Take the blind challenge! 300B SET vs. Straight Wire with Gain

[Ra1zel]

Total votes: 14.

How disappointing. Objectivists love to demand blind tests. So it seems, only if other people are performing it. And then nitpick other people's blind tests to death. When it comes to doing it yourself, you are too lazy to participate. What about getting off your behinds and participating? Are so many here really only armchair objectivists?

Most likely most people don't care about this test since it's a bit unclear what's the point exactly. "What you prefer" is a bit meaningless on ASR, one amp is higher fidelity than the other so more people would be interested in ABX where X is the direct recording in digital and to spot the higher fidelity amp. Nothing of value is being tested here.

 

[Ra1zel]

To all, vote honestly and you can tell everyone else you were right when the results come out or pretend you didn’t vote at all. No one but you will know how you voted unless you volunteer that info.

How exactly can you be right or wrong in a preference test?

If you like chocolate more than vanilla you are wrong and a moron?

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

Subjectivist Foodie - "I can definitely taste the difference between food based on the shape of the plate it's served on!"

Objectivist Foodie - "Really?? Can you do it while wearing a blindfold?"


Subjectivist Foodie - "OK you Objectivists are so fixed on blind tests so heres a test for you! I've prepared 6 dishes for you. Three of them may have some special sauce mixed in. If you pick those three as your preferance, that means you might prefer dishes that have that special sauce mixed in. If you pick the other three, you like food without that special sauce. But if you can't taste the difference at all then it proves that special sauce doesn't matter."

Objectivist Foodie - "Uhhhhhh...???"

Subjectivist Foodie "Why aren't you poseurs taking my blind test??"

 

[Axo1989]

Except that most of us objectivists don't worship at the SINAD alter like the subjectivists want to believe. We know we likely can't hear the difference between 90 and 110db SINAD. We just figure all things being equal we might as well get the 110db SINAD amp if we have the option.

You've gone on a different tangent, there's no argument from me that "more than a few" faux-objectivists equals "most" of the tribe. I don't have that data.

But that's orthogonal to what's going on here: read the thread more carefully. We aren't listening for difference between your THD at -110 vs -90 dB. The 300B measurements referenced are THD around -40 dB.

And equally apposite, numerous other aspects of amp sonic performance that may vary with speaker load, recording and music type, playback levels and so on.

 

[computer-audiophile]

But that's orthogonal to what's

You have used this term more than once. Can you briefly explain what it means? (I sometimes have difficulty understanding British or American diction).

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

You've gone on a different tangent, there's no argument from me that "more than a few" faux-objectivists equals "most" of the tribe. I don't have that data.

But that's orthogonal to what's going on here: read the thread more carefully. We aren't listening for difference between your THD at -110 vs -90 dB. The 300B measurements referenced are THD around -40 dB.

And equally apposite, numerous other aspects of amp sonic performance that may vary with speaker load, recording and music type, playback levels and so on.

So is the test to determine whether or not I prefer the sound of a terrible amp?

 

[Axo1989]

You have used this term more than once. Can you briefly explain what it means? (I sometimes have difficulty understanding British or American diction).

The basic/literal meaning is 'at right angles', the additional technical meaning is 'having variates which can be treated as statistically independent'. The vernacular usage derives from both: it suggests that the argument heads in a different direction, and/or the ideas and variables in play are not really connected. Does that makes sense?

 

[Axo1989]

So is the test to determine whether or not I prefer the sound of a terrible amp?

Mate, you've already said you're not really interested in this comparison, I'm not here to give your straw men a haircut.

 

[computer-audiophile]

The basic/literal meaning is 'at right angles', the additional technical meaning is 'having variates which can be treated as statistically independent'. The vernacular usage derives from both: it suggests that the argument heads in a different direction, and/or the ideas and variables in play are not really connected. Does that makes sense?

Thank you, I only knew the term from mathematics, not from colloquial language.

 

[Axo1989]

Thank you, I only knew the term from mathematics, not from colloquial language.

Not to insult you by repeating the definition of course, it seemed the best way to convey the related meaning if the idiom.

 

[GXAlan]

How exactly can you be right or wrong in a preference test?

If you like chocolate more than vanilla you are wrong and a moron?

You cannot be right or wrong on a preference test. Thats silly and that’s the whole point.

You become right or wrong when you also are claiming to know the identity of the amp from listening. There’s actually no reason you would prefer the same amp across three different recordings either!

Sgt Ear Ache, the better way to think of the conversation is:

Subjectivist Foodie - "I can definitely taste the difference between food based on the shape of the plate it's served on! I don’t know what sort of magic it is, but that’s the only plate I use now"

Objectivist Foodie - "Really?? Can you do it while wearing a blindfold? Whatever is causing you to taste the difference js just a fixed effects box.”

Objectivist Me;: “Hey ASR guys, I had a small windfall and figure I would try out subjectivist foodie’s claim. You know what? Subjectivitist’s octagonal plate is actually dusted with cinnamon. And you know what? It’s not just a few grains of cinnamon, but it’s a silly amount of cinnamon. But what is crazy to me is that it is surprisingly subtle once you put food on it. It’s super strong when you just taste the plate alone, but with food, I thought it was pretty subtle.

Here, let me carefully read the laws on giving you food from three restaurants without paying so that no one gets in trouble and let you have a taste.

I’d like to get your opinion, Since I know it is cinnamon from doing the research, and there’s a chance that I just cannot taste cinnamon, I am less reliable as a taste tester.

Do you mind, just for fun, to see if you can distinguish between the cinnamon or not, and if you prefer one plate or the other?”

Subjectivist critic: “When you take the food out of the restaurant, you lose some magic”

Me: “Well sure. It makes the differences at home smaller than the differences at the restaurant. But it’s still the best way to get more people to do the taste test”.

Objectivist critic: “I am allergic to cinammon, so I cannot try it”

Me: “Well don’t try it if you’re allergic…”

Objectivist critic: “You put more crust of the brownie on the square plate compared to the octagonal plate.”

Me: “Good point. Most people like the crust. Sorry, it my very best to prepare the samples. Would be interesting if everyone says that the plate that had the extra brownie crust”

Objectivist critic: “You cannot make me do the taste test”

Me: “Of course not! I am just surprised that this club house loves the rank food on nutritional content and consistency, and we always always talks about blind taste tests. When setting up a blind taste test for everyone, suddenly everyone is not interested.”

Objectivist critic: “You cannot say it’s right or wrong to like cinnammon”

Me: “Agree. I was just saying that one of my friends was convinced that one of the samples was spicier and therefore the one with cinnamon. That was actually the sample without cinnamon.”

————
I get it if you don’t have time. Adding your input to the poll is volunteering. We are all busy people, which is why I made the poll a 2 week poll.

The peer review is also important. Good to know that some samples have more brownie crust that the others, etc. Everyone’s input is very valuable for making sure we have a way to make sense of the blind test.

What is surprising is how much time is spent writing and commenting in the ASR forum and how few people have the interest to do a 5 minute blind taste test.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

You cannot be right or wrong on a preference test. Thats silly and that’s the whole point.

You become right or wrong when you also are claiming to know the identity of the amp from listening. There’s actually no reason you would prefer the same amp across three different recordings either!

Sgt Ear Ache, the better way to think of the conversation is:

Subjectivist Foodie - "I can definitely taste the difference between food based on the shape of the plate it's served on! I don’t know what sort of magic it is, but that’s the only plate I use now"

Objectivist Foodie - "Really?? Can you do it while wearing a blindfold? Whatever is causing you to taste the difference js just a fixed effects box.”

Objectivist Me;: “Hey ASR guys, I had a small windfall and figure I would try out subjectivist foodie’s claim. You know what? Subjectivitist’s octagonal plate is actually dusted with cinnamon. And you know what? It’s not just a few grains of cinnamon, but it’s a silly amount of cinnamon. But what is crazy to me is that it is surprisingly subtle once you put food on it. It’s super strong when you just taste the plate alone, but with food, I thought it was pretty subtle.

Here, let me carefully read the laws on giving you food from three restaurants without paying so that no one gets in trouble and let you have a taste.

I’d like to get your opinion, Since I know it is cinnamon from doing the research, and there’s a chance that I just cannot taste cinnamon, I am less reliable as a taste tester.

Do you mind, just for fun, to see if you can distinguish between the cinnamon or not, and if you prefer one plate or the other?”

Subjectivist critic: “When you take the food out of the restaurant, you lose some magic”

Me: “Well sure. It makes the differences at home smaller than the differences at the restaurant. But it’s still the best way to get more people to do the taste test”.

Objectivist critic: “I am allergic to cinammon, so I cannot try it”

Me: “Well don’t try it if you’re allergic…”

Objectivist critic: “You put more crust of the brownie on the square plate compared to the octagonal plate.”

Me: “Good point. Most people like the crust. Sorry, it my very best to prepare the samples. Would be interesting if everyone says that the plate that had the extra brownie crust”

Objectivist critic: “You cannot make me do the taste test”

Me: “Of course not! I am just surprised that this club house loves the rank food on nutritional content and consistency, and we always always talks about blind taste tests. When setting up a blind taste test for everyone, suddenly everyone is not interested.”

Objectivist critic: “You cannot say it’s right or wrong to like cinnammon”

Me: “Agree. I was just saying that one of my friends was convinced that one of the samples was spicier and therefore the one with cinnamon. That was actually the sample without cinnamon.”

————
I get it if you don’t have time. Adding your input to the poll is volunteering. We are all busy people, which is why I made the poll a 2 week poll.

The peer review is also important. Good to know that some samples have more brownie crust that the others, etc. Everyone’s input is very valuable for making sure we have a way to make sense of the blind test.

What is surprising is how much time is spent writing and commenting in the ASR forum and how few people have the interest to do a 5 minute blind taste test.

LOL...OK OK I'll take the test tonight. I don't know why, or what it's going to reveal that is of any use. But I will take it.

But reading the above, it really does seem like there's some fundamental misunderstandings about what this whole objectivism thing is all about.

 

[Sokel]

Record breaker: Raphaelite CS30-MKII tube amplifier review and measurements

Raphaelite CS30-MKII 300B integrated tube amplifier review: A New Performance Record This is a review and detailed measurements of Raphaelite CS30-MKK 300B single ended tube amplifier. It is available on eBay for $1449 + $310 shipping to California + tax. There are some better deals from...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[oleg87]

The original clips are hard to blind A/B. With the trimmed/LUFS-matched ones, I made no attempt to verify audibility in any more rigorous way than flipping back and forth between them in my player at a comfortable listening level, but I don't hear any difference that would conceivably be meaningful to me.

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

Done.

Spoiler: What was my conclusion?

I felt like I heard something in 5 that made me think it sounded a little better in some undefinable way than 2. The other ones all sounded the same to me.

 

[dualazmak]

After good sleep and rest, this morning I very carefully did my comparative listening to the flac music tracks while paying no attention on my objective measurements shared in #56, #57, #67, and #69; then I just voted for the poll.

I believe my DSP-based multichannel multi-SP-driver multi-amplifier fully-active fully-time-aligned (0.1 msec precision) audio system is highly sensitive enough in hearing very subtle difference of distortion and other factors of music tracks as well as audio gears, for example as I shared here and here.

In order to avoid giving any possible prejudice/misleading to other participants, I will share my subjective impressions after the poll will be closed on May 4.
Only if you would be seriously interested in my impressions before the closing date, please simply PM me.

 

[dasdoing]

I miss "hear diference but can't decide" options

Spoiler: my impressions

haven't read almost anything said here...so these are basicly my pure impressions

3 vs 1
the track allready has anoying distorsion for my ears (guitar amp)
number 1 seams to make the second loop of the riff even more hurting (distorded?), so I prefer 3
though the extra saturation(?) on 1 makes the incoming bass more intresting (more lively)

2 vs 5
I think 2 is more saturated. It makes her voice "sweeter", but the upright bass starts to sound unatural. can't decide on preference here, as I prefer 2 on her voice, but 5 on the bass.
voted 2 times here to compensate
[EDIT] so I only have 3 votes to give. If forced to decide I go with 5

4 vs 6
ok, these are night and day.
can't really tell with conviction which one is more saturated cause the extra clarity in 4 could actually be generated by extra saturation (depending how the raw tracks were recorded). but 6 is probably saturated. 6 has a 70ies vibe to it. 4 sounds modern, authentic. I can understand that people divide on something like that. it's pure preference. I clearly prefer 4, for the clarity.

 

[dasdoing]

I would say, if you have a very specific music taste....meaning, you don't switch genres and decades...you probably can find a type of saturation that will enhance you experience entirely. if you are just a little more eclectic, your result will be mixed, with some material sounding better, and others worse.
on the other hand objectives are wrong in assuming that tube sound destroys music, because purposeful saturation is allready baked into the production 99% of the time. tubers just like a little more effect

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

For me, this little test just confirms once again what I already believed to be the case - if you have enough power in your chosen amp to drive your chosen transducers suitably, you're probably good to go. Changing the amp isn't going to make much difference at all. Here we have two amps that apparently measure significantly differently and yet for all intents and purposes they sound basically the same. I mean some of us are hearing some differences...others different differences, and some no difference at all. There certainly doesn't seem to be a strong consensus one way or the other in the results. My choice is to seek transparency as much as possible in my system because I want to know what's reaching the speakers and then deal with the issues between them and my ears from that point via EQ. And since I have access to good information and measured performance tests like those found here at ASR, I can get closer to that goal of transparency than my ears alone are capable of achieving. :shrug:

 

[Sgt. Ear Ache]

... objectives are wrong in assuming that tube sound destroys music, because purposeful saturation is allready baked into the production 99% of the time. tubers just like a little more effect

Yes...any objectivist who said "tube sound destroys music" would be wrong. But, I can't recall that being siad by any objectivists very often at all. What I do recall hearing (and saying myself) is "hey if you like that tube sound more power to you but I don't want to use my amp to add a layer of something to the equation even if in some way it might seem to make things sound better." The issue generally that arises with tube amps is that tube amp advocates declare that the sounds coming from their tube amps are "warmer, more musical, more dynamic, and so on and so on." The implication being that the tube amp is providing a better, more complete musical experience than can be achieved via an amp that does notihing other than amplify. As you say yourself, the saturation is built into the recording already. The objectivist position is simply that (as much as is possible) that's what we want to hear - the recording, and only the recording.

But again, what this test shows (to me at least) is that "tube sound" is a pretty iffy proposition anyway.