Comparative Listening Tests

DaveyF said:

Bob,when you have the answer to that question, please make sure that i am enlightened. For I have no idea as to the answer myself...except for the unfortunate fact that this is just human nature.

Click to expand...

I know that all of us have vast experience in forums of the internet. In the future exchanges are going to be live in direct with words we can hear and faces we can see... My best guess is this, in one word: Miscommunication.

Words are very important, the words we write, the words we read. Without sounds and images we are incomplete.
There are waves to surf @ the right moment for each one of us, like this is my magic wave and it was the right moment and I communicated with it perfectly for the best ride of my life, one of...

The selection of the words we use in forums make all the difference between war and peace...I think. As a human race we are very fragile, sensitive to everything small and big.
So yes, you are right in major part; human nature certainly plays an important role. ...Our sensitivities and sensibilities.

...The words we use, their compositions, their affiliations, their clarity, simplicity, description, images, ...like speakers imaging well.
_____

Yesterday I've read, here, a post that was the perfect example on how sensitive to words we are. I felt it deep in my heart, I wanted to comment with peace in the middle, like Steve just said earlier...it's a beautiful Sunday today. But I refrain myself of replying, and again this morning because there was a new post after that one from last night, and the poster was confused...me too a little as I went back and read the dozen posts or so before it led to that heart wrenching post I've first read last night.
The reason? Words. I give you an example, but please don't judge one way or another; it's only to demonstrate on how sensitive we ALL are to words:
"U R Clueless........"

Yes, our human nature is frail, delicate. As a human race with a language we learned to communicate between us, words have tremendous power.
To me that would be one of the main reasons. I lost precious people in life because of words spoken and not meant. ...And I lost a lot more.

I think comparative listening tests are similar in some sort of way.
It's like understanding the music's message well through a clean audio signal flow, a smooth vibe entering the ears and brain.
...A moment in time, the right moment, the right wave...for a beautiful surfing ride. We all have that ability to catch that wave, @ the right time, @ the right moment, in the right space. Musicians know that; magic happens when all the right vibes sync together just like that, without complicated and extended planning...from harmonious human interaction, the right impulse, the proper glue, the perfect gel.

Words are communication, without good human communication we are lost. Without music, without dance, we are lost.
PINA - "Dance, dance, otherwise we are lost."





It's a great ? dance documentary. I love the music too. It's also on Blu-ray, and in (((3D)))

Folsom said:

http://www.avahifi.com/products/accessories/abx-comparator-switchbox

I think it's more telling when a reviewer buys the reviewed product.

Click to expand...

Pretty cool! are there others? I wonder what AVA has found in their testing, since their show demos have tended to use some moderately-priced (by audiophile standards; insanely-priced by cable naysayer standards) cables?

DaveC said:

Good post! It's true mixing and matching ICs may skew results if one of the ICs is very colored. Al did have 2 sets of D4s if needed.

As far as testing... imo it's important to combine multiple kinds of testing as short A/Bs will tell you immediate differences but there are often other effects that are more difficult to quickly identify such as subtle artifacts that cause listening fatigue, especially if you're not very experienced at identifying these artifacts. An example: Often people feel silver cables sound exciting and highly resolving but the truth may be the sound has accentuated leading edges and grain. This may not be realized until a month after the cables go in, when the music starts getting irritating and not as exciting as it used to be, you turn the volume down and listen less because it's irritating. When something sounds exciting initially you need to be very careful as it's often irritating over time. On the other end people are often seduced by beautiful, warm tone but over time it gets boring, the same tone is superimposed over all recordings and fine detail and spatial information is lost, along with your interest in listening to music.

Off topic a bit... Audio systems stimulate the nervous system and can be either soothing or alarming depending on the distortion/artifact. We shouldn't be seduced by either and instead seek the truth, this will lead to the most engaging system possible imo.

Click to expand...

I find any coloration no matter how attractive that veers off neutral and natural fatiguing after a short while, often people including myself are baited by the slightly bassy and voluptuous sound specially with digital only to find out there can be too much of a good thing down the line. My suggestion is for people to stick with 2-3 tracks that they're really familiar with and know how they should sound when things are right adding variety only adds to the confusion. Ideally these 2-3 tracks should allow you to test all necessary parameters, bass level, extension and articulation, coherence, ambience, naturalness both vocal and instrumental, proper highs without accentuation, independent interplay of various instruments regarding individual scale and loudness, and of course correct tone and timbre. With very familiar tracks one should already know the strengths and weaknesses of one's system and one can see/hear if the component under test is improving or degrading more parameters. Same tracks can be used everywhere, setting up speakers or setting the VTA and tracking force of a cartridge. IMO these few tracks are as important a tool as any in one's audio toolbox, look at them as your Reference tool when testing components, setting up or educating yourself with various systems.

stehno said:

Differences in designs / technologies of one can bottleneck the performance of the other. But then I suppose that's true anywhere throughout a system's chain. Just one more thing I suppose to potentially compromise the legitimacy of a quick cable shootout.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily in this case and not a question of bottleneck when you're doing comparative testing, two identical wires can sound very different with different termination it's nearly impossible to figure out which is better or right with only one run and lacking a known Reference point otherwise it's just confusion.

david

cjfrbw said:

Several years ago the founder of DaVinci audio gave an interesting interview. He said that he didn't "believe" in exotic cables, but his customers did, so he had to manufacture the expensive cables for them and so that he wouldn't discredit his products by not making them available.

He was free to make such a remark, I think, because he knew that no matter what he said, the believers would still believe and the buyers would still buy. It is a market driven belief system.

I own one of these cables because it came with the DaVinci tonearm I bought, and was marketed separately for $2000. It is a nice stretch of oxygen free copper with some kind of miraculous crystal structure and some nice terminators. I think it would be an OK used deal for about $60, but it was already included with the used tonearm.

Everybody knows that the best way to stir vitriol, ad hominem, anger, spluttering rage, murderous bile and religious retaliation in audio is to open up a cable "discussion". It's about money and "belief". There's also the grey poupon aspect of having fire hoses attached to your high end speakers.

I honestly think there are a lot of audiophiles who profess to "believe" in cables, but don't, just so they can conduct civil conversations in audio without being attacked. If an audio critic claimed he didn't "believe", his career would probably come to a screeching halt right there.

Cables are conductors, yet they are imbued with characteristics of exotic equalizers, with all of the attendant cant about transparency, imaging depth etc. etc. They have to be the most awkward and roundabout "equalizers" ever. If you want to equalize, use an equalizer of some kind rather than an amorphous stretch of conductor.

Click to expand...

Excellent Post.

Not much else I can add to it... perhaps this:
Same could be said about many "differences" that spring up the second a change is made.

FrantzM said:

Not much else I can add to it... perhaps this:
Same could be said about many "differences" that spring up the second a change is made.

Click to expand...

Exactly, and there's plenty of folks that believe all amps sound the same, all CDPs sound the same, etc... it's the nature of audio and how our brains deal with it, not exclusively tied to cables.

And people who "believe" in cables can't say that people have different abilities, aptitudes and experience for hearing and own systems of varying quality lest they get castigated, yet it's the truth.

Everybody knows that the best way to stir vitriol, ad hominem, anger, spluttering rage, murderous bile and religious retaliation in audio is to open up a cable "discussion".

Click to expand...

It boggles my mind that people who think cables don't make a difference seek out and post in threads about cables...

So we know this, yet we go ahead and do exactly that anyways... interesting... I'd suggest we all agree to stop talking about this subject now, as Steve suggested earlier about cable co's duplicitous marketing tactics. Actually, the fact is everyone in the audio sector is a lizard person, if you don't know what that refers to ask Steven Jones, but put on your tinfoil hat first! And the truth is: It all sounds the same. Go buy a boombox at Best Buy and rest assured you have the best audio possible. Now I have to run as the illuminati are bound to take me out for this!

ddk said:

I find any coloration no matter how attractive that veers off neutral and natural fatiguing after a short while, ...

Click to expand...

Well, the good/bad news there is no such cable or component or speaker in existence that is truly neutral. To the best of my knowledge anyway. And if per chance one did stumble across a truly neutral product, I'd venture they'd never know it because of the other less than neutral products making up a given system.

ddk said:

Not necessarily in this case and not a question of bottleneck when you're doing comparative testing, two identical wires can sound very different with different termination it's nearly impossible to figure out which is better or right with only one run and lacking a known Reference point otherwise it's just confusion.

Click to expand...

Not sure what case you're talking about, David. I was simply stating/confirming that when mixing and matching cable designs and/or technologies, one always runs the risk of one cable potentially bottlenecking the performance of another cable. Then again, that could even be true if all the cables comes from the same mfg'er and same design / technology. i.e. the mfg'er makes an outstanding ic but less than stellar speaker cable or vice versa.

cjfrbw said:

Several years ago the founder of DaVinci audio gave an interesting interview. He said that he didn't "believe" in exotic cables, but his customers did, so he had to manufacture the expensive cables for them and so that he wouldn't discredit his products by not making them available.

He was free to make such a remark, I think, because he knew that no matter what he said, the believers would still believe and the buyers would still buy. It is a market driven belief system.

I own one of these cables because it came with the DaVinci tonearm I bought, and was marketed separately for $2000. It is a nice stretch of oxygen free copper with some kind of miraculous crystal structure and some nice terminators. I think it would be an OK used deal for about $60, but it was already included with the used tonearm.

Everybody knows that the best way to stir vitriol, ad hominem, anger, spluttering rage, murderous bile and religious retaliation in audio is to open up a cable "discussion". It's about money and "belief". There's also the grey poupon aspect of having fire hoses attached to your high end speakers.

I honestly think there are a lot of audiophiles who profess to "believe" in cables, but don't, just so they can conduct civil conversations in audio without being attacked. If an audio critic claimed he didn't "believe", his career would probably come to a screeching halt right there.

Cables are conductors, yet they are imbued with characteristics of exotic equalizers, with all of the attendant cant about transparency, imaging depth etc. etc. They have to be the most awkward and roundabout "equalizers" ever. If you want to equalize, use an equalizer of some kind rather than an amorphous stretch of conductor.

Click to expand...

Da Vinci Audio manufactures analog turntables - I can easily admit that in a vinyl analog system a designer is so free to modify the signal that the effect of cables can be minimized. If living just with a vinyl system I could easily be still using the same cables that I used 20 years ago and still own - the teflon insulated multistrand solid silver Mandrake, developed for Ricardo Franassovici of Absolute Sounds.

And no, cables are not imbued with the characteristics of exotic equalizers. Equalizers modify the objective frequency response, cables do not do it. But people wanting to denigrate them often use this analogy. And victimization of the poor guy who does not believe in cables is also an old faded argument. Just MHO, as I saw YMMV.

The problem is that once we experience what a good set of unhappily expensive cables properly matched can do in our systems, it is not easy to go back. Surely some manufacturers sell snake oil, but fortunately most of them manufacture excellent cables. Audio forums should help members to choose the appropriate ones, not just use the poor cases to spread vitriol against the cable industry.

DaveC said:

....

It boggles my mind that people who think cables don't make a difference seek out and post in threads about cables...

Click to expand...

DaveC, it should not boggle your mind. Though there are numerous types who think this, first and foremost those types who think cables don't make a difference seem to be the hacks, bush-leaguers, and also-rans in the science sector.

In fact, one of Amir's outstanding audio science colleagues stated too many times all cables (and components too) sound identical and all maintain the fidelity of the input signal.

Hmmm. What do they say about birds of a feather?

rbbert said:

Pretty cool! are there others? I wonder what AVA has found in their testing, since their show demos have tended to use some moderately-priced (by audiophile standards; insanely-priced by cable naysayer standards) cables?

Click to expand...

I think Frank might be beyond hearing a lot of stuff at his age, but the people that work at AVA and general users I'm sure have had a lot of fun.

There is a difference between being a "non believer" and somebody who is motivated to denigrate "believers". There are all kinds of market driven belief systems. There is actually no reason for the Mfr. or believers to even get their hackles up, because the believers will continue to believe and the buyers will continue to buy.
They WANT to believe, so that is fine, the markets will remain intact without going ape **** on the "non believers".

I am perfectly content to listen to the wonderful audio system of a believer without questioning his market driven belief systems. If anything, the market driven belief is a symptom of his devotion and attention to detail, which can manifest in a lot of other beneficial ways.

Some objectivists have a manifest goal of attempting to humiliate, marginalize, mock or denigrate market driven belief systems. I have no such goal, I just like to keep things straight in my own mind.

I am not that much of a pure objectivist, anyway, I just draw the line in certain things and cables are one of those lines.

FrantzM said:

Excellent Post.

Not much else I can add to it... perhaps this:
Same could be said about many "differences" that spring up the second a change is made.

Click to expand...

Frantz,

Do you really consider that cables do not affect sound quality? And that speaker manufacturers who select expensive cables for the internal connections in speakers and exotic capacitors are just brainwashing us and exploiting us, obliging us to pay for them?

cjfrbw said:

There is a difference between being a "non believer" an somebody who is motivated to denigrate "believers". There are all kinds of market driven belief systems. There is actually no reason for the Mfr. or believers to even get their hackles up, because the believers will continue to believe and the buyers will continue to buy.
They WANT to believe, so that is fine, the markets will remain intact without going ape **** on the "non believers".

I am perfectly content to listen to the wonderful audio system of a believer without questioning his market driven belief systems. If anything, the market driven belief is a symptom of his devotion and attention to detail, which can manifest in a lot of other beneficial ways.

Click to expand...

IMHO it is easy to ignore speaker cable effects if owning a four way active system - Peter Newell had an excellent article on this in HifiCritic long ago. I congratulate you on your great system. But IMHO you perspective is far away from that of owners typical audiophile systems using passive speakers.

Is there anybody that thinks any audio system reproduces 100 percent of the information present on CD,vinyl,or tape? I didn't think so....this continues to be a learning curve that is very personal. I always find details about peoples individual experiences...the what and why...interesting and informative. The rest of it not so much.

RogerD said:

Is there anybody that thinks any audio system reproduces 100 percent of the information present on CD,vinyl,or tape? I didn't think so....this continues to be a learning curve that is very personal. I always find details about peoples individual experiences...the what and why...interesting and informative. The rest of it not so much.

Click to expand...

No. But I'm getting warmer.

In all seriousness, I suspect most reasonable high-end systems are retrieving and processing 99% or better of the music info embedded in a given recording (for digital at least). But how much of that processed music info remains audible above a much rasied noise floor at the speaker is a whole nuther matter.

RogerD said:

Is there anybody that thinks any audio system reproduces 100 percent of the information present on CD,vinyl,or tape? I didn't think so....this continues to be a learning curve that is very personal. I always find details about peoples individual experiences...the what and why...interesting and informative. The rest of it not so much.

Click to expand...

Yes, systems only reproduce 100 - 1/m percent of the information, m being the new retail price of your system in $1000's!

microstrip said:

IMHO it is easy to ignore speaker cable effects if owning a four way active system - Peter Newell had an excellent article on this in HifiCritic long ago. I congratulate you on your great system. But IMHO you perspective is far away from that of owners typical audiophile systems using passive speakers.

Click to expand...

Right.

I don't care for the "everyone is just so damn stupid they believe things that can't be heard because our ABX tests never give any results"... I believe there is more of a problem with the ABX method deployment, at least when there's no relation to personal accounts and purchasing patterns.

Other problems are from people measuring for differences don't know what to look for... I've seen a member here uncover the truth behind a device and then claim it doesn't do anything because he doesn't know what he's looking at, for, and why. But they'll disqualify everyone on the planet from hearing a difference because they "can't find it" - even when they do.

RogerD said:

Is there anybody that thinks any audio system reproduces 100 percent of the information present on CD,vinyl,or tape? I didn't think so....this continues to be a learning curve that is very personal. I always find details about peoples individual experiences...the what and why...interesting and informative. The rest of it not so much.

Click to expand...

Actually some systems can get somewhat close from a purely distortion (voltage) perspective. That doesn't mean they sound good for numerous reasons, or are an accurate representation for even more reasons. We are so sensitive to such little differences that it's kind of mind boggling. Also people may not want to hear a lot of CD's as purely as possible since the recording studios can be dry and sterile, unlike live music.

Folsom said:

...

Also people may not want to hear a lot of CD's as purely as possible since the recording studios can be dry and sterile, unlike live music.

Click to expand...

I fail to see the logic here. If some-to-many are somewhat satisfied with the level of musicality of CD's when their systems are only audibly reproducing X% of all the music info embedded in a given recording, why would X+n% suddenly take us to dry and sterile places?

If timbre and detail and dynamics and transparency and ambienct info at X%, etc are at least somewhat palatable, then why wouldn't X+n% be even more accurate timbre, dynamics, detail, transparency, ambient info, etc. be that much more palatable?

ddk said:

(...) My suggestion is for people to stick with 2-3 tracks that they're really familiar with and know how they should sound when things are right adding variety only adds to the confusion. Ideally these 2-3 tracks should allow you to test all necessary parameters, bass level, extension and articulation, coherence, ambience, naturalness both vocal and instrumental, proper highs without accentuation, independent interplay of various instruments regarding individual scale and loudness, and of course correct tone and timbre. (...)

Click to expand...

David,

I have found that using just 2 - 3 tracks can be limited, specially considering the chaos of the recording practices - we risk forming opinions that will not apply to most of our recordings, but will only play optimally a few.


Can we know what are the 2-3 tracks you would suggest for this purpose, particularly for "independent interplay of various instruments regarding individual scale and loudness"?

stehno said:

No. But I'm getting warmer.

In all seriousness, I suspect most reasonable high-end systems are retrieving and processing 99% or better of the music info embedded in a given recording (for digital at least). But how much of that processed music info remains audible above a much rasied noise floor at the speaker is a whole nuther matter.

Click to expand...

I would say "we" really don't know the number....everybody's system is different. I have thought I was at the point of finality in system performance,only to be proven wrong. I find nothing wrong with experimentation and in fact that is how I learn. You have to be able to compare against something that is constant. I have trained my ear to make decisions quickly,but sometimes it can take 100 hours. I find no fault in Al M.'s method or decision,he knows his system best. Anyway that's how I view audio reproduction.

David earlier said that we should get familiar with two-three tracks, how they should sound and test all sound parameters from there.
We look for the most neutrality in order to get the most accurate reproduction. Then we play with various gear, cables and hear what adds coloration and what removes detail's retrieval. We need that familiarity as our guide, as we know how a musical instrument sounds in real life, non-amplified.

Ok, we arrive @ the best audio gear, loudspeakers, cables, room, etc. to get the most acuity with what we are most accustomed with, those 2-3 tracks.
For now, because we don't know what else is out there that we've never heard yet. But we are @ the apotheosis of what we're familiar with and what we experimented with.
Then we explore more fine tuning to get even more familiar with these 2-3 tracks (I wonder how many young and older people are reading our posts...).

So we're @ a point now we can listen to more music more with what we're familiar with. We find out that all music recordings sound different, and that some recordings are more consistent from some record music labels and the years that the same audio engineer was recording them.
Some music has pathetic bass on the drums and irritating strings on the violins. Other recordings are majestic in both renditions; drums that sound true and violins that resonate right. We soon find out that some music performances are magic but the sound quality is mediocre, and vice versa.
We acquire and develop a taste for our own ears and soul, a balance of both performance and quality/accurate tonality and timbre of the instruments.
Some recordings go in the bin of lost memories while new music is enchantment.

We try cables of all colors and gauge and materials, with what we're familiar the most with...the 2-3 tracks. Then we settle for that cable with the most neutrality (in someone's case it was one that costed her $100, and in someone else's case $10,000 to him ... say a pair of 8-foot speaker cables). Everything else sound colored and unfamiliar, we stay the course...simplicity.

We listen to more music and we can decipher the room where the music was first recorded, the brand of guitars used, the piano, the mixing board, etc.
More music goes in the bin of forgivable memories, and more new music is rediscovered from older recordings.

We always listen to the music, how it sounds with what we're most familiar with...the 2-3 tracks. That's how we compare and test various audio gear and cables.

Some people change gear and cables every month, others never in their lifetime, or perhaps no more than twice. :b

Listen, this is all a supposition here, because no one is the same as the other one sitting by.
{I wonder how many people from the cyber vacuum space are reading this, and other posts and threads here.}

To come back to Ron's first original post mentioning Peter's own experience with Al; how far can we go? And how close to the 2-3 tracks we are familiar with can we get? Simplicity is king by setting up and educating ourselves with various systems.

Some music we can listen to @ perpetuity, without ever getting fatigued. Some systems help, others not.

You guys here always explore new audio gear, turntables, tonearms, cartridges, cables, speakers, positions, different pressings, ...you switched gear like you race Le Mans.
That is great because you become our audio gurus/teachers and we can skip all the tribulations lost in the bin of forgivable memories.
We advance @ a faster pace, towards the ultimate goal of neutrality, familiarity, non-fatigue and pleasurable music listening.
There is no way that the average common population is going to compare and test for themselves. So we come here and learn from you. I'm sure there are millions of people reading without posting, and learning. And even if only a dozen learn something it's all worth it.

That ABX machine earlier's link posted ($999), that's mostly for serious compare/listen audio testers. I wonder how many here have such a machine @ home.

* My neighbor just stopped by to see if I had any carrots (he's making supper).