Blind Test Challenge Offered by Engineer on Audiogon

[NorthStar]

I think one of the problems is, is that there are a number of chalatons in high end audio (as with any business), so those outside of high end will tend to focus on those, and paint the entire industry with the same broad brush.

I post regularly on the talkclassical.com music forums, and there is also a "protector of the audio uneducated" over there. He works at a recording studio in LA. He constantly claims, that $5000.00 is the most anyone ever has to spend on speakers, and that anything above that is a waste of money. He also claims, that room treatment will always make up for inadequacies in speakers. He's argued that a mediocre speaker will always sound better in a correctly treated room, than a very high end speaker in a normal living space. And that $5000.00 worth of multi channel speakers will always sound better than substantially more money invested in 2 channel.

Among his other claims are: all CD players/transports are comparable, a consumer level multi channel AV receiver will sound as good as any high end amp, there is no reason for any resolution above 44.1/16 bit.

What is his name; he sounds like a solid down-to-earth type of guy.

 

[Gregadd]

Never accept a blind test challenge. It will prove nothing and you will regret it.

 

[RogerD]

These guys are the real deal.... http://www.aes.org/

 

[Gregadd]

I guess that depends on the deal you are searching for.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Never accept a blind test challenge. It will prove nothing and you will regret it.

Normally I would agree with you. But on this particular one, I like the risk/reward.

 

[treitz3]

*shakes head*

Tom

 

[spiritofmusic]

Another plea for you not to do it, Ron. I think it'll end in tears LOL.

 

[Gregadd]

Normally I would agree with you. But on this particular one, I like the risk/reward.

It is essentially a "Heads I win. Tails you lose." game. At least in Las Vegas they pay high rewards for high risk games.
w
P.S. Let us assume you take ten trials. Your score is 5\10 correct. There exist two pssible explanations, 1. your score is consistent with chanc. 2. you actually were able to identify or match A\B to X, But your score is statistically insignificant, Or if you score higher than 8\10,you are a" lucky coin."

 

[JackD201]

I think one of the problems is, is that there are a number of chalatons in high end audio (as with any business), so those outside of high end will tend to focus on those, and paint the entire industry with the same broad brush.

I post regularly on the talkclassical.com music forums, and there is also a "protector of the audio uneducated" over there. He works at a recording studio in LA. He constantly claims, that $5000.00 is the most anyone ever has to spend on speakers, and that anything above that is a waste of money. He also claims, that room treatment will always make up for inadequacies in speakers. He's argued that a mediocre speaker will always sound better in a correctly treated room, than a very high end speaker in a normal living space. And that $5000.00 worth of multi channel speakers will always sound better than substantially more money invested in 2 channel.

Among his other claims are: all CD players/transports are comparable, a consumer level multi channel AV receiver will sound as good as any high end amp, there is no reason for any resolution above 44.1/16 bit.

Winer has a clone in LA? Where's that emoticon when you need it?

 

[the sound of Tao]

Ron,
Understand completely the desire to do this as the kind of blind absolutism and hubris caught up in these kinds of claims is niggling to say the least but I also remember a good mate recalling his favourite Macedonian proverb that his grandmother would tell him at times like these... touch it and it will smell! Oh so very wise, wise words.

But if you do go ahead please whoop his dbt, and may the force be with you.

 

[Al M.]

I think one of the problems is, is that there are a number of chalatons in high end audio (as with any business), so those outside of high end will tend to focus on those, and paint the entire industry with the same broad brush.

All true.

I post regularly on the talkclassical.com music forums, and there is also a "protector of the audio uneducated" over there. He works at a recording studio in LA. He constantly claims, that $5000.00 is the most anyone ever has to spend on speakers, and that anything above that is a waste of money. He also claims, that room treatment will always make up for inadequacies in speakers.

Nonsense to both claims.

He's argued that a mediocre speaker will always sound better in a correctly treated room, than a very high end speaker in a normal living space.

It depends on what the acoustics of the "normal living space" are. However, I agree with the guy that the importance of acoustics is vastly underrated.

Among his other claims are: [...] there is no reason for any resolution above 44.1/16 bit.

The importance of "high-res" digital is overrated. The 44.1/16 bit CD format is in fact high-resolution (or "high-res"), and is vastly underrated. It is tremendous when decoded right. So he has a point -- up to a point.

 

[NorthStar]

He's a "protector of the audio uneducated"; in that sense, his above three points do make sense.

The first and second ones we can certainly argue with...anything above $5,000/pair of loudspeakers.
The third, as long the loudspeakers are good enough...frequency curve off axis and phase.

 

[Gregadd]

Digtial proponents have always argued that each incarnation is perfect. That begs the question of; why they work so hard to improve I?.

 

[still-one]

Digtial proponents have always argued that each incarnation is perfect. That begs the question of; why they work so hard to improve I?.

Because contrary to the belief of some the audio hobby is not exempt from continuos improvement. Cameras, cars, computers, phones ........ all continue to improve yet we "audiophiles" are supposed to yearn for the good old days

 

[cooljazz]

Because contrary to the belief of some the audio hobby is not exempt from continuos improvement. Cameras, cars, computers, phones ........ all continue to improve yet we "audiophiles" are supposed to yearn for the good old days

Which is why I like to say "Perfect and getting better everyday!!"

No one seems to know though how perfect can be topped.

CJ

 

[NorthStar]

Digtial proponents have always argued that each incarnation is perfect. That begs the question of; why they work so hard to improve I?.

Sound rewards, audiophilia, mission accomplished, addictive hobby, satisfaction guaranteed, ...all that jazz.

The closest possible high fidelity sound reproduction to the live event.

 

[asiufy]

I second the call for Ron not to do it.
One of the things having a store has taught me is that people will hear what they want to hear.

 

[Gregadd]

"Let me clear my throat" Ahem. In a thread whose very premise is that audiophiles engage in hyperbole overkill, we are also accused of being static. it is a sign of the times.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Alex, that is the nice part of my reply to the Audiogon poster: I offered only that I would be able to identify reliably my system from his $3,000 - $5,000 system — in my listening room.

 

[Al M.]

I second the call for Ron not to do it.
One of the things having a store has taught me is that people will hear what they want to hear.

Not just in audio.