Does Op-amp Rolling Work?

[SuicideSquid]

The characteristics of some specific ICs are very easy to distinguish, especially the headphone system. I have done an experiment at home, AB comparison in a pure black environment, the same song was played back 30 times, and the recognition ratio was 25:5. It is very simple to identify it by the sound field size.

Did you level-match? Did you know which opamp you were listening to?

"Sound field size", by which I assume you mean something like "sound stage" or "imaging" is generally not a function of electronics, but of speakers and room. I'm not clear how very small differences in distortion and noise floor could give rise to perceptible differences in "sound field size".

 

[Thomas Savage]

I don't think so.

(I'm going to use an us vs. them categorical model that I just yesterday deplored in another thread but it's useful here. I am sorry for this.)

We (those who understand physics, measurements, statistics...) are satisfied with the objective information available. Some people (they) insist this information must be incomplete because they can hear something we can't measure. Whose job is it to settle this?

If we do the work and present psycho-acoustic measurements that show with controlled tests the entirely expected results, do you think it would change anyone's position? Maybe a few fence-sitting consumers but the industry that makes its living from conjuring an esoteric aura around the equipment they sell? I don't think so.

I think it is their job to do the work and present measurements that support their claims that we are wrong. But I don't think that's gonna happen.

We've been through all this before with cables. The situation is clear and also stable. No amount of bench or psycho-acoustic measurement is going to change it.

Sometimes I think we all (and here I mean both sides of the us vs them) keep on with these arguments despite knowing that nothing much changes because participating in the arguments is intrinsically rewarding (@Thomas Savage c.f. schismogenesis).

There's uglier examples of a schism, reference David Cronenberg movies.

I think although the results often being tiresome and ever repeating the willingness of the guys here to keep the conversation going while both defending and respecting the institution of audio science and engineering is remarkable, noble even . Its the other side of the divide that tends to mindlessly double down , never willing to truly examine and question. I won't mention the basis of this behaviour ha ha

Folks here love a question, it just has to be a good one too often few and far between ..

This thread is yet another example of a attempt to engage the ' outside world ' , there's few members here that really need this kind of examination after all. It's for the benefit of ' others ' , inviting difficulty of sorts for the sake of a greater purpose.

Brilliant IMHO.

Long live ASR.

 

[DonH56]

I am completely sympathetic to Amir and other engineers having to go over this again and again. If it is any consolation, this conversation won me over and I changed my vote. What brought me around is the callout ‘hey, were electrical engineers dammit, we might actually know more than amateurs’. Indeed, that hit home to me as a scientist, as a geologist and soil scientist I have amateurs contributing nonsense all the time. Occasionally though an outside perspective does spark progress…

Ironically, i just swapped Sparkos into my V3 monos (sorry Dylan, I am cheap and Amir’s review was favorable. Ill upgrade in your direction eventually…). So on my favorite track the imaging was clearly better. Why? Well likely my favorite volume setting is now a little louder, close to whatever the sweet-spot is for my room. So I paid 150 dollars for a moment of better listening concentration and a lesson in volume optimization.. ah well it was fun anyway..

I long, long ago lost count of the number of times I changed something, added something, you name it, and heard new sounds that when I went back to the old thing were there all along.

 

[antcollinet]

I long, long ago lost count of the number of times I changed something, added something, you name it, and heard new sounds that when I went back to the old thing were there all along.

Yep - we change something, then we listen to see what has changed in the sound. This is a different form of listening to that we were doing before the change, when we were just enjoying the music.

Then we hear all those details that were there all along, but that we didn't notice because we weren't listening for them.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

Yep - we change something, then we listen to see what has changed in the sound. This is a different form of listening to that we were doing before the change, when we were just enjoying the music.

Then we hear all those details that were there all along, but that we didn't notice because we weren't listening for them.

That still happens to me when I've fixed an old Yamaha amplifier and swap it in for a few days instead of my usual one. Since I've had it apart, I sit and listen closely, and at first, I think I hear something new -but I don’t. By the next day, it’s gone.

 

[levimax]

Besides listening differently after a change I think the importance of "level matching" is underestimated by many people. I will never forget when I was setting up an ABX amp test and I had to build a little voltage divider with a trim pot to equalize the volume. When I first switched back and forth before level matching I was a little panicked that I had somehow damaged the "lower level" amp as it sounded so much worse that it had to broken. Then magically as I turned the screw on the trim pot all the differences disappeared. It was shocking actually.

I think it is difficult to convince people with just words and graphs and I always encourage people to "experience" what it is like to do a controlled listening test. I am consistently surprised that so few seem to want to go to the trouble. If they knew how much money they could save they would probably be more motivated.

 

[SIY]

Also a question: in the very first FFT, which is the red curve?

Ch1 blue and Ch2 red is the default. So 5532 blue, Sonic Imagery red.

 

[dark132]

Did you level-match? Did you know which opamp you were listening to?

"Sound field size", by which I assume you mean something like "sound stage" or "imaging" is generally not a function of electronics, but of speakers and room. I'm not clear how very small differences in distortion and noise floor could give rise to perceptible differences in "sound field size".

The test is like this: my familyer randomly changes A or B, I close my eyes, and then in a completely dark environment, I use a pen to write down what might be A or B, randomly 30 times, and then compare the order

 

[antcollinet]

The test is like this: my familyer randomly changes A or B, I close my eyes, and then in a completely dark environment, I use a pen to write down what might be A or B, randomly 30 times, and then compare the order

So no accurate level matching (with a meter).

How were you swapping between op amps? Two identical amps one with one without? Or?

Did you check before swapping that there was no difference between the amps?

 

[dark132]

Did you level-match? Did you know which opamp you were listening to?

"Sound field size", by which I assume you mean something like "sound stage" or "imaging" is generally not a function of electronics, but of speakers and room. I'm not clear how very small differences in distortion and noise floor could give rise to perceptible differences in "sound field size".

And please note that just Specific IC, because there are also some tests can't hear the difference at all, and more than half of the results of 30 times are wrong.

 

[Bruce Morgen]

Audio's favorite village |d|ot predictably and shamelessly chimes in.

 

[antcollinet]

And please note that just Specific IC, because there are also some tests can't hear the difference at all, and more than half of the results of 30 times are wrong.

Can you clarify that statement. Can't work out what you mean.

Half the results are wrong? Just result of guessing then.

 

[dark132]

So no accurate level matching (with a meter).

How were you swapping between op amps? Two identical amps one with one without? Or?

Did you check before swapping that there was no difference between the amps?

The same amplifier, just internally can change the mode of the two channel ICs, plugins

 

[antcollinet]

Audio's favorite village |d|ot predictably and shamelessly chimes in.

(link snipped)

Someone else has already referenced that video, but didn't link to it to avoid gifting him views for his clickbait.

 

[dark132]

你能澄清一下这句话吗？不明白你的意思。

一半的结果是错误的？只是猜测的结果。

For a particular IC, there is a very high level of accuracy, and I have tried six or seven different models and done cross-comparisons

 

[antcollinet]

The same amplifier, just internally can change the mode of the two channel ICs, plugins

So when you say the family were "randomly switching" they were swapping op amps each time?

 

[DMB90]

So you're walking back all your claims after that about audible differences? Wise move.

And I hope you follow it up with some ears-only tests of your own when trying to validate extraordinary audibility claims.

No, I did not walk back anything I wrote. It stopped making sense discussing it seeing how it seems to upset so many members here. If you don't believe there is an audible difference between different opamps or you can't hear it it is okay with me.

 

[dark132]

So when you say the family were "randomly switching" they were swapping op amps each time?

yes

 

[antcollinet]

snipped

Do we really need to see this nonsense promoted twice in 8 posts?


Oh, and:

Notification about “External YouTube Video Link Dropping”

Forum Wide Notification: We are strongly discouraging random YouTube and similar “Video links” being posted without some detailed type of description as to what you want to highlight, or what you think is important to our community. Another words, what in the video do you want to...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[antcollinet]

yes

So how did they prevent you knowing they were doing it? EG the times when they were not changed?

How were the levels matched each time?


On the "special" one, what about the possibility that you were hearing a difference simply because it was unstable and ringing?