Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Critic's Corner ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

AFAIK, they're referring to Clark's amlifier challenge

Clark offered $10,000 to anyone who could consistently ABX any two modern amplifiers in proper working order, provided that the amplifiers were used within their linear range and that any frequency response aberrations were equalized out:

http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

So far, no one's been able to beat it, although what I think is often lost in the discussion is that this doesn't make Clark's assertion true. All it says is that the amplifiers don't differ enough to be identifiable on ABX tests, which I can easily believe, since in my own experience, the differences between modern analog solid state amplifiers operating in their power range are subtle at best.

From what I've seen of Hydrogen, you have a variety of types, as you do here. There are people there who do very solid work with blind testing -- Sean Olive in particular has made significant contributions to audio knowledge. And some other very knowledgeable pros. At the opposite extreme, you have some people there who are just out to feast on the bones of the opposition, and they were out in force in that ridiculous kill John Atkinson thread.

But I've picked up some interesting info from their ABX tests. For one thing, they usually demonstrate that you *can* hear the difference between components, not the other way around, and sometimes contradict the results of widely-publicized tests that claim otherwise. For example, participants have been able to detect the difference between 192 kHz and 44.1 kHz downsampled audio. And for all the hysteria about MP-3's, I was just reading a thread about the audibility of 320 kHz MP-3 compression:

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=85961&st=0&gopid=743201&#entry743201

Which kind of makes me wonder why they were so up in arms. They've already proved themselves that you can hear lossy compression -- what's wrong with a subjective demonstration of those effects?

ABX testing can't disprove the existence of audible differences between components, and IMO those who rely on it to do so are (cliche police!) barking up the wrong tree. But it can demonstrate the existence of audible differences, and from what I've seen, it frequently does that. It's also very useful for manufacturers since it gives them a way to identify major improvements without the bias that can creep in to a sighted subjective evaluation.

Where I disagree with Hydrogen Audio is their over-reliance on forced choice testing, and their refusal to countenance discussion of differences that haven't been demonstrated in a forced-choice test. Forced choice testing has some well-documented limitations, and even if it didn't, the experimental setups are frequently flawed. And the strictly enforced ban on subjective impressions can get a bit ridiculous at times, as when Greynol suggested that spending more than $4000 in a home system might not have sonic benefits, and I had to try to respond without recourse to listening. Weird.








This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Parts Connexion  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]