I for one, think sometimes deference is used to imagine difference.
Differences in Amp Sound: What’s the Truth?
- Thread starter gagelle
- Start date
- Status
I for one, think sometimes deference is used to imagine difference.
Ok! So I spelled it wrong, you got my point, didn’t you?
So now were down to criticizing my spelling and using a spelling error to make fun of me. Very mature of you, I must say. If you can’t find anything wrong with my observations you, you stoop to childish actions.
There is a difference between hearing things and "Hearing things". I agree with everything John says, live, enjoy, experiment, treat yourself etc. But is "Hearing things" necessarily a good thing in Hi-Fi audio? Us trying to fool ourselves by "hearing things" and then loudly proclaim superior sonic performance of our Hi-Fi swag is why we are tagged as Audiophools by "outsiders".
There isn't a clear line separating mind game and hardware game in this hobby and I doubt there will be one. Psychoacoustics is a tricky area to deal with mainly because of the Psycho and not the Acoustics segment. Psychology isn't an exact science.
IMO yes there are audible differences in sonic performance between amplifiers but not enough to justify from engineering POV some boutique prices that exist in Hi-End audio or subjective claims made by Hi-Fi magazine reviewers.
But just like the case with cars, yes you can treat yourself with a rare German amp and enjoy your hobby, don't bother deconstructing what you heard or what the manufacturer and the magazine reviewer have claimed. You don't really buy a Ferrari because it's fast, we all know that. You just treat yourself with some bling because you only live once.
Funny thing is how EQs can completely annihilate the Audiophile tower of Babylon and all this "Hearing things" that has us going on our consumer odyssey. When was the last time Stereophile reviewed an EQ, sound processor etc? Are they really that bad? Why do music studios have them? Weird isn't it?
:scratch2:
There isn't a clear line separating mind game and hardware game in this hobby and I doubt there will be one. Psychoacoustics is a tricky area to deal with mainly because of the Psycho and not the Acoustics segment. Psychology isn't an exact science.
IMO yes there are audible differences in sonic performance between amplifiers but not enough to justify from engineering POV some boutique prices that exist in Hi-End audio or subjective claims made by Hi-Fi magazine reviewers.
But just like the case with cars, yes you can treat yourself with a rare German amp and enjoy your hobby, don't bother deconstructing what you heard or what the manufacturer and the magazine reviewer have claimed. You don't really buy a Ferrari because it's fast, we all know that. You just treat yourself with some bling because you only live once.
Funny thing is how EQs can completely annihilate the Audiophile tower of Babylon and all this "Hearing things" that has us going on our consumer odyssey. When was the last time Stereophile reviewed an EQ, sound processor etc? Are they really that bad? Why do music studios have them? Weird isn't it?
:scratch2:
Last edited:
ev13wt
Super Member
What I have learned from this thread and the information it contains:
1. Per se, audio recording has flaws. It is not reproducing the "real thing".
2. Recording venues color the sound of the "sources".
3. The "Sources" sound different - a piano from one manufacturer sounds different than one from another.
4. Reproduction gear inherently has flaws. One wishes to have a transistor that is "perfect", but the reality is they have flaws. They are not perfect.
5. Analog to digital technology (and DA) has flaws. It is not perfect.
6. Human ears and brains interact. It is possible to train them for certain things.
7. All humans have different levels of training.
8. Education level in humans varies. None are "perfectly" educated. Thus there will be problems in communication because one person is trying his best at communication but it is just not reaching another person.
9. All humans have different personalities, which affect communication as as well as hearing.
A thought concluded from the above "facts":
1. The 10,000$ challenge compares an inherently faulty transistor to another inherently faulty transistor ONLY, disregarding all that engineers and salesmen and marketing people do to the "sound" in each company to please human ears that are different to each other. So that challenge does not compare gear to gear, but in reality - similar specced transistors to each other.
Obvious facts:
2. The line between a troll and an ignorant person if very fine.
3. Trolls will be trolls because they can.
Conclusions for me personally:
1. For ME, since the entire reproduction process has certain flaws, good enough for me is good enough for me. This means I won't discuss amp sound coloration to a emotive level, nor will I discuss cable sound or all those other "tweaks". I am happy at a certain point. I will however discuss speakers, carts and AD compression technology. I will discuss op amps to a certain degree.
2. If someone wants to discuss amp coloration or cable sound, it is only fair that I let them and don't try to push my religion upon them. They are free to have their own religious views.
3. I will always "look down" on manufacturers that sell minuscule improvements for large sums of money. Not saying there isn't a difference to be heard, but FOR ME, its playing with people.
4. If someone wants to spend 1000$ on a power cable however, I will voice my opinion based on what "I" think is "fact". If they still want to buy it, it is not my mission to change this.
5. I have a pair of 400$ sunglasses, and a 20$ one with UV protection will also do the job "just the same". Maybe the 400$ ones are 1% clearer than the 20$ ones. When out on the lake, the 20$ ones will work just fine for me because:
6. Good enough is good enough.
Final conclusion:
1. Since the topic has so far brought so many results, using statistical analyses on the various opinions posted I have come to the "fact" that many amps sound different than many other amps while all amps sound the same. It is the only "truth" in this hobby.
1. Per se, audio recording has flaws. It is not reproducing the "real thing".
2. Recording venues color the sound of the "sources".
3. The "Sources" sound different - a piano from one manufacturer sounds different than one from another.
4. Reproduction gear inherently has flaws. One wishes to have a transistor that is "perfect", but the reality is they have flaws. They are not perfect.
5. Analog to digital technology (and DA) has flaws. It is not perfect.
6. Human ears and brains interact. It is possible to train them for certain things.
7. All humans have different levels of training.
8. Education level in humans varies. None are "perfectly" educated. Thus there will be problems in communication because one person is trying his best at communication but it is just not reaching another person.
9. All humans have different personalities, which affect communication as as well as hearing.
A thought concluded from the above "facts":
1. The 10,000$ challenge compares an inherently faulty transistor to another inherently faulty transistor ONLY, disregarding all that engineers and salesmen and marketing people do to the "sound" in each company to please human ears that are different to each other. So that challenge does not compare gear to gear, but in reality - similar specced transistors to each other.
Obvious facts:
2. The line between a troll and an ignorant person if very fine.
3. Trolls will be trolls because they can.
Conclusions for me personally:
1. For ME, since the entire reproduction process has certain flaws, good enough for me is good enough for me. This means I won't discuss amp sound coloration to a emotive level, nor will I discuss cable sound or all those other "tweaks". I am happy at a certain point. I will however discuss speakers, carts and AD compression technology. I will discuss op amps to a certain degree.
2. If someone wants to discuss amp coloration or cable sound, it is only fair that I let them and don't try to push my religion upon them. They are free to have their own religious views.
3. I will always "look down" on manufacturers that sell minuscule improvements for large sums of money. Not saying there isn't a difference to be heard, but FOR ME, its playing with people.
4. If someone wants to spend 1000$ on a power cable however, I will voice my opinion based on what "I" think is "fact". If they still want to buy it, it is not my mission to change this.
5. I have a pair of 400$ sunglasses, and a 20$ one with UV protection will also do the job "just the same". Maybe the 400$ ones are 1% clearer than the 20$ ones. When out on the lake, the 20$ ones will work just fine for me because:
6. Good enough is good enough.
Final conclusion:
1. Since the topic has so far brought so many results, using statistical analyses on the various opinions posted I have come to the "fact" that many amps sound different than many other amps while all amps sound the same. It is the only "truth" in this hobby.
Last edited:
davidro
Lunatic Member
Well there's a Stereophile Feb 2013 issue lying right next to me (used as mouse pad) and it has an article devoted to BSG qø1 Signal Completion Stage. I still don't quite understand exactly what it does but the impression is it's something similar to an EQ.
ev13wt
Super Member
Today, in the military field of electronics devices exist that so far surpass this 20 Hz to 20KHz discussion... These devices take a certain analog signal and digitize it. The devices generate signals completely in the digital domain. The devices generate analog signals from these digital signals.
We are talking about <1pps clocks. Jitter levels < 10 ps, 16-Bit 2.7 GHz at up to 3.6 Giga samples per second analog to digital conversion.
What to these devices do? They fly around in the air and float around on the sea. They generate fake (Reproducing reality) aircraft and boats. They mimic the bad guys electronically for military training purposes.
Applied to audio, gear like this can extract a single voice talking (into a cell phone for instance) in a bar that is filled and loud while a band is playing at full blast as long as the position of the mic array and of course the mouth talking is known in 3D space. It has algorithms to zoom in onto the voice. It can also simulate this mouth in position and timbre using a speaker array in the same bar while masking the real voice and putting another persons voice in its place.
What I am saying is: There are so many possibilities for audio reproduction to tap into in the future! When this tech trickles down, it is possible to measure your room and adapt your speaker (Multiple speaker arrays on multiple walls for instance) response to it with the push of a button for reproduction levels approaching perfectly recreated venues...
I hope we all get to experience this "HD" breakthrough in audio.
We are talking about <1pps clocks. Jitter levels < 10 ps, 16-Bit 2.7 GHz at up to 3.6 Giga samples per second analog to digital conversion.
What to these devices do? They fly around in the air and float around on the sea. They generate fake (Reproducing reality) aircraft and boats. They mimic the bad guys electronically for military training purposes.
Applied to audio, gear like this can extract a single voice talking (into a cell phone for instance) in a bar that is filled and loud while a band is playing at full blast as long as the position of the mic array and of course the mouth talking is known in 3D space. It has algorithms to zoom in onto the voice. It can also simulate this mouth in position and timbre using a speaker array in the same bar while masking the real voice and putting another persons voice in its place.
What I am saying is: There are so many possibilities for audio reproduction to tap into in the future! When this tech trickles down, it is possible to measure your room and adapt your speaker (Multiple speaker arrays on multiple walls for instance) response to it with the push of a button for reproduction levels approaching perfectly recreated venues...
I hope we all get to experience this "HD" breakthrough in audio.
What he said
What are you talking about? If I'm going to criticize you for anything it would be taking a post that has absolutely nothing to do with you, and thinking it is in some way directed at you. What on Earth does my post have to do with you?
EQ, DSP, ASP, tone controls - are all different things. Bass/Treble tone controls compared to a studio quality Parametric EQ are like doing surgery with a brick.
I'm not saying that an EQ can fix everything in a bad amplifier. No, I still think you need a decent amplifier and an EQ and you can fine tune to your musical preferences, room and rest of the HiFi components synergy. Its like doing the Carver challenge but with alien technology compared to Carvers soldering iron, resistors and caps. With an EQ you can imitate many amps, preamps, speakers, speaker cables etc. that would cost you money to buy as alternatives to your components.
But oh no! That is a grave sin, it gets you out of the Audiophile club. Why so?
Clearly Hi-Fi magazines consider EQs to belong in musicians rooms and not audiophiles rooms. I think that is no coincidence.
I'm not saying that an EQ can fix everything in a bad amplifier. No, I still think you need a decent amplifier and an EQ and you can fine tune to your musical preferences, room and rest of the HiFi components synergy. Its like doing the Carver challenge but with alien technology compared to Carvers soldering iron, resistors and caps. With an EQ you can imitate many amps, preamps, speakers, speaker cables etc. that would cost you money to buy as alternatives to your components.
But oh no! That is a grave sin, it gets you out of the Audiophile club. Why so?
Clearly Hi-Fi magazines consider EQs to belong in musicians rooms and not audiophiles rooms. I think that is no coincidence.
There are times I read things here that are unintentionally the funniest things to me. Why else would we do anything else in a hobby about listening, then listen to hear things?
No, not imagine things. HEAR things. Again, we're talking about different personality types more than different gear here. You are a person chained to proof and objectivity. As such, it is "proven" that you will be less likely to allow for deviation from your own point of view, because you are convinced through your reasoning that you are seeking the one, singular, answer. What you fail to see, is that not everybody shares that personality trait. Another type of personality will appreciate that in some things, there isn't one answer, and especially in something in pursuit of enjoyment of an art form, there is room for subjective deviation. The whole subjective/objective thing is a debate between different ways we are wired. And as such, it is absolutely pointless. You aren't going to chain somebody's mind, because our minds are created differently.
You guys who think you understand what the EQ thing is about have no idea. I don't know what chip you have on your shoulder that makes you think that audiophile guys are out to make every decision to make you feel inferior. They're not. They simply have tried the things, and found they like to chase the sound they're after in a different way. Why? Because they didn't like them. That's it. They didn't like what they added in comparison to what they took away. End of story. It has nothing to do with a comment on social status or illogical reasoning. Not everything in the world is directed at making you feel bad about yourself. These people are just out to make a system that sounds good to THEM not YOU. And as such, they've made a different decision for themselves. As such, get over it. Or, rather, get over yourself. Its not about you.
Beyond that, there is hi fi gear that has tone controls. I know Luxman and Marantz have integrated amps and at least Marantz currently makes a high-end preamp with them because I owned it. And it was well reviewed and popular. So if you don't even read the magazines, don't try to invent what they're talking about because you can't stand to crack open some reading material because it'll conflict with the bogey-man you're creating.
Beyond that, there is hi fi gear that has tone controls. I know Luxman and Marantz have integrated amps and at least Marantz currently makes a high-end preamp with them because I owned it. And it was well reviewed and popular. So if you don't even read the magazines, don't try to invent what they're talking about because you can't stand to crack open some reading material because it'll conflict with the bogey-man you're creating.
The beginner uses "EQ", the audiophile "changes one amp for a different sounding amp".
Hmmm.
Some audiophiles change interconnects and/or speaker cables instead of amps to get a different sound.
The beginner uses "EQ", the audiophile "changes one amp for a different sounding amp".
Hmmm.
No, the audiophile chooses the amp that best works with the rest of his system. HUGE difference.
Not a different sound. More a matter of fine tuning to get the best out of their equipment.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
