DISBELIEF...
Hi,
Neither do I, but it's a start.
As Carlos points out you also need experience in the field of passive components and that only comes, to some extend, after years and years of critical listening.
I had to do that for years as a professional and I tell you upfront that it's not something I'd want to do again.
Not for a living anyway.
Cheers,
Hi,
Neither do I, but it's a start.
As Carlos points out you also need experience in the field of passive components and that only comes, to some extend, after years and years of critical listening.
I had to do that for years as a professional and I tell you upfront that it's not something I'd want to do again.
Not for a living anyway.
Cheers,
Re: don't cry for me
So, it's not just me then.
It strikes me that nobody can really agree about whether a £3000 amp sounds different to a £300 one. I've never heard anybody doubt that a £3000 pair of speakers can't be told apart from £300 ones.
(In defence of "expensive amplifiers", though, it's a fact of life that every £1000 spent on commercial amplifiers buys you £250 worth of bits, tops. And there are other compromises; manufacturing sites don't like tweaking bias currents or matching transistors for gain. So I'm perfectly prepared to believe you need to spend many hundreds of pounds on a commercial amplifier before it reaches the "no obvious technical faults" level).
Cheers
IH
Christopher said:
So, it's not just me then.
It strikes me that nobody can really agree about whether a £3000 amp sounds different to a £300 one. I've never heard anybody doubt that a £3000 pair of speakers can't be told apart from £300 ones.
(In defence of "expensive amplifiers", though, it's a fact of life that every £1000 spent on commercial amplifiers buys you £250 worth of bits, tops. And there are other compromises; manufacturing sites don't like tweaking bias currents or matching transistors for gain. So I'm perfectly prepared to believe you need to spend many hundreds of pounds on a commercial amplifier before it reaches the "no obvious technical faults" level).
Cheers
IH
Re: Re: don't cry for me
Well... yes, very true.
Do you know the price of a 47 Labs Gaincard?! 
With speakers it's the same.
Some years ago I made a (very good) pair of speakers with Seas units, which I have on a second system.
Those Seas units I used are not expensive, but they are very good.
It happens that you only have those units on "high-end" (expen$ive) speakers.
IanHarvey said:
Well... yes, very true.
Do you know the price of a 47 Labs Gaincard?!
With speakers it's the same.
Some years ago I made a (very good) pair of speakers with Seas units, which I have on a second system.
Those Seas units I used are not expensive, but they are very good.
It happens that you only have those units on "high-end" (expen$ive) speakers.
well, yes actually
Good point Ian, and to be clear, I'm not suggesting there are no advantages to high quality amps, I mean damn it, I just built one. I just figure there are bigger fishes to fry than which cap sounds better.
Now, as for the telling how it 'sounds' by looking at the schematic that's not what we were talking about, we were talking about speaker mismatches, and I said I figured I should some day be able to recognize a mismatch between speaker and amp by looking at the schematic. And yes, I think there are many on this forum who can already do that. I'm not sure if I care to state this again but I will. Any amplifier that 'sounds' different with a particular speaker can be picked out by looking at the schematic and specs of the amp, and the plots for the speaker.
And Carlos, I'd love to drink a bottle and listen to your fine system any day. But you won't show me anything unless we do a bunch of DBLT's, and we shouldn't be drinking for that, not too mention it takes all the pleasure out of the listening session. I hear 'real' differences when I want to, but they usually dissappear when I don't know which thing I'm listenting to. I'm quite certain that 2 CDP with 20 to 20K may be audibly different, but I'd never be so bold to say that they are without listening to the 2 in a DBLT, especially if I was the builder of one of them.
I just fail to see why so many of you guys can't accept the concept, it's simple, and accepted standard practice in so many subjective pursuits, and if there are any real and audible differences they will be just as apparent double blind as not.
Carlos, you bring up a very good point. Audio is a matter of taste for you. Wine is a matter of taste for everyone. I've had some outstanding icewine, which blows me away, and served it to others who just didn't like it. Certainly a matter of taste there. But when we want to compare that icewine to another icewine, it will always be done blind. Each subtle difference being assessed, without knowing which wine you're tasting, why not do that with Audio?
'Once more around the park James'
Chris
I just thought of how to construct a DBLT for Reidel crystal, hey SY you big deaf, dumb drunk, you interested?, or you been there already?
Good point Ian, and to be clear, I'm not suggesting there are no advantages to high quality amps, I mean damn it, I just built one. I just figure there are bigger fishes to fry than which cap sounds better.
Now, as for the telling how it 'sounds' by looking at the schematic that's not what we were talking about, we were talking about speaker mismatches, and I said I figured I should some day be able to recognize a mismatch between speaker and amp by looking at the schematic. And yes, I think there are many on this forum who can already do that. I'm not sure if I care to state this again but I will. Any amplifier that 'sounds' different with a particular speaker can be picked out by looking at the schematic and specs of the amp, and the plots for the speaker.
And Carlos, I'd love to drink a bottle and listen to your fine system any day. But you won't show me anything unless we do a bunch of DBLT's, and we shouldn't be drinking for that, not too mention it takes all the pleasure out of the listening session. I hear 'real' differences when I want to, but they usually dissappear when I don't know which thing I'm listenting to. I'm quite certain that 2 CDP with 20 to 20K may be audibly different, but I'd never be so bold to say that they are without listening to the 2 in a DBLT, especially if I was the builder of one of them.
I just fail to see why so many of you guys can't accept the concept, it's simple, and accepted standard practice in so many subjective pursuits, and if there are any real and audible differences they will be just as apparent double blind as not.
Carlos, you bring up a very good point. Audio is a matter of taste for you. Wine is a matter of taste for everyone. I've had some outstanding icewine, which blows me away, and served it to others who just didn't like it. Certainly a matter of taste there. But when we want to compare that icewine to another icewine, it will always be done blind. Each subtle difference being assessed, without knowing which wine you're tasting, why not do that with Audio?
'Once more around the park James'
Chris
I just thought of how to construct a DBLT for Reidel crystal, hey SY you big deaf, dumb drunk, you interested?, or you been there already?
Originally posted by Circlotron
The part where has this little test setup measuring distortion at different levels of feedback, it would seem that even a source follower with it's 100% feedback makes unacceptable distortion because the transconductance curve is not quite a perfect parabola. What are we to do then?
OK. sorry to be labouring the point, but is a source follower with it's implicit 100% feedback any different a case than a common source with 100% feedback as far as distortion vs nfb is concerned? Intuition tells me it is different but I can't say why just yet.
The part where has this little test setup measuring distortion at different levels of feedback, it would seem that even a source follower with it's 100% feedback makes unacceptable distortion because the transconductance curve is not quite a perfect parabola. What are we to do then?
janneman said:
OK. sorry to be labouring the point, but is a source follower with it's implicit 100% feedback any different a case than a common source with 100% feedback as far as distortion vs nfb is concerned? Intuition tells me it is different but I can't say why just yet.
Yes, Graham, it has to be different because the source follower is a uniphase, single component while a common source is a phase inverting configuration and customarily used with interstage - usually global - feedback.
Wherever the loop encompasses two or more devices, the issue of phase shift becomes significant, ultimately leading to positive feedback and thus oscillation. If it only encompasses one device, such as the source follower, or a common source with resitive or capacitive feedback from output to input, then the phase shift is minimal and stability is thus much easier to achieve.
Further, it is the combination of phase shift and group delay which creates harmonics, so you'd expect global feedback to be much more difficult to tame, and this turns out to be pretty right.
Cheers,
Hugh
Wherever the loop encompasses two or more devices, the issue of phase shift becomes significant, ultimately leading to positive feedback and thus oscillation. If it only encompasses one device, such as the source follower, or a common source with resitive or capacitive feedback from output to input, then the phase shift is minimal and stability is thus much easier to achieve.
Further, it is the combination of phase shift and group delay which creates harmonics, so you'd expect global feedback to be much more difficult to tame, and this turns out to be pretty right.
Cheers,
Hugh
OT, sorry
I've never been able to think of a way to blind-test Riedel's claims. Sorry to disappoint, but I'd love to hear your idea.
I've had some of Iniskillen's ice wines (as soon as you spell it that way instead of "eiswein," I know you're talking about Canadian), which were pretty good, but priced totally out of line with their quality. At that tariff, I'll drink Austrian or German. And since I'll be in Germany next week, I think I'll do so.
In any case, reading schematics can tell you something, but not as much as running some measurements on an actual implementation.
I've never been able to think of a way to blind-test Riedel's claims. Sorry to disappoint, but I'd love to hear your idea.
I've had some of Iniskillen's ice wines (as soon as you spell it that way instead of "eiswein," I know you're talking about Canadian), which were pretty good, but priced totally out of line with their quality. At that tariff, I'll drink Austrian or German. And since I'll be in Germany next week, I think I'll do so.
In any case, reading schematics can tell you something, but not as much as running some measurements on an actual implementation.
Sounds almost like a comb filter made from a delay line??? Sort of. The filter notches are like the harmonics. I imagine group delay in a feedback situation comparable to when you aim a video camera at a monitor that is displaying the image the camera is looking at. You get many pictures within pictures until finally it looses it's mind or suchlike. Soooo, group delay and feedback huh? For a source follower the feedback path is into the source lead so as to subtract from the gate-source voltage. Is there likely to be less group delay from a source follower than with a common source?AKSA said:
nw is back!
Christopher,
I see you've read all the notes on this thread but you clearly jumped on some things I said.
I've done plenty of blind tests over the years and I can detect differences between gear, cables, etc.
I don't see what's the point.
That's what differentiates some of us in this thread to others.
Some of us (including me) think it's not possible that in a blind test you could go wrong in detecting where's de Bryston amp and where's the crappy Onkyo AV amp.
Anyway, what you claim is impossible.
With a schematic in your hand and the basic specifications of an amp and speakers you won't go anywhere.
There are so many variants you don't know...
Would you just be happy in knowing just the sensitivity, average impedance and power handling of a pair of speakers?
That's what the brands tell you, and nothing more.
You won't go anywhere.
And as for the amp, passive component quality and circuit design
is very important, and you won't go anywhere with a schematic and some basic specifications in your hand.
I actually think you changed your name and registered again.
In fact, I think you are nw_avphile, who completely desappeared for the other side of the moon.
note:
"There's no dark side of the moon.
Matter of fact, it's all black".
Roger Waters
Christopher,
I see you've read all the notes on this thread but you clearly jumped on some things I said.
I've done plenty of blind tests over the years and I can detect differences between gear, cables, etc.
I don't see what's the point.
That's what differentiates some of us in this thread to others.
Some of us (including me) think it's not possible that in a blind test you could go wrong in detecting where's de Bryston amp and where's the crappy Onkyo AV amp.
Anyway, what you claim is impossible.
With a schematic in your hand and the basic specifications of an amp and speakers you won't go anywhere.
There are so many variants you don't know...
Would you just be happy in knowing just the sensitivity, average impedance and power handling of a pair of speakers?
That's what the brands tell you, and nothing more.
You won't go anywhere.
And as for the amp, passive component quality and circuit design
is very important, and you won't go anywhere with a schematic and some basic specifications in your hand.
I actually think you changed your name and registered again.
In fact, I think you are nw_avphile, who completely desappeared for the other side of the moon.
note:
"There's no dark side of the moon.
Matter of fact, it's all black".
Roger Waters
What I'd like to know, and it might take a painful degree of honesty, is under precisely what circumstances you all have heard differences between various audio components.
For me, a thoroughly scientific and convincing procedure for demonstrating the difference between, say, capacitors, would be:
- build two identical amplifiers
- blind listening test on both amps to check that they sound the same
- change the caps in one amplifier
- blind listening test on both amps to determine if there are any changes
(Ideally, the first and second tests should be done in an order unknown to the listener, to make sure they don't know whether to "listen for differences" or not).
Anyway, my main point is that I've never done anything like the above, and few others have either. I've done the usual non-blind before-and-after comparisons, and sometimes I'm in no doubt I've heard an improvement, but I don't expect other people to be convinced by this, especially if they don't know how I arrived at my conclusions.
So I'd love to know, when people post that a particular component sounds better than another, what listening methodology was used. Purely out of intellectual curiousity - no personal criticism is implied.
Cheers
IH
For me, a thoroughly scientific and convincing procedure for demonstrating the difference between, say, capacitors, would be:
- build two identical amplifiers
- blind listening test on both amps to check that they sound the same
- change the caps in one amplifier
- blind listening test on both amps to determine if there are any changes
(Ideally, the first and second tests should be done in an order unknown to the listener, to make sure they don't know whether to "listen for differences" or not).
Anyway, my main point is that I've never done anything like the above, and few others have either. I've done the usual non-blind before-and-after comparisons, and sometimes I'm in no doubt I've heard an improvement, but I don't expect other people to be convinced by this, especially if they don't know how I arrived at my conclusions.
So I'd love to know, when people post that a particular component sounds better than another, what listening methodology was used. Purely out of intellectual curiousity - no personal criticism is implied.
Cheers
IH
NW's not the only one
Fred seems to have disappeared too. And no, I'm not NW.
I must say I'm loving the feedback discussion, I wish I could participate but for now I'll just take notes.
Yes, Carlos, I read the entire thread, I made that clear in my first post. And the examples you have given of blind tests were not in fact blind tests at all. But, once again you're talking about something different. I'm not saying you can tell how a speaker will sound from the specs, I'm saying that if you look at the plots, you can tell if it will be a tough load or not. And if you look at the architecture of an amp(not me, I don't have that skill) you should have a pretty good idea of what kind of load it will have trouble with.
I think you were eluding to the idea that if you have two amps with similar architecture and specs one may sound great and the other awfull when driving the same speakers, I just can't accept that.
SY makes a good point that to really know for sure you need to measure it. And for speaker/amp matching, you'll have a hard time convincing me that a listening test will tell you more than measurements.
Really there are some things that measureing can relate so well, but those who want 'ears' to be the final judge seem to ignore this. Take 2 class A mosfet amps, 1 is rated at 20W and the other at 200W. Which one would be a bad match with some 84db speakers? Do you think that listening is likely to change that? Obvious numbers with obvious meaning. The more you understand about the architecture and the numbers, the more you will know. Eventually, you'll know which speaker/amp combos just arent' good, without ever hooking up a lead. And if you are going to make public judgements about the sound by listening, you should most certainly do it blind.
You may think that all you want Carlos, but in order to have any credibility you have to prove it. The owner of Sunshine Audio thought he could, the guys at Stereophile thought they could, NW's buddy thought he could. But when they actually tried it, they couldn't. Until you actually do it, properly thinking it is just an opinion. And can somebody please tell me where to find a little happy face beating a dead horse?
Chris
Fred seems to have disappeared too. And no, I'm not NW.
I must say I'm loving the feedback discussion, I wish I could participate but for now I'll just take notes.
Yes, Carlos, I read the entire thread, I made that clear in my first post. And the examples you have given of blind tests were not in fact blind tests at all. But, once again you're talking about something different. I'm not saying you can tell how a speaker will sound from the specs, I'm saying that if you look at the plots, you can tell if it will be a tough load or not. And if you look at the architecture of an amp(not me, I don't have that skill) you should have a pretty good idea of what kind of load it will have trouble with.
I think you were eluding to the idea that if you have two amps with similar architecture and specs one may sound great and the other awfull when driving the same speakers, I just can't accept that.
SY makes a good point that to really know for sure you need to measure it. And for speaker/amp matching, you'll have a hard time convincing me that a listening test will tell you more than measurements.
Really there are some things that measureing can relate so well, but those who want 'ears' to be the final judge seem to ignore this. Take 2 class A mosfet amps, 1 is rated at 20W and the other at 200W. Which one would be a bad match with some 84db speakers? Do you think that listening is likely to change that? Obvious numbers with obvious meaning. The more you understand about the architecture and the numbers, the more you will know. Eventually, you'll know which speaker/amp combos just arent' good, without ever hooking up a lead. And if you are going to make public judgements about the sound by listening, you should most certainly do it blind.
You may think that all you want Carlos, but in order to have any credibility you have to prove it. The owner of Sunshine Audio thought he could, the guys at Stereophile thought they could, NW's buddy thought he could. But when they actually tried it, they couldn't. Until you actually do it, properly thinking it is just an opinion. And can somebody please tell me where to find a little happy face beating a dead horse?
Chris
Re: BLIND AND DEAF.
True. Especially if the 84dB speakers are headphones.
84dB and 20 watts wouldn't necessarily be a bad combination in a nearfield scenario. I don't know if you caught the mention of the little "Nuetrino" speakers mr_ro_co mentioned in the Sun Microsystems Gainclone thread, but they're actually a bit less than 84dB and I was driving them with less than 20 watts and was getting very good results.
No, you're not going to fill any sizeable room with 20 watts and 84dB, but power and sensitivity are relative and it doesn't pay to make sweeping generalizations.
Yup. And by the time you're up to actually USING those 200 watts, your speakers are going to be in thermal compression hell.
se
fdegrove said:
True. Especially if the 84dB speakers are headphones.
84dB and 20 watts wouldn't necessarily be a bad combination in a nearfield scenario. I don't know if you caught the mention of the little "Nuetrino" speakers mr_ro_co mentioned in the Sun Microsystems Gainclone thread, but they're actually a bit less than 84dB and I was driving them with less than 20 watts and was getting very good results.
No, you're not going to fill any sizeable room with 20 watts and 84dB, but power and sensitivity are relative and it doesn't pay to make sweeping generalizations.
Yup. And by the time you're up to actually USING those 200 watts, your speakers are going to be in thermal compression hell.
se
Blind Melon Chitlin
"Fred seems to have disappeared too."
You wish I bet! I am busy explaining voltage regulators to "know it all"s and insulting the worst offender in Japanese.
I see these thread as veered into philosophical discussions of phase margin as well. I think it deserves it's own thread. How about "Phase Margin for Poets"?
Uhh Ya!
Fred
"Fred seems to have disappeared too."
You wish I bet! I am busy explaining voltage regulators to "know it all"s and insulting the worst offender in Japanese.
I see these thread as veered into philosophical discussions of phase margin as well. I think it deserves it's own thread. How about "Phase Margin for Poets"?
Uhh Ya!
Fred
- Status
- Not open for further replies.