[net.audio] Modifying the Magnavox FD1040

kaepplein@amber.DEC (09/14/85)

RE: CD double blind testing...

Originally, I wrote a paragraph about how I owned the player for 3 weeks and
had become bored with it and how much distaste I had for schmaltzy crescendos
in Flynn and the BBs, but wanted a tighter posting.  So now I will go into it.
The sound was uninvolving and the thrill was gone.  Good reproduction isn't
that way. Flynn's crescendos, I discovered offended my ears more than my taste.

I'm sorry, but I don't think that double blind testing is an absolute
requirement.  After living with a piece of gear or a pair of pants you know
them and can recognize them.  The DC filtering cap change was so dramatic
that I knew there was a big improvement even with 15 minutes elapsed between
listenings.  I must admit that the subsequent changes that I made I was not
very sure if it was any better.  Theory dictated that it would be, but I
did wish for a second machine to compare with.

If anyone has any doubts about the low price of the Magnavox/Sylvania players,
the FD1040 is called the Phillips 104 in England and sells for #280 or
$370 (1.32 rate on Thursday).  An unprecedented bargain for a machine that
is made in the common market (Belguim).  This is a quality machine and noone
should feel bad about not paying a lot of money for it.

I'm going to post pointers to the two companies mentioned because I'm inundated
with requests:

The Mod Squad			Musical Concepts
542 Coast Highway 101		1060 Fifth Plaza
Leucadia, CA  92024		Florissant, MO  63031
619-436-7666			314-831-1822

These and many other interesting places frequently advertise in the back of
Audio magazine (a CBS publication).

I've continued to make some minor changes.  I did replace some of the surface
mount resistors with metal films, and I put a film cap where the DC blocking
cap originally was.  I can't say if these made much difference.

These type changes, called POOGEing in the Audio Amateur, would also improve
"hifi" VCRs, laser disk players, and stereo TVs - future projects for me.

Mark Kaepplein

Kaepplein%amber.dec@decwrl
Kaepplein@dec.arpa

ark@alice.UucP (Andrew Koenig) (09/15/85)

> I'm sorry, but I don't think that double blind testing is an absolute
> requirement.  After living with a piece of gear or a pair of pants you know
> them and can recognize them.  The DC filtering cap change was so dramatic
> that I knew there was a big improvement even with 15 minutes elapsed between
> listenings.  I must admit that the subsequent changes that I made I was not
> very sure if it was any better.  Theory dictated that it would be, but I
> did wish for a second machine to compare with.

Yes, you know there was a big change, but you also knew to expect a
change.  The placebo effect is *very* powerful.

I have seen several product reviews recently in which the reviewer said
something like "This amplifier had a sweeter high end than our
reference amp, but we were unable to substantiate this perception
during double-blind testing."