Is ABX finally Obsolete
- Thread starter Gregadd
- Start date
- Status
Australia is a wonderful place. I spent about 2 weeks in Queensland and had an absolutely fantastic time. Highly recommended!
Aha! Now we're starting to get somewhere ...
So was the other bloke's name Terry? Highly unlikely -- it was some time ago, and your attitude and perspective perfectly mirrors the "other chap", so if I was mistaking you for him, my apologies! You should have mentioned this earlier, as in "You should have called!". Sneaky bugger...
Yes, his system did poorly on my test CDs, he sneered that if I was going to use crap recordings to check out gear, what hope did I have of knowing how good his speakers were ...
So to get back on track, I have no idea what YOUR speakers or system would sound like. The HT system is not "superior", just been largely sorted out to give of its best. Or would you consider anyone who claims to get high quality sound using pretty efficient speakers and a 20-40 watt amplifier is up themselves, hmmmm?
Yes, if you are not the man from the shed, I have no idea who you are ...
Frank
Jack, I mentioned to my wife some of the photos that IIRC you posted here about a year ago. She definite is game and, as such, a visit is on our radar.
Nothing sneaky about it at all. You mentioned a 'factory', that was suddenly plausible (as opposed to a gtg or sumthin)...BUT that factory could have been bankstown, faulconbridge, north richmond or indeed bathurst (or kelso).
Twas not me making the claim, and the more you gave the more credible it could become.
I have no idea if you are mistaking me, as I said this new data has a ring of truth about it.
Oh, his name was john.
That could be true (his response that is). It could also be true about using a crap recording to test out a system...
Frank, given that it is your system then yes, I would say 'he is up himself'. Pretty efficient eh? Well, let's test yet another claim shall we? How efficient are they?
20-40 watts...PMPO frank? What IS twenty HTIAB watts. Guess you know they are efficient because the twenty HTIAB watts drives them to eleven (that was it no?) What IS eleven, in db?
I certainly could have been A man in the shed, but I would not have participated much when anyone came and auditioned, and am even more sure I would not have made vocal comments about someones music, no matter what I may have thought about it personally.
So we may have met, tho why you'd remember my name and not his I have no clue....'less it was my aura/personality that stuck with you?
Another problem with ABX is that it has become an argument unto itself. Failure of the proponent of the hypothesis to either engage in the test or once having engaged in the test to achieve an acceptable result is used to prove the negative. Indeed it is used to prove incompetence or a fraud. Even if an acceptable result is achieved the person is called an auditory freak or his results statistically insignificant.
I love my car and want to put premium or extra-premium gas in it. I want to use Exxon Mobil synthetic oil and tires that are wide and low profile. I want to wax it every week . In three years trade it for an even better model.
Nobody calls me stupid.(wives and girlfriends don't count. they have a different agenda). No one asks the Car Guys to take an ABX.
Many don't want cables or anything else to be better. I know for a long time I did not. It is presumptuous that you think you are educating the masses.
I think what bothers me is others say I heard what I heard because.that is what I wanted. How can you ever be sure what I was expecting? I could very well expect there to be no difference.
Tests shows people tend to pick the bigger speaker or the louder one. How far have we come since those basic discoveries?
I love my car and want to put premium or extra-premium gas in it. I want to use Exxon Mobil synthetic oil and tires that are wide and low profile. I want to wax it every week . In three years trade it for an even better model.
Nobody calls me stupid.(wives and girlfriends don't count. they have a different agenda). No one asks the Car Guys to take an ABX.
Many don't want cables or anything else to be better. I know for a long time I did not. It is presumptuous that you think you are educating the masses.
I think what bothers me is others say I heard what I heard because.that is what I wanted. How can you ever be sure what I was expecting? I could very well expect there to be no difference.
Tests shows people tend to pick the bigger speaker or the louder one. How far have we come since those basic discoveries?
Greg, I'm afraid some people just have an agenda to insist that another person's reality is not valid, if it is not in accord with their own. They are not willing to leave it in the "maybe" basket, for them the world is most definitely made up of black or white, no shades inbetween. It bothers them that perhaps that there is another "truth" out there, which would take some effort for them to track down, and verify for themselves.
So it is easiest for them to just deny its existence, and keep on insisting on "proof", which of course as you indicate, no matter what lengths you go to will never be good enough, will never satisfy them ...
Frank
Let's say that car is the the technological equivalent of an '89 Buick LaSabre and you claim that, performance measurements be damned, it's a better car than a new TOTL Honda, and you further claim that the special "Speedwax" you use, regardless of what it might say, make your Buick more "fastical" (not everything can be measured, Dude) than a new Mustang.
Someone might question your intelligence, or sanity, or at least your objectivity, then.
Tim
PS:
...or let's suppose the car is a used Scion, and you didn't change the suspension, or the tires, or even the air pressure in the tires. You welded the lug nuts on and encased that battery in aluminum foil and now you are claiming for the Scion feats of handling that a Formula 1 car couldn't accomplish.Someone might ask for a bit of objective data. -- T
Frank (and greg!)
not true at all. Nothing to do with agenda, nor with saying another's reality is not valid.
Why do you guys always miss this?
Your reality IS your reality. As an example, Frank tries to push off his reality onto all by his own system...a HTIAB (with tweaks natch)...as being better than 'most other' systems out there.
Fine. Seriously.
Not for one second do I not think that is franks reality!! After all, unless he really IS trolling, I take him at his word, that he feels it sounds great.
So WHO is pushing an agenda here?
*We* DO say however, that because your reality is so heavily influenced by factors OTHER than pure sound, when making sound claims then those factors need to be taken into account.
That is when we see the furious backpedalling eh?
Maybe it IS true that you can hear cables say, well then, make sure ALL you hear is cables, isolate that one factor.
So no, it does not bother *us*. It does annoy the frickin **** out of us tho when the bigmouth net blowhards don't have the courage of their convictions, AND crow about converting others!
Greg, what senses (if I have understood your analogy properly) would a salesman use to see if you have maintained your car properly? His sense of smell, hearing? You'd be a bit annoyed if he didn't bloody look at your car no? Else why bother maintaining the paintwork.
Should he listen? No, I agree, that would be stupid.
So why is it so important that sight be used in evaluating the sound of a stereo system?
Hehehe,
I am having flashbacks to a film with an AI planet busting bomb debating with the astronaut who is trying to talk it into disarming and not detonate
I guess reality is all relative to someone, somewhere
Film was Dark Star, but seems sort of apt with all this talk of each others reality as part of the debate in this thread.
Cheers
Orb
I am having flashbacks to a film with an AI planet busting bomb debating with the astronaut who is trying to talk it into disarming and not detonate
I guess reality is all relative to someone, somewhere
Film was Dark Star, but seems sort of apt with all this talk of each others reality as part of the debate in this thread.
Cheers
Orb
Steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
Terry- I usually just try to ignore you. Others apparently find your name calling and false bravado amusing or entertaining, I find it boorish and a substitute for the lack of anything substantive to say on a subject. Frank has not complained. Maybe he has a much thicker skin than I. it's probably not that important.
"Bigmouth net blowhard, stupid, furious backpedaling, courage of thier convictions." IMO you do Australia a disservice. I am sure there are many there who are tolerant of the opinions of those they disagree with; who are capable of a polite discourse.
I assume Frank purchased his system because he likes it. That he thinks it was the best he could do with the resources he had at the time. His knowledge of audio included. He wants to share his efforts with others. Have you heard his system? Do you know what floats his boat? Ah but you are sure of one thing. His opinions are invalid because he did not arrive at them via blind evaluations. Of course you cannot even be sure of that. Has anyone ever arrived at the same conclusion via sighted tests as they did via ABX?
I am sure people receive advice on just about every subject. I know I do. How could anybody eat that food, like that girl or drive that car? Opinions are just that.
Here in America when I was a kid there was a huge debate over Ford basis Chevy pick up. The argument was completely irrational. My grandfather was a Chevy man. The opinions were so strong if I made a gift of a Chevy to a Ford man he would trade it in for a Ford.
A knowledgeable person can use their senses to evaluate the condition of a care. Check the oil. Moisture can indicate a cracked block. White smoke means it's burning oil. This could indicate a ring problem. Uneven tire wear could indicate an alignment problem or that the frame was bent in an accident. Is normal wear and tear consistent with the odometer mileage. A good appearence indicates that maybe the owner took good care of the car. Visually check for leaks. I could go on.
As for an agenda it just seems to be an effort to challenge anyone who believes differently to a duel. ABX is the weapon of choice.
"Bigmouth net blowhard, stupid, furious backpedaling, courage of thier convictions." IMO you do Australia a disservice. I am sure there are many there who are tolerant of the opinions of those they disagree with; who are capable of a polite discourse.
I assume Frank purchased his system because he likes it. That he thinks it was the best he could do with the resources he had at the time. His knowledge of audio included. He wants to share his efforts with others. Have you heard his system? Do you know what floats his boat? Ah but you are sure of one thing. His opinions are invalid because he did not arrive at them via blind evaluations. Of course you cannot even be sure of that. Has anyone ever arrived at the same conclusion via sighted tests as they did via ABX?
I am sure people receive advice on just about every subject. I know I do. How could anybody eat that food, like that girl or drive that car? Opinions are just that.
Here in America when I was a kid there was a huge debate over Ford basis Chevy pick up. The argument was completely irrational. My grandfather was a Chevy man. The opinions were so strong if I made a gift of a Chevy to a Ford man he would trade it in for a Ford.
A knowledgeable person can use their senses to evaluate the condition of a care. Check the oil. Moisture can indicate a cracked block. White smoke means it's burning oil. This could indicate a ring problem. Uneven tire wear could indicate an alignment problem or that the frame was bent in an accident. Is normal wear and tear consistent with the odometer mileage. A good appearence indicates that maybe the owner took good care of the car. Visually check for leaks. I could go on.
As for an agenda it just seems to be an effort to challenge anyone who believes differently to a duel. ABX is the weapon of choice.
Methinks the thread has gotten too much personal for my tastes... I has devolved. Still fas42 trolling however subtle is unnerving but a few, very few seem to find it interesting .. So be it .. To each its own, that's why there is an "ignore" option...
ABX unsettles many audiophiles(I included) but works well too remove numerous biases .. No one would claim that sighted audition removes any bias ...
In conclusion : ABX is NOT finally obsolete ... I am out of this thread for good ..
ABX unsettles many audiophiles(I included) but works well too remove numerous biases .. No one would claim that sighted audition removes any bias ...
In conclusion : ABX is NOT finally obsolete ... I am out of this thread for good ..
Last edited:
Steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
It is getting very personal and unless something substantive and new is posted and/or personal attacks continue the thread will be closed
Is there anything that ultimately matters in audio other than audibility? If the difference between two things is not reliably and repeatably audible, then the two things for all intents and purposes (given that audio equipment is just a tool to achieve an audible result) are freely interchangeable parts.
(Edit: that first sentence was poorly phrased. Plenty of other things matter: looks, actual and perceived build quality, etc. They're just not relevant to actual sound quality assuming nothing is broken.)
Actually, I'm suggesting that "every intermediary step prior to that" has basically no importance in comparison to the loudspeakers and the loudspeaker/room interface. There are two main exceptions:
-Cases of abject incompetence. For example, if someone wants to listen to Mahler 8-scale music at realistic levels, but selects a set of 83dB/W/m speakers and an 8-watt amp to do that in a large room, that is an (extreme) example of incompetence. But it's something that sadly we see among "audiophiles."
-Gear designed expressly to alter signals, such as equalizers, inasmuch as they perform that function.
I don't know what speakers Tom or Walker have, the size of their rooms, or their level preferences, so I must answer generally. So long as they have amplification sufficient to drive their speakers to their intended listening levels without audible strain, then no.
Furthermore, it's worth noting that "better performance" need not be expensive. Often, for instance, "pro" amps provide superior performance to "high end" amps (low noise floor but a whole lot more power) for a lot less money. They are, however, as a rule uglier, and may have fans that audibly intrude.
Generally: low noise floor, flat frequency response within the intended bandwidth (for audio generally, let's say 16-20k Hz).
For amplifiers specifically: sufficient gain to drive a given set of speakers to the desired SPL in a room of a given size.
For line-level wires: competent joints, adequate noise rejection.
For speaker wires: resistance ? 5% of a given loudspeaker's minimum impedance.
Not really.
That is simply incorrect on fact.
I have never seen anyone serious about audio discount a statistically-significant positive arising from a competently administered test.
Certainly, nobody has ever dismissed such a result on the basis that the person listening had superior hearing! That's just rank audiophool fantasy. Provide a citation for that claim, because otherwise that statement alone proves your intellectual dishonesty on this issue.
I know I for one would take such results as concrete proof that differences exist, and seek to replicate them myself.
That's as intellectually sloppy as anti-reason arguments typically are when "audiophiles" attempt to bolster basically untenable positions.
So, let's deconstruct them and see exactly how silly such arguments are.
Put whatever fuel you want in your car. That's irrelevant, just as it's irrelevant what wires you choose to use to string your gear together. The only time it may come up is if you claim that one gives performance advantage that is unsupported by reliable data. In the fuel analogy, if your car's manufacturer expressly recommends regular, and the engine's compression ratio and computer mapping are such that higher octane fuel is going to lead to any changes in timing, etc. whatsoever, then reasonable people will cry foul at such claims.
As for oil, again use what you want. The issue only arises if you claim your choice leads to performance increases.
Wide, low-profile tires have obviously different subjective and objective performance in traction, ride quality, etc. from narrower, higher-profile tires. That's much more like speakers than amps or wires.
Waxing a car every week...chances are that will lead to visible improvements on a vehicle driven in environments that are not vacuums. (Though if done incompetently it could cause more harm than good.) Still, not especially relevant to claims of audible differences in audio electronics.
As for swapping cars every three years, nobody is arguing that a new car is the same as an old car.
Yes.
A "car guy" ignores arguments about lorries and other work/delivery/assault vehicles completely.
I agree regarding forum decorum. Too many discussions are shut down immediately with "do you have a DBT? If not, we are done and what you say is inaudible." I call it censorship for the lack of a better word to describe it. We come to these forums to explore ideas. And to have a good time discussing things. Such answers stifle both.
Again a fair point. I have often asked people who demand DBTs whether they use premium gas and if so, have measured objectively what it does for their car. The answer is always no. But when it comes to audio, improvements in gear fidelity are dismissed by them without said proof. We can't have a different bar for different hobbies and remain credible in our arguments.
Sad to say, I used to believe this and it is not true Greg. I can't explain the perceptual reasons but you can still imagine improvements even if you didn't expect it. I have recently tested this where I was shocked to see a software player outperform another when I was not even looking for that (was trying the other player for iPad functionality). I then researched and found out that objectively the two players were doing the same thing and in a blind test I set up, the difference vanished (and then sighted).
Again, I have no explanation for why the brain acts this way without expecting it so but at least in my limited experience, it is not a valid argument.
I'm fascinated that not once do you mention distortion, levels of and type, or do you believe that the ear/brain is able to filter out any non-linearities due to electronic misbehaviour?
Frank
DS-21
Thank you for taking the time to give a detailed reply. While there are things I do not agree with, I respect your opinions. At this point I will refrain from citing the specifics since I think we can agree our positions can not be reconciled. Again, thank you for your response.
Thank you for taking the time to give a detailed reply. While there are things I do not agree with, I respect your opinions. At this point I will refrain from citing the specifics since I think we can agree our positions can not be reconciled. Again, thank you for your response.
- Status
Similar threads
