In my experience, I've never heard two pre-amps that sound exactly the same, nor two DACs that sound the same, nor two amps...etc. Yet, occasionally someone will claim that they heard no difference between Product A and Product B in their system. I find it difficult to believe.
Because you are not listening blind. If you did demo blind, you’ll find a $500 DAC and a $2500 DAC (assuming cream of the crop for their price points) are not going to sound dissimilar.
If an amp or preamp has good linearity, low distortion (THD+IMD), high SNR, high channel separation, etc., then it’s hard for them to sound appreciably different.
I don’t think listening blind will do any good. The problem appears to be people don’t know what they’re listening to or how to analyze sound in comparative situations. Obviously any tests are system and listener dependent so negative results should be taken with a grain of salt.
If you did demo blind, you’ll find a $500
DAC and a $2500 DAC (assuming cream of the crop for their price points)
are not going to sound dissimilar.
That's quite possible. Many poorly-conducted blind listening tests obscure audible differences between the devices under test. Conducting a scientifically valid, double-blind listening test is trickier than it might seem.
Not hard to believe. People hear differently. I grade all my albums on sound quality, (class A, B, C, D, and F). When I have others over to listen there is almost always disagreement, with incredulous looks, over differences in opinion. YMMV...
@4hannons Ask your friend to use the same preamp without telling you for the same track at the same SPL level. May be you will find more often than not that you think you can hear a difference. A good experiment which is repeatable will help you run it multiple times, this will help you factor out irrelevant variables. You have to run the experiment many times (many many times) and then try to look at the distribution of the result.
Then reason (sometimes use basic probability theory to get concrete justification) about the result. Like for example if you ran the experiment 10 times and 7 out of 10 times you can hear a difference then something is not right. But 9 out of 10 times you hear no difference, yeah they are the same preamp and this makes sense. So running it more times makes it more easy to reason the distribution of the result, like here 10 is a bad example for some tests.
Do the same with different preamps, sure some preamps do sound different. But it is good to do it this way rather than spending a week with one preamp and a week another one and drawing a conclusion. Which is fine to get an impression, but statistically meaning less.
As a new audiophile I find that any number of tweaks and improvements suggested make no appreciable difference to me.....while others make big differences. Speaker position for me is one of those things I notice right away. Small changes. Even head position can make a difference for me.
And then there are differences that I can perceive but have a hard time saying which is better. To me that is the real hard thing. And it also makes me wonder if different but equal SQ doesn't suck some people into constant changes and 'upgrades' which might only actually be lateral moves???
Really funny, I do nothing but blind listening, and have no problem hearing differences between components.... Yep, I listen only with my ears *Grins!*
You have to ask yourself, what makes them different. For example obvious SS vs tube sound. Then what are the caps and resistors used. Power supplies. I have mentioned this many times, the Counterpoint line is an example, the basic preamps use 1 6DJ8 tube, the next model up 1 6DJ8 per channel, then as you go up the line separate power supplies, tube regulation and tube rectification, so you get the picture. If you are comparing similar designed components then they may not sound exactly alike but maybe not that different also. Again tube vs. SS sounds, Class A and D designs, OTL and DHT designs, see where this is going? If you only compare preamps that use 6922/6DJ8 tubes with similar designs, they may sound different but maybe not as much of a change that one may be looking for. Probably better trying a 6SN7 preamp to see what that would sound like in ones system, etc.
Then there are people who can change the sound of a component with modifications, that can be as simple as better power supply caps, swapping out resistors with Vishay, caddock, shinkoh, swapping out other capacitors with V-Caps, Jupiters, Duelands. And then there is adding filter chokes, upgrading transformers, etc. These simple changes may change the sound to more what you are looking for, plus once you hear what these changes accomplish, this can then help you understand each design and what changes make a component sound the way it does in comparison..
Because people like to think that they are smarter than everyone else and that "they know better." They’re just trolls who have "be right."
It's also possible that their system are set up like some of the ones that I've seen posted on the B&W forum on FB where one speaker is sitting in a corner, they aren't toed in equally, there's a lot of exposed glass in the room... If the whole system sounds like garbage anyway, then they won't hear a difference between cables or a DAC.
I have witnessed a person with .99 cent cables with a pioneer receiver and swears he can’t hear a difference between cables. He compares $49 cartridges to more expensive 1’s and can’t hear a difference. Your system has to be of some decent quality before you can take advantage of better products. Your system will only sound as good as your weakest component.
Everything I've switched up in my systems has sounded different in some way, the exception perhaps being cables. Sources, amps, preamps, turntables, cartridges, DACs, etc. have all sounded different in some way. Speakers of course have the most obvious effect on sound.
I'm not saying cables don't make a difference, because I have sat while someone swapped out cables in rapid succession and also switched between identical systems with different cables and heard differences.
I've noticed differences in sound with some of the cables in my system, but mostly when I've replaced really cheap cables. I have spent a fair amount of money on power cords and interconnects, but have not bought any megabucks cables. If there are differences in sound quality for the most part they have been to subtle to notice. Maybe the rest of my system isn't resolving enough for it to matter or my hearing isn't that sensitive.
Listening with just your ears does eliminate the effect of psychoacoustics quite plenty if you are totally blind, and you ask the in-store consultant not to tell you which one of the several amps, or preamps, or players, or cables, etc... in the lineup you are listening to... Particularly if the evaluation and results are repeated with consistency.
I found there can be significant differences in performance between components of same price ranging from freeby earpieces given out by airlines in flight or 50C RCA wires supplied with old boomboxes and cassette recorders, all the way upto multi thousand $$$ wiring and high end speakers... Same thing for other components in the audio chain.
While this has usually been the case, it has not been universally so... There have been some less than common cases where I have perceived little or no difference.
Listening with just your ears does eliminate the effect of psychoacoustics quite plenty if you are totally blind ...
This is mistaken and a common misnomer. It is impossible to listen "with just your ears." Just as with vision, what we perceive is determined as much by our brain as it is by the physical hearing mechanism. There is simply no way to completely eliminate psychoacoustic phenomenona from a listening test. Those who completely reject scientific blind listening tests - and I’m not one of them - often cite that as a flaw in blind testing. It’s a valid point, but doesn’t completely discredit the value of such testing, imo.
... ask the in-store consultant not to tell you which one of the several amps, or preamps, or players, or cables, etc... in the lineup you are listening to ...
If you want a meaningful blind test, it has to be double-blind. And there’s more to it than that; to be scientific, you need to match levels, and you need to provide quick switching while also allowing the subject to listen for as long as he likes to each DUT, such as is provided in the abx protocol.
Conducting a valid, double-blind, scientific listening test is a tricky business. And even when properly conducted, it’s easy to misinterpret the results. For those reasons and others, I believe that audiophiles have very little practical use for blind listening tests.
Hearing, just like the rest of our senses can be refined and educated over a period of time. As an example, top chefs and wine sommeliers have educated their palette to discern subtle taste differences that most would miss. Perfumers have developed their sense of smell to the point that they can deconstruct a perfume formulae. Or how a conductor hears the orchestra differently than the audience.
Hearing, just like the rest of our senses can be refined and educated over a period of time.
Quite so! In fact, when professionals conduct blind listening tests, they commonly begin with some training to help the subjects know what to listen for.
Some very good points made here. I take care quite often to have a friend come help blind test; I also compare over time, and get my wife's "golden ears" opinion until she gets annoyed (humor).
I understand and agree that certain components will sound similar, especially DAC's. I've had to do some very careful listening to reveal the smallest of differences. On one occasion, the difference was so slight, it came down to a two second section where I could hear a difference of a faint bongo beat that DAC A presented with more percussion than DAC B (about the 6:56-58 mark on the song "Morning Mist" performed by Ahmad Jamal).
If you think that two components sound the same, then you need to keep listening until you hear the difference.
I'll admit that sometimes the differences can be so small they aren't worth mentioning or not meaningful enough. In the DAC comparison I described above, that difference had meaning to me, small as it was.
cleeds, I do not think it would be that difficult at all to design a randomized, double blinded study for audiophiles. I'm not saying it wouldn't be a little complex but it wouldn't be hard.
The issue is who would need such a test and why. I do not think it is useful for an individual audiophile for whom the only determinant is "what do I like better".
However, for critics (whose descriptions of equipment SQ all seem to sound the same) or for magazines/web sites that compare equipment I think such tests would be very valuable and legitimizing if results corroborate critical assessments. I deeply suspect that they wouldn't.....and that's why it isn't done.
Many areas in medicine that were once dominated by the diagnostic proficiency of experience physicians have gone by the wayside because studies show that many aspects of the physical exam are not nearly as sensitive or specific as physicians claimed and swore that they were.
4hannons, if I think two pieces of equipment sound the same then I'm done. Why spend time trying to hear a difference that is so minute as to be irrelevant? As you say, the key word is "relevant" I suppose.
I do not think it would be that difficult at all to design a
randomized, double blinded study for audiophiles. I'm not saying it
wouldn't be a little complex but it wouldn't be hard.
It's fairly easy to design such a test, but it is a real challenge to actually conduct such a test if you want it to be scientifically valid. It's a tedious and laborious undertaking on the parts of all, including the test subjects.
The issue is who would need such a test and why. I do not think it is
useful for an individual audiophile for whom the only determinant is
"what do I like better".
n80 - I don't find it useful when someone describes two components sounding the same, that's my point. It just makes sense to me to find the difference if you've taken an interest to compare. Notice I'm not saying "better", a subjective term but sometimes useful. I suppose someone can argue that the term "different" is subjective as to the skill of the listener, the equipment, if detectable, etc.
Some very good points made here. I take care quite often to have a friend come help blind test; I also compare over time, and get my wife's "golden ears" opinion until she gets annoyed (humor).
I understand and agree that certain components will sound similar, especially DAC's. I've had to do some very careful listening to reveal the smallest of differences. On one occasion, the difference was so slight, it came down to a two second section where I could hear a difference of a faint bongo beat that DAC A presented with more percussion than DAC B (about the 6:56-58 mark on the song "Morning Mist" performed by Ahmad Jamal).
IMO if you have to have a friend come over, or take more time then there is probably very little difference. When I demo one of my products, if you don't hear a dramatic difference within about 30 seconds, then take it out and be happy with what you have.
Here's a tip which costs nothing, nada, and you will hear a difference. Just cup your hands behind your ears. Even if you like the sound I know it's a real pain keeping your hands in place but you will hear a difference. I recall that too many years ago to remember a US company tried to market a cardboard device which looked like Mickey Mouse ears and you fitted to your head when listening. It looked ridiculous and therefore didn't sell but it did work.
Was I not the first? Ortho Ears was going to be my first product. They were based on Spock Halloween ears. Which I think is a smart look. That was 25 years ago.
Funny that this was mentioned. The hearing in my left ear is worse than my right. As I was learning about speaker position and listening position etc I cupped my hand behind my left ear and it made a big difference in the size and shape of the sound stage. But it did have a hollow 'sea-shell' quality to it so I tried different hand shapes and was able to eliminate that.
I'm glad no one saw me doing this...my wife already has plenty of reasons to have me committed.
Anyway, this worked but is very impractical. Also, with a little more time and effort I was able to balance things out with minor adjustments to speaker and listening chair placement. So now I appear semi-sane while listening.
The cupped-hands technique definitely yields a "sea-shell" effect. Closing the eyes always improves aural acuity. Removing eye-glasses does too. Still trying to prove to my wife I'm semi-sane also...
Act chew ally the cupped hands improves dynamic range, especially for systems that lack dynamic range, and loudness, i.e., a better antenna, but the down side is it impacts soundstage. Once your system can perform dynamically, e.g., room acoustics treatments, you’ll discover the cupped hands doesn’t do much at all. Recordings are made with human ears in mind, not Mr. Spock’s. You’re not hearing the rear reflections since the hands block them.
In fact, in the case of power amplifiers as an example; it needs to accurately amplify the input signal, and transfer that signal, fully intact, to a low impedance load. A well-designed power amplifier, in theory, is not supposed to reshape the input in any unintended or involuntary manner, so I support the concept that accuracy improves when the potential for error and distortion is minimized.
Unfortunately, there are many people who’ve never been taught how to listen or what to listen for and that’s because they’ve never met a person, or found a dealer/store, who was willing or able to teach them. Can you tell the difference between a male and female voice? Congratulations, you can hear. If you go to a Hifi shop to listen with the preconceived notion you won’t hear any differences, then there’s a great chance you won’t. The teacher has to be willing to teach, but the student also has to be willing to learn...
I need a psychologist to weigh in here. (I am not one). The central fallacy as I see it is; assuming one can hear a difference in presentation between two similar components, is one better? Chocolate and vanilla are both ice creams, both cold and sweet, but decidedly different; so which is "better"? Can't they just be different? I prefer vanilla, so to ME it is "better." This is the tyrrany of choice; we assume that because two things are demonstrably different one has to be better. Take tubes and transistors. They both distort, but in different ways. This is what gives them their characteristic "sounds." But as they improve in quality their distortions minimize and their sounds become more similar. Still, each has a distinctive "sound" of its own; perhaps a vanishingly small difference but since there are two different pieces being compared then at least a theoretical difference. Which is better? The one I prefer may not be what you prefer, but for me the better component is the one I prefer, and I don't really care what YOU like best. I find audiophiles divide into two groups; those that listen to music with components vs. those that listen to components with music.
The problem is too many people make this way harder than it has to be. A lot of people listen for a lot of different things. For me it’s simple - I listen for clarity/resolution/detail - basically, do I hear things I’ve never picked up or heard before and is it more intelligible? So to dohanian’s point, chocolate vs vanilla = Speakers are the instrument - do you want a Taylor, Martin, Gibson etc. guitar? Find the speaker that tonally appeals to you. Now, who do you want playing your instrument - your Electronics? If you liked the Taylor guitar and handed that same guitar to Jeff Beck, Eric Clapton, and Chet Atkins, it’s going to sound very different, but for one of those guys, that guitar is just going sound right with them playing it. So tubes, or solid state? Yes! One will be more right and “Does it get out of the way” - or does it add or take away from what you’ve heard in that recording you’ve listened to a 1000 times? There in lies your answer - yes it’s better or no it’s not - because it certainly will without a doubt be different one way or another, however, different doesn’t always mean better or worse, but like I said, there is a synergy that can happen with Electronics and Speakers that can just be great and then you should know. That’s also why it’s important to pick well recorded music to audition with because then understanding flaws in recordings of music you truly like to listen to becomes easier to discern. The Music has been mixed, mastered. EQ’d, engineered and produced, so the better your Electronics/Speakers are, the more they show differences in those recordings - you’re never Improving the signal with anything, you’ only making it less bad and I think once everyone understands that, then the differences between good and bad become a lot clearer!
Not a bad metaphor, cbrents73. Just a side note to dig in a bit to the tubes/transistor point. You say one will be "more right." Each have qualities that are superior to the other. We know that traditionally transistor amps have killer, tight bass. Tubes have sweet, transparent mids and highs. Which is better? One is "right" for me, the other is "right" for you. Both, then, are "better" for someone, but they are certainly different. If one amp had the best qualities of both THAT would be the better amp. Otherwise you'll just have to choose which one you can live with; which one is right for you.
@dohanian - My solution to the tube/transistor, strength/weakness point, is to actively bi-amp, with SS on the bottom. The results can be wonderful, if it’s done correctly.
I've never understood why people who claim everything sounds the same are even in to the audio hobby, and especially why they spend so much effort across the various audio forums trying to convince people they aren't hearing what they are hearing.
OK right, then you must plug your ears and conduct a 'silent test' when you compare the taste of two different hamburgers. Because of the 'psychodegustations'.
Is this question serious ? 1st off Agon isn't going to allow any peer reviewed white papers to be posted that disprove 90% of audiophile snake oil , secondly who cares if people can't hear the difference between a $20,000 Audio Research amp and a $300 Behringer pro amp ,I wish I was in the camp who doesn't hear differences in components ,I'd sell off my entire collection ,replace it with a $500 Bose plastic mess and put an extra $100k back in my bank account , I've been gone for 8 years and still the questions are the same lol
I think this discussion is purely academic. By far, majority of people can tell the difference between a good sounding system and a great sounding one. It’s the so-called audiophiles that look for small incremental improvements which may or may not be apparent to an average person.
... 1st off Agon isn't going to allow any peer
reviewed white papers to be posted that disprove 90% of audiophile snake
oil ...
I think you are mistaken. I've never seen any indication that Audiogon limits content in the fashion you describe. Of course, I'm not aware of any "peer
reviewed white paper" that would disprove 90 percent of audiophile snakeoil. Can you provide any evidence of either of these claims, bigjoe?
I know also time is a factor as well, I've listened to components I'm interested in and thought they sounded better because they did have more of this and that. but long term I wasn't listening to music anymore I was listening to what that component did well. Then you realise your only listening to the few things that component does well and not the whole, that's when you realise your not listening to music anymore but the components. That's why I have to live with something longer then a few days to get a whole picture, is that picture the music or the component? When I'm fully engaged in the music the component doesn't mater anymore that's what I look for. I was stuck in the listening to components wheel for a long time then I re-found music and stopped listening to the components and listened to weather that component brought me closer to the music and the musical engagement.
only advice I can give a new audiophile is don't listening to components listen to the music and weather you are engaged in the musical event.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
