He just explained why so much audio gear is dreck. They make it that way to have something jump out and get your attention- that's new! I'll buy it! When the truth is the very best most perfect component there ever could be (and does not exist) would do.... nothing. It would simply pass the signal.
Therefore, the better the component the less the attention grabbing exaggerations and the more listening time it takes to find the flaws.
|
First of all, you can only listen, evaluate one item at a time. You can not evaluate bass and treble at exactly the same time. Your brain switches back and forth. Yes, the most pronounced differences will attract your attention first. So you just switch your attention to other facets.
I A/B high resolution files to vinyl all the time. I mean 24/96 and 24/192 files. In doing so with my friends it is interesting that there is, without discussing it first, 100% agreement as to which is "better."
A/Bing equipment is more difficult if not down right impossible. If you have a good relationship with a dealer he might allow you to borrow electronics to A/B especially if you are a big ticket buyer. Even so it is very unusual to be able to A/B speakers in your own home and they are the most determinant part of any system.
Listening to one speaker for a week then listening to another speaker for a week is not a good way to evaluate minor differences between speakers because we accommodate to sound. Switching back and forth is always the best way to evaluate equipment but difficult to arrange. There are situations where there is such a profound difference in performance that there is no question which device is better. Then it becomes a no brainer. |
my takeaway is that as essential as properly conceived and controlled a/b testing (volume equalized etc etc) is to elucidate sq differences among pieces of gear, there is much much more to it than that -- if the objective is to determine which is truly more pleasurable for ownership and longer term ’living with it’
multiple modes of comparison, over short and longer durations, using various pieces of ancillary gear, are necessary to really help us decide and be confident of the choice
the process must be enjoyed |
An interesting take on how to determine your own long term preference when quick switching differences are obvious. I know when I had LP playback and digital of many of the same albums and could compare them at length I never did establish a preference. The subtleties he mentions would seem to disappear on digital at times, but then suddenly all be there depending more on my mood and the state of my hearing apparatus. I never noticed over the long run that vinyl ever produced any better subtleties than CD. I did notice that on some records the apparent equalization was much different than the CD, and I preferred the rolled off highs of the LP. I was able to fix that with a digital EQ comparing the spectral contents until they closely matched. That being said, I do think that sometimes a certain amount of noise and distortion can be actually beneficial to the listening experience, allowing our brain to fill in what's missing in ways that might be more pleasing than having everything explicitly clear. Similarly, HD video played back at 60 fps loses a lot of the magic I experience from 24 fps playback. A little film grain and vignette also seems to add something special. |
" mijostyn says: Listening to one speaker for a week then listening to another speaker for a week is not a good way to evaluate minor differences between speakers because we accommodate to sound. Switching back and forth is always the best way to evaluate equipment but difficult to arrange."
How do you compare an apple to a pear? You can't. The only way to tell what you like best is through long term evaluation playing different kinds of music. After a while you will get both items under comparison to sound their best and be able to decide which one works best for you. But it takes time to do this, playing a few tracks might get you a rough estimate but you really need time to evaluate fully. The industry pretty much agrees that long term evaluation is the tool used to review products.
|
the process must be enjoyed This is much more important than one might think. Many well-meaning audiophiles shoot themselves in the foot by obsessively playing the same snippets at the same volume over and over again. Then to make things even worse they use one track to evaluate this, one to evaluate that. You all know its true, they are on here every day. This approach virtually guarantees utter boredom and leads to the same problem one of its practitioners already noted of being able to listen for only one thing at a time. This is not normal. This is borderline neurotic. Every time I have people over, and I have a bunch of them coming this weekend, I always make sure and ask what kind of music do they enjoy and let them know its all about them. Because I am really, really into listening and nobody but nobody ever gonna be listening to crap that turns them off. Music they love, that gets them going, whatever it is, that they will focus on like a laser beam. Think about that and consider just how screwed up so many audiophiles are. Its almost like they search out the most unlistenable music and play it over and over again not because they like it but because has some little artifact of a sound they think is somehow essential to evaluating the perfect whatever. I was lucky and broke out of this mold early on. Took my little stack of CDs with me, started listening to a McCormack DNA1, knew I found my amp when I noticed my list of audio tics was the last thing on my mind, I was just enjoying the music. |
Some of the best playbacks I've ever heard were on really crappy systems on the beach in the Dominican Republic and in the mountains of northwest Vietnam. |
But please don't forget why we strive for that exact moment when the experience at that moment reflecting a past experience allows us to emotionally connect with the tru 3 dimension experience of being in the moment |
If my foot is tapping and my head is bobbing, then it sounds good. |
the point here is how best to decide what sounds better...
one thing, one system sounding 'good' is a different conversation, a separate matter, a different bar |
Tally ho this guy knows next to nothing with crappy gear. |
@MC”I was lucky and broke out of this mold early on. Took my little stack of CDs with me, started listening to a McCormack DNA1, knew I found my amp when I noticed my list of audio tics was the last thing on my mind, I was just enjoying the music.”
Exactly what happened to me when I heard the PAP’s. at the NY audio show. I could not leave the room as it was all about the music, and not even music I was familiar with. That said it all. It may have been interesting if the Moab’s were next door, but weren’t. Nothing to AB, like meeting the right woman, (OK, I’ll welcome the comments), it just hits you and you make the move, for better or for worse!
|
Russ, the industry simply wants to sell you stuff. Like I said, sometimes the differences are outstanding and it is easy to choose over a relatively short period. Outstanding differences I can usually discern at the store and at isolated listening sessions. Fine details are not so easy especially with differences in recordings and program sources. After listening to a speaker for a while you accommodate to the sound. Most people think this is the equipment breaking in. It is not. It is your brain breaking in. This is a reality of science whether anyone here like it or not. Certain defects like an irritable upper midrange will persist but I usually can pick this up at first listening. Go to a dealer that can arrange rapid AB comparisons of speakers and see how easy it is to pick out differences between speakers that you would not pick out otherwise. |
When I'm evaluating gear I like to spend some "quality time" listening to item A, then some "quality time" listening to item B.
From 1978 thru 1982 I worked in high end audio shops in the DC area. It was common to be able to A/B speakers, but at one of the shops we had this "computerized" console, where you could A/B amplifiers, and it was "programmed" to set the volumes equal. I remember a customer spending HOURS A/Bing a McIntosh MC2205 solid state power amp vs. a Luxman Laboratory Reference tube unit, switching back and forth causing the "computerized" console to illuminate one lamp for the McIntosh, the other for the Luxman. After HOURS of listening, he bought the Luxman. A few days after he left the store, our head repair tech came into our high end room and replaced the motherboard in the unit, saying that though the unit switched from one lamp to the other, it was not actually switching from one amp to another...so this customer was probably listening all the time to the McIntosh. |
"There are two kinds of music. Good music, and the other kind"
- Duke Ellington
Just as I'd rather drive a slow car fast, than a fast car slow, I'd rather listen to good music on a bad system, than bad music on a good system.
|
|
@widmerpool
@mijostyn
life is short, why settle? the idea is to listen to great music on a great system |
@jjss49 - "...why settle?" = +1 |
Harman testing showed that most people prefer speakers with a flat frequency response . Why settle for less ? |
@russ69 ,
'The industry pretty much agrees that long term evaluation is the tool used to review products.'
The industry most probably would as it serves their interests best.
However since most audiophiles want to know which equipment is better, a more useful way is to compare different products via a blind listening session conducted through a comparator. Near instant switching and level matched of course.
It is a real shame for the consumer that such facilities are not readily available.
Yes, you can argue what you will about unsighted tests, but no one will argue that sighted ones are in any way more accurate or less biased.
|
How much money have I blown with that instant gratification that the new gizmo was better and was really not. It takes me about a month of listening to find out what that component brings to the system...good, and bad.
|
