Hearing is Believing

[Richard Dunn]

hahah. directional cables, oh FFS sake. Get a grip on yourself. There is no such thing recognised in any field of science.
But you got those magic ears.

Some designs of capacitor are directional. So construction and design hasn't caused that Cables are capacitors in some form and at some level, and as far as I am concerned one of my main design and selection briefs is to remove as much of it as possible.

 

[RobHolt]

So why did all your blind test Bake-Offs come up with no difference results?

I've done group tests with cables and dacs.

The cables show no difference because there is none - at least no effect even remotely near the audio range.
In the case of the dacs, there are differences (as per the specifications) but in our test group of five they were so small that nobody could detect them. Everything performed to a very good standard from the cheapest to the most expensive and that was reflected in the listening.

For a blind test to reveal a difference it has to actually exist, or be of sufficient strength to be audible.

 

[Richard Dunn]

I've done group tests with cables and dacs.

The cables show no difference because there is none - at least no effect even remotely near the audio range.
In the case of the dacs, there are differences (as per the specifications) but in our test group of five they were so small that nobody could detect them. Everything performed to a very good standard from the cheapest to the most expensive and that was reflected in the listening.

For a blind test to reveal a difference it has to actually exist, or be of sufficient strength to be audible.

Well I could duplicate both of your tests and people would hear consistent differences (apart from you as you have programmed yourself not to hear them). The reason is what this argument is about.

 

[RobHolt]

Well I could duplicate both of your tests and people would hear consistent differences (apart from you as you have programmed yourself not to hear them). The reason is what this argument is about.

You cannot have it both ways.

If you argue that blind tests deprive the senses, cause stress and therefore create a 'no difference' result, that applies equally to any test including those that you arrange.

What you suggest makes no sense at all.
It wasn't just me hearing no difference in the tests described - nobody did.

 

[RobHolt]

Tasking this further, did anybody read the amplifier ABX test report?

Anyone care to offer a view as to how a $220 Pioneer receiver was found to sound strikingly different to a high-end Mark Levinson amplifier when sighted, yet strikingly similar when presented blind?

 

[Richard Dunn]

It wasn't just me hearing no difference in the tests described - nobody did.

So that should make you realise that it is the process that is a fault, you can never prove a negative.

 

[Richard Dunn]

Tasking this further, did anybody read the amplifier ABX test report?

Anyone care to offer a view as to how a $220 Pioneer receiver was found to sound strikingly different to a high-end Mark Levinson amplifier when sighted, yet strikingly similar when presented blind?

Because depriving a normal sense partially disables the others.

 

[RobHolt]

So that should make you realise that it is the process that is a fault, you can never prove a negative.

...or there is nothing to hear.

I see an event looming after the Halloween show has run its course

Because depriving a normal sense partially disables the others.

The gulf between those products should be huge. Even if sensory deprivation was a factor (and it isn't since there is no actual 'blinding' during the test - only product identity is hidden which is entirely different) it would have to be a huge effect for that degree of masking. Unless of course there is nothing to mask.

 

[Richard Dunn]

The gulf between those products should be huge. Even if sensory deprivation was a factor (and it isn't since there is no actual 'blinding' during the test - only product identity is hidden which is entirely different) it would have to be a huge effect for that degree of masking. Unless of course there is nothing to mask.

If there is nothing to mask then you wouldn't hear it when it is sighted, but you do hear it. I am beginning to believe that sighted or blind has nothing to do with it. You have invested in there being no difference so that is what you create in your choice of system and choice of method, where as I have invested in there being difference so I create a system and methodology that shows it, it seems the only logical conclusion.

Seeing as we are an industry based on hearing differences (otherwise we would all own Bose) I know which one is more logical.

 

[Jimbo]

There are significant differences in dacs thats for sure. You only have to listen to a nos against an up sampling one and notice. I listened to a modded nos dac and it made every instrument and singer sound 3d with more body and smooth sounding. Where as my cd player sounded rather flat and shrill. I dont think i was imagining it.
Jim.

 

[Richard Dunn]

There are significant differences in dacs thats for sure. You only have to listen to a nos against an up sampling one and notice. I listened to a modded nos dac and it made every instrument and singer sound 3d with more body and smooth sounding. Where as my cd player sounded rather flat and shrill. I dont think i was imagining it.
Jim.

What ever you do don't say you "don't think" you imagined it, they will be down on you like a ton of bricks - quite simply if you heard it then you heard it, that is *your* reality, don't let them bully you out of it.

 

[Jimbo]

Yes i knew as soon as i typed it in but decided to keep it in i think.

 

[RobHolt]

If there is nothing to mask then you wouldn't hear it when it is sighted, but you do hear it.

Yes you would - that is the whole point of the argument!
People often hear what they expect/want or are guided into hearing.

 

[RobHolt]

There are significant differences in dacs thats for sure. You only have to listen to a nos against an up sampling one and notice. I listened to a modded nos dac and it made every instrument and singer sound 3d with more body and smooth sounding. Where as my cd player sounded rather flat and shrill. I dont think i was imagining it.
Jim.

Neither do I.

NOS and up-sampling dacs measure very differently indeed.
NOS dacs can display some very odd characteristics including response errors.
Not only that but if you haven't precisely matched the listening levels you will get a very misleading result. Why do you think manufacturers hotten-up the output levels of products if not to make them sound more impressive on quick dem?
If you are comparing them with any significant time lag then all bets are off because our memory simply isn't good enough.

So you probably did hear differences Jim, but perhaps not for the reasons you might think.

 

[Dev]

I watched it this afternoon on iPlayer. The 'bar / far' spoken thing was real food for thought, everyone interested in expectation bias etc should watch that bit at the least. For those that missed it this was the word 'bar', very clearly enunciated and sampled, then precisely synced with the speaker alternately mouthing the word 'bar' or 'far' - despite the sound recording being 100% identical in both cases ('bar') the watcher / listener is utterly convinced the word being spoken is 'far' when the visual stimulus implies that is what is happening. The scary thing is that even though you know it's an illusion you remain convinced you are hearing the word being mouthed. Close your eyes and the truth is swiftly revealed.

Tony.

I just watched it and and agree that the "bar/far" bit was very convincing. Close your eyes and you clearly hear what was being said but open your eyes and even though you knew what the guy was saying ("bar") you heard what your eyes told you to hear"(far").

I also found the blind cyclist and the development of new senses interesting.

 

[Richard Dunn]

Yes you would - that is the whole point of the argument!
People often hear what they expect/want or are guided into hearing.

Then why do they come to individual conclusions, at none of the bake-offs I have witnessed has there been complete consensus, because there was personal choice, and there could not have been personal choice without difference.

 

[RobHolt]

They all expect different things to a greater or lesser degree.
No two people are the same and no two people will express themselves in exactly the same way.

 

[Richard Dunn]

Neither do I.
Why do you think manufacturers hotten-up the output levels of products if not to make them sound more impressive on quick dem?

You always use this excuse and it can just as easily be aimed at you, as you have little understanding of an SPL meter, if you really think they represent flattening the playing field for all product you sadly misunderstand how they function. Basically they lie to you and take everything back to the common denominator. A 1khz steady state signal has *nothing* to do with reproducing music, or if you do it with music then you penalise against the amp able to resolve musical dynamics, so it is false readings both ways, and you take away the betterness of the more dynamic amp. It is far better to do it by ear, it is very easy to hear when an amp is set louder, so just turn it down. You attended the last Bake-Off at my place and one of the things continually adjusted (by ear) was the level, and all could hear it and agreed when levels were balanced.

 

[Richard Dunn]

They all expect different things to a greater or lesser degree.
No two people are the same and no two people will express themselves in exactly the same way.

Nobody expects differences, they hear them or not as the case maybe.

 

[RobHolt]

You always use this excuse and it can just as easily be aimed at you, as you have little understanding of an SPL meter, if you really think they represent flattening the playing field for all product you sadly misunderstand how they function. Basically they lie to you and take everything back to the common denominator. A 1khz steady state signal has *nothing* to do with reproducing music, or if you do it with music then you penalise against the amp able to resolve musical dynamics, so it is false readings both ways, and you take away the betterness of the more dynamic amp. It is far better to do it by ear, it is very easy to hear when an amp is set louder, so just turn it down. You attended the last Bake-Off at my place and one of the things continually adjusted (by ear) was the level, and all could hear it and agreed when levels were balanced.

Don't be daft.

For a start he's talking about a dac.
Secondly, you can show in seconds that the peak levels of replay from dacs - using music - can be equalised to within very tight limits of better than 0.1db

Even if you were to use some very shoddy amplifier with a bit of dynamic compression you are still far better placed to judge having made some attempt to equalise levels.