And for a great number of years...possibly still today, there's $10,000 on the table for anyone who can identify it, and the $10,000 was never won, despite being tried for many, many, many times.
I don't think anyone is saying that all amplifiers are electrically the same, but when there's serious money on the table for anyone willing to prove any of the claims that go on for pages and pages in this very thread.
It starts to get irritating....and not really arguing, I enjoy arguing sometimes, but when people just refuse to acknowledge some of the more serious facts being discussed, then it goes from what should be a productive argument into just face-slamming into keyboards.
If I believed all the people in this thread who claim sonic characters from amplifiers that are easily and readily discernible, then we should have a lot more $10,000 winners than we have.
Which is zero. Money still there, folks.
Thanks for address those 1 by 1, Jan.
If an amp can maintain very low levels of distortion across its frequency range, and thru its usable power range (not clipping) then I would also say that the distortion doesn't matter.
Testing these things and publishing the results is important.
Ditto the amp's behavior into complex and difficult loads. Driving a pair of Magnapans is not the same as driving double stacked Quad ESL. 😉 Knowing how an amp may behave into those loads is important.
IME, many of these amplifier characteristics can easily be measured. They have a lot to do with how an amp sounds. More specifically, how an amp-speaker combo sounds.
I think that not discussing those things is a disservice to amp builders.
Newb: "My amp is weak and has no bass"
Us: "No surprise! The PSU transformer is undersized and you are driving 2 ohm speakers."
Newb: "But it measures flat"
Us: "At 2.83 volts into 8 ohms, yeah"
If an amp can maintain very low levels of distortion across its frequency range, and thru its usable power range (not clipping) then I would also say that the distortion doesn't matter.
Testing these things and publishing the results is important.
Ditto the amp's behavior into complex and difficult loads. Driving a pair of Magnapans is not the same as driving double stacked Quad ESL. 😉 Knowing how an amp may behave into those loads is important.
IME, many of these amplifier characteristics can easily be measured. They have a lot to do with how an amp sounds. More specifically, how an amp-speaker combo sounds.
I think that not discussing those things is a disservice to amp builders.
Newb: "My amp is weak and has no bass"
Us: "No surprise! The PSU transformer is undersized and you are driving 2 ohm speakers."
Newb: "But it measures flat"
Us: "At 2.83 volts into 8 ohms, yeah"
Well maybe not "Nobody". 😉
But over the years on this forum there have been claims that amplifiers that measure the same will sound the same. A reasonable statement. But what is "measure the same"?
What measurements, and under what conditions? When asked that, the answer begins to slide.
Yes, I believe so, but some seem to view audio as a tool to assert their manhood. This recalls the old saying, you either talk about it,
or you actually do it. Doing it is a lot more fun.
Last edited:
That is not an interesting notion to me, nor likely the bulk of those here.
I still do not see you addressing my comments that a straight wire with gain would meet your "criteria". In other words, there is no discussion here. You are merely promoting your agenda to the exclusion of all reason. That, by definition, is trolling.
BigE
Well, maybe so but tailoring sound to a preference may very well be the future of audio and M Gregg hints why this might become so.
DrDyna
Well, maybe so but tailoring sound to a preference may very well be the future of audio and M Gregg hints why this might become so.
DrDyna
Like when you rehash the same argument and ignore the caveats about AB/X tests presented on page 3?
Last edited:
My guess as to why "tailoring of sound preference" rears it's ugly head is due to room acoustics. The "tailoring" is more than likely just room correction. That is independent of amplifier properties.
"I have to say that I've done lots and lots of comparisons over the years, and have never been able to attribute anything to an amplifier, except the obvious, like wildly underpowered amplifiers driving low impedances at high levels...even with salesman coaching. "
"Yeah, it sounds the same as the Marantz, the same as my Yamaha HTR-5960, the same as my Behringer EP2000, the same as my old Anthem and Acurus / Aragon amps, the same as a Parasound I once had, the same as a Pioneer SC75 I had for a couple days, the same as my Onkyo NR-609.."
From DrDyna posts.
Last edited:
BigE
Well, maybe so but tailoring sound to a preference may very well be the future of audio and M Gregg hints why this might become so.
DrDynaLike when you rehash the same argument and ignore the caveats about AB/X tests presented on page 3?
The only "caveat" with blind ABX testing is it makes audiophiles look stupid.
Yes, these amplifiers that I own or have owned all sound the same when driving my speakers at reasonable levels.
This isn't a categorical statement, it just means I would fail the ABX testing, just as a thousand other people have, just like you would, and everyone in this thread.
If you want to create a silly testing condition with a crazy load, crossovers with dead shorts at certain frequencies, then no, I'd imagine in that scenario, the EP2000 and the big Aragon would probably be the superior choice, but if we have to create butt-awful conditions so that we can go "See, look I was right.." then...you really aren't right.
I don't blame people for crapping on the ABX test, I mean, do we seriously expect that anyone is going to be like..."You know what, I was wrong."
Some of have done exactly that. If you're interested in finding out the truth rather than satisfying an ego itch, it can be very enlightening and allows you to focus on important issues.
Of course, that only matters for those of us who actually design and build things. It is not useful for generating gas for internet posting.
Of course, that only matters for those of us who actually design and build things. It is not useful for generating gas for internet posting.
I accept what you say they all sound the same to you..
So I have to ask the question...why did you continue to buy more amps?
Was there something wrong with the system you thought you could correct by changing the amp?
Regards
M. Gregg
One more question,
Which amp do you prefer? because you should have no preference..
This might be interesting..is it a long term thing..ie you have a preference over a long period in your system..is there some slight irritating thing that makes you reach for the off button after several hours of listening?
I'm not saying they are out of spec or anything else..however sometimes a system can be revealing something in the recording you don't like.
Bass to low, high frequencies that are there but you find it hard to listen to over long periods.
But if you listen over a shorter period you would not be able to tell..maybe the reverse of the above etc
Regards
M. Gregg
Which amp do you prefer? because you should have no preference..
This might be interesting..is it a long term thing..ie you have a preference over a long period in your system..is there some slight irritating thing that makes you reach for the off button after several hours of listening?
I'm not saying they are out of spec or anything else..however sometimes a system can be revealing something in the recording you don't like.
Bass to low, high frequencies that are there but you find it hard to listen to over long periods.
But if you listen over a shorter period you would not be able to tell..maybe the reverse of the above etc
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
BigE
I don't think the relationships of speaker and amp are so easy to separate and that is a good thing for the purpose of the framework because it gives us a way to change an electrical attribute where it is relatively easy to measure (the amp) and correlate it to what we hear in the room.
Bob Katz, engineer of the Chesky recordings, offered this observation at an AES meeting:
"It is important to realize that ABX tests and psychoacoustical studies and FFT measurements and subjective listening tests are each
one-dimensional attempts to describe or analyze our experience of music listening. But music listening is a holistic, multidimensional
experience that includes emotions, reactions, and involvement in the music. As scientists, it is important for us to remain cognizant
of the fact that we are always looking through a small window on a very complex experience and to remain forever skeptical of our
own conclusions and methods and as well as remain open-minded about the conclusions of others."
nezbleu
Primarily because of their mechanical/dynamic nature and their poorer immunity to environmental influences.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.