Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Music and Art

Expand Messages
  • Robert
    There is also the fact that one may change one s self. Ricci in that same interview told me he changed from Strad to Guarneri del Gesu not because it was
    Message 1 of 15 , Jul 31, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      There is also the fact that one may change one's self.
      Ricci in that same interview told me he changed
      from Strad to Guarneri del Gesu not because
      it was better but because he had become more oriented
      towards the bottom. GdelG have a darker, more
      bottom oriented sound.
      On the other hand, there are people who stick with the
      same violin forever. It becomes their voice in effect.
      People vary here.
      Of course, one can also keep the same instrument
      but mess around with adjustments, with different
      kinds of strings(which make a big difference), with
      different bridges--also makes a big difference.

      One cannot help noticing how silly in this context
      the audiophile evaluation "sounds like a violin"
      is in this context. Musicians are worrying about
      far far more subtle things than just the instrument
      sounding like a violin--which can hardly be avoided!
      (if it is a violin)

      REG

      --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "jsch3" <jsch3@...> wrote:
      >
      > In many ways, professional instrumentalists are like audiophiles, always searching for that one thing that will improve their performance.
      >
      > We speak of the old master violins makers and I have made the pilgrimage to Cremona to see for myself. I consider the day spent there to be one of the most interesting and enlightening in my life.
      >
      > But as far as I am aware, I know of no blind test that successfully chose the master's from the new. If fact, experts have been fooled many., many times.
      >
      > And its just not violins, in the US, the French oboe maker Loree is considered to be the standard for orchestral musicians. Of course, people play everything nowadays but still the Loree is upheld my many as the best.
      >
      > The oboe importer Nora Post used to have an exercise called "pin the tail on the oboe" where oboists were to listen in the blind and choose the makes of oboes. As you would imagine, the results were always no better than guessing. Loree would sometimes end up dead last in the ranking!
      >
      > My own instrument, the bassoon, has a standard as well, Heckel. This is a family business that has been around since the 1830s. There is a five year wait and the instruments cost about 50,000. In the US, many say you have to have a Heckel to get a job. I have owned two Heckels myself and they have attributes that are very desirable as a performer, but there are several other fine makers as well, and I sure would not want to be asked to identify a Heckel from a Fox, from a Moenning, etc. in the blind.
      >
      > Certainly I do not suggest buying instruments on the basis of a blind test. There are many other considerations as well...ease of response, evenness of scale, feel, etc, etc. And there is also the important pride of ownership. If you want a Strad and can afford one, get it by all means. But I think we are fooling ourselves to reply on reputation, age and cost as a basis of superior sound.
      >
      > Jim Schaeffer
      >
    • Peter Allen
      ... under blind conditions--if you know what better means! Ah. . .  I wonder if the (in)famous BAS double blind SACD vs. CD tests would have turned out
      Message 2 of 15 , Aug 1, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        > Clearly better ones really are better
        under blind conditions--if you know
        what better means!
        Ah. . .  I wonder if the (in)famous BAS double blind SACD vs. CD tests would have turned out differently if the listeners had been "taught" the differences before hand.
         
         

        From: Robert <regtas43@...>
        To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 8:13 PM
        Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Music and Art

         
        Certainly not about hifi! Hifi is supposed
        to REPRODUCE things not produce them.
        It is not the same at all. Because
        recordings are so bad and speaker playback
        is so unstandardized , things do float
        a bit but there is a goal.

        There is no "absolute violin".

        Strads do not sound all alike--not one
        by one within a period, and moreover the three periods of
        his life sound different.
        And Guarneri del Gesu sounds really different
        from all the Strads of all three periods.
        Listen to the Miracle Makers--a listen
        is worth a lot of not convincing reports
        of badly done blind tests!

        This really is a matter of taste--
        but not all that much either in the sense
        that violinists tend to agree.

        Look at the reaction of the young people
        on the tarisio video.
        They are in love! Say what you will
        about reputation, etc. they are in love--
        with the sound.

        A lot of nonsense is propagatd in the world
        on the basis of badly done blind tests
        showing that everything is the same.

        Would someone like to explain to me
        otherwise, if the differences are not real,
        how it happened
        that listening to a whole lot
        of people playing , as I was that
        day when the guy showed up with the Zyg,
        that I jumped all over the Zyg, was
        really really axious to find out what it was
        and could hardly wait until they finished
        playing to ask and yet I
        ignored all the others?(which were mediocre instruments
        by comparison)?

        Clearly better ones really are better
        under blind conditions--if you know
        what better means!

        What is true is that the modern good
        ones as also really good--and cheaper.
        (Not that a Zyg is cheap--around $100,000
        nowadays I think but a lot cheaper
        than a Strad).
        It is of course true that collectors
        value has pushed the Strads out of
        this world nearly on price. But they
        do sound good. Collectors push everything
        out of shape, but that does not mean
        the collected things are not good.
        Rembrandt really was a great artist,
        if great artist means anything at all!

        It is also true about the playing ease etc.

        BUT the Zyg still sounded amazing--and
        in the hands of someone who was a nice but
        not great player(he would say that of himself).

        The great instruments really are great.
        Under blind conditions. too.
        But some of them are modern!

        REG

        --- In mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com, mm <yipmangmeng@...> wrote:
        >
        > And as in hi-fi , wine and food, there is no best of anything for everyone, but what one prefers?
        >
        > mm
        >
        >
        >
        > >________________________________
        > > From: jsch3 <jsch3@...>
        > >To: mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com
        > >Sent: Tuesday, 31 July 2012, 23:02
        > >Subject: [regsaudioforum] Music and Art
        > >
        > >
        > > 
        > >In many ways, professional instrumentalists are like audiophiles, always searching for that one thing that will improve their performance.
        > >
        > >We speak of the old master violins makers and I have made the pilgrimage to Cremona to see for myself. I consider the day spent there to be one of the most interesting and enlightening in my life.
        > >
        > >But as far as I am aware, I know of no blind test that successfully chose the master's from the new. If fact, experts have been fooled many., many times.
        > >
        > >And its just not violins, in the US, the French oboe maker Loree is considered to be the standard for orchestral musicians. Of course, people play everything nowadays but still the Loree is upheld my many as the best.
        > >
        > >The oboe importer Nora Post used to have an exercise called "pin the tail on the oboe" where oboists were to listen in the blind and choose the makes of oboes. As you would imagine, the results were always no better than guessing. Loree would sometimes end up dead last in the ranking!
        > >
        > >My own instrument, the bassoon, has a standard as well, Heckel. This is a family business that has been around since the 1830s. There is a five year wait and the instruments cost about 50,000. In the US, many say you have to have a Heckel to get a job. I have owned two Heckels myself and they have attributes that are very desirable as a performer, but there are several other fine makers as well, and I sure would not want to be asked to identify a Heckel from a Fox, from a Moenning, etc. in the blind.
        > >
        > >Certainly I do not suggest buying instruments on the basis of a blind test. There are many other considerations as well...ease of response, evenness of scale, feel, etc, etc. And there is also the important pride of ownership. If you want a Strad and can afford one, get it by all means. But I think we are fooling ourselves to reply on reputation, age and cost as a basis of superior sound.
        > >
        > >Jim Schaeffer
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >



      • Fred
        2 instruments from the same maker. Do they sound different so different that you need 2? When in my teens an accident rendered my left wrist useless for
        Message 3 of 15 , Aug 1, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          "2 instruments from the same maker. Do they sound different so different that you need 2?"

          When in my teens an accident rendered my left wrist useless for playing instruments but having "played" Morse keys professionally I know how differences can be difficult to adapt to quickly.    That a professional musician could change to an identical cleaned fresh instrument is as obvious an advantage as not having to resort to a different one in event of loss, damage, maintenance or re-work.  Such things happen at worst possible times (replacement might take months).
          I'd therefore more think "2 instruments from the same maker" a necessity.

          Fred.



          From: HM <hmartinburm@...>
          To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Tuesday, 31 July 2012, 23:41
          Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Music and Art

           
          Hi Jim
          2 instruments from the same maker. Do they sound different so different that you need 2?
          BR HM
          >
          > In many ways, professional instrumentalists are like audiophiles, always searching for that one thing that will improve their performance.
          >
          > We speak of the old master violins makers and I have made the pilgrimage to Cremona to see for myself. I consider the day spent there to be one of the most interesting and enlightening in my life.
          >
          > But as far as I am aware, I know of no blind test that successfully chose the master's from the new. If fact, experts have been fooled many., many times.
          >
          > And its just not violins, in the US, the French oboe maker Loree is considered to be the standard for orchestral musicians. Of course, people play everything nowadays but still the Loree is upheld my many as the best.
          >
          > The oboe importer Nora Post used to have an exercise called "pin the tail on the oboe" where oboists were to listen in the blind and choose the makes of oboes. As you would imagine, the results were always no better than guessing. Loree would sometimes end up dead last in the ranking!
          >
          > My own instrument, the bassoon, has a standard as well, Heckel. This is a family business that has been around since the 1830s. There is a five year wait and the instruments cost about 50,000. In the US, many say you have to have a Heckel to get a job. I have owned two Heckels myself and they have attributes that are very desirable as a performer, but there are several other fine makers as well, and I sure would not want to be asked to identify a Heckel from a Fox, from a Moenning, etc. in the blind.
          >
          > Certainly I do not suggest buying instruments on the basis of a blind test. There are many other considerations as well...ease of response, evenness of scale, feel, etc, etc. And there is also the important pride of ownership. If you want a Strad and can afford one, get it by all means. But I think we are fooling ourselves to reply on reputation, age and cost as a basis of superior sound.
          >
          > Jim Schaeffer
          >



        • Robert
          Good point. It is a standard error (when it is not done deliberately) to refrain from telling people what to listen for in doing DBTs with the idea of showing
          Message 4 of 15 , Aug 1, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Good point. It is a standard error (when it is not
            done deliberately) to refrain from telling people
            what to listen for in doing DBTs with the idea
            of showing that things are all alike--which is
            often the hidden agenda of the people doing the test.

            The prototype is the amp test done by the AES, the
            one Michael Fremer likes to talk about. There were
            three amps, one of which had 1.5 dB more bass than
            the other two(it was a tube amp with a high output
            impedance). Now it is know for sure, with hard
            science, that that much extra bass is an audible
            matter. Yet the test showed that statistically
            the amps were indistinguishable.

            Obviously if people had been told to listen carefully
            to how much bass there is, the results would have been
            different.

            This is how audio gets messed up. Half the people
            do not believe in blind tests and the other half
            do blind tests wrong. Well, half minus a tiny fraction:
            there are a few people who do blind tests right, with
            training and instructions and sighted listening beforehand.

            Anyway about the violins:
            Listen to one of the violin comparison recordings where
            the same piece is played on all instruments. If
            it is not clear that there are audible differences--
            do only two at a time, more creates confusion--
            well, you will learn with practice no doubt. Listen
            to the sound of individual notes and try to remember it.
            . If need be, stop after just a couple of notes and
            listen to the same notes on the other track. It will
            all become apparent!

            REG

            --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Peter Allen <alcomdata@...> wrote:
            >
            > > Clearly better ones really are better
            > under blind conditions--if you know
            > what better means!
            >
            > Ah. . .  I wonder if the (in)famous BAS double blind SACD vs. CD tests would have turned out differently if the listeners had been "taught" the differences before hand.
            >  
            >  
            >
            >
            > ________________________________
            > From: Robert <regtas43@...>
            > To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2012 8:13 PM
            > Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Music and Art
            >
            >
            >
            >  
            >
            > Certainly not about hifi! Hifi is supposed
            > to REPRODUCE things not produce them.
            > It is not the same at all. Because
            > recordings are so bad and speaker playback
            > is so unstandardized , things do float
            > a bit but there is a goal.
            >
            > There is no "absolute violin".
            >
            > Strads do not sound all alike--not one
            > by one within a period, and moreover the three periods of
            > his life sound different.
            > And Guarneri del Gesu sounds really different
            > from all the Strads of all three periods.
            > Listen to the Miracle Makers--a listen
            > is worth a lot of not convincing reports
            > of badly done blind tests!
            >
            > This really is a matter of taste--
            > but not all that much either in the sense
            > that violinists tend to agree.
            >
            > Look at the reaction of the young people
            > on the tarisio video.
            > They are in love! Say what you will
            > about reputation, etc. they are in love--
            > with the sound.
            >
            > A lot of nonsense is propagatd in the world
            > on the basis of badly done blind tests
            > showing that everything is the same.
            >
            > Would someone like to explain to me
            > otherwise, if the differences are not real,
            > how it happened
            > that listening to a whole lot
            > of people playing , as I was that
            > day when the guy showed up with the Zyg,
            > that I jumped all over the Zyg, was
            > really really axious to find out what it was
            > and could hardly wait until they finished
            > playing to ask and yet I
            > ignored all the others?(which were mediocre instruments
            > by comparison)?
            >
            > Clearly better ones really are better
            > under blind conditions--if you know
            > what better means!
            >
            > What is true is that the modern good
            > ones as also really good--and cheaper.
            > (Not that a Zyg is cheap--around $100,000
            > nowadays I think but a lot cheaper
            > than a Strad).
            > It is of course true that collectors
            > value has pushed the Strads out of
            > this world nearly on price. But they
            > do sound good. Collectors push everything
            > out of shape, but that does not mean
            > the collected things are not good.
            > Rembrandt really was a great artist,
            > if great artist means anything at all!
            >
            > It is also true about the playing ease etc.
            >
            > BUT the Zyg still sounded amazing--and
            > in the hands of someone who was a nice but
            > not great player(he would say that of himself).
            >
            > The great instruments really are great.
            > Under blind conditions. too.
            > But some of them are modern!
            >
            > REG
            >
            > --- In mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com, mm <yipmangmeng@> wrote:
            > >
            > > And as in hi-fi , wine and food, there is no best of anything for everyone, but what one prefers?
            > >
            > > mm
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > >________________________________
            > > > From: jsch3 <jsch3@>
            > > >To: mailto:regsaudioforum%40yahoogroups.com
            > > >Sent: Tuesday, 31 July 2012, 23:02
            > > >Subject: [regsaudioforum] Music and Art
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > 
            > > >In many ways, professional instrumentalists are like audiophiles, always searching for that one thing that will improve their performance.
            > > >
            > > >We speak of the old master violins makers and I have made the pilgrimage to Cremona to see for myself. I consider the day spent there to be one of the most interesting and enlightening in my life.
            > > >
            > > >But as far as I am aware, I know of no blind test that successfully chose the master's from the new. If fact, experts have been fooled many., many times.
            > > >
            > > >And its just not violins, in the US, the French oboe maker Loree is considered to be the standard for orchestral musicians. Of course, people play everything nowadays but still the Loree is upheld my many as the best.
            > > >
            > > >The oboe importer Nora Post used to have an exercise called "pin the tail on the oboe" where oboists were to listen in the blind and choose the makes of oboes. As you would imagine, the results were always no better than guessing. Loree would sometimes end up dead last in the ranking!
            > > >
            > > >My own instrument, the bassoon, has a standard as well, Heckel. This is a family business that has been around since the 1830s. There is a five year wait and the instruments cost about 50,000. In the US, many say you have to have a Heckel to get a job. I have owned two Heckels myself and they have attributes that are very desirable as a performer, but there are several other fine makers as well, and I sure would not want to be asked to identify a Heckel from a Fox, from a Moenning, etc. in the blind.
            > > >
            > > >Certainly I do not suggest buying instruments on the basis of a blind test. There are many other considerations as well...ease of response, evenness of scale, feel, etc, etc. And there is also the important pride of ownership. If you want a Strad and can afford one, get it by all means. But I think we are fooling ourselves to reply on reputation, age and cost as a basis of superior sound.
            > > >
            > > >Jim Schaeffer
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > >
            >
          • jsch3
            ... Hello, Oh no, I did not own them at the same time. I started on an undistinguished Schriber and that got me through undergrad and my first professional
            Message 5 of 15 , Aug 1, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Fred <glenndriech@...> wrote:
              >
              > "2 instruments from the same maker. Do they sound different so different that you need 2?"
              >
              > When in my teens an accident rendered my left wrist useless for playing instruments but having "played" Morse keys professionally I know how differences can be difficult to adapt to quickly.    That a professional musician could change to an identical cleaned fresh instrument is as obvious an advantage as not having to resort to a different one in event of loss, damage, maintenance or re-work.  Such things happen at worst possible times (replacement might take months).
              >
              > I'd therefore more think "2 instruments from the same maker" a necessity.
              >
              > Fred.
              >

              Hello,

              Oh no, I did not own them at the same time. I started on an undistinguished Schriber and that got me through undergrad and my first professional jobs. When I was principal at the Cambridge (UK) orchestra, I had a fit of patriotism and ordered an American instrument from Fox. That proved to be the worst bassoon I ever played and it was so bad, I could not sell it and had to donate it to my old high school!

              I then bit the bullet and ordered my first Heckel. Years later, it was delivered and I was delighted. A few years later, it was at my repairman for a check and someone played it and offered to buy it for three times what I had payed. Of course I sold it and ordered another from Heckel. By the time this was delivered, I was no longer playing professionally and had taken up directing opera companies, a dubious career choice I may add.

              I could not justify the expense of a Heckel and sold it at another great profit and with the proceeds bought a lovely Italian bassoon from Allesandro Masi and had enough left over to buy a Heckelphone which I needed like a hole in the head. www.heckel.de/en/prod-heckelphon.htm

              Given the problems with the stock and real estate markets, the moral of the story is to put your money in Heckel bassoons and old master violins...blind tested or not!

              JIm
            • Fred
              Tahnk you JIm. Interesting insight and moral! ... Fred. ... Tahnk you JIm. Interesting insight and moral! :-) Fred. From: jsch3 To:
              Message 6 of 15 , Aug 1, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Tahnk you JIm.
                Interesting insight and moral!

                :-)

                Fred.


                From: jsch3 <jsch3@...>
                To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Wednesday, 1 August 2012, 15:39
                Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Music and Art

                --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Fred <glenndriech@...> wrote:

                "2 instruments from the same maker. Do they sound different so different that you need 2?"
                 
                When in my teens an accident rendered my left wrist useless for playing instruments but having "played" Morse keys professionally I know how differences can be difficult to adapt to quickly.
                That a professional musician could change to an identical cleaned fresh instrument is as obvious an advantage as not having to resort to a different one in event of loss, damage, maintenance or re-work.Such things happen at worst possible times (replacement might take months).
                 
                I'd therefore more think "2 instruments from the same maker" a necessity.
                Fred.

                Hello,

                Oh no, I did not own them at the same time. I started on an undistinguished Schriber and that got me through undergrad and my first professional jobs. When I was principal at the Cambridge (UK) orchestra, I had a fit of patriotism and ordered an American instrument from Fox. That proved to be the worst bassoon I ever played and it was so bad, I could not sell it and had to donate it to my old high school!

                I then bit the bullet and ordered my first Heckel. Years later, it was delivered and I was delighted. A few years later, it was at my repairman for a check and someone played it and offered to buy it for three times what I had payed. Of course I sold it and ordered another from Heckel. By the time this was delivered, I was no longer playing professionally and had taken up directing opera companies, a dubious career choice I may add.

                I could not justify the expense of a Heckel and sold it at another great profit and with the proceeds bought a lovely Italian bassoon from Allesandro Masi and had enough left over to buy a Heckelphone which I needed like a hole in the head. www.heckel.de/en/prod-heckelphon.htm

                Given the problems with the stock and real estate markets, the moral of the story is to put your money in Heckel bassoons and old master violins...blind tested or not!

                JIm



              • Robert
                It is surely true that as long as the Old Master violin you buy does not turn out to be a fake(look for solid certfication) then old violins are an excellent
                Message 7 of 15 , Aug 1, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  It is surely true that as long
                  as the Old Master violin you buy does
                  not turn out to be a fake(look
                  for solid certfication) then
                  old violins are an excellent investment.
                  But a big enough depression can knock even those down.
                  In my youth I knew a violinist who had had a chance
                  in the 1930s to buy a famous (and definitely real) Strad
                  for $400 cash(it is worth at least a million today).
                  But he did not have $400 cash!

                  He never really quite recovered from this
                  missed opportunity--not so much for
                  the money but for the chance to spend
                  the rest of his life playing such an instrument.
                  REG


                  --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Fred <glenndriech@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Tahnk you JIm.
                  >
                  > Interesting insight and moral!
                  >
                  > :-)
                  >
                  > Fred.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > >________________________________
                  > > From: jsch3 <jsch3@...>
                  > >To: regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com
                  > >Sent: Wednesday, 1 August 2012, 15:39
                  > >Subject: [regsaudioforum] Re: Music and Art
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >--- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Fred <glenndriech@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > >"2 instruments from the same maker. Do they sound different so different that you need 2?"
                  > > 
                  > >When in my teens an accident rendered my left wrist useless for playing instruments but having "played" Morse keys professionally I know how differences can be difficult to adapt to quickly.
                  > >That a professional musician could change to an identical cleaned fresh instrument is as obvious an advantage as not having to resort to a different one in event of loss, damage, maintenance or re-work.Such things happen at worst possible times (replacement might take months).
                  > > 
                  > >I'd therefore more think "2 instruments from the same maker" a necessity.
                  > >
                  > >Fred.
                  > >
                  > >Hello,
                  > >
                  > >Oh no, I did not own them at the same time. I started on an undistinguished Schriber and that got me through undergrad and my first professional jobs. When I was principal at the Cambridge (UK) orchestra, I had a fit of patriotism and ordered an American instrument from Fox. That proved to be the worst bassoon I ever played and it was so bad, I could not sell it and had to donate it to my old high school!
                  > >
                  > >I then bit the bullet and ordered my first Heckel. Years later, it was delivered and I was delighted. A few years later, it was at my repairman for a check and someone played it and offered to buy it for three times what I had payed. Of course I sold it and ordered another from Heckel. By the time this was delivered, I was no longer playing professionally and had taken up directing opera companies, a dubious career choice I may add.
                  > >
                  > >I could not justify the expense of a Heckel and sold it at another great profit and with the proceeds bought a lovely Italian bassoon from Allesandro Masi and had enough left over to buy a Heckelphone which I needed like a hole in the head. www.heckel.de/en/prod-heckelphon.htm
                  > >
                  > >Given the problems with the stock and real estate markets, the moral of the story is to put your money in Heckel bassoons and old master violins...blind tested or not!
                  > >
                  > >JIm
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  >
                • tim-bailey@grapevine.com.au
                  Yet the test showed that statistically the amps were indistinguishable. Did the test really show that? What were the values of alpha and beta, with out
                  Message 8 of 15 , Aug 2, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "Yet the test showed that statistically the amps were indistinguishable."

                    Did the test really show that? What were the values of alpha and beta, with out those, I as a trained statistician wouldn't know. Do you know the values for that test. If you don't know/didn't find out, how can you say that the test showed anything at all?

                    JBTWay I have raised this before and been pretty much ignored. If the value of beta is over 0.5 than the test shows the commitment of the tester to a particular outcome, OR their complete ignorance of testing.

                    In plain English there's a higher than 50% probability that the test not only doesn't show what it purports to, but that the opposite is in fact true for that test.

                    The test you mention might have had the result that - during the test - no-one could distinguish the amps. That does not mean that the amps would be audibly indistinguishable to anyone. And, you've already stated that they are audibly different. The next test should have bean after the subjects had been told one had a bit more bass, to see if they could reliably identify it.

                    When I make changes to my system e.g. using a commercial quality teflon capacitor to replace a WIMA MKP in the passive RIAA, the differences were audible and I'm not imagining it. My wife said much the same things and she's not technical at all. She is the reason I changed over to MC cartridges in the late 1970s.

                    I'd like a response this time, thanks.
                  • tim-bailey@grapevine.com.au
                    Some people even try to assure that they do enough trails to get beta lower than 0.5, and some also know that beta and n trials are interlinked, so they don t
                    Message 9 of 15 , Aug 2, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Some people even try to assure that they do enough trails to get beta lower than 0.5, and some also know that beta and n trials are interlinked, so they don't get too tight with p, either.

                      Far too few IMO&E.


                      --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, tim-bailey@... wrote:
                      >
                      > "Yet the test showed that statistically the amps were indistinguishable."
                      >
                      > Did the test really show that? ......... "
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.