Nice review Sander!SSassen said:
I wonder how some of the angry and mud throwing members at audiocircle will react this time, though I suppose it doesn't really matter. They probably need to search for a new mud puddle, since their last supply was emptied down to the very last drop. 😉
So in short, the new Reference gives you more power and a slightly better, but mediocre soundquality at 1.5x the original price. I find it rather peculiar that such an amplifier would get an award...
Cheers,
Hans.
Yeah, better award some backward company like Krell, Linn, Meridian or Naim that hasn't had an independent thought in the last quarter century. God forbid the mullet will ever go out of fashion.
"The last 25 years of the 20th century will go down in history as unique in one respect. These 'postmodern' years are symptomatic of a total lack of originality." --From Introducing Postmodernism.
"The last 25 years of the 20th century will go down in history as unique in one respect. These 'postmodern' years are symptomatic of a total lack of originality." --From Introducing Postmodernism.
Well, I think we've all misquoted the 'amplifier of the year' quote, it should read 'ad campaign of the year'. Cause honestly NuForce does deserve an award for most effective ad campaign for such a so-so product. Even people that've been stuck with tubes for the past 30-years are thinking of listening to one, that's no easy feat to accomplish, we all know those people have a serious disliking towards anything solid-state 😀
Best regards,
Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
Best regards,
Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
SSassen said:
I'm not surprised. Audiophiles always want to believe the next thing will give them that bit of extra. They always grasp for straws.
Sander,
Alot of the tube guys are of the variety who just want what they think, more so, are told, is the best, by reviewers, and when sold upon their beliefs, cost is often no objective, they just want it.
More so, they'll go with what the majority of those reviewers say, and an award..... wow, there's no turning back now. Your review is likely not to sway these kinds of people into doing their homework, using their own judgment, or looking at anything objectively. They just won't want to believe you, and I trust your review will be dismissed by them outright.
Also, most of them dont' even seem to have the understand that class d actually is solide state, you'll often see it referenced seperately, "should I get a class d or a solide state amp?"
What a market, you can sell these people a lump of coal with a good review, proven by any given snake oil product time and again.
Alot of the tube guys are of the variety who just want what they think, more so, are told, is the best, by reviewers, and when sold upon their beliefs, cost is often no objective, they just want it.
More so, they'll go with what the majority of those reviewers say, and an award..... wow, there's no turning back now. Your review is likely not to sway these kinds of people into doing their homework, using their own judgment, or looking at anything objectively. They just won't want to believe you, and I trust your review will be dismissed by them outright.
Also, most of them dont' even seem to have the understand that class d actually is solide state, you'll often see it referenced seperately, "should I get a class d or a solide state amp?"
What a market, you can sell these people a lump of coal with a good review, proven by any given snake oil product time and again.
Oh it's worse than not having any taste of their own. It's perhaps more to do with a lower threshold towards commercial brainwashing preventing them from thinking for themselves.
I've said this before but I've spoken to people who could do nothing but give me quotes from stereophile reviews, regardless of anything I said to em, I just kept getting more quotes. It was a disgusting experience, and frightening to think, that's likely the majority of everyone. 😕
It's also why a forum such as this (for the most part) is so refreshing.
I've said this before but I've spoken to people who could do nothing but give me quotes from stereophile reviews, regardless of anything I said to em, I just kept getting more quotes. It was a disgusting experience, and frightening to think, that's likely the majority of everyone. 😕
It's also why a forum such as this (for the most part) is so refreshing.
Pr from a more positive point of view, could it be that some people prefer a certain kind of 'taste', otherwise known as 'distortion'. That wouldn't be a novelty in the audioworld 😉classd4sure said:
Although I strive for low distortion in my designs, I can safely say that I've been fooled in the past by some really 'sweet sounding' setups.
Sander, can you give us a few more 'subjective terms' as to how the sound of this amp is?
Hi Hans,
From my view distortion caused by heavy EMI and the like is far removed from a euphonic nature like tubes may provide.
Certainly nothing you can grant a best of award to with any level of seriousness and retain credibility, but the comment you quoted was geared more towards the believers than the writers.
From my view distortion caused by heavy EMI and the like is far removed from a euphonic nature like tubes may provide.
Certainly nothing you can grant a best of award to with any level of seriousness and retain credibility, but the comment you quoted was geared more towards the believers than the writers.
I strongly recommend to anyone reading the following article mentioned by pmkap on post 54:
http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/amplifiers/SwitchingAmplifierBasics.php
Every technical criteria mentioned on it can be fully trusted. It's nice to find such a nice article among that much B.S. Implementation means a lot for class D.
http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/amplifiers/SwitchingAmplifierBasics.php
Every technical criteria mentioned on it can be fully trusted. It's nice to find such a nice article among that much B.S. Implementation means a lot for class D.
Eva,
You'll find that mostly all of Bruno's writings are the same way.
Certainly a good departure from the "norm", wish more follow that example.
You'll find that mostly all of Bruno's writings are the same way.
Certainly a good departure from the "norm", wish more follow that example.
In the light of Bruno's article I think it is worthwhile to glance over the pictures in my article and the technical analysis I provide again. You'll then quickly realize that my comments about the NuForce amplifiers (both in this and my previous article) are spot on. NuForce still has quite a few things to learn about designing a class-D amplifier. Actually if they'd taken the time to read through some of the excellent posts here (the class-D forum) they would've found solutions for their problems which, when implemented, would've made their amplifiers perform a lot better, on all fronts.
Best regards,
Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
Best regards,
Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
IMO there are two points to consider:
1.) Implementation. We all know that it is hard to properly implement a switching amp considering all EMC problems and the like. In this respect NuForce might have done a mediocre or even bad job.
2.) I don't know the topology that they use but the owners of the company are also the owners of the "one cycle control" patent. So they might probably use this. This is a very clever idea IMO, combining the advantages of self oscillating (high PSRR) with some advantages of carrier-based amps (like fixed switching frequency).
Although they might have gotten too much praise in advance I think they will be able to improve their products in the future. Every attempt to bring class-d a step forward is positive IMO even when it sometimes comes along with a lot of marketing BS and the like.
Luckily we are in the position to be able to distinguish between the BS written in magazines and the technical truth. So we probably won't buy any of the current incarnations of these amps. But companies like NuForce need those "early adaptors" to keep their business going and further improving their products.
Regards
Charles
1.) Implementation. We all know that it is hard to properly implement a switching amp considering all EMC problems and the like. In this respect NuForce might have done a mediocre or even bad job.
2.) I don't know the topology that they use but the owners of the company are also the owners of the "one cycle control" patent. So they might probably use this. This is a very clever idea IMO, combining the advantages of self oscillating (high PSRR) with some advantages of carrier-based amps (like fixed switching frequency).
Although they might have gotten too much praise in advance I think they will be able to improve their products in the future. Every attempt to bring class-d a step forward is positive IMO even when it sometimes comes along with a lot of marketing BS and the like.
Luckily we are in the position to be able to distinguish between the BS written in magazines and the technical truth. So we probably won't buy any of the current incarnations of these amps. But companies like NuForce need those "early adaptors" to keep their business going and further improving their products.
Regards
Charles
I feel sorry for Jason of Nuforce...
Having read this entire thread and with all due respect to Sander & ClassD4sure and all the other technically proficient types on this forum - I have to say that I feel sorry for Jason of Nuforce for having to put up with all this techno-babble.
We can discuss Class D this and UCD that; this-measurement-and-that-measurement ...but in the end the burden of proof is in the 'listening'. Nuforce has garnered a lot of praise recently and there is definitely more in favour than not (at a ratio of about 99:1 in favour, from what I've seen). This favourable view of Nuforce is both from the review mob as well as the wider audiophile 'user' community. You HAVE to give some credence to this, you can't fool that many people!
This whole story reminds me of a couple people I know in everyday life ... full of knowledge, intelligence and the best of intentions in their endeavours, but not much skill at producing an end result that is 'intrinsically right'. I have heard the Nuforce 9's at a local dealer and I think they are very good and sound 'right' (better than Bel Canto, IMO). Music is such an individual thing that the successful recreation of it in our homes is not necessarily determined by measurements and technology, S.E.T amps and Nuforce are good examples of this.
In case you are thinking I'm some sort of hopeless romantic, please be aware that I use every type of amplifier from Single Ended Triodes to Class A to Tripath/Sonic Impact/ICE module digital amps. (See my system pics at the link below).
I also know of another Supratek Grange user here in Australia who has gone from Halcro to Nuforce.
As DIYers we are naturally inquisitive and tend to get caught up in the technical side of things to increase our knowledge base and it can become an end all approach. Sometimes we need to adopt an alternative view, that is, listen to what the music is saying - and learn to place more trust in our ears.
Please don't flame me! I'm really quite a nice guy (I think?)...
Regards,
Steve M.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vevol&1146370182&read&3&4&
Having read this entire thread and with all due respect to Sander & ClassD4sure and all the other technically proficient types on this forum - I have to say that I feel sorry for Jason of Nuforce for having to put up with all this techno-babble.
We can discuss Class D this and UCD that; this-measurement-and-that-measurement ...but in the end the burden of proof is in the 'listening'. Nuforce has garnered a lot of praise recently and there is definitely more in favour than not (at a ratio of about 99:1 in favour, from what I've seen). This favourable view of Nuforce is both from the review mob as well as the wider audiophile 'user' community. You HAVE to give some credence to this, you can't fool that many people!
This whole story reminds me of a couple people I know in everyday life ... full of knowledge, intelligence and the best of intentions in their endeavours, but not much skill at producing an end result that is 'intrinsically right'. I have heard the Nuforce 9's at a local dealer and I think they are very good and sound 'right' (better than Bel Canto, IMO). Music is such an individual thing that the successful recreation of it in our homes is not necessarily determined by measurements and technology, S.E.T amps and Nuforce are good examples of this.
In case you are thinking I'm some sort of hopeless romantic, please be aware that I use every type of amplifier from Single Ended Triodes to Class A to Tripath/Sonic Impact/ICE module digital amps. (See my system pics at the link below).
I also know of another Supratek Grange user here in Australia who has gone from Halcro to Nuforce.
As DIYers we are naturally inquisitive and tend to get caught up in the technical side of things to increase our knowledge base and it can become an end all approach. Sometimes we need to adopt an alternative view, that is, listen to what the music is saying - and learn to place more trust in our ears.
Please don't flame me! I'm really quite a nice guy (I think?)...
Regards,
Steve M.
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?vevol&1146370182&read&3&4&
Attachments
Hi,
Please note that it is now stricktly the reviewers which I comment poorly on.
Nuforce is not blind to their product's problems, have improved it, and I trust will continue to do so, I'm glad for that, and I wish them the best in that.
The reviewers however, I have absolutely no hope for. 😀
I can appreciate a review like Sander's for what it is, and can laugh at the others for what they are, but as you just demonstrated yourself, alot of people only have the fact that "well, it got two bad reviews, must be a personal issue, and it got 10000 good reviews, and 100 awards, so that's my new amp"...
Not intended as a flame in any way shape or form, it's just that I think more people need to make an effort to reason for themselves.
Best Regards,
Chris
Please note that it is now stricktly the reviewers which I comment poorly on.
Nuforce is not blind to their product's problems, have improved it, and I trust will continue to do so, I'm glad for that, and I wish them the best in that.
The reviewers however, I have absolutely no hope for. 😀
I can appreciate a review like Sander's for what it is, and can laugh at the others for what they are, but as you just demonstrated yourself, alot of people only have the fact that "well, it got two bad reviews, must be a personal issue, and it got 10000 good reviews, and 100 awards, so that's my new amp"...
Not intended as a flame in any way shape or form, it's just that I think more people need to make an effort to reason for themselves.
Best Regards,
Chris
Steve,
Although I realize that your train of thought has many followers and I agree with it to a certain extend, I think you lose track of a few very important issues. You simply do away with technical analysis because it is over your head and hence you dismiss it as you can't put it into proper prespective. That's unfortunate, because in the technical analysis are the differences that distinquish a good amplifier from an exceptional one.
Good design and good sound go hand in hand, a poorly designed amplifier will never amount to much, and vice versa an amplifier with very good specifications that's just been designed on the drawing board might well come up wanting. I'll totally agree with you there. But lets take a closer look at the NuForce.
The NuForce primarily sounds different, that's the reason for its appeal, but I wouldn't immediately equate that to better. Hence that begs the question whether what it does differently is sonically pleasing. The Reference 8 has high 2nd order harmonic distortion, which gives it a tonal character much like a tube amplifier. So I can see why it has appeal to some, especially people that prefer tubeamps.
The Reference 9 however sounds more like a normal amplifier, it has far less 2nd order harmonic distortion. It does have have better tonal quality and more control than the Reference 8 with much of the same character. People that will find the Reference 8 pleasing will most likely also like the Reference 9.
It is only when compared to more neutral amplifiers you'll notice what you're missing. In the end some people prefer music reproduction that moves them emotically regardless if it is accurate and others prefer to come as close to lifelike reproduction as possible. The first group will welcome a bit of harmonic distortion that'll color the sound and make it more appealing, such as with a tube amplifier. The second group will never accept that, they're looking for the proverbial piece of wire with gain.
In the end it is the recording that we're reproducing, if that's missing emotion, do you want you amplifier to add it? I wouldn't, I'm only interested in the recording. So in the end I'd like my equipment to be as neutral and transparant as possible, so I can enjoy the recording to its fullest, knowing that its reproductio is as life-like as possible. If you aspire to just make it sound good, that's perfectly fine with me, just don't expect me to be happy with it.
Fortunately we're getting better and better at comprehending what is needed to reproduce a recording down to the smallest detail, by means of better understanding of the fundamentals, simulation and better parts and engineering. I'd rather not go back and use yesterday's technology and forego all that.
Best regards,
Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
Although I realize that your train of thought has many followers and I agree with it to a certain extend, I think you lose track of a few very important issues. You simply do away with technical analysis because it is over your head and hence you dismiss it as you can't put it into proper prespective. That's unfortunate, because in the technical analysis are the differences that distinquish a good amplifier from an exceptional one.
Good design and good sound go hand in hand, a poorly designed amplifier will never amount to much, and vice versa an amplifier with very good specifications that's just been designed on the drawing board might well come up wanting. I'll totally agree with you there. But lets take a closer look at the NuForce.
The NuForce primarily sounds different, that's the reason for its appeal, but I wouldn't immediately equate that to better. Hence that begs the question whether what it does differently is sonically pleasing. The Reference 8 has high 2nd order harmonic distortion, which gives it a tonal character much like a tube amplifier. So I can see why it has appeal to some, especially people that prefer tubeamps.
The Reference 9 however sounds more like a normal amplifier, it has far less 2nd order harmonic distortion. It does have have better tonal quality and more control than the Reference 8 with much of the same character. People that will find the Reference 8 pleasing will most likely also like the Reference 9.
It is only when compared to more neutral amplifiers you'll notice what you're missing. In the end some people prefer music reproduction that moves them emotically regardless if it is accurate and others prefer to come as close to lifelike reproduction as possible. The first group will welcome a bit of harmonic distortion that'll color the sound and make it more appealing, such as with a tube amplifier. The second group will never accept that, they're looking for the proverbial piece of wire with gain.
In the end it is the recording that we're reproducing, if that's missing emotion, do you want you amplifier to add it? I wouldn't, I'm only interested in the recording. So in the end I'd like my equipment to be as neutral and transparant as possible, so I can enjoy the recording to its fullest, knowing that its reproductio is as life-like as possible. If you aspire to just make it sound good, that's perfectly fine with me, just don't expect me to be happy with it.
Fortunately we're getting better and better at comprehending what is needed to reproduce a recording down to the smallest detail, by means of better understanding of the fundamentals, simulation and better parts and engineering. I'd rather not go back and use yesterday's technology and forego all that.
Best regards,
Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
Everybody here knows the favourable reviews the Sonic Impact T amp has received, here and on commercial review sites. Some even prefer the more expensive Super T to tube amps priced in the thousands!
You will not find a bigger fan of the Sonic Impact T amp than me. I would easily call it the amp of the last century.
I posted something similar elsewhere. The SI completely embarrassed my highly regarded (now sold) British SS amp. I'm not talking some low-price great-value-for-money NAD here. But there's no comparison between the SI and my (currently out-of-order) 40-yr-old tube amp. The tube amp is original save for the replaced electrolytics and oil cans. The tube amp has more detail, deeper bass, and wider/fuller sound. And it's at least as fast as the SI. (The SI is currently my main amp and I'm not complaining a lot. That's how good it is.)
I guess I'm saying two things here. One is that I haven't fallen for the hype. Second, what's wrong here? Do tastes vary so much? Or is my 40-yr-old tube amp better than new tube amps costing thousands? Mine cost hundreds. (It would no doubt have cost thousands if made today.)
The SI has taught me that I cannot believe reviews. I believe nothing somebody else says. I will believe if a reviewer prefers the Ongaku to an iPod. In that particular case I apply Occam's razor. But that's about it.
My problem with this thread is the lazy nay-sayers. We have eight pages and not a single thought. If you think the NuForce isn't worthy of being named amp of the year you have to offer an alternative, otherwise you have no credibility. (Naming the Ongaku doesn't count. It's old and too expensive.) Until then nobody can take anything in this thread for real. For now this thread is just a waste of time.
And feel free to be subjective. I don't believe in objectivity. Objectivity is nihilism. It's the rejection of your own person and selfhood. That's not living. That's being.
You will not find a bigger fan of the Sonic Impact T amp than me. I would easily call it the amp of the last century.
I posted something similar elsewhere. The SI completely embarrassed my highly regarded (now sold) British SS amp. I'm not talking some low-price great-value-for-money NAD here. But there's no comparison between the SI and my (currently out-of-order) 40-yr-old tube amp. The tube amp is original save for the replaced electrolytics and oil cans. The tube amp has more detail, deeper bass, and wider/fuller sound. And it's at least as fast as the SI. (The SI is currently my main amp and I'm not complaining a lot. That's how good it is.)
I guess I'm saying two things here. One is that I haven't fallen for the hype. Second, what's wrong here? Do tastes vary so much? Or is my 40-yr-old tube amp better than new tube amps costing thousands? Mine cost hundreds. (It would no doubt have cost thousands if made today.)
The SI has taught me that I cannot believe reviews. I believe nothing somebody else says. I will believe if a reviewer prefers the Ongaku to an iPod. In that particular case I apply Occam's razor. But that's about it.
My problem with this thread is the lazy nay-sayers. We have eight pages and not a single thought. If you think the NuForce isn't worthy of being named amp of the year you have to offer an alternative, otherwise you have no credibility. (Naming the Ongaku doesn't count. It's old and too expensive.) Until then nobody can take anything in this thread for real. For now this thread is just a waste of time.
And feel free to be subjective. I don't believe in objectivity. Objectivity is nihilism. It's the rejection of your own person and selfhood. That's not living. That's being.
phn said:
Lazy nay-sayers of which you happen to be included. I don't think any alternatives need to be offered by us, they're obvious enough and we are aware of them.
I think the fools who awarded it amp of the year having compared it against NOTHING in the same category (supposedly) are the ones with that particular responsibility. If you think such an award is credible, all I can say is that I feel sorry for you.
As per Sanders latest review, it did indeed mention an alternative, but had it remained a part of the review, you'd have said it was too biased to be meaningful.
So, it somehow took the SI amp to discredit reviewers for you? Hm. Can't say much more.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.