270 posts / 0 new
Last post
steve_1979's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 15 min ago
Joined: 14/07/2010 - 21:04
Posts: 3871
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

matthewpiano wrote:

Totally off-topic but good to see I'm not the only non-drinker round these parts.

+1

Me too. Smile

Hi-Fi - Yamaha RX-V667 > AVI DM5

Head-Fi - Epiphany Acoustics EHP-O2Di > Sennheisser HD700

Portable - Sony NWZ-A847 > Westone UM3x

Overdose's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 08/02/2008 - 18:23
Posts: 3570
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

John Duncan wrote:

Overdose wrote:

John Duncan wrote:

So enlighten me.  Is it possible for - eg - amps to be 'incompetent' and 'not incompetent', and, irrespective of how the methodology might skew the results, is it possible to tell them apart by sighted listening?

You are well aware I'm sure, of the influences affecting sighted listening and equally aware of the benefits of blind testing. The results of sighted listening will not be as acurate at determining differences that exist between equipment as blind testing will be. Differences can and do exist and at obviously different levels depending on what it is being tested, how easy it is to differentiate between equipment on a sighted test will depend a lot more on additional external factors not included in blind testing.

So yes then?

Most things are possible, but the likelihood of success varies enormously.

Given your confidence in sighted testing, yourself and the Devialet might be ideal contenders for the Harbeth challenge then (see above for the same caveat)?

  Smile

John Duncan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 18 hours ago
Joined: 08/01/2008 - 17:25
Posts: 23060
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

Overdose wrote:

Given your confidence in sighted testing, yourself and the Devialet might be ideal contenders for the Harbeth challenge then (see above for the same caveat)?

As noted very far back on this thread, I think the Harbeth challenge was worded in such a way that it would be extremely difficult or impossible (for me, at least) to meet the prerequisites set by Mr Shaw.  But yes, I stand by my contention that it is possible to differentiate between amplifiers.  There are those out there who decry Naim amplifiers, for example, as 'incompetent'.  Are they wrong?

Overdose wrote:

John Duncan wrote:

So yes then?

Most things are possible, but the likelihood of success varies enormously.

Yes or no?  It's quite a simple question.

Moderator: john.duncan.whf at gmail dot com

Overdose's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 08/02/2008 - 18:23
Posts: 3570
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

John Duncan wrote:

Overdose wrote:

Given your confidence in sighted testing, yourself and the Devialet might be ideal contenders for the Harbeth challenge then (see above for the same caveat)?

As noted very far back on this thread, I think the Harbeth challenge was worded in such a way that it would be extremely difficult or impossible (for me, at least) to meet the prerequisites set by Mr Shaw.  But yes, I stand by my contention that it is possible to differentiate between amplifiers.  There are those out there who decry Naim amplifiers, for example, as 'incompetent'.  Are they wrong?

Overdose wrote:

John Duncan wrote:

So yes then?

Most things are possible, but the likelihood of success varies enormously.

Yes or no?  It's quite a simple question.

Given the right circumstances, yes.

John Duncan's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 18 hours ago
Joined: 08/01/2008 - 17:25
Posts: 23060
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

OK, good - see, we can agree on some stuff. What do you think the right circumstances are? Level matching and same source/speakers are a given.

Moderator: john.duncan.whf at gmail dot com

Overdose's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 08/02/2008 - 18:23
Posts: 3570
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

John Duncan wrote:

OK, good - see, we can agree on some stuff. What do you think the right circumstances are? Level matching and same source/speakers are a given.

.

Depends on whats being tested, I would consider level matching a given.

Amps and speakers are probably more difficult than other equipment, as they are largely dependant on one another for how they behave.

Some sort of reference equipment if testing individual items, but nothing to say that an entire system couldn't be tested.

fr0g's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 10 hours ago
Joined: 07/01/2008 - 18:38
Posts: 2954
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

I must say I don't necessarily think level matching is needed.

As I can't easily do that myself other than for software, when testing anything I start with the volume at zero. Turn up to the level I like and listen.

This can easily be done blind.

Of course if one item is played louder then it can affect the outcome. But given enough trials that should be irrelevant... 

 

steve_1979's picture
Offline
Last seen: 11 hours 15 min ago
Joined: 14/07/2010 - 21:04
Posts: 3871
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

fr0g wrote:

I must say I don't necessarily think level matching is needed.

As I can't easily do that myself other than for software, when testing anything I start with the volume at zero. Turn up to the level I like and listen.

This can easily be done blind.

Of course if one item is played louder then it can affect the outcome. But given enough trials that should be irrelevant... 

 

I disagree. If you have two music files (for example) which are identical in every way but you played one of them at a slightly higher volume most people will say that the louder one sounds better.

 

This would makes the data from these blind tests inaccurate and essentially useless. Level matching is a must in A/B or ABX comparisons IMO.

Hi-Fi - Yamaha RX-V667 > AVI DM5

Head-Fi - Epiphany Acoustics EHP-O2Di > Sennheisser HD700

Portable - Sony NWZ-A847 > Westone UM3x

Overdose's picture
Offline
Last seen: 18 hours 26 min ago
Joined: 08/02/2008 - 18:23
Posts: 3570
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

It depends on how acurate you want/need to be. If you find that whatever it is you are testing reveals differences, you may need to find out why.

At this point level matching would need to be checked to be ruled out as the cause.

fr0g's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 10 hours ago
Joined: 07/01/2008 - 18:38
Posts: 2954
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

steve_1979 wrote:

fr0g wrote:

I must say I don't necessarily think level matching is needed.

As I can't easily do that myself other than for software, when testing anything I start with the volume at zero. Turn up to the level I like and listen.

This can easily be done blind.

Of course if one item is played louder then it can affect the outcome. But given enough trials that should be irrelevant... 

 

I disagree. If you have two music files (for example) which are identical in every way but you played one of them at a slightly higher volume most people will say that the louder one sounds better.

 

This would makes the data from these blind tests inaccurate and essentially useless. Level matching is a must in A/B or ABX comparisons IMO.

You miss the point.

I am not talking about a "single" comparison. If you repeat often enough then any discrepancy in volume will be evened out.

 

TrevC's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 4 days ago
Joined: 12/06/2013 - 10:07
Posts: 761
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

John Duncan wrote:

OK, good - see, we can agree on some stuff. What do you think the right circumstances are? Level matching and same source/speakers are a given.

 

Plenty of alcohol to aid relaxation and enable one to sleep through the sheer tedium of it all.

CnoEvil's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 45 min ago
Joined: 21/08/2009 - 18:01
Posts: 12417
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

TrevC wrote:

Plenty of alcohol to aid relaxation and enable one to sleep through the sheer tedium of it all.

Other than the misery of a bad back (which I suspect you have experienced), we finally agree on something.  : Dance 4 :bounce: :cheer:

"We should no more let numbers define audio quality than we should let chemical analysis be the arbiter of fine wines."  Nelson Pass

Alec's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 18 hours ago
Joined: 08/10/2007 - 21:06
Posts: 6079
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

TrevC wrote:

John Duncan wrote:

OK, good - see, we can agree on some stuff. What do you think the right circumstances are? Level matching and same source/speakers are a given.

 

Plenty of alcohol to aid relaxation and enable one to sleep through the sheer tedium of it all.

HA!

JamesMellor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
Joined: 19/07/2013 - 15:45
Posts: 337
RE: Subjective/objective testing /AB / AB/X, thoughts.

Thompsonuxb wrote:

steve_1979 wrote:

Thompsonuxb wrote:
Oh, to the person who mentioned "power chords making no difference" I can only guess you have not experimented with them and have no knowledge of the profound differences they make.

Yes I have tried a few power chords in shops and didn't hear any difference.

 

Thompsonuxb wrote:
I for one was genuinly suprised at the degree of difference they do make - more than interconnects I found but are cost inhibited.

I bet you couldn't tell them apart in a blind A/B comparison.

 

I would wager 10,000pounds no joke...actually 20,000pounds.... I would test them in your house on your system (provided your amp as a removeable power chord ). Seriously I would drive upto wherever you live to take the money off you.

 When I "upgraded" to the Rotel RA-1520 finding I was unable to get a sound I could live with changing interconnects I tried a power chord, the Audioquest NRG-X3 (60pounds) it made the amp sound worse than the cable supplied - what shocked me was the degree in difference the cable made to the sound

I'd take that A/B test anytime.

 

I'm new here and hate to dive into a some what heated discussion , and excuse me if I've got this wrong but you seem to have spent 700 quid on an ampilfier you don't like while saying people should blind test power cables and interconnects at 60 quid ?

Could I suggest a £ 700 A/B test on amp's before a 10k wager on copper cable <S>

 

James

Pages

Log in or register to post comments