|
Post by drbill on Jun 3, 2017 10:59:33 GMT -6
First off, I don't believe that "nulling" is the be all, end all master arbiter of what we can hear or can't hear. In addition, the defining of "null" is so varied that it becomes almost useless other than to be used as a blunt instrument in very generalized conversations. An indicator, yes. A finalized perfected rule of thumb. No. At least not for me.
That said, I don't have the time, inclination and certainly not the money to be interested in swapping out cables endlessly. I picked Mogami as the benchmark for my studio and went with that. At this point, I don't really care about the sonics or if there's something better. After putting well over $25k into raw Mogami cabling, I'm not about to up that to $150-250k in smoke and mirrors audiophile cabling. Not gonna happen. There's far better ways to spend my time and money. I'm all about the making of music. I'll let the audiophile parse whether or not I used decent cables, and if my sonics could have been 0.00237 % better with a different alternative cable.
One man's "night and day" is another man's "who cares".
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jun 3, 2017 11:27:45 GMT -6
First off, I don't believe that "nulling" is the be all, end all master arbiter of what we can hear or can't hear. In addition, the defining of "null" is so varied that it becomes almost useless other than to be used as a blunt instrument in very generalized conversations. An indicator, yes. A finalized perfected rule of thumb. No. At least not for me. That said, I don't have the time, inclination and certainly not the money to be interested in swapping out cables endlessly. I picked Mogami as the benchmark for my studio and went with that. At this point, I don't really care about the sonics or if there's something better. After putting well over $25k into raw Mogami cabling, I'm not about to up that to $150-250k in smoke and mirrors audiophile cabling. Not gonna happen. There's far better ways to spend my time and money. I'm all about the making of music. I'll let the audiophile parse whether or not I used decent cables, and if my sonics could have been 0.00237 % better with a different alternative cable. One man's "night and day" is another man's "who cares". I mean, if it's truly a null to infinity, how is that possibly not the Be All End All Master Arbiter? It's the same thing as duplicating an audio track and flipping the polarity.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,918
|
Post by ericn on Jun 3, 2017 12:45:35 GMT -6
First off, I don't believe that "nulling" is the be all, end all master arbiter of what we can hear or can't hear. In addition, the defining of "null" is so varied that it becomes almost useless other than to be used as a blunt instrument in very generalized conversations. An indicator, yes. A finalized perfected rule of thumb. No. At least not for me. That said, I don't have the time, inclination and certainly not the money to be interested in swapping out cables endlessly. I picked Mogami as the benchmark for my studio and went with that. At this point, I don't really care about the sonics or if there's something better. After putting well over $25k into raw Mogami cabling, I'm not about to up that to $150-250k in smoke and mirrors audiophile cabling. Not gonna happen. There's far better ways to spend my time and money. I'm all about the making of music. I'll let the audiophile parse whether or not I used decent cables, and if my sonics could have been 0.00237 % better with a different alternative cable. One man's "night and day" is another man's "who cares". I mean, if it's truly a null to infinity, how is that possibly not the Be All End All Master Arbiter? It's the same thing as duplicating an audio track and flipping the polarity. Is it? In the measurement we have calibration and know the resolution. In the DAW world we don't know i.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Jun 3, 2017 14:01:34 GMT -6
Once at a high-end home audio show, I participated in a room where one of the other participants was demo-ing a CD treatment product. Once an hour he would do a demo where he would play a minute or so from two CDs that were identical except that one had been treated and the other hadn't. Sometimes he would give his spiel before the demo, sometimes after, and usually not at all.
Briefly, the spiel was this: The manufacturing process leaves the plastic surface of the CD with small imperfections which are well within the capability of the CD player's error-correction system, but because error-correction is inherently limited to interpolating an approximation of the missing data rather than actually replicating it, the less error-correction needed, the better the sound quality. The surface treatment addresses those imperfections, thus less error correction was needed, ergo better sound.
Here is what I noticed: When he gave the spiel before the demo, he often made a sale. When he either gave the spiel after or didn't give it at all, he made fewer sales if any. So here is my take-away:
If people have a reason to believe that they might hear a difference, they are much more open to actually hearing one. If they do not have a reason to believe they might hear a difference, they are much less likely to hear one. In other words, our pre-existing beliefs play a much bigger role than we would like to admit.
Did I hear a difference? Yes. I think his first sale of the show was to me. But I had heard the spiel, so I was open to the possibility that this was science and not snake oil (my default setting was of course "snake oil", and besides one does not want to appear gullible in front of one's peers - it's socially safer to "reserve judgement".). So did hearing the spiel taint my audition, or un-taint it? Could be either one, or even both.
I think that, as Martin has suggested, the real proof is in the long-term pudding, because expectation bias can all too easily be the hidden 9/10ths of the iceberg in a quick A/B test if the difference isn't dramatic. So here is a possible alternative approach: Assuming the new thing doesn't obviously suck, try living with the new thing in the system for a while, then take it out and put the old back in, and see whether you miss it and still miss it after some time has passed, or are relieved that it's gone, or simply don't care one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jun 3, 2017 14:07:33 GMT -6
I mean, if it's truly a null to infinity, how is that possibly not the Be All End All Master Arbiter? It's the same thing as duplicating an audio track and flipping the polarity. Is it? In the measurement we have calibration and know the resolution. In the DAW world we don't know i. If you're saying that an incomplete or improperly done null test might not reveal differences that are in fact there then yeah, of course. I was meaning if it is in fact a true null, that is precisely the Be All And End All on the question of difference, no?
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jun 3, 2017 14:33:00 GMT -6
First off, I don't believe that "nulling" is the be all, end all master arbiter of what we can hear or can't hear. In addition, the defining of "null" is so varied that it becomes almost useless other than to be used as a blunt instrument in very generalized conversations. An indicator, yes. A finalized perfected rule of thumb. No. At least not for me. That said, I don't have the time, inclination and certainly not the money to be interested in swapping out cables endlessly. I picked Mogami as the benchmark for my studio and went with that. At this point, I don't really care about the sonics or if there's something better. After putting well over $25k into raw Mogami cabling, I'm not about to up that to $150-250k in smoke and mirrors audiophile cabling. Not gonna happen. There's far better ways to spend my time and money. I'm all about the making of music. I'll let the audiophile parse whether or not I used decent cables, and if my sonics could have been 0.00237 % better with a different alternative cable. One man's "night and day" is another man's "who cares". I mean, if it's truly a null to infinity, how is that possibly not the Be All End All Master Arbiter? It's the same thing as duplicating an audio track and flipping the polarity. Well, first off, it's NEVER truly a "null to infinity", there's always SOME residual. It's just that people put it in the "doesn't matter" territory at a certain point. Which to me, is one of the biggest problems with a lot of digital audio. NOTHING "doesn't matter" (and it's the only thing that does.) Even our best test instruments are still a blunt instrument compared to the subtleties that the human auditory system is capable of. Which has been proven time after time when new discoveries are made after the "experts" and pundits have decided that we already know everything. So I distrust null testing, too, as a master arbiter. It's a useful tool, but like all tools it has limits. And, as I've mentioned before, I regard the vast majority of blind testing as nothing more that one flavor of religion. (It IS possible to set up a meaningful blind test of some things in some circumstances,. but to really do it right is so fiendishly difficult that nobody really ever bothers. It's another case of "doesn't matter." That being said, I'm not running out and buying uber fancy cabling, either. Even if I could afford it there are too many things ahead of it on the wish list - microphones, a really GOOD console, a few more compressors, better monitors, a Radar, lots of stuff that is higher on my list of priorities... Maybe if I win the lottery I'll consider some silver.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jun 3, 2017 14:36:26 GMT -6
Is it? In the measurement we have calibration and know the resolution. In the DAW world we don't know i. If you're saying that an incomplete or improperly done null test might not reveal differences that are in fact there then yeah, of course. I was meaning if it is in fact a true null, that is precisely the Be All And End All on the question of difference, no? How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? To answer the initial question: Yes, sometimes they're hearing something we're not. Ans sometimes they're hearing something they're not, either.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jun 3, 2017 14:54:15 GMT -6
If you're saying that an incomplete or improperly done null test might not reveal differences that are in fact there then yeah, of course. I was meaning if it is in fact a true null, that is precisely the Be All And End All on the question of difference, no? How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? To answer the initial question: Yes, sometimes they're hearing something we're not. Ans sometimes they're hearing something they're not, either. You're speaking in broad generalities as far as what's "been proven time and time again" and I don't necessarily disagree with it on general terms. As far as specifics, I keep asking what's the alleged flaw in simply blind swapping back and forth and listening? Every decision I make from tracking to mixing is from mix position in my room on my monitors through my DAC. That's the exact spot I want to be when judging sonics. Seems the most logical thing in the world, if one wants to know if two pieces or audio are different (and if so, what that difference is) to sit at mix position and focus in and LISTEN. I can set up blind swapping with a couple keystrokes. I close my eyes and spend some time going back and forth and auditorally peering into the sonics, without knowing which is which. I do it all the time with comparing plugins vs hardware or two pieces of processing or two mics I'm comparing or whatever. It's wonderful. So many times the differences that seem so apparent when I know what's what, largely evaporate when I don't know which is which. Or sometimes it confirms what I though I was hearing. Sometimes I go blind and it's totally clear which mic (or whatever) sounds better to me. Sometimes it's the one I expected, sometimes not. I think blind ABing is essential. So again, to the group, what is allegedly wrong with it?
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Jun 3, 2017 15:15:03 GMT -6
What I heard was better imaging and depth. I'd guess this is because the capacitance and inductance of the two bonded pairs are more identical than a typical pair of cables. Media Twist is four twisted pairs in one crescent shaped cable.
My view of cables is that there is a lot of real crap sold in music stores but there is also a lot of mid-priced broadcast grade cable that is about as good as anything.
CD treatments are interesting in that they knock the CD more off balance resulting in additional servo motor activity which generates heat that can affect the clock crystal depending on how the board is laid out. This can result in the disk playing ever so slightly faster.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Jun 3, 2017 15:28:04 GMT -6
CD treatments are interesting in that they knock the CD more off balance resulting in additional servo motor activity which generates heat that can affect the clock crystal depending on how the board is laid out. This can result in the disk playing ever so slightly faster. I hadn't thought of that. But the final step in this particular treatment is "thoroughly wipe it all off".
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 3, 2017 15:55:51 GMT -6
Some things are easy to A/B swap out. With a plugin or hardware plugin it's a couple of clicks and bam! Done, easy. No time spent swapping where you loose objectivity. Personally, If I can't swap in 15-30 seconds, my objectivity is gone, and the "test" useless. As far as cabling goes, it's impossible for me. Aside from the extra $100k of custom cut and terminated cables and the two days it would take to swap out each time I wanted to swap listening, it's just not a viable test. what works on paper does not necessarily translate to what you "like" when employing ears. So....make your best guess, and move on. There are so many things that are much, much more appropriate for dumping money into.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 3, 2017 16:02:34 GMT -6
I mean, if it's truly a null to infinity, how is that possibly not the Be All End All Master Arbiter? It's the same thing as duplicating an audio track and flipping the polarity. No test gear goes to infinity.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jun 3, 2017 16:03:24 GMT -6
Ragan, I used to blind test cables, it has value. I'd also use them for anywhere from a week to a month, taking detailed notes, including time spent listening and what I listened to.
Subtleties did reveal themselves, or better put, I began to be able to notice them, and at that point it was very clear which cable I was listening to because it had a sonic signature. This was very refined listening and not something any artist or audio engineer would do normally, and highly likely something people would not notice in some blind test situation where they were in fact under the pressure of testing, often on unfamiliar systems. When you're just listening casually for days and days, sometimes a random thought pops into your head like, (those words were clearer with the other cable I had last month. or holy $#*!, I thought there was a trumpet in my living room). In my blind tests I was always able to call which one was which.
Only a few times out of hundreds was I not sure, and in those cases both products were so similar as to be almost indistinguishable anyway. One time I compared two competing cable company's interconnect and power cords. I was unaware at the time they were designed by the same person who'd left company A to start company B. It was really difficult, they were so similar, but Company B had better depth.
Also, I was listening comfortably over long periods of time on my own home system which I knew well, and that had to help with what I was doing.
Drbill makes a good point about this not being viable in most cases. That's why I recommend trying a couple of different power cords in key places, like an amp or your powered monitors. I have a high quality power cord on my Apollo, and heard no difference when the original was used. I kept it there because I had it in my closet anyway. But, try it on a compressor or your amplifier, and you may be surprised.
My rule of thumb is use upgraded power cords where you can afford it. Typically, mine cost between $80 and $250, nothing megabuck crazy, just brands I've grown to trust and like. One day I'd like to try one of Jim Williams' custom made mic cables, just to see. Wouldn't it be sweet if $60 extra on a mic cable really helped with the sound quality we all struggle with so frequently. It's worth a try is all I'm saying.
I'm not a scientist or engineer, and my tests could be questioned, and I wouldn't argue it has flaws, that's why I just keep saying it won't do much harm to try. Of course every situation and listener and their needs are different, so YMMV.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Jun 3, 2017 16:22:56 GMT -6
>>I can set up blind swapping with a couple keystrokes. I close my eyes and spend some time going back and forth and auditorally peering into the sonics, without knowing which is which. I do it all the time with comparing plugins vs hardware or two pieces of processing or two mics I'm comparing or whatever. It's wonderful. So many times the differences that seem so apparent when I know what's what, largely evaporate when I don't know which is which.<< This^ I've found that at the very edges of my ear's competency, memory plays a role. I.e. at that level direct A/Bing is essential because my ears forget what I've listened to/for after about 5 to 10 seconds, and if I have to A/B more than a half dozen times, it's just splitting hairs.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jun 3, 2017 16:26:27 GMT -6
I like it when shootouts switch quickly. I just listened to a comparison between a vintage Telefunken U47 and a brand new one this morning, and they kept the track going and every ten seconds or so, switched mics, it was pretty cool.
When I've heard a minute or more of one vocalist or instrument, and then a minute more of another, it's not as helpful, so I end up clicking back and for the to hear the same lines back to back on each mic.
Getting back to the original question asked in the thread, I think that sometimes audiophiles are hearing things we're not, because they've been trained or trained themselves to hear it. Do they sometimes imagine something, maybe, I wouldn't know.
The question itself is incomplete anyway, because we don't only hear things, we feel them too. Jitter differences might not be something you could pick out in a test situation, but you might catch yourself shutting the music off much sooner with one CD player when compared to another, so it was the way it made you feel that affected you.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 3, 2017 16:58:58 GMT -6
I can set up blind swapping with a couple keystrokes. I close my eyes and spend some time going back and forth and auditorally peering into the sonics, without knowing which is which. You can't keystroke swap cables apples to apples because they have to be going in and out different paths, and I assume there you mean different physical converter paths. 1/10th of a dB makes a difference, and adds another random layer. I haven't measured a converter yet with absolutely identical channel to channel throughput.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jun 3, 2017 17:05:22 GMT -6
I can set up blind swapping with a couple keystrokes. I close my eyes and spend some time going back and forth and auditorally peering into the sonics, without knowing which is which. You can't keystroke swap cables apples to apples because they have to be going in and out different paths, and I assume there you mean different physical converter paths. 1/10th of a dB makes a difference, and adds another random layer. I haven't measured a converter yet with absolutely identical channel to channel throughput. That's true. What I would do is run audio through cables, all using the same I/O, and then swap back and forth on the printed tracks in the DAW. Doesn't that achieve instantaneous, level playing field cable ABing?
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 3, 2017 17:07:11 GMT -6
Typically, mine cost between $80 and $250, nothing megabuck crazy, just brands I've grown to trust and like. Lets see.....power cables first. 75 or so pieces of gear....better round up to 80 to be safe and allow for future growth. 80 cables X $80 a cable = $6400 + tax and shipping. Call it $7000. OR 80 cables X $250 a cable = $20,000 + tax and shipping. Hmmmm..let's call it $23,000. So....that's my job for the weekend. Decide which power cables I should buy. Then....I'll move on to mic cables (50 X 250 ea), and after that, 24 pair interconnects (sorry, can't think that high), and finally, instrument cables. $100 X 75 of those..... So.....to outfit my studio with "mega elite cables that DO make a difference" - IF I spend months with them taking notes.... and spend probably over $200,000 by the time I get everything changed over.... OR toss the obviously spindly cables and replace them with Mogami, and power cables with beefy 14Ga cables - both of which I've pretty much already done. (There may be some spindly power cables lurking in the back of a rack somewhere, but I promise I'll kill and replace em when I see em.... I mean, I've spent probably close to $50k on wire, interconnects, connectors and power cables on the studio already - and all I've got to show for it is some crappy Mogami and worthless beefy power cables..... ********** - my mic cables are complete trash. OK wait. I just decided. I'm fine with the cables I've got. ****** and *** anything "audiophile". Note to self. Avoid Audiophile threads.....,.. Sleep better. Live life happy.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,918
|
Post by ericn on Jun 3, 2017 17:29:36 GMT -6
Is it? In the measurement we have calibration and know the resolution. In the DAW world we don't know i. If you're saying that an incomplete or improperly done null test might not reveal differences that are in fact there then yeah, of course. I was meaning if it is in fact a true null, that is precisely the Be All And End All on the question of difference, no? Even in the world of All amplifiers sound the same" & measurements show all the Null test just isn't an excepted test! Never has been never will be. It is an out growth of the cheap, everyone has one DAW world! The Null test dose not reference self noise of the Converters, Interface protocol, host computer or software! Nor the dirity secret that at a certain level lots of software " gates " the risidual noise add in any dither and what are you nulling? In the measurement world the devil is in the details , and that's where The differeance is the noise! In theory the Null test is best but we live in the real world.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jun 3, 2017 21:39:24 GMT -6
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? To answer the initial question: Yes, sometimes they're hearing something we're not. Ans sometimes they're hearing something they're not, either. You're speaking in broad generalities as far as what's "been proven time and time again" and I don't necessarily disagree with it on general terms. As far as specifics, I keep asking what's the alleged flaw in simply blind swapping back and forth and listening? Every decision I make from tracking to mixing is from mix position in my room on my monitors through my DAC. That's the exact spot I want to be when judging sonics. Seems the most logical thing in the world, if one wants to know if two pieces or audio are different (and if so, what that difference is) to sit at mix position and focus in and LISTEN. I can set up blind swapping with a couple keystrokes. I close my eyes and spend some time going back and forth and auditorally peering into the sonics, without knowing which is which. I do it all the time with comparing plugins vs hardware or two pieces of processing or two mics I'm comparing or whatever. It's wonderful. So many times the differences that seem so apparent when I know what's what, largely evaporate when I don't know which is which. Or sometimes it confirms what I though I was hearing. Sometimes I go blind and it's totally clear which mic (or whatever) sounds better to me. Sometimes it's the one I expected, sometimes not. I think blind ABing is essential. So again, to the group, what is allegedly wrong with it? As a casual tool as you describe using it, Nothing. As far as using it to "prove" stuff as done by various "true believers", everything.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jun 3, 2017 21:50:50 GMT -6
drill, I don't know how to take your post, is it meant to be sarcastically directed at me? Clearly, I wasn't suggesting someone outfit a complete full studio with the cables I mentioned. It was directed at folks here who have a small setup who are often trying to squeeze the last ounce of quality they have out of their hard earned gear.
I also mentioned that I tend to focus on only a few key components, like powered monitors, a preamp or perhaps a main compressor. In my system I need less than a dozen cables, so a few upgraded cables aren't too costly, especially since I had a few left over from my bigger surround sound systems I sold a long time ago.
On newer purchases I simply buy the slightly better than stock cables, like Mogami, Canare or Redco.
Most studios equipped with the kind of gear you must be referring to more often than not were put together over a long period of time. If you'd bought some upgrade power cords or cables as you went along, you might very well have outfitted much of your gear with higher end cables. Still, I'd bet there are some very good values out there that are much less expensive than my favorites.
I also agree that cables are not necessarily high on most priority lists for good reason. An incremental improvement isn't as fun as a new mic, but for me, good cabling equals peace of mind.
Let's say tomorrow you by a $2,500 compressor, I think it might be smart to spend another $80-$125 on a better made power chord, call me crazy.
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jun 3, 2017 22:11:11 GMT -6
You're speaking in broad generalities as far as what's "been proven time and time again" and I don't necessarily disagree with it on general terms. As far as specifics, I keep asking what's the alleged flaw in simply blind swapping back and forth and listening? Every decision I make from tracking to mixing is from mix position in my room on my monitors through my DAC. That's the exact spot I want to be when judging sonics. Seems the most logical thing in the world, if one wants to know if two pieces or audio are different (and if so, what that difference is) to sit at mix position and focus in and LISTEN. I can set up blind swapping with a couple keystrokes. I close my eyes and spend some time going back and forth and auditorally peering into the sonics, without knowing which is which. I do it all the time with comparing plugins vs hardware or two pieces of processing or two mics I'm comparing or whatever. It's wonderful. So many times the differences that seem so apparent when I know what's what, largely evaporate when I don't know which is which. Or sometimes it confirms what I though I was hearing. Sometimes I go blind and it's totally clear which mic (or whatever) sounds better to me. Sometimes it's the one I expected, sometimes not. I think blind ABing is essential. So again, to the group, what is allegedly wrong with it? As a casual tool as you describe using it, Nothing. As far as using it to "prove" stuff as done by various "true believers", everything. Well, "prove" is a big concept. I don't know if blind ABing "proves" anything. But I can say confidently that when someone believes they hear a difference while they can see what they're listening to and then when they listen blind they can't do any better than a guess I am no longer persuaded they were hearing the difference they believed they were. For my part, I think there is a hell of a lot of pseudo-science and wishful thinking/expectation bias in this subject and, for me, something solid like blind ABing is a hell of a lot less "casual" than vague impressions and anecdotal rememberings. I'm not claiming to be an authority though, just saying what is and isn't persuasive to me.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jun 3, 2017 22:17:50 GMT -6
Want to be persuaded Ragan ;-). Try this, it's a $50 test. Replace the main basic wall outlet you use for powering your system with this, then sit back and wonder why you never did this before. www.psaudio.com/products/power-port-classic/Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 3, 2017 22:19:14 GMT -6
drill, I don't know how to take your post, is it meant to be sarcastically directed at me? Clearly, I wasn't suggesting someone outfit a complete full studio with the cables I mentioned. It was directed at folks here who have a small setup who are often trying to squeeze the last ounce of quality they have out of their hard earned gear. I also mentioned that I tend to focus on only a few key components, like powered monitors, a preamp or perhaps a main compressor. In my system I need less than a dozen cables, so a few upgraded cables aren't too costly, especially since I had a few left over from my bigger surround sound systems I sold a long time ago. On newer purchases I simply buy the slightly better than stock cables, like Mogami, Canare or Redco. Most studios equipped with the kind of gear you must be referring to more often than not were put together over a long period of time. If you'd bought some upgrade power cords or cables as you went along, you might very well have outfitted much of your gear with higher end cables. Still, I'd bet there are some very good values out there that are much less expensive than my favorites. I also agree that cables are not necessarily high on most priority lists for good reason. An incremental improvement isn't as fun as a new mic, but for me, good cabling equals peace of mind. Let's say tomorrow you by a $2,500 compressor, I think it might be smart to spend another $80-$125 on a better made power chord, call me crazy. just having a little fun bro!! For audiophile applications, I have no doubts that going the extra mile on some cables or other perhiperals is an improvement. In almost every "studio" type applications of dozens of pieces of gear, it's not only impractical, it's impossible for all but 0.0002 % of studios out there, so at this point, I'll skip the audiophile threads. <thumbsup> PS - my $2500 compressors are NOT all getting $250 or even $80 cables. The amount of improvement over a $15 cable is not a good investment in sonics percentage wise.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jun 3, 2017 22:20:29 GMT -6
Want to be persuaded Ragan ;-). Try this, it's a $50 test. Replace the main basic wall outlet you use for powering your system with this, then sit back and wonder why you never did this before. www.psaudio.com/products/power-port-classic/How do you A/B test those? Never mind, I'm out. LOL I said I was leaving and the next sound you hear is the door slamming behind me. LOL Cheers,
|
|