Testing audiophile claims and myths. Thread starter Prog Rock Man Start date May 3, Tags amp-dacs analogies r us borefest cables desktop-amps hifiman myths portable-amps science spouting ideological rhetoric where cretins get busted. Prog Rock Man Headphoneus Supremus. Joined Jul 2, Posts 3, Likes As I find more blind tests I will add them to the list here. The arguments go round in circles; I hear a difference - but there cannot be a difference, it is all in your mind - have you tried different cables?
Occasionally there are attempts to test such myths. Three What Hifi forum members are invited to their listening rooms and have been blind tested on cables to bit rates. From the issues I have read, there is a confirmation that the myths of differences are not correct, the differences are real.
Different bit rates have been correctly identified, different cables have produced different sounds in the same Hifi kit. But, they are blind listening reviews, which are different from ABX tests where people are asked to correctly identify products. Here is a list of blind listening and ABX tests that I have found on the internet. What I have done is summarise their conclusions. It is important to note the difference between blind and ABX testing as they produce different results.
Blind tests mean the listener does not know what they are listening and are asked to describe any differences they can hear which is a type of blind testing commonly used in audio. That kind of test often results in low priced hifi 'surprisingly' doing as well as high priced as factors such as image, product reputation is hidden from the listener. Some blind testing also involves a competition between products were say two amps are pitched next to each other and the winner progresses to the next round.
As you see I have very broad in the definition of blind testing. ABX testing more of a test. You listen to product A and product B and are then played X, which is either A or B and have to say which it is. There can be more than A and B as some tests involve multiple cables. Then any differences have to be clearly audible, which for the likes of cables has not been the case yet. I have also been broad in the definition of ABX testing. The aim is to see what the overall result of these tests gives us and whether they provide evidence to back up or deny the reality of alleged audiophile myths.
Before you read on here are tests you can try out yourself to see how your hearing is and what ABX testing involves The answer is, no. The changes observed were either too small to be audible, or very large and not repeatable, which suggests fluctuations in system performance or environmental noise.
Also, no pattern was observed in any of the changes over time, ruling out a cumulative or long term effect due to burn-in. This is a web site dedicated to such testing. Back in May of there was a comparison of amplifiers which found over three tests of two amps each, listeners could tell a difference in two, but not the third which was an even split. It is important to note that not all of the ABX tests here are negative. Some do find differences can be identified.
That shows that with some parts of the hifi chain there are real differences, but with others there are not. None of the tests involve a large amount of people and some are just of one person. Effects of Cable, Loudspeaker and amplifier interactions, an engineering paper from The results are based on the theory that loudspeaker cable should transmit all frequencies, unscathed to any speaker from any amplifier and loss is due to resistance.
There is an assumption that letting through more frequencies with less distortion will sound better. But that seems reasonable to me. The best performance was with multi core cables. The car jump leads did not do well and cable intended for digital transmission did!
The most expensive cable does not get a mention in the conclusions, but the cheapest is praised for its performance and Kimber does well.
Sadly there is not a definitive list of the cost of the cables and their performance, so it is not clear as to whether cost equals performance, but the suggestion is that construction equals performance. Do all amplifiers sound the same? Original Stereo Review blind test. The original Bruce Coppola link is broken, and I cannot find any existing link at this time A number of amplifiers across various price points and types are tested.
The listeners are self declared believers and sceptics as to whether audiophile claims are true or not. There were 13 sessions with different numbers of listeners each time. The difference between sceptic and believer performance was small, with 2 sceptics getting the highest correct score and 1 believer getting the lowest. The overall average was Cable directionality. Not the best link as it only refers to a test without giving too many specifics.
The cable maker Belden conducted a test with an un named magazine which found the result was perfectly random. Three cables from Canare, Radio Shack and a silver one were put into the same sleeving to disguise them, a mark put on each one so only the originator knew which was which and then sent around various forum members. The result was that only one forum member got all three correct.
The Radio Shack cheap cable and the silver were the most mixed up. Unfortunately I cannot see from the thread, which is huge how many members took part and what the exact results were. Power cable ABX test Oct This is a very well done large scale ABX test. A similar set up to Head-fi where four mains cables including 2 kettle leads stock power cords that had come with hifi products , an audiophile one, a DIY one and a tester CD were sent out forum members.
The results were inconclusive to say the least, for example; The kettle lead was C. There were 23 answers : 4 said that the kettle lead was A 6 said that it was B 8 said that it was C 5 said that they didn't know. Note - one of the participants to this test has pointed out that the two kettle leads, described in the test as exactly the same were in fact not identical and were just basic leads which had come with hifi products.
What Hifi The Big Question on cables. Sept From the Sept issue. Three forum members were invited to WHF and blind tested where they though the kit Roksan, Cyrus, Spendor was being changed, but instead the cables were.
The same three tracks were used throughout. The kit started out with the cheapest cables WHF could find and no one liked it saying it sounded flat and dull. Then a Lindy mains conditioner and Copperline Alpha power cords were introduced and the sound improved.
The IC was changed to some Atlas Equators and two out the three tracks were said to have improved with better bass and detail.
Again, changes were noticed, but they were not big. Various swaps took place after that which confirmed the above, that the power cords made the biggest difference. When the test was revealed the participants were surprised to say the least! Note - this is not an ABX test, it is a blind listening review and as you read on you find the two produce different results. But they do not, they are blind listening reviews, which allow people the chance to claim a difference, but offers no evidence they they can really hear a difference.
Secrets of Home Theatre and High Fidelity. August A rather complex testing of Ivor Tiefenbrun himself, who at that time was very pro vinyl and anti digital the opposite almost of how Linn operate now!
The In famous Audioholics forum post, cables vs coathanger!. June "After 5 tests, none could determine which was the Monster cable or the coat hanger wire. Further, when music was played through the coat hanger wire, we were asked if what we heard sounded good to us. All agreed that what was heard sounded excellent, however, when A-B tests occured, it was impossible to determine which sounded best the majority of the time and which wire was in use.
ABX test of two systems. June Two systems, one cheap A with a Sony DVD and Behringer amp supported on a folding chair with chepo cables and the other more expensive B with Classe, YBA, Wadia and expensive cables and proper stands were hidden behind a sheet and wired to the same speakers.
The results were; 38 persons participated on this test 14 chose the "A" system as the best sounding one 10 chose the "B" system as the best sounding one 14 were not able to hear differences or didn't choose any as the best. Blind cable test. They found the cheaper Maplins cable easy to differentiate and the more expensive harder to differentiate from the Chord. Their resident sceptic agreed he could hear differences. The final conclusion was; In , Denon developed its own high-torque AC motor for low speeds where speed was controlled by highly precise detection of magnetic pulses recorded around the perimeter of the platter.
Denon incorporated this epoch-making servo technology in its development of the direct-drive turntable whose high performance and reliability represented a clear break from conventional idler and belt drive products, and earned Denon a solid position as the brand for players used at radio stations.
In the following year, the turntable was adapted for consumer use, and Denon, which continued to produce direct-drive players, became an unforgettable brand of analog players among audio enthusiasts. The DP-A player is being released as a Denon anniversary model with the same high-performance Denon direct-drive turntable technology that has delivered cogging-free, high-precision rotation for 40 years.
Equipped with the DL-A cartridge, the DP-A is capable of masterfully reproducing the energy and beauty of analog discs. The DP-A features the th anniversary logo badge, and comes with a 5-year warranty and a signed certificate of authenticity from the chief production engineer who hand crafted the product. Tape decks Tuners View All Analog. The potential for favorable combinations is mind boggling; which is all the more reason the jury needs your help in sorting things out.
Imagine the impact of an expanded Recommended Components list which has batches of recommended components matched with each other. Speaking of combinations, are there pieces of equipment, which for one reason or another, a plurality of reviewers have come to own themselves? Does PS Audio equipment, for example, end up in many reviewers' homes? These are just a few of my thoughts from the peanut gallery, sorry for the interruption, thank you for listening, you may now get on with the proceedings.
This message has been edited by Colin on at PM. You might want to consider Ultra High Fidelity Magazine. This Canadian audio magazine has been around since the 80's and while they too get carried away with themselves betimes,in general,I find the content and reviews more "real world" than most audio magazines.
It is meet to recall that the Great Green Heron rarely flies upside down in the moonlight - Foo Ling ca. This message has been edited by lynnm on at PM. The MOON W5 is a masterful amp,anyone who has high class speakers and wants total quality and power needs to look no further.
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.
Paste as plain text instead. Only 75 emoji are allowed. Display as a link instead. Clear editor. Upload or insert images from URL. Share More sharing options Followers 0.
Reply to this topic Start new topic. Recommended Posts. Posted October 18, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options MacKlipsch Posted October 18, Here it is I disliked some reviews in Stereophile's Guide to HT. TheEAR s Now theears. Posted October 19, TBrennan Posted October 19, Ray Garrison Posted October 19, Posted October 21, Just maybe.
Strange how they love tube gear,and tubes add some coloration to the sound! Colin Posted October 21, Posted October 28, Audio Flynn Posted November 1, Posted November 1, Some of the brands they avoid reviewing make me suspicious of their objectivity.
Klipsch 2. Parasound 3. Harman Kardon 4. KEF 5. Definitive Technology I am sure other competent brands are avoided I am not thinking of. Ray Garrison Posted November 2, Posted November 2, Audio Flynn, Hummm Audio Flynn Posted November 2, Ray, OK I am full of hot air too often. Correct about the Klipsch though; I hope. I have only been subscribing to Stereophile for about 4 years I think. It is humbling being caught embelishing. How many years back does that list go?
Colin Posted November 4,
Author lorena f, become more real, ag from stereophile, the whole review, bagheera the trainer, the next generation, our february issue, moon evolution 740p线前置放大器, into the soundstage, march 2014 column, a 16bit system, tries her hand, john crabbe firebrand, amp power amplifier, 31 kt88 review