In essence, our 'case' seems to be that if we believe something, then it is true.But would any of us believe this type of statement when applied to other things....religion, fairies, ghosts, fortune telling?
Some of these things (ie, religious belief) have become culturaly accepted as a matter of 'faith.' But we are surely not claiming that whether amps sound different is a matter of faith?
As for specs not telling the whole job. Well agreed. Not least because the human mind, our consciousness, is barely understood. And thus the connection between technical spec and our experience is, at best, tenuous. Which is why a simple direct test is so tempting...it short cuts the issue. Despite the genuine methodological issues, this is 'do able'. As for who does it, as long as the tests are robust and properly recorded, it shouldn't matter.

My position is simple; this has been done many times before. Bob Carver maintained years ago that he could make his amp sound like any other amp you would like and performed a demonstration to the staff at Stereophile that convinced them. So the question should already be settled; right? The discriminatory power of short listening sessions does not appear to be very great; classical musicians have failed to discriminate between classic and modern violins even though they would all choose to use the classic ones if they could. Are they also subject to mass delusion as well? I am not trying to convince the "objectivist" crowd of anything; if they can't hear things that to me are clearly there that is their problem, not mine. Listening to music is a subjective experience; period, full stop, say no more, enough already!!! If Martin were willing to waste his time and take the test and get a 100% accurate score do you think Alan Shaw would then agree with him? I doubt it; his opinion is based on his personal experiences; just as Martin's or mine are. For me the bottom line is " If you don't really think differences exist then what are you doing in this hobby"? I hear consistent differences and have often demonstrated them to others without telling them what to listen for. I realized decades ago that not all hear the same way; when I was an active dealer I would try to get a picture of what a customer was looking for in sound reproduction and steer him toward components that would give him that kind of sound rather than telling him which was the "best". At least at this stage of its development audio is at least as much an art as a science; there is an article in the current Absolute Sound discussing why anyone would listen to SET amps given their objective measurements. Their point was that despite 3% distortion and other defects they can produce a sound that is very lifelike in many respects. Why is this true? At this stage we don't know and for the purposes of listening we do not need to. Enough blather already! Go listen and see if YOU think all amps sound the same. Hint, if you do you will save yourself a lot of money. But possibly cost yourself a lot of pleasure. There is my presentation; just like Fox News; fair and balanced! ROFL. I assume you back in the old country are familiar enough with Rupert M. to get the joke.

The reason is simple: the distortion measurements are taken at the limit of the amp's performance envelope, which occurs, ooohh, perhaps 0.001% of the time while listening. An analogy is in the area of cars: a lousy car is always lousy to drive irrespective of the speed you're going, a brilliant car feels as good at 120mph as at 30mph, and a well sorted out, conventional car will very pleasant to drive up to 100mph, then fairly dramatically loses that competence as you try to hit 120mph. Now, what are the normal range of speeds that you drive a car?

Frank

Edited by user 14 April 2012 03:47:00(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Which DAC was "more like the best vinyl replay", Martin?

Very much agree and very well thought out and written Stan

Done for publicity reasons, perhaps, as Martin suggests. No such thing as bad publicity!

Coincidentally, there seem to be quite a few other cloth-eared people writing on the Harbeth forum site ...

HiFi Stan is simply not facing the facts. The issue is not what he likes, or enjoys, neither is it the refusal of 'objectivists' to accept results (a dubious proposition as science has accepted many .many, results in a whole variety of subjects. Including, no doubt, any medicine ne takes.)
Neither is it the case that an acceptance that well-desinged amps sound virtually identical is any threat to our hobby. There are huge shortfalls in much equipment, speakers in particular. If (if) good amps sound indistinquishable, that is just one variable out of the way.Anyway, the truth of this matter is independent of whether we happen to like the results.
Sadly, the more I see on the forums, the sheer evasive sophistry, the more I come to suspect that no-one really believes that they can reliably pass such a test.

What are the facts I am not facing? The fact I am concerned with is that TO ME amps sound different. If I were seeking to establish on a scientific basis that I could quantify such differences then I would be concerned about such tests; but I am not. My test instruments are my ears, my goal my own listening pleasure. Since you are apparently set on denying the validity of my perceptions FOR ME the burden of proof lies on you; not me. I am not an audio engineer [not that there is anything wrong with them as Seinfeld would say] and do not attempt to unravel all the reasons for what I am hearing. I leave that to Martin and others with the training for the job. If you believe all amps sound the same that is fine with me; buy the cheapest one you can and spend the money elsewhere. I will agree that there is a morbid fascination with amplifiers that use to drive me bonkers as a dealer. There was a marked tendency to select the amp first which I constantly had to contend with. No matter how often I would urge the selection of the speaker, or at least speaker type, first they would still buy the amp and THEN look at what speakers would work with it. While I have absolutely NO formal training in audio I have spent 50 years f**ting around with hifi gear and have picked up a few things over the years. I suspect you would regard my experiences as some exotic form of "Dungeons and Dragons" in which a small group perform a game in their imagination based on arbitrary rules they have agreed upon. As I said I have had a chance to listen to a much wider range of gear than the average audiophile; not in a class with PM or MC or SC or other professionals but nevertheless numbering in the hundreds and covering a wide range both in variety and time. I use to think amps were quite similar and that speaker wire that cost me 40 cents a foot was an extravagance. I have learned better by experience that for me there is a difference. I have also learned that most of the audiophiles I know hear the same thing when it is presented to them WHETHER OR NOT IT CONFORMS TO THEIR PRIOR BELIEFS! My favorite current example is my friend JE, the retired mechanical engineer. A third friend had a Lamm tube line stage in his Wilson Sasha based system that I thought did not mate well with it. I suggested he try my MF kW instead. JE had heard both in our respective systems and was ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED that there would be no difference in sound. In the actual event he heard a large positive difference right away as did the system owner; who purchased the kW. Did I know in advance exactly how the kW would sound? No, but having heard both in separate systems I thought its sound characteristics would be a better match for the Sasha system. It turned out that both the others agreed with me. Is this "scientific proof" ? Of course not. It could be due to my [non existent] salesmanship skills or my power to cloud men's minds [anyone else here old enough to remember "The Shadow"]? Having now provided an "Apologia" for my existence as an audiophile let us move on to more fertile grounds.

I've heard two SETs in private homes in the Far East and the Kronzilla at the Munich show a few years ago, on each occasion the sound was disappointing and in the case of the Kronzilla horribly distorted.

Like many here I have no objection to measurements and certianly have no problem with ensuring equipments meets it saftey standards and is fit for purpose. Were I do have a problem is with what we are measuring and then how this is given applied to music as if it matters .

These are what I understand (and I have been known to make errors) are the current thinking with regard to hearing . Firstly all of us have an individual and unique physical hearing system . No two head shapes , ear shapes and inner ear shapes are identical . Secondly how the sound we hear is routed and then differentiated by the brain is again unique for each individual . So when you say this sounds different to me you are completely correct it does . it is also therefore equally true that no one and I do mean no one can tell you what you hear only you can tell other people what you hear.

Given the above then until it is possible to measure exactly what an individual hears at any one time be a single tone or complex tone then you have no idea if they are hearing accurately what is being generated. Another example of this is the very complex issue of stereo imaging . For some they can hear this very clearly and are sensitive to it . Thye can tell (for them) when something produces clear and defined stereo and when the whole illusion collapses. I know of at least three individuals from personal experience who appear not to be able to hear any stereo image at all. This can very strongly influence their choice of equipment for them other parameters become more important .

Given all of the above it is obvious how complex this all is but now we add the additional and most complex layer than makes this whole thing even less understandable than quantum mechanics. We are all mostly in this hobby to listen to music and music is the most wonderful and powerful artform . But it is governed by personal taste. I can listen to a full track of Bob Dylan because I find his voice grating yet to others he is a man of great genius. I cam bewitched and floored often when listening to Tom Waits yet others would scream to have me turn off that noise . Given all of the things that music can bring to anyone , emotion , pleasure , dancing whatever it is impossible for us to tell anyone else what they do or do not hear .

Given that music is only in your head and that it is reproduced through the individual filter that is your brain is there any wonder that blind listening never and I will repeat never works . If you are listening to something and the outcome has a significance or even more a consequence then it will change how you listen. If you listen to a piece of music and then switch it over time after time and hear it agian and again then that will also change what you hear because that is not the normal way that we hear. We often get the argument which is very probably accurate that if you padi a large amount of money for any piece of equipment and you compare it to a cheaper item many if they knwo the rpice difference will think the mre expensive item is better . It will not be based on the real sound it will be absed on the idea that more expensive is always better. Blind testing tries to take out the variables such as this but it does so in such an unnatural way that it in my view introduces its sets of problems.

I uas Harbeth speakers and I enjoy them I have met Alan Shaw and enjoyed talking to him and his views on equipment and music. I think his speakers are safe and that it is unlikely he will have to gvie any away but this will not prove that there is no difference in amplifiers and the sound they produce just that the test itself is flawed.

I would also add that I am neither clever enough or technically gifted enough to suggest any alternative to blind testing. I know that much in both sides of the Objective / Subjective argument is done with real passion and belief in what they think is correct. We are currently stuck with imperfect tests on both sides and frankly given the complexity of the issue I doubt in my life time we will see any improvements . I do not want to se equipment made without measurements , and I do not want the hear the line this measure flat at all test frequencies so it is to all a perfect item . Both of these are not the right way. But I think we all have to consider that we can and do hear things that change some are just changes others are improvements . When you hear it by all means report it let other know and let them discuss it but do not be surprised if others say it is not possible or that it is all in your head bcause all they are telling you is the truth , it is all in your head.

Edited by user 18 April 2012 11:31:26(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified