John Atkinson Wrote: > Hi Kim, that's not actually what I wrote. In the newsletter piece -- see > http://www.stereophile.com/images/newsletter/306Bstph.html -- I was > auditioning the SB3's digital output into my Mark Levinson No.30.5 D/A. > I will be writing about the sound quality of the SB3's analog outputs in > the July issue of Stereophile. > > John Atkinson > Editor, Stereophile
No offense to Mr. Atkinson, but should we really care what he wrote? He didn't do a proper comparison (by proper I mean a comparison which removes bias, such as a blind test), and he himself states that he was "hard-pressed to hear much of a difference" between the SB as transport and a $6000 CD player as transport. Given the massive influence bias has on human perception, and given the fact that Stereophile magazine relies on advertising income from manufacturers of audio gear, I think we have to begin with a presumption of strong bias towards expensive gear on the part of their reviewers and editors. As such, this review is probably just about the best the lowly $300 SB could possibly hope for. It would really be nice to see blind testing instituted as part of the reviewing process at such publications. This doesn't at all preclude the type of analysis they do now--after all, if a difference indeed exists one still needs to characterize it and decide what sounds best--but rather would compliment it and provide confidence in the conclusions. -- opaqueice ------------------------------------------------------------------------ opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=19598 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
