Oh, I agree. In fact, I reckon an amp like the Devialet is likely superior to something like (say) a McIntosh, which are considered by many to be 'high end'. I hasten to add that I don't consider them as high end. Devialet amps are also superior to a very large number of valve amps, IMO. So yes, one can consider that SOME Class D amps are high end.
Yes, brutal. The Spectra 1100 impedance is also troublesome
Acoustat Spectra 1100 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
I think your class D should have a second chance with a more civilized loudspeaker load.
George
Yes, brutal. The Spectra 1100 impedance is also troublesome
Acoustat Spectra 1100 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
I think your class D should have a second chance with a more civilized loudspeaker load.
George
As soon as every speaker system on the planet, that is difficult to drive, is magically whisked away to another universe, I will do just that. As long as companies like Wilson, Infinity, Martin Logan and many others produce speakers that are difficult to drive, then testing an amplifier that is purported to to be 'high end' should be tested with such speakers. Here's some more to think about:
Wilson Audio Specialties WATT/Puppy System 8 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
Hi Zaphod,
I think I have to disagree with you on that. A speaker designer who creates a difficult to drive speaker is an idiot. No matter what an amplifier can drive, it will sound better into a reasonable load. Why would any intelligent individual purchase a speaker that only a few amplifiers can drive, and then they won't even sound at their best?
The vast majority of high end systems utilize speakers with reasonable impedance curves. It is these systems that do sound the best (easily).
To those "designers" who create defective speaker systems, they only hurt themselves. - and the poor customers who have been lead to the slaughter by salesmen who really only want the higher commissions from selling these things. A bit irresponsible of them, wouldn't you say?
I used to sell audio systems in the 70's, a real job. I quit that when the average salesman knew less about a component than the customer who read the spec sheet.
-Chris
I think I have to disagree with you on that. A speaker designer who creates a difficult to drive speaker is an idiot. No matter what an amplifier can drive, it will sound better into a reasonable load. Why would any intelligent individual purchase a speaker that only a few amplifiers can drive, and then they won't even sound at their best?
The vast majority of high end systems utilize speakers with reasonable impedance curves. It is these systems that do sound the best (easily).
To those "designers" who create defective speaker systems, they only hurt themselves. - and the poor customers who have been lead to the slaughter by salesmen who really only want the higher commissions from selling these things. A bit irresponsible of them, wouldn't you say?
I used to sell audio systems in the 70's, a real job. I quit that when the average salesman knew less about a component than the customer who read the spec sheet.
-Chris
Yes. In fact, I try when i can to ignore what is behind A and B. But I need to see if I'm playing A or B.
I never compare more than 2 things at a time. ABX is a miss, on my opinion, too complicated and tiresome.
If i cannot ignore A and B, because I'm alone, I take only for granted what is very obvious and repeatable. When I start looking and looking for tiny microscopic differences, I can go crazy and it is useless.
I use to edit short loops of music (for they loop in rhythm), some very short, some like 12 bars of blues ;-). I chose samples I know very well, and selected for what they can reveal.
And I never spend hours on those listening sessions, because it is both boring and tiring and that is not good for accuracy.
This is the way I work when I hesitate between two solution in a design.
For evaluating equipment, I add listening experience on the long run (several days) not concentrating on the "evaluation".
This is only my way, everybody is free to do things like he prefers ;-)
Last edited:
Arnie Nudell, David Wilson, Gayle Saunders, Ron Sutherland, Peter Walker, the facelss engineers at B&W and many others are idiots? I don't think so. Poorly thought through designs? In some cases, possibly. In others, nope. Like it or not, these designers and many others have advanced the state of the art in speaker design over the years. In many cases, their designs demonstrated difficult load conditions for amplifiers. A good amplifier designer makes his/her design capable of dealing with any foreseeable load.
I can't answer that question. Why do people buy valve amplifiers? There are a great many questions that may be unanswerable.
Nope. I suggest you listen to a pair of B&W 800D or 802D speakers sometime. Both present tough loads and sound sublime.
It is certainly irresponsible of sales-people who promote many useless items to unsuspecting consumers. Stuff like expensive power leads, ByBee devices and all the other stuff. It is irresponsible of sales-people to fail to advise customers to deal with room/speaker interactions. It is irresponsible of sales-people to fail to sell appropriate amplification for the speakers used by customers.
OK.
Refs:
Infinity IRS Beta loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
Genesis Technologies Genesis III loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
B&W 800 Diamond loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
B&W 802D loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
B&W Signature 800 loudspeaker Measurements | Stereophile.com
My Nudell designed speakers are a rather easy load. It was just his bonkers models that required you get get medieval with the power
Depends on your definition of the term: "bonkers models".
Here's an impedance curve I ran on the Kappa 9 speakers a few years back:
Rage Audio -
The Kappa 9 was not a high end model by any means. It was, however, a very uncomfortable load for most amplifiers. And, of course, like most such speakers, it was not about the 'power'. It is all about the current.
HAH! Now you're talking my language. Those RS1b speakers are very serious indeed. As you correctly surmised, they need lots of room to breathe, but they also need seriously brilliant amplification. I've set up 4 or 5 pairs over the years and they never fail to delight. In fact, I will have a pair in my listening room in a few weeks, to sell on behalf of a client.
Care to share your thoughts on speakers that would shine in a smaller environment? Or, better worded, what would you choose if forced into this compromise for a listening area or second listening area.
I understand there are serious limitations involved and you might not consider that reference quality, but let’s say you were in a small study, playing much lower levels (evening, small children sleeping) than realistic presentation.
I find most of the time that I’m able to sit down and relax and listen, it’s not possible to enjoy loud listening levels through a main system in a common area.
I’ve been thinking about Harbeths or something similar. Open to modern or vintage.
I’ve found it extremely challenging to find a pair that does this well. Curious what others do as I can’t be the only person who can’t crank RS1b’s all the time.
Easy. Find yourself a pair of NEAR 10M-II. I intend to be buried with mine. Cheap as. The NEAR 10M-II is another speaker that really performs well with very high quality amplification. I think they were less than US$500.00 a pair way back when. Prolly less than a hundred Bucks now. Make sure they work perfectly though, as spares can be difficult to obtain.
(EDIT) Back in the 90s I used to retail the NEAR speakers, along with other brands. Here in Australia, the 10M-II retailed for around AUS$1,200.00. I had to be very careful when demonstrating the things, as they would easily equal or better speakers costing much, MUCH more (ca. AUS$5k ~ $6k). In fact, one of my clients who purchased the 10M-II speakers (BTW, The regular 10M is also very good too) loved them so much that he asked me to order in a pair of the much more expensive NEAR 50ME speakers. He was disappointed. Whilst they were a little better than the 10Ms, they weren't that much better. The 10Ms and the 10M-IIs were freakily brilliant.
For a more recent release, one of my mates has suggested that the new B&W 705 S2 is an absolute stunner. I haven't listened to a pair yet, but I trust his opinions on such things.
Last edited:
John Atkinson missed his calling, he should have been a politician. Time after time he writes things in a way that keeps the important people happy. Even when the important people are dead wrong.
Hi Zaphod,
In all of my 40+ years of experience in the audio field, I've seen time and time again that amplifiers perform at their best with reasonable loads. Not perfect resistive loads, just not really stupid loads. I've had to service loads of amplifiers killed by kappa 9's.
You seem to be equating a bonkers (like that word) load with extra special sound quality, yet the situation is exactly reversed. Add to that the even an amplifier that can drive stupid loads will not sound as good on those stupid loads. Rather than expect all amplifiers to even survive a load that should never have been designed in the first place, wouldn't we all be better off if speaker impedance was specified to have a minimum resistance and maximum phase angle? Anything outside of those specs would be ... defective. Still-born designs. If you were to pass such a law, all of a sudden your favorite designers would be designing good speakers that very probably sound even better.
Oh, and my favorite B&W designs were those speakers that had a plastic baffle they screwed onto chip-board (it wasn't even particleboard). Absolute garbage worse than the cheap store speakers. Yet, B&W was marked all over them. Something to be proud of I guess.
One thing about being a high end audio technician is that you get to see inside most products to see what makes them tick. Really, what they are made of. Speakers are generally where consumers get ripped off the most. Even some of the bigger brand names make junk. Bose would be another, and countless others. It's not fun when the expensive junk blows up otherwise good amplifiers.
-Chris
In all of my 40+ years of experience in the audio field, I've seen time and time again that amplifiers perform at their best with reasonable loads. Not perfect resistive loads, just not really stupid loads. I've had to service loads of amplifiers killed by kappa 9's.
Well, as an engineer, they are not only well aware that the loads put amplifiers at a disadvantage, but they are also aware of how to make the load more reasonable. So I'll stick to my original comment. They were idiots for doing what they did with full knowledge of what they were doing. And as far as advancing the science of sound reproduction ... I'd say they hindered it. BTW, B&W speaker? They don't sound that good and the "high end' of their line tends to look terrible. What I do know about B&W is that they are good at creating a lot of noise in the market place.
I buy tube amplifiers, and listen to them. They can sound excellent, but there are a lot of them that stink too. My preferred system is solid state though.
We will disagree on that point. Listening to the same electronics, that system always sounds better with speakers that present a reasonable load. Assuming the different speakers are roughly equivalent quality.
Hey! we agree on something after-all!
You just merely flipped the argument around the other way. Doesn't work that way. There are a lot of really good amplifiers out there that can't drive stupid loads. Those systems sound perfectly good with decent speakers.
You seem to be equating a bonkers (like that word) load with extra special sound quality, yet the situation is exactly reversed. Add to that the even an amplifier that can drive stupid loads will not sound as good on those stupid loads. Rather than expect all amplifiers to even survive a load that should never have been designed in the first place, wouldn't we all be better off if speaker impedance was specified to have a minimum resistance and maximum phase angle? Anything outside of those specs would be ... defective. Still-born designs. If you were to pass such a law, all of a sudden your favorite designers would be designing good speakers that very probably sound even better.
Oh, and my favorite B&W designs were those speakers that had a plastic baffle they screwed onto chip-board (it wasn't even particleboard). Absolute garbage worse than the cheap store speakers. Yet, B&W was marked all over them. Something to be proud of I guess.
One thing about being a high end audio technician is that you get to see inside most products to see what makes them tick. Really, what they are made of. Speakers are generally where consumers get ripped off the most. Even some of the bigger brand names make junk. Bose would be another, and countless others. It's not fun when the expensive junk blows up otherwise good amplifiers.
-Chris
- Status
- Not open for further replies.