Agree with SY. Unless an amp is faulty, its impact on soundstage is non-existant. Soundstage happens on the loudspeaker/listening room interface.
Given how miserable the separation and crosstalk are in phono cartridges, yet people praise them for "soundstage" (however one defines that poorly defined term), amps aren't even close to being in the picture. Zero evidence otherwise. You have to deliberately design in some out-of-phase crossfeed to make an audible difference- that's the basis for effects boxes like the infamous Carver Sonic Hologram, the Dynaquad adapter, and for headphone guys, the marvelous Smyth A8 Realiser.
I'm a freak for accurate imaging and room acoustics reproduction, and as vac says, it's the speakers and listening room that are critical.
(edit: And, of course, the recording!)
I'm a freak for accurate imaging and room acoustics reproduction, and as vac says, it's the speakers and listening room that are critical.
(edit: And, of course, the recording!)
That certainly is what he's saying, both in theory and in his personal experience.
Originally Posted by jan.didden
Nobody is so stupid to categorically state 'all amplifiers sound the same'.
That has been said here, just a few pages back.
"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......
Now we can start talking about the differences and naming them. We can't act like we get here every day, because when we're talking about amplifiers,
this step doesn't exist...so why talk about all the things that can be noticed during this step if they're all complete garbage that can't even reliably
be identified to exist outside of the audiophile's brain in the first place?
is it unreasonable to make a logical assumption that different amplifier configurations (ie: power supplies, devices, circuits and topologies) might have
different effects on this sonic attribute? In a properly working amplifier, no. One would have to start with a broken amplifier
The first would be admitting to ourselves that any electrical component that changes the signal enough to slant it toward any of these attributes
by definition makes it broken.
why would I spend 10 grand on an amplifier, when all someone has to do is put a sheet up in front of it and I can't tell it apart from a sam's club AV receiver?"
Those things are accurate quotes. "All amps sound the same" is your conclusion, not what anyone who knows better actually said.
Sort of, but not quite. Wasn't there a caveat in there about clipping and bizarre loads? Let me look.... yup, it's there.
Sort of, but not quite. Wasn't he talking about competently designed amps? Let me look... yup, it's there, too.
That's the problem with substituting your own conclusions for what people actually say.
No, that's a straw Man of his argument.
No one can tell COMPETENT (emphasis on competent, meaning amplifiers with a flat response, very low distortion and noise, high input impedance, low output impedance, that doesn't oscillate or clip during the test) amplifiers apart just by their sound (ie, in a double blind or abx test).
Enviado de meu GT-I9505 usando Tapatalk
Exactly! That's why ears-only testing is sooo important if your serious about getting to the bottom of it.
jan
So I guess if the same speakers in the same room with the same recording make a different soundstage then one of the amps must be broken, but which one? I prefer the one with the bigger and more stable imaging even it's broken 😀
Last edited:
Assuming that you've matched levels and frequency response between the two and have made this determination ears-only, the one whose output doesn't match its input. You'll have trouble finding two amps like that, however- I've been doing this stuff for nearly half a century and I wouldn't have the foggiest idea of where to find them.
Then you want an effects box, not a neutral amplifier. Nothing wrong with that. There are plenty of options out there for you (not among amps so much as system add-ons). This can even be accomplished with DSP, which is going to be the simplest and most reliable way to accomplish your goal.
Why are you making the assumption that one of the amps output doesn't match the input? Are making the claim that two amps with the same published specs you have described previously cannot have a different soundstage?
Because they sounded different. If both outputs match the same input, they will sound identical unless one invokes magic.
No. Published specs are irrelevant. Actual measurements are relevant.
What does THAT mean?
BigE said:
Soundstage, etc belong in the realm of psycho-acoustics. FR, THD etc are about electronics. An ideal amp would have infinite bandwidth and zero THD, noise. With infinite bandwidth comes infinite slew rate. It's power supply would have zero ripple, and it would sag 0 VDC under load. IMO, that is pretty clear that those would be properties of an ideal amp. None of these are psycho-acoustic properties.
The problem with "measuring psycho-acoustic properties" is two fold:
1) There are no instruments to make the measurements, as there are with electronics.
2) People are very suggestible, and their opinions are notoriously unreliable.
eg. In the past, when I "believed" that 'everything makes a diffeference' (even cabling), there was one evening when a certain DIY cable was thought to be the best of the bunch we tested. Another evening that very same cable was thought to be terrible -- in the same system. Never mind that we were peeking.
Because if you have two amplifiers that both pass a signal through them unchanged within the limits of audibility, and the only way to detect a difference is knowing which one is playing with your eyes, then the amplifier isn't responsible for the perceived change.
You shouldn't need anything but your ears to tell the difference in an audio device. Most of this hoopla comes from
marketing , and it's disgraceful, imo, not just because of the obvious, but because it causes issues just like what we've got in this thread. People buy a fancy new amplifier because they've been told it's got this and that characteristic, so the user expects this.Watch that video again, but instead pretend that seeing the person's mouth make the "da" shape, that's a salesman saying "this has better imaging and a smoother midrange." Then you play the amplifier, and you hear "da" (better imaging and smoother midrange) when the whole time, the only sound that was happening was "ba".
What makes measurements actual? What is the universally agreed upon method, equipment, environment and resolution? Please review my posts on page 38 and 43 about the caveats and assumptions made with measurements..
Last edited:
+1.
Only on single mic's live from the floor recordings do you have a real soundstage...
In modern recordings, with electric instruments, (guitar/bass/keyboards), where vocals and drums are recorded independently in different spaces, the whole notion of soundstage is a fabrication -- what we are listening to is the reverb applied by the recording engineer.
An amp that would bring with it a cavernous soundstage would be a reverb unit.
Render unto Caesar what is Caesars.... if you want big soundstage, get a reverb unit.
That they're done with a measurement device that can't be marketed, tricked or lied to, like a human can be.
Ok, so you can't tell amplifiers apart, unless you can, and you get to define which amplifiers.
I get it. We're in a Monty Python sketch. I'm outa here.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.