Bt At Kajak

[BladeRnR]

I will do a 2nd BT in the future that's fully documented, for the full 10 times in the future (i.e. more formal)... and even a sighted one as control... Depends if Kajak still want to do that, coz from his viewpoint all this is really a waste of time. You have to be here to understand this.

At least you acknowledge the fact you'll need to experience another BT to lend it more credibility. A dry run (so to speak) never hurt anyone. More formal? Absolutely.

Next time record the results and convey them (and your total experience) more accurately. That way your methodology & results remain beyond reproach and will not suffer under scrutiny.

Blade

[Drizt]

justin think of it this way treblid heard the difference and that is the only thing that matters who gives a **** about recording results the bt brigade will find something to pick on unless they are present.

pov heard it himself and if we recorded the results then some would say oh its been forged and not correctly done all the excuses under the sun.maybe we should also monitor his brain functions and wear white coats and 60 minutes on site recording the bt.

POV was not participating in the blind test so in the scheme of blind test results his views are irrelevant. So are yours for that matter as you did not sit the blind test.

The point of doing a blind test is to confirm that what you have heard with your hearing only (no other external cues involved) matches up with reality. The fact that the results of the blind test were not correctly matched up with reality is very telling.

Can anyone not actually see that?

[Drizt]

The sad thing is that people will now try to argue that blind testing is futile because some will argue the results no matter what the outcome.

That would only be a valid argument if the proper protocols were followed. In this case they clearly were not. Its not really that hard, and the fact that more effort was not put into meeting the very simple requirements is very bewildering.

Anyway's enough from me on this dry run. Hopefully next time it is done properly.

Edited February 12, 2011 by Drizt

[myrantz]

Pardon? Isn't BT supposed to be about zero bias, no prompting, no external cues etc Drizt? I ask you because you're a SME (Subject Matter Expert) on BT.

They only tell me what to listen for once I told them I had enough..

I wasn't going to get into this but some of these statements don't gel and the fact results were not recorded smells.

Bowing out now.

Blade

Please don't let it go so easily.. Pick the BT apart...

It definitely smells fishy. It may well have been 100% above board, but treblid is terrible at relaying what actually happened. And when someone is unable to relay the facts properly it makes one very very suspicious.

In any case, without being there I have no idea what actually happened (especially given the info presented by treblid).

Shooting the messenger? That's why I preferred to measure things where possible... But I don't really know how to measure this.. Somebody who thinks he can, maybe we can do a 2nd BT at his place, if Kajak still wants it...

Anyways.... i have no vested interest in the outcome. I am just happy that they did blind testing (assuming they did it properly, I can not confirm nor deny).

It's a BT, you have to take my word for it...

Treblid. What are your thoughts on blind testing now?

So far it seem to have validated everything I said about BT...

Seriously, I don't object to BT now if it's done on a good system.. Fatigue, audio memory isn't a big factor. So it can work, but it needs a lot of preparation, a guy with good language skills to churn out proper reports, etc... And somebody who is disciplined enough not to say forget BT, let's play...

I'm not a disciplined person. I can't really see myself using BT to evaluate stuffs. But if I know the system, and the person taking the test, I can can accept BT results from a select few.

Treblism: It has been demonstrated to me my ears can be fooled (Mc Gurk effect), and yet, it has been demonstrated again to me, my ears can't be fooled... :lol:

[Once was an audiophile]

POV was not participating in the blind test so in the scheme of blind test results his views are irrelevant. So are yours for that matter as you did not sit the blind test.

The point of doing a blind test is to confirm that what you have heard with your hearing only (no other external cues involved) matches up with reality. The fact that the results of the blind test were not correctly matched up with reality is very telling.

Can anyone not actually see that?

dritz what you think about the bt: myself,pov and treblid dont give a f???k

he could do it 100 times on my system and you will still find something not done right its in your nature

Edited February 12, 2011 by kajak12

[Drizt]

So far it seem to have validated everything I said about BT...

how convenient Its as if that is what you planed all along when replying with such vague results

[Drizt]

dritz what you think about the bt: myself,pov and treblid dont give a f???k

he could do it 100 times on my system and you will still find something not done right its in your nature

Excuses excuses. Was the blind test done properly or not? If it wasn't then the results are invalid. The vagueness of the replies thus far have been very confusing, and it would seem that was the intent. I have stated I do not have a vested interest in the results. I am happy treblid did the test, I just wish the results were actually captured properly and that the correct procedure was followed.

Edited February 12, 2011 by Drizt

[BladeRnR]

justin think of it this way treblid heard the difference and that is the only thing that matters who gives a **** about recording results the bt brigade will find something to pick on unless they are present.

pov heard it himself and if we recorded the results then some would say oh its been forged and not correctly done all the excuses under the sun.maybe we should also monitor his brain functions and wear white coats and 60 minutes on site recording the bt.

Calm down friend. I'm not Drizt

I merely suggested if one is conducting a test (Especially a Scientific one where the results can cause hostile division) then record the results and be as transparent as possible. If you did then well and good - no skin off my nose. That was not conveyed by Treb. His answers appeared to be rather vague as I stated. Personally, I would never have thought the results would have been forged. I believe you have shown you are a person of some integrity and it would not behoove you to lie.

Whether Treb or POV heard a difference is meaningless to me as I was not there. Attempting to experience such a specific test vicariously is futile. One should be there to experience it for themselves would you not agree?

I have no interest in picking apart your BT apart from suggesting the results should have been recorded and conveyed accurately. If one is vague, it introduces ambiguity and equivocation which in turn leads to misinterpretation. That in turn leads to hostility and frustration. We had enough of that in the other thread did we not?

Being an amateur Scientist in some topics, the thought of monitoring the brain is somewhat appealing to me

All the best

Blade

Edited February 12, 2011 by BladeRnR

[Once was an audiophile]

Calm down friend. I'm not Drizt

I merely suggested if one is conducting a test (Especially a Scientific one where the results can cause hostile division) then record the results and be as transparent as possible. If you did then well and good - no skin off my nose. That was not conveyed by Treb. His answers appeared to be rather vague as I stated. I for one would never have thought the results would have been forged. I believe you have shown you are a person of some integrity and it would not behoove you to lie.

Whether Treb or POV heard a difference is meaningless to me as I was not there. Attempting to experience such a specific test vicariously is futile. One should be there to experience it for themselves would you not agree?

I have no interest in picking apart your BT apart from suggesting the results should have been recorded and conveyed accurately. If one is vague, it introduces ambiguity and equivocation which in turn leads to misinterpretation. That in turn leads to hostility and frustration. We had enough of that in the other thread did we not?

Being an amateur Scientist in some topics, the thought of monitoring the brain is somewhat appealing to me

All the best

Blade

if only you lived in perth you would be welcomed for a test anytime

yes you must experience yourself borrow a cord and do it

[myrantz]

treblid deliberately has tried to be vague in an attempt to dismiss blind testing on the grounds that if people question the results no matter what the outcome then the method is pointless.

No I'm not.. I always ramble.. That flaw has been well documented. I have 10+ ideas popping up in my head all the time...

1/ What happens if I swap all kajak's system to normal cables?

2/ What happens if I swap half of them?

3/ What if I swap the other half?

4/ What if I don't use the throughbred power?

5/ What if I use half with the throughbred, and half without?

6/ What if I use audiophile cables, but with a stock power board

7/ What if I upgrade the stock power board with audiophile cables?

8/ What if I pee on the earth stake?

9/ What if I get a power generator? And run everything off batteries?

10/ What if I listen to his system with my back facing it? (To be honest I've only thought about that when I was driving home).

I have no idea Kajak's cables are unshielded.. That has gave me even more ideas...

But if you can't even do it properly or even report the findings properly then you really haven't followed the method, therefore you can not confirm nor deny the validity of the method.

Hey it's my first time.. What do you expect me to do? After saying I have a learning difficulty before, surely you can't expect much..

I call shenanigans. Seriously how hard is it to do 10 or more iterations of a blind test and mark down your answers and then validate your answers against the testing methodology?

Very hard.. Find a day and sit down on his system and you'd realise it...

POV was not participating in the blind test so in the scheme of blind test results his views are irrelevant.

Well he's like the judge to make sure we don't cheat... If he wasn't there, I would have done only 3..

The point of doing a blind test is to confirm that what you have heard with your hearing only (no other external cues involved) matches up with reality. The fact that the results of the blind test were not correctly matched up with reality is very telling.

You prob should elaborate what you mean by the blind test were not correctly matched up with reality...

Kajak, before you swapped to normal PC cable, were all the plays done with your cable?

The sad thing is that people will now try to argue that blind testing is futile because some will argue the results no matter what the outcome.

That's why my ingenuity lies. Using you against yourself... I'm not arguing anything at all ...

That would only be a valid argument if the proper protocols were followed. In this case they clearly were not. Its not really that hard, and the fact that more effort was not put into meeting the very simple requirements is very bewildering.

So you're saying today wasn't a BT? Despite not knowing what cables are used, and I have got at least 4 out of 5 right (for sure), that is still not enough for you, and it's not a BT enough? You do have a point.. So I concede on that.

Anyway's enough from me on this dry run. Hopefully next time it is done properly.

It's informal.. Not a dry run... Need a disciplined person to do the documentation... I'd see if I can bring my Mrs next time round... She'd be good at this.

Well... The above is an honest account of what I think happened this afternoon... That's my reality (and I own it) so I'm sticking to it...

[Drizt]

*say what*

hmmmm. ok.

Not sure if serious

[myrantz]

hmmmm. ok.

Not sure if serious

Ha.. This is nothing...

The discussions I had when I'm sharing the same apartment with a Christian EEE and a Muslim Mathematician students... Alot of the things I've learnt I think I learn from them.

The two GTGs and these threads reminds me of those days... When I'm still young and not a single worry in the world.

Edit: Seriously though, everybody give this a go.. Now you know what to listen for, all the best seeing if this can work on your system or not...

Edited February 12, 2011 by treblid

[Paul Spencer]

One suggestion for next time, if there is a next time.

1. Start with cable A, the standard cable as the baseline and you know first time what it is.

2. Then do B, the fancy one, you still know what you are hearing, just this once. At this point you are sure you hear the differences.

3. Now the tester swaps the cables, or pretends to. You don't know which is used this time, you have to identify as either A or B.

The above is one round. Identifying the third one correctly counts as 1 point.

I wonder how loudly Kajak curses at the end of 10 rounds! lol

It gets tedious quickly, so if you plan to do a fair amount, not a bad idea to come up with an instant switching setup. Then you don't play a whole song, but switch frequently, not necessarily knowing what is heard. I prefer that method.

[Once was an audiophile]

One suggestion for next time, if there is a next time.

1. Start with cable A, the standard cable as the baseline and you know first time what it is.

2. Then do B, the fancy one, you still know what you are hearing, just this once. At this point you are sure you hear the differences.

3. Now the tester swaps the cables, or pretends to. You don't know which is used this time, you have to identify as either A or B.

The above is one round. Identifying the third one correctly counts as 1 point.

I wonder how loudly Kajak curses at the end of 10 rounds! lol

It gets tedious quickly, so if you plan to do a fair amount, not a bad idea to come up with an instant switching setup. Then you don't play a whole song, but switch frequently, not necessarily knowing what is heard. I prefer that method.

next time for what? to please the bt brigade its not a maybe difference on my system i can show treblid other changes that can be made to the sound so he learns more like how important are other components in a system eg:dacs,transports,valves,capacitors that way he will learn more its very easy to go from brilliant to average hifi just by changing a dac and nothing can be done later in the chain to fix a average dac no room treatments or speakers or any other tweaks will fix a weak source, the only reason i done this with treblid is so he learns his education in 2 channel audio has just begun next time i will change caps in my clock power supply then his jaw will drop what happens to analogue sound with some changes in the digital domain

Edited February 12, 2011 by kajak12

[MLXXX]

The power is swapped at the KDac.

The main marketing push for specialised power cords is for power amps. Power amps use heavy duty power supplies with good regulation of the voltage. The claim that changing the power cord would make a difference is surprising, as others have noted. I had assumed it was this surprising claim that was to be tested in a formal double blind test.

But it seems something else was tested, instead. A custom built digital to audio converter (a "killer" DAC).

Treblid, or kajack12:-

1. Am I right in assuming that the only thing changed was the mains power cord for the DAC?

2. Is this DAC mass produced, or custom built?

3. What is the arrangement for the power supply for the DAC (e.g. outboard transformer with DC connection to the DAC casing, or a power transformer inside the casing of the DAC)?

4. Why was the DAC unable to operate optimally with a standard power cord? (Any theories?)

If I am wrong and other parts of the reproduction chain were under test, please advise the forum exactly what parts of the reproduction chain had their power cords changed.

Cheers.

[Once was an audiophile]

The main marketing push for specialised power cords is for power amps. Power amps use heavy duty power supplies with good regulation of the voltage. The claim that changing the power cord would make a difference is surprising, as others have noted. I had assumed it was this surprising claim that was to be tested in a formal double blind test.

But it seems something else was tested, instead. A custom built digital to audio converter (a "killer" DAC).

Treblid, or kajack12:-

1. Am I right in assuming that the only thing changed was the mains power cord for the DAC?

2. Is this DAC mass produced, or custom built?

3. What is the arrangement for the power supply for the DAC (e.g. outboard transformer with DC connection to the DAC casing, or a power transformer inside the casing of the DAC)?

4. Why was the DAC unable to operate optimally with a standard power cord? (Any theories?)

If I am wrong and other parts of the reproduction chain were under test, please advise the forum exactly what parts of the reproduction chain had their power cords changed.

Cheers.

1.dac custom built killer dac

2.power transformer inside the dac (custom made)

3.none of my components operate optimally with kettle cords(had plenty of components from shops they dont either)

4.power cord only changed in the dac

5.after the bt treblid had a listen to a harmon kardon 990(as transport and terra dac modded)

Edited February 12, 2011 by kajak12

[MLXXX]

1.dac custom built killer dac

2.power transformer inside the dac (custom made)

3.none of my components operate optimally with kettle cords(had plenty of components from shops they dont either)

4.power cord only changed in the dac

5.after the bt treblid had a listen to a harmon kardon 990(as transport and terra dac modded)

Thanks. This clarifies and confirms what was compared for the "blind tests".

[Once was an audiophile]

for the people that are open minded a link to a cd85 with clock upgrades caps do change the sound in a clock power supply

http://killerdac.com/forum/index.php?topic=165.15

treblid go and visit flemo have a listen to cap changes in a clock you head will spin

Edited February 12, 2011 by kajak12

[Tweet]

Honestly, this whole thread has gone bananas, and Treb I think you mean well but your posts are simply erratic and convey non-sensical responses to questions asked.

While Kajak just dismisses anyone's suggestion that he should provide some tangible evidence that gives credence to his claim of such differences 'being as night and day'. Yet, such differences only appear to be heard on his high-end system.

If a 'specialized' power cable has such an effect then one must conclude there is something wrong with the stability of the system itself, like internal H.F oscillations generated within the amplifiers themselves through improper grounding.

I'm a tech and have been a HiFi enthusiast for a very long time and have put such claims to the test for myself in years past, and having made a couple of 'specialized' power cords it did not convince me in the slightest that such attachments made any discernible difference to the audio quality from the speakers.

And...that goes for exotic interconnects too.....it's all marketing B/S and it is for that reason that such superlative claims are made for such products.

C.M

Edited February 12, 2011 by Tweet

[DarrenW]

Now.......All we need is for DrP to stick his 2 cents in as well

[mello yello]

1.dac custom built killer dac

2.power transformer inside the dac (custom made)

3.none of my components operate optimally with kettle cords(had plenty of components from shops they dont either)

4.power cord only changed in the dac

5.after the bt treblid had a listen to a harmon kardon 990(as transport and terra dac modded)

so only "modded" gear was used in the tests ?

is it possible your "mods" may have introduced flaws in your equipment that only a properly "modded" power cord can neutralise

are you also saying the same results will be obtained on stock standard equipment or do you need special screws* to hold your modded equipment together

_{*use of screws as a metaphor for power cables}

and if so , shouldnt you be going back to the drawing board so you can obtain the same killerdac results with an ordinary kettle cord?

[mello yello]

I can build an engine to misfire and splutter on unleaded petrol but as soon as I pour leaded fuel in, up goes the "performance" and shes purring like a kitten

would that prove leaded petrol performs better than unleaded ?

[Drizt]

Before this thread deteriorates much further, I'd like to thank treblid, POV and kajak12 for taking the time to do the blind testing.

No matter what the cause of the differences heard, treblid was able to reliably pick the difference via blind test which is actually a massive win. I don't recall ever reading about anyone being able to pass a blind test with regards to power cables.

It would be interesting to find out the reason for the differences heard.

I'm also glad that treblid has now experienced blind testing and that he now knows that they work and that they have a place.

Apologies for some of my previous posts in this thread if they seemed overly aggressive. I get frustrated easily when it seems like someone is avoiding answering the question or I feel they are being deliberately vague, my bad.

[mello yello]

Now.......All we need is for DrP to stick his 2 cents in as well

I think youll find the Doc is worth a bit more than 2 cents, Darren

[Drizt]

I can build an engine to misfire and splutter on unleaded petrol but as soon as I pour leaded fuel in, up goes the "performance" and shes purring like a kitten

would that prove leaded petrol performs better than unleaded ?

In the confines of the test parameters the answer is obviously yes. Outside of the test one could not conclude that statement to be true in all situations but one could conclude that it is possible in certain circumstances that lead petrol performs better than unleaded.