Blind listening - TT3.0, HWmods and Teddy Pardo PSU

[Phil Leigh]

Since it was my set-up that was under examinations/blind testing I can say a few words about it:

Bryston 7B SST
Meridian 568.2MM as pre.
ATC SCM 40
Buffalo DAC II w/IVY - coax SPDIF
One SB Touch w/ factory settings w/Teddy Pardo PSU –WLAN
One SB Touch w/ HW upgrade level 1 from Fidelity Audio w/TT3.0 w/Teddy Pardo PSU - LAN

Purpose:
Try to hear difference among 2 different SBT and to determine which was best in audiophile terms.

• Blind testing among standard SBT and SBT w HW mod and TT.30 made it obviously that standard SBT w/factory settings is far more musical. Better bottom end – more liquid presentation.
• Blind testing between standard SBT and SBT w/HW mod without TT3.0 was quite impossible to distinguish,
• Teddy PSU vs stock SMPS – quite easy to distinguish difference even blind tested. Teddy PSU is clearly better.

Comments:
• My Level 1 mod from FA is only 3 weeks old – lack of burn-in??

Not lack of burn-in, merely lack of any tangible benefit!

[MCG555]

Now you are aware that this is the "audiophiles" section of the forum and that blind or double blind listening tests are considered worthless, especially when these tests result in finding out almost all audiophile beliefs are just myths. In fact, all listening tests, whether sighted, blind or double blind, which involve direct comparisons between two similar components (e.g. speakers, amps, SBTs, etc.) are strictly forbidden.

For example take this quote from Michael Fremer's review of the MBL Radialstrahler 101E Mk. II loudspeaker which appears in the April 2012 issue of Stereophile:

"Although my entire system has changed in the eight years since the first version of the 101E Radialstrahler was here, I feel confident saying that the sound of the Mk. II is more refined and well behaved, and far more capable of speaking with a uniform, focused voice."

As you can see by the above quote, direct comparison is not only not needed but reviewers of high end audio equipment (equipment which, as is the case with the MBL Radialstrahler 101E Mk. II loudspeaker, often costs tens of thousands of dollars) can make comparisons based on simple long term memory and using a completely different set up.

Hopefully you will soon find a source for some of the magic audiophile kool-aid which once consumed will enable you to understand the error of your ways and allow you to make similar comparisons based on long term memory alone. As an added bonus you will then also be able to detect things like unmeasurable jitter, 100kHz harmonics and whether the electricity used to power your equipment is made by wind, solar, fossil fuel or nuclear power.

+1

Brilliant post! :-)

[ralphpnj]

+1

Brilliant post! :-)

Thanks. I do feel just a little (and I mean really, really little) bit undeserving of praise since poking fun at the high end audio magazines is like shooting fish in a barrel. They truly are such fools and leave themselves wide open for much well deserved scorn and ridicule. I guess writing the nonsense like I quoted above keeps the manufacturers happy and that in turn helps to keep the reviewers enjoying very expensive and nice sounding audio equipment which they never have to pay for. A very cosy little arrangement.

[Zombie]

Did you do a test with both sets on LAN?

[NoRoDa]

Did you do a test with both sets on LAN?

No
We only had one ethernet cable available.

...And why bother when the WLAN factory SBT was preferred in all rounds?

[NoRoDa]

Thanks. I do feel just a little (and I mean really, really little) bit undeserving of praise since poking fun at the high end audio magazines is like shooting fish in a barrel. They truly are such fools and leave themselves wide open for much well deserved scorn and ridicule. I guess writing the nonsense like I quoted above keeps the manufacturers happy and that in turn helps to keep the reviewers enjoying very expensive and nice sounding audio equipment which they never have to pay for. A very cosy little arrangement.

I used to write reviews myself, and I don't recognize your facts from that time.... (Only in a small magazine and not like God's next in command Fremer of course...)
You truly leave yourself wide open for scorn and ridicule when you actually have an opinion about something as a reviewer, that's for shure.
I didn't have to pay listprice for the products I bought, but who does anyway - reviewer on not?
Too much work for for too little money and not enough time to enjoy my own system. I'm more happy like this, a blind testing we go

A small note:
If the reviewers write pure BS, then why would they enjoy the very expensive and nice sounding audio equipment? It will for shure sound no better than cheaper gear?

Regards

[darrenyeats]

I do feel just a little (and I mean really, really little) bit undeserving of praise

LOL.


Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

[ralphpnj]

I used to write reviews myself, and I don't recognize your facts from that time.... (Only in a small magazine and not like God's next in command Fremer of course...)
You truly leave yourself wide open for scorn and ridicule when you actually have an opinion about something as a reviewer, that's for shure.
I didn't have to pay listprice for the products I bought, but who does anyway - reviewer on not?
Too much work for for too little money and not enough time to enjoy my own system. I'm more happy like this, a blind testing we go

A small note:
If the reviewers write pure BS, then why would they enjoy the very expensive and nice sounding audio equipment? It will for shure sound no better than cheaper gear?

Regards

The BS part is not that the reviewers are writing that poor sounding equipment sounds good but rather in their BS testing methods, all their BS about how much better certain mega-buck equipment than other mega-buck equipment and all their BS for the reason why one piece of equipment sounds better than another. As I wrote in my first post on this thread when not only base but actually that you based your judgement on your memory of how a speaker sounded eight years ago, playing under very different conditions, you deserve all the scorn and ridicule anyone cares to toss your way.

[NoRoDa]

The BS part is not that the reviewers are writing that poor sounding equipment sounds good but rather in their BS testing methods, all their BS about how much better certain mega-buck equipment than other mega-buck equipment and all their BS for the reason why one piece of equipment sounds better than another. As I wrote in my first post on this thread when not only base but actually that you based your judgement on your memory of how a speaker sounded eight years ago, playing under very different conditions, you deserve all the scorn and ridicule anyone cares to toss your way.

We're on the same page, I agree

[SBGK]

Interesting findings yesterday!

http://forums.slimdevices.com/showpo...postcount=1936

HWmods made no difference, but at least did not sound worse.

CD-player vs SBT as a digital source made no clear difference.

Teddy Pardo TTouch PSU made a difference, and IMO an improvement.

My own conclusion:
- Factory SBT connected via WLAN sounds better than TT3.0
- Teddy Pardo TTouch PSU improves the sound
- HWmods are not worth the effort or money
- The SBT is a good enough digital source feeding my Rega DAC







I know there are a lot of people that will say I'm wrong.
But did you listen without knowing what you are listening to?
You'll need two SBTs to do this

Regards

Hi, if you PM me I'll send you some settings that will give you music playback 100x better than TT3.0 default settings. What have you got to lose.