In my years of audiophilia I have crossed swords with my brother many times regarding that which is real, and not real, in terms of differeces heard and imagined. He holds a Masters Degree in Education, self taught himself regarding computers, enough to become the MIS Director for a school system, and early in life actually self taught himself to arrange music, from existing compositions, yet he denys that any differece exists in the 'sound' of cables--to clarify, he denies that anyone can hear a difference in an ABX comparison. Recently I mentioned that I was considering buying a new Lexicon, when a friend told me about the Exemplar, a tube modified Dennon CD player of the highest repute, video wise, which is arguably one of the finest sounding players around. When I told him of this, here was his response: "Happily I have never heard a CD player with "grainy sound" and, you know me, I would never buy anything that I felt might be potentially degraded by or at least made unnecessarily complex and unreliable by adding tubes."
Here is the rub, when cd players frist came out, I owned a store, and was a vinyl devotee, as that's all there was, and he saw digital as the panacea for great change; "It is perfect, it's simply a perfect transfer, ones and zero's there is no margin for error," or words to that effect. When I heard the first digital, I was appalled by its sterility and what "I" call 'grainy' sound. Think of the difference in cd now versus circa 1984. He, as you can read above resists the notion that this is a possibility. We are at constant loggerheads as to what is real and imagined, regarding audio, with him on the 'if it hasn't been measured, there's no difference', side of the equation. Of course I exaggerate, but just the other day he said, and this is virtually a quote, "Amplifiers above about a thousand dollars don't have ANY qualitative sound differences." Of course at the time I had Halcro sitting in my living room and was properly offended and indignant. Sibling rivalry? That is the obvious here, but this really 'rubs my rhubarb', as Jack Nicholson said in Batman. Unless I am delusional, there are gargantual differences, good and bad, in audio gear. Yet he steadfastly sticks to his 'touch it, taste it, feel it' dogma. Am I losing it or is he just hard headed, (more than me)? What, other than, "I only buy it for myself," is the answer to people like this? (OR maybe US, me and you other audio sickies out there who spend thousands on minute differences? Let's hear both sides, and let the mud slinging begin!
It's funny, this thread conjured up memories of my old store in Louisville. The way I would evaluate anything was first, unkown, as to which was which, then, do an A/B/A. I would make notes sometimes, but usually, and this is a curse rather than a blessing usually, I would immediately hear the differences, for good or bad. Now, to be clear, I NEVER cared which was better, I only wanted to know. This was an instructive time in my audio development, in that it taught me patience, and let me be self assured. One of the posters on here who shall remain nameless, hates me because I hear in seconds, what it takes him hours to ferret out. And trust me on this ALL of his tests are blindfold tests, and he's really good. I only wish, God love him, that my brother and I could have a discussion about possibilities for a change, rather than onlt dwelling on that which is known. The only way we discover new things is to go out on that limb. When, (yes I am a commercial poster) I voiced my speakers, I used the Sound Labs as well as my inner reference of music as a musician for decades, as the control. I never questioned the outcome with caps etc, or wiring, regardless of where it led, I only accepted the findings, as sounding either better or not as good, regardless of what was SUPPOSED to be according to the hype or accepted wisdom. Most of you out there when listening to power cords no doubt have had the same experience. One is better than another, WHY? Maybe a better plug, and so on, but who cares ultimately. If it sounds better it IS better, for you. This is why speaker designers pull their hair out. They are all convinced that theirs are better, no doubt, but since this IS SUBJECTIVE, we'll always agree to disagree, I guess. Thanks, keep em coming, you guys are interesting.
It reminds me of the old days, when kids would come into the shop saying that they got an XYZ amplifier for $100, and it sounds as good as any other amp because it had only .00000001% distortion, and no other amp could possibly sound better than that.
It has also been proven that people imagine differences that are not really there at all. John Dunlavy used to do an experiment where he would gather audiophiles in his lab, position a technician behind a set of speakers, change speaker cables and the audiophiles would claim to hear large differences -- but the trick was -- the cables were never changed. Now, show me an audiophile who is open to the idea that there is a very real possibility that the differences he/she hears is due to his/her imagination and I'll show you an audiophile who is REALLY open minded. There is more than enough irony in listening to audiophiles who think they are immune to such imaginary effects calling others closed minded. Unless you can prove that you aren't imagining the differences you are claiming to hear or that the differences are audible to your brother, there is nothing here but a he said/she said type of debate. There is a very real possibility that some of these alleged differences are like the emporer's new clothes. Without proof of the existence of these alleged differences, there's no proof that there are any clothes to see. So, in absence of that proof, there's no justification for smugness on anyone's part. Anecdotal testimony with regard to these alleged differences wouldn't hold up in any scientific debate. So, what do you do when you're debating sounds that haven't even been proven to exist -- and no anecdotal testimony is not accepted as *PROOF*. So many of these alleged differences disappear under double-blind testing that, IMO, a little humility is in order. Show me the humble audiophile who is open to the possibility that he/she is affected by peer group pressure and his/her imagination and you win a trip to Bermuda! But, if YOU are satisfied that you hear these things, be happy. If others -- like your brother -- are cynical, you've got no magic bullet to end the debate. Further, just as people can imagine hearing differences because they think they are supposed to -- it stands to reason that people can fail to hear differences because they think they are not supposed to. Also stands to reason that one must think any differences, if they do in fact exist, are worth hearing in order to hear them. These are just some of the reasons these types of debates rage on. And, why the correct response, IMO, to either position is just a bemused, "oh you!" But -- that's just my opinion.
Heh, yer brother is messin with you, there are definatly differences in CDP's
Example, I have 2 sources hooked up, a Denon 2900 and a Pioneer CDR. I keep the CDR mainly for recording and do pretty much all of my listening with the Denon 2900.
He gets off work a couple hours before i do and usually has music playing when i get home.
Before i even open my door i can tell if he is listening to the radio, comcast digital music, the CDR, or the Denon 2900.
The problem with those tests is how many of those audiophools owned the players being tested?
I can tell which source is being played before i even walk into the room because i have had enough time with my system to be able to tell the sonic characteristics of each well enough to make a guess as to which it is with about 90-95% accuracy.
Put me in a room on a system i dont know, with several players of various price points and i wont be able to tell them apart for a while either. And even when i do start hearing and recognizing the sound to A B and C which would probably take days of extended listening, i would need even more days to be able to even ATTEMPT to guess the price tags of the players.
There are differences but they are subtle, and i dont believe anyone will be able to just walk into a strange system and be able to tell which player is which just from listening to them for a few minuits, it took me a few weeks to really pin down the sonic characteristics of the Denon 2900. The radio usually sounds compressed and crappy, the Digital Music is pretty clear but still compressed with a higher noise level, the CDR is pretty good but just lacks the detail of the Denon 2900
Sometimes it takes a little while to get to know the characteristics of a new piece of gear and how much you like it, but you can take a song and play it on my Denon 2900, Pioneer CDR, and 4-5 other players, i wont be able to tell what the other players or thier price points or anything, but then the Denon or Pioneer are playing on my system you bet yer ass that i will know it. Those 2 players on my system are plain as day to me.
I would be willing to say the same thing about any component i have in my system.
I dont know how it is for others, but when i get a new piece of gear and it sounds better, well, it sounds better right off the bat, it just takes me a while of listening to figure out exactly what it is that i was missing before.
that is the problem with the super-triple-threat double-dog-dare Uber-stupid bogus blind tests.
How the hell are you supposed to pin down the sonic characteristics of CDP's on gear you dont know?
as for your brother saying if it cant be measured it doesent exist, that means that we currently have the ability to measure and quantify everything in existance.
So that means that since we havent measured god that must he doesent exist, which basically means there is no afterlife, so he better have fun with the time given to him cause once it is over it is totally over.
better go ahead and tell all the scientists to go ahead and take a break cause we know everything.
Is this the only example of debate you have with your brother? Otherwise you get along? Insensitive as it sounds, I envy you. Whenever I try to engage my brothers in a conversation about any audio related topic they begin to complain of physical pain-its like I am giving birth ooooh(godfrey). I...can...hardly ...breath. Or, My favorite-distortion! thats what is..on the line...we are breaking up... i can hardly hear you! Whatever your relationshiop with your brother is, it is certain this debate you have had has helped you define your point of view. Otherwise,you might have asked why it is SOME people deny audio differences.
I certainly recognize that intelligence insures nothing as it relates to this topic, just to get that out of the way; from an art perspective, Andy Warhol, like him or not, was wildly successful, and had an estimated I.Q. of 85, which places him in the mildly slow category, as average uis between 90 and 110, average being established by the largest portion of scores i.e. the most will score 100 with others falling at the extremes. I only point out that someone who is a thinking person, will take an issue, and treat it with such a closed minded approach, disallowing even the remotest possibility that cables, and power cords for example, can make a difference. I am on the side of the ledger that states, 'just because I don't understand or can't rationally condlude why this IS the way it is, doesn't make it untrue, and doesn't mean it isn't happening. In Psych 101 the professor asked the old chestnut, "if a tree falls in a forrest and no one is there to hear it, is there any sound?" Someone in the front row said no, and he agreed. I raised MY hand and said, "well if there's no noise, there's also no tree, and no forrest." The professor immediately told me I was being disruptive, and I pointed out that I had simply taken his logic one step further, for illustrative purposes. The answer being, if it takes human interaction for reality to have occurred, (an event such as gathered sound waves) it also takes eyes to behold the tree, and or the forrest. The point here is, I don't need to understand why, to appreciate differences, whereas, emperically, he does. Someone said, 'there is a tendency for teachers to talk down to both adults and students, so I chose to get out of the field." I think that that is the real hook here, the smugness of the response. Thanks for responding.
Good advice from several people on this thread. Forget it! You will never change his mind, but mor than that, he's having too much fun yanking your chain. Arguing just encourages him.
I don't try to explain why a cd player might be worth $3000 to people who don't understand. If you don't hear a difference, you shouldn't buy it. The last thing I want to discuss with my friends who are not in to audio is the price of components in my system. They think I'm crazy, and maybe they're right.
How much of this chase is about ego? It's sometimes difficult to admit that things that cost less are better. We have so much time, money and ego invested in a product, that if something cheaper and better comes along, we resist it. I just sold my amp and preamp in favor of an integrated that is about 30% of the price. It absolutely sounds better to me! I didn't want to admit it at first, but I heard what I heard. Frankly, I miss the bragging rights, but the music sounds better with the integrated, and that's most important to me.
Your brother is at one extreme, and it's easy for us to be at the other. Things aren't always better because they cost more, but it's silly to think they all sound the same. Chip sets, power supplys, and transports are just a few of the things that can make one disc player sound different from another. Ego and price justification can cloud our objectivity, but if your brother really doesn't hear the differences, he should keep what he has. If you hear a difference, enjoy it! and don't let your brother rain on your parade.
I agree that intelligence,per se, may not be the issue. There are allegedly 16 types of intelligence, anyway.
If your brother can't hear the difference between sources or amps, he simply may not be very discerning at this time. That is why in college they make you take Art Appreciation. It is like any endeavor-he doesn't know what he doesn't know at this point. But if he is content-what can you say. Hey, 61 million people voted for Bush. The world has all kinds.
I just replaced my source with a different one. It sounds so much different (and better) it is not even funny. By the way (as you are probably wondering) I replaced a $1500 cd player with a $700 cd player. Price sometimes is not relevant.
Your brother is exaggerating a bit for effect, but his general point is correct. He's clearly done a good bit to educate himself about the field of audio reproduction. Perhaps you could learn from him.
And no, you are not delusional. But that doesn't mean that every difference you think you hear has a physical cause.
The connection made between inteligence and subjective opinions about audio equipment is troubling. You should consider that perhaps your brother is too smart to be swayed by hype. And vice versa.
Before I get blasted on this I'd like to clear the air with everyone knowing I have an education degree in industrial arts. Having attended teachers college and interacting with many educators through the years there is a tendency among the rank and file to talk down to adults as well as the children they teach. They are acustomed to shaping minds and yours is no exception. I have teachers that are my friends but in general I bristle at the attitude your brother displays. I'd suggest simply never talking about audio. You are not going to change his mindset and you hear what you hear. This is one reason I decided not to teach officially. And yes, there probably is some sibling rivalry going on here. Get this out of your head.
Well said and my thoughts exactly. As larsky and I have traded e-mails discussing the pros and cons of Thiel speakers. People hear what they hear and it really doesn't matter what their opinion is as long as you enjoy it. If we listen to music and are concerned what other people hear then we are listening for the wrong reasons.
I too was a skeptic of cables and power cords making any difference. But I kept an open mind and have since proven myself wrong. And now believe there is truly a difference albeit maybe not in all systems.
As for CD players of yesteryear compared to players available today. I have played around a little bit with different players and have never heard as much of a difference as I thought I should have. My old Philips CD-80, vintage 1990, still sounded damm good when I sold it, even compared to players of today.
Lrsky, just relax and enjoy the music and forget what your brother thinks. I believe most of us who frequent this site are on your side. As to why do intelligent people deny audio differences. I don't think in general they do. Maybe your brother does because he is either close minded or simply doesn't hear it or both. I consider my self fairly well educated with a BSME and MBA from a major Big 10 school. And as mentioned above do believe differences exist. I am also sure others do as well or this site wouldn't exist.
By the way I am looking forward to that speaker trial; you are not backing out are you.
Sounds to me like your brother is trying to get in your head and has done a pretty good job. There's nothing wrong with either of your approaches to audio -- to each his own. His works for him and yours works for you. You can't force someone to see through your eyes or hear through your ears and it shouldn't matter if someone else doesn't hear what you hear -- or else you'll end up on an audio site writing to yourself. More like Jack Nicholson in The Shining. The proper response to your brother, as well as his proper response to you is something along the lines of, "oh, you!" With a bemused shake of the head.
God, I am doing it again. I went to the site in question, and the Cd players listened to were, Krell, Theta, and others of that ilk. I am sure he has plenty of others as 'evidence', but this one caught me by surprise. This is in the upteenth generation of players, some 9 years after introduction.
To be the first to answer one's own post seems bizarre, but here is yet another slice of his logic from the same email. "While it is unquestionably true that many technical areas have improved, many tests have shown that reports of this early harshness was, for the most part, unfounded. I.e., many of those early CDs played today sound indistinguishable when played on first generation players and newer players in a double blind test. _All_ CD players do not sound exactly alike as some are too cheaply made and others were/are simply defective. However, at a certain price point and level matched, the differences disappear. See http://tinyurl.com/53e3s for just one of hundreds of examples."
Have I lost it, or do cd players, circa 1984 REALLY sound largely like cd players of today, all things being equal, otherwise?
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
