Which Amp

[DMK]

Since you label yourself as a newbie, you deserve to at least hear a few facts instead of the usual BS.

Under controlled conditions nobody (that is nobody) has demonstrated that they can hear differences among properlyperforming and measuring amps and they have been tested in a variety of conditions over the past 25 years. If frequency response is flat and they have relatively low distortion into reasonable loads, then there is no reason in the world they would "sound" differently. (Even if they did, moving your head or your speakers a few inches would have more effect on what you hear.)

Audiophle magazines lie about this or fool themselves (as to audio fans) beacuse they need something to talk about. Things that actually affect what you hear are generally ignored because you can't buy them (except speakers).

Do yourself a favor and research the issue beyond what you read in forums and magazines. People can't hear difference among even cheap vs. expensive amps. The ones you listed are all just fine and should be judged base on power output per dollar, features, and build quality only.

Nobody? That's a wild claim! You are infinitely familiar with each and every person that may have done such a test? Don't you mean nobody, as far as YOU know? If you do some research yourself, you might find that two guys from Stereophile demonstrated exactly what you're saying "nobody" has done. Not enough trials to be a true demonstration? That's been said before. So now what you mean is that they haven't demonstrated it to YOUR satisfaction. That's quite a bit different from your original half-baked claim.

Audio magazines don't lie or fool themselves. What they do is exaggerate the differences they hear until they become "night and day" differences instead of what my experience tells me they are - slight, subtle, minute. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

As for your last paragraph, I'd say the first sentence is very good advice, the second sentence is a claim you can't substantiate and the third is only your opinion. I'm not going to say you're wrong because, quite frankly, I think most solid state amps that measure properly and are of adequate power for the speakers DO sound nearly identical. But that's only MY experience and my opinion. So I essentially agree with your basic premise but it's absolutely wrong to think it's an absolute truth, at least at this point.

To the original poster, take Robot Czar's advice and arm yourself with some research knowledge. Then listen carefully, and preferably in a controlled test. Then take your results to the bank and forget what both the "measurements only" crowd and the "night and day" difference crowd tell you. They're both wrong, IMHO. It's true that there is a lot of BS that circulates through the world of audio gear. It appears when someone leans too far to one side. As with many debateable issues, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

[mtrycraft]

Nobody? That's a wild claim! You are infinitely familiar with each and every person that may have done such a test? Don't you mean nobody, as far as YOU know? If you do some research yourself, you might find that two guys from Stereophile demonstrated exactly what you're saying "nobody" has done. Not enough trials to be a true demonstration? That's been said before. So now what you mean is that they haven't demonstrated it to YOUR satisfaction. That's quite a bit different from your original half-baked claim.

Audio magazines don't lie or fool themselves. What they do is exaggerate the differences they hear until they become "night and day" differences instead of what my experience tells me they are - slight, subtle, minute. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

As for your last paragraph, I'd say the first sentence is very good advice, the second sentence is a claim you can't substantiate and the third is only your opinion. I'm not going to say you're wrong because, quite frankly, I think most solid state amps that measure properly and are of adequate power for the speakers DO sound nearly identical. But that's only MY experience and my opinion. So I essentially agree with your basic premise but it's absolutely wrong to think it's an absolute truth, at least at this point.

To the original poster, take Robot Czar's advice and arm yourself with some research knowledge. Then listen carefully, and preferably in a controlled test. Then take your results to the bank and forget what both the "measurements only" crowd and the "night and day" difference crowd tell you. They're both wrong, IMHO. It's true that there is a lot of BS that circulates through the world of audio gear. It appears when someone leans too far to one side. As with many debateable issues, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Are you refering to the large group test with 5 trials? Out of the number of participants just by chance you can expect exactely that result, nothing more of getting 5 out of 5. Besides, it was a very poor test indeed, regardless what they try to claim about it. This may also be the one where the frequency was not level matched, among other things.

So, that one is out of the way. Next?

There is a compilation of amp tests in The Proceedings of the AES 8th International Conference, 1990, page 117-120. 13523 trials prior to that time.

[DMK]

Are you refering to the large group test with 5 trials? Out of the number of participants just by chance you can expect exactely that result, nothing more of getting 5 out of 5. Besides, it was a very poor test indeed, regardless what they try to claim about it. This may also be the one where the frequency was not level matched, among other things.

So, that one is out of the way. Next?

There is a compilation of amp tests in The Proceedings of the AES 8th International Conference, 1990, page 117-120. 13523 trials prior to that time.

Yes, that's the one. Statistical analysis may suggest that the 5/5 was by chance and there could have been other things wrong with the test, no question. But we don't KNOW that the two people didn't or couldn't hear differences. As such, we have to be careful what we claim as fact. For all anyone knows, someone HAS heard differences. But there ain't no "next" as far as I know. There may never be one and there may never have been one. I would bet the farm that even if there are sonic differences in solid state power amps, they are so miniscule that no one could ever be sure they heard them - all the appropriate codicils attached i.e level matched, etc, of course! But I am speculating, the same as anyone is.

You may recall that I participated in some single blind test of SS power amps several years ago. The amps ranged in price from extremely modest to quite expensive. None of us heard even the subtlest of differences. For a group of audiodorks, it was like having our legs cut off! Ever see one of those Springer shows where the male swears he's not the father of his girlfriends child and the test results show he is? Well, the look on those guys faces is the same one we had! Then the protestations began!

[RobotCzar]

Nobody? That's a wild claim! You are infinitely familiar with each and every person that may have done such a test? Don't you mean nobody, as far as YOU know? If you do some research yourself, you might find that two guys from Stereophile demonstrated exactly what you're saying "nobody" has done. (PLEASE GIVE REFERENCE, IT IS UNLIKELY A GUY FROM STEREOPHILE COULD DEMONSTATE ANYTHING SCIENTIFICALLY.) Not enough trials to be a true demonstration? That's been said before. So now what you mean is that they haven't demonstrated it to YOUR satisfaction. That's quite a bit different from your original half-baked claim.
(MY CLAIM IS BETTER BAKED THAN YOURS AS YOU ARE ASSUMING SOMETHING WITHOUT ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCE--"THAT I KNOW OF". DO YOU KNOW OF ANY?)

Audio magazines don't lie or fool themselves. What they do is exaggerate the differences they hear until they become "night and day" differences instead of what my experience tells me they are - slight, subtle, minute. That doesn't mean they don't exist.
(IT ALSO DOESN'T MEAN THEY DO EXIST!)

As for your last paragraph, I'd say the first sentence is very good advice, the second sentence is a claim you can't substantiate and the third is only your opinion. I'm not going to say you're wrong because, quite frankly, I think most solid state amps that measure properly and are of adequate power for the speakers DO sound nearly identical. But that's only MY experience and my opinion. So I essentially agree with your basic premise but it's absolutely wrong to think it's an absolute truth, at least at this point.

.

Of course I mean nobody I have heard of. How could I know about something I haven't heard of? I am not aware of any evidence that people can distinguish properly performing amps. Nit picking that statement is useless. I don't know that nobody can jump to the Moon, and I haven't checked everybody out. Still, I get the feeling that nobody can jump to the Moon. After 20+ years of NO ONE I KNOW OF being able to demonstrate they and hear amp differences AND due to the logic involved of distortioni and frequency response errors lower than can be detected, reasonable people might conclude that nobody can because (to my knowledge) nobody has and it defies the known perceptual abilities of humans to do so.

So, you can take the middle road and the reasonable position that we don't know that NOBODY can jump to the Moon. But, don't bet on it.

Skeptic criticizes measurements "from the 30s" (I guess the laws of physics and human perception have changed a lot since then), but he doesn't say what could be causing audible differences other than distortion and frequency response errors. There ain't anything else! He posits that some amps may have audible distortion into some speaker loads, but he is quite unspecific about that and, in my view, overestimates the problem because he thinks he hears problems in a 30 year old amp. Why assume that people can hear differences in amps, skep? Don't you think they should prove it? We are all awaiting such proof. Don't hold your breath and don't spend money on amp differences that are imaginary.

[DMK]

Of course I mean nobody I have heard of. How could I know about something I haven't heard of? I am not aware of any evidence that people can distinguish properly performing amps. Nit picking that statement is useless. I don't know that nobody can jump to the Moon, and I haven't checked everybody out. Still, I get the feeling that nobody can jump to the Moon. After 20+ years of NO ONE I KNOW OF being able to demonstrate they and hear amp differences AND due to the logic involved of distortioni and frequency response errors lower than can be detected, reasonable people might conclude that nobody can because (to my knowledge) nobody has and it defies the known perceptual abilities of humans to do so.

So, you can take the middle road and the reasonable position that we don't know that NOBODY can jump to the Moon. But, don't bet on it.

Skeptic criticizes measurements "from the 30s" (I guess the laws of physics and human perception have changed a lot since then), but he doesn't say what could be causing audible differences other than distortion and frequency response errors. There ain't anything else! He posits that some amps may have audible distortion into some speaker loads, but he is quite unspecific about that and, in my view, overestimates the problem because he thinks he hears problems in a 30 year old amp. Why assume that people can hear differences in amps, skep? Don't you think they should prove it? We are all awaiting such proof. Don't hold your breath and don't spend money on amp differences that are imaginary.

As for the reference on the Stereophile test, I don't save references. Sonic differences or no sonic differences among amps isn't a meaningful enough issue for me to go nuts and horde references. However, Mtrycrafts may have effectively shot that one down anyway.

What I meant by "no one you're aware of" has heard differences in amps is that the people that claim to do so aren't concerned enough about what you think (or what I think, either) to sit and take DBT's and make copious notes. That's for the scientific crowd. Your average audiophile only cares about what sounds good (or different) to him. There's no reason for him to try to prove anything to you. You're the skeptic - he's not. If you need proof, you can always gather your own. For what reason would they be obligated to make you happy with a peer reviewed, bias controlled test? Have you ever participated in one? I have! never again! They are a major PITA. And because YOU want proof, audiophiles should go through that?

My point is that simply because you aren't aware of anyone being able to detect differences in amps (assuming enough power, etc etc etc) doesn't mean they aren't there. You claimed they weren't. Until you've personally tested all amps under all conditions, you don't know for sure. I've tested enough of them to believe they sound virtually identical. However, Skeptic's experience with equalization that he has quoted a few times makes me wonder if perhaps my ears simply aren't up to the task. Either way, I'm satisfied with what I can or cannot hear but I don't presume that everyone else has my same hearing.

[RobotCzar]

What I meant by "no one you're aware of" has heard differences in amps is that the people that claim to do so aren't concerned enough about what you think (or what I think, either) to sit and take DBT's and make copious notes. That's for the scientific crowd. Your average audiophile only cares about what sounds good (or different) to him. There's no reason for him to try to prove anything to you. You're the skeptic - he's not. If you need proof, you can always gather your own. For what reason would they be obligated to make you happy with a peer reviewed, bias controlled test? Have you ever participated in one? I have! never again! They are a major PITA. And because YOU want proof, audiophiles should go through that?

IF "AUDIOPHILES" ONLY CARE ABOUT WHAT SOUNDS GOOD TO THEM, THEN WHY SHARE THEIR OPINIONS WITH OTHERS. THEY ARE HEARING THINGS THAT ARE ONLY IN THEIR HEADS, AND THEY ARE PRETENDING THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT REAL, OBJECTIVE DIFFERENCES. THEY NEED TO STOP AS THEY ARE MISLEADING AUDIO NEWBIES. THEY ARE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO MAKE ME HAPPY. ....AND I AM UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO RESPECT THEIR UNFOUNDED OPINIONS.

My point is that simply because you aren't aware of anyone being able to detect differences in amps (assuming enough power, etc etc etc) doesn't mean they aren't there. You claimed they weren't. Until you've personally tested all amps under all conditions, you don't know for sure. I've tested enough of them to believe they sound virtually identical. However, Skeptic's experience with equalization that he has quoted a few times makes me wonder if perhaps my ears simply aren't up to the task. Either way, I'm satisfied with what I can or cannot hear but I don't presume that everyone else has my same hearing.

And my point is that there is no evidence (I am aware of) that anyone can hear differences in amps. If you are aware of such evidence then tell us, if not, then don't pretend my statements are unreasonable. They are a lot more reasonable than believing things for which there is no evidence and also make no logical scienctific sense.

Let me reinterate this last point. Current scientific information about human auditory perception indicates that people cannot hear differences in distortion typical in modern amplifiers (driving typical speaker loads--for skeptic's sake). So why in the heck do you believe that some people can? If some claim that they can, shouldn't they be on the hook to demonstrate that they can? Well, to date, I am aware of no body that has demonstrated that they can.

Ask me if I care if audiophiles don't care about this or my opinion. Who cares who doesn't care about other people's opinions. Those people shouldn't be reading and writing in audio forums.

[DMK]

And my point is that there is no evidence (I am aware of) that anyone can hear differences in amps. If you are aware of such evidence then tell us, if not, then don't pretend my statements are unreasonable. They are a lot more reasonable than believing things for which there is no evidence and also make no logical scienctific sense.

Let me reinterate this last point. Current scientific information about human auditory perception indicates that people cannot hear differences in distortion typical in modern amplifiers (driving typical speaker loads--for skeptic's sake). So why in the heck do you believe that some people can? If some claim that they can, shouldn't they be on the hook to demonstrate that they can? Well, to date, I am aware of no body that has demonstrated that they can.

Ask me if I care if audiophiles don't care about this or my opinion. Who cares who doesn't care about other people's opinions. Those people shouldn't be reading and writing in audio forums.

1) I am not aware of any such evidence regarding sonic differences in amps. I don't care.
2) Your statement IS unreasonable! Your saying that because you know of no one that can discern differences in amps, that no one can.
3) I don't believe people can hear such differences. Again, that is only my belief. It just so happens I share your belief (emphasis on "belief"). But some people with some amps in some systems certainly may be able to tell differences.
4) "On the hook" to whom? You? Me? Why? Who should feel the need to demonstrate to you or me?
5) At least you finally admit that your post is only your "opinion".
6) I'm not saying you aren't totally correct. You may very well be. You may not be. But until you're proven correct, is it prudent to state unequivocally that power and features are all that's required in an amp?
7) Almost forgot - people post about their experiences with amps on audio forums because that is what they've experienced. Their implied suggestion always seems to be "try it for yourself".

[mtrycraft]

7) Almost forgot - people post about their experiences with amps on audio forums because that is what they've experienced. Their implied suggestion always seems to be "try it for yourself".

Not all experiences are created equal or of equal value, right? Just like opinions, some are much better than others.
And the implied suggestion is also fatally flawed since no mention is made of biase, its affect on perception, and the subsequent reliability of the experience.

[lattybuck]

It is all in the synergy for me, and manyn others I suspect as well. I was taught that lesson when after rediculing radio shack, realistic equipment for their plain/flat sound a few years back a friend showed me his setup suing a realistic amp. It soudned great. He did lots of tweakin on it, but it was well balanced and very worth the under 1000 total he had in it all.
It is easy to only see thru the experiences we personally have. Doesn't make anyone elses sonic experience less valid though. Or possibly even less accurate in technical terms either. Everyone hears a little differently just as all equipment has some differences in how it reproduces that sound.
The mix is whats important in the end. Electronics to speakers to environment and finally to the sound curve you can physically hear. I have tested myself a few times and there have been changes in what I can hear clearly over the years. There is an evolving sound curve to my listening ability that I suspect everyone has to some degree. Mother nature will deal out what sounds good to you as much as anything you can obtain. In the end all we can do is give pointers based on ourselves.
My take on the "what sounds best" issue.
Take care all

[DMK]

Not all experiences are created equal or of equal value, right? Just like opinions, some are much better than others.
And the implied suggestion is also fatally flawed since no mention is made of biase, its affect on perception, and the subsequent reliability of the experience.

Right. that's why you and I have the ultimate judgment of whether we choose to believe the opinions and experiences. And it's highly unlikely the poster will care either way we go. To him, his experience is highly valuable.

The implied suggestion is "try it for yourself". Very few audiophiles find anything more powerful than their own perceptions, including bias - right or wrong. But then, I'm not telling you anything you don't already know!

[mtrycraft]

(I guess the laws of physics and human perception have changed a lot since then), .

It's called evolution