Blind test: we have a volunteer!!!

[Iving]

You accused Amir of being an apologist for Schiit… I don't see what else that could be interpreted as. Either you're not standing by your own comment and now trying to obfuscate the issue, or you may need to clarify further.

So don't then.



JSmith

Amir clearly made the case for Schiit's reputation in this matter. I explained the Drama implications - as part of a main point - that the project is contaminated with combative nonsense.

I have explained what I care about and what I don't. I'm happy to be taken as "read".

 

[aandres_gm]

I refer *only* to what has been said on *this thread*. My case is that the blind test project in hand is contaminated by combative nonsense - and it is.

Apparently you are sensitive to a broader history. That has nothing to do with what I am saying here.

fwiw I have no interest in discrediting anyone. I *am* seeking to "discredit" the present approach/dynamic in so far as it feigns scientific merit or purports to be constructive on any human level.

If my remarks help evolve the discussion towards an even more fundamental reset, I wouldn't exactly cry about it.

If they were, even a little bit, to help provoke more dignified and properly scientific debates - especially any crossing silos amongst us - well then I would be overjoyed.

It's not about Schiit, really. It's about someone wanting to prove someone else wrong, just to show their observations were right in the first place. Had GS said something different from Amir about another device (ie Topping's A90), then the name you'd see in that post would be Topping instead.

 

[DaleBerlin]

I have a stupid idea to remove the need for a switch. Why not have a 3.5mm splitter feed the headphones from each amp. Then program two buttons on a universal remote control.

Button 1 - Mute amps A&B, restart mustic source, Unmute amp A

Button 2- Mute amps A&B, restart mustic source, Unmute amp B

 

[Andysu]

I think the double blind listening test should include Electric Shocks if getting the listening wrong.

 

[restorer-john]

I love Americans, I really do. But their propensity to throw down cash bets on just about anything in order vainly attempt to prove a point is terribly tiresome. It's essentially a pathetic "my c#ck is bigger than yours unless you show me" type challenge.

It's kiddies schoolyard stuff. We can do better- or at least I hope we can.

 

[bboris77]

It's essentially a pathetic "my c#ck is bigger than yours unless you show me" type challenge.

There's an idea for the next not-so-blind test lol...as long as we can all agree on how exactly the said specimen will be measured.

 

[Shazb0t]

Well my entire point that is intended to be tested is that the current measurements are either insufficient or the interpretations of them are wrong.

Successfully blind testing between two products that you've deemed to be 'sonically transparent' would demonstrate that they aren't sonically transparent would it not? I don't believe in fairy dust. If something sounds different it can be shown via some measurement whatever it may turn out to be.
But I can't point you to a specific measurement that says 'this amp will sound "grungier" than amp B' if that's what you're looking for.

The whole point of this is to show that I was hearing differences. Differences which I perceived to be negative. And with a blind test success we can then start to look into what those differences might be caused by and do iterative and synthetic tests to explore it. And if the test is failed then there were no differences anyway.
If you want me to say 'this amp is harsher' rather than 'this is the magnius' during the test than I can do that instead...

Im not sure what you're looking for at this point. But regardless, I'm going to do the video anyway and will see if we can raise the $1000 for charity collectively given as it seems the original offer is now off the table.

You're not going to pass a proper blind test regardless... Don't cheat in your video.

 

[richard12511]

I think a digital capture, if he fails, is sufficient to show that @GoldenOne's claims are at the very least exaggerated. If a simple A to D conversion is enough to completely obscure the differences, then it's essentially a guarantee that those differences are miniscule to begin with.

However, a digital capture online test is insufficient to show that there is no difference at all. I agree with @restorer-john . The only way to prove that there is no difference at all is for the test to be performed blind in room.

I honestly would like to see both tests happen. If @GoldenOne can't pass the online test, then it can be shown that no significant differences between the amps exist,

If he fails the first test, though. I'd still like to see an in person test, without that extra A to D conversion. Even if the first test shows that no significant audible difference exists, I'd still like to know if any audible difference exists.

 

[Andysu]

When the audiophile gets all the audio listening wrong they get the cat shock treatment room.

 

[restorer-john]

There's an idea for the next not-so-blind test lol...as long as we can all agree on how exactly the said specimen will be measured.

Blind testing will work. I think...

 

[Andysu]

Just as may as well get a real blind listener for the test.

 

[bboris77]

I think a digital capture, if he fails, is sufficient to show that @GoldenOne's claims are at the very least exaggerated. If a simple A to D conversion is enough to completely obscure the differences, then it's essentially a guarantee that those differences are miniscule to begin with.

However, a digital capture online test is insufficient to show that there is no difference at all. I agree with @restorer-john . The only way to prove that there is no difference at all is for the test to be performed blind in room.

I honestly would like to see both tests happen. If @GoldenOne can't pass the online test, then it can be shown that no significant differences between the amps exist,

If he fails the first test, though. I'd still like to see an in person test, without that extra A to D conversion. Even if the first test shows that no significant audible difference exists, I'd still like to know if any audible difference exists.

The counterargument to this is that the differences are very subtle to begin with, and an additional A to D conversion plus a D to A conversion plus the amplifier required to get the signal to the end user's headphones add 3 variables that could obscure those subtle alleged differences between these two amplifiers. I genuinely think that the online challenge proposed by Amir is pointless and he may do a lot of prep work for no tangible benefit. It is not the same as plugging a transparent switcher with no crosstalk between channels into 2 level-matched amplifiers and simply toggling the switch between them using the same headphones.

 

[MDT]

I'd like to echo some of comments in here. As I've said before, I believe everything can be measured. And two transparent amps should sound the same. However I won't discount the possibility that they sound different. What is interesting, is that, if they do, why do they sound different? If particular combinations of gear make an audible difference, this should be quantified and explored further. Having said that, I wouldn't bet on there being a positive result.

Regarding Schiit, last I checked, they themselves (Jason in particular) claim that DACs and amps sound different and that measurements don't tell the whole story. So I don't see that Golden's subjective opinions will be unwelcome to them. If anything, his subjective impressions on a well measuring amp might even be seen as positive, from their perspective

 

[Andysu]

 

[JSmith]

Amir clearly made the case for Schiit

Not in general, only for that specific product, which is based on data not brand etc. Your comments were worded generally which then can be viewed as a personal attack.

You seem ok, so I'll put it down to a wording/2nd language issue and move on.

Don't cheat in your video

+1



JSmith

 

[Shazb0t]

I think a digital capture, if he fails, is sufficient to show that @GoldenOne's claims are at the very least exaggerated. If a simple A to D conversion is enough to completely obscure the differences, then it's essentially a guarantee that those differences are miniscule to begin with.

However, a digital capture online test is insufficient to show that there is no difference at all. I agree with @restorer-john . The only way to prove that there is no difference at all is for the test to be performed blind in room.

I honestly would like to see both tests happen. If @GoldenOne can't pass the online test, then it can be shown that no significant differences between the amps exist,

If he fails the first test, though. I'd still like to see an in person test, without that extra A to D conversion. Even if the first test shows that no significant audible difference exists, I'd still like to know if any audible difference exists.

I agree. I hope @amirm posts the digital files here soon so that everyone here can get an idea of how ridiculous the claimants YouTube video truly is.

The only way this is going to work for the in person test though is with an elaborate pre-configured ABX switching test device or a trusted observer in a neutral location.

 

[Andysu]

I had a double blind test with my GP years ago for a hearing test. Now I use the online https://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/hearing.html where I can take my time, and not having my GP rushing it.

 

[Iving]

2nd language issue

lol - funny man

 

[Andysu]

Does this guy ever use that test equipment behind him or is broken and only used to make the video look good?

 

[JSmith]

lol - funny man

I wasn't trying to be funny actually, I was trying to be understanding and giving you the benefit of the doubt. I based this on interpretation issues when I communicate in 2nd or 3rd languages. As I said, I'm moving on from this as it's all off topic to the main discussion here... best you do too or send me a PM.

But I am glad you were amused anyway, that's at least a positive post.



JSmith