What's don't produce audible distortion?
Can the THD CCIF SMPTE multitone represent real world music content?
Can a resistor with heatsink represent real world speaker loading?
As for what is better sounding, conduct MUSHRA experiment perhaps can answer your question.
Not sure if there's research about amp existed.
Can the THD CCIF SMPTE multitone represent real world music content?
Can a resistor with heatsink represent real world speaker loading?
As for what is better sounding, conduct MUSHRA experiment perhaps can answer your question.
Not sure if there's research about amp existed.
He may have said many things. This is a direct quote from the interview:
"It is my experience -- confirmed by every new thing I do -- that when you get into really high measured performance, really low distortion, superlow noise, then the ultimate subjective sound quality starts improving and continues to improve in step with the measurements. At some point you will find that a product that measures absolutely perfectly under an extensive battery of tests will sound a lot better than a product with more typical high-end audio performance that has been tuned by ear for years. The upshot is that measurements do matter."
I think cab's point was that amplifiers that impart their own character don't classify as proper amplifiers. That's not my opinion, but that's my understanding of his, given this comment from him
"An amplifier is a device that by definition takes a small signal and makes it larger without adding or subtracting anything additional. Thus by definition the closer the performance of an amplifier is to this definition, the closer it is to the perfect amplifier and the less distortion it adds to the signal. Ultimately, when the performance is so close that any added distortion is below the threshold of hearing, one has solved the issue of an amplifier having "a sound". Today's amps by Hypex and Purifi are state of the art with distortion below the threshold of hearing. If one prefers an amp that "sounds" different, it isn't an amp but an effects box and the added distortion is what is actually preferred. Far better to add distortion in a controlled way through DSP."
My understanding agrees this. But it's him that knows what measurement to conduct......like a secret sauce to me now.
The interview by Darko
Around 9 min.
-But the thing with with measurements is there, there's no standard battery of tests that you can, that you can just blindly apply to an amplifier and then then trust that this will that this covers all for instance, you can, you can take a class A/B amplifier, sort of One which is optimally biased, as they call it.-
-yeah. So, so you really, yeah, you really have to tailor the test to the product. I mean, that's always some, some general ones, like, like, just ordinary distortion and output impinges, or have you.I mean, those, those just have to be good always, but it's but that they don't in the on their own. Telling enough, you have to be creative-
And the continued conversation. My word did not capture the whole idea but that's what I think about the measurement he pointed out...
Last edited:
Assuming that it was true, even if it is not, that doesn't stop people from wanting to look for it.
😉
Thank you!
It did indeed.
Listening tests, even when subjective, are essential.
"the thing with with measurements is there, there's no standard battery of tests that you can, that you can just blindly apply to an amplifier and then then trust that this will that this covers all".
"will sound a lot better than a product with more typical high-end audio performance that has been tuned by ear for years".
How likely is it that a U-tuber audio influencer like Darko would state that measurement has perfect correlation with subjective SQ?
That would be the end of that channel as it would be enough to read the data sheet and no need for any fancy verbal description of the "sound" of an amp - which anyways is the sound of a system.... and not the amp...(perhaps he could start to compete with Archimago?)
I understand that it is much more funny, interesting and mysterious if there where some unmeasurable secret sauce in the game, but sorry, there isn't - just plain hard basic technology. This is my insight.
//
That would be the end of that channel as it would be enough to read the data sheet and no need for any fancy verbal description of the "sound" of an amp - which anyways is the sound of a system.... and not the amp...(perhaps he could start to compete with Archimago?)
I understand that it is much more funny, interesting and mysterious if there where some unmeasurable secret sauce in the game, but sorry, there isn't - just plain hard basic technology. This is my insight.
//
Perhaps you can ask some AI transcribe service to mute all what Darko says and just look into Bruno's opinion.
The interview on best of high end also sound to me that 1ET9040BA is a small step forward although the "old" product should already be good enough as a transparent amplifier.
--though it's the subjective impression from the customer so probably no reliable information inside it.
Why is your current amp getting rare? I read the designer has passed away, and likely took knowledge with him. But is the transistors or something else in it thats just not available anymore? Has anyone tried to quantify the sound and perhaps try and understand whats going on? If yoi have working and good sounding unit, should you try and clone it?
Thank you, I missed your comment.
However, the hypothesis that an amplifier whose distortion is so low to be inaudible automatically becomes an ideal or a perfect (that's "being entirely without fault or defect") amplifier it's not convincing, in my view of things.
Otherwise we would have the definitive way for building amplifiers without defects at a price that is perhaps even convenient and within everyone's reach.
If that were the case, then Class D amplifiers of a certain quality and a certain price should all are the same and all sounding the same way.
Do they do it?
I don't think so, but I haven't listened to them all.
I believe there are additional factors than the distorsion that influence the SQ and will influence it in the future.
At the end of the day some Class D amps of certain value are so very good, but it seems to me that none of them are already perfect.
how do they sound different? current state of the art class d amps by Purifi and Hypex have been said to be indistinguishable by several manufacturers who make amps using both modules and have tested. and listened to both extensively.
what are these additional factors? there is perfect in theory and perfect in practice. of course all amps add distortion and thus none are perfect in an absolute sense however once distortion has reached levels where it is inaudible we can say that for practical purposes they are perfect. Such is the case with Purifi. The amp issue has been solved in practce- speakers produce a much greater amount of distortion but
purifi is workiung on that as well...
what are these additional factors? there is perfect in theory and perfect in practice. of course all amps add distortion and thus none are perfect in an absolute sense however once distortion has reached levels where it is inaudible we can say that for practical purposes they are perfect. Such is the case with Purifi. The amp issue has been solved in practce- speakers produce a much greater amount of distortion but
purifi is workiung on that as well...
While the core modules from Purifi and Hypex may be similar, the differences emerge when you change elements like the buffer topology or swap the op amps for something like Weiss, Sparkos, or others that match your sonic preferences. This is why a NAD amp doesn’t sound the same as a Marantz Model 10, even if they use similar Class D technology; circuit design choices shape the final sound signature
Perfection in audio is like chasing unicorns; an idealized concept that doesn’t truly exist. Every design involves trade-offs, whether in distortion, efficiency, or tonal balance etc.
Even the best amps represent a balance between competing factors, which is why ‘perfect’ remains subjective IMHO
He gets a little rambly but hits on some good points.
It's clear that the modules are not the only contributors to the signal that an amp ultimately outputs. I think cab is aware of this, and it seems like the point he was trying to make is that when you design an amplifier to do one job, amplify without alteration, if you do that job well, your amp will sound basically the same as any other well designed amp made with the same goal. That encompasses buffers, and any other part of an amp. Marantz deviates from that goal, so their amps end up sounding different. Correct me if I'm wrong cab.
Last edited:
That is indeed my point. Some assemblers add tube buffers, etc. to these modules in an effort to create a distortion profile that appeals to some. Others use extremely low distortion op amps in their buffers in an effort to retain the performance of the modules themselves. As a result, you can indeed get a variation in distortion profiles among different amps that use the same modules. There are though no apparent differences between amps using ultra low distortion buffers according to the assemblers themselves.