The difference between mainstream HIFI, budget seperates, midrange and high end?

[nando]

Quote

You've confused me now, Simon.

Haven' t quite grasped your argument.


??

DEFINE: directions of molecules based on directional wave of signal direction and earthing control of negative flow "feedback of signal" does matter in the way that no longer that 7 nines copper is no more recognised as the most likley pure form to deliver signal but silver and gold are! virgin cable have no direction untill molecumes create them
nando.

 

[Dave Simpson]

Bub - It's easy to construct a blind test accidently or otherwise so you can't hear the difference between most anything (LP-12 vs cassette deck for example) so I'm not sold on them. I prefer to use my own ears and live with the pleasing consequences of my imagination.

regards,

dave

 

[nando]

to each it's own, nothing matters anymore, how sad,
nando.

 

[Dave Simpson]

Errr...what doesn't matter Nando?

 

[nando]

what i think "forgive me" we all have views and knoledge of the trade that we either like or love,persoanelly i love, the issue on this thread has somewhat went in a diferent direction from the main title, i do found it very interested and amusing, what i meant but "it does not matter" is that the themo got lost,
regards,
nando.

 

[Dave Simpson]

Ahhhh...I see. You're correct, several of us have taken the thread in another direction-apologies.

Personally, I don't define equipment as "mid-fi", "high-end" or "low-end" using dollars. I've found three hundred dollar turntables outperforming twenty-five thousand dollar turntables and the same with speakers, etc and in reverse as well. Price assures nothing when it comes to performance from my experience.

regards,

dave

 

[nando]

quote

Ahhhh...I see. You're correct, several of us have taken the thread in another direction-apologies.

Personally, I don't define equipment as "mid-fi", "high-end" or "low-end" using dollars. I've found three hundred dollar turntables outperforming twenty-five thousand dollar turntables and the same with speakers, etc and in reverse as well. Price assures nothing when it comes to performance from my experience.

regards,

dave

yes, it is true money or priced as such does not mean the best sound for pound, however there is a limit as to cost, i have lost one of my agancies wicth i have being selling since the 70's for a coment about their latest product, one can not open it's mouth, bring back BRIAN CLOUGH,
nando,

 

[DavidF]

Ahhhh...I see. You're correct, several of us have taken the thread in another direction-apologies.

Personally, I don't define equipment as "mid-fi", "high-end" or "low-end" using dollars. I've found three hundred dollar turntables outperforming twenty-five thousand dollar turntables and the same with speakers, etc and in reverse as well. Price assures nothing when it comes to performance from my experience.

regards,

dave

Yes, me too.

When people write some of the nonsense I have seen here its difficult not to react.

 

[RobHolt]

An extemely weak arguement.

The poll was taken over across section of pf posters, which includes doubters as well as so called "beleivers".

So, to say the 150 who posters "yes" are all deluded merely (again with repect) really just indicates your inability (or unwillingness) to accept the evidence before you.

Look David, lets cut to the chase here.

You dismiss the findings of every single controlled test demonstrating that people cannot hear cable differences.

You embrace the findings of a straw poll taken among audiophiles, many of whom will have spent considerable cash on cables about which they are commenting and voting.
Not to mention the utterly daft poll question - and I really cannot be bothered explaining this to you again.

The simple fact is that you cannot, will not and never will accept that perhaps you've got it wrong, no matter what the weight of evidence presented or what your ears tell you. I stress what your ears tell you - not what you might have read, seen or been told by a cable salesman.

 

[RobHolt]

Bub - It's easy to construct a blind test accidently or otherwise so you can't hear the difference between most anything (LP-12 vs cassette deck for example) so I'm not sold on them. I prefer to use my own ears and live with the pleasing consequences of my imagination.

regards,

dave

So long as you accept that at least some of the differences you hear are due to pleasing consequences of your imagination that is fine. Unfortunately many sitting in your tent can't quite grasp the idea that humans are easily fooled, at least sometimes

 

[DavidF]

Look David, lets cut to the chase here.

You dismiss the findings of every single controlled test demonstrating that people cannot hear cable differences.

hmmmm.....

Interesting.

Which ones are these?

First I've heared about it.

You embrace the findings of a straw poll taken among audiophiles,

Not especially.

I'm just saying they can't be dismissed quite as totally as you seem to like to do.

many of whom will have spent considerable cash on cables

and many of whome, like me , will not.

about which they are commenting and voting.
Not to mention the utterly daft poll question -

An input of 200 people is far from daft, Rob.

When I was dealing it agricultural field trials a bit a few years ago now, we would have said a far lower lower number of replicates than that would have produced significant results.

So, without going into further details, I am happy that, whilst not conclusive in any one direction, you certainly can't dismiss the poll as being "worthless".

I think the cross section of forum members was a very representative one.

and I really cannot be bothered explaining this to you again.

no problem

The simple fact is that you cannot, will not and never will accept that perhaps you've got it wrong,

no....

because the evidence seems to be very much against that belief, despite your present (rather desperate) clutching at straws.

no matter what the weight of evidence presented or what your ears tell you. I stress what your ears tell you - not what you might have read, seen or been told by a cable salesman.

I think your last sentence was intentionally provocative and as such will be treated in the manner in which it deserves.

Now, might I suggest (as another member off pink fish suggested) that we let cable wars go a bit quiet and employ a bit of live and let live? This gentleman I refer to is as out spoken as anyone but even he has become weary of these silly debates. His attitude is if people want to try dif cables so be it. Its their money. Which I woiuld have thought was a sensible approach.

How about it Rob?

 

[DavidF]

So long as you accept that at least some of the differences you hear are due to pleasing consequences of your imagination that is fine. Unfortunately many sitting in your tent can't quite grasp the idea that humans are easily fooled, at least sometimes

Of course we can.

I just so happens that I am confident that I've been able to tell a sonic loss as well as a gain.

As I've said before (many times) I've made mistakes as well as progress.

 

[The Devil]

An input of 200 people is far from daft, Rob.

When I was dealing it agricultural field trials a bit a few years ago now, we would have said a far lower lower number of replicates than that would have produced significant results.

So, if a lot of people believe something, despite no evidence whatsoever, then that is thought of as "significant"?

This is possibly the worst argument I've ever read, other than from creotards.

 

[RobHolt]

So, if a lot of people believe something, despite no evidence whatsoever, then that is thought of as "significant"?

This is possibly the worst argument I've ever read, other than from creotards.

James, he's trolling, and quite frankly taking the rise.

 

[RobHolt]

Now, might I suggest (as another member off pink fish suggested) that we let cable wars go a bit quiet and employ a bit of live and let live? This gentleman I refer to is as out spoken as anyone but even he has become weary of these silly debates. His attitude is if people want to try dif cables so be it. Its their money. Which I woiuld have thought was a sensible approach.

How about it Rob?

You can suggest it.

 

[DavidF]

James, he's trolling, and quite frankly taking the rise.

The kettle calling the pot black I think.

(edit;I think you read my last post but didn't hear ('cos you didn't want to hear))

The evidence I was specifically refering to, gentlemen (must I spell it out? ) that 150 out of a possible 200 HI FI forum members stated they could hear a difference between cables. (IIRC it was 170 out of 240 actually)

As has been pointed out, why I shoiuld care I don't know.

I just fear that your pseudo-scientific approach will put people off a rewarding hobby; allow them to make their own minds up.

I think thats my point really.

Is that not reasonable??

Back to origional thread topic, OP ideally.

 

[The Devil]

The evidence I was specifically refering to, gentlemen (must I spell it out? ) that 150 out of a possible 200 HI FI forum members stated they could hear a difference between cables. (IIRC it was 170 out of 240 actually)

What if 99 out of 100 church-goers believed in god? Is that evidence that god exists?

 

[RobHolt]

The kettle calling the pot black I think.

(edit;I think you read my last post but didn't hear ('cos you didn't want to hear))

The evidence I was specifically refering to, gentlemen (must I spell it out? ) that 150 out of a possible 200 HI FI forum members stated they could hear a difference between cables. (IIRC it was 170 out of 240 actually)

As has been pointed out, why I shoiuld care I don't know.

I just fear that your pseudo-scientific approach will put people off a rewarding hobby; allow them to make their own minds up.

I think thats my point really.

Is that not reasonable??

Back to origional thread topic, OP ideally.

David, you are talking complete nonsense.
I did read your last post and gave it the response I thought appropriate.

What you are presenting is not evidence - if you truly feel that it does represent evidence it simply shows that your standards aren't particularly high and that you don't understand the argument even at the most basic level, to put it mildly.

If you regard my approach as 'pseudo-scientific' then spell out your precise criticisms. Better still, take up one of the numerous offers I've made to demonstrate that you are misguided. It won't take long

Well, up for a real test?
Or would you prefer a poll?

 

[RobHolt]

What if 99 out of 100 church-goers believed in god? Is that evidence that god exists?

Only if you run a poll.

 

[Dave Simpson]

Rob,

Curious...exactly which electrical parameters would need to be adjusted for a Technics, Yamaha or Kenwood receiver to sound precisely like Bub's 52 preamp and ATC power amps?

Also, which electrical and/or mechanical characteristics would need to be adjusted so that Bub's ATC 150s (?) would sound exactly like your ESL57s?

I'm not expecting exact numbers as such, just the measurable parameters that would make this happen. (I'm thinking in terms of FR, THD, IM, TIM, etc if it helps.) I'd think this would be easy since we know everything there is to know about audio (and there aren't that many recognized distortions affecting audible fidelity as I understand it.) Don't worry about reporting impedance mis-matches, predicting circuit or mechanical design changes, etc. This is purely hypothetical...the distortion types are sufficient in other words.

regards,

dave