Differences in Amp Sound: What’s the Truth?

[JohnVF]

The beginner uses "EQ", the audiophile "changes one amp for a different sounding amp".


Hmmm.

Actually yes, that is exactly what I do. Experience has taught me that getting things right from a hardware standpoint instead of correcting things with tools too blunt for what I'm trying to solve, results in a much more consistent sound across the board, without having to put yet one more thing in the signal path, which leads to a cleaner sound here. If experience hasn't taught you that, then that is fine. Different paths for different people.

Like it or not a bunch of guys chase a "simpler is better"approach for themselves. Again, its no remark on you and has nothing to do with you. It is their personal preference and almost always chosen after exploring other options. Which is not something I can say for all the stances being taken in this thread.

 

[ev13wt]

No, the audiophile chooses the amp that best works with the rest of his system. HUGE difference.

The beginner uses EQ to help his bad tape sources. The audiophile only has virgin pressings of audiophile recordings.

Not a different sound. More a matter of fine tuning to get the best out of their equipment.

Isn't fine tuning the same, albeit only on a much smaller scale?


Ok, I was trolling a bit, trying to joke around - I admit it. But all last 5 posts really belong in TOL, now don't they?

 

[ev13wt]

Actually yes, that is exactly what I do. Experience has taught me that getting things right from a hardware standpoint instead of correcting things with tools too blunt for what I'm trying to solve, results in a much more consistent sound across the board, without having to put yet one more thing in the signal path, which leads to a cleaner sound here. If experience hasn't taught you that, then that is fine. Different paths for different people.

Like it or not a bunch of guys chase a "simpler is better"approach for themselves. Again, its no remark on you and has nothing to do with you. It is their personal preference and almost always chosen after exploring other options. Which is not something I can say for all the stances being taken in this thread.

I almost always have the button for the EQ loop OFF. My EQ is old and while it is quite musical it does add some sort of change to the sound even if all levers are in the middle position. Maybe its only volume (It gets a tad quieter with the EQ in the loop) but I really don't know.

When I listen to movies I use it to boost the 30 - 50 Hz range a bit. Sometimes I need to add some 16KHz because my speakers are not the "most revealing" at lower volumes.

When I turn it up, the EQ is almost always out.

 

[JohnVF]

Ok, I was trolling a bit, trying to joke around - I admit it. But all last 5 posts really belong in TOL, now don't they?

Why would they? There is nothing controversial about a personal decision to use or not use EQ. There's plenty of reason to do so, and plenty of reason not to do so. Depends on what you're after, and what you're trying to achieve. TOL doesn't exist anymore, anyway.

 

[Dr Tinear]

Not a different sound [from changing cables or interconnects]. More a matter of fine tuning to get the best out of their equipment.

I see this as a semantic point, Bigerik. The difference you hear from changing cables or interconnects may be subtle, but it's still a difference. If the new cables or interconnects sounded the same as the old ones, there would be no reason to make the change.

 

[JohnVF]

I see this as a semantic point, Bigerik. The difference you hear from changing cables or interconnects may be subtle, but it's still a difference. If the new cables or interconnects sounded the same as the old ones, there would be no reason to make the change.

I'd say that's why I've changed cables (though many times I pick speaker cables because they match my carpet, shhh, don't tell anybody). But I am one of the people who "hear things" when it comes to cables, though in my case its usually very subtle things. And I pick cables as a fine tuning thing, like Bigerik said, and also because I just like playing around with different stuff whether it makes a big difference or not. I certainly hear more differences in amps, preamps, speakers, and source gear. I was recently loaned an expensive USB cable that I was told would make a huge difference and after two songs I put my $12 one back in because it was much longer and let me keep my laptop in my lap while listening. I didn't hear a difference. So its possible to subjectively come to a conclusion that doesn't tow the "audiophool" line.

 

[Jeffery]

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.

Who said I disagreed with your observations? I was just pointing out that you could possibly clarify and/or solidify your argument if you used the right words.

 

[Pandovski]

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.

Hi-End preamp? Whats so Hi-End about it? Special pots, switches and knobs? I bet it has brilliant tone controls, probably epic sonic performance. :scratch2: I might really "hear things" on it.

Seriously now. No man is an island and in this hobby we are a collective, not the generic mass of individuals that just happen to do the same rituals. I am implicitly concerned with your buying decisions and your public opinions (because that's how market economy and society works). And believe it or not, you are also concerned with my opinions and purchases. Eventually property is imaginary, everything in life is on lease.

You are not here discussing on this forum with us because you are not concerned what others think or say about this hobby. You're just a borg like the rest of us. Actually Borg of the year 2012. :thmbsp:

 

[Jon_Logan]

Not a different sound. More a matter of fine tuning to get the best out of their equipment.

huh?

So isn't fine tuning changing the sound?

With regards to a statement made a couple of pages ago about a show of hands who think all amps sound the same. You tend to put all amps together, but we both know that there are amplifiers that that are way off the average amplifier. We both know that "all" is too big of a statement.

Now, if you said, "Can I get a show of hands of those that say most amplifiers, probably 95% of them will sound the same?".
I would raise my hand.

Why? Not because I haven't listened to the amps. No indeed. In fact I used to "hear" the differences. All of the time. Then to hammer home my new found finding, I connected a switch to switch in what amp was playing at a particular time. I had made a note to myself to not pay attention to which amp was connected to which side of the switch. I adjusted the input gains so that there was the same output while connected to the load at 400Hz. Then listened to some music and threw the switch back and forth again and again.

Guess what? I couldn't hear the difference. The two amps were my Mark Levinson ML-3 and my SAE Mark 3C. These two amplifiers couldn't be more different circuit wise, yet, no difference in sound. This, and this wasn't even a good/rigid DBT. I may have subconsciously known where the wires were going, but made an effort to not pay attention to that.

Take home message for me: amplifier differences do exist if the listener knows which one is playing, but the "differences" disappear when the listener does not know which amp is playing.

For me, it comes down to that. Try a DBT to see if the differences hold up.
And for the folks that say things like, "the people talking about DBT's don't have good systems", "don't actually compare anything", "don't actually listen to anything except test tones", or whatever garbage that is slung with the hope of discrediting a "non-believer". Just try the thing that strikes so much fear in your belief system. More data is better right?

I am not ashamed to say that I do not hear amplifier differences when they are of average quality and above.

A lot on this board tout themselves as easily being able to hear these differences, but when any test comes along that requires scientific rigor or test methodology, people get all bent out of shape. The same people fancy themselves as some kind of audio oracles of how the audio hobby should be practiced.

I think that this assumption that humans can hear differences between amplifiers is only an assumption backed up with poor testing.

My question is why?

 

[kirk57]

Hi-End preamp? Whats so Hi-End about it? Special pots, switches and knobs? I bet it has brilliant tone controls, probably epic sonic performance. :scratch2: I might really "hear things" on it.

Seriously now. No man is an island and in this hobby we are a collective, not the generic mass of individuals that just happen to do the same rituals. I am implicitly concerned with your buying decisions and your public opinions (because that's how market economy and society works). And believe it or not, you are also concerned with my opinions and purchases. Eventually property is imaginary, everything in life is on lease.

You are not here discussing on this forum with us because you are not concerned what others think or say about this hobby. You're just a borg like the rest of us. Actually Borg of the year 2012. :thmbsp:

Yeah, sure. We will be assimilated into the collective that says there is no differences in the way amplifiers sound.

The process has already begun.

 

[JohnVF]

Hi-End preamp? Whats so Hi-End about it?

Better build quality, designed by a person after sound not a committee after cutting costs and pleasing the most people, a person who shares whatever take on sound I'm currently chasing (such as "simpler shorter signal paths") and in general, competence of design over selling the most units to the most people for the least overhead. Nothing revolutionary about that. If you want quality in a niche hobby, economies of scale, or lack thereof, means you pay for it. The other option is buying from a mass-market company who's after selling the cheapest junk to the most people.

 

[Brett a]

Hi-End preamp? Whats so Hi-End about it? Special pots, switches and knobs?

So this is to say that all components that preamps are made from are equal whether it's a hand-made stepped attenuator, or a 25 cent volume pot squeezed off an assembly line by the thousands every day in some 3rd world country?

Are there really people coming out of the woodwork to say that all preamps sound alike?

 

[JohnVF]

Are there really people coming out of the woodwork to say that all preamps sound alike?

There's a few on AK, I've encountered them.

 

[Pandovski]

Better build quality, designed by a person after sound not a committee after cutting costs and pleasing the most people, a person who shares whatever take on sound I'm currently chasing (such as "simpler shorter signal paths") and in general, competence of design over selling the most units to the most people for the least overhead. Nothing revolutionary about that. If you want quality in a niche hobby, economies of scale, or lack thereof, means you pay for it. The other option is buying from a mass-market company who's after selling the cheapest junk to the most people.

That sounds like a very elitist statement. I personally think trickle down economy is a good thing.

 

[Pandovski]

So this is to say that all components that preamps are made from are equal whether it's a hand-made stepped attenuator, or a 25 cent volume pot squeezed off an assembly line by the thousands every day in some 3rd world country?

Are there really people coming out of the woodwork to say that all preamps sound alike?

Preamps do sound alike. They are by far more similar than they are different. Do a double-blind test or ABX and you will struggle as well.

 

[DougMac]

While I didn't read all the posts, I've decided that I found out more about members of AK than I did differences in amplifiers.

Here are some personal observations.
I had an NAD 2200 with a classic NAD preamp. I added another 2200 and ran both in bridged mono mode. I felt the sound was more open, especially at higher volume levels. I guess the extra headroom helped.

Since I had owned NAD for years, I bought a T-762 as my first A/V receiver back in 2002. It sounded great. I wanted to get HDMI inputs, so just for grins, I bought a Panasonic SA-XR57 for $200. About that time I bought Ascend speakers. They sounded horrible. I hooked up the NAD T-762 and it made all the difference in the world. The Panasonic got moved upstairs to drive Boston Acoustics CR-9 and they sound fine with it.

I was still after HDMI, so I bought an Onkyo TX-NR808. I was expecting an inferior sound to the NAD, since I paid a little more than half as much for it. I was surprised at how well it sounds, especially after running and tweaking Audyssey Multi-EQ. I had planned to use external amps for L/C/R, but was so pleased I've put the external amp purchase on hold.

BTW, has anyone who has used NAD bought Emotiva? How did they compare?

 

[JohnVF]

That sounds like a very elitist statement. I personally think trickle down economy is a good thing.

If you take it as such, that's your own chip on your own shoulder. Its not elitist to suggest that you get what you pay for in a free market. Its economics.

But if you want to suggest that I think a lot of people invent reasons to be a cheapskate and still feel superior about their choices, I'll admit to it and proudly own up to it whether you think that is elitist or not. I happen to think that some things ARE better than others, and that you often have to pony up the funds to acquire them, or invest the time and learning to build them yourself.

There are no shortcuts. You pay or you build. The other option is inventing an alternate universe where everything sounds the same, and nothing is different.

 

[Pandovski]

If you take it as such, that's your own chip on your own shoulder. Its not elitist to suggest that you get what you pay for in a free market. Its economics.

But if you want to suggest that I think a lot of people invent reasons to be a cheapskate and still feel superior about their choices, I'll admit to it and proudly own up to it whether you think that is elitist or not. I happen to think that some things ARE better than others, and that you often have to pony up the funds to acquire them, or invest the time and learning to build them yourself.

There are no shortcuts. You pay or you build. The other option is inventing an alternate universe where everything sounds the same, and nothing is different.

Would you consider 20 year old amp costing MSRP 200-500$ to be "cheap mass produced junk"?

 

[Brett a]

Preamps do sound alike. They are by far more similar than they are different. Do a double-blind test or ABX and you will struggle as well.

That's just nuts.

And if they are more similar than different, then you are saying they do not sound alike.

 

[JohnVF]

Would you consider 20 year old amp costing MSRP 200-500$ to be "cheap mass produced junk"?

No, why would I, unless it was that way when new? I run a Luxman M12 with my Quads occasionally. Paid $200 for it, sounds better than a lot of new stuff I've heard. And worse than some others. And my Klyne 6L preamp is 20 years old, it replaced a preamp that was 2 years old.

Next assumption...

By the way, I do think a lot of vintage audio is crap that only has any following due to internet echo-chamber hype, because some of this stuff just totally falls apart when compared to other things. But much of this stuff ISN'T compared, due to assumptions of its owners about how that would go without actually doing the leg work. But there are a lot of excellent older amps and a select few good older preamps.