2. misc-audio
  3. 1383246560

Objective vs. Placebo relating to system changes

I am continually baffled by the number of people that are convinced that changes to power cords, speaker wires, interconnects, etc. in their systems result is objectively real changes. While I won't go so far as saying that making these changes absolutely doesn't make a difference, I would love to have the resources to challenge people prove it to me and test it with my own ears.

Here's what I would do if time and financial resources were no object (I'm visualizing retired millionaires that are audiophiles).

I would build a listening room where the only components in the listening space were the speakers and the speaker cables coming through opening in the wall where the rest of the system was setup. The idea would be to allow the test subject the opportunity to create their system of choice and then have the opportunity to become very familiar with the system by spending hours listening. Then I would let them know when I was going to start changing different components on them on a very random basis and they should report any changes that they heard so we could link the changes to any potential changes on the other side of the wall.

Here's a short list of things that I'd try:

(1) I would replace the upgraded power cord with the stock unit.
(2) I would install or remove isolation (e.g. Nordost sort kones) devices from a component.
(3) I would replace interconnects with basic quailty products.
(4) I would replace well "broken-in" cables with otherwise identical new ones.

Depending on the results of doing these test slowly over a period of time I would consider swapping out some of the more major components to see how obvious a macro change was if the listener wasn't aware that a change had been made.

I can tell the difference between new and broken in speakers (on ones that I'm familiar with) so I know this break-in is very real and would also not be at all surprised with differences from amplifiers and analog sources being obvious. I'm not as sure about digital sources.

So the question is, what components in your system would you be confident enough to bet, say $1,000, that you could identify that something changes if it was swapped out?

In my system I am sure that I could identify a change in amplification or speakers, but highly doubt that I could do the same with any cables, isolation devices, or digital sources. Maybe I just reduced myself to being a non-audiophile with low-fi gear?
mceljo

Showing 7 responses by mapman

mapman's avatar
mapman
22,860 posts
 
Stirring up the mice again, eh?

I am confident I can tell when my analog ICs change between the 3 I have tried at least: dnm, MIT, Harmonic Tech. Each is clearly radically different in design. Not all are so much so. I would not say I could always tell a difference, though one might exist.

I have not had much success hearing differences with different digital ICs or even with different digital sources of same resolution into the same DAC.

I think I have heard difference using power conditioner.

I use a decent quality power cord and am done with it. Not looking to hear any differences even if they exist.

That's the extent of my dabbling. Once I have things sounding just right, tend to stop dabbling for the most part and just enjoy listening.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,860 posts
 
"shielding against RFI and EMI can make an audible difference in a high end system"

That's a good one that often relates to ICs.

Encompassing my low level phono set up transformer device with a makeshift external mu metal surround is a clearly audible example of this I can point out in my experience, but the concept extends to even more common line level signals, though the effects at higher levels is surely more subtle. Science accounts for why this would be the case fairly well I would say. Using shielded ICs (like the MITs I use) versus unshielded (the DNMs I use and prefer for this) alone also makes a clear difference in my case.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,860 posts
 
Audiophiles care a lot about subtle things, a lot of which cannot be easily measured or quantified. It s kind of like The Twilight Zone. Hard to know the difference between what is real and what is not. One hears something, the next does not. A lot is hard to believe. The only way through is to trust ones own ears and proceed with a healthy dose of skepticism.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,860 posts
 
"I think a lot of my skepticism is directly related from understanding enough of the related science, or having friends that do, to understand how misleading a lot of the "science" manufactures give to support their products."

Yea, that's all part of the high end audio twilight zone. I always hesitate to even mention it, but see most any product from Machina Dynamica for a good example of the kind of nonsense that can and does go on.

The Twilight Zone of high end audio is prime feeding ground for vendors to prey on clients with lots of money and ambitions but little relevant knowledge to go with it.

Also home of those who are trustworthy and with very high standards for sound quality who understand the scientific and engineering fundamentals of producing good quality sound and are likely to be able to set the bar for good sound quality, and are able to communicate intelligently and with good intentions about how to go about it.

THen of course everything in-between, including many diverse views and opinions.

GOtta say that only a fool would tread these waters without being prepared to assert healthy doses of skepticism regularly. Some thick skin can help.

But if good sound and camaraderie with other with like mind and good intentions is your goal, I'd say its worth spending teh time it might take for one to sort through it all.

That's the sign post up ahead....
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,860 posts
 
"all that I ask is don't lie to me."

I pretty much agree with that. Trust is the key! Hard to trust liars, charlatans, obfuscators, etc. Luckily, trustworthy people are out there if you are smart enough to be able to find them. High end audio is probably no worse or better than most other "boutique" type industries in this regard, if that is any consolation. At least there is some basis for the products in science and engineering that one can bank on even if it does not ever completely tell the whole story.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,860 posts
 
" If you are indeed looking to upgrade, you need to quit looking for excuses and decide to dedicate a fair amount of money towards it."

I'd dedicate some time to experiment and learn as needed yourself first. Buy used, look for "value", experiment, keep or move on as needed without taking an unnecessary large financial hit in the process. Throwing money at the problem might work if you have it, but you might find you can do a lot better for less if like anything based on technology you do your homework first.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,860 posts
 
Mc,

Glad the new amp is sounding good.

What you describe with the two amps doesn't surprise me. You have a nice AV receiver, but few if any receivers ever made (2 channel stereo even or especially multi-channel, mutli-featured A/V ones) can compete with most ANY standalone power amp of good design and build quality, regardless of design/technology applied. The physics just does not allow a really good power amp to occupy space in the same box as the other line level and digital oriented components and for everything to perform as well as it might. Too many noise related issues! Build quality needed would price the thing out of sight and loose teh advantages of having everything in one box. Its a dilemma. Can't have the best sound and all those features and functions in proximity in the same box AND get teh best performance possible.

It is basic science and engineering in this case that can do a good job of explaining why.

I do think that newer integrateds built around very high efficiency CLass D amp modules have a good chance of pushing what is possible in a single small box further, but I have not had an opportunity to hear these much to date so cannot say for sure, but it is something worth keeping an eye on I would say.

I do use separate Class D monoblock amps. Class D amps in general is a technology worth considering if you think there is a chance of squeezing even more performance out of those Focal speakers beyond the current tube amp.

I think the new tube amp is a pretty good match for teh Focals, but you know us crazy audiophiles, always looking to raise the bar if possible.....
More to discover