all good amps sound the same ?

[ken kantor]

Recently had the opportunity to try, over the course of a month, four different power amps, all of which I judge to be reasonably competent.

They were, in order; Dynavector HX100, Pure Audio class a monoblocks, Naim Nap300, Naim Nap500.

Within the big picture they all sounded quite similar but after a week with each, no way did they sound the same. You could argue that this means at least three of them were poorly designed - well good luck with that argument.

My view is that they were simply voiced differently according to their designers views of how their product should sound.

Steve

Sorry, but it is hard enough for me to keep up with the folks that do understand what I said. I just can't keep responding to posts like this, that display a complete misunderstanding of the issues being discussed. (As if their personal experiences could change the facts anyway.) Enjoy your amps.

-k

 

[quadklipsh]

did i unleash a fission reaction ..........this thread

 

[SteveA]

Sorry, but it is hard enough for me to keep up with the folks that do understand what I said. I just can't keep responding to posts like this, that display a complete misunderstanding of the issues being discussed. (As if their personal experiences could change the facts anyway.) Enjoy your amps.

-k

Whatever...

Not really, or at all for that matter, responding to your posts, mearly to the original gist of the thread.

Basically just saying that from my own observations, I agree with the postulation put forward by the original poster.

You can take a nap now.

Steve

 

[Superampman]

I'm afraid I don't really understand this post. Can you phrase it again?

-k

That long apparent defense reminded me of a documentary of Joni Mitchell in the early sixties in San Francisco literally singing her heart out where the narrator who was there stated,"My God, save something for yourself". He thought she was baring her soul to the point of embarrassment. A bit of an embellishment on my part but none the less, certain crass comments deserve different types of responses imo. However, you do follow up well.

 

[Pio1980]

BTW- there is one big gotcha with differential testing....

The height of the residue line will be the same for differences at 50 KHz, 20 KHz, 1 KHz, 20Hz, etc. It doesn't give a useful picture of the audibility of differences.

-k

Good to know, thnx. Think I'll just shift that pile-o-Tek 560 off to someone else someday then.
BTW, re your visit to Corey Greenberg. Did he tell you that the music you liked sucked and that his was "The Bomb !"?

 

[Poultrygeist]

Started to say "except for SET amps" but Lord knows Poultry hates ruffling feathers.

 

[E-Stat]

How's this for a frame of reference?

That was the text from which I quoted in post # 70 that Ken took umbrage to.

 

[E-Stat]

I moved not long ago. Currently I am using some NHT towers designed after my time there, powered by a Dynaco 410 I built in college, and modded just a little. Or Sennheiser 650's run either directly off my laptop, or via a Tascam 600 interface. I also have NHT Pro M00's on my computer.

So your comments about amplifier audibility found in post #50 do reflect the current as well as the past. Thank you.

Why do you assume Julian Hirsch's hifi was poor? Have you heard it?

Thank you again for asking the question this time instead of assuming. I'll let Frank Van Alstine speak (again).

Even though one of the three original NHT founders was in HP's, uh, more intimate cadre, I was never invited to Sea Cliff. Go figure.

Did you ever request a review or offer a sample for him to hear?

I heard that when he debuted his new IRS system at a party to much fanfare, he forgot to turn on one channel, and didn't notice this for 20 minutes. I have many other stories about which famous industry people could actually hear or couldn't, but they are waiting for my tell-all book...

The last party I attended was in '83. Understand that his parties were not about critical listening when you've got 100 folks there. Most of the activity is outside enjoying the wine, song and conversation with the folks there. While Room #3 is reasonably large, it is really only set up for three to audition using director's chairs. As strange as it seems, the IRS were really used for background music. Lots of drinking and delicate arms and expensive styli are not a good match.

I really love good large electrostatics, by the way. And good small ones...

Hearing JWC's Dayton-Wrights in '76 charmed me from that day on. For me, Dr. West has taken the concept further than anyone else with their Quad-like midrange purity, flat to 30 hz bass capability and virtual elimination of beaming via the faceted panels. I wish I could have heard the triple 922 array Ray Kimber brought to RMAF several years running. (Scroll down a bit)

I have reviewed all my comments in this thread, and I cannot find anything at all paradoxical. Perhaps I have not explained myself clearly?

Perhaps not. That observation was based upon the conumdrum between your post regaling the various systems you've heard (" I have heard experimental systems at ATT, BBN, NASA and Delta that would make you weep") and your finding that a Dyna 400 or Crown Microtech can "do an effectively perfect job amplifying a signal ".

Seriously? The Dyna 400/410/416 cum C100/Double Dyna 400 was a great amp in the 70s, but cannot match the focus and resolution of any number of great amps today to these ears.

 

[Pio1980]

Again, are we debating whether all "good" amps basically sound similar, or, that they all sound identically indistinguishable to one another in the same set-up and room without the usual obfuscating factors of inferior related componentry and/or poorly recorded/engineered program material.
I am here with an open mind to learn something from any/all contributors with something constructive to add/elucidate.

 

[wmgwizard]

You guys sure know how to beat a dead horse. Twelve pages deep and still going strong.

There have been numerous threads on this and similar topics that just go round and round without ever getting anywhere. Maybe that in itself gives validity to the question.

Does all ice cream taste the same ? It is really just three or four simple ingredients.

 

[E-Stat]

You don't need to potshot, especially when you try to put words in my mouth.

Let's review the words that came out of your mouth:

" It is just plain, utterly wrong. No gray area, or debate need apply."

Reasonable folks would call that arrogance in response to what a distinguished colleague says he measured.

First of all, I have no idea if you have properly conveyed FVA's thoughts here.

I did better - I directly linked to his own words in post #105. No need to find that post, I'll include them here:

"As I have explained many times, the problem with "scientific" A-B amp testing is that the amplifiers are connected to a common source and then into a speaker switcher, which can switch either amplifier into the speaker load.

What the ABXers fail to understand is that the distortion characteristics of an amplifier are reflected back into its input jacks because the feedback loop contains these distortions. Since the inputs of the amps are being fed from a common source, the sum of the distortions of both amplifiers are present at the input of either amp being used. Thus essentially both amplifier under test under these conditions will sound the same, and generally the overall sense of the listening session is unsatisfactory, for good reason...

This process eliminates the ABX common input issue which has clouded so called "scientific" listening tests for years. Of course the ABXers don't believe us, but they are too pig headed to make the simple measurements to the amplifiers to show themselves that the distortion is indeed appearing at the input jacks. It is..."

Make the simple measurements to show themselves that the distortion is indeed appearing at the input jacks.

For brevity, I skipped the middle section outlining his test procedure that eliminates the problem.

I was surprised to hear them come from a respected engineer such as he, so I suspect there is some misinterpretation in your description. Do you have a link where I can read what he says directly?

No doubt. Have you measured the effects like FVA?

While some may call me a "subjectivist", I'm actually an observationalist who walks both sides. I don't discount science and measurements - only bogus science and extrapolation of simplistic metrics assumed to provide correlation well beyond their ability. Ever heard the Crown ICK-150 preamp with its wonderful THD spec?

I measure what I can. My speaker placement was assisted with lots of level measurements in the bottom three octaves for the best neutrality (yes, it has only third octave resolution). I found an interconnect AB test here (scroll down a bit) and decided to duplicate and measure the results for myself. Bogus *science* for sure! (note: while the forum sometimes underlines words for marketing, please recognize I've placed three links within this paragraph)

Also, people are often sincere, but mistaken. I sometimes am, at least. It would be odd to go through life feeling deceived by people who were simply misinformed.

A truly professional stance (yes, I thought you read the link on which I based my comments given the participation in the discussion) would have been a bit more measured that yours I cited above.

 

[SoCal Sam]

You misunderstand what I wrote. I do not refer to any particular individual's particular hearing acuity.

It is in the way our perceptions treat various kinds of distortions differently. It is not the loudness level of fingernail scratching a chalkboard that most folks find most irritating.

If you cannot refer to one, you cannot generalize to most. Your sweeping generalizations are not valid to begin with.

 

[Pio1980]

What the ABXers fail to understand is that the distortion characteristics of an amplifier are reflected back into its input jacks because the feedback loop contains these distortions. Since the inputs of the amps are being fed from a common source, the sum of the distortions of both amplifiers are present at the input of either amp being used. Thus essentially both amplifier under test under these conditions will sound the same, and generally the overall sense of the listening session is unsatisfactory, for good reason...

I'm just not 'getting' this if is as seems to be standard, the input circuit of most power amp topology isolates the input from the global FB loop generally via a front-end cathode insertion FB loop input against G1 signal input or a diffy input pair.

 

[edwyun]

But, am I allowed to an Objectivist about audio, but a Subjectivist about music???

of course, and that's kinda what i meant by being in the middle.

 

[62caddy]

Let's review the words that came out of your mouth:

" It is just plain, utterly wrong. No gray area, or debate need apply."

Reasonable folks would call that arrogance in response to what a distinguished colleague says he measured.


I did better - I directly quoted his words in post #105. No need to find that post, I'll include them here:

"As I have explained many times, the problem with "scientific" A-B amp testing is that the amplifiers are connected to a common source and then into a speaker switcher, which can switch either amplifier into the speaker load.

What the ABXers fail to understand is that the distortion characteristics of an amplifier are reflected back into its input jacks because the feedback loop contains these distortions. Since the inputs of the amps are being fed from a common source, the sum of the distortions of both amplifiers are present at the input of either amp being used. Thus essentially both amplifier under test under these conditions will sound the same, and generally the overall sense of the listening session is unsatisfactory, for good reason...

This process eliminates the ABX common input issue which has clouded so called "scientific" listening tests for years. Of course the ABXers don't believe us, but they are too pig headed to make the simple measurements to the amplifiers to show themselves that the distortion is indeed appearing at the input jacks. It is..."

I hope FVA was taking distortion measurements at the amplifier outputs rather than at the inputs - both with and without connections made to the secondary amplifier.

Even if some distortion were created in the dual feeding of two amplifiers, the suggestion that the resultant signal reaching each wouldn't be identical completely escapes me, frankly. :saywhat:

At any rate, I could detect no difference in SQ by removing the ICs from the amplifier that was not playing when I tried that last night. There may have been a negligibly small drop in volume when the secondary connections were made but I couldn't even swear to that.

Just out of curiosity - how would FVA suggest connections be handled for those choosing to bi-amplify speakers if such dual connections are so deleterious to SQ? :scratch2:

 

[E-Stat]

If you cannot refer to one, you cannot generalize to most. Your sweeping generalizations are not valid to begin with.

One individual?

My point is about human perception and differing sensitivity to linear and non-linear distortion, i.e. even vs odd order harmonics.

Here you'll find a series of AES presentations that focused on that very topic. The first document discusses the psychoacoustics of distortion perception.

 

[Glass Prison]

You guys sure know how to beat a dead horse. Twelve pages deep and still going strong.

There have been numerous threads on this and similar topics that just go round and round without ever getting anywhere. Maybe that in itself gives validity to the question.

Does all ice cream taste the same ? It is really just three or four simple ingredients.

I guess somebody was bored. :lmao:

 

[E-Stat]

Just out of curiosity - how would FVA suggest connections be handled for those choosing to bi-amplify speakers if such dual connections are so deleterious to SQ? :scratch2:

The output speaker connections don't share common grounds as involved with your switch.

The following comment is not intended as an attack, but you're comparing two very similar amps from one company produced in the sixties. You may disagree, but I find that amplifier sound quality has improved over the past half century. Try comparing your tube amp to a current 2301 (within the same power level) and you might change your mind. I've heard those amps in an exceptional system.