SV: [sdiy] Here's what you need

[Magnus Danielson]

Ben Lincoln wrote:
> I have a borderline audiophile coworker who says that the truly hardcore
> audiophiles run everything off of batteries because they consider it the
> only way to be sure that the power is clean.
>
> A lot of audiophile gear is obviously bogus (the subject of this thread,
> the multi-hundred-dollar wooden volume knobs, the magic rocks, the $2000
> power cables), but he *does* have good ears, especially for someone over
> 40. I gave him some mp3s I'd ripped at 256kbit and he was able to tell
> (without looking at the bitrate) that they sounded nicer than your typical
> mp3s. I'm at least a decade younger than him, and above 192kbit I can't
> tell the difference - I rip at 256 just to err on the side of caution.
>
> It's too bad audiophiles generally refuse to submit their gear (and ears)
> to double-blind tests, because I'd be really interested to know if *any*
> of their equipment makes a difference that some humans can perceive.
>   
It is fairly easy to make things sound or at least be perceived to sound 
different. By the power of suggestion it is easy to accept this as 
better. This may also be a trap that professionals may fall into without 
an bone in the body for being audiophile. It is a general wish to make 
things sound better, but what is better can be highly subjective. When 
listening to something, the material may be critical to bring out the 
difference between two variants which may initially sound just a little 
bit different, but none of them is immediatly obvous as the better. I 
recall one time when we made a 100L wedge monitor speaker, a 15" JBL at 
the bottom and a 1" throated horn. We had two different shapes for the 
same element. They where about equalent to us, but with some noticeable 
differences, but nothing major we thought. Then we had a song where a 
girl sang backing vocal, the same lyrics and I beleive in the same key, 
quite subtile actually. In one speaker the voices where compounded to 
one voice, but in the other it was clear that it was a second singer 
present, and she was very easy to hear separate. That song helped us 
choose. Infact, we learned that we had mentally set out minds on one 
horn but ended up choosing the other after that song. It was the 
material which caused us to select. We knew exactly which was which... 
so it was not a pure blind A/B test, but we where all fairly baffled by 
the distinct difference. It was the inteligentibility of voice that 
became the benchmark. Our reasoning on theory and beleif was proven 
wrong. If we had used some other material, we would have gone the wrong 
way. The thing was, the music was actually new to us. We listend to the 
record for the first time. We did not have a preconception of what it 
should sound like. This made us more allert. Staying allert and 
listening to the right things, that's the trouble. I would probably go 
with the wrong horn today... out of lazyness and not paying attention to 
detail.

Maybe not a good story about the power of suggestion, but maybe a little 
story which can remind us to find what actually is important.

Cheers,
Magnus