I can't believe people buy such high priced amps over such cheap talk

Account Closed
Joined 2010
I stumbled over this guy 2 videos .One was 5 months ago totally unrecommending rockna audiobyte stuff for being unreliable then just a few weeks ago reviewing as a standard dac architecture one of the rockna dac:
Completely different perspective...what do you know?!
What do you know about this guy's talent of licking a**es?
Then the same guy takes on interviewing Nelson Pass while he probably thinks the diy community doesn't really count as we aren't the guys paying 10...40k $ for any amp...Does NP know the behavior of this guy or it doesn't matter anyway cause nobody outside the diy community knows how to compute this cheap talk that changes with time and intere$t$?
Well...if I am going only to COPY an expired 80's patent I bet I can make amplifiers that are better than 99.999999% of ALL the best high end manufacturer's of today for half the price of their lowest of the low entry level amplifier.Will you bet against my cheap talk just because I don't upload a new review bla-bla every 3 days on youtube or do you have actual proof I'm wrong ? I can bet you have no solid proof of that though!
 
Like Audio.png


It's like a veil had been lifted!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChrisABC
Well i can bet a 17k$ amp is much much easier and cheaper to build than a 6k telescope...there are way fewer billionaires to be interested in stars than listening to music...aThe best amps of the 80's that this guy is bashing against were 500...1500 dollars...which are about 5000 dollars in today's money.I see tons of reviewers that has no clue how cheaper those audio equipment were 40years ago...You'd pay your top dollar like 2...5000 $ for a video or a cd player as that was indeed new technology, but audio amplifiers...they were done for 70 years allready in 1980...technology was quite mature in the 80's or 90's.We only witnesses a massive rebranding of audio quality in the past 40 years of power amplification, but nothing really new and revolutionary for reproducing audio.
 
Last edited:
The best amps of the 80's that this guy is bashing against were 500...1500 dollars...which are about 5000 dollars in today's money.I see tons of reviewers that has no clue how cheaper those audio equipment were 40years ago...
High prices sell hifi equipment to those for whom products simply being expensive means they are good and have a place in their lives. Just like clothes, watches, jewellery etc. etc. I used to work for an acoustics company who, as a sideline, built and marketed a very good quality amplifier at a fair price but it enjoyed only very limited sales. When the price was increased fourfold with zero product changes it sold very well.
 
So silly. You can build an amplifier that's better than 99+% of any amplifier ever offered, for a few hundred dollars.

My Nelson Pass "Blameless" clone, which I built on a lark for almost nothing from salvage parts, isn't the best amplifier in the world but it's pretty hard to beat. It's better than anything else I have by a long shot. It only needs more power, but I could build a bigger one.
 
Well, it you have a scope with the same spec as Hubble, outside the atmosphere, it'd look the same.
Hubble images, like most deep sky images, are false colour. Usually you'd take the images through narrowband filters, Ha, OIII and SII spectral lines then fit those to an RGB palette for the final image. So, the colour is approximate, but the objects are far too dim to trigger they eye's cones, they appear monochromatic to the human eye - if you can see them at all!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrKlinky
So...the first amp i'm gonna build should be sold for no less than 10 K bucks just because...or I'd be just another stupid guy.If these guys can do that with a product worth of 500 bucks of components I have to do it better with 1000 bucks worth of components.I' d use nothing original just 60's...80's expired patents and obsolete components.I'm simply sick of striving to be original and poor...The " Me and another clone audio company" or MACAC should be the name 🙂
Anyone poor interested in a shared capital venture? If you have the cheap talk you have enough capital to get on board!
Here's its first employee:
 

Attachments

  • Macaca_fuscata.jpg
    Macaca_fuscata.jpg
    15.7 KB · Views: 73
Last edited:
It's the water we're swimming in.
You have got to appeal to the people with money if you want to sell your art.
You could also just build stuff that's cool because you want to have it. If you never expected to sell your diy audio stuff you'll save yourself the disappointment of someone elses "valuation" of your work.
Build audio equipment for yourself, if someone wants one, build them one and include some "labor" in the cost.
It's sort of foolish to get into this expecting to make money. That's how we arrived at black plastic compromise electronics in the first place...
 
Looking at yhe first video i could only understand how some well drilled polished aluminium, a bunch of capacitors, some silicon transistors and a lot of words describing it can get you a 3... 17 000 bucks amplifier...That's Industrial artistic design ...we shouldn't sell amplifiers...we should sell aluminium artwork instead.And we shouldn't add copper heatsinks unless it's sold for the price of gold.
 
Here is business plan for you: Make one good amplifier. Then make a product line based on that exact same amplifier circuit just pot it so nobody can see it, its industry secret as its the best. Target three different price points, shinier more expensive one and cheaper with cost effective hardware and looks, something in the middle ground 500$ or what ever, 5000 and 15000. Perhaps one exclusive model with 150k price tag and diamonds on it, gold bar inside to add some weight. Weight is important. You could swap coupling cap or something to affect measured response some so they wouldn't perform exactly identical.

I bet people would grave the most expensive one but then buy the one they afford to. Perhaps there is no sales at all until some paid asslickin takes place on any of the popular forums for it, magazines, youtube channels and web sites... 😀 Its silly business but some can do it. I suspect success today is anywhere else than in the audio quality/engineering, its in the marketing. Cynic, yes.

I haven't heard too many systems but I'd also feel the circuitry has been mature for long time and its just different dressings they sell. One could toe in the speakers, or drop the blinders on windows to get more change in sound than investing thousands into amplification... its jewelry, some like it, some afford it and some don't but nobody really needs it.

I preserve rights to change my mind. Perhaps there is audible difference between two good amplifiers, especially when rest of the system is true, but until then not buying it 🙂
 
Last edited:
Here is business plan for you: Make one good amplifier. ......
Perhaps one exclusive model with 150k price tag and diamonds on it, gold bar inside to add some weight. Weight is important.

I preserve rights to change my mind. Perhaps there is audible difference between two good amplifiers, especially when rest of the system is true, but until then not buying it 🙂
Actually there's quite a difference between good and very good amplifiers if you can hear it, but most clients of this kinda stuff can't hear 12kHz anymore...so it's more important if they can see the 24k gold plated tridimentional sound...Platinum is heavier, but tungsten or lead is good enough 🙂
 
Last edited:
Perhaps the people who spend absurd amounts of money for amps don't know that the music source source plus the input and output devices primarily determine the quality of sound. The amplifier is the easiest component to design. The difference between amplifiers is tiny in my ears.
Exactly - also, amplifier distortion typically 0.0something%; speakers whole numbers, often double digits. 3-4 orders of magnitude higher distortion from paper cones flapping around in a box - no surprise there then. And as you say, source material quality varies hugely.
That having been said, when comparing a no-name digital amp to an old analogue MC2 one driving Beyma AMTs the difference was readily apparent, even though I was a confirmed sceptic about 'amp sound' and was expecting none!
 
Indeed it is - it's utterly breathtaking - but is the image really 2.1/2 million times better? 😉
Diminishing returns, as in almost any product expenditure...
Of course that image was done as much as a 'wow' pretty picture for PR as for science. De-sintillating mirrors mean that ground based telescopes have better resolution than hubble at some wavelengths, which is the joy of 30 years of development. What Hubble can do that ground based scopes can't is low intensity work such as https://esahubble.org/science/deep_fields/ . So until Webb starts work Hubble can look further back in time than any other telescope in the wavelengts it operates in. Absolutely no parallel with high end audio of course other than perhaps using half a dozen 18" subs to play c
chamber music...