nezbleu
I've already answered that it was a comparative scale without a fixed standard but a relative one. May I ask you how many amps you own? I'll assume you have heard more than one and have formed a preference, tell us what that preference is based on.
I've already answered that it was a comparative scale without a fixed standard but a relative one. May I ask you how many amps you own? I'll assume you have heard more than one and have formed a preference, tell us what that preference is based on.
rayma
I have two diy amps that are fairly well known and would be willing to take DrDynas place. I also have some pretty well known vintage gear that could use some sprucing up. Email me privately and we can discuss it so as not to clutter this thread any further.
I have two diy amps that are fairly well known and would be willing to take DrDynas place. I also have some pretty well known vintage gear that could use some sprucing up. Email me privately and we can discuss it so as not to clutter this thread any further.
Yeah, don't clutter it with any actual measurements or data, that would be absurd.
After all, maybe the $10,000 is still up for grabs.
http://tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/
Last edited:
pay no attention to the link
http://www.delta.dk/imported/senselab/AES125_Tutorial_T4_Perceptual_Audio_Evaluation_Tutorial.pdf
...or references to the actual audio perceptual research methods
http://www.delta.dk/imported/senselab/AES125_Tutorial_T4_Perceptual_Audio_Evaluation_Tutorial.pdf
My immediate impulse is to say "No, you may not ask how many amplifiers I own, because it is not germane to this discussion," but I am in a generous mood after hearing some wonderful live music tonight, so I will humour you.
Let's see, are we restricting this to power amps, or can we include preamps? I will count integrated amps and receivers as one amp each even though they contain both power amps and preamps (and phono stages). So I currently own 5, including my preamp: one receiver, one integrated amp, one preamp, and then it gets complicated. My speakers are active and include electronic crossovers and dedicated amplifiers for the woofer and tweeter (2 LM3886's for each woofer, one for each tweeter). So is that one amp for the stereo pair of speakers, or two, or four (two woofers + two tweeters) or six (6 * LM3886)? My "5" counted each speaker as an amplifier, is that OK?
Oh, I suppose I should include my 3 headphone amps too, and my 2 phono stages. What are we up to now? What was the question?
"I'll assume you have heard more than one and have formed a preference" -- you should not assume so much. You are correct that I have heard more than one. Conservatively I would say that I have heard in excess of 30 amplifiers in contexts where I have been able to listen to them for an extended period of time and with a variety of sources and speakers. That's not counting multiple instances of the same make and model amplifier.
I cannot however claim to have formed strong preferences. Since I worked in the service departments of a couple of stereo shops my preferences tend toward build quality. Old Sansui amps were tanks, later ones were frequent guests on the repair bench. I like Quad amps because they are cool design, same with B&O. Yamaha made great gear forever, same with Bryston; the latter was built better but for home use it's hard to tell them apart. I was partial to an early B&K MOSFET power amp, again primarily because of build quality. It also was powerful and had a good power supply and seemed to drive lots of real loudspeakers without difficulty. HK Citation series the same; their integrated amps and receivers were also excellent, I still own a 15W/channel HK 230e receiver, although I haven't powered it up in decades. I used several different nice British amps that were well built and lacked obvious sonic flaws, and some with British names and Chinese innards that were still good.
Yeah, I'll stick with build quality.
Now: "comparative scale without a fixed standard but a relative one" -- WTF does that mean? When will you answer a simple question and provide some semantic content to your silly scales?
nezbleu
Noted, you like to listen to "build quality". Do you think that is a better descriptive of the sound product than my offering or doesn't the sound matter? Or is it maybe that all the amps sound exactly the same to you?
jcx
I copied and read that link the first time you provided it. For the record, I did post the method I used to evaluate the postulates on page 34 for anyone to critique/review. All I did was switch out the amp. Same recordings, same time of day on the same day, yaddah-yaddah-yaddah.
Noted, you like to listen to "build quality". Do you think that is a better descriptive of the sound product than my offering or doesn't the sound matter? Or is it maybe that all the amps sound exactly the same to you?
jcx
I copied and read that link the first time you provided it. For the record, I did post the method I used to evaluate the postulates on page 34 for anyone to critique/review. All I did was switch out the amp. Same recordings, same time of day on the same day, yaddah-yaddah-yaddah.
Last edited:
Posts deleted.
This thread is on the verge of closure. Any more OT or provocative postings and its curtains.
A naïve question,
If its all so easy why don't we invent a computer program that can be put in a listening room for 10 minutes and cough out this amp is good or bad and it has a satisfaction rating of 60% also can you bring in some coffee and biscuits...😀
Also please move the Tibetan bowl 3mm to the left..Buzzz click...
The printout could read things like this amp likes classical music but is rubbish for rock and roll..and sounds better in lilac with the badge not illuminated.
The soft ambiance of the music drifted across the room like a butterfly in spring...the sound embraced the listener like the flickering of candle light on a warm summers evening..
Amplifier No2 was like a slap in the face with a wet fish it grated against your ear drums like a trash can battered with a stick..
Next up the syrup amp with lashings of 2nd harmonic 25% satisfaction rating..however when the triode switch was operated it could beat others at the same price point.. we will now compare it to the Razzor..buzzzzz it was a close shave but the hum level was lower with the shaver the amp had superb music rejection.
Regards
M. Gregg
If its all so easy why don't we invent a computer program that can be put in a listening room for 10 minutes and cough out this amp is good or bad and it has a satisfaction rating of 60% also can you bring in some coffee and biscuits...😀
Also please move the Tibetan bowl 3mm to the left..Buzzz click...
The printout could read things like this amp likes classical music but is rubbish for rock and roll..and sounds better in lilac with the badge not illuminated.
The soft ambiance of the music drifted across the room like a butterfly in spring...the sound embraced the listener like the flickering of candle light on a warm summers evening..
Amplifier No2 was like a slap in the face with a wet fish it grated against your ear drums like a trash can battered with a stick..
Next up the syrup amp with lashings of 2nd harmonic 25% satisfaction rating..however when the triode switch was operated it could beat others at the same price point.. we will now compare it to the Razzor..buzzzzz it was a close shave but the hum level was lower with the shaver the amp had superb music rejection.
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
Exactly.
I have no problem with the idea of "voicing" an amplifier. In the olden days, there were extra knobs on the front for exactly that purpose. I think that was a wonderful scheme, as it allowed each user to "voice" the amp to his or her taste.
For example, my paprents old radiogram had tone controls (to adjust the timbral balance), and balance and stereo width controls (to adjust soundstaging or whatever you want to call it). It also had a reverb button because Elvis.
Unfortunately, somewhere along the line these sorts of things became unfashionable. So whereas in the old days, if someone wanted a bit more bass, they'd just reach for the tone controls, these days it's a lot more complicated and people end up doing stupid things like trying to replace all the caps in their amp with yellow ones because "someone on the internet said yellow caps sound better". Then they come to a forum like this and start a thread: "Please help me fix my amp which was working fine before I modded it". Sad.
Yes, that was the ideal years ago before audio turned into a fashion industry. Then some genius proclaimed that different pieces of wire sound different and the brown stuff hit the fan with a vengeance as audiophiles started agonizing over exactly which piece of wire their amp was supposed to sound like. Some were actually neurotic enough to convince themselves they could hear the alleged differences and were promptly hailed as gurus, since they "obviously" had better hearing than anyone else.
Logic having left the building, it's been downhill ever since, with the "gurus" coming up with ever more bizarre claims and suggestions. Demagnetize your LPs. Stick bits of tinfoil on the ceiling. Strip all the insulation off the internal wiring...
Last edited:
Rofl!
I think it's because somewhere along the line, we all collectively decided that reproduction should split into two avenues of thinking, those that want to hear only what's in the recording with as little coloration as possible, and those who want to season to taste. Edit2: Loudspeakers getting way, way better probably had something to do with it as well.
So, we gradually lost tone controls and presence controls and effects buttons on gear, and all those things were put into separate boxes. Edit: It's a shame all the terminology didn't get moved into it's own box as well, but eh...humans, whaddyagonnado.
Now, we're in 2014, and all those buttons and sliders that used to live under the lid of the family Hi-Fi unit now live in units like this (attached image), so you can add them back in if you want them. Grab one of these and "voice" to your heart's content.
If you really do think that there's some readily identifiable "voice" in an amplifier strict, please, feel free to arrange your cash at the cakehole and go here:
Richard Clark Amplifier Challenge FAQ
Attachments
Last edited:
Amen Brother .
What pisses me off about this ridiculous waste of brainpower is that still:
Speakers are HORRIBLE
Rooms are HORRIBLE
And there is where brainpower, research, experiments, discussions should be put to good use, instead of inventing meaningless descriptions or inexistent problems about this:
415 posts about nonexisting unmeasurable undefined amplifier "parameters" ?
Wow !!!
What pisses me off about this ridiculous waste of brainpower is that still:
Speakers are HORRIBLE
Rooms are HORRIBLE
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
And there is where brainpower, research, experiments, discussions should be put to good use, instead of inventing meaningless descriptions or inexistent problems about this:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
415 posts about nonexisting unmeasurable undefined amplifier "parameters" ?
Wow !!!
The problem is that I have no idea which features of an amp your 'postulates' are supposed to describe.
With regards to PRaT every replay system I have heard in my n early 50 years in this world scores a perfect 100%. It doesn't matter if they were '50s valve radios, walkmen, good or bad PA systems or home HiFis. Not one of them influenced the Pace, Rhythm or Timing of the music they played.
I can't say anything about timbral accuracy since for that I would need access to the original recorded instrument, room and of course the musician(s).
That leaves soundstaging/imaging and what is possible to achieve there depends largely on the mixing and mic placement during the recording.
I postulate that the three 'postulates' you claim describe every aspect of an amplifier do no such thing. Furthermore I do not think that I have to be able come up with better ones to know that yours just simply do not do what you say they do.As an analogy: It seems like you are trying to apply grammatical rules to mathematics which is of course doomed to failure.
As for your last straw that you seem to cling to ie amplifier linearity under certain conditions: I want my amps to be linear within a FR somewhat exceeding our audible spectrum (5-50 000Hz will do nicely), the harmonic distortion of all orders to be well below what I can hear and distinguish through my speakers (which is 0.5%, so my amps which stay below 0.03%THD at rated output should be fine). They are also stable into nominal 2 Ohm loads which in the real world means that they can cope with impedance minimums of about 1.2-1.5 Ohm. Being transistor amps they are not bothered that much by high impedances.
Personally I do not like valve amps in my replay chain as they tend to produce high (as in audible) THD and provide very little control over the woofer leading to 'mushy', overblown bass response. Basically I consider them to be effect boxes. However that makes them almost unbeatable as instrument amps but in that case they ARE part of the instrument and their transparency or rather distinct lack of it becomes an asset rather than a problem.
Bottom line: Your 3 'postulates' need to be replaced with actually useful ones that mean the same thing to everybody, that we can measure and hear. I do suspect that there need to be more than 3 and they will need conditions attached.
For example: A 50W amp will be fine if the speakers it drives are fairly efficient, the listening level generally low and the dynamic range of music played through it is limited.
Change two of these restrictions and the amp will fail as it would be underpowered and thus prone to clipping.
That's OK, neither does he. He is apparently asking for an amp that alters the input signal in an audible manner, but is unhappy that this is by definition an effects box. He is unhappy that what he wants to accomplish is easily done at line level, but using a politically incorrect knob.
Who/what did you see? My good humor is due to seeing John Gorka last night at a tiny venue in rural Wisconsin. My wife managed to get us seating two meters from him.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.