Publisher Profile

Audio by Van Alstine ABX Comparator Review, Part 1: Audio Store & Wiring

By: |

A note to the reader: This is a lengthy and technically oriented article, with much discussion of setup, wiring and ABX testing conditions. I attempt to keep my articles accessible to the average audiophile, but admit that this will be too much for some. If you find yourself uninterested in the mechanics of setting up ABX systems I invite you to skip sections “It Takes An Audio Store” and “How I Did the Wiring”. However, gluttons for details and tortuous setup, enjoy!


ABX testing is taboo, a subject guaranteed to make some recoil with disgust, and others secretly wish they could experience. Not many in the audiophile community get to do ABX testing, and even fewer do so in an environment where multiple systems are established and controls used to ensure consistency of results. The purported outcome of such testing makes marvelous fodder for bickering among “authorities”; the “Subjectivists” don’t seem to care if anything is measured, and the “Objectivists” think measurements are the only thing that really matters. While that is a tad cynical, it gets to the heart of the issue, whether ears or instruments are to be trusted. I may as well wade right in to this backwater bayou filled with Crocs!

ABX, or double blind testing, is fraught with vicious attitudes and ad nauseam arguments about minutia. Sometimes people are ridiculed by those who despise their perspective. Threads on forums have to be closed or pulled, warnings issued, and some websites monitor for flare-ups on the topic.

Deep down we all want the proverbial Golden Ears. We all want infallibility in assessment of sound; otherwise, why waste our time on a demo of a piece of gear? Why have more than one recording of a performance? Why invite others over to discuss our shared experiences? Why read this article? I’ll tell you why. We want confirmation that our hearing is exquisite, that we can beat the machine and judge the sound more perfectly than the machine can play it back. We want to be perfect, and know that we hear the music as it really is! Well, for most of us maybe not all the time, but at least when we really need it, when purchasing gear!

But, would you be willing to actually test it? If given the opportunity, would you sit for a double blind test, and let others, or a machine detect how well you did? Would you admit if you couldn’t pass the test, if the ABX method did demonstrate that for you there was no difference between a type of component or system? Would you put your vaunted status as a wise, experienced listener on the line for one big roll of the dice, as it were?

Such were the variety of thoughts that raced through my mind when Frank Van Alstine of Audio By Van Alstine fairly challenged me to work with his “ABX Box”. The ABX Comparator is a fancy switchbox for multiple components such that one can compare sighted or blindly one or several components. It was designed by Dan Kuelchle, who worked with Frank to bring it to market.

How could I refuse Frank’s offer? I love building systems and comparing them, as well as having had a long running catalogue of ideas about ABX, but was never able to confirm them. Would doing so put my reviewing credibility on the line? Would my ego allow for a potential embarrassment, perhaps being shown that I cannot with certainty identify sound from level-matched gear? I knew what was at stake; if I was transparent with the process and did poorly, my nearly ten years of reviewing would be fairly worthless. I suspect the fear of the implications keeps many reviewers away from the process.

On the other hand, I respect manufacturers, designers, engineers and objective types, and saw an opportunity to see just how good my ears are, and how potentially fiendish ABX testing could be. I have casually followed the Fremmer/Randi fracas and thought to myself, “I wonder if I could win such a challenge?” If you know the challenge I’m referring to, the odds are you have wondered whether you could pass it yourself. We hard-core types wish we could go into such a situation and kick some ass, to select the correct cables and leave the cable skeptics speechless.

Aside from Frank’s gentle nudging, this article is not the result of some grand challenge. Nor is it about a Saturday spent drinking and running half-assed trials. It is about one man’s sensible and serene time spent with an ABX component designed to test personal limits of acuity, and sharing his thoughts about the nature of human auditory perception. It is about self-discovery as well as discovering what might really matter to the audiophile when it comes to gear.

In the end, I learned everything matters; well, almost everything, but not as much as you might think.


What does that mean?

What kind of a statement is that? It sounds like a contradiction, but it is actually a very succinct summary of what it is like to conduct ABX tests. Unpacking the comment, it means systems, when level-matched, have discernible differences, but may not have as much difference as we tend to think. One of the things I could not get over while using the ABX was how small the differences between speakers, DACs, or cables seemed! The recurring thought was, “If there is this small a gap in performance, then why am I spending so much money in the pursuit of better sound? That is a very uncomfortable feeling when participating in an ABX test.

Is it legitimate? Are the differences really so minor? They certainly were whenever I did comparisons using the Audio By Van Alstine ABX Comparator. Conversely, it seems the thin slicing, “sweating the small stuff”, seems to have a disproportionate influence upon our psyche. We hear a fresh interpretation of the music we love and it means the world to us! Something catches our attention, makes us adore it, motivating us to enthuse about it. During this review I moved through the emotions of dismay, disgust, joy, disappointment, excitement and satisfaction. There were many surprises in store for me. Let me introduce you to the device that caused such a range of emotions.


The ABX Box

The AVA ABX Comparator is essentially a switchbox that can assess multiple sources, preamps, amps, cables and speakers. From as few as two to as many as seven components/speakers can be compared in a blind or sighted listening. The ABX Comparator is built smartly, with well-snugged sets of RCA jacks and speaker binding posts; the construction and case is solid, but not extravagant. The backside is replete with pairs of inputs and outputs, cleanly marked in bold print, albeit in crowded fashion. From left to right, the connections are three sets of speaker posts, under which lie two “splitters” whereby one can input a line level signal and have it split to return to two different sources; subwoofer In and Out; A and B “SRC” (Source) Input; A and B Amp Output. A 15 amp IEC connection is used and the unit comes with a generic power cord.

The designations “A” and “B” constitute the uniqueness of each system, and when the AVA ABX Comparator is used for comparison, one selects between A and B, which are indicated on the front display panel by green (A) and blue (B) LEDs. A host of functions programmed into the Sony remote allow for the user to remotely set both A and B systems’ level, switch between one, two or three components in the A system or B system in sighted and blind listening, and preset both systems at matched listening level for quick switching between them “on the fly” when the music is playing. Further, one can darken the display either when in casual listening or test mode.

The ABX Comparator can only pass through a signal with or without attenuation. It cannot add gain, as it is not a preamp. The volume setting steps from 99 down to 10 represent an attenuation of about 1dB to 9.9dB in 89 steps. From volume setting 09 down to 00 the full range of the attenuation circuit is used, which is roughly 3 to 4 dB per step. Only in the event of a very low signal are the steps 0-9 used. The Owner’s Manual explains that in such a way the ABX Comparator can accommodate a comparison between an extremely “hot” source versus an extremely “quiet” source, or an extremely efficient speaker versus an extremely inefficient speaker.

The user should not worry if the readout represents numbers 90 or higher, as this is not indicative of driving the amp toward maximum output.

There are several other more obscure operations, and the informal Owner’s Manual with densely worded descriptions of functions covers all the bases, but I suspect it would put a quarter of the audiophile community reading it to sleep, while confusing another quarter of them. Had I not the experience of hooking up hundreds of systems I would find the discussion of wiring systems with the ABX Comparator daunting.

4 Responses to Audio by Van Alstine ABX Comparator Review, Part 1: Audio Store & Wiring

  1. Charlie mathews says:

    I have forwarded this series of articles to some of my friends who do regular testing/listening of differnt audio components. Over all I want to thank Doug for all his work! It was a great effort. NO buts!
    I will say this that in the past when some of my colleagues and I were conducting blind back and forth champagne tasting tests between some very low cost sparkling wines (the kind you find in 7/11’s) and very EXPENSIVE French champagnes many novices were not able to discern or detect a difference among the wines tasted. WE could not figure that out….not necessarily a parallel with Doug’s finding but some similarities. All in all Doug’s article was way cool because it has got me thinking about other similar human phenomena.
    Best to you guys


  2. Anonymous says:

    The problem I have with performing ABX comparisons of audio equipment is that it’s impossible to perform without adding additional equipment which is not normally present when we connect our audio system. Any additional equipment presents potential changes to the system mitigating any actual differences in equipment we are trying to compare. Look inside this ABX switch box, I see a lot of capacitors, crappy RCA connectors (all RCA connectors suck, some just suck less than another), integrated circuits, diodes, a power supply, resistors, etc. So that ABX switch box, WITH additional cables, is going to filter the audio signal and since it’s one more piece of equipment not normally present, then it’s just going to make both sound more similar to each other.

    Nice try, but I’m not going to suggest that people think that this ABX switch box with additional cables is NOT going to be a factor in what we hear.

    Unfortunately, there is no definitive testing mythology for ABX testing and any test performed is only that test that’s performed with the people used in the test and that’s all any test really is.

    I would suggest that people download the Harmon How To Listen app first and pass all of the tests before they make any definitive statements about something having no difference.

    Let’s first focus on one’s listening skill set first.

    • Gee anonymous, some inaccurate comments there. First of all, the capacitors, integrated circuits, diodes and resistors are not in the signal path at all. Second, the RCA jacks are not crappy. Yes, they are not $100 each ones, but if we used those the cost of the unit would double.

      Note that Doug was able to reliably detect differences between different brands of premium cables he used so our ABX box can’t be doing much masking.

      The ABX box simply reveals truths about equipment differences that make some audiophiles uncomfortable.

  3. “Anonymous”
    God’s Peace to you,

    According to your analysis, the addition of any component containing capacitors, RCA connectors, integrated circuits, diodes power supplies or resistors should make all systems sound more similar to each other. That is not my finding.

    You state, “There is no definitive testing mythology [sic], but I believe you meant methodology. If you wish to not accept my findings because you weren’t in the test, so be it. It is relatively easy to dismiss findings when one is not the subject of the testing, if that’s the criteria chosen to believe the results.

    Regarding focusing on one’s listening skills, there are no special listening skills required to hear a difference in an ABX test. There either exists a difference, or there does not. If one cannot tell, then one will fail the ABX testing.

    I’m not interested in further discussion, when you conclude, “… about something having no difference.”
    Unless one has done ABX, I don’t think one is in a position to make such a declarative statement.

    Douglas Schroeder

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popups Powered By :