The Half Life of Expectation Bias

[mep]

Mark, I would appreciate it if you would quit re-phrasing in Mark Speak what I said:

"Mark Speak" is much easier to understand than Tom gobbledygook. Look, I later quoted your exact statement before you went off the rails. And the reality is all components actually contain analog circuits because even digital components have to convert the digital back to analog before it gets to your preamp. So if you want to stand on your statement "that there is no real advance in two channel high end analog gear in at least 20 years," then you are also damning the analog section of digital gear.

 

[dingus]

Can you please clarify what you would consider to be "truly significant or real advancements"?

for me it would be the ability to definitively determine if a fully operational 20 year old component is audibly inferior to a modern component of relatively equitable price\performance.

 

[dingus]

I respectful disagree with your valuation of the improvements. As my opinion is supported mainly by subjective findings obtained through listening and reading about stereo reproduction, and most probably the systems and experiences I could refer do not mean anything to you, readers will have to rely on their experiences to appreciate the argument.

But I answered mainly to tell that IMHO we will never see real improvements looking at singe pieces of equipment - you must listen to properly assembled and optimized FULL systems in ADEQUATE rooms.

you are supporting the argument that subjective observations are only meaningful to the individual making the observation. i accept your apology.

 

[microstrip]

SIX HUNDRED hour break-in?

How can you even design something that has a 600 hour break-in period? You design and build a prototype and run it 24 hours a day for a month, then listen to it to see if it is any good??? (...)

Would you find 200 hours acceptable? Then forget about ARC and go cj.

 

[mep]

Would you find 200 hours acceptable? Then forget about ARC and go cj.

McIntosh gear requires no break in time. It's not mentioned in their manuals. I looked up Gary's MC 601 amps owner's manual and nary a word was written about break in.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Would you find 200 hours acceptable? Then forget about ARC and go cj.

Sorry cj needs at least 300 hrs.

 

[microstrip]

you are supporting the argument that subjective observations are only meaningful to the individual making the observation. i accept your apology.

My comments do not support such wrong statement. And I was not apologizing - there was no reason for such behavior IMHO.

You should remember that once individual subjective observations are analyzed and weighted by the experimenter and others they are very meaningful.

 

[microstrip]

Sorry cj needs at least 300 hrs.

Should we have a dispute in a separate thread on this?

 

[MylesBAstor]

Should we have a dispute in a separate thread on this?

No I prefer a duel to the death!

 

[mep]

No I prefer a duel to the death!

Conrad Johnson-Sound worth dying for.

 

[dingus]

My comments do not support such wrong statement. And I was not apologizing - there was no reason for such behavior IMHO.

You should remember that once individual subjective observations are analyzed and weighted by the experimenter and others they are very meaningful.

my apologies, my last post to you was entirely in jest. its a joke often used by comedian Stephen Colbert. i was poking fun at myself and anyone else who can get carried away and take these kinds of topics too seriously.

 

[mep]

my apologies, my last post to you was entirely in jest. its a joke often used by comedian Stephen Colbert. i was poking fun at myself and anyone else who can get carried away and take these kinds of topics too seriously.

No wonder it wasn't funny.

 

[thedudeabides]

for me it would be the ability to definitively determine if a fully operational 20 year old component is audibly inferior to a modern component of relatively equitable price\performance.

Don't know what you mean by "definitively" and "relatively equitable price / performance" but I will cite my personal experience with Martin Logan speakers and Conrad Johnson preamps. I have owned both brands and have purchased various models thereof over the last twenty years plus. Suffice to say that the each successive model was clearly sonically superior to the previous.

And all the "lower end" models benefit from newer technology incorporated into the the "higher priced" selections within that brand for less cost.

With all due respect, I think you are very mistaken regarding your premise stated above.

 

[Orb]

That would be a sight worth seeing. There's a lot primping (or is that pimping?) going on here.

LOL, and that person would be the new X to the Z of Pimp my Forum
Thanks
Orb

 

[dingus]

Don't know what you mean by "definitively" and "relatively equitable price / performance" but I will cite my personal experience with Martin Logan speakers and Conrad Johnson preamps. I have owned both brands and have purchased various models thereof over the last twenty years plus. Suffice to say that the each successive model was clearly sonically superior to the previous.

And all the "lower end" models benefit from newer technology incorporated into the the "higher priced" selections within that brand for less cost.

With all due respect, I think you are very mistaken regarding your premise stated above.

equitable price\performance simply means that you are going to try and match the components as closely as possible in spec. pitting the a Krell KSA-100 against a modern flea amp and driving low efficiency speakers is not going to be a productive exercise. if both components are of similar performance and price (adj. for inflation), then if i think the 20 year old piece is not up to par with the modern piece in terms of its sound, thats definitely definitive for me. i'd love to get your feedback if you could do a demo of an older CJ pre and a comparable modern CJ pre.

 

[MylesBAstor]

equitable price\performance simply means that you are going to try and match the components as closely as possible in spec. pitting the a Krell KSA-100 against a modern flea amp and driving low efficiency speakers is not going to be a productive exercise. if both components are of similar performance and price (adj. for inflation), then if i think the 20 year old piece is not up to par with the modern piece in terms of its sound, thats definitely definitive for me. i'd love to get your feedback if you could do a demo of an older CJ pre and a comparable modern CJ pre.

There is no contest. The rest is argument for the sake of argument as most of these posts have become.

But since want to argue, you can start by telling us how the older Mylar caps are as good as Teflon. Jung and Curl.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Well designed audio gear, such as my Hafler gear, was already using polypropylene and polystyrene capacitors, and this is in the late 70's and early 80's. Just sayin.

Um first of all, who mentioned Hafler? Who cares?

Two, what caps were being discussed?

Third, just sayin mine didn't. I modded mine.

And the Hafler stuff was total garbage. I oughta know. Couldn't wait to get rid of them. The worst of all and one of my all time worst audio purchases EVER-was the DH-500. One of the worst amplifiers I've ever heard. The Amber 70, as did practically every other amplifier of the day, kicked it in the a**. 500 watts? Sounded more like 2 watts. Total dreck.

What no secret notes passed around behind my back?

 

[dingus]

There is no contest. The rest is argument for the sake of argument as most of these posts have become.

i'm saying i havent heard the results of that contest where i thought there was an appreciable difference. different yes, better no. i dont mean to discount your findings, and as i said earlier i know i need to expand my horizons, i havent been convinced yet.

But since want to argue, you can start by telling us how the older Mylar caps are as good as Teflon.

thats not my argument to make.

 

[MylesBAstor]

everybody has a right to their opinions. What high end gear had mylar caps in it Myles that was made 20 years ago as said a few posts up?

Go back and read the thread again before posting. You're post has zero, zip, nada to do with the original question by Dingus.

Hafler did not have in the signal path. Cap knowledge was well established by the early 80's in audio design by real engineers vs tweeko designers. Never heard the 500, but my 450 watts sounds fine.

I never heard the Amber 70.

Yeah and a lot others too.

So you're calling Walter Marsh and Carl Jung tweako engineers? And major capacitor manufacturers like Rel Cap tweako engineers? And the military that uses most of these caps tweako engineers? Actually if you ever saw capacitors designed, wound and built, you could never say the above statement. But that's OK because we know that nothing has changed and improved in the last 20 years and all high-end audio designers are idiots. That's why leading speaker manufacturers have made significant inroads into improving their sound by going to new capacitor designs.

Oh forgot. The Haflers on the right speaker were also totally outclassed by an old Dynaco 70.

 

[Robh3606]

Hello Myles

That's why leading speaker manufacturers have made significant inroads into improving their sound by going to new capacitor designs.

What new capacitor designs??

Rob