Believers VS. nonbelievers???? GEEzzzzz

It too bad Jostler that you choose to see it that way. Is low level distortion all it is? What effects does this distortion have on other components? Can you have two "identical" amps, if so how? Can you prove the impact of burn-in is equal in each piece of equipment? What impact does the interconnect have on the given amp, and thus a potential variable? If your right though, shouldn't any amp of the same spec sound the same? How do you explain that they don't? I'm afraid your objective listening test is so potentially flawed that I discount the value of the science. I'm saddened that you will choose to protect yourself and not allow your self the chance to learn, but it's not my lose, it's yours. J.D.

I don't know why tubes and especially SET's are exempt from Jostler's generalized description of all amps sounding the same, but I am pleased that the exception was made. I will agree that similar amp designs sound "somewhat" alike, provided they are constructed with equal care, parts, circuit design techniques and are of near identical power. Unfortunately there are almost an unlimited number of problems that every amplifier must face in a high end system that can, and do make even that statement an exception. These problems substantially effect the sound, and ultimately, what pleases the listener. Just the very tip of this issue in broad terms are; The amps ability to drive non linear loads with a varying impedance. Ability and speed to electrically recover after driving such a load. Ability to reject or be nearly unaffected by a multitude of outside sources such as RF, EMI, brown downs, power surges, electrical noise, digital signals ( on AC from your electric company ), household appliances, and all the ground planes in the system and the house. If this sounds complicated, you are right. It is only a fraction of the reasons well informed and intelligent audiophiles argue about which amp sounds right in their system. Often the conclusion of a well conducted test in two locations with similar equipment will come to two completely different ends. I believe that very often, if the two testers could visit each others location, there may not be any disagreement about the test result in THAT system and THAT location. I believe that most of us are after similar high quality results. The enormous number of factors that effect the result of our tests are so many and so varied, that only listening with the intention of finding the best compromise will resolve the problem. Of course there are the issues of peripherals as well. This includes, but not limited to, all the variables of isolation, Interconnect and speaker cables, room dimensions, acoustics, and software. To illustrate my point. I could give at least six names of Audiogon members, who I have met in person after I began postings at Audiogon. Each have visited my home and listened to my system. Each one of them will tell you that the difference of removing even one isolation foot, changing one single wire or removing one weight off the top of a piece of equipment, is so big that it can be heard without any further discussion or tests. I know Jostler3 will not believe this, and I would be ( honestly!) pleased for he or she to come and listen at my home. I cannot predict in advance what combination of removing and replacing parts in my system would provide the most enjoyable tonal balance of music for this specific visitor, but I can absolutely guarantee that the difference will be so obvious, that there will be no doubt that the change was made. Most posters will probably have no problem understanding my assertions, because they have experienced similar results in their own system. The problem with scientific and numerical argument lies in the fact that the conclusions are correct, only if every minute possible variation can be considered in the test. I do not believe that anyone here has the resources to test in such a manner, which leaves the human ear as the only consistent and reliable tool. After all, it is what must live with your final decision in the end, and it will eventually reveal any mistakes you make that are based on prejudice, short term conclusions, or the numbers that science uses to describe only a single test situation.

Nicely stated Albert. I think the challange to the guys who require scientific proof is determaining how to predict the varience, not challange the fact. That would be of value to all of us, to simply hide from the things not understood and claim "science" as your protector is crazy. I just wish Jostler and his like thinking minority would use that potential brain power for something helpful. I'm crearly of a different mind than Jostler in that my whole life is about creativity not fact, but I just can't imagine losing as much of life as I believe he is missing. Too bad for Jostler, it just helps me learn who to listen to for good audio advice. Albert and Sedond you guys are true winners. J.D.

I agree with Albert, that with the inherent limitations, experimental setups generally fall under, vis a vis the complexity of the object in question, the only consistent and reliable tool is our pair of ears. Science obviously cannot help us here, because its premises will not allow as "real", what we, the "empiricists" if you like, are hearing and describing. To discount us all as selfdelusional would be just as simpleminded as to discount the vality of scientific thinking per se. It seems to me however, contrary to Jadem's opinion, an asset to our field , if someone is sceptical and questions, because audio abounds with snake oil peddlers, charlatans and wierdo theories. We are swamped with hype and clever sales talk and who can be really sure, that all that stuff will have no effect on what one "hears".
Lets face it, how can I be sure, that what I hear, is not only actually there but also really an attribute of the object under scrutiny. Not that this really bothers me as an audiophile. As such I am not after scientific truth, but after musical enjoyment. But if a person like Jostler would ask me, if I really were sure, that its the "sound" of this wire or that amp which I am hearing through my speakers, I would even in the best of cases have to admit to a residual doubt. Is there a way out of this fix? Perhaps in part: Through the years we audiophiles have developed a descriptive language, a terminology and lingua franca, which, with the most erudite amongst us, has achieved a high degree of differentiation in the description of what can be heard and under what circumstances. You may think of the mags what you like, but probably one has to admit that languagewise we all have been educated by the likes of Holt and Pearson. Now I may believe, that my Jadis stuff in my system, with all other things being equal, will sound such and such with this particular software and will form a descriptive set of that experience in my brain. If I chance on a post by say RCPrince, who also owns Jadis gear, describing some aspects of what he hears and I compare that to my findings and to those of my local peers with similar setups, I will not entirely lose my doubts about the objectivity of what I hear, but in time and listening to others, I will be able to form a fairly structured opinion of what Jadis gear can sound like. Of course that is not objectivity, only a possible approximation towards it, but with that I can live, like the most of us, quite comfortably. The "scientist" in me might be unhappy of course with that subjective tinge, which will always remain to all our describing, but I'll surely forget all about that, when I am drawn into the music.

Detlof, what you state, reminds me of certain aspects in clinical psychology: Metric personality tests are usually pretty scienceproof, but they tell you either something you already know anyway or will throw light only on isolated aspects of personality. If on the contrary you try the holistic approach in assessing a person and putting that into descriptive language, you are at once scientifically in deep water but often enough closer to the human reality of the person under test. You see, you are not alone in your dilemma.