|
|
Post by billmac on Nov 5, 2010 18:55:04 GMT -5
That said, if anyone, not just BrianHD, rejected A for B, then sits in a non-blind listening test of A & B, how can anyone conclude that such a person is completely objective? I was born at night, but no last night! ;D jamrock The same can be said for someone that is very pro Emotiva  . By that I mean how can someone expect an unbiased opinion of a comparison between an Emotiva product and one from another manufacturer? Works both ways wouldn't you think . Bill |
|
jamrock
Emo VIPs 
Courtesy Costs Nothing. Give Generously!
Posts: 4,750
|
Post by jamrock on Nov 5, 2010 19:19:57 GMT -5
That said, if anyone, not just BrianHD, rejected A for B, then sits in a non-blind listening test of A & B, how can anyone conclude that such a person is completely objective? I was born at night, but no last night! ;D jamrock The same can be said for someone that is very pro Emotiva . By that I mean how can someone expect an unbiased opinion of a comparison between an Emotiva product and one from another manufacturer? Works both ways wouldn't you think . Bill Sure Bill, it works both ways. However, I am not ABX-ing Emo products with anything else. I have never claimed that I evaluated any Emo product against a similar non-Emo product. However, in some cases where there are obvious quality differences between products, you can safely conclude that the one with the better quality will perform better. That is common sense! However, when you announce that you are evaluating one product against another, it is expected that you go into that test with no preference / bias for one over the other. It is also expected that your conclusion will be completely objective. Once your bias is already known, even if your conclusion is honest, the perception will be that the result cannot be trusted. Is this a fact that escapes you? jamrock |
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Nov 5, 2010 19:48:28 GMT -5
I do not believe I said that you were. Wow, thats real enlightening . How can ones opinion on comparing the SQ of two prepro/AVRs be objective? The fact has not escaped me in the least. Maybe you did not understand my post that you quoted. If you reread the post that is basically what I said. Maybe that fact escaped you . Bill |
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Nov 5, 2010 19:57:19 GMT -5
Bill, can you please tell me how you do multiquoting?
|
|
jamrock
Emo VIPs
Courtesy Costs Nothing. Give Generously!
Posts: 4,750
|
Post by jamrock on Nov 5, 2010 20:14:58 GMT -5
I completely understood your statement. It must be then that you have not expressed yourself as intended. Here is your quote:
"By that I mean how can someone expect an unbiased opinion of a comparison between an Emotiva product and one from another manufacturer?"
You can only ask this question with the assumption that the person you are addressing is pro Emo. Otherwise, you are alleging that "there can never be" an objective comparison of an Emo product to any other similar product. And this would be unqualified rubbish!
"How can ones opinion on comparing the SQ of two prepro/AVRs be objective?"
If you don't believe that an objective opinion can be rendered when comparing 2 pre/pros, I can't help you. This is just unbelievable. It's time to end the discussion.
jamrock
|
|
|
|
Post by thepcguy on Nov 5, 2010 20:22:55 GMT -5
Bill, can you please tell me how you do multiquoting? Just copy/paste to the reply box then put '[qoute]' at the beginning '[/quote]' at the end. then repeat the process. You can play around like this: |
|
|
|
Post by thepcguy on Nov 5, 2010 20:39:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Nov 5, 2010 20:49:38 GMT -5
Apparently you did not understand my post. If you reread it again it is quite clear . I guess you missed the first sentence in my post which was: The same can be said for someone that is very pro Emotiva .As I said above reread the original post you quoted from me. Its really quite easy to understand . Do you understand the difference between subjective and objective? If you did you would realize that to give an objective opinion one needs facts to back it up. So in other words if I say "My 886 sounds excellent for HT use" that is a subjective opinion. I show no facts at all to back up my opinion its just my perception of the sound being produced. Now do you understand? So its good we did not end this discussion as you would not have gained this unbelievable knowledge . The defintion of objective: Expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations The definition of subjective: Arising out of or identified by means of one's perception of one's own states and processes. Lacking in reality or substance. Bill |
|
|
|
Post by jeffreymercado on Nov 5, 2010 21:05:03 GMT -5
Jamrock, while I understand your concern this test is not to be anything definitive. It is meant to be a fun comparo not taken too seriously.
We are not professional reviewers, just two guys who love the hobby and the sound of great music. This is just our opinion, but just to show you what a bunch of amateurs we are.
We have not even calibrated the units yet. We were just so excited to start saying that my unit sounds better than your unit. We are using his oppo 83SE analog only for two channel.
The first thing we put on is Diana Krall The Look Of Love. We wanted to here some sultry vocals and the Anthem delivered what Brian felt was a clean natural sound. Soundstage is enveloping and the feeling as if your there was quite evident.
We just calibrated the Anthem manually and we are doing the UMC-1.
Before we calibrated during the initial listen of the two units Brian HD was laughing at the sound of the UMC-1 saying it was no comparison. When we hooked it back up the right channel was not connected. He swore that the Anthem sounded better more clarity and better detail. I quickly argued that the bass was non-existant and the speakers now souded thin. The right speaker was not connected. We don't even know when the speakers are not connected guys, this is anything but serious.
More later
|
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Nov 5, 2010 21:18:27 GMT -5
Jamrock, while I understand your concern this test is not to be anything definitive. It is meant to be a fun comparo not taken too seriously. We are not professional reviewers, just two guys who love the hobby and the sound of great music. This is just our opinion, but just to show you what a bunch of amateurs we are. We have not even calibrated the units yet. We were just so excited to start saying that my unit sounds better than your unit. We are using his oppo 83SE analog only for two channel. The first thing we put on is Diana Krall The Look Of Love. We wanted to here some sultry vocals and the Anthem delivered what Brian felt was a clean natural sound. Soundstage is enveloping and the feeling as if your there was quite evident. We just calibrated the Anthem manually and we are doing the UMC-1. Before we calibrated during the initial listen of the two units Brian HD was laughing at the sound of the UMC-1 saying it was no comparison. When we hooked it back up the right channel was not connected. He swore that the Anthem sounded better more clarity and better detail. I quickly argued that the bass was non-existant and the speakers now souded thin. The right speaker was not connected. We don't even know when the speakers are not connected guys, this is anything but serious. More later Jeffrey, Thanks for the above post ;D. I appreciate your intention but really like that you guys are having a good time and have a sense of humor . I do not know how many times I have sat down to compare a new component and I found out afterward that I had a setting incorrect or something was not on  . I look forward to both Brian's and your thoughts on both the UMC-1 and the MRX-700. It should be interesting . Bill |
|
|
|
Post by thepcguy on Nov 5, 2010 21:21:20 GMT -5
www.matrixhifi.com/ENG_contenedor_ppec.htm Participants  "HABX" (Human ABX)  The results showed:
38 persons participated on this test
14 chose the "A" system as the best sounding one
10 chose the "B" system as the best sounding one
14 were not able to hear differences or didn't choose any as the best.
|
|
jamrock
Emo VIPs
Courtesy Costs Nothing. Give Generously!
Posts: 4,750
|
Post by jamrock on Nov 5, 2010 21:33:51 GMT -5
Bill, you woke me up. You slice & dice every word, phrase & sentence and say they are wrong, but you never say what the correct word, phrase or sentence is. You ask questions but never offer answers or solutions.
Subjective opinions are not necessarily wrong. When you say that your 886 sounds excellent for H/T, it is not necessarily a wrong (subjective) opinion. But it is meaningless. Excellent as compared to what? However, when you make such a statement, it is logical to assume that you do know what a poor H/T pre/pro sounds like. Nevertheless, good subjective opinions, while they don't give the specs, (facts) they do describe properties of the sound that are indicative of the quality of the specs.
However, when you are comparing similar products, your prime qualifications are competence (can you perform the test properly) & trustworthiness (can you be believed). When you enter such a scenario with a known bias, you then lost both qualifications and your comparision don't mean squat!
jamrock
|
|
|
|
Post by thepcguy on Nov 5, 2010 21:40:54 GMT -5
Jeffrey & Brian,
Blind Test please pretty please? ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffreymercado on Nov 5, 2010 21:50:20 GMT -5
We got to call it a night because BrianHD lives in a Co-op with a bunch of elderly people. We tried calibrating the UMC-1 with the internal test tones to 75db. When we put it back on, same track, it sounded pretty low in comparison to the Anthem at the supposedly the same volume.
We used the Rat Shack meter and it was a bust the volume was way lower on the UMC-1 as oppose to the Anthem. The internal test tones might be off or not working because we both measured both units at 75db but when we played the track at the same volume it was off by like 10db.
We double checked and still it sounded louder on the Anthem. We are going to try to just use the Avia tomorrow. I really felt as if the bass on the UMC was deeper and fuller and her voice seemed way more forward to me. But this was before calibration so who knows what volume it was at. After calibration the results were one sided as the volume on the UMC-1 was way lower. Tomorrow hopefully we can recalibrate and see what happens.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeffreymercado on Nov 5, 2010 21:59:15 GMT -5
We really need more people for a blind test. Maybe I can recruit my brother tomorrow. I am going to get my HDMI cables which are longer and easier to switch between the two.
|
|
|
|
Post by billmac on Nov 5, 2010 22:08:26 GMT -5
Huh? Could you be more specific? Answers or solutions to what  ? Again why don't you try being specific with the point you are trying to make. Where did I ever say a subjective opinion was wrong? I give subjective opinions all the time. Why is my opinion meaningless? Who are you to determine if anyones subjective opinion is meaningless or not? Are you serious? What are you talking about? I'm sorry but you are all over the place with the above post. First you are going on about objective opinions in an earlier post. Then when it is pointed out to you that you really need facts to render an objective opinion you come back with the above about what makes a correct or incorrect subjective opinion. I guess you still do not understand the definition of a subjective opinion . Bill |
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Nov 5, 2010 23:13:08 GMT -5
Bill, can you please tell me how you do multiquoting? Just copy/paste to the reply box then put '[qoute]' at the beginning ' ' at the end. then repeat the process. You can play around like this: [/quote] ___________________________________________
______________________________________________I meant from various posts, and not only one post.
* I would love to bring my post count down.
And if I can multiquote like 5 to 10 posters in only one post, that would be awesome.
Because I can operate much better like that. It gives me a better state of mind
which helps me to concentrate in only one thread instead of several.
Comprende?  * I just need to be more efficient with less time zigzagging around. 
...Go straight to the center of the target,
like a straight arrow coming up from the bow of a professional sharp shooter. |
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Nov 5, 2010 23:36:02 GMT -5
I completely understood your statement. It must be then that you have not expressed yourself as intended. Here is your quote: "By that I mean how can someone expect an unbiased opinion of a comparison between an Emotiva product and one from another manufacturer?" You can only ask this question with the assumption that the person you are addressing is pro Emo. Otherwise, you are alleging that "there can never be" an objective comparison of an Emo product to any other similar product. And this would be unqualified rubbish! "How can ones opinion on comparing the SQ of two prepro/AVRs be objective?" If you don't believe that an objective opinion can be rendered when comparing 2 pre/pros, I can't help you. This is just unbelievable. It's time to end the discussion. jamrock 100% agree with you here Jamrock. * I can love a product very much and even swear by it, and still give my honest, sincere, objective opinion, evaluation, "compte-rendu", findings, about any other products, without any prejudice, missconception, with indulgence, merit, valor, integrity, and ABSOLUTE TRUTH. ** I don't have any bias in my life whatsoever and I am a total free human being that loves all my sisters, brothers, children, Mum, Dad, and all that Bluessssy Jazzzzz. __________________________ Bill, I also agree 100% with you. |
|
|
|
Post by Chuck Elliot on Nov 5, 2010 23:40:30 GMT -5
I use notepad to assemble a post like that. You go to each post and extract the text you want via the 'quote button', paste it into notepad, edit and then when you are done post the entire contents back to the message you want to post. To show it both ways the first group has the '[]' replaced with '<>'. The second shows what it looks like. <quote author=thelordoftherings board=preamps thread=14474 post=221894 time=1289016788>....snippet1....</quote> Comment1 <quote author=thelordoftherings board=preamps thread=14474 post=221894 time=1289016788>....snippet2....</quote> Comment2 <quote author=thelordoftherings board=preamps thread=14474 post=221894 time=1289016788>....snippet3....</quote> Comment3 Comment1 Comment2 Comment3 |
|
NorthStar
Seeker Of Truth
"And it stoned me to my soul" - Van Morrison
Posts: 0
|
Post by NorthStar on Nov 5, 2010 23:55:04 GMT -5
^ But this is only from one post! Can you simply multiquote several different posters just like you can on most other sites?
* I need quickness, efficiency, and "rapidite etonnante".
|
|
. By that I mean how can someone expect an unbiased opinion of a comparison between an Emotiva product and one from another manufacturer? Works both ways wouldn't you think 
. 
? Again why don't you try being specific with the point you are trying to make.
