|   Mtrycrafts How do you audition your Audio Equipment Purchase | Robert Hamel
Nov 27, 2001 9:47 AM | | Sorry to put you on the spot but after reading your response in the thread below I am curious.
"Sorry, you are trying for excuses. Since he didn't conduct a valid observation in the first place, he has an unreliable observation, meaningless for what he claimed with it."
""- if you hear them sighted(bias driven or not) does it really make a difference? ""
"Yes, sighted has no meaning."
If sighted listening has no meaning what do you do?
Do you have the showrooms set-up DBT because your sighted listening would have no meaning. How can you make a decission without some kind of reasonable compromise? You can't DBT everything in the real world so I would honestly like to know how you aproach a purchase with that limitation? How would you limit the effects of sighted bias in a showroom? |
| re: Mtrycrafts How do you audition your Audio Equipment Purchase | Pat D
Nov 27, 2001 10:27 AM | | >You can't DBT everything in the real world so I would honestly like to know how you aproach a purchase with that limitation? How would you limit the effects of sighted bias in a showroom?
Has anyone said you have to do a DBT in order to choose equipment? |
| re: Mtrycrafts How do you audition your Audio Equipment Purchase | Eyespy
Nov 27, 2001 12:04 PM | | Funny how history repeats itself, over and over. |
| Its not history to me. | Robert Hamel
Nov 27, 2001 12:07 PM | | Well I am not here often so if I am asking a previously posted question and you know where it is on the site would you please post the link.
Thanks |
| Here's an important part of history. | Claudius
Nov 28, 2001 5:19 AM | | Mtrycrafts :
"Unless you can proove a difference, they are the same"
Which explains why everyone sharing an audio experience is viewed the same as someone claiming to be abducted by aliens.
Also explains why it appears that people with opinions are guilty until proven innocent.
Good thing that doesn't hold true in our society. |
| Here's an important part of history. | mtrycrafts
Nov 28, 2001 11:30 PM | | "Which explains why everyone sharing an audio experience is viewed the same as someone claiming to be abducted by aliens"
You left out an importand fact, only when they are testable. Many of the audio claims are testable and evidence is non existant as with alien abducions. So, it is very appropriate comparison. But you knew that, or should have.
"Also explains why it appears that people with opinions are guilty until proven innocent. "
More distortion. Just taken to task. Not all opinions are equal, are they. |
| If DBT is the Holly Grail?? | Robert Hamel
Nov 27, 2001 2:17 PM | | If all sighted listening is biased and not valid when you do sighted auditions your bias can lead you down the wrong road to make the wrong choice. If you firmly believe this is true then sighted evaluations while auditioning are useless. So how do you do it? What do you use to base your decissions on? |
| IWho said it was the Holy Grail? | Pat D
Nov 27, 2001 7:26 PM | | If someone persists in attributing positions to us that we do not hold, it is difficult to get through to him. Who said DBT is the Holy Grail? What would you mean by this image?
First of all, in choosing equipment, one ordinarily forms a preference, which can be based on many things besides sound. Build quality, perceived reliability, power output, ability to drive low impedances and reactive loads, features, styling, and so on. There is a French saying that everyone has their taste. In any case, no one need use DBTs to choose equipment unless they want to, and we have never said anything different.
Second, there is the matter of audible differences. Now, with speakers, one takes it for granted that there are audible differences, although bias is still present in making choices. But that is why one does not see such arguments on All About Speakers, although one does seem them concerning preamps, amplifiers, and CDPs and different digital formats.
The vinyl vs. digital and tube vs. solid state arguments are of a different nature, for hear everyone agrees LPs often sound different from CDs and that tube amps are likely to sound different from solid state ones (it's chiefly a matter of the output impedances, I think!). I have no problem if someone prefers vinyl or tubes as long as they have no problem with my prefernce for CDs and solid state and does not make up spurious and derogatory reasons for them.
But remember, on this forum, we are here talking about interconnects and speaker cables of appropriate length and guage. Everyone agrees the measured differences are likely to be small. Phono leads are a different matter and the capacitance can make a big difference in the FR with some cartridges. So, when claims are made as to audible differences where the measured differences are prima facie small, some of us simply ask whether such claims have been reliably verified. Small means below the Just Noticeable Differences. This requires, among other things, level matching to within 0.1 dB.
Often people make testable claims where differences are prima facie under the JNDs. For examaple, when someone proposes that 10-15% of the cost of a system should be spent on interconnects and cables, we would like to know the basis of this advice. So far, we haven't found anything satisfactory.
Here is a well-know set of level matching criteria:
http://www.oakland.edu/~djcarlst/abx_crit.htm
The following is also a good read:
http://www.dself.demon.co.uk/subjectv.htm |
| 10-15% rule | Warren Warren
Nov 27, 2001 8:02 PM | | I am actually a proponent of this rule of thumb, within reason. I do believe that you reach a point where more money does not make a better cable. I think this rule of thumb works well for systems between $500 and $5000. If you have a $5000 system, odds are good that you have either a home-theater setup with several speakers, or good quality, low-noise separates and speakers, probably with 5 way binding posts on each end. The way I would look at this, and again, it is only a rule of thumb, is that if you have an HT system, you will need a lot of speaker wire, and several different types of interconnects. If you have a $500 system, $50 will buy you 2 3' pairs of Radio Shack's best interconnects, 16 feet of OFC speaker wire, and terminations for each end. If you have a $5000 system, $500 will buy you a better quality interconnects with better, more durable connectors, sheilding, better (i.e. some silver content) solder and better quality of construction, and either more pairs of speaker wires for HT, or more pairs for a better quality speaker that can be bi-amped. Of course, bi-amping usually means more than one amp, as well as an external crossover, so you need more interconnects. Anyway, that's how I arrive at the 10% figure. HOWEVER, I do believe that a budget of $500 could buy outstanding cables no matter what the cost of the overall system, unless you have a LOT of speakers and/or components that need to be connected. I do think that people who spend $500 PER FOOT are going overboard in no small way. I hope you find my basis satisfactory, as I have not only given this advice to many, but also live by it myself. Of course, I have a lot of speakers and components, so I have spent about $1000 on interconnects and cables on a $10K system, without even really thinking about the rule, but in my case the 10% rule worked anyway! |
| 10-15% rule | Pat D
Nov 27, 2001 8:32 PM | | >If you have a $500 system, $50 will buy you 2 3' pairs of Radio Shack's best interconnects, 16 feet of OFC speaker wire, and terminations for each end.
Yeah, but they will work just fine in a much more expensive system, too, which mine is. Even so, the prices you give seem rather high and I just use ordinary interconnects and 12 guage wire.
> Of course, I have a lot of speakers and components, so I have spent about $1000 on interconnects and cables on a $10K system, without even really thinking about the rule, but in my case the 10% rule worked anyway!
I'm sure your interconnects and cables work just fine. No one says they would not.
You may click on the 'head' next to my moniker to see what my system is. My speakers cannot be biamped--no crossover. |
| 10-15% rule | Warren Warren
Nov 28, 2001 3:24 AM | | Very nice system. I have been quite impressed with the few Quad pieces I have heard. I realize that ordinary 12ga cable is very inexpensive, but I also believe there may be some benefits (not all of them sonic) in buying better quality cables. Some of these benefits may be (but are not limited to) durability, resistance to abrasion, appearance (which can be important if your cables are visible), fire retardance (plenum), shape (i.e. flat or flattened rather than round), etc. Also, I include cable terminations with the cables. A nice set of spade lugs and a silver solder will set you back some money as well. Like I said, it is a rule of thumb, not etched in stone, and I certainly wouldn't condemn anyone if they only spent 1% of their audio budget on these things. In fact, I would be more critical of someone who spent 50 percent of their budget on them. As I said, there is a point of diminishing returns, but I also believe that you could benefit by using good quality interconnects and cables. |
| Fire retardant?????????? | Pat D
Nov 28, 2001 9:15 AM | | Trust me, my speaker cables are durable. I've had them for almost 20 years, I think.
>As I said, there is a point of diminishing returns, but I also believe that you could benefit by using good quality interconnects and cables.
You can believe this if you wish. I see no reason to believe there would be any benefit for me. |
| Fire retardant?????????? | Warren Warren
Nov 28, 2001 3:24 PM | | Why Fire Retardant? Because some people who would like to hide their speaker wires rather then show them off live in finished homes. Some of these people run the speaker wires through ductwork. If there should ever be a ventilation fire (it happens), a normal cable can give off toxic fumes, as well as be completely destroyed. This is why there is plenum cable, not only for speaker wire, but Cat5 and others as well. I know it sounds weird, but it may even be required by building codes in some areas. So, not as funny as it seems. |
| Cool !!!................. (nt) | ckturtle
Nov 29, 2001 12:40 PM | | |
| Why the fixed percentage? | Robert Hamel
Nov 28, 2001 9:48 AM | | I have all after market connectors either Monster various grades which I got cheap when Circuit City went under, Radio Shack Gold, or Discwasher Goldens with 12gA Recoton speaker wire with Radio Shack solderless Gold Banana Plugs. I use these because the 12ga just makes sense and the bananas are a godsend when I change out my mains. The rest is because I actually have had lesser interconects become intermitent which drive me nuts until I realized what was up. I like the better made cables. I am not to sure about any fixed forumula just get the quality you are comfortable with. |
| Why the fixed percentage? | Warren Warren
Nov 28, 2001 11:10 AM | | Just out of curiousity, have you added up the cost of all your cables and compared it to the actual value of your system? I have no problem with RS at all, and the only problem I have with Monster is they are frequently overpriced, but they are not a bad product in general. Do the math and let me know what you come up with, just to see if it fits. Of course, if your system is worth over $5K, then don't worry about it. Thanks! I'll look for your response. |
| If you dismiss all sighted listening what is left? | Robert Hamel
Nov 27, 2001 8:53 PM | | Hello Pat
DBT is the Holy Grail if you dismiss all sighted listening as worthless. That is an outlandish statement. What else do we have?
Thanks for the response you raise good points and yes I do realize this is the cable forum. I think DBT is a usefull tool beyond the average person's reach. Lets face it we couldn't even get the levels matched well enough and that's the easy part. To require a person to do a DBT test to post there opinion is as ridiculous as the sonic improvement claims my dog can't hear. |
| If you dismiss all sighted listening what is left? | mtrycrafts
Nov 27, 2001 9:23 PM | | "DBT is the Holy Grail if you dismiss all sighted listening as worthless. "
It is when you want to know if there are audible differneces. That simple, irrefutable. Sighted listening is just fine for preference.
"I think DBT is a usefull tool beyond the average person's reach. "
The average person can learn the whys of DBT and what the availabkle research and evidence is. That would go a long way in eliminating a need to listen for audible differences, not rely on testimonials based on such mode and not obsess over an non issue.
"Lets face it we couldn't even get the levels matched well enough and that's the easy part. "
And yet, one bases their peceived differences on such an unreliable method. What good is it? What can it possibley tell the listener, if he is so ill equipped to know?
"To require a person to do a DBT test to post there opinion is as ridiculous as the sonic improvement claims my dog can't hear. "
What is required is to suppor a testable claim one makes. As it should be, not blindly accept any testimonial as having merit or that all opinions have equal weight. |
| Actually why listen at all? | Claudius
Nov 28, 2001 5:10 AM | | You said "Sighted listening is just fine for preference" but if well designed components are transparant, then you should just choose your preference based on sight and not bother listening right?
I'm sure lot's of people do this, why else would Stereophile ads be worth so much? |
| Actually why listen at all? | mtrycrafts
Nov 28, 2001 11:35 PM | | "I'm sure lot's of people do this, why else would Stereophile ads be worth so much?"
Not at all. The marketeers are trying to convince a better sound can be had and the consumer has been well trained over the years to expect it to be so. Well reflected by the bismal scores in the science tests. |
| It depends on what you sighted auditions to do for you. | Pat D
Nov 28, 2001 9:08 AM | | If you read my post carefully, you will see that I exclude speakers, where measureable differences may be expected to exceed the JNDs, although bias certainly affects speaker auditions and speaker choices.
For my part, I expect a CDP, preamp, amplifier and so on, let alone interconnects and speaker cables to be audibly neutral. I am not into tubes. For example, when I have compared amplifiers, my procedure was to try to get them to sound the same using the volume control and balance control. This succeeded pretty well. I now know more about blind tests than I did then, and I am not currently in the market for a new amplifier, since I already have a fine one. Superb technical performance is a plus for me, as it gives some indication of the quality of the design.
I can level match CDPs much more accurately and even measure the frequency response using the analog meters on my old tape deck and/or equalizer. I cannot control for polarity, and cannot be sure that the level matching is with .1 dB. I can do fast switching this way.
It is just that I do not expect electronics (signal processors aside) to sound much different, used within their design limits. No one is saying that an amplifier that is in severe clipping will sound the same as one that is not. The power output into various loads is important. Frequency response, noise, distortion, input impedance, and output impedance are relevant, and often are good enough so as to give no reason to expect a 'different sound.' Of course, tube amplifiers often have a high output impedance, so they likely will sound different as the FR will likely not be flat into most speaker loads.
When electroncis do sound different, one would like to know why, and the answer usually seems obvious to those with the appropriate measuring equipment.
For speakers, I first have to find some way of selecting those to audition, and I use various sources such as reviews, recommendations by friends and dealers, or on line testimonials. I will listen to speakers using a broad variety of music, starting with full orchestra with massed strings, male vocal, female vocal, mixed chorus, and piano--few speakers make it through all of those. Room effects are most prominent below the midrange, and while it is advisable to try out speakers at home, one can usually tell what they do in the midrange, treble and highs even in a store. I try to make sure the speakers are placed well, in any case. I also like to see a good objective review giving a good set of measurements; the old Audio magazine was especially good at this. As for the results, all I can say is I have managed to get speakers that keep me happy for years.
There are very good reasons to try out electronic equipment before buying. You can see if it has the features needed, whether it is easy to use, and in the case of amplifiers, whether it can drive your speakers to the desired levels, how it looks, how well it seems to be built, and so on. Anyway, by using a piece of equipment, one may develop a preference for it. But this is just not a reliable method of determining audible differences between electronics when used within their design limits. For that a controlled DBT is needed. Of course, if the meaurements are above the JNDs, we could presume there would be an audible difference. Lacking those, one has a right to be sceptical. O)f course, one need not claim audible differences . . . |
| I'll tell you how I do it | Norm Strong
Nov 28, 2001 6:41 PM | | I don't audition audio components. I just follow the advice in Consumer Reports, keep the price down, and make sure the feature set is what I need. In the one instance when I performed a listening test of 3 similar speakers, I did, in fact, do it blind. I had 2 other guys make the same comparison.
And yes, it was a PITA. It took a day to set up and another day to do the test. The general conclusion I drew from this test, and from the results of CR speaker tests, is that there is very little correlation between price and sound quality. Loudness and bass extension correlate weakly with price. |
| If you look at the big picture. | Claudius
Nov 28, 2001 5:00 AM | | "Has anyone said you have to do a DBT in order to choose equipment?"
If you look at the big picture you'll see that anything less than a well conducted DBT, when that experience is shared with others on this board, is likened to an experience with aliens. |
| How do you choose a TV? | Monstrous Mike
Nov 28, 2001 8:48 AM | | Obviously, step one it to watch it in the store. But how do you compare different TV sets? If you are comparing TVs A and B, don't you have to be careful that the contrast, brightness, color, etc. is set the same? Should you should watch the same program? I think so. What about the lighting, this can affect the picture.
You can see how many variables there could be in simply selecting a TV in a showroom. So when some guy says: "The Sony XXX is better than the Toshiba YYY", how do you absorb this information? Don't you want to know what he did to determine his choice? And I think it is very clear that this would be a preference, not a fact. If it is presented as a fact, it should be challenged (due to the variables I have mentioned earlier). Can you see how this could apply to cables? |
| How many people cover up the brand names when comparing tv's? | Claudius
Nov 28, 2001 9:18 AM | | How many people go through the trouble of making sure that only picture quality and not brand name affect their T.V. decision.
I'd say probably Zero.
Maybe Mtrycrafts should go to television forums and blast everyone for sharing their "wives tales".
hehe.
In all seriousness, I think that you and I both agree on cables; but in recognizing that a properly controlled DBT is difficult to set up, I think we should accept the fact that anecdotal opinions (especially if they are the result of a single blind level matched test) do have SOME value and shouldn't be ridiculed. |
| How many people cover up the brand names when comparing tv's? | Monstrous Mike
Nov 28, 2001 10:52 AM | | You're right, a DBT for selecting a TV wouldn't work too well. The last time I picked a TV, I reviewed the specs, looked at several TVs and selected the one with the best picture (also had an excellent remote) for the best price. The whole process was completely subjective and I ended up with my preference.
I guess my real beef is the price range of cables. Let's compare TVs and cabling. A good TV can be $2000, $3000, or $4000. There's lots of choice within these price ranges. A cable can cost $10, $100, or $1000. The range of price for cabling is extreme for the same basic materials and construction. Think of all the different components that go into a TV and all the possible combinations. Then think of how cables can differ. From a purely engineering perspective, it is highly unlikely that the great price range of cabling is due to materials and construction superiority.
It's really crazy. I paid $1200 for my 36" JVC TV. There are 10 foot speaker cables out there that cost $1200. How can this be?
I think the point is that if you buy $1200 speaker cables, you must be expecting some sort of improvement over your $10 Radio Shack wires. So when someone claims they inserted $1200 speaker cables into their system and the sound came alive, I have to question this sort anecdote.
In the end, perception is reality. But if I am perceiving something the wrong way, please let me know. |
| I agree for the most part. | Claudius
Nov 29, 2001 7:38 AM | | You'd never catch me spending $1200 for cables! (LMAO)
"The last time I picked a TV, I reviewed the specs, looked at several TVs and selected the one with the best picture"
No, you only think you selected the best picture. Unless you removed all biases and had a peer with you to ensure that you followed the right protocol, it's just a wives tale. You been abducted by aliens too? hehe
Mike, I respect your approach to the cable debate. Unfortunately, some over rate absent evidence and behave as though there is proof that all well designed components are transparent AND they announce it implicitly 400-500 times a month.
Peace out. |
| Consumer reports is a good place to start | Markw*
Nov 28, 2001 10:01 AM | | they are a pretty good indicator of reliability. That has more than a little impact on my decisions. |
| Consumer reports is a good place to start | Monstrous Mike
Nov 28, 2001 10:54 AM | | What do consumer reports say about fancy cabling? |
| They don't. | Markw*
Nov 28, 2001 11:51 AM | | Nor do they rate the effectiveness of the various psychic hot lines or get rich quick schemes. |
| What does CR say about fancy cabling? | Norm Strong
Nov 28, 2001 6:53 PM | | Nothing--which is probably what they think the subject is worth. |
| You should choose based on all senses except hearing. | Claudius
Nov 28, 2001 5:15 AM | | "Has anyone said you have to do a DBT in order to choose equipment?"
No, but they have said you have to do a DBT in order to choose equipment based on how it sounds.
Of course, if it's just a matter of forming a preference, that should be based on sight, smell, touch, and maybe taste.
It's the only rational thing to do if you believe that well designed components are transparent. |
| re: Mtrycrafts How do you audition your Audio Equipment Purchase | mtrycrafts
Nov 27, 2001 9:06 PM | | If I were to purchase a system, it would be based on preferences. That simple. The available evidence indicates that well designed components are indeed transparent. Issues of preference and flexibility. Simple. |
| So then you don't audition. OK | Robert Hamel
Nov 27, 2001 9:35 PM | | I will tryout equipment to verify features and such also. This make sense as if you don't believe there are diferences between components wires are a no brainer to you. The only components I have ever auditioned were speakers. I will assume you do audition them! |
| So then you don't audition. OK | mtrycrafts
Nov 27, 2001 10:15 PM | | Is that what I said? Or, listen for a preference? Or not listen?
"This make sense as if you don't believe there are diferences between components wires are a no brainer to you. "
Well designed one, you are correct. Cables, you are correct, a no brainer.
"The only components I have ever auditioned were speakers. I will assume you do audition them!"
Of course. I need to like them. |
| Do you still have your... | Zheeeeeeeeeeeeem
Nov 28, 2001 1:33 AM | | JBL Ti 250s? |
| Jim Willis | mtrycrafts
Nov 28, 2001 11:42 PM | | <http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/music/messages/34053.html>
Just cannot stay away. What brings you back? AA too looney for you? |
| Ahhhhh, Chuck, as you know... | Zheeeeeeeeeeeeeem
Nov 30, 2001 4:45 AM | | There's nowhere too looney for me.
Just thought I'd drop by and see if you and your droogies are trying to save the world from cables. You've got quite a following. Do you guys dress alike, too? |
| Is there a place that lists which components are "well designed" | Claudius
Nov 28, 2001 4:57 AM | | Just curious. |
| Is there a place that lists which components are "well designed" | Spiky
Nov 28, 2001 6:47 AM | | This is absolutely hilarious!! :)
Now mtry claims he DOES care about quality manufacturing, all other evidence to the contrary.
Claudius, there would be just as much arguing and fighting over what would be on that list as there is on this message board. There's no way to create such a list that even 20 people would agree with completely. Shop for yourself. Put trust in well-heralded brands until they screw you over. |
| Is there a place that lists which components are "well designed" | mtrycrafts
Nov 28, 2001 11:46 PM | | David Rich and Peter Aczel, 'Topological Analysis of Consumer Audio Electronics: Another Approach to Show that Modern Audio Electronics are Acoustically Transparent,' 99 AES Convention, 1995, Print #4053.
He has a few listed, yes. And if you read The Audio Critic, you will find even more. But then, you may have to do some outside research, a strange phenomenon. |
| So the '99 AES Convention was reported on in 1995? | Claudius
Nov 29, 2001 7:40 AM | | "Another Approach to Show that Modern Audio Electronics are Acoustically Transparent"
So they proved it? |
| So the '99 AES Convention was reported on in 1995? | mtrycrafts
Nov 30, 2001 12:16 AM | | 99th AES Convention in '95, yes.
they couldn't find audible differneces. |
| Were the listening tests calibrated? | Claudius
Nov 30, 2001 7:39 AM | | |
| Were the listening tests calibrated? | mtrycrafts
Dec 1, 2001 4:24 PM | | Probably not. They have no idea how to do it right. |
| Hold your calls, we have a winner!!! | billdean
Nov 28, 2001 10:00 PM | | For all of us who have asked this guy to please describe his system or relate his experiences, in order to add perspective to his comments, he's finally done it!
See the first phrase of his post - "If I were to purchase a system"...
I, too, wonder what he would hear if he purchased a system.
But hey, it's a start!!! |
| How to audition. | A
Nov 28, 2001 11:14 AM | | (Obviously, my comments are mine and not Mtrycrafts. However, my comments are relevant to the general topic at hand.)
When you decide to listen to something, what factors should you consider? Do you listen wearing a green shirt? Will a red shirt make the music sound "hotter"? These questions are important. Why? Because they illustrate the fact that some factors are not to be regarded as important. How should you decide whether something is important or not?
Well, first, one should consider whether it makes any sense that the thing in question will make any difference or not. If there is no reason to believe that the thing in question will make a difference, then it is safe to ignore it. (If someone later comes up with a REASON to suppose that the matter is relevant, then it can be examined at that time. But in the mean time, the color of your shirt can be ignored when listening to music.) Now, some things have been measured to be significantly different from other things, and tests have been done (DBTs) to demonstrate that certain differences are audible. Consequently, anything that can be measured to make such a difference is something to consider when listening (though one might reject something without listening to it, if it is measured to do something audible that one does not desire; e.g., 2kHz @ -10 dB from 1kHz). Speakers often fall into the category of things that have been measured to be sufficiently different to be audibly different. With such measurements, no one need now do a double blind test to know if they are audibly different, because double blind tests have been done in which such differences have been demonstrated to be audible. But wires of comparable gauge in normal lengths do not have measurable differences that are such that they are enough different to be known to be audibly different. This means that, in order to have any reason to believe that wires are audibly different, one must either (1) do a double blind test which demonstrates an audible difference, or (2) find a measurement that is sufficiently different; by "sufficiently different", in this context, it is meant a difference that has been demonstrated to be audible. This principle applies to everything else. The result is, with certain exceptions (e.g., malfunctioning equipment, insufficient power, impedance mismatches, etc.), that certain components may be regarding as being AUDIBLY identical to other components of the same type (typically, this means amplifiers, wires, CD players, etc.). Typically, speakers exhibit measured differences that are such that they fall into the category of things that are audibly different, and consequently no DBT is needed to know that they are different. You then pick which one you prefer (and, of course, non-audio related issues are also relevant; size, appearance, etc.). In the case of CD players, one considers features, appearance, build quality, ability to play defective CDs, and price. It is not likely to be audibly different from most other CD players (remember, anything can malfunction, so it is always possible for there to be a real audible difference between any two components). And, of course, different CD players often have different output levels, and if one does not compensate for these differences, then the difference in volume may be audible, and differences in volume are subjectively perceived as being qualitatively different, with the louder one sounding more "full" (the subjective qualitative difference resulting from differences in volumes is sometimes dealt with by modifying the frequency response; that is the purpose of "loudness compensation" circuits, which are often engaged with a switch marked "Loudness"). Of course, a CD player can be made to audibly alter the sound, and then it will sound different from other CD players. However, that should show up in measurements that can be made.
Now, someone says they hear a difference that is unexpected. How doe |
| No offense, Robert, but WHO CARES? (nt) | Musika
Nov 29, 2001 1:09 PM | | |
| |
