Hardware Mods - the ugly story

[rebbiputzmaker]

And I eagerly await the posting of results from supervised bias controlled blind listening tests proving the audible value of any such products in any reasonably well designed system.

Just curious, do you own now or have ever owned any equipment that you have done this type of testing before purchase, or after purchase?

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

Based on the complete lack of evidence more like it.

It's nonsense, always has been. Great margin products for retailers however. That's how it all started, products we could stock, in order to claw back GP$ after discounting. Started with speaker cables, green pens, isolating feet, clock 'upgrades', special optical cables, magic rocks, cable elevators etc.

The entire segment is a pathetic joke.

Not always good to mix thing together. Like equating an ax murder with a lumberjack.

 

[Jakob1863]

Not always good to mix thing together. Like equating an ax murder with a lumberjack.

I second that.

Actually the discussion and arguments remained the same for the last 40 years but the topics do change. I remember the first CD player tests describing sonical differences despite quite similar measurements and the angry reactions by EEs who pointed out that it wasn´t possible that any audible difference exists.
Quite the same a couple of years before that when especially japanese amplifier manufacturers started the so-called numbers race. Ultra low distortion numbers but sometimes/often mediocre sonical results.
Later, again with digital, we got rumors that optical S/PDIF didn´t sound as good as "coax S/PDIF", a lot of rants were written why that ulitmatetly couldn´t be.........
And while there is overall a constant lack of published controlled listening test results to back the audibility claims, there were a lot of technically differences found that at least could explain why audible differences might exist.

Is there fraud happening? I´ll bet, as i don´t know about any human actions where no fraud exists. Is it all fraud? I´ll bet again that is is likely not.

 

[SIY]

Curious as to what you found in the realm of bad design issues with AR and CJ gear?

RIAA conformance, poor or nonexistent buffering of outputs (and the drive to the RIAA), excessive phono stage Miller capacitance, poor overload margins. Some of those things were fixed in later models, so it wasn't just my imagination. At that time, both companies were just selling slightly reworked versions of Marantz and Dynaco circuits of the '50s and '60s, with all of their attendant faults.

 

[Wombat]

I second that.

Actually the discussion and arguments remained the same for the last 40 years but the topics do change. I remember the first CD player tests describing sonical differences despite quite similar measurements and the angry reactions by EEs who pointed out that it wasn´t possible that any audible difference exists.
Quite the same a couple of years before that when especially japanese amplifier manufacturers started the so-called numbers race. Ultra low distortion numbers but sometimes/often mediocre sonical results.
Later, again with digital, we got rumors that optical S/PDIF didn´t sound as good as "coax S/PDIF", a lot of rants were written why that ulitmatetly couldn´t be.........
And while there is overall a constant lack of published controlled listening test results to back the audibility claims, there were a lot of technically differences found that at least could explain why audible differences might exist.

Is there fraud happening? I´ll bet, as i don´t know about any human actions where no fraud exists. Is it all fraud? I´ll bet again that is is likely not.

So, where is it specifically likely not? No evidence, no substance. Just marketing icing. How is one to know? That is where up front credible measurements matter - to too few.

 

[Jakob1863]

So, where is it specifically likely not? No evidence, no substance. Just speculation. That is where up front credible measurements matter.

How could you know?
I´ve started another thread about "evidence" so i refer to that. Before knowing what is considered as sufficient evidence i can´t tell about _evidence_ .
Rebbiputzmaker already pointed to it, if you mix everything together, you most likely get it wrong.

 

[Wombat]

How could you know?
I´ve started another thread about "evidence" so i refer to that. Before knowing what is considered as sufficient evidence i can´t tell about _evidence_ .
Rebbiputzmaker already pointed to it, if you mix everything together, you most likely get it wrong.

Who mixes everything together? Science and evidence is focused and specific.

 

[Purité Audio]

A customer told me his experience with ‘mods’ , CD player sent for modification, ‘modder’ shows customer tea cup full of parts which have been switched out, a few weeks later the fascia clock dies and the unit is sent to the distributor for repair.
Customer is told that the new clock has been wired ( incorrectly) to the fascia panel, customer asks whether the other modified parts have been installed correctly, ‘what other parts’ is the reply!

Keith

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

RIAA conformance, poor or nonexistent buffering of outputs (and the drive to the RIAA), excessive phono stage Miller capacitance, poor overload margins. Some of those things were fixed in later models, so it wasn't just my imagination. At that time, both companies were just selling slightly reworked versions of Marantz and Dynaco circuits of the '50s and '60s, with all of their attendant faults.

Interesting, at what times were they doing that?

 

[SIY]

'70s and '80s.

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

Who mixes everything together? Science and evidence is focused and specific.

Sorry if I was not totally clear. Working on equipment, for example, is very different from wood blocks and crystals. Not good to lump these into one conversation IMO. Also pointing out individual cases of bad or unprofessional mods etc, should not paint all with a broad brush.

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

'70s and '80s.

Not a big fan of CJ stuff and some were better than others, but Bill's stuff, (ARC) was much different IMO.

 

[SIY]

Not a big fan of CJ stuff and some were better than others, but Bill's stuff was much different IMO.

Not really, no. Having familiarity with tube circuits removes a lot of the mystery and hype. Audio Research has done some amazingly questionable designs along with some OK ones.

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

Not really, no. Having familiarity with tube circuits removes a lot of the mystery and hype. Audio Research has done some amazingly questionable designs along with some OK ones.

Well, let's just say you are not the only person here familiar with tube circuits.

How is your understanding of output transformer design?

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

‘modder’ shows customer tea cup full of parts

Sorry but have to ask. Is that a literal or figurative "teacup" Is the teacup the universal vessel in England? Do people carry urine samples to the doctor in a teacup?

Thomas where are you when we need you?

 

[Frank Dernie]

Sorry but have to ask. Is that a literal or figurative "teacup" Is the teacup the universal vessel in England? Do people carry urine samples to the doctor in a teacup?

Thomas where are you when we need you?

I have seen "cup" used as a measure in cookery, but usually in US recipe books. Here in the UK it used to be ounces but it has been grams since 1968 (officially, old people changed slower )

 

[rebbiputzmaker]

(officially, old people changed slower )

Yes so true. A cup as in measure is 8oz, but a drinking tea/coffee cup is maybe 5oz or 6oz I would estimate. Could be anything size wise really, but going up in size it starts being called a mug and shaped like a mug. Now we have Starbucks sizes; tall, grande, venti, and trenta.

In F1 when did you switch over to metric? Did you use both english and metric?

 

[Frank Dernie]

In F1 we stuck with Imperial measurements whilst we were using the DFV engine, which had been designed in Imperial dimensions. We also used a lot of US aerospace materials since there was plenty of surplus available on the market, The UK stuff was never available surplus and minimum order quantities were ridiculous for us. We went metric at Williams during 1983 when we were designing for the Honda turbo engine. I haven't used Imperial units since.
Other than dimensions I started using centigrade, watts etc instead of farenheit , BTUs etc in 1968.
PS sorry for the OT post folks...

 

[amirm]

Actually the discussion and arguments remained the same for the last 40 years but the topics do change. I remember the first CD player tests describing sonical differences despite quite similar measurements and the angry reactions by EEs who pointed out that it wasn´t possible that any audible difference exists.

Blind tests of the era, i.e. Clark's, showed that people almost entirely could not tell the difference between CD players in controlled tests.

I am confident in controlled testing, those 1980s CD players would not be distinguishable by vast majority if not all the audiophiles from the best of the best high-end players today.

So please don't put that forward as if it is a given that there were audible differences in players then.

 

[Jakob1863]

Blind tests of the era, i.e. Clark's, showed that people almost entirely could not tell the difference between CD players in controlled tests.

No, Clark´s test couldn´t show that as he only used (imo) one specific kind of controlled test protocol and failed to properly consider statistical power problems of this test protocol.

I am confident in controlled testing,......

So am i,but it has to be sound controlled testing and that what was routinely done as "ABX" then does not really qualify.

......those 1980s CD players would not be distinguishable by vast majority if not all the audiophiles from the best of the best high-end players today.

I hope we can agree that "distinguishable by vast majority" is a (totally) different topic?!

So please don't put that forward as if it is a given that there were audible differences in players then.

Unfortunately it is a given that audible differences existed in players then.