I agree --- that was certainly not meant as a jab towards Craig but I can see that it can be taken the wrong way. Personally, I don't have any problem with the process that Craig used, it was definitely what I would consider "blind" (thus the quotes).. My only issue was directed towards that passive level matching switch box, which Craig had no control over. I will change the thread title.Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonColeman
Thanks, Dave.
Jason
This is amazingly informative. It really is too bad that Craig put in so much time and effort to stumble upon what looks like an oversight, such as this. I'm thinking the mag will have to print something to cover their bases on this. I really enjoyed the read, too :(.
Nice catch, Dave. I'm duly impressed, as always.
I guess we'll just disagree on this. I don't see where it's been determined to be an "oversight." Could it have been done better? In a private home? A retraction? Have I missed something?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonnyozero3
David
I don't think a "retraction" is needed. I think after more tests and data collection that perhaps an editors note would be appropriate. I see that as fairly common in the print magazines. I don't think the baby needs to be thrown out with the bathwater, but on the other hand any foilbles with the actual listening tests should be pointed out in print if valid.Quote:
Originally Posted by bikeman
In other words, if the the switch is shown to affect response, an editors note in bold letters would be appropriate in my opinion. Whether the parties can agree on that is not definite, but if there is any doubt, the appropriate note would be the right thing to do IMHO.
If you take a look at Craig's response, he says that there was never greater than a 1dB difference in sensitivity between any pair. He also says that the Acculine was actually 0.5 dB more sensitive than the 340SE (which is weird).
If this is so, then it would seem the switcher had a less detrimental effect then we thought.
"if there is any doubt" is going to be used as a criteria, then we'll have to have more footnotes than space for the article. The switchbox was hardly the only variable. Any listening session is going to have lots of variables. Craig did a excellent job minimizing the problems given the issues he was working with.Quote:
Originally Posted by randyb
No footnotes, retractions or anything else is called for. We can always make something better by throwing more money at it. More than enough money was thrown in this instance.
David
Quote:
Originally Posted by bikeman
All true, but if the switch did (and I don't know if it did-just relying on David) alter the sound of some speakers more than others from the get go, I think it is worth noting. I am sure you would raise your eyebrows if you went into a store and auditioned speakers and afterwards the vendor said, you know there are alot of variables but you should be able to make a decision on what sounds the best and oh yea, the switch I used altered the basic sound of the more sensitive speaker. Certainly, DavidF seems to think that issue was more important than all the rest of the variables combined are he wouldn't have spent so much time analyzing and then posting. Especially, since he is smart enough to know it would tend to start shall we say a vigorous discussion.
As much as I admire Dave as both a person and an engineer (I've purchased eight speakers from Ascend), it's not reasonable to add multiple footnotes or total retractions based on speculation no matter how knowledgeable the source. If Dave had been present, I'm sure, like so many of us in attendance, he could have zeroed in on several areas that made this listening session less than ideal. This event wasn't constructed to be the end all in speaker comparisons. I haven't seen anyone who attended frame it as such.Quote:
Originally Posted by randyb
This was an opportunity for some very serious audio nuts to get together and experience what would otherwise have been impossible. For me it was nine hours of driving that day. For some others it was way too much time spent in airports and airplanes. Those factors alone would have effected the results to a good degree. How would you handle that as a footnote?
The session was what it was. I could nitpik it to death. That would add nothing. The session was a data point. Nothing more. Dinner and the comradery were not data points. They were the stars of the show. No one will forget having spent the day at Craig's. But few of us will remember what speakers we auditioned in the years to come. The listening session was fun and informative but not for the scores.
David
It appears to me that a group of hobbyists interested in comparing the relative performance and value of loudspeakers have crossed over into a different realm. Through the power of the internet, they now have the capacity to influence sales. Publishing the GTG results that include not only qualitative but quantitative (numerical) comparisons in a magazine suggests, in spite of the caveats indicated in the article, that one speaker is better than another. Comments on the internet forums suggest that many individuals will be making their purchasing decisions based on the results. Consequently, it seems only right that the intentions and methods of the GTG be held to a higher level of scrutiny.
I always take audio reviews, and most anything I see/hear in public media with several grains of salt. How much do advertising dollars influence the perception of the reviewer? This situation is no different. The flags went up for me when representatives of organizations who have a financial interest in the findings participated in the forum discussions before and after the event. One actually attended the GTG. The flags also went up when the description of the sound of the 340SE, the speaker I own, was so different from my personal experience. The article in Affordable Audio states that the listeners heard subdued horns, felt vocals were hard to follow, and experienced the sounds as sitting in row 50, and not row 5. That’s nothing like how the speakers sound in my room. How can you account for such a difference?
It may all be very innocent. I suspect that it is but I have no way of knowing for sure. When does a get together of audio enthusiasts become a mechanism for marketing? Again, there is no way to know for sure. That said, I appreciate the efforts of the group and think that they offer valuable information. I just keep those grains of salt handy.
For folks with a financial interest, like David, the stakes can be high. Scrutiny of the results is completely justified.