Does Everything Make a Difference?

[Ron Resnick]

This thread is terrific. But you are forgetting a few things.

• The limits of human hearing.
• The limits of human perception
• The effects of aging on hearing ability

You guys carry on.

Actually, I would say that the OP is trying implicitly to raise these very questions.

 

[Folsom]

Several of those have real electrical reasons.

 

[PYP]

this might be philosophically the deepest of recent posts on the forum

agree these are essential considerations. Also want to submit this candidate which is a variation of a bumper sticker: More wag and less bark.

 

[Robh3606]

Does everything matter??? Just like all ideas they can be taken to the extreme.

I am more common sense so obviously some certainly do. Beyond that I think there is a little to much "snake oil" in the hobby. These products are designed to take advantage of the "everything matters" point of view and actively promotes that point of view for obvious reasons.

Rob

 

[Kingrex]

Related to judging a change. When I was newer, Emmanuel with First Sound came to my house with a demo preamp. He went home empty handed. I called a couple days later concerned about something being off. He came to my house with a pile of $22 stock power cords he likes. He started removing my audiophile cords. At first I said I don't like it. He said it was going the right way and let him push on. It was the last cord to my server or DAC he replaced and it all clicked. We both looked at each other with our mouths hanging open.

There are a few meaning in that experience.

 

[Neoteric]

To be perfectly honest, when experiencing audiophile nerviosa outbreaks of uninterrupted fiddling with the dang stereo , I swear out, “Why does everything make a difference?!”

 

[tima]

Is it a silly thread, or do you just want to believe that it's a silly thread?

it's silly regardless of what I believe. As an author might say, "it's objectively silly".

 

[dcathro]

Ron,
I loved your 'everything matters' list until I came across:
- the DAC is plugged in when you are listening to vinyl and
- a clock is plugged into a AC outlet in the listening room

Sorry buddy, but that's a bridge too far for me to cross!
Perhaps the lunar phase matters as well?
(If i'm not mistaken, either HP or JPMoncrieff mentioned something about that decades ago!)
Who knows?

I remember Martin Colloms mentioning the need to turn off all unused digital gear in the early 90s.

This is something that always made a big difference for me.

 

[dcathro]

It is often said by many audiophiles that "everything makes a difference." Beyond different cables and different components making a difference, these folks mean that everything makes a difference:

-- the metallurgy of the duplex outlet wall cover plate

-- a block of wood or other material on the top of a component

-- a Shun Mook disc or Shakti Stone on the top of an amplifier

-- the power cord going into the power supply of a turntable motor

-- the DAC is plugged in when you are listening to vinyl

-- interconnects are elevated above the floor

-- the metallurgy of the wire carrying power from the electrical sub-panel servicing the listening room to the outlets into which components are lugged

-- different fuses in a component

-- power cables are not criss-crossed with signal cables

-- an unused amplifier is sitting on the floor of the listening room

-- the connector on the speaker cable is Rhodium plated or not

-- the unused jacks on the pre-amp are plugged up

-- a coffee table is in front of the listening chair

-- an extra piece of wire "dongle" is inserted somewhere

-- a block of wood or steel or granite underneath a component

-- the ASC TubeTrap is diffusion side out or absorption side out

-- a clock is plugged into a AC outlet in the listening room

-- the wire coming out of your Wi-Fi router

-- the USB extension bus ("switch") going to your streamer

-- etc.

Does everything really make a difference? Or do we just believe -- or do we just want to believe -- that everything makes a difference?

Do we want to believe that everything makes a different because we think we can hear a difference?

Great thread Ron!

My experience is that everything does make a difference. The difficulty is interpreting what the differences mean - does the difference add value, just different, or take something away.

A few that have done my head in would be:

- the orientation of the AC going into components and coming out of transformers

- the position of components on the rack ( left to right, front to back )

- the tension of screws/bolts in equipment ( this is one that has driven me mad for years )

 

[PeterA]

Related to judging a change. When I was newer, Emmanuel with First Sound came to my house with a demo preamp. He went home empty handed. I called a couple days later concerned about something being off. He came to my house with a pile of $22 stock power cords he likes. He started removing my audiophile cords. At first I said I don't like it. He said it was going the right way and let him push on. It was the last cord to my server or DAC he replaced and it all clicked. We both looked at each other with our mouths hanging open.

There are a few meaning in that experience.

I can relate to this. I did the same thing replacing all my fancy audio file cords with stock cords and it was better. Then I found some industrial chords they made a slight improvement over that. Interestingly the stock chords for my Pass Labs we’re also made by Ching Chang. They sounded more like music than my audio file cords. More balanced less enhanced. These things do make a difference. And fancier is not necessarily better.

I had a similar experience at a friends house when we started removing fancy footers from each component, one at a time. By the time the last one was out the system was sounding really good.

 

[ThatStereoSound]

This topic has me thinking about statistical concepts related to sensitivity analysis of a system. A system or process comprised of multiple factors can be analyzed to determine which factors are statistically significant. Each factor has an interaction with every other factor leading to first, second, third, etc order interactions which each have a significance level, however the more complex the system the greater the chance the factors influence may not stand out above the level of noise. In hifi speak this could be called law of diminishing returns, but I would imagine that hearing a difference in a system made up of 100 components might be more difficult than a system with 5 components assuming equal system resolutions (big assumption I know!).

 

[dcathro]

Hi, Mike. Good afternoon to you.

Hearing and listening are definitely two different things. Many of the people I have met in my audio journey simply don't care about the subtleties, nuances and all of the other aspects many of us at the WBF might. All they care about is, "Does it sound good?". If it sounds good, they are as happy as a clam in mud. To others, especially trained listeners, these subtleties and nuances are (or can be) extremely important.

There is nothing wrong with each approach. There is no clear winner in this situation. There is no need for there to be camps staking it out on each side. To each, his or her own. But, you do bring up a good point. What is insignificant to the person casually hearing a selection being played, might very well be considered a significant change to the experienced listener.

I cracked up one time because someone gave me a wonderful but funny compliment at an audio event once. He stated that I could, "hear a fish fart in the middle of a waterfall". Hadn't ever heard that one before. I honestly don't think my hearing is better than anyone else's. There were plenty of people there at the event that heard the same things I heard. The difference was that they didn't pick up on the differences quickly. They had not really "listened" before. They just concentrated on hearing. With that said, when the differences were pointed out and described in detail, they could hone in on the change and identify them moving forward.

There are several people on this forum and a handful on some others that when they speak? I listen and pay particular attention to what they have to say. We may not all hear alike and we all have differences on what does or does not sound good, differing preferences for a reproductive effort, differing ways to achieve audio nirvana but when someone actually listens, instead of simply sitting back and hearing? In my experience, their listening skill set holds more weight than just the casual listener.

Personally, I think it mostly comes down to listening experience. Going through gear throughout one's lifetime, listening to different gear along the way. Sharing observations, learning and yes, listening to what other trained ears have to say is also an important part of honing your own listening skills in.

Getting back to if everything makes a difference. Not everything is detectable or easily identifiable. As aforementioned, there are some things that aren't discovered until later. There are things that by themselves don't make much more than a undetectable difference, but when combined with other tweaks or gear/cables/tubes/fuses/whatever, the cumulative effect of the little things add up. A good example of that would be adding things to help clean up the noise on a streaming rig. Some of the things didn't really seem to help the effort at first but as the signal got cleaner and cleaner? Now, you take one of those undetectable or barely negligible (before) components (or changes) out and now it can make a big difference.

How much of a difference?

Well, you have to go back to Mike's point. It depends on whether or not one is simply hearing the music or listening. The person hearing the music could probably care less. The person listening could consider the difference to now be significant.

Tom

Great post Tom.

Someone who just hears may or may not notice a difference, but a trained listener may be able to apply meaning to the difference.

 

[PeterA]

Great post Tom.

Someone who just hears may or may not notice a difference, but a trained listener may be able to apply meaning to the difference.

I would think one would have to have a very clear target or a goal or reference to be able to apply meaning or value to differences he hears in sound from various changes. Absent that, it’s just a difference in sound which may or may not be preferred. And that is fine too, but for discussion purposes and learning, it helps to understand a little bit more than simply “I like this one better“. I think it helps to understand why one prefers A over B, and then be able to articulate the reasons.

First, does it make a difference?
Second, can one hear the difference?
Third, what is the value of that difference to the listener?

 

[dcathro]

I would think one would have to have a very clear target or a goal or reference to be able to apply meaning or value to differences he hears in sound from various changes. Absent that, it’s just a difference in sound which may or may not be preferred. And that is fine too.

First, does it make a difference?
Second, can one hear the difference?
Third, what is the value of that difference to the listener?

Hi Peter,

To my mind, having a clear target is the most important thing in trying to improve an audio system. If you don't know where you are going you will never get there.

For me the critical criteria (in order) are timing, coherency, dynamics and tone.

 

[Rt66indierock]

Actually, I would say that the OP is trying implicitly to raise these very questions.

Ron, I'm sorry I missed you at the gala. I was busy helping set up and catching up with people that I hadn't seen for quite a while.

I think you have things backwards. When we talk about human hearing and human perception at their limits, we are talking about things that are fairly constant. Then you move to the limits of your own hearing and perception of sounds. These are separate steps from evaluating components in a system.

One of fundamental advantages I have in any audio discussion is I understand the most important thing in the listening room is the listeners. Everything starts there.

 

[PeterA]

Hi Peter,

To my mind, having a clear target is the most important thing in trying to improve an audio system. If you don't know where you are going you will never get there.

For me the critical criteria (in order) are timing, coherency, dynamics and tone.

I completely agree. I used to list exactly what I did not like about a certain component and then when auditioning a replacement it had to be better in that specific area and not worse in others before I made the switch. With all the tweaks, I simply removed them all and focused on the basic system, the room speaker position and listening seat. And power. Then I started adding accessories, but none of them got me closer to my target, so they were sold or given away or discarded.

 

[Rt66indierock]

Great post Tom.

Someone who just hears may or may not notice a difference, but a trained listener may be able to apply meaning to the difference.

Who are these trained listeners you're talking about? In my case I was taught audio by Techtronix engineers when I was a teenager. I found out when I had dinner with John Atkinson after the Annual Gala that he is self-taught as is Amir at ASR. Robert Harley of TAS claims to have an audio engineering degree but nobody can tell me where he got it from. So, I'm leery about saying trained listeners.

 

[dcathro]

Who are these trained listeners you're talking about? In my case I was taught audio by Techtronix engineers when I was a teenager. I found out when I had dinner with John Atkinson after the Annual Gala that he is self-taught as is Amir at ASR. Robert Harley of TAS claims to have an audio engineering degree but nobody can tell me where he got it from. So, I'm leery about saying trained listeners.

I don't mean a higher education degree or certificate.

I was heavily influenced by someone 30 years ago as to what is important in audio. They set me on my path and from there it is all self taught - the training is repeated listening and experiments with focused objectives. My training is far from complete as I am always learning.

Note that what is important to me may be different from what is important to you or anyone else.

 

[MarkusBarkus]

...I feel like the Replicant getting tested in Blade Runner.

 

[PYP]

...I feel like the Replicant getting tested in Blade Runner.

yes, but do you know you are a replicant?

Attributed to Heraclitus: "It is not possible to step into the same river twice." Not only is your setup changing all the time, so are you. How do you separate the two?

Emerson said: A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.