• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Do all amplifiers sound the same?

tubed said:
Even if amplifiers did not sound the same, and I presume that it's more than likely they don't, I'm sure I'd enjoy any of them on my favorite pairs of speakers as long as they were well functioning and matched power requirements.:) Even Krell and Bryston
Click to expand...
Well ABX doesn't prove they sound the same, the methodology just proves that they are indistinguishable in the tests. There are three samples, each sample takes 30 seconds. Auditory memory lies between 7 and 11 seconds, and iconic memory is approximately 1 second, so by the time sample X rolls around the listener has forgotten most of sample A. Halfway through sample X they've forgotten sample B. Double blind (DBT) are far better than ABX but the same condition applies.

It's safe to say amplifiers that measure the same sound the same. It's also safe to say amps with inaudible differences will sound the same, qualifying that statement being: frequency response flat within 1dB from 20-20kHz and THD below -100dB. But if the amplifier adds frequency phase distortion, then those measurements fail to describe the difference that exists. Frequency phase distortion (compression) affects the first and last few cycles and doesn't show in constant tone tests.
 
Yup, Amplitude Frequency or Phase Frequency Distortion, or both. That article didn't actually discuss either though it was titled as such. It's dynamic compression that alters the first half cycle or more and last cycle. It reminds me alot of measuring speakers and having a white noise response vs build up tone response. A noteworthy difference.


http://www.customanalogue.com/elsinore/elsinore_16.htm
 
Last edited:
Harmonic distortion alters the crests of waveform and adds harmonics. AF/PD alters the scale of frequencies as they initiate.
 
Nikko75 said:
Yup, Amplitude Frequency or Phase Frequency Distortion, or both. That article didn't actually discuss either though it was titled as such. It's dynamic compression that alters the first half cycle or more and last cycle. It reminds me alot of measuring speakers and having a white noise response vs build up tone response. A noteworthy difference.


http://www.customanalogue.com/elsinore/elsinore_16.htm
Click to expand...

Interesting article. I was a little weary of the site though, as the KT88 tube amp they push is really a Chinese Yaqin 100b. I recognized it as I had one and set it up with KT120s. It was good, but I don't think I would have called it one of the best I've heard.
 
Last edited:
this ought to last me the first 50 pages

iStock_000009848998XSmall.jpg
 
Nikko75 said:
Well ABX doesn't prove they sound the same, the methodology just proves that they are indistinguishable in the tests. There are three samples, each sample takes 30 seconds. Auditory memory lies between 7 and 11 seconds, and iconic memory is approximately 1 second, so by the time sample X rolls around the listener has forgotten most of sample A. Halfway through sample X they've forgotten sample B.
Click to expand...

In a properly conducted ABX test there are no set durations, and the person being tested can switch between A, B, and X however and whenever they want.
 
This is from the brochure of my newly acquired Citation XX. I'm pretty sure I'd be able to distinguish it from my other amps, all excellent btw.
 

Attachments

  • P1010633.JPG
    P1010633.JPG
    89.6 KB · Views: 15
  • P1010634.JPG
    P1010634.JPG
    94.8 KB · Views: 14
I once did an AB comparison between my MC2205 and my Bose 1801 using the same Bose 4401 preamp and Kef 105 speakers. The Kef's sounded better on the Bose. Mind you the damping factors are quite different between the two amps. That same afternoon, a friend came over and I got him to listen also, and he right away heard a difference when I switched from the Mc to the Bose.

I also heard a difference between a Kenwood Supreme 600 and a Restored Kenwood Supreme 500 with a pair of Kef 104/2s. The 500 sounded best.
 
If all amplifiers sounded the same, would there be a need for so many variations?
Your question is illogical ...

spock.png
 
I try to stay away from such divisive fire storms of opinion, but I am literally and astoundingly baffled that this is even a question within the community. I agree with Spock above. *shakes head* :/
 
sKiZo said:
If all amplifiers sounded the same, would there be a need for so many variations?
Your question is illogical ...

spock.png
Click to expand...
But the differences are incidental among those designers motivated by accuracy in a free enterprise capitalist economy, no? Flavor of the month types are about deliberate distortion. Success among the former is relative to skill level. So I think the need for variation is exclusive to the latter.
 
Granted ... but it's these excursions and experiments that have gotten us where we are today, starting with basic sound reproduction and evolving to perfection in it's many variations, scattered amongst a vast array of epic failures.

Therein lies the rub ... we all hear said perfection differently ... it IS in the ear of the beholder. A designer's goal is to have a wide enough audience of admirers to make his design worthwhile, but even the field's leaders will agree that there's no such thing as "one size fits all" when it comes to audio quality and how it's perceived.

Keep in mind we're just talking amplifiers here ... every other piece of equipment in a system, as well as our individual personal preferences and environment, add potentially infinite layers of possibilities. You won't hear me complaining ... that's half the fun!

The same could be said about the evolution of music itself, but that's best saved for another thread.
 
I certainly would not take seriously a person's opinion that an amp with a great reputation sounds horrible. I think the major factor in the differences we hear is due to our individual reference points however they may have been established. IOW, I think it's mostly a communication issue. If we all had the same experiential references to judge by, we'd probably all come to the same conclusions. For example, I keep reminiscing to the time of brick and mortar at my favorite hang outs in the 70's-80's when this topic comes up. There was always consensus among us. We all seemed to hear the same things then. Whether it was about speakers, amps, carts, TTs, etc. This subjectivism thing is just a twisted box car on the train of political correctness imo. Agreeing on what you hear doesn't obligate you to like it. But then again, a person who claims a great sounding piece of gear sounds horrible cannot be taken seriously.
 
Superampman said:
But then again, a person who claims a great sounding piece of gear sounds horrible cannot be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

But what sounds good is subjective. You're saying that those who don't agree with you can't be taken seriously. Which is true if your idea of what sounds good agrees with mine, but if not, then it's you who can't be taken seriously. You see what I'm getting at.
 
"Bob Carver may have single-handedly debunked any number of theories about sound quality by using physics, blind and double-blind testing and unbiased measurements, such as "Gold-plated" speaker wires sound better than copper wires, etc.)"

Love it, more debunking, please. LOL
 
Different topologies sound different. Class A sounds different than A/B, D, AB2, etc. Different output tubes sound different, different tube amps sound different, tubes often sound different than solid state. All this is true, IF you listen through a system capable of delivering the needed resolution to differentiate. If you don't have the speakers capable of a high enough resolution, scale, imaging, and wide range response, then everything starts to settle out at a lowest common denominator, and that lowest common denominator does not exceed what the speakers can deliver.
 
Freds.Bands said:
"Bob Carver may have single-handedly debunked any number of theories about sound quality by using physics, blind and double-blind testing and unbiased measurements, such as "Gold-plated" speaker wires sound better than copper wires, etc.)"

Love it, more debunking, please. LOL
Click to expand...
He must think that amplifiers sound different. Otherwise why the Stereophile/Carver test. He spent several days making one of his amplifiers sound like the reference. The T (Transfer Function) series was the result of the test.

I've never heard of Gold plated speaker wires. There are plenty of Gold plated connectors. I bet you have some!
 
Yes, they do sound different; I've heard it with a few. I don't think the gold-plated refers to a brand, but to the concept of unnecessary fussing and over-pricing. But gold-plated connectors have utility because of avoidance of corrosion problems and thus bad contacts over time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom