| lazyfly |
Hi forum.
Is there a major difference in sound between the two? Has there been any AB testing?
I'm tempted to get a couple of premiums and a basic to see but was after a wee bit of feedback first.
TIA :) |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| There is a difference, but it will also depend on your system and your perception.;) |
|
|
| lazyfly |
That's a perfectly understandable yet cruel answer :D
p.s read your email ;) |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| The premium kit offers more refinements, but depending on your demand and application, a basic kit might be a satisfying performer as well. |
|
|
| percy |
Could you explain in little more detail ? I am not yet able to get a clear understanding of what type of difference there really is.
In what type of demand and application will the user experience what type of difference ? |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
It will depend on the revealing properties of your system and your perception. I hear quite substantial difference, but others might not.
The sound of premium kit is more refined, more open and more hi-end. OTOH, many people who use basic kit, praise the quality of the amp.
Maybe other people can voice their opinion, as I'm quite interested myself. |
|
|
| geewhizbang |
| The premium kit is more reassuringly expensive, so it will sound better to some people. |
|
|
| geewhizbang |
If there are differences at all between the good components in the basic kit and the rather expensive components used in the premium kit, they will be vanishingly small. It is not like the components in the basic kit are substandard at all.
A lot of this reverence for expensive capacitors, resistors, and interconnects is just a religion some subscribe to here.
Most of the time, I doubt that it makes that much of a difference. |
|
|
| djk |
All food tastes the same(if you have a zinc deficency),
all women kiss the same(if you're a eunuch),
VHS and Beta look the same(to Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder),
and all amplifers sound the same(to the deaf old men at Stereo Review).
WHO?
Tell the deaf/dumb/blind kid to go play pinball. |
|
|
| geewhizbang |
Yeah, right. That's how the religion goes. If you don't agree with them, you're deaf.
I don't agree that all amps sound the same, BTW.
I also don't agree with many here that CD's sound better than vinyl. There are some ways that they do (no pops and clicks) but some ways they don't (relaxed naturalness of vinyl is way superior, though gradually diminishing as digital audios continues to get better).
You may be able to hear very slight differences with these expensive components. Or may you may not. Chance are the differences will be vanishingly small because the good-quality components in the basic kit work fine.
These same guys put a freakin' solid-state amp on expensive pointy isolation studs better suited for putting speakers on carpet when cheap rubber feet would be plenty adequate (and may actually work better, since they actually damp the vibrations), out of some paranoid fear that something in a SOLID STATE amp is microphonic.
There is often no science behind it. If something like that worked on a turntable, they try it on an amp. Since it costs more, it must sound better.
(Yes, I know that some ceramic caps can be microphonic. Tubes can be microphonic to an even greater degree. But are transistors or the electrolytic / foil caps they used in the kit microphonic ? .... probably not or you would be hearing problems with this all of the time in commerical equipment and you just don't. |
|
|
| djk |
The people that insist that there can be no difference in passive components are a religion of sorts too.
For the most part I don't use SMD at home.
On wire leaded parts, the composition of the wire and its attachment to the part, play as big a role in the sound as the part itself.
A Mylar cap with a copper lead sounds better than a Polypropylene cap with a copperweld lead (tinned copper plated steel).
Same thing goes with carbon composition resistors vs 1% metal films, and for the same reason (most of those cheap blue 1% all have copperweld leads).
I have found the plugs and termination of wire to be a bigger difference than the wire itself. Most of what I use is Teflon.
All said and done, some real progress in audio has been made by the 'fruitcake' crowd.
Edison was a good example not knowing what he was doing, but being persistant enough that he eventually got results. |
|
|
| geewhizbang |
I'm not saying that there isn't a difference between different passive components. The design and manufacturing tolerances of a component can have an effect on the sound.
But there is a certain point where you get to vanishingly small differences, or greatly diminishing returns, and I think this is one of them.
Some of us on a limited budget would rather use the $3.00 part that works well instead of some religious quality $12.00 part.
The $9 difference isn't that much but it becomes one if you are doing this with 20 different parts. We can then apply this significant savings to making better investments throughout the system such as being able to afford a $40 tweeter instead of a $12.00 one. That will make far more difference than any gold plated resistor. |
|
|
| percy |
I think geewhizbang makes two good points and I agree with both.
#1
There is only a certain point upto which an increase in cost results in a noticeable increase in performance. When 'noticeable' I mean noticeable to the human senses, not on paper. An improvement of a certain amount might look great on paper but virtually undetectable to a human. If you draw a graph performance v/s cost, it will have a slope upto a certain point and then starts to flatten out indicating that gain in performance is little for a given increase in cost. Whether you want that barely noticeable gain in performance or not is upto your personal preference. If you ask me, I would rather spend $100 for 90% of performance then spending $600 for 95% and $1200 for 98%.
Its often referred to as the 'sweet spot'.
#2
Say if you're going for a 5.1/6.1 setup using this kit, then in the end it all adds up. The cost you save by using the basic kit instead of the premimum, and instead apply the amount of saved costs towards a better speaker (or other components) then you would end up with a much better system then going with the premimum kit and lesser speakers.
However - my thoughts - if you already have or are going to have premium speakers, it might be ok go with the premium kit BUT I think the point that people often miss is that then EVERYTHING in your system should be premium otherwise it doesn't make sense.
Even if a single component in your entire system - the source(player), interconnects, amplifier/receiver, speaker wire, speakers etc - is a weaker link then it defeats the whole purpose. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| If i would be concerned with price (of the whole system), I would use premium kit for main channels and basic kits for surround. |
|
|
| geewhizbang |
If I were to be concerned about the price of the whole system, I'd leave off the surround and do the best job I could afford with the stereo system.
I still don't think most people would be able to notice much of a difference from these expensive caps and resistors. |
|
|
| mgmopar |
| quote: | | However - my thoughts - if you already have or are going to have premium speakers, it might be ok go with the premium kit BUT I think the point that people often miss is that then EVERYTHING in your system should be premium otherwise it doesn't make sense. |
I agree to a point. :xeye:
I can see going with a premium kit and lesser speakers. It is easier to upgrade speakers later then upgrade to internal component of the amp. But just like the speakers the amp could also be later replaced with one with the premium parts if more quality was desired. (hey another chance for A-B test) I guess it is always good to work toward your final goal. Even if some of the steps taken to get their don't leave the ideal setup during the process.
I have just recently ordered two basic kits with mono block upgrades, I figured for my uses at this point, they will be fine for my purpose. :) |
|
|
| thomas997 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Peter Daniel
If i would be concerned with price (of the whole system), I would use premium kit for main channels and basic kits for surround. |
That would be a good idea :).
and of course if you have the money to spend and are willing... |
|
|
| geewhizbang |
| quote: | | If i would be concerned with price (of the whole system), I would use premium kit for main channels and basic kits for surround. |
But it hardly addresses whether normal people who don't have a budget to spend on psychoacoustics, can actually hear a difference.
If you are going to make assertions like this, how about doing an independently verified scientific AB comparison. You should AB without anyone in the room knowing which system is which.
You also assume people have the money to spend on surround sound. Some of us would be quite happy to have a very good sounding stereo system for the cost of what most people spend on a bad surround-sound system.
If you do things your way, with all of these overspecced components, it breaks the bank for some of us. If such components are overkill, as I strongly suspect, then it is just a waste of money pursuing non-existent improvements. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by geewhizbang
But it hardly addresses whether normal people who don't have a budget to spend on psychoacoustics, can actually hear a difference.
If you are going to make assertions like this, how about doing an independently verified scientific AB comparison. You should AB without anyone in the room knowing which system is which.
You also assume people have the money to spend on surround sound. Some of us would be quite happy to have a very good sounding stereo system for the cost of what most people spend on a bad surround-sound system.
If you do things your way, with all of these overspecced components, it breaks the bank for some of us. If such components are overkill, as I strongly suspect, then it is just a waste of money pursuing non-existent improvements. |
I suggest you voice your concerns in this thread: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/show...9498#post469498 which is probably more suitable for that type of discussion.
I know that you like 'to think' and 'suspect', but as long as you didn't try, you have nothing constructive to add in this current discussion here. |
|
|
| geewhizbang |
Has there been any attempt at all to do a scientifically valid test of this or not? My reply on this is right on topic, you just don't like what I'm saying.
Or are we to trust your opinion, especially since the extra cost of the expensive components adds so dramatically to the cost of the unit. And you are the one selling these expensive parts. So there is somewhat of a conflict of interest here.
Then there are many other people in other threads about the gain clone, who have solid credentials as circuit designers that suggest that a active buffer for the gain clone greatly improves the sound.
I even saw elaborate tests and simulation results posted showing why this was so. This is science, not speculation or psychoacoustics. They are using either FETs, op amps or even tubes as a buffer.
Wouldn't that be a better investment than the expensive parts you are using?
What is the scientific rationale behind the use of these components? In what way do they have better performance that will make a difference in the sound?
It only makes sense that if there is a difference that our ears can hear, there has to be something that can be measured with an oscilloscope or other tool that shows why it is better.
If not, it is just psychoacoustics. Some of us don't have a budget for it. There is room for a little black magic, but it doesn't hurt to at all to do some math and have some respect for good science either. |
|
|
| Vikash |
It was just his opinion - take it or leave it. I think it's highly distasteful to insinuate that Peter is trying to profit by providing his opinion. If you read more of his posts you would know how much of an asset he his to this forum, whereas all you seem to do is criticise.
Have you built both? No one here is arguing about the well known law of diminshing returns here, or how other changes may show bigger improvements. But the question was simply about the two kits.
Lazyfly, I have just completed building two amps with basic and premium components which I will hopefully AB test this week. |
|
|
| grege |
hey geewhizbang,
To summarise you're responses.
| quote: | lazyfly said
Is there a major difference in sound between the two? |
You said: No
| quote: | lazyfly said
Has there been any AB testing? |
You said: I haven't done any.
| quote: | lazyfly said
I'm tempted to get a couple of premiums and a basic to see but was after a wee bit of feedback first. |
You said: If you can afford it, that would be a good idea, I'd be interested in your opinions. |
|
|
| geewhizbang |
That will be kewl to see what you find.
Don't get me wrong, I do like Peter, but I don't like his tendency to pile on expensive components (including nonsensical things like brass feet on amps) and claim that they sound better, but we never get any specifics why or how, other than mentioning "listening tests" that appear to be done in a way rather likely to get a psychoacoustic result.
He is also a big proponent of expensive interconnects, and as for myself I can understand how $20-40 nice cables could be somewhat better than the flimsy poorly shielded $6.00 ones, but I don't get how spending vastly more is going to make much of a difference.
Not all of us have the money to afford that kind of snobbery, especially if it doesn't actually make a difference. |
|
|
| lazyfly |
Hi Vikash.
I look forward to hearing your opinions of each in comparison.
I might clarify that though there is a fair increase in price between the two kits and no one as yet has really said if the premium is worth the extra, cost wasn't why I'd asked - at all
The reason for asking was far more innocent. As everyone hear knows you can have two different amps, same cost one more expensive or whatever. Amp A sounds tighter, faster and has slightly better soundstaging ad infinitum... Amp B: isn't sonically as defined both in terms of speed and soundstage but it's benefit is that it's perhaps a little easier to listen to over long periods.
This is what I was wondering about the two kits - not whether one is worth it over the other but whether they sound distinct enough that they almost sound different.
I'm sure I read Peter Daniel saying such a thing between panasonics and black gates and wondered if as a whole there was a marked difference that isn't bad but just different.
Cheers |
|
|
| mgmopar |
gewhizbang
From what I have read in this forums Peter doesn't try to up-sell the kits. The difference in the quality may not be noticed to all. But either does the wire quality or for that matter a lot of other things, my girlfriend can't tell if one speaker is out of phase. The kits being offered in more then one form basic, and premium. This gives the builder the choice. I defiantly believe higher grade components will make for a more stable and better sound. If you don't think their is a benefit going with higher grade parts maybe you should be writing the manufactures that are charging more $ for them to begin with. Even know I haven't bought a premium kit yet, I don't believe he makes much if any extra profit from the upgrade. After all of the upgraded components come at a higher price. From what I have seen on the prices of kits, Brain and Peter are charging a fair price for their kits and they seem to give forum users A LOT of free advice. I don't know if I would be able to here a difference. I started to look at this thread for what it was posted for "'Difference between BrianGT basic and premium" and to read what the difference was. I expected the input on it to be mostly from people that built or herd both amps! Preferably with the same setup. (speaker and power supply). Peter, I would assume has done that. This makes his input worthy of listening to. |
|
|
| Peter Daniel |
| quote: | Originally posted by geewhizbang
He is also a big proponent of expensive interconnects |
Can you back it up with some examples? |
|
|
| Vikash |
| quote: | Originally posted by lazyfly
...but whether they sound distinct enough that they almost sound different.
|
In which case I would guess no. I would expect any difference to be subtle, and that's if you have the ears to pick it up, and other equipment in the chain with good enough resolution to display it. I was straining to hear the difference between the basic kit and a relatively different type of amp (Denon AV).
I should mention that I've also added the BG 1000uf to the premim kit. You still may not get what you're looking for from my tests :rolleyes: |
|
|
| lazyfly |
Hi Vikash.
You've answered my question exactly as it was asked so I did get what I was after.
Okay so they're the same amp with subtle differences between the two that most casual listeners wouldn't pick up on - probably including myself. Cool! This is what I wanted to know :)
That there is a premium kit is definately a GOOD THING. Giving us the choice to go with something a little more swish than the stock 4 door sedan. The upgrade has leather trim, air con and fuel injection. Choice is good.
I have a premium kit setup and am getting more (when I get my butt into gear) and wondered if a basic was worth it, just because.
:D
*edit - that this momentarily turned into a pseudo-slinging match is unfortunate. And not to jump to anyones defence as they don't need it I'd add that some good points were made all round. That a premium kit is offered doesn't force us to buy it. It's simply a choice and a nice one to have. That Peter is a proponent of high quality cables or what have you is fine too, that's his choice as is ours to agree or not. |
|
|
| samsagaz |
so, looks like with premium ppl dont heard any diference, right?
:D |
|
|
| samsagaz |
using MK132 instead metal film or carbor resistences, ill hear some diference?
MK132 resistors cost 4-5$ each one, and normail resistors less than 0.10 :D |
|
|
|
