@viber6,
Correcting your assertion…. 57% vs 43% is a landslide. 30% more. But that is not really the true result… I was just summarizing. The full results are far more revealing and detrimental to your position.
presentation 1: 45%-55%. (The least obvious of the 3) 20% more.
presentation 2: 41%-59%. 45% more
presentation 3: (and easily the clearest to hear due to the more revealing Soulution preamplifier:…. 37%-63%. 70% more.
A gargantuan difference and statistically significant by nearly any measure.
The difference between the Rouge and mystery amp were not “fairly small”. They were so large that many of us—including you—had no trouble not only identifying differences but rather confidently labeling the two on multiple blind AB trials via a highly and lossy compressed YouTube video recorded with an iPhone and stereo microphone. A reasonable expectation would be that if they were “fairly close” we wouldn’t be able to identify them.
Addressing what is more likely the main reason your preferences are tilted so far away from the norm (accepting that you do have some knowledge, some experience and some skill): It seems likely that in your age, you have lost much more of your hearing above a few thousand hz than you realize. An expected result of both age and spending much of your life sitting in the middle of an orchestra and having your instrument’s sound hole 6 inches from your ear.
Until you have designed and successfully sold a line of audiophile equipment or world class instruments or been the keynote speaker at an audio or recording conference or been otherwise publicly recognized—contrary to your own opinion—you are not an expert in this field. You are an hobbyist with some experiences and a point of view. That’s it…. Just like most of us.
I studied cello with 2nd chair in Pittsburgh symphony. I studied classical guitar in college. I have been the manager of an actively touring and recording artist recording in some of the worlds best studios working with top producers and engineers. I have been on the credits of 3 records that spent time on Billboards top 10 chart. I have owned several world class instruments including cello and guitars. I grew up with an audiophile father who hand built his own first stereo in the late 50’s early 60’s while attending MIT for undergraduate and graduate school and was constantly trying to improve his system. Audio Research SP3 and SP6b with Vandersteen speakers were some of his prized system in the 70’s and 80’s—I know you would hate that system, but I wonder how many thousands of speakers Richard V has sold over the past half century?. I have been patiently building my own high end system since college in the 80’s (albeit never reaching into the stratosphere world that Jay is able to report on). I have been blessed to listen to some of the greatest musicians in very good… and very bad venues.
BUT…! I am not an expert. I am also an hobbyist. I am a music lover striving to eke out that little bit of higher performance within my limited budget.—By the way, there are other trained, professional musicians that also participate in this thread. You are far from special in this regard.
You regularly expound on equipment that you have not ever heard, let alone owned or had in your system and then castigate others for doing the same thing.
I have an idea…. Take out your camera phone—without changing a setting (we are on the honor system…!)—take a picture of your beloved Rane (clearly showing the settings) and post it on your Audiogon virtual system. We can then take a pole and post what we all think your system would sound like. My top 2 predictions…. 1. Teenager that listens to too much heavy metal at <105 db’s, 2. Deaf old man who ought to recognize his own deficiencies by virtue of the settings he has chosen on his Radio Shack quality, graphic equalizer that are readily available for $129.99 + shipping in 1 whopping payment from eBay.
You like to talk about equipment that is not to your preference as “euphonic”, “soft”, “rolled off”, etc. I’m guessing that were we not polite, we would describe your 1970’s era graphic equalizer modified preferred sound as “discordant”, “disharmonious”, “dissonant”, “inharmonious”, “blaring”, “grating”, “harsh”, “jarring”—antonyms for “euphonic”. I would likely describe it as strident, harsh and completely unnatural. In a world where the designers of high end equipment spend their lives striving to perfect their equipment according to you nearly every one of them get’s it so wrong that you have to apply up to 12 db to the top 15% of the spectrum—as stated per your prior posts—of elevating levels from 8000-20000 Hz. What you describe as “sparkle”, most of us would describe as shrill… the stuff of fingernails on a chalkboard.
You are being patently offensive when you say that the readers “…90% in favor of soft, pleasant amps with rolled off HF”. You are being patently offensive when you say “only a small % of a-Phil’s are trying to imitate reality/high fidelity… most people have a preference for just what pleases them without an objective standard.”
When tossing the word “foolish” about criticizing your expertise, clearly there is not a mirror large enough in your house to recognize yourself.
Warmest, Euphonic regards,
Paul
Correcting your assertion…. 57% vs 43% is a landslide. 30% more. But that is not really the true result… I was just summarizing. The full results are far more revealing and detrimental to your position.
presentation 1: 45%-55%. (The least obvious of the 3) 20% more.
presentation 2: 41%-59%. 45% more
presentation 3: (and easily the clearest to hear due to the more revealing Soulution preamplifier:…. 37%-63%. 70% more.
A gargantuan difference and statistically significant by nearly any measure.
The difference between the Rouge and mystery amp were not “fairly small”. They were so large that many of us—including you—had no trouble not only identifying differences but rather confidently labeling the two on multiple blind AB trials via a highly and lossy compressed YouTube video recorded with an iPhone and stereo microphone. A reasonable expectation would be that if they were “fairly close” we wouldn’t be able to identify them.
Addressing what is more likely the main reason your preferences are tilted so far away from the norm (accepting that you do have some knowledge, some experience and some skill): It seems likely that in your age, you have lost much more of your hearing above a few thousand hz than you realize. An expected result of both age and spending much of your life sitting in the middle of an orchestra and having your instrument’s sound hole 6 inches from your ear.
Until you have designed and successfully sold a line of audiophile equipment or world class instruments or been the keynote speaker at an audio or recording conference or been otherwise publicly recognized—contrary to your own opinion—you are not an expert in this field. You are an hobbyist with some experiences and a point of view. That’s it…. Just like most of us.
I studied cello with 2nd chair in Pittsburgh symphony. I studied classical guitar in college. I have been the manager of an actively touring and recording artist recording in some of the worlds best studios working with top producers and engineers. I have been on the credits of 3 records that spent time on Billboards top 10 chart. I have owned several world class instruments including cello and guitars. I grew up with an audiophile father who hand built his own first stereo in the late 50’s early 60’s while attending MIT for undergraduate and graduate school and was constantly trying to improve his system. Audio Research SP3 and SP6b with Vandersteen speakers were some of his prized system in the 70’s and 80’s—I know you would hate that system, but I wonder how many thousands of speakers Richard V has sold over the past half century?. I have been patiently building my own high end system since college in the 80’s (albeit never reaching into the stratosphere world that Jay is able to report on). I have been blessed to listen to some of the greatest musicians in very good… and very bad venues.
BUT…! I am not an expert. I am also an hobbyist. I am a music lover striving to eke out that little bit of higher performance within my limited budget.—By the way, there are other trained, professional musicians that also participate in this thread. You are far from special in this regard.
You regularly expound on equipment that you have not ever heard, let alone owned or had in your system and then castigate others for doing the same thing.
I have an idea…. Take out your camera phone—without changing a setting (we are on the honor system…!)—take a picture of your beloved Rane (clearly showing the settings) and post it on your Audiogon virtual system. We can then take a pole and post what we all think your system would sound like. My top 2 predictions…. 1. Teenager that listens to too much heavy metal at <105 db’s, 2. Deaf old man who ought to recognize his own deficiencies by virtue of the settings he has chosen on his Radio Shack quality, graphic equalizer that are readily available for $129.99 + shipping in 1 whopping payment from eBay.
You like to talk about equipment that is not to your preference as “euphonic”, “soft”, “rolled off”, etc. I’m guessing that were we not polite, we would describe your 1970’s era graphic equalizer modified preferred sound as “discordant”, “disharmonious”, “dissonant”, “inharmonious”, “blaring”, “grating”, “harsh”, “jarring”—antonyms for “euphonic”. I would likely describe it as strident, harsh and completely unnatural. In a world where the designers of high end equipment spend their lives striving to perfect their equipment according to you nearly every one of them get’s it so wrong that you have to apply up to 12 db to the top 15% of the spectrum—as stated per your prior posts—of elevating levels from 8000-20000 Hz. What you describe as “sparkle”, most of us would describe as shrill… the stuff of fingernails on a chalkboard.
You are being patently offensive when you say that the readers “…90% in favor of soft, pleasant amps with rolled off HF”. You are being patently offensive when you say “only a small % of a-Phil’s are trying to imitate reality/high fidelity… most people have a preference for just what pleases them without an objective standard.”
When tossing the word “foolish” about criticizing your expertise, clearly there is not a mirror large enough in your house to recognize yourself.
Warmest, Euphonic regards,
Paul