$75k preamp.... - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: IvoS
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 03:37:02 pm
content: http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/tenor3/1.htmlexotic, indeed.But still, I would rather buy a "S" class Mercedes instead.

author: M. András
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 03:43:03 pm
content: hmm i bet they didnt want to show the whole empty box's inside just the front with a cuople of transformators and a tube socketi wonder what the hell cost 75k about thisbut as i see this is an industry where you can make millions by giving nothing

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 03:48:57 pm
content: Whereelse in the world is this possible butAUDIOPHOOLERY

author: FenderBender
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 03:52:46 pm
content: Don't you think for $75,000, they wouldatleastshow you the internals?No no...too much to ask, I understand.

author: IvoS
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 03:55:40 pm
content: Even better it the company philosophy of their implementation design.http://www.tenoraudio.com/thecompany_thedesign.html

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 04:02:36 pm
content: I think those multipole sockets are a part of the price tag. they are pretty expensive items.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 04:24:00 pm
content: Lovely chassis (no sarcasm), but for that price I'd expect the wood to be polished by Canadian virgins.

author: M. András
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 04:40:03 pm
content: Quote from: AntiProtonBoy on August 18, 2012, 04:24:00 pmno-no it should be come with 10 redhead blue/green eyed pretty virgins

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 06:10:41 pm
content: I can supply the 10 certified virgins, but you better have 60 cows as the bride price. I charge a commission of $2000 and 2 cows as broker. Not blue eyed, not red hair, but guaranteed virgins.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 06:16:38 pm
content: they must be using 40GSps ADCs and DACs and high end ASICs/FPGA/DSP inside. 20 years of research, me is certainly not the target costumer.Quote from: M. András on August 18, 2012, 04:40:03 pmi dont care how many virgins polishing even if angels from heavens. with 75K i can get 7 chicks at my disposal. virgins are pain in the scrotum.

author: djsb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 07:00:15 pm
content: It has a MCU inside. Not very purist signal wise. If I was going to buy a new preamp it wouldn't have a noisy microcontroller within a million miles of it. Looks all sizle and no steak to me.David.

author: Sionyn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 08:27:51 pm
content: blimey check his wool usb cablehttp://www.elijahaudio.com/

author: M. András
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 08:55:03 pm
content: dear god..... but only the fools can be parted from their money

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 09:37:22 pm
content: I think in any line of business there will be fools willing to pay over the odds. The art of it is creating a sideline especially for them and then letting them know about it in a way they are convinced it is worth it.

author: Nirios
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 10:10:25 pm
content: Quote from: Sionyn on August 18, 2012, 08:27:51 pmThat looks like copper wire stuffed into shoe laces with the ends cut off. I'm in the wrong industry.

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 10:41:41 pm
content: Quote from: djsb on August 18, 2012, 07:00:15 pmHuh? Bring your talk elsewhere.

author: bilko
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2012, 11:47:05 pm
content: Are the cables temperature compensated or will the audio be susceptible to noise from random electrons and thermal energy ?

author: DrGeoff
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 12:02:44 am
content: If only they realised what the signal went through in the recording, mixing and mastering chain ...

author: RCMR
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 01:33:15 am
content: Quote from: IvoS on August 18, 2012, 03:55:40 pmHmmm... and I bet he drives a car that runs on nothing more than water and baking-soda!

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 02:04:19 am
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on August 18, 2012, 06:16:38 pmAnd where would you find a virgin in Canadia anyway?

author: chickenHeadKnob
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 02:34:45 am
content: Quote from: Ed.Kloonk on August 19, 2012, 02:04:19 amWell I would start my search at star trek conventions, however I don't think those are the virgins anti-proton is looking forThose guys are good at polishing knobs though.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 04:06:11 am
content: hahahahaNo these aren't the droids we're looking for. Move along.

author: djsb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 10:43:45 am
content: Quote from: T4P on August 18, 2012, 10:41:41 pmHas my post offended you in some way? Are you a moderator who has the power to dictate who posts on this forum? If you are not you can not tell me where I can or can not post.If you read the description of the preamplifier in question you will notice that it has a USB port and that its various switching actions are controlled by pressing control knobs. Clearly done by using a microcontroller. Most Hi-Fi pre-amps are very wide bandwidth (upto 100Khz) and they are cabable of picking up switching transients. My comments refered to the ideal of keeping all audio signal paths as simple and direct as possible. This precludes the use of a micrcontroller where a simple switch would do. I'm just expressing my preference for simplicity wherever possible. Now do you understand?

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 11:02:19 am
content: Quote from: djsb on August 19, 2012, 10:43:45 amDon't mind T4P. He thinks he is special and may well become part of a special minority soon if he does not get his act together. He's on his 3rd username that I'm aware of as if he thinks that fools people into thinking they are randomly getting abuse from different people (we have now disabled the ability to change usernames in his honor)...... I'm still trying to work out if he thinks he is a potential rival for Dave or the late Kiriakos...... he will be joining the later's category if he is not careful !

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 11:17:32 am
content: What the hell.I'm just trying to find a username that suits my blog, not "raining abuses" making people think i'm 3 people at once,I'm not that stupid!

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 11:26:46 am
content: Quote from: T4P on August 19, 2012, 11:17:32 amAh so it's Dave your trying to emulate but have not yet spotted the difference between having a strong opinion and being abusive for the sake of it !

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 12:05:42 pm
content: Simon, you mean I cannot change my user name to "That darn Git!" now?Just change T4P to SingSingSingapore.Dave, you are young, and someday will learn to chill out a little. ( T4p aka Davexrp.....)

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 12:12:54 pm
content: Quote from: SeanB on August 19, 2012, 12:05:42 pmNo I'm afraid not. But I'm sure that if you ask Dave nicely he may revert the setting for an agreed time frame to allow you to change it or anyone with a genuine need.T4P started as DaveS, I don't think anyone enjoys his abuse when he decides he is so much more in the right and others must be totally irrevocably wrong giving him the right to be personally abusive. Strong opinion is one thing. Out and out abuse for self gratification will not be tolerated. You may be right, you may have an opinion but others are entitled to be wrong providing they are not doing harm in which case we have no power but to reason and advise.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 12:42:48 pm
content: He can abuse me all he wants, not as if I am near him, and he will find it hard to find me in country. Worst is I will have some fun.............

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 01:16:08 pm
content: For $75k I would expect the front being a perfect hardwood, not something cheap with multiple failures in the grain. So I have to assume that the preamp is a cheap one :-)

author: M. András
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 01:23:13 pm
content: Quote from: madires on August 19, 2012, 01:16:08 pmits propably cost 500usd to make and most of the wood case and those multipole connectors the rest is pure fool ripoff

author: poorchava
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 07:02:23 pm
content: I think that's the same tier as 'directional (?), 5ppm copper (??) and dielectric (rly, wtf?!) speaker cables for $5k.Or that:http://www.lessloss.com/blackbody-p-200.html?zenid=hg7g7frqv6ns0r638e2og8igs7Or maybe they only assemble these ams on 29th of February, when it happens to be a Saturday and in prescence of three legged goat painted pink or when [insert any similar or dissimilar nonsense here].

author: StubbornGreek
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 07:25:16 pm
content: Simply disgusting.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 07:30:38 pm
content: Quote from: StubbornGreek on August 19, 2012, 07:25:16 pmwhat the price, the product or other bits of the discussion ?

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 11:39:17 pm
content: For an additional $5k, we'll make it go to 11!

author: Ferroto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 19, 2012, 11:46:39 pm
content: I'm just gonna leave this herehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2166788/What-does-109-000-taste-like-Extremely-rare-Australian-Cabernet-Sauvignon-worlds-expensive-bottle-wine.html

author: StubbornGreek
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 05:22:20 am
content: Quote from: Simon on August 19, 2012, 07:30:38 pmThe product (EDIT: Price of). I'm actually an audio enthusiast but the amount of garbage toted as 'audiophile' makes me sick. These companies take advantage of people's ignorance (God forbid we actually educate the consumer and really compete for sales based on performance).

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 05:46:24 am
content: Quote from: Ferroto on August 19, 2012, 11:46:39 pmHmm...QuoteSo you are paying over £108K just for the fancy pancy bottle?i.e. it's the same plonk inside from the same vine, from the same maker who operates the machine with stubbies and thongs, and his bum crack showing at the right angle.Dave.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 06:01:11 am
content: Don't get me started on wine, because if you think the french make it out of their own grapes your wrong ! Another industry scam

author: JuKu
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 07:15:59 am
content: You guys just don't get it. Buying that wine or the preamp has nothing or very little to do with performance. Sure, it has to perform, but that is not the point. Compare to perfume: Sure it has to smell nice, it must not go bad in the bottle even after several years (very difficult), the bottle must be closed by a lady force at 20C and still it can't release vapors at 50C (handbag on car seat, the handbag can't start smelling) (devilishly difficult) and so on. But when a lady buys perfume, does she buy long "best before" date or the technical details of the cap sealant?High end audio is a luxury business and luxury is not about performance, not really. If you can't see how the special bottle, the opening ceremony performed by a guy that flew from the side of the world for just the occasion and the fact that you have to drink it all with special friends that get an experience of a lifetime and know you can spend £100k+ on a single bottle of wine is worth of every penny, you don't get high end audio business either.I was once treated with a "slight snack" after the concert: Two biscuits, two spoonfuls of caviar and a class of wine, about $1k per person. Would I do something like that, even if I could afford it? Hell, no! Was it really that good? Yes, it was. Was our host happy about the evening? You bet!

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 07:38:52 am
content: It's more about self-gratuition and "showing off"The same way some people buy ferrari's not for the flair, style or performance!Just for the sake of showing off"HEY MATE! LOOK I GOT ME A 75k preamp... YOU MUST COME TO MY HOUSE AND HEAR IT, IT'S DAMN NICE I TELL YA"

author: Sionyn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 09:30:12 am
content: oops wrong thread

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 11:36:07 am
content: Quote from: T4P on August 20, 2012, 07:38:52 amYes I think that is the case. People love to spend money to show off if they can. My friend works for a company that restore prewar aston martins. Rich people actually rally rhese cars worth £2M and then come in after each season to have them fixed again for £250'000 - 500'000, They have the money to do it so they do.

author: andyturk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 11:53:53 am
content: How about $22K USD for speaker cables?http://app.audiogon.com/listings/speaker-nordost-odin-4m-speaker-cables-banana-plugs-2012-08-19-cables-10010Second hand! OMFGMaybe Dave could hook them up to a 13GHz scope and measure the speed of light with 'em.

author: M. András
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 11:58:46 am
content: dear god and there are people who actually buys all of this bullshit. i would take them into a studio put in a speaker which is recessed into something. and the cables end the amplifier would be some low distortion solid state one. then hook up to a fool device and make a bunch of idiots chose which 1 sounds better. then show them their choices and the cablesthick mains cable ftw

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 05:34:42 pm
content: Quote from: M. András on August 20, 2012, 11:58:46 amVisual perspection kills all senses

author: RCMR
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 09:45:47 pm
content: Never underestimate the power of a placebo!Many a hypochondriac has been completely cured by them.

author: IvoS
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 10:57:26 pm
content: That's what happens when you set up blind listening test, no one shows up.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 20, 2012, 11:16:28 pm
content: Why all the hating? These people are making money off their labor just like the folks at Aston, Ferrari or Lamborghini. Taste is subjective. Belittling another man's taste doesn't make the other man any lesser.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 12:21:58 am
content: Quote from: poptones on August 20, 2012, 11:16:28 pmThat analogy is only valid when we get to examine the amp's guts to make that assessment. For all we know it could be just a stock Holden engine in Ferrari chassis.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 12:25:34 am
content: No, you're not getting it at all. It's not about performance. It's not about measuremenmt. It's about perceived value. You cannot decide my perceptions, nor can I yours. And as it should be.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 12:57:38 am
content: Quote from: poptones on August 21, 2012, 12:25:34 amThere is a term for that: Delusion.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 01:02:48 am
content: That's idiocy. Why are there mroe than one car maker? More than one company making furniture? If it was all about "delusion" then Dave would have no reason to do any of this stuff, he'd just be feeding people's "delusions."

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 01:31:11 am
content: Objective analysis and measurement exists for the sole purpose of overcoming the limitations of subjective perception you described. The second you throw out all objectivity in favour of perceived value, you are in danger of deluding yourself, particularly if there is a large disparity between the product's quantifiable performance vs. your perceived performance. Now, if products from various manufacturers are shown to perform similarly, then it's perfectly reasonable to make a selection based on personal taste. There is a limit to that. The point is, you can not trust your senses (nor anyone else's), you can not trust the manufacturer, your only reliable option is to measure.

author: Short Circuit
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 01:45:23 am
content: Quote from: AntiProtonBoy on August 21, 2012, 12:57:38 amNonsense. Of course this amp is outrageous expensive. But I'm sure it's quite justifyable; lot's of work perfecting the thing (80/20 rule!). And an exclusive product, so only very low production quantities, which means there is significant amount of R&D cost in each sale. Rest assured that the thing is build from top notch parts, which can add up quickly, especially with custom manufactured parts. So in this case, percieved value is largely about exclusivity and no-compromise design and build quality.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 01:56:30 am
content: Delusion: A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary.If you believe the point of a piece of gear like this is how low the distortion is while passing a 10khz sine wave, or how low the noise floor, or how wide the bandwidth, then you simply are overlooking what is right before your face. See definition above.

author: Short Circuit
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 02:09:37 am
content: Btw here's a interview/factory visit of Tenor, the makers of this preamp. Story is more about their $90k monoblocks. Did not really read it, but it includes some nice photos of their lab/factory and amplifier gut:http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatures/tenoraudio/tenoraudio.htmlAlso, that 6moons preamp review supposedly gets a interesting follow up "Coming up next will be the circuit design, sound and a technical interview with Michel."

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 02:23:16 am
content: There is nothing wrong with products sold for purely on their aesthetic/novelty/artistic value,as long as there is admission of that fact. Delusion enters the picture when one makes outlandish assertions about a product when in reality its advantages are superficial, or worse, a placebo. It is this delusion that perpetuates dishonest claims and questionable practices by the manufacturing industry. (The last two points don't deserve defending, IMO).

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 02:28:23 am
content: Instead of conjuring strawmen, why don't you point out some of these dishonest practices? I certainly have not seen any amongst these products.Methinks your prejudices are clouding your objectivity.... hmmm.

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 02:33:52 am
content: Quote from: poptones on August 21, 2012, 02:28:23 amBullshitting about the performance and lots of "wank" words about as such "Cryogenically frozen to give you the best sound quality!"

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 02:38:57 am
content: Hmmm, can you show us where those words were used in reference to these products?Strawmen don't win arguments.

author: Short Circuit
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 03:00:58 am
content: Quote from: T4P on August 21, 2012, 02:33:52 amhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 03:45:22 am
content: Personally, I wasn't talking specifically about this Tenor product, I was talking about the mindset of the fanatic consumer.But if you insist, we can have look at the Tenor product. At first glance, you will immediately note that there is not much to look at, as far as information concerned, because there is practically nothing listed about the ampon the official website. A bunch of basic specs and that's all you have to go on for assessing the product. I mean, stuff like "Sonic Attributes: Perfect timbre, reference level transparency and resolution" doesn't tell me a lot. The testimonial quotes that occupy a third of the page is also completely worthless. Where are the Bode plots? Loading and THD test results? For that much cash, I'd definitely expect to see more.Since we can't rely on manufacturer specs, we have no choice but fall back toamp reviews, like the one linked by the OP.The first couple of sentences in the article opens with:"Expectations. Biased? Aren't we all. Anyone who believes in his own absolute objectivity is either lying or delusional."Wow, a brilliant start. There is so many things wrong with this opening, I don't know where to start. From the very onset, the author admits that he is going to perform a biased review, and then proceeds to shoot down the value objective analysis, right to the point of calling objectivity a delusion. The latter is not only an oxymoron, but it's also ironic. It's ironic, because this is precisely what a delusional person would say (or someone who is completely dishonest). In fact, the entire first paragraph is dedicated to validate the practice of bias.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 03:57:07 am
content: Ah. so a Ferrari is measured by its zero to sixty time? How quickly it brakes? Where does that leave Morgan?You're really not getting it. And getting down on a company for NOT doing the stuff you're complaining about and THEN finding someone else who HAS done the stuff you're talking about in a third party referenceaboutthat company and then trying to holdthe companyresponsible for what is written about them is completely and utterly intellectually dishonest. There are immeasurable problems with the audiophile press - as a former contributor to one of these mags I can tell you about some of them firsthand - but the companies can no more control what others write about them than can you or I.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 04:37:52 am
content: I thought that was a perfect demonstration of the dynamics between the fanatic consumer, the biased reviewer, and the opportunistic manufacturer.BTW, for the record, I have not drawn any hard conclusions about the Tenor amp. It's quite conceivable that the amp is pretty damn good, butI don't know thatunless I see convincing evidence. There is practically no reliable information that conveys the merits of this amp. So you'll have to forgive my scepticism.The manufacturer had an ample opportunity to provide verifiable specs on their site, but they chose not to do that. Instead, they opt audiophile mags to write biased reviews for them (no doubt through some kind of mutual arrangement), which then gives the manufacturer an opportunity to establish exposure and do stuff like cherry picking testimonial quotes to paste on their product page. Again, praise for the product may be warranted, but I can only take them with a grain of salt.I challenge Tenor to send a unit to Dave or Mike for a detailed tear-down review/analysis.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 05:21:58 am
content: You're asking for evidence of the musicality of an amplifier from the printed page? That's as ridiculous as asking someone to judge the merit of the Mona Lisa's smile. And tearing one down... yeesh. So should we dissect Leonardo's treasure so as best to glean its value? Strip away the reds and blues, bottle the pigments and subject them to countless lab tests - yes, that will tell us of its value. For surely he must have used only the most expensive pigments as no such a work could have been made with pigments of mere earth.Reviewing the work of a reviewer is called meta review. It's not welcome in most circles for the very reason you've seen here: because it tells of nothing of the original argument and only serves to digress and distract from the original point.If you love music, every opportunity to listen is a valuable moment. It's a unique performance every time you click play on that favorite piece of music. Did it sound better today than yesterday? Perhaps. How does it sound in my car? Well in my car it sounds terrible and I have no desire nor money to make it better, so I drive instead listening to the sound of the road and the desert in my ear - and I save my musical ear for a time when the performance is better suited to my tastes.If you love poring over bode plots and frequency response charts and reading about lab reports, then bully for you - but that is no more about musical enjoyment than words on a page. Can charts and graphs tell you what it's like to drive a lamborghini? To cruise along the PCH on your new Harley? I say that's the job of the poet, not the technician. Just don't let anyone lie to you.http://youtu.be/awWZkKnS1So

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 07:13:14 am
content: QuoteBy that definition, all those biased, anecdotal drivel on the printed pages of audiophile mags are especially meaningless. One can formulate all kinds of creative adjectives to describe sound, but none that means anything to me. How on earth can an amplifier have 'musicality' for starters? It's just a circuit. It's a device engineered to operate within certain parameters. The most reliable thing can anyone do is quantify the amp's characteristics through a reproducible method and compare the results with expected specifications. Anything else is placebo rubbish.QuoteComparing a circuit with a painting is a logical fallacy. It's an appliance, consisting of replaceable, assembled components. It has no more special significance in this world than a microwave oven.(And FYI, we have actually 'dissected' Leonardo's treasures andwe leaned a lot about it.)QuoteIf you want to make your listening experience a spiritual one, that's fine by me. If you want to tell the tale about your experiences, that's also fine by me. But please don't use that as a benchmark for differentiating products.Side note, there is so much emphasis on the perfect amp and on the perfect speakers, but interestingly I rarely see anyone giving some thought about the room they are situated in. Unless you live inside an anechoic chamber, putting those 'perfect' amps and speakers into a room with an acoustic characteristic of a typical garden shed will defeat the entire argument for perfection.QuoteIf you have the experience and knowledge, you can reliably extrapolate and assess what the vehicle is potentially capable of. Let's not lose sight of the fact that machines perform predictably the way they do,because someone actually sat down and did the math for it.

author: JuKu
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 07:49:16 am
content: Quote from: AntiProtonBoy on August 21, 2012, 07:13:14 amThey do to me, especially when I have heard some of the products reviewed. When I have an idea how John Atkinson describes a certain product, I have some vague idea how the reviewed piece of gear might sound like. Besides, reading reviews is an entertainment in itself. Might not be fun for you, but then, don't do it. I don't get anything out of vine reviews, but certainly, I'm not going around asking for chemical analysis of it and claiming that is just a piece of organic chemistry.QuoteYou sound like the parameters of how a piece of gear sounds like are known? A grandiose delusion right here. At best, we have a faint clue. I'm an engineer, I believe that the sound of electronics can be defined by a set of definable, measurable parameters. I also believe that we know maybe 20% of those.QuoteIs a medicine placebo if it cures? Similarly, a consumer does not use a product in a blind scientific environment, so everything that affects how the sound is perceived, whether it affects the movement of air molecules or not, is significant. Unless you really understand how the color of the chassis, the weight of the equipment, the price you paid for it and the package it came really do affect how music sounds trough it. Also, unless you understand how that doesn't really matter so much, you don't get luxury business. Of course, great performance has to be there, just like a perfume bottle cap has to be tight, but it is not the main point.When you claim hoax on something you don't understand, you only ridicule yourself.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 08:52:23 am
content: Quote from: AntiProtonBoy on August 21, 2012, 07:13:14 amWell, there you go. And bode plots and frequency response charts tell me nothing of how an amp sounds. In fact, it really tells nothing much to anyone. Frequency response 20hz to 100k, s/n 90db blah blah - once the specs reach a certain point they're meaningless - but they do not reveal the character of the sound. How does the amp handle transients? How does the phase response hold up?QuoteAnd there ya go - you're just not getting it. And that's ok... lots of people don't get jazz. I don't care for country. Ce la vie.QuoteYes, and a Maserati is just a car.QuoteI don't know about you, but I don't listen to music through my microwave oven. My microwave oven heats food (poorly) and that's about as far as our relationship goes. You're not likely to find Dave tearing down microwave ovens unless his just happens to blow up. There are no magazines I have seen devoted to Microwave ovens. Ergo, your statement here is fundamentally flawed. You may regard a piece of musical gear and a microwave oven the same - well, you're not alone. The sad truth is there are LOTS of engineers who fall into that camp. They also design a lot of really crappy gear.QuoteSorry, I have every right to take it however I want it. And you have every right to disregard it. But hating on someone who refuses to accept your narrow beliefs, I'm sorry, doesn't reflect poorly on the one you are hating. Seriously, think about it.QuoteYeah, then you ain't paying attention. See, this is another strawman you've concocted. I don't knowanyonewho cares about audio who is not well aware of the effects of the room and who takes steps to integrate their equipment into that space.And an acoustician will tell you an anechoic chamber is the very worse place to get good sound. Anechoic chambers are for measurements, not for listening.QuoteSo charts and graphs can give you an idea what it's like to putter along in the sun on the PCH on the Harley I just bought? What charts and graphs would you like to see? The air temp vs humidity vs distance travelled? The number of bikinis I counted? Help me here, because I really can't fathom your sense of perception.Look, I find the audio press a bunch of crap too - that's why I quit participating in that particular space. But you really are delusional if you think objective measurements can tell you everything about the character of a piece of gear.I can demonstrate:I'm into synthetic music. In fact, my current project is putting together some inexpensive synthesizer kits. So I'm familiar with a wide array of designs and how things are done. One common part of a synthesizer is called a VCF, or voltage controlled filter. Its basic function is to filter away the harmonics of a waveform and most use a 24db/octave response. This particular part is also one of the most fundamental to the character of the sound of a piece of gear. It's so important, in fact, that Bob Moog patented his design - it's what gives Moogs "that fat Moog sound" - and it's so important that Arp copied his transistor ladder design for the 2600 - and was subsequently sued and forced to redesign it.Now, you can design a VCF using transistor ladders, diode ladders, or transconductance amplifiers and they'll all perform roughly the same function. They'll also sound and, to some extent, behave differently. All of them. Measure them all week long, it won't tell youexactlyhow they sound or perform, especially when you begin cranking up the resonance. A 2600 doesn't sound like a MiniMoog doesn't sound like a 303 which doesn't sound like a xoxbox - which is essentially an exactcloneof the 303. This has nothing to do with subjective "feelings" about having an old piece of gear or about the spirit or the mojo of the gear - go to youtube yourself and look around, you'll see numerous videos of people demonstrating this gear and I dare say you'd have to be deaf to not hear the differences.And before you say it ain't the same let me remind you thatanyelectroacoustic network is fundamentally a complex series of filters.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 10:06:30 am
content: Geez, here we go.Quote from: JuKu on August 21, 2012, 07:49:16 amIf you compare data of two audio amps, which both have similar THD and SNR characteristics, both have a flat spectral response and can far exceed your hearing ability, then I'm sure as shit you are not going to be able to differentiate the two.QuoteAre you trolling? If not, your engineering cred is revoked, unless you experience a form of synesthesia.QuoteUnderstand from whose perspective? From the perspective of the con artists that push "luxury" products? Or from the deluded consumer's perspective, who is routinely sucked in? The mentality (or the motivation) of former I can understand, the latter I don't.Quote from: poptonesYou have a right to form opinions, you don't have the right to derive facts from your own beliefs or experiences.QuoteWho is hating? I'm not hating. I'm simply challenging your assertions. People claim all sorts of bullshit in this world and thus I face this world with a healthy scepticism. Objectivity is the polar opposite of blind belief, particular narrow ones, as you have claimed. I am open to new ideas and new suggestions. I'm willing to learn and will always learn, provided the concepts that are presented in front of me is independently verifiable.QuoteYeah, you really missed my point on that one. Never mind.QuoteNaturally, some gear, particularly generators will possess some measurable inherent quirks (i.e. flaws) that makes them sound unique and attractive. So what? I mean, I like the way my vinyl recordings sound, but I'm under no illusion to claim that they are technically better than my other formats. Same can be said with replica analogue synts, or software emulations.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 11:09:48 am
content: It certainly looks like a nice bit of kit but I don't think it's worth that much. Maybe a few hundred. (But then again, the Chinese seem to bereallygood at making impressive-looking equipment for surprisingly cheap.)

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 11:35:48 am
content: If you compare data of two audio amps, which both have similar THD and SNR characteristics, both have a flat spectral response and can far exceed your hearing ability, then I'm sure as shit you are not going to be able to differentiate the two.Seriously? Let me pick the amps and I can beat this every time. Define "flat." And you don't mention IMD or TIM. Since I'm picking the amps, I could even demonstrate this to you - ie it's not just me who could hear it.You have a right to form opinions, you don't have the right to derive facts from your own beliefs or experiences.Of course I do. So do you. Why do people say "you haven't the right" when they're talking about belief or thought?If you disagree with my facts, make up your own. You seem to have done well at it so far

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 12:11:09 pm
content: QuoteHow are you going present these comparison results for me? What methodology are you employing to extract this data? Will I be able to verify this myself through independent quantitative or empirical analysis? How will I know there was no selection bias with your chosen amps?Re. definition of flat: I meant flat Bode plot within the amp's official frequency response (all the way up to the -3 dB fall-off).QuoteNo you don't; and neither do I. Facts are decided through consensus and peer review via repeatable experiments. And in case you were implying I just dreamt this up: I didn't. This is how science functioned in the past 400 years.

author: JuKu
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 12:21:58 pm
content: Quote from: AntiProtonBoy on August 21, 2012, 10:06:30 amNot a troll, just a long time member of AES and IEEE, very familiar the fascinating results of non-blind tests. If you claim that color, price and weight of the equipment doesn't matter in non-blind tests, feel free to revolutionize 20+ years of solid scientific work. I'll wait.QuoteAnother :lol:. Like I said, super good THD and SNR, and flat to the limit of measurement, can and do sound very different. Often we just don't know where the difference is. Tthere are big number of audible characteristics in the signal that I'm sure would be measurable, if we just would know what to measure.Combine the real audible differences and the subjective strong bias, and high-end audio becomes fun. Sure, there are frauds, legitimate super-high quality stuff, stuff that we don't know what they are and the really fascinating stuff, so-called frauds that turn out to be real, after all - and everything in between.And the final note:QuoteC.E.Q. You don't get luxury business. That's fine. There are many things I don't get either. But please don't call honest, hard working business people con artists just because you don't see value in what they provide.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 12:48:12 pm
content: While studying electronics I worked (building prototypes) for a small audio high-end company in the neighbour town. The distortion of the flagship amp was so low that it was really hard to find a meter capable of measuring it. There was only one meter on the market, for an insane price. The company bought it. And that amp was sold for a adequate and affordable sum.And regarding R&D costs, small markets, low volumes and what have you, the street price of such an audio product is about two or three times the price of a similar one from a known large-scale vendor. And it doesn't take years to R&D an audio amp/preamp if you're not inventing a complete new class-x technology. Show an amp circuit from a magazine to an experienced engineer for audio electronics and he'll tell you within the next 5 minutes what to change to improve performance and how much those changes will improve performance. Do the changes and measure again. You'll will be amazed!IMHO those insane high prices of audiophoolery are just for rich people who don't know how to spend their money. They need to distinguish themselfs from others by expensive toys. The funny thing is that more and more common people are trying to follow. And if there's a market more companies will follow too. I won't be surprised if we see more audiophoolery the next years.

author: HackedFridgeMagnet
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 12:50:50 pm
content: hard working they may be but they are still con artists. It's not worth 75k.It even looks stupid, although it still looks better than my amp.Q: What's the price?A: How much do you wanna pay?

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 01:41:50 pm
content: Quote from: HackedFridgeMagnet on August 21, 2012, 12:50:50 pmYou nailed it.

author: M. András
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 21, 2012, 09:01:17 pm
content: in the other room there is a 4-5 years old sony home theatre amplifier from the older high end section its way obsolete now by sony they run products for 1 year only. connected to 6 jamo 3 way speaker with ordinary speaker cable approx 1.5mm2i watched the same movie in that room via the sony amplifier dts decode etc, the movie had insane sound effects on it so clear high and mid tones etc. then i watched the same movie in my room on an integrated soundcard+a logitech x530 speaker set i couldnt hear half of the sound effects and it wasnt that clear either. i know there are significant differences between an integrated soundcard and a cheap pc speaker set. a pair of those jamo speakers were double the price of this logitech set if i remember correctly around 120w each not even mention the hifi amp itself i dont know the type of it and i wont take it out from the racked desk to read the back labelsbut if i find the manual or the box of the thing i will write it down. but i would like to know the measurable differences between the 2 mentioned sets i bet it would be a very significant. even several times better mesaured values.as i see the pic in that review that amp is not so empty but it still doesnt worth 75k usd

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 01:06:09 am
content: How are you going present these comparison results for me? What methodology are you employing to extract this data?ROTFL. Do you have ears?

author: JuiceKing
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 02:26:37 am
content: There's a paradox of hifi as a business. On one hand, by definition, hifi aims to make products which sound faithful to the original. This should mean that the sound of all products will converge as companies compete and products improve--in principle they should sound more and more alike.But, as anyone with business experience knows, to survive in a competitive marketplace, a company needs a differentiated strategy, and more often than not, this means that products are intentionally made to be different from the rest. And they do sound different, alright, even though all of these vendors would tell you that it's their ultimate goal to be faithful to the original.I've been to several stereo shows I'm amazed at how many takes there are on this. Dozens of vendors all scratching to survive, it seems. Nobody's getting rich--it's driven by passion if these lifers. Sadly, most sound pretty poor if you ask me, but there are always a few stand-outs, and, wow, they just floor you. People who have not heard this just would not know. It's astonishing when the illusion of hifi works well.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 03:18:17 am
content: Being faithful to the original doesn't always mean being faithful to the bits in the recording. There is no "perfect" system - you can never completely reproduce what happened in the studio or - harder still - in the auditorium. The idea is to make amusical eventhappen. This has as much to do with numbers as the color of the sky.Yes, someone has to do the math - even a simple triode amp, made from a total of five parts, requires some amount of math as a basis. But for any high and maker (and this includes the guy working in his home shop, so you can put away that strawman about money) most of the iterative work involveslistening.Some of you clearly cannot seem to grasp this. I don't understand it. If I want to make a circuit that beams light at a hundred thousand cycles per second across a field I can design the circuits but ultimately it comes down to taking the damn thing to the field, firing it up, and seeing how it works. How the hell is audio any different?The goal of making quality audio equipment isnotto faithfully recreate the bits on the disk - it's to create amusical experience. What happens when the bits on the disc are rubbish? What happens when the only source I have available is some 128kbps mp3? Yes, I'm saying the goal often times is to deliberately add coloration to the sound - so? No matter what I do I am adding color to the sound, because speakers and rooms are all different. It's aboutmaking music happenand if you don't understand that then, ok, so you're not an audio designer. So what? I'm not a rocket designer - but I don't go about blabbing about how it's not a science, or how rocket designers are con men.I don't like Bose either. I think their stuff all sucks. They're not even close to the high end, and many consider them a con. So? I don't like Sony either, I think it's overpriced crap. These companies all have brands, and that makes them valuable to some people. Doesn't make them cons.

author: RCMR
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 03:21:17 am
content: These days I would wager that the weakest part of any sound system is the environment in which it is operated.Even with a significant amount of work, the acoustics of a small room in an average house are appalling and, even the best pre-amp, amp and speakers will not correct these deficiencies.I would wager that spending $75K to create an anechoic chamber in which to listen to your audio system would yield much better results than blowing the same amount on a pre-amp.And I know someone's going to tell me "but real audophools *do* build anechoic chambers and spend a fortune on such things"Oh well.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 03:25:25 am
content: Dude, study acoustics. Spend like... I dunno, ten minutes on it.Anechoic chambers are NOT for listening. Why do you believe this?

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 03:27:53 am
content: Quote from: JuiceKing on August 22, 2012, 02:26:37 amMy favorite 'wow' audio brands are Sennheiser and Klipsch.I can't really offer constructive comparisons to other speakers because i haven't listened to many, but good quality Sennheisers headphones or Klipsch reference speakers always blow my mindWith the possible exception of the sub $200 Sennhesiers, they tend to lack the wow factor.

author: DrGeoff
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 03:40:09 am
content: The one thing the audiophile does not control is the recording, mixing and mastering. The mics chosen, their position, the mic pre's, converters or console, the mix engineer's choice of treatment to the signal or balance and the mastering engineer's choice of treatment or the producer's whims.At best they can hope to hear what the mastering engineer heard in the mastering studio, which may or may not be a good representation of what was originally played. The fact that during this process the signal has likely travelled through hundreds of active devices (many NE5532 op amps) seems to be completely ignored in the quest for something which is simply not there.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 04:28:36 am
content: More strawmen. No audiophile I have ever known was so ignorant - there's a reason for record reviews, and recording engineers who know their salt are well paid. There are also many boutique labels that record using very minimal equipment.What about electronic music? This may have had no acoustic source, ever. Brian Eno, Giorgio Moroder, Trent Reznor - there are many talented engineers who can take a studio full of equipment and build an incredible illusion.Again: what you're not getting is it's about creating a musical experience - not replicating data.

author: andyturk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 07:13:58 am
content: Quote from: AntiProtonBoy on August 21, 2012, 01:31:11 amAh, but now you're cheating. That word, "quantifiable" brings in a whole new level. Who quantifies, and with which tools?Just because the "stone knives and bear skin" meters you've brought to the party can't distinguish those exquisitely subtle differences doesn't mean they're not present. It seems perfectly reasonable that a gifted audiophile could detect a sonic difference between two setups that couldn't be measured with the instruments on your bench.The cochlea is an incredibly sensitive instrument honed over millions of years of evolution. In addition to helping measure spousal annoyance, it has also keeps us alive. When we hear tires screeching against asphalt, we have an immediate sense of where the action is and whether we need to jump out of the way. Bunnies (and other tasty critters) use the same hardware to steer clear of predators. Those big ears are highly directional antennas with minimal phase distortion.All that audiophile talk about acoustic fidelity and "imaging" is mostly to do with a prey animal's ability to create a 3-dimensional threat model based on vibrations in the air. It's pretty amazing what our aural hardware is capable of.Even dulled by a perfectly chilled glass of Chablis, I'll bet that the human ear can pick out differences that even Agilent would have a tough time measuring.

author: GK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 08:18:25 am
content: Wow. From admiration for Leonardo’s painted works to rabbit ears. Most of the argumentation here on both (but mostly the audiophile side) consists of just one dim non sequitur after another.It has yet to be demonstrated by anyone that anyone is capable of distinguishing levels of change in phase, amplitude or linearity that are beyond our ability to measure.

author: poorchava
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 08:34:55 am
content: There's a guy offering $1M for proving any type of paranormal abilities. There is also audiophile stuff included:http://www.skepdic.com/randi.htmlhttp://www.randi.org/site/http://www.skepdic.com/skeptimedia/skeptimedia7.htmlI heard about one case (not sure if that was James Randi's test) where they made an audiophile ignorant take a blink test to tell apart $5k speaker cables from.... chain of cloth hangers joined with ductape. And result was really, really close to 50% hit/miss

author: amvakar
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 09:32:17 am
content: Quote from: poptones on August 22, 2012, 04:28:36 amIf seeking better accuracy reduces the sound quality, the recording engineers must not be particularly talented.Quote from: andyturk on August 22, 2012, 07:13:58 amAnd I'd be willing to bet that it has more to do with human eyes and the power of suggestion than anything we can hear.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 09:38:09 am
content: So you're saying being able to discern and appreciate quality sound is somehow "paranormal?"Y'all are just full of strawmen.I heard about one case (not sure if that was James Randi's test) where they made an audiophile ignorant take a blink test to tell apart $5k speaker cables from.... chain of cloth hangers joined with ductape. And result was really, really close to 50% hit/missYou're completely mistaken. James Randi challenged Michael Fremer, Fremer accepted, then Randi pulled out - blaming Fremer of course.What you might be thinking of is a double blind test between coat hangers and Monster Cable. And the subject wasn't an "audiophool" but a panel. None of which suprises me a bit, since Monster Cable is pretty much overpriced coat hangers and virtually any "audiophool" you ask will tell you so.So, another strawman.

author: nitro2k01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 11:45:45 am
content: Quote from: poptones on August 22, 2012, 09:38:09 amWhen the differences in quality are so small that they are reasonably beyond what any human ear could plausibly detect, yes we're in the realm of the paranormal.The buzzword seems to becreating a musical experience. What you're basically saying is that the color and shape of the amplifier also matters because it adds to the experience. Actually, you could really replace the innards at will, as long as the user doesn't know -- it's all about maintaining the illusion, right? Some people fall for it and pay $75k for an amp. I bet these are the same people who otherwise would have joined the Church of Scientology or some other similar cult and would be ranting and raving about how much it changed their life, while at the same time funneling money into the cult. It's all in the experience, right?Well, when you come and talk about these things on a forum for electrical engineers, where some people make a living off doing analog circuit design, you can bet your bottom dollar (to reuse Dave's expression) that these same people are going to ask for values that can be quantified, not just what you or your friends experience.

author: Tepe
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 12:43:34 pm
content: Quote from: andyturk on August 22, 2012, 07:13:58 amThat is very, very doubtful.

author: nitro2k01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 12:54:58 pm
content: Quote from: Tepe on August 22, 2012, 12:43:34 pmSpot the sarcasm. Give a man a glass of Chablis, and there's no end to the detail of sound he can hear. I'm pretty sure a decent upper range amp + good glass of wine is actually a better audio investment than a $75k amp.

author: andyturk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 04:05:48 pm
content: Quote from: GK on August 22, 2012, 08:18:25 amHave there been studies to quantify the outer limits of the human ear? Obviously there were studies related to what "good enough" reproduction meant. That's where 44.1KHz came from. Most people can't hear past 20K, so double that via Nyquist and throw in some extra to make the cutoff filters easy. Billions of CDs were sold based on that analysis.But what about the Gary Kasparov's of the hearing world? Has anyone measured them?Quote from: amvakar on August 22, 2012, 09:32:17 amNo doubt. But just because most people who buy these things have more money than sense doesn't mean it's impossible for anyone to hear the difference.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 04:39:42 pm
content: Quote from: poptones on August 22, 2012, 01:06:09 amIn other words, you have absolutelynothingof substance to demonstrate to me. (Recounting spiritualistic experiences and anecdotes do not count.)Quote from: andyturk on August 22, 2012, 07:13:58 amLike what, for example? Define 'sonic difference'. This falls in the same line as 'musicality' and other vague terminology used in this thread.What does it all mean?Language like this is one the many problems exhibited by the audiophile community. And when I question them, I get replies, such as "you don't understand". Of course I don't understand. Anecdotes do not mean anything, except for the person who wrote them. It is the failure on part of the author to relay information concisely.I have mentioned this before, you can not trust your own senses, nor anyone else's. We live in a world of illusion. We are severely limited by our sensory organs and by the quirks within our cognitive ability. We are highly susceptible to suggestion, manipulation and the distortion of the sensory information we receive. Therefore, whatever differences you experience is totally open for interpretation in multitude ways. All of this is meaningless when others can not reliably reproduce or understand these alleged differences. This is why tools, such as measurement, statistics and mathematics were invented (or employed).Scientific and engineering publications deliberately avoid such ambiguous language. Diction is important. Such literature relay information through the presentation of facts, through hypotheses supported by strong data, including references and other derived works that are testable. There is no other mechanism that we know of that forces us to be impartial. Naturally, there are limits to measurements, and there will be always a degree of uncertainty. However, you can not fill that uncertainty with anecdotal evidence. You can not give a meaning for something that is undefined.To further expand why you can not trust your senses, let me give you a fascinating example: Research has demonstrated that your perception of colour is partly dependent on the language you speaking, including the cultural influences in your community. People who spoke English could easily distinguish aqua tones from greens, while African tribesmen had trouble differentiating them. Conversely, the English had more trouble differentiating lime tones, while our African brothers saw them as very distinct colours. Such disparity was strictly due to the high level cognitive functions the human brain. Therefore, one can not use subjective data to accurately asses the colour of an object. One must employ measurements for that kind of thing. This way, we can universally agree there is a difference, irrespective whether you see them, not see them, or imagined them. The same goes for anything.Nutshell: You may hear something special, perhaps not.I don't know thatand I will never know for sure, unless the artefact can be demonstrated using the criteria I outlined before.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 07:37:48 pm
content: In other words, you have absolutely nothing of substance to demonstrate to me.Are you serious?So I play component B and you hear something, then I play A and you hear something else. Yes, we'll do it double blind... and you're still going to refuse to believe your own ears?That's beyond delusion.

author: nitro2k01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 07:48:41 pm
content: Quote from: poptones on August 22, 2012, 07:37:48 pmThis reminds me of what an audio engineer said once during a panel discussion about these things. This was the mid-90s and he had just gotten a new top of the line digital audio workstation. Just for no reason, he fed a recorded song through the output and back through the input. He did an A/B test and he was a amazed about how much fuller and airier these new fabulous DACs and ADCs made the sound. It was amazing how these digital components opened up the sound just by putting them in the signal path!When he looked at the files and analyzed them, though, theonlydifference between the files was that the newly recorded copy was 2 dB louder. Moral of the story: don'tjusttrust your ears, because they are biased by the emotions and expectations of the thing between them.

author: nitro2k01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 08:02:41 pm
content: Quote from: poptones on August 22, 2012, 07:37:48 pmTO answer this from a different angle.Your assertion is that different speakers/amps/setups sound different. This is in itself not very controversial. The controversy is whether 1) you could hear someone that test equipment couldn't detect. 2) if it's really worth the extra $100k. Your call.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 08:33:09 pm
content: When he looked at the files and analyzed them, though, the only difference between the files was that the newly recorded copy was 2 dB louder. Moral of the story: don't just trust your ears, because they are biased by the emotions and expectations of the thing between them.That's not a valid abx test, and anyone worth thier salt knows it. Levels in tests are usually matched to within .1db.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 08:54:44 pm
content: Is there any point in playing an audio recording through a $75K amplifier and presumably similar cost speakers and cables when the original sound came out of a $2K marshal amplifier.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2012, 09:57:36 pm
content: Maybe not.. if all you're listening to is a solo guitar through a Marshall.While we're at it, why not just limit it to solo voice? Then you can be happy with a telephone.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 12:51:30 am
content: Quote from: poptones on August 22, 2012, 07:37:48 pmHave you actually read the rest of my post?How will I know your perception is not biased by environmental, psychological, or physiological factors that is beyond your control? How will I know you are not deliberately making shit up?You seem to be fixated on the notion that your ears (and your ears only) is somehow a benchmark, or a standard for differentiating audio equipment. It is not. If you want to have an impartial analysis of any subject, your personal opinions/experiences do not count. Period!I don't even know why am I bothering with this any more...

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 02:41:18 am
content: If I design a bridge, the ultimate test is whether or not the locomotive crossing it ends up in the river. If I am designing a rocket, does it blow up or does it get where I am going, or does it kill the passengers. If I am designing a flashlight, how well does it illuminate the night. But if I am designing audio equipment, the ultimate test is how it measures on a bench?What sort of engineering is this?

author: HackedFridgeMagnet
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 04:27:59 am
content: QuoteI had a bit of a look, I couldn't find anything conclusive on this except that James Randi hasn't given away the million dollars. Point me to a 'conclusive' link and at least I will do you the courtesy of reading it.poptones: I know we are not supposed to make this personal, and I will try not to, but I think you are either very deluded, have a vested interest in Audiophools or just having a bit of fun trolling. Tell me if I am wrong.Your strawman assertions might be valid but I think you have been guilty of the same misrepresentation in this thread.Actually I think you are right on one major fact. Assuming similar frequency responses two amps with similar THD measurements will not necessarily sound the same, especially if the THD is fairly high as the distortion may be on different parts of the waveform.QuoteThis statement seems reasonable too, but the point is you can't measure it, so what is picked out in one instance might not be noticed next time. So what can you do with it apart from argue endlessly about it? In short it's not in the realm of science but of art.BTW: antiprotonboy you argue a very solid case, I totally agree with you but couldn't put it nearly as well as you.Actually poptones you argue very eloquently too but unfortunately you're trying to argue against science.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 06:21:44 am
content: Point me to a 'conclusive' link and at least I will do you the courtesy of reading it.Background:http://gizmodo.com/307473/pear-cable-calls-james-randis-1-million-offer-a-hoax?tag=gadgetsdoubleblindhttp://eetimes.com/design/audio-design/4015820/Loudspeakers-Effects-of-amplifiers-and-cables--Part-4Fremer's diatribe in SPhttp://www.stereophile.com/thinkpieces/021708swiftboat/Tell me if I am wrong.None of that is entirely wrong, but none of it is entirely correct. As I have said before, I too have a hard time with the way many aspects of audiophoolery are conducted - shakti stones, green pens and stuff like thishttp://www.stereotimes.com/comm040510.shtmlHowever, one cannot dispute that, to those who believe these things work, they probably make a difference. And you can call them ignorant or suckers or whatever you like, but the people who buy this stuff have considerable income in order to be able to afford them, so one needs to be careful about who one calls the "fool." If a fool is to become a Millionaire, then I certainly would like a bit of that foolery for myself. Note I am not saying their success leads me to believe this stuff - anymore than the success of Mitt Romney inclines me to start believing in talking snakes.Your strawman assertions might be valid but I think you have been guilty of the same misrepresentation in this thread.Really? Can you point out a strawman I have invented? I am carefully to avoid things like "you all think" and such. I did in one comment use the word "y'all" but my comments were pretty carefully directed, at least in intent. Seemed more expedient, and I'm sure those reading knew if I were speaking to them.Actually I think you are right on one major fact. Assuming similar frequency responses two amps with similar THD measurements will not necessarily sound the same, especially if the THD is fairly high as the distortion may be on different parts of the waveform.And what began much of this is a person specifically mentioning certain measurements, and my point (and it is an accurate one) is that those measurements alone leaveampleroom for other distortions that one would genuinely require a tin ear to miss. Even in harmonic distortion measurements - using 1khz sines the ear may have a hard time hearing less than .3% second harmonic distortion - but toss in a higher harmonic - say 7 or 9khz - over a very pure 1khz sine and it becomesmuchmore audible.My ancient Marantz likely still has pretty good specs even with nearly 40 year old coupling capacitors - and most of the time it sounds great. But there are certain passages that play in certain pieces of music that cause very noticeable distortion to arise. Because these are transient in nature, one would have a very hard time "objectifying" them on the bench - so what? Listen, and the proof is there. How to fix it? Well, how to correct the unexpected oscillation in a PID controller design? You use math to get things right but often it comes down to experience andartto make thingsreally right.Well, in the case of my Marantz I list the thing on ebay and use the hundred bucks to build a more modern and compact amp...So what can you do with it apart from argue endlessly about it? In short it's not in the realm of science but of art.That's kinda the point I have been making. Engineering is art. And bad engineering is bad art.

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 06:55:06 am
content: This preamp? Good engineering yes, marketing just to earn that much more money out of the product is just nonsensicalThat's what audiophilism is all about

author: JuKu
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 07:42:36 am
content: What you hear is very realto you. I might not hear the same so there is no differenceto me. The physical phenomenon may or may not be the same, but fundamentally, does not matter. You can't really argue this. You can call the buyer fool, but if he got a real improvement to his system,for him, and paid a price that he was happy to pay for it, was he really a fool? You would have been a fool paying for something that does not improve things for you, but I would hesitate to state opinions about what someone else hears.We can scientifically measure what people hear. Not the physical phenomenon, but what is the actual hearing sensation (by doing statistical analysis of surveys filled during the tests). This is tedious and difficult research, so it is not done much, and it is beyond the capabilities of single R&D labs, hobbyists and magazines. But it can and it is being done, and there are some fascinating results. The color, size and shape of speakers matter (red speakers sound the worse, btw:) ), color TV sounds better but B&W TV sounds louder, price of the equipment matter, even equipment boxes outside the listening room matter in a blind test. You can't argue this either.Again, you can say that the listeners are mistaken, but if the sound that you hear is different, the difference is real. You can argue about the reasons, but the difference between "it sounds better because I paid $75k", "it sounds better because it uses circuit topology X" and "it sounds better because the noise floor is so low" is fundamentally unimportant. The bottom line is that it sounds better. (The first example is likely purely psychological, the last one is measurable, the middle one might be either.)And it sounds to me (pun intended) that some of the commenters think that we actually know what makes a difference in physical sound! Scientifically, this can't be proven one way or another. The best we can do is "we measured this, this and this, and found no difference in listening", but that does not rule out that in some other setup or some other material there could be a clear difference. In the same way, the result could be "we measured this, this and this and found a difference in listening". If the listening was a blind test rightly done, we know there is something that we could in principle measure, but we don't know how. This happens. Just this result does not make a good paper, so they don't get published that often, but sometimes they do. The scientific progress is made with papers "We measured this, this and this but found a difference in listening, so we looked again and the difference is here". I personally believe there is much to explore, especially in the" borderline of a reality illusion" high quality audio.In hifi, the progress is often that anecdotal evidence builds up. A company sells a product claiming that it has feature X and sounds great. The consumers and press agree. If there is no patent, other products with X come to market as well and consumers and press still agree that X sounds great. Finally, researchers pay attention and somebody writes to AES Journal what the difference of X really is and how to measure it. Finally, Audio Precision builds it in to the instruments.I'm old enough to have seen this happen a few times. Remember the black pens to color the edges of CDs? Remember the claims that bit perfect CD copies have audible differences, to the point that CDs from some factories sound better than the others, self-burned copies sounding worse of all? I do, and I remember all the cries for foul, con, conspiracy of record companies and so on. This has not been a subject of discussion for a long time because nowadays, we know exactly what is going on and can measure jitter and therefore, it is not generally an issue with modern players.I'm very cautious in claiming hoax in high end audio. I rather sit back, wait and see. Some examples, just because I have some free time right now: The speaker cable thing is well understood. Some speakers with some amps are sensitive: It is mostly in low end AC resistance, assuming insignificant inductance or capacitance, milliohms matter much. Your system might not be sensitive at all, your system might not be good enough or you might not hear something that someone else could: You are good with thick power cable. (Most systems are, I have that too:) ). What is not generally understood, the anecdotal evidence is huge and I'm just waiting a paper about circuit topologies about it: It seems that the current output capability in a pre-amp power supply makes a difference. Personally, I think that in a circuit that draws way less than 100mA there should not be a difference in sound with 1A and 10A supply, the difference is somewhere else that just happens to come more often with 10A supplies. But the anecdotal evidence seems to be there.Sometimes, the researches come forward first. Matti Otala comes to mind.Sometimes, there is the inventor that truly believes what he hears. The difference is real to him, but the market does not agree. And of course, where there is money there are crooks, so there are true con artists on the market. Not many, imo, but of course there are.And finally, there is the luxury aspect. You pay for something just because you want to, like jewelry, handbag or perfume. No con, you pay for something just because you want it, not that you need it or it makes a difference in your life. (Now where is my ice cream?)Combine all of the above, and high end audio is fun.

author: deephaven
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 07:53:55 am
content: Quote from: poptones on August 23, 2012, 02:41:18 amI hope you don't design bridges or rockets. Every part of them is tested and tested in methodical detail before the finished design is built. Then they are measured and tested and verified before they are put to their intended use. I prefer THAT sort of engineering to yours!

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 08:03:55 am
content: Uh huh. And after all that testign and measuring, sometimes bridges fall down.Still missing the point?

author: JuKu
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 08:07:44 am
content: Quote from: deephaven on August 23, 2012, 07:53:55 amWho said audio equipment are not "tested in methodical detail before the finished design is built" (measurements of prototypes) or "verified before they are put to their intended use" (production tests). Ok, some are not, but usually they do that, too. But the ultimate test in audio is not the measurements, just like a bridge that may be great engineering but too narrow for the traffic is a bad bridge.Also: Two bridges, both well engineered, strong and reliable. One is ugly, one is beautiful. Which would you prefer?

author: Tepe
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 08:12:54 am
content: Quote from: poptones on August 23, 2012, 08:03:55 amThe Tacoma Narrows Bridge notwithstanding, usually due to fatigue and insufficient maintenance. You don't get better bridges by not simulating, testing, and measuring.

author: Tepe
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 08:15:58 am
content: Quote from: JuKu on August 23, 2012, 08:07:44 amWhich one gets me across most conveniently? Or if I am sailing, which one makes me get past it with the minimum amount of fuss?

author: andyturk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 08:16:48 am
content: Quote from: HackedFridgeMagnet on August 23, 2012, 04:27:59 amYes, it's certainly helpful to recognize when one's arguments aren't convincing to the opposition.A while back I purchased a semi-audiowank headphone amplifier. It's the amusingly named Yulong D100. When I tell my friends that I actually spent $400 on a headphone amp (which requires decent headphones to be useful), they say I'm nuts. But it seems like a well designed piece of equipment and it's vastly better (even to my tin ears) than plugging headphones into the back of my computer. Money well spent, if you ask me.On the other hand, I have a habit of drinking cheap wine (known as "two buck chuck" here in California). Yes, it's actually cheaper than some brands of bottled water. The same friends who think I'm silly for dropping $400 on my Yulong also can't understand how anyone could possibly stomach $2/bottle wine. I ask them why they prefer to spend $25, and they say, "It tastes better."

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 08:53:09 am
content: Hmm, Yulong? Sounds chinese to me.Anyway, what would you expect from a cheap PC soundcard? Nope i always cross fingersThe next important point is you do not need 400 bucks for your headphones to sound good, just 50 bucks will do, and in many cases it's due to the PC soundcard not intended to drive headphones therefore being unable to provide a nice sound to your headphones without distortingIn fact 100 bucks for a good Creative X-Fi soundcard is money well spent if looking for a better soundThe Creative SB X-Fi Xtreme Fidelity Elite Pro/Pro-X shocked me the other day!

author: nitro2k01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 09:27:02 am
content: Poptones, since you've been ignoring me so far, I'll try again. I'd like you to pick about 10 audiophile products that you think are good. Amps, speakers and preferably couple more exotic ones like novelty power cables, speaker cables, vinyl demagnetizers or similar. Highlight with a few words what makes these products good products.Then pick about 10 products which you think are bad audiophile, or what some would call audiophool, products. Products that are perhaps overpriced, silly or perhaps even a hoax in your opinion. Don't just pick Bose products because you don't think they bare pro enough. Pick something like Monster cables etc. Something that us laymen would carelessly place in category 1 in this challenge. Motivate why they are bad products with a few words.If you take this challenge, there will be something substantial to discuss. I will already predict that you will not take this challenge and just ignore this post. What a shame, really...

author: ftransform
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 09:36:21 am
content: I think how you enjoy things depends on your mood and state of mind. I'm sure if you are in a good mood the cheap noisy radio will sound better then the most expensive audiophoolery bullshit in the world.Also try closing your eyes/drugs.. its cheaper then 75k lol

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 09:57:40 am
content: I haven't been ignoring anyone, and yet I have not previously seen any mention of such "challenge" until this latest post. Are you sure you didn't just imagine I hadn't replied to you?I have no idea what your "challenge" would be about, nor do I have any desire at all to accept such a "challenge" as you proffer. The reason is, as I have said before, I'm really not "into" that crap anymore. My entire beef with this discussion was all these strawmen being hurled at a product of obviously very meticulous design offered at a price most find exhorbitant - yeah, well so are Maseratis and Bugattis and no one calls that snake oil.If you want links to some stuff I find entertaining I'll be happy to guide you there. But I don't do equipment reviews, and I certainly don't do sideshows.Here's something you can chew on... or not.http://www.meta-gizmo.net/Tri/adv/KIT.html

author: nitro2k01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 11:16:43 am
content: Quote from: poptones on August 23, 2012, 09:57:40 amMy two other posts are both on page 7 in this thread, and are not related to the "challenge".Quote from: poptones on August 23, 2012, 09:57:40 amCuriosity on my part is basically what it's about. Gauging your views on these things from a real world perspective rather than an endless back and forth about principles.Quote from: poptones on August 23, 2012, 09:57:40 amI think in general in audiophile products, the markup is much higher than in the world of high-end cars. I.e., in a Bugatti, I'm convinced that a much more significant part of the price consists of costs for actual materials and r&d for the car, than in a typical audiophile product. That preamp is hardly $75k of parts. I'd be surprised if it's even $100 of parts, and I'm pretty sure you could find product for sale with an equivalent quality from a technical point of view at $1k or at the very most $10k. To quote a previous post:Q: What's the price?A: How much do you wanna pay?Additionally you don't see as much proper, undeniable snake oil in the high end car industry as you do in the audiophile industry. You don't see the car equivalent of a directional Monster cable, or awool USB cable with the +5V wire removedor an, ehhh, claimedEM field absorber boxwith an outlandish pseudoscientific explanation. And there's more where that came from, giving the industry a bad name.But what really strikes a chord with me is the argument you've repeated which basically reduces to "it's all subjective". It's all about the experience. It comes across to me that in most of these products, 90% of the price you're paying, you pay to reinforce your belief in the product. I mean, at that price point, you'dbetterbelieve that what you're buying is worth it, or you haven't just lost your money but also your face.And also the claim that your ears can hear things test equipment couldn't. Granted, what you might describe as "airy sound" or whatever, test equipment will describe as something like "+0.8 dB, 2Q boost and 3 degree phase shift around 12 kHz." But if you can hook a good quality microphone next to your ear and you can hear a difference but the microphone and test equipment can't, either you or the test equipment is lying, and I know where I would place my bet.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 01:50:03 pm
content: Quote from: andyturk on August 23, 2012, 08:16:48 amNo DIY headphone amp? I would be ashamed :-) But a nice amp with tubes for 400 bucks would be ok. My simple and inexpensive solution for PC sound is a TDA1519B and a pair of Magnat Monitor 100 speakers (70 Euros for the pair). And a headphone jack is included. Much better sound quality than any Logitech or whatever PC sound system.

author: HackedFridgeMagnet
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 02:28:35 pm
content: I really appreciate we can have this discussion without the hatred.and one thing about irrationally priced high end audio equipment is that (I am assuming here) it almost always does it's job well. As opposed to other scam products.even super pure copper monster cable etc, actually will do it's job well.QuoteThat's the strawman, nitro2k01 was pointing out that people can be easily deluded into thinking they are hearing what they cannot.I had a look and the links, nothing conclusive,I guess the main point is can listenersrepeatablypass a blind test, if the cables are similarly specc'ed in normal electrical terms. ie Length, resistance, vaguely similar impedance at a normal cable length and nominal 8 ohm speakers? I didn't see any effort on behalf of the Audio guys to proceed with the tests regardless to prove the sceptic wrong. Pear Audio did refer to a blind test taken with their cables but I couldn't see a link to it.If listeners could really tell the difference between the super expensive cables and just reasonably sized cables then maybe we would consider buying them.One last thing I was wondering is how much is the power amp? It would need to be pretty good.

author: andyturk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 02:35:54 pm
content: Quote from: T4P on August 23, 2012, 08:53:09 amYup, the Yulong is definitely Chinese, but there's a lot of decent gear coming out of China these days. Like Rigol. :-) My headphones are AKG 701s. I'm sure there are some nice sound cards out there, but not many of them will plug into my Mac.Quote from: madires on August 23, 2012, 01:50:03 pmI've got enough DIY to choke a horse. Sometimes you just want to listen to music!Here's some budget audio-wank that I'd love to try:It's $349 USD.

author: GK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 03:00:15 pm
content: Quote from: andyturk on August 22, 2012, 04:05:48 pmWell of course there has. I suggest you start with a book on basic psychoacoustic principles.

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 04:22:25 pm
content: I laughed when i saw the ... tubesAnyway, i saw a Samsung docking station > That's audiowank shat already! < that costs about i think 900 sing bucks? that just has a tube as a preamp ... DAFUQ IS THAT SHAT SO EXPENSIVEOh by the way, i never liked tubes because they're expensive now and have so much coloration it's unbelievable, i want my Metallica pure dammit!

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 06:00:46 pm
content: I have seen some OHL tube amps that use the tubes as power indicators, they only glow, and provide a bias current to the preamp so that it does not work if you remove them............You could literally use any standard 9 pin valve and have it work. triode, pentode, diode, double diode triode, indicator, so long as it used the standard heater pins. No Ht at all applied to it.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2012, 09:33:18 pm
content: You don't see the car equivalent of a directional Monster cable, or a wool USB cable with the +5V wire removed or an, ehhh, claimed EM field absorber box with an outlandish pseudoscientific explanation.There are countless television programs that are little more than adverts for whatever "project" they are building that week - intake manifolds, headers, camshafts - all of which wonks are encouraged to apply to their vehicles willy nilly in order to extract more performance from them. How many teens have spent the weekend under their new ride ripping out exhaust bits, unhooking engine mounts and forcing bits around to fit a new pair of headers believing their buying extra performance? Often this venturecostsperformance and simply results in a loud, annoying car with ground clearance problems. Same can be said of carburetors and such. If applied correctly these thingsmayimprove performance, but few of these shows delve into their correct application - they simply focus on labels and brands. And let's not even get into the cow magnets, 30" rims and "deer whistles."I guess the main point is can listeners repeatably pass a blind test, if the cables are similarly specc'ed in normal electrical terms. ie Length, resistance, vaguely similar impedance at a normal cable length and nominal 8 ohm speakers?Like the way the teenager "evaluates" his new header install through the seat of his pants? Few have the gear to accurately measure even 0-60 times... it's just get in, start it up and see if it "feels different." Well, of course it does - you've thrown away 10ft/lb of low end torque and increased the wot spl by 30db... ofcourseit "feels different."But what really strikes a chord with me is the argument you've repeated which basically reduces to "it's all subjective". It's all about the experience.Tell that to the teenager.Yep, it's all about the experience. It's all subjective. If I want to DIY a tube amplifier that distills amplification down to its four part essence (valve, output transformer, bias resistor and input coupling transformer) and I believe it sounds good, then that is the end of it. If you disagree with my evaluation, then bully for you - you're free to pursue your own audio nirvana - or just to be happy with your sound card and logitech "home theater" setup. No skin off my nose, and none off yours either.It seems your problem is with the waythe presstreats much of this stuff. Well,the presscan choose to debunk it but what do they gain? One more advertiser is out the door, meanwhile this other magazine will gladly cater to that market. And most of the journalists probably really do believe this stuff - which, frankly, I find a lot more honest than the car performance shows where the "dialog" sounds like it was written by marketing droids. Well, I have a problem with the press too - that's why I don't bother myself with them. These last few days I've read more of that crap than I had in the last decade, and I really don't care to go on.Some of you seem to think I am defending the snake oil - I'm not. I'm simply saying it's unfair to brand everything as snake oil simply because it's more expensive than you find "morally justifiable." I'm not down with the money either - if you read that last link you'll see pretty much where I am: build it. There is much more happiness to be gained from building your own rig than from spending thousands on someone elses mojo... just ask the teen who spent the weekend busting his knuckles to install those headers.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2012, 07:46:11 am
content: Quote from: HackedFridgeMagnet on August 23, 2012, 02:28:35 pmUntil you look at this...http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/crystal2/micro.htmlhttp://img31.imageshack.us/img31/7971/picolopowercord.jpghttp://www.berlin-hifi.de/shop/images/product_images/popup_images/901_0.jpg18AWGpower cable. That justcannotbe safe.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2012, 07:54:58 am
content: Quote from: amyk on August 24, 2012, 07:46:11 amNope, you're wrong, when the "special insulation material" is toasted, it will emanate a nice toasted caramel smell when your system running at full power to complement the audio, you will get a surreal and almost perfect ambient especially when you played the right song.

author: HackedFridgeMagnet
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2012, 12:20:06 pm
content: QuoteI didn't manage to wade through the hype so I don't even know if they're double insulated, but they scare me. I wouldn't have them in the house in case somebody plugged one in.It would probably be fine for a 'normal' preamp at our nominal 230v but all bets are off for a 75k preamp with 2 x 19 pin power connectors in the back and in USA where I gather you normally would need double the current running at 120v.Ok I will retract that statement.

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2012, 01:14:39 pm
content: Well what's all that argument for when it's truly snake oil?The way they advertised the 75k preamp and pricing it like that automatically groups it as snake oil!

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2012, 02:25:02 pm
content: Jeesus. So I guess high priced cars, wine, food and anything else you find priced offensively makes it snake oil? Or do you save your derision exclusively for sound gear? And does that extend as well to $15,000.00 guitars and $200,000.00 violins?

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2012, 03:29:01 pm
content: Quote from: poptones on August 24, 2012, 02:25:02 pmAt least they do what they claim on the paper and NOT bullshitting about what they doA audio preamp should have a similar signal on the output and not require 75,000 to do the same job a 500 buck preamp can do for similar performance!DON'T drag high priced cars into this, many R&D went into them and nobody can blame a bugatti veyron for costing that much, the engine is very expensive itselfSnake oil is something that does what they thus not claim and shall cost much morePlus you cannot use R&D as a excuse for audio preamps, the core technology has been here and forever!If the veyron's specs says 1500hp and 500km/h that would be snake oil BUT IT DOESN'T!Because it does exactly about 1001HP and 253mp/h it's understable lots of R&D went into the airbrake and the body itselfAs well as developing a new advanced chassis for a car to handle 1001HP without spinning the rear tires and being able to corner itselfWhat about the gearbox itself?

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2012, 03:32:37 pm
content: Once again, I am in awe of your logical consistency...

author: deephaven
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2012, 03:49:07 pm
content: Here is my take on all this.I have no objection to people/companies coming up with a product which has a high price tag. What it means is that the product will not be bought by many people, so it has a feel of exclusivity about it. People can come round to the owner's house and say "Wow, you've got an XYZ". As long as the supplier doesn't make claims which are false or misleading, then there is no problem. I myself would have some difficulty in seeing how the supplier in question can justify the high price tag, but if people are willing to assess the product and decide it is worth their money, then there's no problem. I think paying £75K for a preamp will put you in a very exclusive club!Regarding perception of musical quality, I'm sure that the placebo effect can come into play. What I mean is that you expect it to be good, and that expectation has a part to play in it's perceived quality. There are other effects that come into play as well. As an illustration, try drinking coffee which has been dyed green or blue, it will taste different, because your brain has different expectations. Therefore, just the look of the equipment will change your perception of the quality of music.Having said all that, I am quite happy with the audio quality of my 'ordinary' equipment. I don't use fancy mains, speaker and phone cables. I put on a good movie or CD and it sure sounds good to me. I think these expensive mains cables really are pushing the limits of credibility!

author: Short Circuit
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2012, 03:50:25 pm
content: Quote from: T4P on August 24, 2012, 03:29:01 pmWhat is fundamentally different from a 1908 T-ford?(apart from having only two seats and no cargo space)

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2012, 02:17:04 am
content: Quote from: poptones on August 24, 2012, 02:25:02 pmYep.After a certain point, it is all knobbery.Listen up.You like playing with expensive audio equipment. That's cool. However, this becomes a problem when you are attempting to convince people about the benefits of something that is most likely fictitious. Instead of defending a bunch of outlandish pseudo engineering reasoning to validate your hobby, why not just say that you simply like shiny, expensive and reasonable quality toys? Just cut the bullshit and say that. This is what the whole discussion ultimately boils down to: Claims are being made, some of us called out on those claims, and yet we're getting nothing but hot air in return.

author: poptones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2012, 02:29:21 am
content: Wow, you're arguing with, like, someone in your head. You're obviously not arguing with me because it'sincrediblyobvious you haven't really read a thing I have posted.I don't "like playing with expensive audio equipment" at all. The most expensive gear I haveeverbought was a 3 year old Luxman CD player back in about 1990, and I only bought that because I had been, up to to that point, too cheap to buy a CD player and I got it for like 50 bucks because they thought something was wrong with it. My present speakers are some Klipsch HT speakers with 6.5" woofers and my receiver is a Marantz 2220A which, if you know anything at all about Marantz, you know is considered pretty much one of their least desirable from the "vintage" era because of its amplifier design with a single HV rail and giant output coupling capacitors. I bought it because the price was right and it looks cool - it's a 70's Marantz. I'm not at all happy with the sound of it and am taking steps to build something better, but I am going to miss it when it's gone.I like listening to music. I like building gear. I have no need to pay for someone else's mojo, as I have plenty of my own.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2012, 05:05:55 am
content: I do have a nice Kenwood separate system, that is not used often. I have an old ( 1990's ) Aiwa radio that is the primary radio, but most of my listening is done on a PC, via an external USB sound unit, and a set of home built speakers which use a TDA2009 as amplifier. As good as my ears are happy with, and perfect for close up listening.

author: T4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2012, 05:23:16 am
content: My setup that i use to listen to is a PC Speaker that i bought just for the transformer and the wood enclosures ... 12 bucks onlyConsists of 2 TDA2030A for the left and right channelsAnd a TDA2040A for the sub

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2012, 02:36:01 pm
content: Hmmm, nasty stuff. Are you suggesting audiophoolery is a 2CE trip?Quote from: ftransform on September 06, 2012, 03:24:04 am

author: ftransform
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2012, 07:00:36 pm
content: im suggesting 1$ of that is better then any amplifier in the world.