🚀 go-pugleaf

"ric" <nospam@home.com> wrote in message news:42D415DF.EBFEE3FA@home.com...
> Gordon wrote:
>
>> Arny ,a quick question ,as you are in Michigan why do you feel the need 
>> to
>> post in an Austalian newsgroup.
>
> Gordon, read your headers! This thread has been crossposted to
> FOUR newsgroups, only one of which is Aussie.
My appologies , in this case , but most of the Ozzy posters will know what I 
was getting at.
Gordon 

You can buy a lot of cheap players
> for what one exotic costs and as long as it works OK it will
> sound as good as any of them.

** You're paying for what you get. Just like you can not expect Proton's
vehicles to give you the same driving experience as Lexus vehicles-
regarless of physical appearances.

Cheers

Dean

 Better made players last longer, play marginal discs better, and are
nicer to use. If you want okay for cheap buy a $39 Apex at WalMart. It
will work about a year then buy another.  If you don't need DVD-A or
SACD, and don't mind the nasty smell it gives off-why,I'm not sure, but
it has no toobs and Margaret can't possibly put out enough slime to
smell that many of them up-and don't mind the fact you will have to
dismantle it and use a 9V battery to open the drawer to get the last CD
it plays because it will trap your disc when it dies, well, go for it.

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 02:18:41 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
<YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote:

>
>"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message 
>news:eqm6d1p2dotgtu1j7vhck3gie5t6sbs3qk@4ax.com...
>> On 11 Jul 2005 17:27:35 -0700, calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Arny isn't too keen on actually listening to audio products, since
>>>they should all sound the same according to tests.
>>
>>
>>In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.
>>
>
>Damn it, there are those pesky expectation effects again. 

Indeed - that's why the tests are done blind...........

-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 18:13:32 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
<YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote:

>
>"Harry Lavo" <hlavo@comcast.net> wrote in message 
>news:3t2dnYqMZtkjVU7fRVn-tg@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Clyde Slick" <YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote in message 
>> news:42d36070$1_2@spool9-east.superfeed.net...
>>>
>>> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message 
>>> news:eqm6d1p2dotgtu1j7vhck3gie5t6sbs3qk@4ax.com...
>>>> On 11 Jul 2005 17:27:35 -0700, calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Arny isn't too keen on actually listening to audio products, since
>>>>>they should all sound the same according to tests.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>>>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Damn it, there are those pesky expectation effects again.
>>
>> Clyde, don't you know that "expectation effects" only apply to those of us 
>> who disagree?  Has nothing to do with those who *know* there is no 
>> difference.  :-)
>
>And the abx test removes our expectations, yet leaves their expectations in.
>It is a more biased test than subjective listening!!!
>ABX is hideously flawed. 

Bullshit. What you mean is that ABX doesn't support your absolute
knowledge that 'high-end' designer label gear *must* sound better than
'Chinky cheapies'.
-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 22:45:15 -0400, "Clyde Slick"
<YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote:

>
>"Howard Ferstler" <ferstle@attglobal.net> wrote in message 
>news:42D47BFB.8C63757F@attglobal.net...
>> Clyde Slick wrote:
>>>
>>> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:eqm6d1p2dotgtu1j7vhck3gie5t6sbs3qk@4ax.com...
>>> > On 11 Jul 2005 17:27:35 -0700, calcerise@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Arny isn't too keen on actually listening to audio products, since
>>> >>they should all sound the same according to tests.
>>
>>> >In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>>> > players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.
>>
>>> Damn it, there are those pesky expectation effects again.
>>
>> You are just trying to rationalize the fact that you simply
>> must have something exotic and esoteric to believe in. (That
>> this involves audio gear and not some kind of religious
>> deity and a need for salvation shows a monumental smallness
>> of mind.) That you place expectation effects higher up on
>> the scale than simply not hearing differences during a DBT
>> says more about you as a true believer than it does about
>> any kind of audio gear.
>>
>Take a good look at the test methodology, it only accounts
>for eliminating one side of the expectation effects, the expectation
>that there will be differences. It does not address eliminating expectation
>effects, based upon an expectation that they will sound the same. Thus,
>this so-called "unbiased" test is actually quite biased towards
>producing your "expected" results.

Bullshit. Those tests are taken by people from both sides of the
fence. The results are the same, only the reactions vary! :-)

-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 11:26:35 GMT, "EddieM" <eddie.g.m04@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>
>> Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote
>>> calcerise wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Arny isn't too keen on actually listening to audio products, since
>>> they should all sound the same according to tests.
>>
>> And indeed the good ones *do*, if we're talking about *listening*
>> tests. I have a Sony CDP-715E, one of the best-performing players Sony
>> ever made, although lacking the 'battleship' build of the XA7ES, I
>> have access to a Meridian 588, probably the finest 'high tech' SOTA CD
>> player on the planet, and I also own a Pioneer DV-575A 'universal'
>> player that cost less than the quoted price of a new laser assembly
>> for the XA7ES. In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.
>
>
>
>Any reasonable person would most likely also ask that ... when you
>were performing a level-matched blind listening test among your
>three cd players namely:
>
>1.   Sony CDP-715E
>
>2.   Meridian 588
>
>3.   Pioneer DV-575A
>
>
>Were you also comparing their sounds from each other?

I have no idea what that means. 
-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 12:11:27 -0700, ric <nospam@home.com> wrote:

>Gordon, read your headers! This thread has been crossposted to
>FOUR newsgroups, only one of which is Aussie.

This one was, but Arnie DOES post here specifically though from time
to time. The question is valid. 

On 12 Jul 2005 03:04:26 -0700, "Sonic" <sonicart@hotmail.com> wrote:

>I remember when the XA5 and 7ES came out, had some of the first ones to
>try out. Found them to be bright as anything, especially the XA5ES,
>even using the digital out it proved to be bright.

Well, that's about as dumb a comment as it gets.................

>I also remember Greg Borrowmans first review on the 5, he couldnt bring
>himself to say it but read between the lines and he basically was
>saying its bright as all buggery! LOL

Yeah, riggghht.

-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Gordon wrote:

>>Gordon, read your headers! This thread has been crossposted to
>>FOUR newsgroups, only one of which is Aussie.
> 
> My appologies , in this case , but most of the Ozzy posters will know what I 
> was getting at.

How about the Black Sabbath ones?  ;-)


-- 
--Scot
www.RonnieJamesDio.org
www.SMCProductions.org
www.CraigGoldy.org
www.TonyIommi.org
www.ScotClayton.org
http://scotclayton.blogspot.com/

Mr. Kroofeces, your "language maven" credentials are somewhat worse than
tarnished by your performance on Usenet.

>$kilobuck 

You so stupid! What do you think the "$" symbol means if not the same thing as
"buck"?

It's so funny to see you whine about other people making typos when you can't
even think straight enough to express a simple idea like this correctly.

I suggest switching from a carpenter's hammer to a ball peen the next time you
try to adjust your wetware.

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 11:38:14 GMT, "EddieM" <eddie.g.m04@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>
>> Stewart Pinkerton wrote
>>> EddieM wrote:
>>>> Stewart Pinkerton wrote
>>>>> calcerise wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Arny isn't too keen on actually listening to audio products, since
>>>>> they should all sound the same according to tests.
>>>>
>>>> And indeed the good ones *do*, if we're talking about *listening*
>>>> tests. I have a Sony CDP-715E, one of the best-performing players Sony
>>>> ever made, although lacking the 'battleship' build of the XA7ES, I
>>>> have access to a Meridian 588, probably the finest 'high tech' SOTA CD
>>>> player on the planet, and I also own a Pioneer DV-575A 'universal'
>>>> player that cost less than the quoted price of a new laser assembly
>>>> for the XA7ES. In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>>>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.
>>>
>>>Any reasonable person would most likely also ask that ... when you
>>>were performing a level-matched blind listening test among your
>>>three cd players namely:
>>>
>>>1.   Sony CDP-715E
>>>
>>>2.   Meridian 588
>>>
>>>3.   Pioneer DV-575A
>>>
>>>Were you also comparing their sounds from each other?
>>
>> I have no idea what that means.
>
>I was wondering what exactly were you talking about  when you said
>you did a *listening* test as you had mentioned above.  You said
>that you did a *level-matched* blind listening test among the  3 players
>and that towards the end, you concluded that all 3 sounded the same.
>So I wonder how you carried out your test.  Did you listen separately or
>did you made an active comparison using a switch during the test?

Switched between two players at a time, (normally the Pioneer and any
'audiophile contender' nowadays, but the Meridian's been compared
against both Pioneer and Sony), using identical CD-Rs synchronised as
closely as possible, and with levels set to be the same +/- 0.1dB at
the speaker terminals, using -20dB test tones at 20Hz, 1kHz and 10kHz.
Since no statistically significant identification was possible, it
seems that the synch was adequate! 

>And how would a person go about concluding with reasonable expectation
>that all three players will sound identical without having made an active
>comparison

Irrelevant, given the existence of an 'active' comparison (whatever
that's supposed to mean). OTOH, anyone with any understanding of the
optics and electronics involved, would indeed expect that they would
most likely sound identical, unless one had a serious problem. Here's
a handy hint - many so-called 'high end' players *do* have serious
design problems, for which you are charged a stratospheric price!
-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

"Clyde Slick" <YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:42d5000d$1_1@spool9-east.superfeed.net

> That they are taken by people from both sides is
irrelevant.

Not at all.

> Its the test design  that skews the results, so that they
tend to
> be the same

The ABX test was designed to be very sensitive to
differences that are actually audible. This contrasts with
your hobby-horse sighted, non-level-matched,
non-time-synched auditions that can be counted on to sound
different for reasons that are irrelevant to sound quality.

"Clyde Slick" <YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:42d4fe86$1_3@spool9-east.superfeed.net

> Idiot, the test removes some expectation effects, but not
> others.

As I showed in another post, ABX tests can be used to detect
both false positives and false negatives.

> It is more biased than sighted listening.

That's bad joke! There is very little that is more
susceptable to bias than sighted listening. After all that's
one reason why all the high end magazines and audio shops
employ it so religiously. It facilitates them to bias
customers and readers in ways that are profitable for the
audio shops and ragazines.

"Sander deWaal" <nospam@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:1ugad115cgppsvjr83e895il73ftm5vi8d@4ax.com
> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> said:
>
>>> ** You're paying for what you get.

>> Not at all. A lot of the $kilobuck players have the same
>> operational guts as the $200 players.

> Examples please?

Theta-Digital

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.video.laserdisc/msg/ab2653a388212cc9

McCormack

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.tech/msg/f073dd41bd672652

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> said:

>>> Not at all. A lot of the $kilobuck players have the same
>>> operational guts as the $200 players.

>> Examples please?

>Theta-Digital
>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.video.laserdisc/msg/ab2653a388212cc9

>McCormack
>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.tech/msg/f073dd41bd672652


DVD players.........interesting.

With CD players, the only 2 examples I know of are the Rega Planet
(earlier versions) and the Ah Tjoeb 99, which was in fact a lower-end
Marantz with an added tube stage.

Both weren't kilobuck players, BTW.

-- 

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:14:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com>
wrote:

>"Sander deWaal" <nospam@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
>news:1ugad115cgppsvjr83e895il73ftm5vi8d@4ax.com
>> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> said:
>>
>>>> ** You're paying for what you get.
>
>>> Not at all. A lot of the $kilobuck players have the same
>>> operational guts as the $200 players.
>
>> Examples please?
>
>Theta-Digital
>
>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.video.laserdisc/msg/ab2653a388212cc9
>
>McCormack
>
>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.tech/msg/f073dd41bd672652
>

Yes and no.  Those are both Pioneer-transport-based but they do have
different PS, audio and, in the case of the Theta, video boards.  In
fact, you can add the BelCanto Pl-1 and the Moon Orbiter to that list
but, again, each does have different proprietary circuit boards and PS
circuits as well as different video options and controls.  Same
Pioneer OSD, of course.

Kal

"paul packer" <packer@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message
news:42d520b9.12440848@news.iprimus.com.au...
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 21:58:52 +1000, "roughplanet"
> <roughplanet@optushome.com.au> wrote:
>
> >"Howard Ferstler" <ferstle@attglobal.net> wrote in
message
> >
> >Harry Lavo wrote:
> >
> >>> > Harry, I really do not know what you are trying to
sell.
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >Would it be too much to ask the members of other Usenet
groups to delete
> >aus.hi-fi from their newsgroup lists? I think I speak for
most of the
> >members of this group when I say that we really aren't
interested in your
> >squabbling, as we have more than enough of it here
already.
> >Thanks in anticipation of your assistance.
> >
> >ruff
>
> Seconded, Ruff. I feel like I've been dragged back down
into that
> nightmare hell-hole known as RAO after only lately
escaping it. Names
> I'm still trying to forget keep appearing before my
startled gaze like
> phantoms of the underworld. Please make it stop.
>
Paul and Ruff, how is this for a Utopian ideal "When the RAO
gang leave perhaps they could take one or two more with them
that wish to carry on like this all the time" ;-)

BTW I only have read one or two posts here (from non-local
posters) and it still confirms they are a rather sad bunch -
still.

Cheers Terry

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message 
news:rvadnZznXqTJm0jfRVn-pg@comcast.com...
> "Clyde Slick" <YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:42d4ff39$1_1@spool9-east.superfeed.net
>> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in
> message
>> news:97c9d1hmhthem3b89f02jiphm8ahgj4mqm@4ax.com...
>
>>> Bullshit. What you mean is that ABX doesn't support your
>>> absolute knowledge that 'high-end' designer label gear
> *must*
>>> sound better than 'Chinky cheapies'.
>
>> It doesn't support it because it is inherently designed
>> to purposefully support the opposite conclusion.
>
> This is the usual audiophilia-dupe answer, which is what we
> should expect from an audiophilia-dupe like Art.
>
> Please note that Art has so much confidence in his baseless
> accusations that he doesn't even post under his true name.
> Art is obviously afraid of his senseless natterings on
> Usenet being associated with his true identity.
>

So much for my secret identity!


> I know exactly how ABX was designed because I was there when
> it was designed almost 30 years ago. ABX was designed to be
> as sensitive as possible to audible differences.
>
>> It is NOT a neutral test.
>
> ABX is as neutral of a test for consciiously-perceived
> differences as is known to exist.
>
It's not neutral towards those
who preconcieve that there will be no difference

>> It does not remove  the expectation effects of those who
>> have preconceived notions that there are no differences.
>
> ABX tests and other DBTs can be used to determine when a
> listener is biased against hearing differences. You simply
> present candidate listeners with audible differences that
> other listeners have been able to hear in DBTs without much
> difficulty. If the listener develops random results when
> listening to differences that are known to be readily
> audible in DBTs or by other means, then it is proof or at
> least a strong indication that he is biased against hearing
> differences.
>

That has nothing to do with the preconceptions
about any differences or preferences betweeen the two test items.
Your pretest does not address that issue, its
irrelevant.



> The PCABX web site uses a "Listener Training Test" to filter
> out listners and listening environments that are biased
> against hearing differences. This facility is freely
> available at http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm .
>

That has nothing to do with any [reconceptions
about the two items to be comapred for preference.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"paul packer" <packer@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message 
news:42d520b9.12440848@news.iprimus.com.au...
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 21:58:52 +1000, "roughplanet"
> <roughplanet@optushome.com.au> wrote:
>
>>"Howard Ferstler" <ferstle@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>>
>>Harry Lavo wrote:
>>
>>>> > Harry, I really do not know what you are trying to sell.
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>Would it be too much to ask the members of other Usenet groups to delete
>>aus.hi-fi from their newsgroup lists? I think I speak for most of the
>>members of this group when I say that we really aren't interested in your
>>squabbling, as we have more than enough of it here already.
>>Thanks in anticipation of your assistance.
>>
>>ruff
>
> Seconded, Ruff. I feel like I've been dragged back down into that
> nightmare hell-hole known as RAO after only lately escaping it. Names
> I'm still trying to forget keep appearing before my startled gaze like
> phantoms of the underworld. Please make it stop.
>

Yes, I will slavishly follow your lead in removing crossposts. 



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

dean wrote:
> <yung@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:1121131732.019446.279970@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >
> > > You can easily get one that is just as good new, for the
> > > price of the laser assembly.
> >
> > Can you please recommend some new players comparable to the XA7ES for
> > $200USD?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
> With $2000 USD you can browse "e-Bay" or "Audiogon" websites for these:
> Meridian 508-24, Pioneer PD-95; Accuphase DP-65V or 70V...etc I have heard
> them in action and they are awesome machines and you can probably pick one
> up for much less than $2000 USD from the mentioned sites.
>
> Cheers
>
> Dean

Dean, the price is $200USD, not $2000USD. Arny had said for the price
of replacing the laser in the XA7ES (less than $200USD), I could get a
new one which sounds as good. So I asked him to name some player for
under $200USD, which he did. Althought I'm not entirely convinced that
it will sound as good though.

"Clyde Slick" <YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:42d5921d$1_3@spool9-east.superfeed.net
> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:rvadnZznXqTJm0jfRVn-pg@comcast.com...


>> The PCABX web site uses a "Listener Training Test" to
filter
>> out listners and listening environments that are biased
>> against hearing differences. This facility is freely
>> available at http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm .

> That has nothing to do with any [reconceptions
> about the two items to be comapred for preference.

I agree, http://www.pcabx.com/training/index.htm has nothing
to do with [reconceptions
about the two items to be comapred for preference.  More
specifically it has nothing to do with [reconceptions, it
has nothing to do with times to be comapred, and ABX tests
have nothing to do with preference.

"Kalman Rubinson" <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote in message
news:24sad1p4oq2hr45c5vrtv152kjntqmvjil@4ax.com
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:14:49 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
> <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
>> "Sander deWaal" <nospam@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
>> news:1ugad115cgppsvjr83e895il73ftm5vi8d@4ax.com
>>> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> said:
>>>
>>>>> ** You're paying for what you get.
>>
>>>> Not at all. A lot of the $kilobuck players have the
same
>>>> operational guts as the $200 players.
>>
>>> Examples please?
>>
>> Theta-Digital
>>
>>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.video.laserdisc/msg/ab2653a388212cc9
>>
>> McCormack
>>
>>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.tech/msg/f073dd41bd672652
>>
>
> Yes and no.  Those are both Pioneer-transport-based but
they
> do have different PS, audio and, in the case of the Theta,
> video boards.  In fact, you can add the BelCanto Pl-1 and
the
> Moon Orbiter to that list but, again, each does have
different
> proprietary circuit boards and PS circuits as well as
> different video options and controls.  Same Pioneer OSD,
of
> course.

We found that the McCormack was using the Pioneer audio
board for signal processnig, but just tacked on a fancy
overbuilt buffer and power supply for the buffer. Without
closer examination, we don't know how much of the Pioneer
circuitry the others actually used. But in the case of the
McCormack, a lot more than just the Pioneer transport was
being used.

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message 
news:idudnTvaDN7RK0jfRVn-uw@comcast.com...


>and ABX tests
> have nothing to do with preference.
>
>

unless a normal proclaims a preference for a
particular item, at which time you throw another ABX
hissy fit. 



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Clyde Slick" <YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:42d5bbd8$1_2@spool9-east.superfeed.net
> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
> news:idudnTvaDN7RK0jfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
>
>
>> and ABX tests
>> have nothing to do with preference.

> unless a normal proclaims a preference for a
> particular item, at which time you throw another ABX
hissy fit.

Mere posturing.

ABX is clearly over your head, Art.

ABX are tests for differences not preferences.

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message 
news:uaGdnTIc28KSI0jfRVn-rQ@comcast.com...
> "Clyde Slick" <YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:42d5bbd8$1_2@spool9-east.superfeed.net
>> "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
>> news:idudnTvaDN7RK0jfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
>>
>>
>>> and ABX tests
>>> have nothing to do with preference.
>
>> unless a normal proclaims a preference for a
>> particular item, at which time you throw another ABX
> hissy fit.
>
> Mere posturing.
>
> ABX is clearly over your head, Art.
>
> ABX are tests for differences not preferences.
>


Whenever it suits your agenda. 



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:eqm6d1p2dotgtu1j7vhck3gie5t6sbs3qk@4ax.com...
> In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
> players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.

It's true - any reasonable person would expect that you can't hear the 
difference between any audio components. 

"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:l5c9d19ivsrrmiv7rl8ugfuvursmro2rq2@4ax.com...
>>>
>>
>>Damn it, there are those pesky expectation effects again.
>
> Indeed - that's why the tests are done blind...........

Another idiotic conclusion.  It's no harder to convince yourself that 2 
components sound exactly the same in DBT than it is to convince yourself 
that they sound different in sighted testing. 

"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:6jhad1h94p18m73cae356n2ggqp3qbenjg@4ax.com...
>
> Switched between two players at a time, (normally the Pioneer and any
> 'audiophile contender' nowadays, but the Meridian's been compared
> against both Pioneer and Sony), using identical CD-Rs synchronised as
> closely as possible, and with levels set to be the same +/- 0.1dB at
> the speaker terminals, using -20dB test tones at 20Hz, 1kHz and 10kHz.
> Since no statistically significant identification was possible, it
> seems that the synch was adequate!

Or, more likely, the ears were not.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 06:05:32 +0800, "TT"
<TTencerNOSPAM@westnet.com.au> wrote:


>> Seconded, Ruff. I feel like I've been dragged back down
>into that
>> nightmare hell-hole known as RAO after only lately
>escaping it. Names
>> I'm still trying to forget keep appearing before my
>startled gaze like
>> phantoms of the underworld. Please make it stop.
>>
>Paul and Ruff, how is this for a Utopian ideal "When the RAO
>gang leave perhaps they could take one or two more with them
>that wish to carry on like this all the time" ;-)

It would be an excellent idea in that the persons you have in mind
would be instantly pulverised on RAO, which is why of course they stay
away. And unfortunately the RAO regulars are too shrewd to invite them
over as their reputations preceed them. 

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 18:39:43 +0200, Sander deWaal <nospam@wanadoo.nl>
wrote:

>"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> said:
>
>>> ** You're paying for what you get.
>
>>Not at all. A lot of the $kilobuck players have the same
>>operational guts as the $200 players.
>
>Examples please?

The Mark Levinson 31.5 'Reference' transport cost $10,000, but at its
heart is a standard Philips CDM 12 CD-ROM mechanism, OEM cost less
than $50 including all associated electronics. Similarly, the original
Meridian 800 series used about $20 worth of cheap plastic CD-ROM
drive, without even a fancy casing, at the heart of a $15,000 unit.
Why? Because as the Meridian engineers pointed out, that's all you
need!

Of course, their marketing boys kicked in, and you can now buy an 800
series DVD unit in beautiful alloy and glass casework for $20,000, or
a 'dedicated' G98 CD transport for $6,500. Doesn't work any better
than the old plastic CD-ROM, but sure looks pretty...................

-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 20:35:14 +0200, Sander deWaal <nospam@wanadoo.nl>
wrote:

>"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> said:
>
>>>> Not at all. A lot of the $kilobuck players have the same
>>>> operational guts as the $200 players.
>
>>> Examples please?
>
>>Theta-Digital
>>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.video.laserdisc/msg/ab2653a388212cc9
>
>>McCormack
>>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.audio.tech/msg/f073dd41bd672652
>
>
>DVD players.........interesting.
>
>With CD players, the only 2 examples I know of are the Rega Planet
>(earlier versions) and the Ah Tjoeb 99, which was in fact a lower-end
>Marantz with an added tube stage.
>
>Both weren't kilobuck players, BTW.

Krell and Mark Levinson players all used standard Philips transport
mechanisms, buried under lots of fancy alloy casework. I believe that
Krell switched to Sony when supplies of the old 'swing arm' Philips
CDM9 ran out, the remaining stocks having been bought up by Naim.

-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 04:37:46 GMT, "jeffc" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

>"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message 
>news:eqm6d1p2dotgtu1j7vhck3gie5t6sbs3qk@4ax.com...
>> In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.
>
>It's true - any reasonable person would expect that you can't hear the 
>difference between any audio components. 

No they wouldn't, if they were also a knowledgeable person. Several of
the multi-kilobuck 'high-end' players are seriously broken, and really
do sound different. The YBA 'blue laser' and Audio Note DAC spring to
mind. Similarly for SET amps.
-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 04:42:16 GMT, "jeffc" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

>
>"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message 
>news:l5c9d19ivsrrmiv7rl8ugfuvursmro2rq2@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>
>>>Damn it, there are those pesky expectation effects again.
>>
>> Indeed - that's why the tests are done blind...........
>
>Another idiotic conclusion.  It's no harder to convince yourself that 2 
>components sound exactly the same in DBT than it is to convince yourself 
>that they sound different in sighted testing. 

Sure it is, you idiot. If there *is* a difference, then you'll hear
it. If there isn't, then you won't. This cretinous argument of yours
remains the same brain-dead strawman it always was.

Compare and contrast with the 'false sighted' test, where the audience
is told that A is a cheap SS amp, and B is a 'designer label' tube
amp. Several pieces are played with changeover switches being thrown
to indicate tube or SS, and the audience duly notes the liquid treble
and added inner detail of the tube amp. Of course, the switch isn't
actually connected.......................
-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

">
> Dean, the price is $200USD, not $2000USD. Arny had said for the price
> of replacing the laser in the XA7ES (less than $200USD), I could get a
> new one which sounds as good. So I asked him to name some player for
> under $200USD, which he did. Althought I'm not entirely convinced that
> it will sound as good though.
>

** In that case, I can tell you that wont be able to find anything as good
as XA7ES for $200USD. I don't read Audio magazines or online reviews but I
do trust my ears and cheapo CD players is no where near as good as flagship
models players like XA7ES. Even with DVD players ( though I am not into home
theatre that much ) the difference in picture &sound between a cheap DVD
players and top range DVD players are apparent.

One of my friends bought a pair of Acoustic Image from the "White Van Scam"
gang awhile ago. Even though I told him that those speakers consist of cheap
drivers and probably don't have cross-over networks and they sounded
*horrible* comparing many other budget speakers ( Dali, Jamo ). He did not
believe me and total convinced that they were as good as Dynaudio Contour
series which he have heard in the HiFi shop. Until I have found an article
about the scam and shown him and ever since then they have been used as
seats. This shows you how convinced people can be until.........


Cheers

Dean

"jeffc" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:I2mBe.40159$XA.406165@twister.southeast.rr.com
> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in
message
> news:l5c9d19ivsrrmiv7rl8ugfuvursmro2rq2@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Damn it, there are those pesky expectation effects
again.
>>
>> Indeed - that's why the tests are done blind...........

> Another idiotic conclusion.

As if your ignorant false claims that ears are more
sensitive than any test equipment indicate any special
smarts on your part, Jeff.

>It's no harder to convince
> yourself that 2 components sound exactly the same in DBT
than
> it is to convince yourself that they sound different in
> sighted testing.

You're wrong on many counts, Jeff.

First off, its harder to convince yourself of anything in a
DBT simply because DBTs take a lot more work - far more work
than idlers like you or high end audiophile press are
willing to do.

Secondly, most audiophiles, even those who have done dozens
of DBTs still seem to nurture some hope that they will be
able to hear the difference this time.

Thirdly Jeff, DBTs put the listener into a position where
they know for sure that the only way they have to go is to
actually hear a difference. In the bogus non-level-matched,
non-time-synched, sighted evaluations you've done and that
you base your decisions on, people can generally easily hear
differences based on the non-existent level-matching, the
non-existent synchonization of the music, and of course the
evidence of their eyes.

"jeffc" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:u_lBe.40138$XA.406032@twister.southeast.rr.com
> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in
message
> news:eqm6d1p2dotgtu1j7vhck3gie5t6sbs3qk@4ax.com...

>> In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person would
>> expect.

> It's true - any reasonable person would expect that you
can't
> hear the difference between any audio components.

Well then Jeff, that makes you an unreasonable person by
your own words because you obviously expect to hear
differences between most if not all audio components.

Looks like Pinkerton tricked you into hanging yourself with
your own tongue, Jeff. ;-)

> Stewart Pinkerton wrote
>> EddieM wrote:
>>> Stewart Pinkerton wrote
>>>> EddieM wrote:
>>>>> Stewart Pinkerton wrote
>>>>>> calcerise wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Arny isn't too keen on actually listening to audio products, since
>>>>>> they should all sound the same according to tests.
>>>>>
>>>>> And indeed the good ones *do*, if we're talking about *listening*
>>>>> tests. I have a Sony CDP-715E, one of the best-performing players
>>>>> Sony ever made, although lacking the 'battleship' build of the XA7ES,
>>>>> I have access to a Meridian 588, probably the finest 'high tech' SOTA
>>>>> CD player on the planet, and I also own a Pioneer DV-575A 'universal'
>>>>> player that cost less than the quoted price of a new laser assembly
>>>>> for the XA7ES. In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>>>>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.
>>>>
>>>>Any reasonable person would most likely also ask that ... when you
>>>>were performing a level-matched blind listening test among your
>>>>three cd players namely:
>>>>
>>>>1.   Sony CDP-715E
>>>>
>>>>2.   Meridian 588
>>>>
>>>>3.   Pioneer DV-575A
>>>>
>>>>Were you also comparing their sounds from each other?
>>>
>>> I have no idea what that means.
>>
>>I was wondering what exactly were you talking about  when you said
>>you did a *listening* test as you had mentioned above.  You said
>>that you did a *level-matched* blind listening test among the  3 players
>>and that towards the end, you concluded that all 3 sounded the same.
>>So I wonder how you carried out your test.  Did you listen separately or
>>did you made an active comparison using a switch during the test?
>
> Switched between two players at a time, (normally the Pioneer and any
> 'audiophile contender' nowadays, but the Meridian's been compared
> against both Pioneer and Sony), using identical CD-Rs synchronised as
> closely as possible, and with levels set to be the same +/- 0.1dB at
> the speaker terminals, using -20dB test tones at 20Hz, 1kHz and 10kHz.
> Since no statistically significant identification was possible, it
> seems that the synch was adequate!
>
>>And how would a person go about concluding with reasonable expectation
>>that all three players will sound identical without having made an active
>>comparison
>
> Irrelevant, given the existence of an 'active' comparison (whatever
> that's supposed to mean).  [...]


All I meant by that is whether you were actively making comparison between
the two or three player through a switching device during your test in order
to determine presence of subtle differences that may exist.

Why is that irrelevant for me to ask ?


> [...] OTOH, anyone with any understanding of the
> optics and electronics involved, would indeed expect that they would
> most likely sound identical, unless one had a serious problem. Here's
> a handy hint - many so-called 'high end' players *do* have serious
> design problems, for which you are charged a stratospheric price!


As you're saying above, assuming your good understanding of the optics
and electronics involved influences you to reasonably conclude that the
three players would sound identical, how would you prevent yourself from
reasonably expecting that the three players would sound different when
performing a listening test without doing such thing as active comparison
using a switch during the test ?

How does using a switching device prevent you from the influences that
the three unit would not sound identical --  ?



> -- 
>
> Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

> Arny Krueger wrote
>> Arny Krueger wrote
>>> EddieM wrote
>>>> Clyde Slick wrote
>>>>> Stewart Pinkerton wrote
>>>>>> calcerise wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Arny isn't too keen on actually listening to audio
>>>>>> products, since they should all sound the same
>>>>>> according to tests.
>>
>>>>> In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>>>>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person
>>>>> would expect.
>>
>>>> Damn it, there are those pesky expectation effects
>>>> again.
>>
>> Good point.
>>
>> There's an equal danger in missing an audible difference
>> because you expect it to not be there, as there is a
>> danger in falsely perceiving a difference because the
>> listening test was done naively.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> So Eddie, what to do?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Note that a day later, Eddie has posted to other threads but
> has no answer for my simple question.



Are you actually asking me how to properly perform your test so as
to not do it "naively" ?    Fuck You.

"EddieM" <eddie.g.m04@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:0drBe.2505$_%4.1312@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
>
>> Arny Krueger wrote
>>> Arny Krueger wrote
>>>> EddieM wrote
>>>>> Clyde Slick wrote
>>>>>> Stewart Pinkerton wrote
>>>>>>> calcerise wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Arny isn't too keen on actually listening to audio
>>>>>>> products, since they should all sound the same
>>>>>>> according to tests.
>>>
>>>>>> In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>>>>>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person
>>>>>> would expect.
>>>
>>>>> Damn it, there are those pesky expectation effects
>>>>> again.
>>>
>>> Good point.
>>>
>>> There's an equal danger in missing an audible difference
>>> because you expect it to not be there, as there is a
>>> danger in falsely perceiving a difference because the
>>> listening test was done naively.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So Eddie, what to do?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Note that a day later, Eddie has posted to other threads but
>> has no answer for my simple question.
>
>
>
> Are you actually asking me how to properly perform your test so as
> to not do it "naively" ?    Fuck You.
>

He gets Christmas greetings like that too!

LOL!


Cheers,

Margaret


PS. Look for a response where Arny asserts how comfortable he is with that.

"EddieM" <eddie.g.m04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0drBe.2505$_%4.1312@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com

>    Fuck You.

Clearly posted in a moment of total clarity - Eddie style!
;-)

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 07:02:38 GMT, "dean" <deanknguyen@msn.com> wrote:

>
>">
>> Dean, the price is $200USD, not $2000USD. Arny had said for the price
>> of replacing the laser in the XA7ES (less than $200USD), I could get a
>> new one which sounds as good. So I asked him to name some player for
>> under $200USD, which he did. Althought I'm not entirely convinced that
>> it will sound as good though.
>>
>
>** In that case, I can tell you that wont be able to find anything as good
>as XA7ES for $200USD. 

Sure you will, if it's sound quality you're interested in.

>I don't read Audio magazines or online reviews but I
>do trust my ears and cheapo CD players is no where near as good as flagship
>models players like XA7ES.

Utter bullshit. All good CD players sound the same. Only the really
expensive 'high end' players tend to be so badly designed that they
sound different....................

> Even with DVD players ( though I am not into home
>theatre that much ) the difference in picture &sound between a cheap DVD
>players and top range DVD players are apparent.

Differences in picture, certainly. In sound, uh uh.

>One of my friends bought a pair of Acoustic Image from the "White Van Scam"
>gang awhile ago. Even though I told him that those speakers consist of cheap
>drivers and probably don't have cross-over networks and they sounded
>*horrible* comparing many other budget speakers ( Dali, Jamo ). He did not
>believe me and total convinced that they were as good as Dynaudio Contour
>series which he have heard in the HiFi shop. Until I have found an article
>about the scam and shown him and ever since then they have been used as
>seats. This shows you how convinced people can be until.........

Exactly - that's why DBTs are important (not that you need them for
speakers). Use DBTs, and you'll realise that it also works the other
way - a $10,000 'designer label' CD player simply does *not* sound
better  - or even different - than a $200 'Chinky cheapy' universal
player such as the Pioneer DV-575A. Of course, you don't get bragging
rights with the Pioneer........
-- 

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

 I'll take the Dewey Decimal System over Library of Congress numbers
any day.

"jeffc" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message 
news:u_lBe.40138$XA.406032@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message 
> news:eqm6d1p2dotgtu1j7vhck3gie5t6sbs3qk@4ax.com...
>> In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.
>
> It's true - any reasonable person would expect that you can't hear the 
> difference between any audio components.
>

True, I am a reasonble person and I doubt that
Stewart can hear the difference. 



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"jeffc" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message 
news:I2mBe.40159$XA.406165@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message 
> news:l5c9d19ivsrrmiv7rl8ugfuvursmro2rq2@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>
>>>Damn it, there are those pesky expectation effects again.
>>
>> Indeed - that's why the tests are done blind...........
>
> Another idiotic conclusion.  It's no harder to convince yourself that 2 
> components sound exactly the same in DBT than it is to convince yourself 
> that they sound different in sighted testing.
>

It's those damned expectation effects. 



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:501cd1lg08kmmla3cqova5f4fh6p5g7sc8@4ax.com...
>
> Compare and contrast with the 'false sighted' test, where the audience
> is told that A is a cheap SS amp, and B is a 'designer label' tube
> amp. Several pieces are played with changeover switches being thrown
> to indicate tube or SS, and the audience duly notes the liquid treble
> and added inner detail of the tube amp. Of course, the switch isn't
> actually connected.......................
> -- 

I never took such a test. Who here has? 



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Clyde Slick" <YustabeSlim@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:42d6de6c_2@spool9-east.superfeed.net
> "Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in
message
> news:501cd1lg08kmmla3cqova5f4fh6p5g7sc8@4ax.com...
>>
>> Compare and contrast with the 'false sighted' test, where
the
>> audience is told that A is a cheap SS amp, and B is a
>> 'designer label' tube amp. Several pieces are played with
>> changeover switches being thrown to indicate tube or SS,
and
>> the audience duly notes the liquid treble and added inner
>> detail of the tube amp. Of course, the switch isn't
actually
>> connected....................... --

> I never took such a test. Who here has?

As close as I've come involved a designer SS amp versus a
cheap Pioneer receiver.

Same outcome.

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 17:07:05 +0000 (UTC), Stewart Pinkerton
<patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote:

> Use DBTs, and you'll realise that it also works the other
>way - a $10,000 'designer label' CD player simply does *not* sound
>better  - or even different - than a $200 'Chinky cheapy' universal
>player such as the Pioneer DV-575A. Of course, you don't get bragging
>rights with the Pioneer........


Why not? I've been bragging ever since I got mine.

The rest of your post is wrong too. 

"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message 
news:kpSdnXCLKZ8E20vfRVn-qw@comcast.com...
> "EddieM" <eddie.g.m04@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:0drBe.2505$_%4.1312@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com
>
>>    Fuck You.
>
> Clearly posted in a moment of total clarity - Eddie style!
> ;-)
>
Please stop cross posting to aus.hifi.
Gordon 

> Stewart  "I'm a qualified physicist and an engineer" Pinkerton wrote
>> EddieM wrote:
>>> Stewart Pinkerton wrote
>>>> EddieM wrote:
>>>>> Stewart Pinkerton wrote
>>>>>> calcerise wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Arny isn't too keen on actually listening to audio products, since
>>>>>> they should all sound the same according to tests.
>>>>>
>>>>> And indeed the good ones *do*, if we're talking about *listening*
>>>>> tests. I have a Sony CDP-715E, one of the best-performing players
>>>>> Sony ever made, although lacking the 'battleship' build of the XA7ES,
>>>>> I have access to a Meridian 588, probably the finest 'high tech' SOTA
>>>>> CD player on the planet, and I also own a Pioneer DV-575A 'universal'
>>>>> player that cost less than the quoted price of a new laser assembly
>>>>> for the XA7ES. In level-matched blind listening tests, these three
>>>>> players sound identical - as any reasonable person would expect.
>>>>
>>>>Any reasonable person would most likely also ask that ... when you
>>>>were performing a level-matched blind listening test among your
>>>>three cd players namely:
>>>>
>>>>1.   Sony CDP-715E
>>>>
>>>>2.   Meridian 588
>>>>
>>>>3.   Pioneer DV-575A
>>>>
>>>>Were you also comparing their sounds from each other?
>>>
>>> I have no idea what that means.
>>
>>I was wondering what exactly were you talking about  when you said
>>you did a *listening* test as you had mentioned above.  You said
>>that you did a *level-matched* blind listening test among the  3 players
>>and that towards the end, you concluded that all 3 sounded the same.
>>So I wonder how you carried out your test.  Did you listen separately or
>>did you made an active comparison using a switch during the test?
>
> Switched between two players at a time, (normally the Pioneer and any
> 'audiophile contender' nowadays, but the Meridian's been compared
> against both Pioneer and Sony), using identical CD-Rs synchronised as
> closely as possible, and with levels set to be the same +/- 0.1dB at
> the speaker terminals, using -20dB test tones at 20Hz, 1kHz and 10kHz.
> Since no statistically significant identification was possible, it
> seems that the synch was adequate!
>
>>And how would a person go about concluding with reasonable expectation
>>that all three players will sound identical without having made an active
>>comparison
>
> Irrelevant, given the existence of an 'active' comparison (whatever
> that's supposed to mean).  [...]


All I meant by that is whether you were actively making comparison between
the two or three player through a switching device during your test in order
to determine presence of subtle differences that may exist.

Why is that irrelevant for me to ask ?


> [...] OTOH, anyone with any understanding of the
> optics and electronics involved, would indeed expect that they would
> most likely sound identical, unless one had a serious problem. Here's
> a handy hint - many so-called 'high end' players *do* have serious
> design problems, for which you are charged a stratospheric price!


As you're saying above, assuming your good understanding of the optics
and electronics involved influences you to reasonably conclude that the
three players would sound identical, how would you prevent yourself from
reasonably expecting that the three players would sound different when
performing a listening test without doing such thing as active comparison
using a switch during the test ?

How does using a switching device prevent you from the influences that
the three unit would not sound identical --  ?




> Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering


                                              *****


Is there any particular reason why you, yet again, appear to be neglecting
to respond to the rather simple question I have for you above?

If your keybaord is malfunctioning, about how much more time do you
need ?