All amplifiers sound alike......... (1 Viewer)

[Chu Gai]

And I might add some good comments also from Mr. Lee Scoggins in indicating his preferences and clarifying his reasoning. I must say it is to Lee's credit that he did not go the SET route and while I may not necessarily agree with his equipment dollar percentage allocation, I wholehartedly defend his preferences and while an electrostatic doesn't work for me, I think given the right room and attention to their placement they sound pretty damned good. I rather hope, for all of us, that more research and study continues to be done in speakers. I may've mentioned it before, but I think we'll be seeing at some point digital crossovers that have room adaptability built in. Good? Bad? Hey things are moving forward and I think the possibiliites are mind boggling.

 

[RobWil]

That is not to say that if you were to perform such DBT's that you would be ale to detect sonic differences, but unless you do, your comparison results are unscientific and invalid.

Sheesh...you guys sound like Mr. Spock!
Unscientific?...maybe. Invalid?...Most certainly not since I was the only one who needed to be convinced.

Thankfully I wasn't trying to write a thesis for my science degree.....I was just trying to buy a nice sounding receiver.
You guys have challenged me to be scientific. Now I challenge you to let your ears be the judge.....go out and get a Kenwood 6050 and an Onkyo 797 (a 600 or 800 will probably do) and you come back and tell me that you couldn't hear a difference. If you can't then you probably should find a new hobby!

 

[Shane Martin]

Some responses:

The problem with your comparisons of receivers/preamps is that they weren not conducted under controlled Double Blind-level matched listening enviorment. That is not to say that if you were to perform such DBT's that you would be ale to detect sonic differences, but unless you do, your comparison results are unscientific and invalid.

Let me breathe for a second... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH /breathe... HAHAHAHAHA. This is the perfect comment from a objectivist. Suddenly every post on this board or close would be classified as INVALID. Invalid to you yes, invalid to me? ROFLMAO.

As Rob Said Unscientific Yes.. INVALID, only to the dyed in the wool objectivist.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Accuracy to most audiophiles I know is how ACCURATE the music sounded to the original or the live experience they had.

Exactly my definition. Having been involved with several Chesky releases I remember what things sounded like in the studio-particularly the recent sessions. The ideal is to capture that "magic" as best one can. Audiophiles have invented an entire language to describe different critical listening events so they can benchmark their experiences along a reasonable standard.

 

[RobWil]

Shane
Lee

 

[Shane Martin]

This I agree with. Most musicians know the sound of their own instrument very well and it makes listening tests much more valid and doable. Ironically, many musicians have lousy sound systems

LOL this is so true of the musicians I know. I have one friend who is a musician and he owns a pretty respectable system. I trust his ears and judgement sometimes even more than mine. He has much more trained ears and I don't think I'm half bad myself. His main issue is $$. He can't afford to keep up with the jones' anymore so he buys what he can afford at the time. That and a new family tend to side track your spending a bit

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Lee Says: "Ironically, many musicians have lousy sound systems."


I respond: Ain't that the truth..

I was watching MTV Cribs last week and they had some rapper
on there (I guess it's debateable if that's music or not
but that's not the point) I can't remember who he was?
Nappy Roots or something like that I think.

Anyway..

He's all walking MTV through his "crib" and he's like "Yo
look at Deez.. Mang, Deez are mah B&O Speakahz.. I paid
like y0 8 grand fo Deez Mang!"


All the while I was thinking two things..

#1: None of his money came from my pockets and if it were
soley up to me he wouldn't have what he has.. (Because I do
not buy rap music..)

#2: Money can buy anything except Love and Class.

 

[John Royster]

Brett,

don't be knocking nappy roots. deez from mah home town yo!

That and amps do not sound the same, i've owned probably 10 different ones and my wife immediately notices the music.

 

[Chu Gai]

The goal is not to dispel myths based upon beliefs. The goal, if that's the right word, is to dispel myths based upon careful scientific investigations and advance the technology. Often, these advances are directed towards cost or space saving measures or improving reliability. Look at refrigerators. Big, clunky, inefficient, unreliable >> efficient, reliable, less expensive, feature laden. It is well within the abilities of companies to produce amps and receivers that do nothing more than amplify the original signal without any audible distortion or coloration. A flat frequency response is a no brainer. This capability has existed for at least 30 years and most of the design parameters are based upon research that's been done long ago in the telecommunications areas.

Despite the willingness of some, and that includes myself, to either provide literature or the methodology by which you could personally conduct a scientific investigation in the privacy of your own home, with equipment, sound sources, and surroundings familiar to yourself, a consistent choice appears to be made by you to dismiss or avoid it. Sheesh, when did the pursuit of knowledge vs. opinion become so terrible?

Choices of what to spend on a component is a personal preference Shane. It's your money. This though is not about that. It's about issues of audibility, understanding a little of human hearing and psychoacoustics. 50% more performance needs to be quantified. People will, and most certainly I've no issue, decide they want an amp with 0.001% THD as opposed to one that's 0.05% distortion. The problem comes when someone comes out with a statement such as "I want it because it's quieter to my ears" That, my friend, is a testable statement. Further, it has been tested and the results were in a long time ago. If that's the only criteria, you can't tell the difference apart.

Science becomes many things to many people. For the life of a person that was saved because of a heart transplant, it's the best thing...God's gift if you will. For the person who's been told that sadly, their cancer is beyond treatment and they're looking at days or weeks, science becomes damnable.

You may look upon it as being disrespectful to inform someone that they're wrong. Not wrong because it's my opinion. Wrong because all the evidence points to it and nothing, other than anecdotal statements weigh in on the opposing side. I'm sure I've been guilty of not choosing my words carefully enough. Usually I try. Sometimes I get frustrated, tired, and it doesn't come out very well. For that I certainly apologize. Yet, in the context of this thread, what sort of respect should be accorded to a false statement based upon a false methodology? This ain't like some of the school districts in Wisconsin that have sought to embrace fuzzy math because they don't want to hurt children's feelings. If you're wrong, find out why you are and move on. If you're not sure, ask for an explanation or a clarification. If someone is claiming they can hear 2 picosends of jitter but all the credible scientific research points to 2 nanoseconds as being the threshhold, then why do you accord that person any worthy respect. They're wrong. If you're going to feel offended everytime someone points out what you did wrong or where you can improve yourself, then you've been watching too much "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" and falling asleep with Oprah reruns.

Are Transparentwires a ripoff? Compared to 12, 10, 8 or whatever gauge, you bet they're a lot more expensive. Are they audibly different. Not a chance. Transparent wires were and may still be, manufactured by New England Wire and Cable. Nice company in NH, where they still don't have a personal income tax!
BTW, you do recall that the president of Transparent some years back took issue with what Nousaine said regarding the inability of people to distinguish between wires. The president told Nousaine to come up and visit him at his house and he'd prove Nousaine wrong. Some time later, Nousaine, and some others drove up, knocked on the door, and said we're here to take you up on your offer to demonstrate your ability to differentiate between your wire and some 12 gauge. Well, the President recanted his offer, an offer that was made verbally and heard by scores of people. Instead, I believe he let them in, where they spoke, listened to his system and probably had some refreshements. Well all I can say, is if the President of the company doesn't have faith in his ability to discern his own wire on what I'd imagine would be quite a nice system, then what does that tell you?

I agree you should trust your own ears Shane. A level matched, blind test allow you to do just that. Nothing more. The veneers are stripped off. Go for it The person doing the test, in an ABX situation, is you. You control everything. You just don't know, until the test is over, which was which. Then you correlate. Nothing devious or underhanded in that. Musicians, orchestral conductors, recording engineers, young people, old people...the results keep coming up the same. It doesn't matter. Your approach involves inaccuracy with respect to level matching, embracement of biases and rolls it into listening. You're looking to obtain meaningful results and not controlling the situation. It's controlling you. If that works for you fine. It's findings though must be taken with enormous amounts of salt though.

I disagree with your definition of accurate as it relates to this thread on amps. An accurate amp accurately amplifies the signal given to it, neither adding nor subtracting. The truth doesn't have two faces. If you find the music more pleasing because something in the amplification chain has altered the signal to your tastes then the signal has been processed. Whether done digitally or analogue, it's been changed from its original.

Presenting evidence, and bodies of it...citations to peer reviewed publications is hardly threadfarting, thread jacking, thread terrorism. If accurate and reproducible research threatens you, then audioasylum is the place to go. It's a comfortable place where anything is possible and is populated by a slew of credophiles. Eventually someone will post something you believe in and you've found your soul-mate in life. Bon-appetit!

The Levinson CD player offers substandard performance for its price. I'm not sure their 'engineers' would find gainful employment in a mid-fi company. It's heavy though. We can debate that some other time.

Rob, I haven't challenged you any more than if you were having a problem and I suggested some things for you to investigate. My fingers aren't in your wallet. You can find out, without biases, if you're on the money or not. If you're the only person who needs convincing fine. But it's time to either s**t or get off the pot.
Further, your statement regarding hearing acuity is actually a rather standard audio sales technique. If you can't hear it, then you're either hard of hearing, a hick, have an insufficiently revealing system, etc. I personally find it telling as to why either amp or wire mongers haven't produced one repeatable controlled listening test that confirms their statements. All it takes is one. I reject the oft said statement, "I don't have to because I believe in my product". So should you.
Listening and coming up with what appear to be conflicts that don't seem to make sense makes me want to know if what I heard was real or imagined. The ONLY way to know for sure is controlled listening tests...the ONLY way.

 

[Chu Gai]

John Royster, my good buddy...you got to know that the reason why significant others immediately notice why we've brought something home is in part that they're desperately hoping we'll stop some of this foolishness . Seriously though, we both know that your ML's presented a unique impendance situation dictating an amp that had performance capabilities down there.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Sheesh, when did the pursuit of knowledge vs. opinion become so terrible?

Why isn't subjective listening the pursuit of knowledge?

Again, use as much valid science as possible to narrow the field if you want - science does have a role. But I think it is naive to believe that metrics can capture everything in music. It is a complex and dynamic interaction with our hearing and brain's neural networks.

While I strive for accuracy to live music performance, it can be noted that some may prefer certain sonic colorations and they should determine for themselves with their own ears what gear meets those colorations.

Just don't be slamming my ARC amps as euphonic...those be mah home boyz!

 

[Jack Briggs]

I think Chu could provide links to papers presented by the Audio Engineering Society and the Boston Audio Society (two organizations historically reviled by the subjectivist crowd) and some will remain unsatisfied. The crux of his argument remains the same, in the form of a question: Why won't somebody from within the high-end cottage industry present test results that are reproducable?

Belief systems, though, are hard to let go of.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I think Chu could provide links to papers presented by the Audio Engineering Society

I can present a paper from the AES that shows people were able to detect jitter down to 10 nanoseconds. There are also papers on other differences being detected by listening as well.

The scientific evidence is far from (1) the absolute truth and (2) being against subjectivism in audio.

 

[Terry St]

Guitar Amps:

I play guitar and I can tell you there is a difference in ss and tube amps as far as guitar goes.The hotter you get the tubes(cranked up)the better they sound,tubes respond to load different than ss.

Tubes and SS amps can both be very accurate when working below clipping level, but when they clip the distortion they generate differs dramatically. When clipping, Tube amps tend to sound better than SS amps and are a lot less likely to damage speakers.

Guitar amps are designed to clip constantly. The distortion of the amp is actually a part of the instrument we know as the electric guitar and a major reason it is capable of sounding different than an acoustic on steroids. For this reason, the blindingly obvious differences between SS and Tube guitar amps are not really relevant to audio reproduction amps. Unlike guitar amps, audio reproduction amps should not be driven into clipping and *should* be as accurate as possible.

Tubes vs Solid State
Tube Amps are finicky creations. They have to be cared for, tweaked, loved. I'm sure a lot of people here have gone to a high end audio store to listen to a BAT or something similar and been shocked at how much distortion there was. Bad tubes, microphonics, who knows what. You can tell when a tube amp hasn't been given the attention it requires. While some tube designs (not all) can be very accurate if you want them to be, they can also be tweaked to introduce a bit of distortion. Some people love the sound, while some prefer accuracy. With tubes you can have it both ways.

SS Amps, on the other hand, tend to be plug and play. It's actually pretty hard to make them sound different without the use of a soldering iron. If you like a little distortion that's actually your only option. I've seen people selling their services to mod SS amps. They'll solder on an extra capacitor or two in the right places and claim it improves soundstage, imaging, etc.. They're really just introducing distortion, but nobody wants to call it that! Of course, some high end SS amp companies deliberately introduce distortion into their amps to make them sound different than the competitors. Distortion is not the sole domain of tubes!

My personal preference is for unmodded SS amps. While I can see why people love the hands-on maintenance of a tube amp and the flexibility they offer, I'd rather listen to music than tweak. With a good SS amp you can get accuracy without worries. I currently own a Bryston amp. Accurate, reliable, and built to last. You set it in it's place, plug it in, and once you get back from your hernia operation you're ready to go. The only maintenance it needs is the occasional dusting.

Chosing an Amp:
So why did I go with a Bryston? Did it make everything else sound like crap? Nope. I tested a few amps, and even failed DBT's and SBT's on a couple. Anthem, Bryston, Rotel, Classe, Krell, all sounded darned similar once I got them into the same system. While others may well hear differences, I felt that if I couldn't tell these amps apart in a blind test then why worry about it? Perhaps I would have perceived subtle differences after weeks of listening to each, as some have suggested. I suppose I'm just too lazy to chase it that far. Spending weeks with each of these amps was simply too much of a hassle.

Once satisfied that these amps were practically inidistinguishable to my tin ears, I made my final choice based on other factors such as construction quality, warranty, etcetera. I would not even think of suggesting that these amps will sound identical to everyone. The numerous variables in home audio systems produce a plethora of complex interactions that cannot be dismissed out of hand based on any one test or even a handful of them. My only advice is to test things yourself, and let your ears be the judge. Not your eyes or easily influenced mind. DBT's aren't perfect, but they beat sighted tests with your mind full of reviews and salesperson pitches.

 

[RobWil]

I agree that in comparing these high-end brands to each other it may be hard to distiguish the difference. How about if you throw a low-end Kenwood receiver into the mix?
What would be your opionion?

 

[Shane Martin]

Quote:



Belief systems, though, are hard to let go of.




Including the belief that small measurable differences are not audible, the belief that power cords are voodoo, yadd yadda yadda. Beating a dead horse with people you can't convince is so much more fun isn't it Jack?

Quote:



Despite the willingness of some, and that includes myself, to either provide literature or the methodology by which you could personally conduct a scientific investigation in the privacy of your own home, with equipment, sound sources, and surroundings familiar to yourself, a consistent choice appears to be made by you to dismiss or avoid it.




I've done your so called level matched blind tests and so has a few others and we have revealed differences. Then again you probably will find a chink in our armor and point that out as a reason the test didn't live up to your expectations. Most people A) don't care about the testing in general and find its a waste of time and B) would rather enjoy their new find euphoria and share it with their peers w/o having somebody "fart" on the thread with their scientific belief/mantra. Tests never satisfy everyone. They are at best a waste of time IMHO.

Quote:



50% more performance needs to be quantified.




in what terms? To me if I notice a difference whatever the amt maybe I then think of what else I could do to improve my system with the same amt I'm spending on such tweak. So Tweak/upgrade costs $500. Could I find another more substantial upgrade that I could spend $500 on or does this make the best sense to me. 50% increase to me maybe 5% or inaudible to you. It's in the ear of the beholder.

Quote:



"I want it because it's quieter to my ears"




The only person I've ever seen to say that is a person who wants a fanless amp. COMPLETELY WAY different reasoning that the discussion we are having now.

Quote:



You may look upon it as being disrespectful to inform someone that they're wrong. Not wrong because it's my opinion. Wrong because all the evidence points to it and nothing, other than anecdotal statements weigh in on the opposing side. I'm sure I've been guilty of not choosing my words carefully enough. Usually I try. Sometimes I get frustrated, tired, and it doesn't come out very well. For that I certainly apologize. Yet, in the context of this thread, what sort of respect should be accorded to a false statement based upon a false methodology? This ain't like some of the school districts in Wisconsin that have sought to embrace fuzzy math because they don't want to hurt children's feelings. If you're wrong, find out why you are and move on. If you're not sure, ask for an explanation or a clarification. If someone is claiming they can hear 2 picosends of jitter but all the credible scientific research points to 2 nanoseconds as being the threshhold, then why do you accord that person any worthy respect. They're wrong. If you're going to feel offended everytime someone points out what you did wrong or where you can improve yourself, then you've been watching too much "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" and falling asleep with Oprah reruns.




IT Isn't wrong if someone asks for that opinion. The UNWANTED opinion is what bugs me the most. If a person asks for such an opinion go for it. If you want to search on the thread for the Breakin Tendancies of Anthem amp50 or something to that sort you will see a thread with a good flow UNTIL someone threadfarts with the unneeded opinion that "break-in doesn't exist, you are imagining things". That is what especially burns me up. Perhaps this statement that alot of folks DON'T READ could apply to all forums..

Quote:



Note: This area of the forum has been set up to discuss/debate the use of cables, interconnects and tweaks. It has not been set up to offer an opinion that has not been asked for. If a member asks which brand of interconnect, etc. to buy this does not give anyone the right to tell them not to buy them in the first place in that same thread. If the member asks you for your opinion on whether to buy a product or not then your opinion is welcome. Posts that are made for the sole purpose of offering an opinion that was not asked for will be deleted!




It is simply about respect. If a person asks, go for it. IF not, bite your tongue

Quote:



Are they audibly different. Not a chance.




How are you so sure? lemme guess... your scientific belief...you spoke of earlier..

Quote:



BTW, you do recall that the president of Transparent some years back took issue with what Nousaine said regarding the inability of people to distinguish between wires.




Provide a link please. Nousiane could of course setup the test to make the guy fail on purpose to make him look like a schiester(sp?). Tests are always setup with a bias.

Quote:



I agree you should trust your own ears Shane. A level matched, blind test allow you to do just that. Nothing more




No they don't. They are setup with a bias. A bias towards whomever is setting up the test. We all have opinions.

Quote:



Musicians, orchestral conductors, recording engineers, young people, old people...the results keep coming up the same.




Then why do we continue to beat a dead horse? They don't come up the same otherwise we'd have moved on by now.

Quote:



Presenting evidence, and bodies of it...citations to peer reviewed publications is hardly threadfarting, thread jacking, thread terrorism. If accurate and reproducible research threatens you, then audioasylum is the place to go. It's a comfortable place where anything is possible and is populated by a slew of credophiles. Eventually someone will post something you believe in and you've found your soul-mate in life. Bon-appetit!




Why should I leave? I'd prefer to stay here and have a unthreadfarted forum with respectful people. Can't you do that? Bite your PHD tongue and move on.

Quote:



The Levinson CD player offers substandard performance for its price




When it comes down to it this is the heart of the debate for the objective crew. its not about differences, its about how much money one is spending to see/hear those differences isn't it? OTherwise you wouldn't tell us to buy the cheapest cable everytime or mock Levinson would you? It IS about money and always will be. Value is a personal term. LEvinson maybe a bad value to YOU but to the person buying it and finding the improved performance it is worth it and let him and the fellow levinsonites enjoy their gear. They are not asking for you opinion on how substandard of a performer it is because it would bear itself out in listening. It has in the past IMHO.

Quote:



If you can't hear it, then you're either hard of hearing, a hick, have an insufficiently revealing system, etc.




It's very real. So you can't hear the difference of $1000 speaker cable on your sony boombox. Yeah thats the same as a $15,000 tube setup right...and monkeys will fly out my ass soon.

Quote:



I personally find it telling as to why either amp or wire mongers haven't produced one repeatable controlled listening test that confirms their statements.




Because they don't need a test to confirm their statement. They are NOT out to prove it to people like you. YOU are the only one asking for proof, not the subjectivist such as myself, Lee etc. Do you see my point so far? They also probably don't give a rip and are enjoying their new found sonic euphoria...until the next upgrade comes along.

Quote:



The ONLY way to know for sure is controlled listening tests...the ONLY way.




TO YOU. Let me repeat that... To YOU. You are the one asking for evidence, not us. Sounds like an audio lynch mob to me.

Quote:



Again, use as much valid science as possible to narrow the field if you want - science does have a role. But I think it is naive to believe that metrics can capture everything in music. It is a complex and dynamic interaction with our hearing and brain's neural networks.




This is perfect. Science can't answer everything IMHO ..it might for you Chu but it doesn't for many of us.

Quote:



by the Audio Engineering Society and the Boston Audio Society (two organizations historically reviled by the subjectivist crowd)




They are? Why is it I've never heard of them.

Quote:



Why won't somebody from within the high-end cottage industry present test results that are reproducable




I bet they don't give a rip. The only people asking for evidence is the objectivist crew. The subjectivist crew doesn't need a test to confirm what they just heard in their own system. Contrary to popular belief, we don't just pick up a copy of Stereophile and buy stuff blindly because they thought "it created a magical soundstage that added depth to my system".

 

[Yogi]

Keep beating the dead horse. I am sure some day in the future it will turn into a beautiful live mermaid.

 

[RobWil]

Hey Yogi! How's BooBoo?


Subjectivist >

< Objectivist

 

[NickSP]

I can present a paper from the AES that shows people were able to detect jitter down to 10 nanoseconds. There are also papers on other differences being detected by listening as well.

WOW! I'd like to drink from the same well those people do!

 

[Lee Scoggins]

I bet they don't give a rip.

Actually many do...visit my buddy George Cardas' site at http://www.cardas.com/insights/index.html and click "Cable Resonance is Easy to Measure" to see oscilloscope graphs where he presents scientific data on his cables. Oh, wait, this can't be right, his cables sell above X dollars. How can that be better?