Equipment interference

Dear Don,

I imagine it would be possible to jump to a great many conlusions from it, but without follow up testing, none of these could be seen as being likely to be right. You are correct in the observation in your last sentence, and therefore no possible conclusion can be drawn from the dem except that my Bach recording was beautifully replayed.

My feeling is that the recordings used for demonstration were not to my taste, so in practice the more soft grained and dulling of rhythmic impetus the replay might have been the more I would have enjoyed it. The music was not to my taste and the level was set too high for m comfort. I am entirely happy that these two conclusions might be drawn from what I said. I reproted this as my reaction at the time. I also indicated that I did not care for the addition of an nSub in the acoustic of the particular dem rom, which I am well acquainted with, and with speakers like SL2s or SBLs gets an excellent balance of musical lines. Any further ideas about what I was trying to say may be regarded as not my conclusion and certainly not possible to probe the veracity off at this remove in time.

All the best from George

Adam,

I'm getting a touch sensitive thses days - probably age related - so forgive me if your remark in the "censored" thread about prevention of listening wasn't related to my earlier comments in the Honeyball HDX thread. I also notice that you have closed both threads so I am unable to respond in what would have been the obvious place. I am confident you didn't deliberately close the thread to block responses to your comments - that's not like you.

Historically, both Linn and Naim got off to a good start in business by promoting A/B comparisons using the Linn Sondek (and being somewhat controversial about "source first"). I have noticed a change over time, away from from A/B comparisons on this forum, but many (well respected Naim) dealers still use them. IMHO they serve a useful purpose. Of course, the overall enjoyment is also important, and I have strongly endorsed this aspect when auditioning hifi. A/B together with overall enjoyment is about the only way to decide what to buy and whether to buy (IMHO).

The A/B part of an audition, is often enhanced by a knowlegable dealer who can guide a customer to the different aspects of musical portrayl (God, I wish I could spell!), presented by different pieces of equipment, or different manufacturers. This can save a lot of time, and ensure a customer is aware of all the differences, rather than just some that he happens to notice and remember.

I formed the opinion that you were suggesting that customers should rely only on the overall musical enjoyment aspect of their equipment, and not go looking for compromises in A/B type listening tests. I disagree with this approach and thought that this forum was substantial enough to be able to withstand such comment, without adverse reaction, followed by Topic closure..

As I said at the begining, I am getting over-sensitive these days, so apologies if your remark wasn't directed towards me, and equally over-inflated ego that you even noticed my previous comments, will be suitably deflated.

Cheers

Don

I once had a friend and reviewer place two thick solid metal tubes on the near inner corner of the speakers we were listening to - he then played the same track we had listened to before. It sounded different - and better. I tried this at home and couldn't hear any difference.

I borrowed a Bedini and "thought" I heard a difference when listening hard. Later - I just stopped using it and let it go back to the owner without an unconquerable need to replace it.

I once thought that the date on which I was riding my motorcycle was after my insurance had expired. As I drove home the bike felt awful and pedestrians launched themselves into my path from the pavement. I got home and discovered I was several days out in my concern. Subsequent rides were unaffected and pedestrians stayed where they should be - at home.

I once tried soldering a speaker connection without disconnecting the cable from an "on" power amplifier. For several days after - my system sounded - maybe broken. I never repaired it physically and that NAP 140 is still with me, having performed excellent service in between.

I have watched several films with people who didn't enjoy them. I enjoyed them far more freely when I re-watched on my own or with a sympathetic audience.

The effect of another's doubts or enthusiasm works to muddy our own judgement. I know it shouldn't and I suspect many, very well balanced, people will aver that they rise entirely above this. I say - NO you do not completely discount the voices around you. With strength - you may reject them but that act of rejection leads to a more positive view than you might have if allowed to make it without "static".

When I was a reviewer, and even now, I find my best judgements are made when I distract myself from "listening" and allow myself to hear. It takes a while to get back to the judgement "space" that matters - do you find yourself playing music regularly or is each listening session a review? Does your system sound as good after something weird has issued from it, a cause for concern, a doubt that it is continuing to perform as it did previously?

Good on you - but my experience is that most are less robust than we might wish to boast ourselves as being.

If it is of any significance I will say that when I am trying some new piece out, I like it at home for a good week, and if it is going to be a success, then I soon end up just listening to music rather than the effect of change. I do not want to be told what someone else thinks. Read acres of reviews etc. And most of all compare the new piece in any sense at all with anything other than what it may replace in some circumstances. And then only at the distance of remembering what the old piece did. If I have to revert to be sure than the difference is not worth the change.

We grow accustomed to what we have, and if we like it to start with, we often end up loving it after a while as its response becomes familiar over a long period of months and years. For something to show its spurs, then first I need to forget the obvious changes, and simply listen to music. The unexpected pleasurable musical surprises that may come mean that the new piece should well be considered!

If however the new piece never stops letting me know how incredibly authoritive or projected in some aspect of its replay it is - for example the bass or the treble, even perhaps the exceptionally defined stereo - then I find the new piece a failure! If I cannot get over the sound within less than an hour it comes back out - a reject, however fine be its reputation.

It is a process that has never failed me in getting fine and enjoyable music replay over a very long period.

I have never found that any short term A/B comparison did more than show the different flaws in the two components being considered, but certainly gives me no idea of whether the piece can give long term and increasing involvement in the music. I find I cannot make an adequate guess as to which set of compromises are going to be the most musically pleasing over the longer period. I can usually tell on the second day in isolation - sometimes much sooner. Indeed, if a I am not sure after more than three days, then I begin to doubt the value of the change. The rest of the time is spent enjoying something special if it is! Either that or it comes out to be replaced with what was there before.

As the musical aspect is all that matters to me it is easy to see why I think A/B dems are catastrophic, though this goes against the old Naim stretegy, and is quite probably against the company's current dem practice. Every Naim organised dem I attended employed the A/B comparison of different components and each produced a bemused response from me.

Being fairly old in respect of replay experience, I have learned what works for me, but that does not make it a generally applicable rule, though I have helped others come to an easy conclusion [without my steering them] not least when I got a friend of my to audition Rotel, Rega, and Naim CD players of fairly similar cost. The Rotel was the least expenive and the naim the most.

In isolation the Naim was clearly better. This was nothing like as clear in quick switching. In quick switching all we proved that each had a different voicing, and each sounded the best on different recordings! He was confused and asked me to choose. I refused and badgered him to do a week dem on each in whatever order he wanted. The Naim was the second up, and the Rega the third. As I say, I made no comment. None was useful as I was not choosing! But the guy got the best player, a CD5, in the group, IMO, and that chuffed me as on being asked at the end what I thought, I then said - but only after the chooce had been made by him! I can play a fair poker face!

So horses for courses.

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by Adam Meredith:
The effect of another's doubts or enthusiasm works to muddy our own judgement. I know it shouldn't and I suspect many, very well balanced, people will aver that they rise entirely above this. I say - NO you do not completely discount the voices around you.

I don't think it's possible to overcome this effect. Much of the communication that goes on when one person demonstrates equipment to another is subconscious.

We are unaware both of the content of subconscious communication and even of its existence (except anecdotally through stories like those Adam relates).

Buying hifi confidently can only rely on the dealer leaving the equipment in the purchaser's environment for a reasonable length of time.