Ytheleus1212
Member
Good for you Jeff. Congratulations.
I'm treating Allo's claim that there is a sweet spot as an open question, pending evidence.
If there is such a thing, it should be measurable with a calibrated microphone , which is more sensitive than our ears, and saves us having spiky conversations about whose ears have the most authority.
It is possible to measure accurately how far any amplifier deviates from complete transparency at different supply voltages with the right equipment. The claim of a sweet spot seems to say that the THD + N figure (deviation from ideal transparency in other words) is different in some important and measurable way at our sweet spot. Obviously different implementations will have their own systems attached, speakers, preamps and so on, but amps can be measured at different supply voltages in the same system.
It only matters (and only a bit) if the sweet spot isn't measurable. Because that would mean the theoretically ideal voltage would be 24V, which would in turn deliver two advantages. Marginally more volume headroom and better dynamics. By dynamics I mean a potentially greater contrast between loud and soft sounds amplified from the source material.
The overall average transparency doesn't matter particularly, just that the claimed sweet spot shows up as differences in transparency, using the source material (usually a frequency sweep) as a known reference signal.
Not sure if this a a response to my post on the same subject, so I'll answer as though it is and beg your indulgence if not.I think something like "sounds better" is probably a hard thing to measure objectively, especially given the whole chicken and egg thing in audio: should it sound like real music or should it convey what's on the actual recording.
I'm treating Allo's claim that there is a sweet spot as an open question, pending evidence.
If there is such a thing, it should be measurable with a calibrated microphone , which is more sensitive than our ears, and saves us having spiky conversations about whose ears have the most authority.
It is possible to measure accurately how far any amplifier deviates from complete transparency at different supply voltages with the right equipment. The claim of a sweet spot seems to say that the THD + N figure (deviation from ideal transparency in other words) is different in some important and measurable way at our sweet spot. Obviously different implementations will have their own systems attached, speakers, preamps and so on, but amps can be measured at different supply voltages in the same system.
It only matters (and only a bit) if the sweet spot isn't measurable. Because that would mean the theoretically ideal voltage would be 24V, which would in turn deliver two advantages. Marginally more volume headroom and better dynamics. By dynamics I mean a potentially greater contrast between loud and soft sounds amplified from the source material.
The overall average transparency doesn't matter particularly, just that the claimed sweet spot shows up as differences in transparency, using the source material (usually a frequency sweep) as a known reference signal.
Last edited: