[carboy]

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

I truly believe Audiophile is an overused and much abused term.

This is what I read somewhere -
- A music lover is someone who loves music.
- An audiophile is someone who loves his stereo.

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

But speaker wire? Take cheap dirty speaker wire - like the kind that comes free-in-the-box of cheap car speakers. Now take any good speaker wire from a decent brand.
The difference is clear. This I agree with.

But given the same system, same hardware, same line-level cables and same level - the difference between decent speaker wire from a good brand and good speaker wire from a good brand is something very few people can point out.

I am not always one of them.

Here is a site about expensive wires - Speaker Wire

[HotChillyPepper]

From my experience designing an accurate Powersupply is the toughest job... If your powersupply designed well and noise free, 70% of the total work is done

Originally Posted by tsk1979

from whatever communitcations engineering I have done, designing an amplifier is much more complex than designing a shielded cable.

[sk456]

Originally Posted by carboy

This is what I read somewhere -
- A music lover is someone who loves music.
- An audiophile is someone who loves his stereo.

How about an insane combination of both.

[navin]

Originally Posted by panky12345

Ok 2-3 "audiophiles" have already posted in, but no conclusive answers to the test yet.....

read post 26. I said that under certain controlled conditions one can tell the difference. Unfortunately we are not always subjected to those controlled conditions.

[navin]

Originally Posted by sk456

My only advice as a very novice music lover would be to start hearing good music.

how about live music?

Originally Posted by gunbir

The only AZaudiocomp ports available here are the FLARED versions.

While a regular port costs $6 the flared Aero port costs $20.

Flared ports have their applications (see my opinon after hydra's post) and should cost 3 times as much as a regualr port.

However if I needed to reduce the venturi effects of a non flared port "straw stuffing" would have been an option.

Originally Posted by hydrashok

BTW, I have used that 850/-port and I have felt how different my (old) sub sounded. I listened to that sub for about 2 years with a "Rs.9 port", and then I listened to it with this Rs.850/- piece of plastic.

It does depend (in my opinion) on the location of the sub and the port vis-a-vis the listener. if the sub and port are facing the listener as in many home audio applications the effects of a flared port (or rather the lack of "effects in a flared port) are audible. However if the sub is in the trunk and the listener is i the cabin I am not sure if the same effects are as discerable.

Since I have not compared a sub with a flared port to one without while I am in the cabin and the sub is in the trunk, hydra I would like to know your expereince. Did you notice the difference when you were in the cabin? Was it a blind test (did you know which port was being used?)?

[carboy]

Originally Posted by navin

read post 26. I said that under certain controlled conditions one can tell the difference. Unfortunately we are not always subjected to those controlled conditions.

Why doesn't the manufacturer conduct double-blind tests to prove it?

[Bass&Trouble]

Originally Posted by hydrashok

BTW, I have used that 850/-port and I have felt how different my (old) sub sounded. I listened to that sub for about 2 years with a "Rs.9 port", and then I listened to it with this Rs.850/- piece of plastic. And I definitely appreciated the difference. So did others, who did not know what change was made in the equipment. If I ever go back to using a ported design, I will use that Rs.850/- port.

I didn't know you can get ports for as little as Rs. 9/-. Even the extruded PVC drainage tubes that can be used as ports cost more than that in 4" diameter unless you were using a very short length which is again not possible if you were using a 4" dia port. And if you were using a port smaller than 4" then it must surely sound bad since as a thumb rule, a 12" sub needs a 3-4" port. Hence, there is a good chance that the new port you used, suited the existing enclosure and the then existing old sub much better than the older port in case the diameter and/ or length of the new one was different from the old one. Otherwise you are truly golden eared, which is indeed an enviable gift. Also, I think I could be reasonably sure that the old sub that you had probably didn't even come with T-S parameters so that you could scientifically ensure that you have correct box volume and port length. I could be wrong here.

My point is that it is not fair to compare ports on the basis of prices. A port is pretty much a port, just a rigid piece of plastic that needs to be firmly and correctly affixed to the enclosure in concern in the appropriately calculated length and diameter. There isn't much more to it. I agree a flared port is better than one that isn't and scientifically so. But a 9 Rs. flared port will be every bit as good and effective as a 9000 Rs. flared port if it fits the preceding description.

Another thing is, there will not be a day and night difference between a flared port and a regular one. More like day, and a bit later that day. Also, the effect of port chuffing will be most prominently heard only when the port action is maximum. Plus, good luck with hearing the difference when the enclosure with a regular port is placed in the trunk of a sedan where the trunk is completely sealed off from the cabin.

Not trying to bash you, or anyone else, and last of all any brand here sir. Just what I think is my understanding of ports.

[hydrashok]

Originally Posted by navin

Since I have not compared a sub with a flared port to one without while I am in the cabin and the sub is in the trunk, hydra I would like to know your expereince. Did you notice the difference when you were in the cabin? Was it a blind test (did you know which port was being used?)?

Yes, Navin, I was in the cabin. And the sub was in the boot (open to the cabin -- I drive a hatchback). It was not a blind test -- I did know about the change in the port.

And it was not a test as such where I was comparing the two back-to-back, to identify any difference. The port was changed and I listened to the sub, that was it. You know how it is, when you do something to some part of the ICE, and you listen for a difference? This was how it was.

The difference I felt was in the lack of a "lengthening" or the lack of a windy elastic-like "extension" of some bass-notes (that the "local" port used to make, and that I did not like hearing). I specifically felt the difference in Madonna's "Music" (I used to listen to that one a lot then, and used it to check the bass-worthiness ).

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

I didn't know you can get ports for as little as Rs. 9/-.

My mistake, I intended to write "Rs.90" as mentioned in akg's post. That is why I put it in quotes in my post.

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

Hence, there is a good chance that the new port you used, suited the existing enclosure and the then existing old sub much better than the older port in case the diameter and/ or length of the new one was different from the old one.

It was a 3" port, that replaced one of those local PVC ports -- the kind that PA speakers use, and that can be bought from most electronic shops. And yes, the new port length was at least 1" longer.

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

Otherwise you are truly golden eared, which is indeed an enviable gift. ...

Nope, I'm not. And those ears would be more of a curse than a gift, I guess: Nothing would ever sound good enough

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

My point is that it is not fair to compare ports on the basis of prices. A port is pretty much a port, just a rigid piece of plastic that needs to be firmly and correctly affixed to the enclosure in concern in the appropriately calculated length and diameter. There isn't much more to it. I agree a flared port is better than one that isn't and scientifically so. But a 9 Rs. flared port will be every bit as good and effective as a 9000 Rs. flared port if it fits the preceding description.

Agreed. As I mentioned before, I intended to quote from an earlier post, and the point I was making was more toward my personal opinion about the port of the brand that was being bashed.

Originally Posted by Bass&Trouble

Not trying to bash you, or anyone else, and last of all any brand here sir. Just what I think is my understanding of ports.

I know you're not the bashful sort, though you maybe beginning to get a bit portly

[Sam Kapasi]

Originally Posted by carboy

Why doesn't the manufacturer conduct double-blind tests to prove it?

Somehow I suspect that may actually prove to be detrimental to the manufacturer - especially in the case of unjustifiably high end cable.

[tsk1979]

Note from mod: Guys, hold your horses. No need to go into a flamewar here. A word of advice to everyone. you can say safely which brand you didn't like. Its your opinion which is very subjective.
DO NOT talk in riddles and speculation, this will again take this thread offtopic. And do not make veiled taunts at anybody. This is not a Lobbying section with camps, its the ICE section, please respect that

[Bass&Trouble]

Originally Posted by hydrashok

The difference I felt was in the lack of a "lengthening" or the lack of a windy elastic-like "extension" of some bass-notes (that the "local" port used to make, and that I did not like hearing). I specifically felt the difference in Madonna's "Music" (I used to listen to that one a lot then, and used it to check the bass-worthiness ).

Fun song, I used to love it at one point of time too. The twang in the bassline is a good test for how well the midwoofers and the sub integrates. Plus, Ali G rocks.

Originally Posted by hydrashok

My mistake, I intended to write "Rs.90" as mentioned in akg's post. That is why I put it in quotes in my post.

Oh sorry, really did not notice those indications.

Originally Posted by hydrashok

It was a 3" port, that replaced one of those local PVC ports -- the kind that PA speakers use, and that can be bought from most electronic shops. And yes, the new port length was at least 1" longer.

Just as I had guessed. Even an inch longer is a whole different ball game.

Originally Posted by hydrashok

I know you're not the bashful sort, though you maybe beginning to get a bit portly

I was really hoping you wouldn't take me in any wrong way, and I'm very glad you haven't.. just as expected. Love the hydrash spirit, ok?

[navin]

Originally Posted by carboy

Why doesn't the manufacturer conduct double-blind tests to prove it?

Originally Posted by Sam Kapasi

Somehow I suspect that may actually prove to be detrimental to the manufacturer - especially in the case of unjustifiably high end cable.

Actually a few manufacturers have does exaclty this. However the results are never conclusive reasons:

1. the tests work better with certain speakers and certain music. for example try comparing Kimber 4VS to Nordost Flatline Gold (doubled up) using Lowther PM 6A drivers in a horn and using acapella and baroque vinyl played on a Kuzma Stabi XL via a 807 tube amp would yield one set of results and

2. Similarly using a rather different setup using a Denon DP500M (later day version of the venerable 62M/47F) with an Ortofon MC mated to a custom 3 way using ScanSpeak and Seas drivers powered by a Rowland Concerta to listne to Alan Parsons (Eye in the Sky), Pink Floyd (Dark Side), Jethro Tull (Think as a Brick) etc...would yieild different results.

Every component in the signal chain including the power supply (check out the number of people who have upgraded their Maratz CD 63Ki's DACs, Power supplies, HDAMs, etc...) can make a difference. Unfortunately at these levels the tests are not easily repeatedly reproducable to justify a scientific GO/NO-GO verdict.

Some moons back I took a pair of Infinity car speakers and tweaked their upper midrange to suit my tastes. On paper the differences were barely 0.5db and never exceeded 1db. The freq. band covered by the tweak was barely an octave and a half (1-3K). The phase response was changed a triffle keeping pass band phase to barely exceeding 45 deg. (any less and I would have put the tweeter in the path of probable damage). Now can I hear these differences on all my music. NO. On some well recorded, suitably mixed, music that had complex passages in this band. YES. If I am alone and my attention is on the music and not on the traffic.

Can I say that the tests would be replicable if Sam or Bass and Trouble (people with very good ears) would give it a listen. NO. Why. Since I have simualted the changes on the computer I have a fair idea what to look for. If Sam or B&T did the same to their systems I would be hard pressed (if not find it impossible) to tell the differences. Is all this effort worthwhile. Now that answer is in the ear of the beholder!

Originally Posted by hydrashok

I did know about the change in the port...You know how it is, when you do something to some part of the ICE, and you listen for a difference? This was how it was....It was a 3" port, that replaced one of those local PVC ports -- the kind that PA speakers use, and that can be bought from most electronic shops. And yes, the new port length was at least 1" longer.

What was the length difference in percentage. 20%? That is very signifant to the tuning. I wont be surprised if the new port tunig suited your music better. Switch to AC/DC and see if the old port sound better.