Anyone heard the GBP7000 NAIM CD Player?
- Thread starter JohnMak
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 301
- Reaction score
- 0
I must thank Notaclue because you have just answered Cookiemonster's questions that he put to me earlier.
I listened to the gear I mentioned because I was contemplating changing my digital rig not because I wanted to prove that a GBP 300 CDP was better than a GBP 3000 one. There is too much hype, marketing bull****, hero worshipping and sheep mentality in this hobby and on these forums. Therefore, I have decided to step out of the flock and go my own way when it comes to auditioning gear. It may not work for every one but it does for me and my amplifier was also purchased this way. Laboratory perfect - no! But I now believe I have saved myself thousands of pounds by not following the crowd and by believing in my own ears instead (not my eyes).
If I choose a piece of eqquipment now, I'll be choosing it for it's sound not anything else and if that equipment just happens to be the most expensive of the lot that I tested, then I'll buy it as I only home audition gear that I could afford. If it turns out that I also like the cheapest equipment, then, I'll go for that also as it means my choice was based on what my ears told me (however unreliable my methods may be) not my eyes or any external influences. If you are paying for your own gear out of your own pocket, you have nothing to lose by trying it. Then use the money you save to buy more music. That is all I am saying.
Enjoy the music,
Lawrie.
greg
Its a G thing
These comments amused me. How can the relative price of cabling versus component value to be judged so assertively?
You must expand on this comment. I simply demand it!
Also - what has the purchase price of the Naim CDP in question got to do with anything? Are you saying the results it provides fundamentally place it above comparison to Michaels setup?
If so name the CDPs which do sit within its scope and conversely those which dont. Or is it as simple as listing a set of price brackets?
One thing I love about this forum is the number of cost-effective suggestions provided to help others achieve better results - for less.
Thanks Lawrie.
But one of my questions in relation to this was not whether you set out to prove whether £300 is better than a £3000 one, but whether you have proved that NOW (as one would infer from the level of your equipment NOW i.e not £300), after you have done the testing and the purchasing? It was just idle curiosity.
But one of my questions in relation to this was not whether you set out to prove whether £300 is better than a £3000 one, but whether you have proved that NOW (as one would infer from the level of your equipment NOW i.e not £300), after you have done the testing and the purchasing? It was just idle curiosity.
It can't. Its spoon bending of the highest order, until such a time as it is demonstrable to the public at large.
greg
Its a G thing
Originally posted by cookiemonster
It can't. Its spoon bending of the highest order, until such a time as it is demonstrable to the public at large.
notice I didnt set out my stall - I was just fascinated (as I always am) by the statement of "truths".Based on what I have read (I am not an 'expert' or a 'blind tester'), there is no known measurable advantage to expensive speaker cables over and above much cheaper ones. The view seems to be that if a new, measurable parameter could be found, it would be big news/Nobel prize wining stuff. Please (someone more knowledgable) feel free to correct this if it is wrong.
I have seen no evidence that anyone has been able to reliably distinguish between two speaker cables that had the same measurements in a test where the identities of the speaker cables were not known by the testee. Again, please correct if wrong.
Now, with whom should the burden of proof of the *audible* advantage of expensive speaker cables lie?
But, hey, perhaps Paul Daniels really can do magic! Yes?
I have seen no evidence that anyone has been able to reliably distinguish between two speaker cables that had the same measurements in a test where the identities of the speaker cables were not known by the testee. Again, please correct if wrong.
Now, with whom should the burden of proof of the *audible* advantage of expensive speaker cables lie?
But, hey, perhaps Paul Daniels really can do magic! Yes?
Last edited by a moderator:
michaelab
desafinado
Find me two different speaker cables, one expensive and one cheap that have the same electrical measurements and I'd be happy to participate in such a test.
I've heard that speaker cable argument many times but it's a bit bogus really. It's like saying no-one has ever been able to show out of two cars with identical top speeds that one can go faster than the other
Michael.
I understand the measurements as they relate to speaker cables come down to measurable differences in frequency response. Again, if anyone can correct this, please do.
How and in what way do 'cheap' cables alter frequency response that 'expensive' cables do not? Not a rhetorical question. I genuinely don't know!
How and in what way do 'cheap' cables alter frequency response that 'expensive' cables do not? Not a rhetorical question. I genuinely don't know!
greg
Its a G thing
Again all this is empirical, but I found the Townshend Isolda DCT s/cables a worthwhile upgrade over my Chord Rumour II. The difference was apparent to me and the improvement seemed a reasonable return on the investment (note: half retail price). Whether the difference could be measured at an electrical level I dont really care either way. There is far more emotion conveyed in my musical experiences since the upgrade.
However as has been a fundamental aspect of this thread - people have different perceptions of the value of their cash versus expected returns on investment. Some want absolutely perceptable improvements before parting with the hard earned - others are happy to buy - try and sell if they dont like it. Horses for courses surely?
In some ways the DBT thing could be compared to wine tasting - some Aussie wines do well at competitions because the first glass tastes remarkable compared to the others in the class, yet if you enjoy a bottle at home, by the third glass the longer experience is not that pleasant, whereas the alternative bottle might have really shown its "value" after further sipping. As a result Aussie wines do well at shows and sell very well.
I think comparison of kit is surely the only way to make a decision before buying - but comparison over a period of time. Though getting the right alternatives together and finding the time to really give each option a proper go is difficult. The time aspect - or lack of it - is the thing I struggle with so I have to try other means (like this forum) to help me narrow the candidates down.
Note: I am aware there are lots of very good Aussie wines before this thread splinters down another tangent!
Something that amazes me is how long this thread is running :SLEEP:
However as has been a fundamental aspect of this thread - people have different perceptions of the value of their cash versus expected returns on investment. Some want absolutely perceptable improvements before parting with the hard earned - others are happy to buy - try and sell if they dont like it. Horses for courses surely?
In some ways the DBT thing could be compared to wine tasting - some Aussie wines do well at competitions because the first glass tastes remarkable compared to the others in the class, yet if you enjoy a bottle at home, by the third glass the longer experience is not that pleasant, whereas the alternative bottle might have really shown its "value" after further sipping. As a result Aussie wines do well at shows and sell very well.
I think comparison of kit is surely the only way to make a decision before buying - but comparison over a period of time. Though getting the right alternatives together and finding the time to really give each option a proper go is difficult. The time aspect - or lack of it - is the thing I struggle with so I have to try other means (like this forum) to help me narrow the candidates down.
Note: I am aware there are lots of very good Aussie wines before this thread splinters down another tangent!
Something that amazes me is how long this thread is running :SLEEP:
Last edited by a moderator:
By a listening test? Seems obvious to me.
What's subjective about a listening test that merely seeks a difference?
If you buy a hifi because you like the sound or the colour, that's subjective. If you go on from that to say that red cables sound different to green ones, then that is something that can be objectively established. If you would remain in the subjective world then nobody would quibble.
Paul
Mike - I think you're being a bit wilfully dense here (although nowhere near as much as Cookie - who I always thought a reasonably intelligent chap up until nowOriginally posted by michaelab
I've heard that speaker cable argument many times but it's a bit bogus really. It's like saying no-one has ever been able to show out of two cars with identical top speeds that one can go faster than the other
). The point that Paul and co are making is that it's the cable manufacturers that claim various benefits of a) 99.99999999999999999% pure copper, b) cryogenic manipulation; c) crystal structures in prime numbers; d) hyperdimensional basketweaving; e) dilithim sputtering et etc., and they all they are asking for is some evidence to support those claims. If there is a demonstrable difference and it's not explicable due simply to differences in standard LRC parameters (which could be quite cheap to reproduce in other ways), then there's some interesting science to be done. Possible other effects that still could come into play are e.g. efficiency of shielding, some particular dielectric behaviour etc, and Jon Risch's site has a load of simulations of current distributions in different wires that indicate other possible effects. I'm not saying whether there is or is not, but I think it's a fair challenge - and one that no-one has managed to satisfy to date.Well the relative price of Michael's cabling wasn't being judged, it was the absolute price.
Please pay attention.
Michael's system is 'cheap' in comparison with just the Naim CDP, which is the subject of this thread. The performance isn't relevant, Michael was suggesting that the pro-DBT'ers tended to be users of cheap hifi.
Paul
I look on this whole debate in two ways
1) You buy the product you want on the terms you want. If that is colour, nice flashy lights a review in a magazine, so what? It is your money and you have every right to spend it how you want.
I would hope that no one has any problems with this?
2) The problems come when we want to justify our purchase, this does appear to be a very human trait. There are all sorts of psychological factors at work, which I for one dont understand.
Historically science has developed ways of removing as much as possible the bias we humans always introduce into the analysis of anything.
Why we humans want to do this I dont think the psychologists understand, but the do know that we do it.
The problems become significantly worse in Males vs Females. What is it about us blokes?
Anyway, in virtually any other field where the human psyche is involved bias controls are introduced to remove as much of the problems of the above as possible.
I know for certain that Harman Industries in the US use Blind tests on there new products.
How many people have you seen or heard of who have purchased product "Y" only to 'upgrade' within a year to another all singing all dancing product. Then the next year and the next etc etc.
This doesnt just happen in Audio.
I am primarily a cyclist, and it happens with new equipment in cycling too.
Is it just the Male genes ?
1) You buy the product you want on the terms you want. If that is colour, nice flashy lights a review in a magazine, so what? It is your money and you have every right to spend it how you want.
I would hope that no one has any problems with this?
2) The problems come when we want to justify our purchase, this does appear to be a very human trait. There are all sorts of psychological factors at work, which I for one dont understand.
Historically science has developed ways of removing as much as possible the bias we humans always introduce into the analysis of anything.
Why we humans want to do this I dont think the psychologists understand, but the do know that we do it.
The problems become significantly worse in Males vs Females. What is it about us blokes?
Anyway, in virtually any other field where the human psyche is involved bias controls are introduced to remove as much of the problems of the above as possible.
I know for certain that Harman Industries in the US use Blind tests on there new products.
How many people have you seen or heard of who have purchased product "Y" only to 'upgrade' within a year to another all singing all dancing product. Then the next year and the next etc etc.
This doesnt just happen in Audio.
I am primarily a cyclist, and it happens with new equipment in cycling too.
Is it just the Male genes ?
greg
Its a G thing
I paid attention you just didnt make your point clearly enough. Thanks for the supporting appendix it helps me so much. :SLEEP:
michaelab
desafinado
Well, I am to some extent because these silly "challenges" that people have put up are just that, silly.
I do think that many cable companies claim all sorts of bullshit and pseudo science for their products but I think some do it because they don't really have an explanation of why their cable sounds better - which isn't a justification for BS but at least a mitigating factor.
I think that you'd be surprised at the variance in the standard LRC parameters amongst cables - which is why adding "that measure the same" to the test is a bit silly really and gave rise to my rather silly car analogy. Still, I think that there probably are cables that have the same LRC parameters that do sound different. Why that is I have no clue. What about skin effect and all that stuff? Why do cables that have undergone DCT (deep cryogenic treatment) sound better?
There may well be some interesting materials science in there but it would seem that most scientists just aren't interested.
Michael.
penance
Arrogant Cock
science cant explain a lot of things anyway
so a futile discussion imo
so a futile discussion imo
sideshowbob
Trisha
But the point is that that kind of claim has never been tested. Some people think they sound better, including the companies that manufacture them, others think, far from them being better, they don't sound any different at all. So why not subject the claim to test?
-- Ian
Is this our longest thread yet?
Lawrie,
Thanks for your long and thoughtful answer. I think are one of the very few people on here who have carried out blind listening tests on audio equipment. It seems that you have managed to find an auditioning process that works for you:MILD:
cheers, Robbo
Lawrie,
Thanks for your long and thoughtful answer. I think are one of the very few people on here who have carried out blind listening tests on audio equipment. It seems that you have managed to find an auditioning process that works for you:MILD:
cheers, Robbo
