"What's your reasoning?" and not "What's your belief?".

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Mikeks, I will answer your question. I LISTENED TO IT, in a direct A-B test with a discrete design. I designed it into a phono stage with RIAA EQ, and I even used exactly the same RIAA network for both designs. Both measured OK, in fact I could MEASURE little difference between them. Still, I could hear the difference. Too bad that you don't appear to be able to do the same.
 
pilpul

mikeks said:


This is probably one of the most enduring pieces of subjectivist nonsense out there.

Really? It makes perfect sense to me, but then I'm a rationalist, not a so-called objectivist or so-called subjectivist.

Amplifiers are built for one of two reasons: to provide satisfaction and education for the builder or to be sold. If the former, the pleasure aspect is self-evident. If the latter, the amplifier must provide pleasure to the buyer or it will fail in the marketplace by not being bought. One can argue as to the source of that pleasure (audible things versus subliminal things), but one way or another, the amp had better provide pleasure (Pass says "entertainment") to be a success. Or, if it's an amateur project, the builder will take it apart and build one he likes. Either way...
 
Stu,

all but one will totally agree with your view, but i think the context of the familiar militant and vague one-liner was aimed at the analyzer versus target pleasure debate.

Good example is the NE5534. Linear Acoustic made a flashy pre-amp in the 80s with TI versions of the 5534. The pre had the looks like solid clean German engineering and was well received, i believe the company sold quite a bunch of them.
Mikey Gorbatjov was given a totally transparent specimen in acrylic as a present during his first stopover in Western Germany, great recipee to raise the pleasure appetite of the average customer .
Obviously the marketing aspects must have been more appealing than spending a few marks more on a different opamp type.

On the other hand, more than a few made comparisons by ear of different opamps in the 1980s by selector switching from one opamp type to another in the same circuit layout.
And to notice that even the sound of different manufacturer types of the NE5534 sound different.
Despite measuring the same in the same setup, a Philly 5534 is a less rotten opamp than the Texas Instruments version.
Just as the Burr Brown version of the OP27 made a big difference compared to the PMI product.

The sensitivity of the customer pleasure button to marketing influences never seizes to amaze, especially the filled pocket type of consumers are the total opposite of the homo economicus.
My personal experience with major money spenders scores a vomit response 9 out of 10, be it an audio product or stuff that costs a great deal more.
 
Jacco,

My personal experience with major money spenders scores a vomit response 9 out of 10, be it an audio product or stuff that costs a great deal more.

But then, you take an intellectual pride in bang for the buck. Not all comers are interested in applying the careful thought to achieve this goal......

Takes all types, as our 'militant one liner' will attest......:clown:

Cheers,

Hugh
 
No. Pick any amp manufacturer. They build their amps, put them in a box, ship them to a user (or a supplier to a user), who gives them money for it. That's called "being sold" here in American English. If there's a different term for it in British English, I'm unaware of it.

diyers have a different motivation. That's education and entertainment, not sales.
 
That's called "being sold" here in American English...diyers have a different motivation. That's education and entertainment, not sales.

Good grief! No. The individual at the end of the sales chain or the one that built the amplifier do so in the final analysis to amplify a signal. That is the ultimate intention of owning or building an amplifier.:p
 
Last edited:
Good grief! No. The individual at the end of the sales chain or the one that built the amplifier do so in the final analysis to amplify a signal. That is the ultimate intention of owning or building an amplifier.:p

Well, the indecently priced SET monoblock amplifies as much as dime integrated chips (technically speaking I mean). Might include my own cherished-better-than-anything-out-there-design.

As much as a Lamborghini Diabolo drives you from A to B like a cheap Asian import. Might include my own custom-super-tuned-up-exclusive-truck.

Yet there are individuals willing to foot the (expensive side) bill in both cases. Must be something about self esteem, desire to show off or whatever you like. Old as Humanity.

Rodolfo
 
Mr Rodolfo,

would you not rather choose to be young and excessive human again ?

Of course,

Besides, I meant self esteem also in the sense of that cozy feeling looking at - listening to your own audio system creation.

Then again, I could probably relate to some feelings about driving a Ferrari.:cool:

Rodolfo
 
Amplifiers are built for one of two reasons: to provide satisfaction and education for the builder or to be sold. If the former, the pleasure aspect is self-evident. If the latter, the amplifier must provide pleasure to the buyer or it will fail in the marketplace by not being bought. One can argue as to the source of that pleasure (audible things versus subliminal things), but one way or another, the amp had better provide pleasure (Pass says "entertainment") to be a success. Or, if it's an amateur project, the builder will take it apart and build one he likes. Either way...

Mike: I've emphasized the word that you've seemingly been missing and repeated the context. I have no idea what you're getting at other than to argue for argument's sake (highly uninteresting).
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.