Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!mcnc!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!ron
From: ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: CD players
Message-ID: <11221@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 4-Jun-85 16:57:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.11221
Posted: Tue Jun  4 16:57:01 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Jun-85 06:46:29 EDT
References: <11172@brl-tgr.ARPA> <3804@alice.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 22

> > Each one of these DEC's sounds different.  Noticeably the TECHNICS
> > has a brighter EQ than the Meridian, which is also different than
> > the NEC.
> 
> Interesting.  Can you tell us: (a) what precautions you took to
> match the levels of the three players accurately, and (b) whether
> or not the percieved differences remained when the listeners did
> not know in advance which machine they were hearing?

The listeners did not know in advance which machine they were listening
to.  We had the capability of hooking any two of the decks up at the
same time.  The tests done were MERIDIAN vs. NEC and MERIDIAN vs. TECHNICS,
as it was the MERIDIAN we were trying to evaluate.  It was easy to tell
one from the other during the test (but not which was which since the
person working the a/b switch didn't show the listener).  We attempted
to match up the NEC and the MERIDIAN by ear, admittedly the slight
level difference would cause problems but, in any case, anyone who would
evaluate these would admit that that was not a problem in this case.
The tests were done by syncing identical CD's in both players and having
a third person work the a/b switch.

-Ron