View Single Post
Old 02-25-2010   #112
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Varennes, Québec
Posts: 41
Default Re: High end processors VS low end processors/receivers, hardware differences?

Originally Posted by DaveLadely View Post
No no troll, the guy is barely literate in English and asks questions that betray ignorance. As I inferred, in fact.

No, DBT is not inherently flawed. Using a DBT to test more than one parameter at a time is a flawed test design caused by the tester.
Yes, DBT should change only one item at a time or a single parameter of an item. That is why I think its difficult to do DBT for equipment, too many variables.Everything has to be set identically. That would have to include not only tone conrols, but Dolby, etc etc., and, say, with preamps or receivers, are those chips and augmentations identical? Not likely Who can afford to run a lot of tested between, say, amps. All the amps being considered would have to be there, that would be expensive and a hassle. I did do a DBT for Bob Carver once, after first just listening to one, then the other, while knowing which was which. The DBT had a surprising result, which gave more credence to the DBT . Cables are MUCH easier to test with DBT thatn, say, amps, preamps, speakers. A bunch of cables can be tested without a huge hassle. I am particularly in favor of such tests for cables because of the hype and the ridiculous expense and profiteering, not to mention the BS. And the fact that the huge amount of money wasted to fill the pockets of modern snake oil purveyors could be well spent on better speakers, where the improvements are much more noticeable anyway. Even if, say, a $1,000.00/meter cable could sound better than a $25.00 monoprice cable, the difference would be very very subtle, otherwise this would not be so controversial in the first place. Even DBT tests by audio magazines reveal that those auditioning just can't hear the difference even if they insisted they could prior to the tests.
So, spend the over $900.00 savings on, say, front speakers. The improvement would be very apparent. Then multiply the number of cables by that savings, and you will get such a large sum that could be much better spent on speakers, that you would have a much improved 5.1 system that anyone could enjoy more!!
PS you have used "there" where "their" is the correct term.

There is one point that we agree: spend where you'll get the most for your money.( And this is not cables)

I rarely reread myself when I write something on the web. ( I've found where the error that you pinpointed is. There are some plural mistakes too) This is not research papers, it's only a forum.

My L1 is not English but French. English is my L2.

Last edited by Daniel-a; 02-25-2010 at 10:07 PM..
Daniel-a is offline   Reply With Quote