The 'New' vs. 'Old' Technology Amp Sound... (1 Viewer)

[RobertR]

Lee,
I appreciate your asking. It is preferable to assuming. With respect to amplifiers, there are certainly reasons why some amplifiers can (and do) sound different, especially with certain designs used with certain speakers. For example, the ultra low impedance of the old Apogee speakers demanded ultra high current amplifiers. Obviously, you couldn't use a cheap amplifier with them. And it's no secret that tube amplifiers can interact with some speakers so that they can sound different.
It's not even a cost issue. Zipser was claiming that his Pass amplifiers were superior to amps in the same price range (Krell, Levinson). I simply find it amusing that SOMETIMES (just in case you or someone else tries to claim I'm making a blanket statement) these sort of claims are, to say the least, rather overblown.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

It's not even a cost issue. Zipser was claiming that his Pass amplifiers were superior to amps in the same price range (Krell, Levinson). I simply find it amusing that SOMETIMES (just in case you or someone else tries to claim I'm making a blanket statement) these sort of claims are, to say the least, rather overblown.

Thank you for stating your position.

By the way, I have always found that all-Minnesota systems are fine sounding. In my system, I have Audio Research VT-100 tube amps driving Maggie 1.6QRs with a digital front end of Sony SCD-777ES and as many Super Audio CDs I can get my hands on. I am looking for a turntable though, due to some cool vinyl over at Classic Records and Acoustic Sounds.

 

[Aaron_Smith]

Aside from the (mostly irrelevant) debate about that listening test, I have a few views that I wanted to post.
- I strongly disagree that all transistor amps made in the 70's were poor. This "dark days" view is widely held by the tube fanatics; I have listened to plenty of 70's sand amps (marantz, sansui) that sound quite a bit nicer than today's transistor amps, and nicer than a poorly executed tube setup. Nothing against tubes, but... c'mon.
- The discussion is mostly irrelevant unless the speakers are brought into consideration. The same amp may sound great with some speakers and lousy with others.
- While better amp parts may be available to today's designers, that doesn't mean better quality amps are being built. If anything there's more cost pressure to use less expensive parts than there was 20 years ago.
- tube, mosfet, bipolar, etc... there are good ones and bad ones. Good designers make good amps, but the "sound" has as much to do with the design as it does with the actual parts.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Good designers make good amps, but the "sound" has as much to do with the design as it does with the actual parts.

Agreed.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Aaron,
If I can elaborate a bit more. I think the newer designs do a better job of creating a more liquid, natural midrange in solid state. As for tubes, I think the bass has become as punchy as solid state.
So if you will, there has been much "sonic crossover" and the designs of both solid state and tubes eliminate past weaknesses.
There are always exceptions, but I am talking of better brands.
Also, I think the less expensive gear is benefiting greatly from improvements in the top of line gear.
Just my opinion of course.

 

[Alex F.]

I just read the link (thank you, Robert).

I have personally never auditioned that Yamaha model. Has anybody else here ever done so? Anyone know its approximate retail price? My hat is off to Yamaha for producing what is apparently a fine-sounding unit.

This would not be the first time that two amps had such close sonic similarities, although in my experience it is rather rare, especially to the point where they could not be reliably differentiated from one another. (I have participated in several blind tests conducted by manufacturers and designers, as I've posted here in the past.) Most of the time, the single-blind testing (conducted with me listening, eyes always closed) was stopped after 5-7 trials because I was able to tell which amp was which every time, and because it became easier and quicker to correctly ID the models.

One test I recall fondly involved a new power amp designed specifically to sonically match a competitor's very popular model, but to be sold for less. The test stopped after seven straight IDs--the new amp's grain structure was a dead sonic giveaway. The last two or so trials lasted under 10 seconds because I immediately and correctly called out the unit being played.

But to get back to the topic, I cannot understand why a different amp was not substituted after it became obvious that by happenstance two very similar units were under test. Continuing the same test was like beating a dead horse. As a store owner, that fellow surely had access to other products.

In the end at least one of three things came to light: (1) the two listeners had hearing problems; (2) something in the test masked the differences; or (3) the Yamaha and Pass amps sounded very much alike.

If the correct answer is number 3, it means that those amps in question are very similar. That is all it means. Nothing more. It is folly to extrapolate that it means all amps sound alike (which Chu inferred earlier and was the apparent reason he mentioned the story in the first place). Can we at least agree that such an extrapolation is incorrect?

Have a nice weekend, everyone!

 

[Maneesh]

Now that this thread has been completely derailed, let me chime in with my decidedly non-expert opinion
To those asking for a link, the thread in question can be found here - rec.audio.opinion debate
I think there are some things we can all agree upon -
- the return from high end audio equipment goes down exponentially as the price goes up. What that price point is is of course the imp question but just because a Pass amp costs >> Yamaha does not necessarily mean its better
- It all becomes very much a matter of subjective opinion and personal taste (influenced by all sorts of biases)
- this is very much like the cable/power cord flame wars where in the end everyone alwyas agrees to disagree
- I believe in DBT's (or in fact any sort of testing procedure as long as its accepted by both parties as a fair test, which it never is ), because otherwise there's no way to objectively decide which equipment is superior
- For many people (in fact the majority) the only way to make decisions is based on reports on forums like this. In other words, hearsay. Having a story published in a magazine in no way gives it credibility (quite the opposite may be true). There's always the 'an audiophile trusts only her ears' defence though Some of us have to rely on other experience and place our trust and $$ in their reports.

in your estimation we should buy the cheapest equipment we can find, that has the minimum power we require, and all the features we need? Any money spent on gear above this minimum level is pure waste?

You would definitely not want to buy the most expensive equipment, would you? Avoiding the extremes is always a prudent strategy. No one ever claimed that there are no sonic or audible differences in the entire range of amps.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Robert,
I see you finally added the link I will check it out.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

the return from high end audio equipment goes down exponentially as the price goes up

Maneesh,

While I agree that "marginal utility" comes into play as one buys more expensive equipment, I do not believe it always occurs exponentially. My super-expensive Cardas wire made a HUGE improvement over my still expensive Audio Research wire.

I have also found that my friend's ever changing and escalating phono cartridge collection is also indicative of this. It seems he is making $1,000 leaps in price every 6-12 months but I gotta tell you the sound improves markedly every time he upgrades. A big step up every time.

 

[Graeme Shiomi]

Robert,
You know what, I must apologize. You are correct. After re-reading your posts, I noticed that at no point did you indicate any opinion on what happened between Nousaine and Zipser. Just that the exchange did indeed happen.
I guess I was reading too much into it, since your opinion that cables are difference free is so well known around here. So am I correct in "assuming" that this belief is not the same for hardware like receivers and/or amplifiers?
So what happened afterwards? Did Zipser sell his amps? Did he renounce his high-end ways and vow to never again buy expensive gear?

 

[mike_decock]

- I believe in DBT's (or in fact any sort of testing procedure as long as its accepted by both parties as a fair test, which it never is ), because otherwise there's no way to objectively decide which equipment is superior

My view on DBTs is slightly different. It is useful for determining if there is an instantly discernable difference but it's not always the whole story.
I read an article in Stereophile a few years ago that I found fascinating. It was an LP vs. CD experiment where groups of non-audiophile listeners were asked to listen to the same pieces of music. After their listening, they were asked how much they liked the music and how they felt afterwards. This was done in as scientific a manner as possible with equally matched high-end components, the same performances and careful level-matching. It was found that the listeners generally favored the same piece of music when it was played back from LP and felt more relaxed afterwards.
Now, I'm not trying to start a CD vs. LP debate here (been there, done that), but I put more stock into long-term listening experiences and the emotional impact a piece of equipment is capable of delivering. Unfortunately, this is a much more difficult thing to quantify and much more expensive and time-consuming to collect the data.
The reason I lean this way is because my pursuit isn't the perfect recreation of sounds. My goal is to find the equipment that will enable me to connect more closely to the music. Maybe someday we'll have a measurement for emotional impact and it'll make my quest a little easier.
Just my Humble Opinion.
-Mike...

 

[RobertR]

I appreciate that, Graeme. Although I do think differences between good transistor amps are overblown, I also think there can be and are differences between amps that are significant in a way that cables aren't.
No, Zipser didn't sell his amps. Instead, he gave excuses for his failure. The first day's comparison was done using cable swapping, because Zipser was of the opinion that an ABX box masks differences (actually, it's been shown to increase sensitivity to differences). He claimed later that he failed the first day because he had had too much wine the night before (even though he didn't say that before the test).
The second day, he wanted to try the ABX box. He attributed his failure then to problems with the box. But he never publicly participated in another blind test.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

but I put more stock into long-term listening experiences and the emotional impact a piece of equipment is capable of delivering.

Excellent point Mike.

I have been involved in many component and cable evaluations where the value of improvement became evident over several days and weeks, not just on the first day.

I think this is a valid weakness of DBTs.

Robert, I think we should be careful not to infer too much from one example.

 

[RobertR]

A few thoughts on your post, Mike. The Stereophile experiment you described is NOT the same as a DBT involving cables or amplifiers. It is clearly different in nature, because the listeners were not asked to tell if they could hear a difference. Obviously they could. Instead, they were asked to say which they prefer. Saying "I prefer A over B" is very different from trying to tell if you even know whether you are listening to A or B.

I've heard of DBTs where a DAT recording of an LP was made. The idea was to see if the DAT could transparently capture the sound of an LP. Listeners under the DBT conditions couldn't tell which was which. This is obviously different from the Stereophile experiment, which deals with preference.

Finally, I'm well aware that one of the objections raised to DBTs is that the comparisons aren't long enough, that one needs a long time to tell the difference. My suspicion is that this objection is raised in order to make it more difficult to conduct the test ("Gee Robert, I'd LOVE to participate in a DBT, but I really need weeks and weeks and WEEKS to eke out the differences, so it's really not practical. Darn! and here I was all ready to do it!"). I'd really have to question the significance of a "difference" that was SO subtle and vague that one could only say one's emotions felt different (of course, one's emotional state is subject to a lot more influences than listening to audio gear, making it highly unlikely that one could attribute the emotional difference solely to what audio gear one was listening to) and that took days or even weeks to "feel". Also, this "It takes me a long time to discern the differences" argument directly contradicts the flowery and dramatic prose used by reviewers ("dramatic", "flabbergasting", "the music now roared like stallions out of the speakers", "jaw dropping", etc.)

 

[Lee Scoggins]

My suspicion is that this objection is raised in order to make it more difficult to conduct the test

You may believe this Robert, but it is still a valid weakness of DBTs.
It also seems to correlate with the Northwestern study of listener experience.
It is entirely possible, that sonic differences can exist but capturing these differences in a 1-2 hour test is challenging.
That's why I believe the best thing to do is simply borrow a cable from a good, independent dealer and drop it in one's system keeping all else equal and listening for improvements or declines in sonic quality over time. This is what we do in the studio as an audiophile label and what most popular recording engineers do. I know because we use the same studios and I have seem them do this to test microphone cables.
Guess we have come full circle now.

 

[RobertR]

but it is still a valid weakness of DBTs.

Not in the case of the speaker cable you referred to as being a "black and white" difference, Lee. It's not so much a weakness as a logistical difficulty. One could still conduct a DBT that lasted weeks. Again, my suspicion is that the believer would find yet another objection (one in an endless series).

 

[Larry B]

I'm stayin' out of this one, too!

 

[mike_decock]

A few thoughts on your post, Mike. The Stereophile experiment you described is NOT the same as a DBT involving cables or amplifiers.

I know it's not a DBT but I think it holds more validity. My goal isn't to have the ability to distinguish sonic nuances that have little to no influence on how much impact listening to the music will have.

I'm also trying to bring to light the idea that there are things we don't "hear" consciously, but affect us subconsciously. I heard of evidence where brain activity was measured in response to ultrasonic frequencies even though the subjects couldn't "hear" it.

It's all a matter of learning to dismiss the hype while at the same time learning to listen with your heart.

-Mike...

 

[RobertR]

I'm also trying to bring to light the idea that there are things we don't "hear" consciously, but affect us subconsciously.

I'm not sure what this means with respect to audio gear. I'd laugh at a salesman who tried to tell me "buy this cable, even though you'll have NO conscious knowledge of any difference, but it COULD make your libido stronger". Classic marketing voodoo. And, of course, it would fail a DBT, since if you tried it, there would be no correlation between what you were listening to and how you "feel".

 

[mike_decock]

I'm not sure what this means with respect to audio gear. I'd laugh at a salesman who tried to tell me "buy this cable, even though you'll have NO conscious knowledge of any difference, but it COULD make your libido stronger". Classic marketing voodoo.

Of course there is a lot of voodoo surrounding audio equipment because we have yet to make any truly meaningful measurements that correllate to our actual enjoyment of how well it reproduces the music.

If a salesman made such a claim about a cable, I'd laugh at him, too. Mostly because I don't think that cables make a lick of difference in the first place. On the other hand, you never know, he may be right. If you gave it a chance, took it home and let it settle in, your Significant Other may be giving you those lusty looks you haven't seen in a while.


-Mike...