Mr_Sukebe;190600 Wrote: > Just a thought on this question. > As Patrick builds the SB+ by starting with a standard SB, don't you > think that it would be fairly reasonable to assume that he's done a > comparison between the two. Furthermore, lets assume he has, and has > then gone on to market the SB+ at about five times the cost of the > standard SB. >
It's not as simple as that. It's very easy to fool yourself into hearing a difference in uncontrolled tests when one isn't there - that's why I asked about blind tests. PD has just confirmed that none have been done, so your assumption is incorrect. It's perfectly possible - in fact it's impossible to do otherwise - to design something like the SB using standard EE theory and measuring equipment. You try to optimize, within the constraints, the quality of the output - defined by measurements and theory. It's impossible to design by what sounds best, because the circuit won't produce any sound until it's been built. At that point you might try swapping one or two components, but that's just a tweak (and most likely won't make an audible difference anyway). I suspect the Transporter was designed like that - SD tried to produce something with the least possible jitter at the digital out, the lowest distortion, etc. - all defined by theory and measured with scopes. My guess is listening tests played a very small role, because we are talking about differences typically far below the threshold of audibility. Whether the end product actually sounds any better than a stock SB is open to question, and same goes for the SB+ - which is why I asked Patrick about listening tests in the first place. -- opaqueice ------------------------------------------------------------------------ opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33917 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
