IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

What *does* make a difference?, Doesn't ABXing show more differences on some things?
BearcatSandor
post Nov 8 2010, 06:01
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 149
Joined: 18-May 10
From: Montana, USA
Member No.: 80732



I've been reluctant to post this because they seem like stupid questions, but my beliefs have been turned upside down so much this week i donno what's "stupid" anymore. So, here i go, even though i'd bet that all three comparisons below would be detectable.

Note that none of this is about perceived quality. It's about not being able to tell appreciable differences via ABXing.

I've been reading up on ABX tests all week and i just give up. I don't get it. There seem to be a few stand-outs such as cables, and devices with D/A converters that don't make any difference, but i'm about ready to throw up my hands in frustration. I just don't get it.

Speakers can be so physically different. I've got the Anthony Gallo Acoustic Reference 3.1's. They are about 3' tall, have rounded "cabinets" around the cones, a cylindrical tweeter and a 10" side firing driver. How can they sound the same as a speaker built around a single fostex driver, or an 8' tall 3' wide Sound Labs panel speaker or a Wilson Audio Maxx ( http://www.wilsonaudio.com/product_images/...groom_large.jpg ).

It is the consensus of the forum that tube amps, class t/d and class A/AB of the same relative power sound the same for the most part? What about different tubes in tube amps? Is tube rolling pointless from a sonic perspective? I mean again, tube amps. and the other types are working in a very different physical manner so how can they not be detectable from one another?

I saw some snickering at room treatments. Is the forum suggesting that room treatments and digital room correction make little to no difference in sound quality? I mean hard/absorbent surfaces do effect what frequencies reach your ears at what times (or at all), so my mind says that logically has to make a difference. Digitally flattening out a response curve has to effect the sound, right? Now, i'm not talking about the *value* of such treatments. Most of the time i see an expensive bass trap or a pricey colorful audiophile pillow that i'm supposed to put on my wall i think "I bet my mate who's a quilter could make me something that would do that same thing or i could just hang a blanket on the wall" Regardless of whether or not you use the $2k room treatment, change your curtains or move the couch for the same effect, the effect wouldn't likely be a placebo would it? Why would recording studios and concert halls work so hard at it?

Bearcat

This post has been edited by BearcatSandor: Nov 8 2010, 06:02


--------------------
Music lover and recovering high end audiophile
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
greynol
post Oct 9 2012, 05:10
Post #2





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



Not only is that overly-simplistic, it is simply not true.

A very obvious example as to where this "universally" applicable generalization falls flat on its face is with perceptual coding where problems with speakers and listening environments can actually break masking.

If this thread was resurrected in order to argue the merits of double-blind testing it will be closed since the poster already has another open discussion on the topic.

This post has been edited by greynol: Oct 9 2012, 05:12


--------------------
I should publish a list of forum idiots.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
item
post Oct 9 2012, 12:33
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 7-August 12
Member No.: 102085



QUOTE (greynol @ Oct 9 2012, 05:10) *
Not only is that overly-simplistic, it is simply not true.

A very obvious example as to where this "universally" applicable generalization falls flat on its face is with perceptual coding where problems with speakers and listening environments can actually break masking.

If this thread was resurrected in order to argue the merits of double-blind testing it will be closed since the poster already has another open discussion on the topic.


Of course, under specific alignments of random circumstances, multiple imperfections may act to multiply differences usefully. But imperfections and deviations more likely act as a leveler during analytical testing. It's all distortion - noise screwing up accurate results.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
probedb
post Oct 9 2012, 12:54
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 1214
Joined: 6-September 04
Member No.: 16817



QUOTE (item @ Oct 9 2012, 12:33) *
Of course, under specific alignments of random circumstances, multiple imperfections may act to multiply differences usefully. But imperfections and deviations more likely act as a leveler during analytical testing. It's all distortion - noise screwing up accurate results.


I'm pretty sure the generic term for what you're doing is "trolling".
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
item
post Oct 9 2012, 14:17
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 7-August 12
Member No.: 102085



QUOTE (probedb @ Oct 9 2012, 12:54) *
QUOTE (item @ Oct 9 2012, 12:33) *
Of course, under specific alignments of random circumstances, multiple imperfections may act to multiply differences usefully. But imperfections and deviations more likely act as a leveler during analytical testing. It's all distortion - noise screwing up accurate results.


I'm pretty sure the generic term for what you're doing is "trolling".


Trolls provoke insincerely for sport. Or mock/hate for kicks. None of the above apply.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- BearcatSandor   What *does* make a difference?   Nov 8 2010, 06:01
- - saratoga   QUOTE (BearcatSandor @ Nov 8 2010, 00:01)...   Nov 8 2010, 06:29
|- - greynol   QUOTE (saratoga @ Nov 7 2010, 21:29) Diff...   Nov 8 2010, 06:50
- - Arnold B. Krueger   QUOTE (BearcatSandor @ Nov 8 2010, 00:01)...   Nov 8 2010, 21:11
- - BearcatSandor   Thanks for the replies folks. That does make me fe...   Nov 8 2010, 21:34
- - Josh358   QUOTE (BearcatSandor @ Nov 8 2010, 00:01)...   Nov 9 2010, 03:45
|- - BearcatSandor   QUOTE (Josh358 @ Nov 8 2010, 19:45) I agr...   Nov 9 2010, 19:12
|- - Arnold B. Krueger   QUOTE (BearcatSandor @ Nov 9 2010, 13:12)...   Nov 9 2010, 21:38
|- - knutinh   QUOTE (Arnold B. Krueger @ Nov 9 2010, 21...   Nov 10 2010, 09:57
- - BearcatSandor   Thanks for the info Arnold. I'm still new at a...   Nov 9 2010, 22:50
|- - Josh358   QUOTE (BearcatSandor @ Nov 9 2010, 16:50)...   Nov 10 2010, 01:07
- - BearcatSandor   Thanks very much for all that Josh. I will look in...   Nov 10 2010, 07:20
|- - knutinh   QUOTE (BearcatSandor @ Nov 10 2010, 07:20...   Nov 10 2010, 09:53
|- - Josh358   QUOTE (BearcatSandor @ Nov 10 2010, 01:20...   Nov 11 2010, 00:39
- - BearcatSandor   This is the email that contains the information on...   Nov 10 2010, 10:14
|- - Arnold B. Krueger   QUOTE (BearcatSandor @ Nov 10 2010, 04:14...   Nov 10 2010, 14:09
- - knutinh   Subwoofers: Optimum Number and Locations by Todd W...   Nov 10 2010, 20:24
- - item   QUOTE (BearcatSandor @ Nov 8 2010, 06:01)...   Oct 8 2012, 19:41
- - greynol   Not only is that overly-simplistic, it is simply n...   Oct 9 2012, 05:10
|- - item   QUOTE (greynol @ Oct 9 2012, 05:10) Not o...   Oct 9 2012, 12:33
|- - probedb   QUOTE (item @ Oct 9 2012, 12:33) Of cours...   Oct 9 2012, 12:54
|- - item   QUOTE (probedb @ Oct 9 2012, 12:54) QUOTE...   Oct 9 2012, 14:17
- - greynol   If not trolling it does demonstrate a gross lack o...   Oct 9 2012, 15:37


Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th August 2014 - 10:42