This is a good example of how being scientific about music often makes you totally wrong.

What's Hot
124»

Comments


  • Wait, so both tests, the old ones came out worst?

    Who'da thunk it?
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 72415
    Wait, so both tests, the old ones came out worst?
    More accurately there wasn't much in it and the new ones were marginally ahead on average. The 'best' was a new one and the 'worst' was an old one though, that is true - and the old (O12) was the only one which was universally rejected. None was universally picked as better, even the 'best' (N5) was rejected by two players in each test.

    That in itself is a pretty damning conclusion given the reputation of the old ones though.

    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski

    "Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • JayceeJaycee Frets: 310
    Great thread. 

    Unfortunately we live in a world of "brands" and one that is driven by money.   We are told that Strads' etc are the best violins on the planet and when we prefer a newer one, the implication is, that there is something wrong with our hearing or us.

    I think most people would rather listen to an instrument that sounds nice to them irrespective of the price.

    There is no better or worse, that's because everyone hears things differently.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • Phil_aka_PipPhil_aka_Pip Frets: 9794
    Isn't this another example of what happens when experts assess hi fi equipment? They tell you the bandwidth is wider & flatter, the distortion is lower, and the s/n is way dB better with product x, but they preferred the sound of product y? 
    "Working" software has only unobserved bugs. (Parroty Error: Pieces of Nine! Pieces of Nine!)
    Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom
  • chrispy108chrispy108 Frets: 2336
    I don't see it like that Phil. The nature of measuring anything is that it only tells you how good the thing is at that measurement.

    So it's perfectly possible for an amp to 'outscore' an amp at the things you've mentioned, but still be worse overall. Those things clearly don't fully define an amp, there are lots of other things going on. There is clearly a link between the stats you've mentioned and amp quality, but there are lots of other indicators going on.

    It's like saying to an estate agent you only want houses with x, y and z features. If you pick the measures that closely align with what makes a house 'good' for you, then they'll find you the best house for you, if you pick irrelevant things, then they won't.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ToneControlToneControl Frets: 11917
    placebo effect seems to work on our hearing too
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
  • ToneControlToneControl Frets: 11917
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom
Sign In or Register to comment.