This an interesting subject.
About three years ago I picked up and American Hi Fi mag called Audio Critic, published by a guy called Peter Aczel. I wish I still had that original. I think it was issue number 16 and worth reading if any of you can get it.
In it he published his annual "The Ten Biggest Lies In Audio" review.
Amazing and I would have thought very litigous stuff to be publishing the the USA as he names individuals involved in the cable and interconnect industry and calls them charlatans. His writing was so fresh and contoversial I subscribed for about two years. I still have the following years issue 26 with the "Ten Biggest Lies In Audio" review and although his language has been toned down dramatically, his viewpoints and challenges remain unchanged.
This guy is very obviously a serious music lover and an Electrical Engineer of some sort. I can easily imagine him provoking intense hatred as he is so blunt in his writing about Hi Fi. A luxury he could afford as he didn't really have to appease any advertisers (which may explain why his mag appears to have sadly gone defunct - it was an entertaining read if nothing else)
Apart from The Ten Biggest Lies In Audio which he worote about each year (they were always the same lies) He was a great believer in two things: (And don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger"
(1) "If you can't measure it, it doesn't exist theory" He appeared to have some other famous audio designers he used to quote E.g Robert Modaferi, Floyd O'Toole - can't remember the others - on his side. and
(2) In blind testing all (well designed) amplifiers sound the same (He also asserts there is nothing a valve amp can do that an SS amp can't do cheaper and more reliably)... on the proviso that the volume level on each component being tested was set by an SPL meter to within some small percentage - around 0.01% or whatever.
He openly challenged anyone - especially Harry Pearson (TAS) and John Atkison (Stereophile) to ever be able to consistently identify which one was playing. As best I recall from the article he mentioned Krell behemoths and budget Pioneer.
He claimed also that :
(a) "All CD players sound the same",
(b) "Amplifiers and speakers do not know the difference between 30c per meter Radio Shack cable and exotic cables and interconnects" He was particularly vitriolic and contemptuos of high priced cables/interconnects even naming the well known people and calling them charlatans.
(c) The "break in theory is nonsence" He asserts transformers and capacitors form within second of being first turned on and that is that.
My first impressions were, the man is nuts but at the time I had in my living room a CD only system comprised of an Onkyo 929 CD Player (I think that was the model number, but it was at the time, the top of the Onkyo range and cost me USD900) an Audible Illusions Modulus 3 tubed pre-amplifier (rated class B by Stereophile) a pair of Antique Audio 100W monobloc valve amplifiers and ATC speakers (I think SC20).
In the family room, I had just installed a home theater system. The cheapest ever "made in Chiina" Pioneer DVD player which cost USD140, the top of the range Onkyo 929 multichannel amp
and Definitive Technology home theater speakers.
To test wether the difference between CD and DVD player I carted the CD only system through to the family room and compared the $900 CD player with the cheap $140 DVD player. Neither I, my wife my son nor any of my friends could tell the difference in my very roughly arranged blind test. This may not mean a lot .... one upper midrange Japanese CDP against a super cheap Chinese DVD player but this is why I asked forummers if they had any experience at evaluating how much better a seven thousand pound CD player was against a five hundred pound CD player.
I then got ambitious and decided to compare the valve pre-amp/ valve monobloc against the Onkyo 929 multi channel amp through the ATC speakers. After changing back and forth, back and forth .... the consensus was pretty well even but very marginally in favour of the Onkyo. (This test was identify which sound was best liked) An interesting but disturbing result. I would never have believed that I could not tell the difference between valves and a upper-mid Japanese Home Theater amp.
I am a guitar and bass player and I always listen for the sharp attack and leading edges of notes ..... which is probably why I like Naim. But between my tubed monoblocs and the Onkyo, there was no difference.
To finish, am I allowed to quote and list Peter Aczel in part from his list of the Ten Biggest Lies In Audio:
"........... At the dark end of the specrum, however, a new age of ignorance superstition and dishonesty holds sway. Why and how that came about has been amply covered in past issues of this publication; here I shall focus on the rogues' gallery of currently proferred mendacities to snare the credulous"
1. The Cable Lie. ............
2. The Vacuum Tube Lie: .........................
3. The Anti Digital Lie: ...............................
4. The Listening Test Lie: ..........................
5. The Feedback Lie: ...................................
6. The Burn-In Lie: .....................................
7. The BiWiring Lie: .....................................
8. The Power Conditioner Lie: .........................
9. The CD Treatment Lie: .....................................
10. The Golden Ear Lie: ......................................
All his explanations are as controversial as his headings and some of it I have come to believe, but some of it I don't .... how's that for selective preference ............. but he's always interesting.
I for one wish he was still publishing.