Integrated better than separates? I think so...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don’t think it really would matter. People are going to hear what they hear and like what they like. Plus having done a lot of measuring of other electronics, you can always get the results your trying to achieve. And once the marketing people thier spin on it...

But I'm not talking about measurements, there's already TOO much of that. I'm talking about proving Amp A sounds better than Amp B by showing how a group of sample listeners chose A over B a statically significant number of times in a (and here's the key) BLINDED listening test. ..It doesn't count if the group knows A is "supposed" to have tighter bass or better "PRAT" (I get sick a little in my mouth when I see that term). ..It's got to be a blinded comparison.. ..Just like what happens w/ demonstrating drug safety and efficacy.
 
In audio, we pretend such testing would be impossible to conduct. ..nonsense.
I think you'll find a number of manufacturers do blind testing on their own. Pass does. Magnepan does. Van Alstine does. Harman does. Many do. It's how they determine whether a change is truly better. The end result is whether or not customers choose their products over their competitors.

The challenge, however, is that blind testing in medicinal trials bears no resemblance to audio DBTs for a number of reasons:

1. In medicine the training, experience and test-taking abilities of the subjects do NOT affect the results of the test.

In audio they all DO. So it is as much of a test of the listeners than differences between the components alone. Harman, for example, trains their speaker evaluators who use the "shuffler". In a world of imperfection, preference continues to play a big part. Are your preferences the same as trained listeners who consistently observe differences?

2. In medicine, the participants don't compare anything. There are administered either the the control or a placebo.

In audio, however, one must make a forced choice between two different DUT.

3. In medicine the tests have been scientifically validated for this use.

In blind audio component comparisons, there has been NO validation. The sensitivity of the tests for different sonic parameters has not been determined. That's because the sensitivity changes with each subject (see #1).

I was fortunate to have two mentors from an early age who exposed me to a wide range of gear and taught me about music appreciation. And yet, my gear preferences are different from either one. Each of us hears the same thing - its how we prioritize those results that differs and part of that has to do with the music we like most.
 
Last edited:
I'm talking about proving Amp A sounds better than Amp B by showing how a group of sample listeners chose A over B a statically

I don’t feel it can be done, what you find terrible I may like. Look at Klispch speakers. Would be great in a prefect world but After trying to teach “listening” I am a skeptic. That statistic wouldn’t really mean anything IMHO.

:beerchug:
 
:

1. In medicine the training, experience and test-taking abilities of the subjects do NOT affect the results of the test.

Sorry but i think that's a cop out. It would be easy for a manufacturer to gather musicians - let's say 20 string musicians from a top US orchestra - and play recorded violin music (perhaps even there own recorded) and ask them, "which of these two amps (or speakers, or cables, or DACs, etc..) sounds more like real music?" You may quibble about whether violin music is the best choice, or whether the playback speakers are "revealing enough" etc. etc.. but you can't tell me that audiophiles would not interested in reading the results of that test. Of course they would. Good Luck getting a gear company to do this however. So, instead of these tests you get gear reviewers who wax poetic without ANY validity controls whatsoever.
 
but you can't tell me that audiophiles would not interested in reading the results of that test.
In passing perhaps. It would have no bearing on my evaluation of gear.

Ironically, some of the least discriminating evaluators of audio gear are professional musicians. One of my mentors is a member of a major symphony chorus and has introduced me to a number of those folks. You might be surprised at the level of gear many of them actually use. :)
 
Hmmm. You previously complained about my presenting "a lot of techy sounding jargon" and yet that is what you want to find? Ok. Click here for a great document to digest about nonlinear distortion, it's causes and effects. Note that most op amps have from 60 to 100 db of open loop gain which must be reduced using 40-60 db of corrective feedback.

Maybe one day you'll chill out and learn to listen. All you need do is audition the products their decades of experience have culminated in. Then perhaps you'll understand.

Reading white papers only predisposes someone to possibly imagining differences that aren't there. ..I don't want to do that. ..Just let me hear both amps side by side without knowing which is being played and I'll decide if I can hear the huge improvement in whatever (insert audio term here).

To go back to the Pharma analogy. Doctors (good ones, anyway) don't care about a purported mechanism of action that makes one COPD inhaler better than another. They regard such discussions as being tainted by marketing buzzwords and language. They care mostly about outcome data that demonstrates one inhaler improved lung functioning more than the other while not increasing adverse events. In the audio world, our attention should be on whether people can REALLY hear the improvement not on the technical reasons that may or may not lead to the improvement.
 
But I'm not talking about measurements, there's already TOO much of that. I'm talking about proving Amp A sounds better than Amp B by showing how a group of sample listeners chose A over B a statically significant number of times in a (and here's the key) BLINDED listening test. ..It doesn't count if the group knows A is "supposed" to have tighter bass or better "PRAT" (I get sick a little in my mouth when I see that term). ..It's got to be a blinded comparison.. ..Just like what happens w/ demonstrating drug safety and efficacy.
I get what you are saying, that we should be able to abx everything in life to find the best solution to any given problem.. Drug companies do it for the most part, but not always are successful. Some pill or therapy that is meant to fix cancer might be pretty convincing, but what if the drug is meant to make your depression go away? Starts to get subjective really fast, and try abx'ing that with any degree of accuracy.

OK, on abx testing involving the 5 seances. Not all of these are cut and dried for a number of reasons, but some are better than others. Taste, I couldn't do what wine tasters do. Same with smell, but I do pretty well at the optometrist with the "better/worse/about the same" questions, but really how accurate am I with that? Sometimes, when I can read that bottom line with a couple different lens settings it becomes less certain which is actually "the best".

With hearing, I think it matters a great deal in how well a person listens. My wife could no more tell a 64k mp3 from a 24/192 hi rez file. She doesn't care either. She obviously would not be successful at telling the small minutia of which amp sounds best, integrated or separates. However some can I believe tell a great deal what sounds better. I probably fall short on this, but I do have some sense of it. Some will no doubt have better ears than others, better listening skills, maybe that can go beyond the mathematics.

OK, they should be able to prove it by ABX, but does the brain immediately interpret the minute differences or do they require time that someone else flipping switches likely wont have to devote to the test?. I have noticed with DAC's in particular that it takes time, as in maybe a few weeks to full realize the difference I am hearing. I start thinking it is just my imagination, and then I will plug back in my old DAC and listen for a while. I find it easier at that point to notice its limitations. Unfortunately I don't have a good way to do actual ABX testing on it, nor do I have any inclination to do so. This hobby is actually for enjoyment, and if ABX'ing audio is what gives enjoyment then I have no judgement, but for me it is music first, and I want to be happy with its delivery system is all.
 
Just let me hear both amps side by side without knowing which is being played and I'll decide

Agree 100%! But you’ll like what you like and I will like what I like. Human physiology really needs to be taken into account, ear, sinuses, bone density etc. at least that’s what I was taught when taking over the Arual Recongniton Class. The Navy has done decades of research on this. No different than different rooms according most that I read. I actually just tried finding some of the studies I had to research back then but couldn’t find them on the inter webs.
 
Last edited:
Reading white papers only predisposes someone to possibly imagining differences that aren't there. ..I don't want to do that. .
You asked for "proof" and I supplied it.

.Just let me hear both amps side by side without knowing which is being played and I'll decide if I can hear the huge improvement in whatever (insert audio term here).
Go for it. Have you heard any of the McIntosh power amplifiers? Pass Labs? VTL? Parasound? Ayre? Audio Research? I did enjoy hearing a pair of 2301s at one friend's home driving Magnepan 3.7s.

In the audio world, our attention should be on whether people can REALLY hear the improvement not on the technical reasons that may or may not lead to the improvement.
You're welcome to do whatever you please. You and Dave, however, seem more interested in non-experiential speculation that relating actual listening.
 
Agree 100%! But you’ll like what you like and I will like what I like. Human physiology really needs to be taken into account, ear, sinuses, bone density etc. at least that’s what I was taught when taking over the Arual Recongniton. The Navy has done decades of research on this. No different than different rooms according most that I read. I actually just tried finding some of the studies I had to research back then but couldn’t find them on the inter webs.

Yes, but what if I (or you!) do the test 20 times and pick one amp 11 times and the other amp 9 times? ..Basically, we would have to conclude that I DON'T actually hear a difference b/w the two. ..That would be a significant eye-widening experience for the ardent audiophile who has churned through half-a-dozen amps over the years thinking he/she was moving steadily toward a better, more accurate (ie., like music) amp.

Bottomline: There is SO MUCH opportunity for expectation bias in this hobby AND absolutely NOTHING is done to prevent it.
 
You and Dave, however, seem more interested in non-experiential speculation that relating actual listening.
Not at all. I can't speak for ODS123, but I do lots of listening.

The problem is that recounting experiences of uncontrolled listening is meaningless. If you tell me you like the sound of A more than B, that's worth exactly what I've paid for it. On the other hand, if 45 out of 50 listeners in a controlled, double-blind study prefer A more than B, now I've got useful data.

Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean I will prefer A more than B -- I might like B more than A, and I'll do my own blind testing to be sure my preference is based on my ears alone, and not other senses or cognition -- but at least I've got some indication of probable preference, whereas with uncontrolled anecdotal reports I've got nothing.
 
Last edited:
Yes, but what if I (or you!) do the test 20 times and pick one amp 11 times and the other amp 9 times? ..Basically, we would have to conclude that I DON'T actually hear a difference b/w the two. ..That would be a significant eye-widening experience for the ardent audiophile who has churned through half-a-dozen amps over the years thinking he/she was moving steadily toward a better, more accurate (ie., like music) amp.

Bottomline: There is SO MUCH opportunity for expectation bias in this hobby AND absolutely NOTHING is done to prevent it.

I tend to "A/B" what I have and I just picked up and go from there. I have a lot of professional musician friends(and agree with EStat, its crazy :confused:) and a few recording eng friends. I have them listen also but in the end really don't use there opinions for a final decision because what they like doesn't matter for something I will be listening to everyday. I really see no way to fix your bottomline statement. But I sure would be a lab test rat!
 
To better understand my skepticism I'll share a true and embarrassing story that dates back many many years. ..Back to my days as a starting audiophile.

I bought a Monster powerstrip to protect my Bryston amp from power surges. I pulled the plug of the Bryston amp from the wall, plugged it into the Monster strip and listened. Though I had been highly skeptical about the benefits of power conditioning I was amazed by what I heard. ..My amp sounded better in ways I couldn't quite articulate. The sound was smoother, cleaner and just more "right". ..Just to make sure I wasn't just imagining things, I switched back and fourth a couple times. Yep, there was no mistaking it. I decided to go back one last time. I unplugged the amp. ..And before plugging it back into the wall I decided to switch on the TV to see how my man Federer was doing during the Wimbledon finals. I hit the TV power button and..... nothing. Huh?? ..I tried again.... nothing.

Turns out, during the whole exercise..I wasn't switching the Bryston's power cord back and forth b/w the wall outlet and the Monster strip, I was switching the TV's.

Case in point: Expectation Bias is very powerful! .It explains why Asthma patients participating in a clinical trial experienced a 30% reduction in symptoms when given an inhaler w/ placebo medication.
 
There is SO MUCH opportunity for expectation bias in this hobby AND absolutely NOTHING is done to prevent it.
Expectation bias is part of the human experience. And it works both ways. Years ago, I spent a weekend with one of my audio reviewer friends and we compared two different amplifiers of equal value that I had never heard of before. Which do you think you'd prefer?

1. Edge Signature One amplifiers. Note the engraving on several panels, the countersunk bolts and mass of the aluminum structure. Dual speaker terminals with large handles. They also have a red glow to the front panel:

edge.jpg


edgerear.jpg


2. VTL Wotans. Aluminum front panel, but main structure is rolled steel using sheet metal screws.

wotan.jpg


wotan_rear.jpg


I made a purchase decision following that weekend. :)
 
Not at all. I can't speak for ODS123, but I do lots of listening.
In the context of this post, which pre and power amps do you find best sounding?

but at least I've got some indication of probable preference, whereas with uncontrolled anecdotal reports I've got nothing.
It's a shame that many folks don't understand the intent of audio reviews. Having known three professionals over a span of forty years, I can tell you it is not what you think.

It is simply to narrow the field of choices for you to evaluate on your own - understanding the previously stated listening biases and choice of gear by that individual.
 
In the context of this post, which pre and power amps do you find best sounding?
I prefer a Yorx all-in-one. I find the pressboard bottom and lightweight plastic turntable platter add a smoothness to the midrange that is simply dreamy.
It's a shame that many folks don't understand the intent of audio reviews. Having known three professionals over a span of forty years, I can tell you it is not what you think.

It is simply to narrow the field of choices for you to evaluate on your own - understanding the previously stated listening biases and choice of gear by that individual.
I'm not interested in individual reviews, but I would pay for an audio magazine that conducts double-blind comparisons on gear with statistically-significant sample sizes and reports the results.
 
FWIW Ref: separates verses integrated..
From all that I`ve read, and experienced in servicing all manner of audio gear is it`s never a good idea to build/use high level circuits/equipment in close proximity to low level circuits/equipment, as amongst other reasons the residual noise floor will usually be higher, with possible noise/EMI modulation imparted in to the low level circuits dynamically while the gear is in use with any audio signals of power being produced..

Just a thought folks.

Carry on.
Kind regards all, OKB
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom