Hi,
Your just proving your not an engineer. Of course there is a correlation
of sorts, but identical basic numbers tell you squat about real differences.
Stating the bleeding obvious, that identical amplifiers must measure
the same is tedious. I can simply state non-identical amplifers must
in some way measure differently, neither offers any real insights.
Claiming the right measurements will sort it out is very niave,
and presupposes there is such a thing as a perfect amplifier.*
Its simply not that simple when it come to amplifier sound quality
in serious hifi systems, but does get simpler the lower down the
quality scale you go and the real effect of amplifier quality.
You can say a bit about an amplifier by the numbers, a lot
more with lots of graphs, and a lot more with advanced
measurements. But you can say very little about two
different amplifiers with roughly comparable measurements
that differ in lots of the details, you have no idea whether
they sound the same or different, or if they sound different,
to you, which one of the two is actually the most accurate.
Fact is, in the end, its not just engineering, its also philosophy,
not that that is an excuse for poor philosophy and engineering,
which leads to lamentably poorly thought out amplifiers.
rgds, sreten.
* http://www.stereophile.com/solidpoweramps/806halcro/
Last edited:
SY is making a good point - live music is clean, and loud; PA systems are loud, and sometimes are lucky enough to be clean as well; home systems are clean but usually can't go loud without losing their cleanness - hence the usual offhand remarks that hifi never sounds like the real thing - because they fail on the loudness hurdle.
The normal measuring never seriously addresses getting clean and loud at the same time, hence most audio systems fail to convince ...
The normal measuring never seriously addresses getting clean and loud at the same time, hence most audio systems fail to convince ...
I think there's some confusion here.
My point is that there's a huge number of specific things that can be measured on an amplifier. What I'm saying is that if all of them are the same for two different amps, they will sound the same. That's all I'm saying.
Meanwhile, in the real world, with typical measurements, no two amp topologies will sound quite the same.
My point is that there's a huge number of specific things that can be measured on an amplifier. What I'm saying is that if all of them are the same for two different amps, they will sound the same. That's all I'm saying.
Meanwhile, in the real world, with typical measurements, no two amp topologies will sound quite the same.
Or in most cases even two different amps of the same type, brand and series due to minute component variations. Would you be able to tell the difference in double blind test? No. And not really important as double blind test have no practical application in areas that are purely subjective.
Last edited:
I agree 100% with Sheldon: if two amplifiers measure identically in every area that matters then, of course, they will sound the same. The trouble is, there is very little interest in identifying what those areas that matter are - hence, no useful measuring tools around - hence, in the real world need to rely on those good ol' rubbery bits on the side on one's head, to work it out ...
Hi,
Practically completely niave. It doesn't exist so its meaningless.
Philosophically claiming your amplifier is "wire with gain" is that
whatever faults it has, which it must have, are meaningless.
Nobody has got very far with that in the long run, and never will.
Ideallism does not touch the real problem, the affects of real
faults, and that some valve amplifiers clearly sound wonderful,
whilst being nothing like "wire with gain" and trounce some
"wire with gain" amplifiers indicates is simply not simple.
rgds, sreten.
Last edited:
Practically impossible yes. Meaningless no.
PS. I see you're in Brighton. I'm in Poynings. Hi!
Oy vey --- such a headache I've got ! Here we are again with the 10,000th amplifier measurement discussion . . .
The late Harvey Rosenberg -- unique wacky wonderful passionate triode guy -- might ask after reading this thread " WHERE IS THE MUSICAL ECSTASY ? "
Other culprits suspiciously sympathetic to Dr. Gizmo : Hiroyasu Kondo / J.C. Morrison / Joe Roberts / Gordon Rankin.
The late Harvey Rosenberg -- unique wacky wonderful passionate triode guy -- might ask after reading this thread " WHERE IS THE MUSICAL ECSTASY ? "
Other culprits suspiciously sympathetic to Dr. Gizmo : Hiroyasu Kondo / J.C. Morrison / Joe Roberts / Gordon Rankin.
I posted that earlier. (#54)
Anyone who relies on an inert piece of electronics to achieve musical satisfaction is pathetic.
It's the System, Stupid! .... sorry, 
The "ecstasy" is in the recording, and always is there ... the job of the system is to try and faithfully reproduce what was captured, without doing too much damage in areas which are subjectively important. Many system fail this, and badly too - just go to a hifi show, and hear expensive equipment mangle what was captured, left, right and centre - you would think by now people would have sorted this sort of thing out - but no, they haven't ... help!!!
The "ecstasy" is in the recording, and always is there ... the job of the system is to try and faithfully reproduce what was captured, without doing too much damage in areas which are subjectively important. Many system fail this, and badly too - just go to a hifi show, and hear expensive equipment mangle what was captured, left, right and centre - you would think by now people would have sorted this sort of thing out - but no, they haven't ... help!!!
Last edited:
Yes. It's Redbird (Peter Mulvey, Jeff Foucault, Kris Delmhorst, and David "Goody" Goodrich) at Cafe Carpe. We saw Peter with Randy Sabien last weekend and we'll see Redbird again tomorrow night.
Congrats on knowing Peter. He's a brilliant musician and a terrific guy. This is him playing a few informal songs in our library/sitting room.
Congrats on knowing Peter. He's a brilliant musician and a terrific guy. This is him playing a few informal songs in our library/sitting room.
Attachments
Double blind doesn't apply to the subjective "do I like this amp or not". It definitely applies to "does this change make an audible difference".
The absolute zero temperature doesn't exist. That doesn't mean it is meaningless. It is the reference point.
No, that is just a straw man.
I am sure a lot of people told Peter J Walker of Quad that too, back in the day.
I suggest we keep "ideal, faithful reproduction" apart from "subjectively pleasing". They are two different issues, and they need to be treated differently. Confusing the two won't help.
Technically it is best to concentrate the "pleasing enhancements" to one or a few places in the system - ideally, these days, that would be a DSP module, but speakers will always be the major part of coloration.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.