I missed (like BASS) with the new speakers, so I came back out of the wilderness of crap and into the lush, full soundstage and expansive dynamic range of horns just like the prodigal son. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formica Posted May 19, 2005 Share Posted May 19, 2005 ---------------- On 5/17/2005 3:55:38 AM Spkrdctr wrote: It is amazing how little the recievers/amps/interconnects/speaker wire effect the sound, but the speaker is a huge issue. Many can pick out a speaker quite easily, but all the other is very difficult to most times impossible. ---------------- I entirely agree with you... speakers (and the room) are the major factors. OTOH, by not performing ABX tests (preferred by most test subjects)... he is making it very hard to compare any possible differences between interconnects or other tweeks. I understand his principals and the test is amusing, but unfortunately it doesnt prove much. I have seen similar tests performed under controlled ABX testing, and the results were very similar... but these are often dismissed, as some believe the test equipment reduced the resolution to the point of not being able to tell the difference. It becomes a vicious circle... But when all is said and done... get the speakers and room right first.... Rob PS: SPL calibration is critical in all ABX testing... as even very small differences in loudness will be detectable not as louder... but clearer or slightly better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumpelstiltskin Posted May 19, 2005 Share Posted May 19, 2005 ---------------- On 5/18/2005 11:00:06 AM rplace wrote: I now wonder if I just WANTED to hear a difference or if there was something else going on with the sales person. I can’t believe they would go to the trouble to make some sort of a/b comparison to rip me off. ---------------- Audio/video salesmen are under extreme pressure to sell extended warranties and accessories, especially the high-dollar cables. There are all sorts of "spiffs" (cash bonuses), contests and other incentives offered to the ones that sell this stuff. I've worked with some real dogs that would do or say anything to wring another dollar out of a customer. So be careful.....it's a jungle out there. Rick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted May 19, 2005 Share Posted May 19, 2005 ---------------- On 5/18/2005 11:00:06 AM rplace wrote: Could your brain trick you into thinking you hear a difference for some strange reason? ---------------- Whenever these comparison listening tests come up, I always enjoy bringing up stories from time spent mixing for live bands. So many times I'll have a musician ask for more of something in his monitor and at times I'll just do the opposite and turn it way down...and the best part is he will then thank me for cranking it! Basically, the musician believed whole heartidly that I was an honest helpful person that would never consider messing with his head and therefore he percieved that instrument to be louder because he was simply listening differently. After a few gigs/practices, the bands of course start to catch on and that's when the process begins of teaching them how to really listen correctly. After a while, they'll even start asking for the right things and the quality of their performances drastically improve. I know it's a prick way of going about it, but I just find it so incredibly ironic that I can drop something 6-10dB and they can percieve it being louder. So if 10dB can be accounted for by just listening differently, then I have no doubt that minor .5dB alterations in the frequency response can sound drastically different. It's all about listening the right way! Heck, there are times when I'm mixing and I'm being super critical and feel like it sounds downright awful and it'll take a friend or coworker to slap me over the head and tell me to try and enjoy the music...and then I will start to realize how good it sounds and I no longer hear the crap that I was just hearing. I really think it's all for the most part a huge psychological battle. Isn't that why expensive good looking equipment sounds better? (I'd seriously love to see the exact same products being sold by different companies, but with different cosmetics and a huge difference in price. I have no doubt the better looking / more expensive one would sound better). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rplace Posted May 19, 2005 Share Posted May 19, 2005 ---------------- Audio/video salesmen are under extreme pressure to sell extended warranties and accessories, especially the high-dollar cables. There are all sorts of "spiffs" (cash bonuses), contests and other incentives offered to the ones that sell this stuff. ---------------- This place was a small, high end store that did not come down a dime in price on anything you bought. It was long before Best Buy and Circuit city started popping up in every strip mall. The sales staff lived and breathed audio. You don't find stores like this any more. I was very, very small potatoes in their bottom line. However they had great equipment and great knowledge. I don't think they were pulling any sort of slick used car sales crap. My point is that either I heard a difference or I thought I heard a difference. That is what I find so interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spkrdctr Posted May 19, 2005 Author Share Posted May 19, 2005 ---------------- On 5/18/2005 11:00:06 AM rplace wrote: The difference has to be more mental. Could your brain trick you into thinking you hear a difference for some strange reason? The above test looks to be much more scientific and hard to argue against. I feel cheated by my brain or my urge to spend more money. That is just crazy who wants to spend money when they don’t have/need to. Very interesting indeed. ---------------- Yes, hearing is the easiest and most commonly fooled sense by the brain. It happens daily in the audio business. It does not matter if it is super efficient horns or not. People can not tell the difference between a crap set up and a good one when the test is properly run. A/B testing is almost worthless for audio gear. So, in the end, you have to buy whatever you think sounds great. For example, we tested speakers behind a speaker grill cloth covering between Klipsch and other high end speakers. People with YEARS and YEARS of experience in listening could not tell the difference in high end speaker costing three times as much as Klipsch. ALL stated the KNEW they could easily tell the differnce in a horn product. None could actually do it. That is why I am not enamored with high end speakers. The Klipsch sound as good as anything else I have ever heard. But, the mind says those $15,000 speakers "must" sound better...... All good news for Klipsch owners! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formica Posted May 19, 2005 Share Posted May 19, 2005 ---------------- On 5/19/2005 7:56:05 AM rplace wrote: I was very, very small potatoes in their bottom line. However they had great equipment and great knowledge. I don't think they were pulling any sort of slick used car sales crap. My point is that either I heard a difference or I thought I heard a difference. That is what I find so interesting. ---------------- Tests of that sort are very difficult to perform on the fly, esp when it's not double blind or even single blind. Everything from a small (<<1db) volume difference, a change in position or angle of the speakers, to the facial expression on the sales man can influence our experience. Knowing that type of shop, I don't think it was a conscientious attempt to deceive you... rather I'm sure the salesman experienced it too, and had to share it with you. That said... the differences we are all talking about are very small, especially when compared to different speakers, room, placement, seating position, etc... Ohhhh, and like drWho said... don't forget to enjoy the music too... Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spkrdctr Posted May 21, 2005 Author Share Posted May 21, 2005 ---------------- On 5/19/2005 2:39:29 AM DrWho wrote: ---------------- On 5/18/2005 11:00:06 AM rplace wrote: Could your brain trick you into thinking you hear a difference for some strange reason? ---------------- Whenever these comparison listening tests come up, I always enjoy bringing up stories from time spent mixing for live bands. So many times I'll have a musician ask for more of something in his monitor and at times I'll just do the opposite and turn it way down...and the best part is he will then thank me for cranking it! Basically, the musician believed whole heartidly that I was an honest helpful person that would never consider messing with his head and therefore he percieved that instrument to be louder because he was simply listening differently. After a few gigs/practices, the bands of course start to catch on and that's when the process begins of teaching them how to really listen correctly. After a while, they'll even start asking for the right things and the quality of their performances drastically improve. I know it's a prick way of going about it, but I just find it so incredibly ironic that I can drop something 6-10dB and they can percieve it being louder. So if 10dB can be accounted for by just listening differently, then I have no doubt that minor .5dB alterations in the frequency response can sound drastically different. It's all about listening the right way! Heck, there are times when I'm mixing and I'm being super critical and feel like it sounds downright awful and it'll take a friend or coworker to slap me over the head and tell me to try and enjoy the music...and then I will start to realize how good it sounds and I no longer hear the crap that I was just hearing. I really think it's all for the most part a huge psychological battle. Isn't that why expensive good looking equipment sounds better? (I'd seriously love to see the exact same products being sold by different companies, but with different cosmetics and a huge difference in price. I have no doubt the better looking / more expensive one would sound better). ---------------- Dr Who, I swear we must have some cosmic karma going on. We have some of the same experiences with audio and the fooling of the brain. Testing shows that the ears/brain are the easiest fooled sense of all. The power of suggestion can make you hear what is not there! I too have had fun with people by fooling their ears........ You can fool the tongue too with suggestion, but that is another topic involving coffee! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coytee Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 ---------------- On 5/19/2005 2:39:29 AM DrWho wrote: that's when the process begins of teaching them how to really listen correctly. ---------------- That suggests a right/wrong way of listening, might you expound a bit more? I'd be very interested to see if I (likely) fall into the incorrect bucket Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted May 22, 2005 Share Posted May 22, 2005 ---------------- On 5/22/2005 7:31:57 AM Coytee wrote: ---------------- On 5/19/2005 2:39:29 AM DrWho wrote: that's when the process begins of teaching them how to really listen correctly. ---------------- That suggests a right/wrong way of listening, might you expound a bit more? I'd be very interested to see if I (likely) fall into the incorrect bucket ---------------- lol, ummmmm... you know you're in the wrong bucket when you tell the sound guy to change something and then when he does something else it ends up sounding better than if he did what you said to do. but seriously, it's all about listening without emotion...sitting back and listening to everything at once, not just what you want to hear. Musicians get emotional real fast when things aren't going well (ie a bad monitor mix)...then they just start blaiming things in search of emotional rest. They're certainly not going to blame themeselves for sounding bad so they quickly blame the sound guy...and most sound guys just blindly listen to the band and do what they tell them to do. As a sound guy, we need to be emotionally seperated and interpret what the musician is actually looking for. Usually the singer can't hear the guitar because the entire monitor mix is so loud that it's just a mess of noise. When you start turning stuff down, the noise floor goes down, they play quieter (which usually sounds better) and they can actually hear each other. It sucks to be a sound guy (especially when a kid) because you gotta learn to ignore what people ask for because their asking is just letting you know there is a problem....then you gotta go about figuring out what they really want and what you can do (and might I add this is all done in real time, or in the few minutes before the show). When it comes to home audio, the same mindset should be used...one of ignoring which device you're using and objectively determining what the problems are. I know there's a learning curve to what problems sound like what, but how many people do we read about thinking they had one problem and then discover it was something else? Once they discover the root of their problem, they will forever correlate the original bad sound with being fixed by whatever they did that fixed it. To provide an example: imagine somebody who has his speakers pointing into the corners instead of into his room...if he was emotional about his knowledge of setting up his system, he might ignore all suggestions that he set it up incorrectly and then proceed to claim that his drivers are blown (because he's getting such a muddy sound). I know it sounds stupid but I've seen people like this....that get so emotional about something and totally ignore good advice or unbiased listening practices. If you want to think your fancy wires are improving the sound, then you are going to hear an improvement when you know you're listening to them...the reason however is psychological and cannot be measured (sorry if I stepped on some toes with that statement). anyways, gotta run and I rushed through this but I hope it sheds some light on the idea... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cal Blacksmith Posted May 23, 2005 Share Posted May 23, 2005 Dr Who; Your point is exactly what I have been saying, thinking, beleaving for years! 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.