Why you can never 'win' with Mana

Has anyone done an experiment to see if someone can tell the difference between a CD player or amp on Mana and off Mana (obviously without them knowing if it's on or off)?

If not, I think they should. It's the only way to settle it, really.

 

The greatest trick The Devil ever pulled was to convince the world about Mana.

 

Present, sir. See

https://www.audio-forums.com/as-rediect/showthread.php?s=&threadid=115

As the whole thing is totally subjective, it means only that I didn't hear a difference. Clearly there are folk who do hear big differences. Lucky them - or perhaps unlucky them, because they are forever buying more. But if they hear the benefit thereof, why not?

 

Re: Re: From a different perspective...

Well, obviously I strongly disagree with the latter statement, but they're entitled to their opinion. Merlin, I hate dragging this up again, but it doesn't guarantee these dealers heard Mana performing optimally. And there could be many reasons for that. Think about this seriously: have you ever wondered why myself and other regular Mana users rarely experience with Mana what people who criticise it experience?

Could it be that we've obtained an altogether different result due to our success at getting it to work as intended?


Yes I know there are many other possible reasons why we like what Mana does, but just for a moment, consider my last question carefully...

Marco.

 

Tones,

A Sound Frame mounted on a wooden sideboard is not gong to give you even a hint of the Mana Effect (TM).

Mana does make a big difference. The question is whether you actually like that difference.

Further to WM's description of the Mana Effect (TM) it does give you a well-focused image. I agree about the timing bit though.

 

Oh dear, just noticed this...

Sorry, Merlin, if you're serious and not just baiting James, I've mistaken you for someone who knows what he's talking about.

Marco.

 

Re: Re: Re: From a different perspective...

Nope Marco, have to say, it doesn't keep me awake at night!

Still, seems there's all of four of you who reckon no one else can set it up right, so I don't see that as an endorsement for JW's current distribution policy!

Why can't you guys have these boring conversations on the mana forum? Surely that's the place for it, not here where your evangelical stance just causes otherwise sane individuals to suffer prolapses.

Anyway, I've got more interesteing things to do this afternoon, so cheerio! Will the last one to leave please turn off the light!

 

[Click!]

 

Thanks, tones.

What you would really need to do is get a Mana user who believes it works and see if they can accurately and repeatedly identify the sound of an amp and/or cd off Mana and on Mana without knowing if it's on or off Mana.

If they could, then it would shut up those who think they are imaging the differences. If they can't, they'll look a little bit silly.

Has this ever been done?

 

Blind testing is for nerds.

Trust your ears unless you're insane!

 

But aren't you otherwise trusting your ears and eyes? I mean, even Pepsi try to make the Pepsi challenge as fair as possible.

I have no experience of Mana and can see why people doubt it could have any influence but if someone could identify it without seeing then I would be convinced.

 

Not a clue

If you heard the Mana effect (TM) you wouldn't need a blind test.

 

Steve, you might well be right, but I think you need to read the description of the Sound Frame on the Mana website. It is designed, so it is said, to be used on a piece of solid furniture. This is the reason I tried the Sound Frame, because it fitted inside my cabinet. It was it or no Mana at all. Had it worked, I would have considered disembowelling the cabinet and getting John Watson to custom-make a Mana shelf to fit within the cabinet (he kindly offered to do so). Are you now telling me that the Sound Frame info on the website is incorrect, in fact misleading or deceptive? Hmm...

So, for my purposes and my ears, sorry, wrong, Mana makes no difference whatsoever. I can't speak for your setup/ears, nor would I try, so you really shouldn't try to speak for anyone else's but your own.

 

But a blind test would PROVE the Mana effect. It would make the doubters eat humble pie. Given the claims made by those who use Mana, it should be easy to identify in a blind test.

 

Notaclue, most audiophiles arent keen on blind tests, because all the differences they hear would suddenly not be there. Then it would mean they no longer have "golden ears". And they'll come out with 101 excuses why they are bad, just so they cant be exposed

 

And yet you would have thought they would be the most keen supporters of blind tests as it would prove their claims.

It does seem to suggest that no-one's 'faith' in Mana is strong enough if no-one has ever done a genuine blind test on it. Really, a few Mana users doing blind tests would pretty much settle the argument!

 

Paul - there are many reasons why blind (ABX) testing isn't as perfect as it would seem. Stereophile has quite a number of articles on the subject. Do the following search in Google:

ABX testing site:www.stereophile.com

to list them (Stereophile's own search engine is crap).

The most obvious problem is that to get a statistically significant result (ie one that couldn't have happened by chance alone) requires either a lot of people in the test audience or running the test many times - preferrably both. Usually it's just not practical.

Even then, subtle changes will show up as a "has no effect" unless you use thousands of people.

Added to that there are the problems of listener/tester fatigue. Once you've heard the same bit of test music 100 times over you might be hard pressed to tell anything at all! The only way to really evaluate things like cables etc is to have them in a system you know for 2-3 weeks at least. Clearly that's incompatible with A/B testing.

ABX testing is a Catch 22 because the things it works for are the things where the difference is so obvious anyway that no testing is required.

Michael.

 

I'm not against blind testing I just find it tedious because it takes the fun out of hearing differences.

Hands-on comparisons are enjoyable. Blind testing is not.

I know, I've done both and the conclusions I reached were unchanged proving to me that blind testing is pointless, other than to satisfy the non-musically motivated sceptics' thirst for the kind of irrefutable proof that belongs in a laboratory not in a listening room.

 

Doing blind/ABX tests on Mana would be highly complicated IMO. You have to be able to switch from A to B quickly in order to do an A/B test with any validity. Farting about changing racks etc would take way too long. Even if you had two identical systems, one on Mana and the other on something else there are likely to be too many other variables that would come into play (even two CDPs of the same make and model rarely sound completely identical).

All in all, I don't think it's really feasible to do an ABX test with Mana.

I don't think anyone here who's heard it (apart from Tones) disputes that Mana does "something". It's just that not everyone likes that something and this is something the Mana crew can't seem to accept

Michael.

 

Just before you go...

Soz, Merlin, but I can't play with James there anymore since his unfortunate exile

Evangelical? I'll have you know I was once one of Mana's harshest critics... have you not read my legendary essays on the subject?

But eventually I realised that I couldn't let a bad decision get in the way of my enjoyment of music.

So, Merlin, honey bunny, doesn't the fact I wasn't born a disciple, so to speak, cut me more slack with you guys? :MILD:

Marco.