12 Gauge vs 16 Gauge??
Comments
-
DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »The top ten reasons you know your discussion thread has just gone off Niagara Falls:
(This might actually be #1, but I'll get the ball rolling and start the list with #10)
#10 - When two polar opposites are unable to reverse polarity and cannot agree to disagree.
If you agree, please do feel welcome to chime in and complete this list by starting at #9. If you disagree, please feel welcome to chime in and complete this list by starting at number one. Please forgive me if I seem disagreeable, agree?
Bon chance, mon ami. Oh mon Dieu! I'm writing en Francais again. Zut alors!
Ok, to add a little grease to the skids of this comment:
#9 When F1nut actually treats someone he disagrees with with courtesy and respect instead of scorn, derision, and ridicule.
(If you are holding your breath waiting for this to happen, please do post the "I've turned blue in the face" video at YouTube for all to see. I'm not holding my breath, but I do hope this day does come).
Adding further fuel to this flaming Flamenco, We know this thread has finally gone over Niagara when:
#8 when the DarqueNight finally agrees to do a Double Blind Test and he picks the Emotiva TA-100 (integrated amp; $399) over the $5,495 Bryston B135 Cubed Stereo Integrated Power Amplifier
Don’t worry, if this does ever happen we will have Emergency Medical Techs on standby ready to revive the DarqueNight and apply CPR. All necessary precautions will be taken.
You clearly aren't aware of @DarqueKnight s credentials. So let me enlighten you. He is a professor of electrical engineering. A double PhD. And has multiple articles published. Not editorial or opinion pieces. He has tested/reviewed more equipment than most of the people on this forum will ever own. And he does it in a way that has been proven time and time again to be very objective and professional.
@K_M congratulations on continuing to deflect and avoid sharing your or your husband's professional credentials. At least Roger Russell shares his background experience to the public before making his outrageous claims. More than what you have been willing to do.
I would also like to note that you are being incredibly hypocritical. Repeatedly.
Also, Bell Labs was far more than just a telephone company. They had their thumbs in quite a lot of proverbial pies. But you would know this had you actually read any of the literature that Raife has referenced. You continue to show your own outrageous biases (see "hypocrite" referenced above).
@Gatecrasher I was not calling your baby's ugly. It was not a personal attack. I was pointing out "different strokes for different folks". Just because you can't tell a difference, does that automatically discount someone else's experiences because they are different than your own.
The sense are very individual from person to person. I will readily admit to not being able to hear as well as someone who is trained to hear better (think Navy Sonarmen, Audiologists, etc).
My reference to SRTs and Ferraris was an attempt to state this. Don't discount the 250GTO just because the newer Enzo does literally everything better. Both vehicles have their merits. It is up to the buyer to decide which meets their needs, wants, desires.
Same with audio gear. The SRTs meet your home theater needs. Personally, I think that manufacturers like JTR and Seaton design much better theater speakers. Different strokes for different folks.
I am note trying hard to believe nor am I victim of some sort of mystical zealotism. I know that the MIT cables I use now perform better with my equipment than the Audioquest cables that they replaced. I don't waste my money because my hobbies are all expensive in one way or another so I look for the best bang for my buck. For me it was used MIT cables. For Reindeer guy, it might be zip cord. For you, it may be Canare. I am not judging anyone for finding their zen.
I am judging those who **** on those who have found their zen and say it can't be so."Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."
"Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip -
DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »The top ten reasons you know your discussion thread has just gone off Niagara Falls:
(This might actually be #1, but I'll get the ball rolling and start the list with #10)
#10 - When two polar opposites are unable to reverse polarity and cannot agree to disagree.
If you agree, please do feel welcome to chime in and complete this list by starting at #9. If you disagree, please feel welcome to chime in and complete this list by starting at number one. Please forgive me if I seem disagreeable, agree?
Bon chance, mon ami. Oh mon Dieu! I'm writing en Francais again. Zut alors!
Ok, to add a little grease to the skids of this comment:
#9 When F1nut actually treats someone he disagrees with with courtesy and respect instead of scorn, derision, and ridicule.
(If you are holding your breath waiting for this to happen, please do post the "I've turned blue in the face" video at YouTube for all to see. I'm not holding my breath, but I do hope this day does come).
Adding further fuel to this flaming Flamenco, We know this thread has finally gone over Niagara when:
#8 when the DarqueNight finally agrees to do a Double Blind Test and he picks the Emotiva TA-100 (integrated amp; $399) over the $5,495 Bryston B135 Cubed Stereo Integrated Power Amplifier
Don’t worry, if this does ever happen we will have Emergency Medical Techs on standby ready to revive the DarqueNight and apply CPR. All necessary precautions will be taken.
You clearly aren't aware of @DarqueKnight s credentials. So let me enlighten you. He is a professor of electrical engineering. A double PhD. And has multiple articles published. Not editorial or opinion pieces. He has tested/reviewed more equipment than most of the people on this forum will ever own. And he does it in a way that has been proven time and time again to be very objective and professional.
@K_M congratulations on continuing to deflect and avoid sharing your or your husband's professional credentials. At least Roger Russell shares his background experience to the public before making his outrageous claims. More than what you have been willing to do.
I would also like to note that you are being incredibly hypocritical. Repeatedly.
Also, Bell Labs was far more than just a telephone company. They had their thumbs in quite a lot of proverbial pies. But you would know this had you actually read any of the literature that Raife has referenced. You continue to show your own outrageous biases (see "hypocrite" referenced above).
@Gatecrasher I was not calling your baby's ugly. It was not a personal attack. I was pointing out "different strokes for different folks". Just because you can't tell a difference, does that automatically discount someone else's experiences because they are different than your own.
The sense are very individual from person to person. I will readily admit to not being able to hear as well as someone who is trained to hear better (think Navy Sonarmen, Audiologists, etc).
My reference to SRTs and Ferraris was an attempt to state this. Don't discount the 250GTO just because the newer Enzo does literally everything better. Both vehicles have their merits. It is up to the buyer to decide which meets their needs, wants, desires.
Same with audio gear. The SRTs meet your home theater needs. Personally, I think that manufacturers like JTR and Seaton design much better theater speakers. Different strokes for different folks.
I am note trying hard to believe nor am I victim of some sort of mystical zealotism. I know that the MIT cables I use now perform better with my equipment than the Audioquest cables that they replaced. I don't waste my money because my hobbies are all expensive in one way or another so I look for the best bang for my buck. For me it was used MIT cables. For Reindeer guy, it might be zip cord. For you, it may be Canare. I am not judging anyone for finding their zen.
I am judging those who **** on those who have found their zen and say it can't be so.
I am judging those that fear finding out they may be wrong.
I was quite wrong in a Blind test, made a fool out of myself. But learned something in the process.
Saying you found some magic in a wire is cool and fine, but going the next step to really make sure you did, means even more.
FYI credentials mean nothing at all in regards to the topic at hand.
We are still discussing why a claim can be made, but not backed up when not aware.
I see no explanation of why someone can hear one way looking at the wire, and hear another way when not sure what wire is being used. -
Whose truth is given that cables matter very little? I am not trying to convince one way or the other. I'm pointing out that unless you try for yourself you have zero claims to make that don't make you look foolish and uninformed.
"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
Plus you asked for supporting evidence. it was given and you can't even be bothered to read it.
Why did you ask? If you weren't going to even read it?
Not even expected you'd agree with the supporting evidence, but then you could refute it. You didn't even bother to read it.
You act like you are heavily invested by your constant participation in these threads, yet you never want to look at all supporting information that you yourself asked for>
H9"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
I am curious as to why the Reindeer guy is now insulting @DSkip
So the guy is fronting his own money and his own business' good name to offer a demo to the forum of a brand of cables he sells. Seems far more than some other members are willing to do."Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."
"Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip -
This content has been removed.
-
DonnerUndBlitzen, For that dissertation I'd award you dual PhDs for good-naturedness any day.
-
Trying way too hard. I smile plenty when things are actually funny. You're not even mildly amusing. Of course, I don't find shills amusing at all."Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."
"Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip -
DarqueKnight wrote: »
Nor does anyone seem to use comparison methods that verify anything.
All the claims I see are based on sighted/biased testing methods.
Not saying that proves the claims are wrong, but it offers NO proof they are real either.
I will make this VERY to the point, as I feel there is truly very little to this whole debate/argument.
No claim, is more than a claim to me, until it is verified.
That is NOT to insult anyone, or doubt their experience, or say they are wrong.
Simply some require more than a claim, anecdote or comparison sighted.
Proof of extraordinary claims falls to the one making the claim.
I am making no claims.
Yes, you are making the following claims:
1. You are claiming that human bias is so overwhelming and mindbending that the EFFECTS of bias cannot be removed by training.
2. You are claiming that blind testing is to ONLY way to remove the effects of bias.
3. You are claiming that the inventors of home stereo systems were wrong when they specified the methods of evaluating stereo systems should be based on training in sound localization and sound quality measurement.
You said "proof of extraordinary clams falls to the one making the claim".
Dr. Harvey Fletcher and his colleagues at Bell Laboratories, who invented home stereo systems, claimed the following:
"Critical listeners were sought in these tests because of a desire to set permanent standards. At the moment, only a small percentage of people fully appreciate high fidelity. Even less appreciate or understand stereo. However, there is a growing sophistication evidenced among users of stereo equipment. Anticipating the future, it seemed wise to avoid naive or unconcerned personnel in these tests to prevent establishing loose standards which eventually might have to be abandoned.
The listeners chosen were sophisticated in the art of sound localization either by working in this field or by education before testing. They were felt to be the equal of any serious listener who is accustomed to playing the same records many times and thus becomes familiar with the more subtle artistic and technical effects."
Citation: Harvey, F. K. and Schroeder, M. R., "Subjective Evaluation of Factors Affecting Two-Channel Stereophony", Journal of The Audio Engineering Society, Vol. 9, No. 1, January 1961, pp. 19-28.
Two principles from the field of sensory science pertain to stereo audio evaluation:
1. A thing must be tested in a manner accurately representative of the way it will be used.
2. Sensory evaluations must be conducted in a manner that does not prevent or diminish relevant sensory stimuli from reaching the subject.
References
1. Lawless, H. T. and Heymann H., "Sensory Evaluation of Food: Principles and Practices", pp. 79-100, 2010.
2. Ennis, D. M. and Mullen, K., "Theoretical Aspects of Sensory Discrimination", Chemical Senses, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 513522, 1986.
Now, you @K_M, are making the extraordinary claim that the scientists who invented home stereo systems were wrong in specifying subjective tests with trained subjects. You are further making the extraordinary claim that stereophonic audio, which is multidimensional in nature, is best tested by forced choice discrimination methods, such as A/B and A/B/X.
The burden of proof is on you to show that the Bell Labs researchers were in error and that the sensory science researchers, who specified descriptive tests for multidimensional stimuli, were in error.
You continually carp about doing a blind test and finding no differences in what you evaluated. When asked to provide details of the test and how it was structured, you refused. You continually carp about people not being able to find audible differences in stereo equipment when blind tested, yet you have not posted a single credible example of a blind test that was based on evaluating stereophonic performance parameters.
Condense it down to a few sentences or questions.
I have no idea WTF you are rambling on about Bell Telephones,
Bell Labs and Western Electric rather literally wrote the book on the transduction, transmission, and reproduction of sound. They're relevant by definition.Post edited by mhardy6647 on -
This content has been removed.
-
It always surprises me what threads end up getting the most traffic.2 Channel
Pre:Bryston BP173
Amp:Bryston 14B3
Speakers: Golden Ear Triton Reference
Source: Oppo UDP-205, Bryston BDA-3, Bryston BDP-3, Bryston BCD-3, Apple TV, Amazon Fire
Cables: Wireworld Gold Eclipse 7 Speaker, Wireworld Gold Eclipse 7 XLR, AQ Diamond USB/HDMI
Power: PS Audio P10 Regenerator, AC12, AC10 and AC5 Cables
Display: Sony XBR65Z9F
Home Theater
Pre: Anthem AVM90
Amps: Parasound A31, A51x2
Speakers: Polk LSiM 707 (FL/FR), Polk LSiM706 (Center), LSiM 703 (SL/SR/SBL/SBR), Polk 900-LS (Atmos)
Subwoofers: SVS SB16 x 4
Source: Oppo UDP-205, Apple TV, Amazon Fire
Cables: AQ Meteor/Rocket 88, AQ Niagara/Sky
Power: Torus AVR20, Shunyata Denali, Shunyata Delta, Cullen, PangeaAC9SE Cables
Display: Sony XBR85Z9G -
This content has been removed.
-
Samsung 60" UN60ES6100 LED, Outlaw Audio 976 Pre/Pro Samsung BDP, Amazon Firestick, Phillips CD Changer Canare 14 ga - LCR tweeters inside*; Ctr Ch outside BJC 10 ga: LCR mids “Foamed & Plugged**”, inside* & out
8 ga Powerline: LR woofers, inside* & out
*soldered **Rob the Man (Xschop) LR: Tri-amped RTi A7 w/Rotels. Woofers - 980BX; Tweets & Mids - 981, connected w/Monoprice Premiere ICs
Ctr Ch: Rotel RB981 -> Bi-amped CSi A6 Surrounds: Premiere ICs ->Rotel 981 -> AR 12 ga -> RTi A3. 5 Subs: Sunfire True SW Signature -> LFE & Ctr Ch; 4 Audio Pro Evidence @ the “Corners”. Power Conditioning & Distribution: 4 dedicated 20A feeds; APC H15; 5 Furman Miniport 20s -
She's not going to answer..............she's been asked numerous times over the past year or so.
Never has answered once.
You'll get some very vague two sentence answer.
Actually she uses the "obvious" choice of cable.
You are correct.
I have found telling anything, simply invites more silly comments, more ridicule etc.
In some ways, the less I tell or describe things, perhaps the better.
You guys tend to not discuss, but bash people.
Thanks for understanding why I do not give details. -
The only reason you feel like you are being "bashed" is that you are participating in a discussion without any personal knowledge about the subject. You are trying to minimize the personal experiences of others by touting as fact that which you personally have zero experience yourself.
Tell you what... it has been offered by others here to actually send you some cables to try. Take them up on it and come back and offer your input. Until then, your participation in this thread is little more than that of a troll...The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD
“When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson -
DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »Hi ZLTFUL:
I need to start a top ten list of clever retorts found on this thread, May I use yours?
"Trying way too hard. I smile plenty when things are actually funny. You're not even mildly amusing. Of course, I don't find shills amusing at all."
Did you mean 'shills' or shrills?"
from Wikipedia:
A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps or gives credibility to a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the person or organization. Shills can carry out their operations in the areas of media, journalism, marketing, confidence games, or other business areas. A shill may also act to discredit opponents or critics of the person or organization in which they have a vested interest through character assassination or other means.
In most uses, shill refers to someone who purposely gives onlookers, participants or "marks" the impression of an enthusiastic customer independent of the seller, marketer or con artist, for whom they are secretly working.
So, I suppose shill would work and survive the Scrabble double blind dictionary test (as long as a 75 ohm digital dictionary cable was used). But if I do a top ten retort list, it would be remiss of me not to let you possibly edit your comment and set the record straight, just for the shill of it.
I bet we could do a double blind test with 12 gauge OFC speaker wire and over half the people would find me at least mildly amusing. But I can understand your resistance is much higher than 12 gauge OFC wire and that helps to protect you from clipping and cracking your face while trying to smile.
I've never been called a shill before, I better get my copyright and trademark in before the SyFy channel beats me to it. I should at least be able to market Shill T-Shirts. I know I could write the story, plot line, and at least the first five episodes for the SiFi channel.
Thanks for this shill of a moment. Don't worry, if this shill venture does work out, you are entitled to the usual 5% finders fee.
Quit with all the B.S.
We all know you are very actively pushing that Home Depot wire. -
This content has been removed.
-
WOW I glanced at this before I left work and gee 38 new post. and this is what started it all
"Just realized my install company used 16 gauge speaker wire. Thinking of replacing with 12 gauge wire. Listen to stereo and HT
Is it worth it? Will there be a difference?
Thx!"
When I was a kid my parents told me to turn it down. Now I'm an adult and my kids tell me to turn it down.
Family Room:LG QNED80 75", Onkyo RZ50 Emotiva XPA3 GEN3 Oppo BDP-93,Sony UBP-X800BM. Main: Polk LsiM 705Center: Polk LSiM 704CFront High/Rear High In-Ceiling Polk 80F/X RT Surrounds: Polk S15 Sub: HSU VTF3-MK5
Bed Room; Marantz SR5010, BDP-S270Main: Polk Signature S20Center: Polk Signature S35Rear: Polk R15 Sub: SVS SB2000
Working Warehouse; Yamaha A-S301, Sony DVP-NS3100ES for disc Plok TSX550T SVS PB2000 Mini tower PC with 400GB of music -
WOW I glanced at this before I left work and gee 38 new post. and this is what started it all
"Just realized my install company used 16 gauge speaker wire. Thinking of replacing with 12 gauge wire. Listen to stereo and HT
Is it worth it? Will there be a difference?
Thx!"
For the front 2 yes, for your rears assuming they are ceiling type or small bookies, I would bother
Front speakers, get you some good cables if the are towers, monitors, or large in-walls2-channel: Modwright KWI-200 Integrated, Dynaudio C1-II Signatures
Desktop rig: LSi7, Polk 110sub, Dayens Ampino amp, W4S DAC/pre, Sonos, JRiver
Gear on standby: Melody 101 tube pre, Unison Research Simply Italy Integrated
Gone to new homes: (Matt Polk's)Threshold Stasis SA12e monoblocks, Pass XA30.5 amp, Usher MD2 speakers, Dynaudio C4 platinum speakers, Modwright LS100 (voltz), Simaudio 780D DAC
erat interfectorem cesar et **** dictatorem dicere a -
This content has been removed.
-
I was quite wrong in a Blind test, made a fool out of myself. But learned something in the process.
A blind test is not required to make a fool of oneself. Question: "Do the people who make fools of themselves in blind tests have a history of making fools of themselves in other areas of their lives?" For example, a consumer who chooses audio gear only on the basis of price, brand, and appearance is not wise. That same lack of wisdom would certainly carry over into a blind test because the parameters that drive their decision making process have been removed.
Why won't you provide details of how your blind test was conducted? Are you scared?We are still discussing why a claim can be made, but not backed up when not aware.
You are the perfect candidate to explain this, since you claimed to hear differences in a sighted trial and those differences vanished when the trial was done blind. Why won't you provide details of the experimental structure of the trials so that we can be more accurate and detailed in our explanation. Don't you want to help us help you?I see no explanation of why someone can hear one way looking at the wire, and hear another way when not sure what wire is being used.
This has been explained many, many times. We have also asked you to provide the details of your sighted and blind trial(s) so that we can get a better understanding of why you made the choices you did.
Common sense indicates that if an item is consistently chosen when its identity is known, and then no difference is perceived when the identities are hidden, then the subject was making choices based on reasons that had nothing to do with performance.
Most people, who have not been trained to ignore price, brand, and appearance will naturally gravitate toward the item with the best appearance, more prestigious brand name, or higher cost.
For example here is a link to, and picture from, a power cable evaluation I did back in 2013:
Shunyata Anaconda power cord top ($3300, 2m length), PS Audio AC 12 power cord bottom ($1200, 2m length)
Link: http://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/153769/shunyata-anaconda-zitron-power-cable-first-impressions
I preferred the appearance of the Shunyata cable, and the Shunyata cost nearly 3X as much as the PS Audio cable and Shunyata is a more prestigious brand name. I'm sure a person naive about stereophonic performance evaluation might be swayed by the appearance, price, and brand reputation of the more expensive cord. However, while I like nicer looking things, I evaluate audio gear on the basis of performance. In my stereo system, I noted the following performance differences between the two cables:DarqueKnight wrote: »1. The Anaconda's sound stage width and height was equivalent to the AC-12's, but depth was shortened.
2. The Anacondas produced a slight veiling. For example, piano notes had truncated sustain, overtones and decay.
3. Image weight and tactile sensation was decreased with the Anacondas.
4. Bass articulation and bass detail was diminished with the Anacondas.
5. The pace, rhythm and timing of music seemed slower with the Anacondas.
6. The noise floor was raised with the Anacondas, as evidenced by apparently lower sound level.
7. Some sound images (like Dave Brubeck's piano on "Take Five") were reduced in apparent size [with the Anacondas].
If I were going from the amp's stock power cord to the Anaconda, or from a lesser audio grade power cord, such as the PS Audio Statement SC, to the Anaconda, I would have been very impressed and would have kept the Anacondas. Indeed, the dealer was very surprised at my results as he had never encountered anyone who preferred a "very inexpensive" power cord to the Anacondas.
My results were not meant to represent that the AC 12s were "better" than the Anacondas. How a cable performs depends in part on the associated equipment and electrical environment in which it is placed. My results represented that the AC 12 performed better in my system between the wall an my power amps.
I also noted the following in the AC 12/Anaconda review:DarqueKnight wrote: »The AC-12 power cables are quantitatively higher performance cables than the Premier SC cables they replaced, however, as I noted in my AC-12 review, the AC-12's only outperformed the Premier SCs when used between the wall and a component. The Premier SCs outperformed the AC-12s when used between an AC regenerator and a component. The synergistic interaction between system audio components, power infrastructure and environmental electrical and mechanical noise will have an effect on how well an audio grade power cable performs in a given application.Human perceptions and subjective choices are very often wrong or colored by bias or other indirect factors.
I don't doubt that. That is why researchers in consumer economics advocate training consumers to evaluate products and services on the basis of performance and value rather than solely on aesthetics, brand, and price.
The sole basis of your argument is that people must do blind tests because the effect of bias is insurmountable, yet the fields of economics, food science, and electronics are full of credible peer reviewed studies which demonstrate that people can be trained to ignore their biases and evaluate on the basis of performance. You have not provided a single shred of credible scientific evidence to support your position.DonnerUndBlitzen wrote: »#8 when the DarqueNight finally agrees to do a Double Blind Test and he picks the Emotiva TA-100 (integrated amp; $399) over the $5,495 Bryston B135 Cubed Stereo Integrated Power Amplifier
Don’t worry, if this does ever happen we will have Emergency Medical Techs on standby ready to revive the DarqueNight and apply CPR. All necessary precautions will be taken.
Very amusing. Your talent for "jesting" is indicative of a very vivid imagination. Certainly you were "jesting" because, on this forum, I have posted many examples of me doing an equipment evaluation and choosing the least physically attractive, least costly, and least prestigious component. The power cable trial referenced in this post is one example. Another example is my recent thread on the sound of hard drive enclosures, where my preferred component, which offered the appearance and display features I preferred, was bested by a lower cost, not as pretty, but higher performing alternative. Therefore, it would be silly and pathologically dishonest for someone to say or insinuate that I would pick a component solely on its higher price, when there is much evidence to the contrary on this forum. I am always delighted when a less costly item offers the same, or better, performance than a more expensive one.
I actually have participated in many blind trials where I was able to pick the component with the best performance 100% of the time. I was able to do this not with "magic" or "golden ears" but by carefully documenting the sonic and tactile characteristics (sonic and tactile signatures) of each piece of gear.
I think that any reasonable person can read my equipment evaluations and come to the conclusion that the appearance, identity, brand name, and price of a piece of stereo equipment are irrelevant (to me) to how it performs in generating a realistic stereophonic sound field.You clearly aren't aware of @DarqueKnight s credentials. So let me enlighten you. He is a professor of electrical engineering. A double PhD.
I only have one Ph.D. I couldn't imagine going through that process twice.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
No doubt Tony, no doubt.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
Condense it down to a few sentences or questions.
I have no idea WTF you are rambling on about Bell Telephones,
I wasn't rambling. I was explaining, in a coherent and lucid manner, that scientists at Bell Laboratories invented home stereo systems and they specified the methods for evaluating their sound performance. This is well documented in scientific journals.
Since you are proposing a "better" method of evaluating stereophonic sound systems that is in direct opposition to the inventors' methods, you need to explain where the inventors' methods are in error and you need to scientifically justify your "better" method...if you can.
Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country!
This discussion has been closed.