Seriously though "reference" equipment and environments are primarily used in audio production ... where the frequency response should be as flat as possible so that the post production final mix will translate as accurately as possible to as many different acoustic environments as possible ... 🙂
Agreed, but sadly it doesn't seem to prevent many 'professional' mixdown and production engineers putting out some pretty appalling recordings...
I am a formerly trained recording engineer (on tape) ... the whole industry took a nose dive when we moved to digital ... many have no idea of the former magic of quality tape production ... 🙁
Used to be the most boring amp in the room due yo its neutral sound in the 80's...Now it's the most pleasing one to some audiophile review magazine staff and especially its cashier.
And yes, tape distortion is king because you could use a tube based J37 to saturate the tape 🙂.
And yes, tape distortion is king because you could use a tube based J37 to saturate the tape 🙂.
Yes I'm still a complete "tube" head .... tape distortion was king!, funnily enough pro dynamic range back in the day was anything over 60dB LOL (those were the days when we tried to avoid noise in recordings not like today when there is a huge market in adding it LOL) ... I've just recently come into possession of a Ferrograph reel to reel (with great quality tape) from 1963 but it's not one of the stereo high speed models so I'm gonna turn the valve pre-amp and cab into a boutique guitar combo ... to go with my 1968 Les Paul ... 🙂
Disagree!
I have spent the last two-three years repairing, restoring and adjusting the old reel-to-reels. Many were pulled out of the recording studios and still sound simply amazing. High-enders are finally getting to a stage where, after 100s of thousands of dollars poured into the digital audio reproduction chain, are now giving up and going back to turntables & tapes. They are now paying huge amounts of money for the master tape copies. No surface noise, wow, flutter, rumble, clicks, special isolating/vibration coupling platforms - simply stunning and infinitely better than digital. However, even a 1k DAC will measure much better than a reel-to-reel. Ha!!
1/4" 2 track even added something but the real magic happened on the big stuff ... editing though done with brass razor blades rather than keyboard and mouse ... 🙂
I have a vintage Sony that was advertised as 'Extremely Standard'.
I'm pretty sure they meant that it was the standard of standards, sort of, but 'Extremely Standard' made me chuckle.
Jan
I'm pretty sure they meant that it was the standard of standards, sort of, but 'Extremely Standard' made me chuckle.
Jan
I'd say "Reference Amp" is a relative term at best. Your individual reference might be mediocre for others. There is no numeric threshold for any relevant measurement that defines a "Reference Amp". So, yes 🙂 sales jabbering and increased price tag are the main features.
Reference is mostly used as a marketing tool. What they mean is the control. The known quantity.
The amplifier that is known to be a tremendous performer, to measure better than the rest of the fleet and to always refresh the owners memory of what music should sound like.
High bandwidth, low distortion, and enough power to drive your speakers to a life like volume, should do it.
Then you can bring home other stuff, and enjoy it but it doesn't displace the "reference system"
The amplifiers I hold as my reference actually have the guarantee of performance screen printed on the side.
For reference...
A reference amplifier therefore, should have the performance guarantee printed on the amplifier itself for reference.
I wonder why more companies don't do that?
The amplifier that is known to be a tremendous performer, to measure better than the rest of the fleet and to always refresh the owners memory of what music should sound like.
High bandwidth, low distortion, and enough power to drive your speakers to a life like volume, should do it.
Then you can bring home other stuff, and enjoy it but it doesn't displace the "reference system"
The amplifiers I hold as my reference actually have the guarantee of performance screen printed on the side.
For reference...
A reference amplifier therefore, should have the performance guarantee printed on the amplifier itself for reference.
I wonder why more companies don't do that?
In the audio world, a reference amplifier is subjective and is labeled so by the manufacturer and/or owner.
Maybe so, but, lacking technical expertise, your average consumer uses the price tag (as well as brand name, advertising copy and professional reviews) as a proxy for a product's delivered 'performance' and 'quality'. This is true for many consumer products. Before you laugh, it's actually a rational, though often inaccurate, buying behavior without the expertise required to competently assess a product only on it's technical merits.
For example, how many of us electrical engineers readily know the technical and performance merits, if any, separating sodium fluoride, and stannous fluoride used in toothpaste? Should we simply trust that all fluoride performs the same (If it turns out we guessed wrong, what's to worry about one or two teeth lost to decay, right?), and therefore buy the lowest price generic brand which we can find? High-end audio and toothpaste are, of course, at opposite extremes in terms of engineering, and especially in terms of cost, but the non-expert consumer purchasing behavior has key similarities. It's quick and easy to research toothpaste fluorides via Google, but suppose it was a topic more complex, such as the significance of amplifier distortion spectra?
The products of a company with a reputable brand name also carry a reduced risk of purchasing remorse. Brands don't develop good names by leaving a trail of dissatisfied customers. For non-expert consumers, purchasing by brand name actually increases the likelihood of purchase satisfaction (of course, it doesn't guarantee that), simply because many other consumers have already been satisfied, as evidenced by that brand's good reputation.
Last edited:
Yes, and it seems quite valid to me that a 'reference amplifier' could be an objective reference, or an subjective reference.
I want an O2
As to NwNavGuy, i would be very leary of any of his designs without listening to them first, he does not seem to cr ehow they sound only how they measure (largely with tests that have little meaning sonically)
dave
That is a good definition.
Given that loudspeakers have different requirements that means there can never be just one reference amplifier.
dave
Behringer A800 has a designation, "Professional 800-Watt Reference-Class Power Amplifier". It may be better to ask which isn't a reference amp.
It's strange / suspicious to see the title of this thread in tube instruments section of the forum. 🤔
It's strange / suspicious to see the title of this thread in tube instruments section of the forum. 🤔