Sampling of Audio Gear

[hifitommy]

at least a decade ago i heard wilson watt/puppys driven with jadis defy 7 amplification. they were the best i had ever heard to date. they measured relatively poorly but the sound was exemplary.

when solid state electronics came out, their MEASURED distortion was noticeably lower but the sound was noticeably worse. perhaps we need to measure the right things.

when cd came out, people ASSUMED it would be better. eventually when sacd and dvda came along, it was much closer to that. still the best vinyl playback sounds better than the best digital but the gap is miniscule now.

too bad sony didnt properly support it and use more intelligent marketing.

[frahengeo]

A thought and a few questions...

Our gear, both analog and digital, are all man-made. Designed, Verified, Manufactured, Quality Controlled using science and technology. If we don't know what to measure or are incapable of measuring this so-called "warm sound", then how can the Manufacturers know that they are shipping a good product. Testing every single released audio unit with the "golden ear" seems far fetched and not feasible.

There was a member that mentioned audio cut-off due to the square wave phenomenon; Can this be quantified?

Finally, for those of you that are experienced in Jazz and Classical; does the turntable properly replicate the "live" sound? If not, what platform does?

Again, my objective is to draw from those with more expertise than myself. Thanks for all the invaluable information.

[Smokey]

Thanks guys for good discussion. I try to summarize instead of individual responses.

After reading many of your long responses and links, I came away feeling that to some of you guys, sound quality came first before anything else. Even if specification are not up to par. And IMO that is a wrong approach.

I look at specifications such as Power, Dynamic Headroom, THD, frequency response and noise figures as foundation to a good amp. Just like building a house where one need a good foundation before anything else is considered. And if one don’t have a good foundation, I think you know what will happen to the house.

There are probably alot of “good sounding” amp that don’t measure up to mentioned specifications, but one have to ask themslef..”Does this amp color the sound or is it transparent?” And if an amp does not measure up to the specifications, then the answer would be that sound is colored.

And the worst culprit to color sound are Tubes because of distortion. Some might argue that Tubes [harmonic] distortion is pleasant to ear, but that is beside the point. The fact are that tubes color the sound and that is bad-even if sound is good.

When cd came out, people ASSUMED it would be better. eventually when sacd and dvda came along, it was much closer to that. still the best vinyl playback sounds better than the best digital but the gap is miniscule now.

I still can't believe some of you guys still saying that vinyl playback is better than digital systems. Vinyl are low dynamic and high noise fornat, and no matter how expensive the system is, one still can not do better than what the source is feeding the system.

For example, I had Frank Sinatra Capital Years on vinyl and bought the remaster version on CD. On the CD where new lyrics start, one could hear Sinatra taking a breath before start singing again. But on the vinyl, the same spot where he is breathing in, there is only noise. And still some audiophiles wonder why vinyl format died.

[E-Stat]

The fact are that tubes color the sound and that is bad-even if sound is good.

The *fact are* that you must have limited access to hearing the finest audio components (most of which are tubes). Ever heard the Audio Research 610Ts? The VTL Siegfrieds? The Joule Electra Rite of Passages? The Lamm Audio ML3s? The Manley Neo-Classic 500 Monoblocks? I suspect the answer is "no" to all of the above. Stick to counting numbers. The rest of us will use our ears instead.

I still can't believe some of you guys still saying that vinyl playback is better than digital systems. Vinyl are low dynamic and high noise fornat, and no matter how expensive the system is, one still can not do better than what the source is feeding the system.

There are tradeoffs to be sure. As for noise, your assumption is lacking a depth of understanding. Digital goes completely deaf at the lowest levels. While there is certainly a level of hiss present even in the best analog recordings, one can still resolve detail below that benign level of hiss.

And still some audiophiles wonder why vinyl format died.

I certainly don't. Most folks don't give a $hit about sound quality and convenience rules. Witness the success of the grossly mediocre MP3 format!

rw

[Smokey]

The *fact are* that you must have limited access to hearing the finest audio components (most of which are tubes). Ever heard the Audio Research 610Ts? The VTL Siegfrieds? The Joule Electra Rite of Passages? The Lamm Audio ML3s? The Manley Neo-Classic 500 Monoblocks?

Damn E-Stat, those are some pricey tube amps

But lets take a closer look at each one:

Audio Research 610Ts: 0.5% THD at rated full power.

The VTL Siegfrieds: 1.5% THD

The Joule Electra Rite of Passages: No mention of THD.

The Lamm Audio ML3s: 3% THD at rated full power

The Manley Neo-Classic 500 Monoblocks: 1.5% THD

As you can see how excessive some of THD are, and in case of Lamm Audio, totaly unacceptable. If one is looking at transparency in their amp, then any thing higher than 0.3% THD mean sound coloration and should look elsewhere.

There are tradeoffs to be sure. As for noise, your assumption is lacking a depth of understanding. Digital goes completely deaf at the lowest levels. While there is certainly a level of hiss present even in the best analog recordings, one can still resolve detail below that benign level of hiss.

Yes that is true, but you are not looking at the whole picture. Since vinyl have much lower dynamics (more compresed) than digital, the treshhold of lowest sound and loudest sound are different also. The low treshhold of digiat is much deeper than vinyl, so what you would hear below the hiss on vinyl is present on digital without the hiss (I hope I made sense there )

You're kidding, right? We haven't reached an agreement since 1981. Analog guys can't convince the digital folks, and vice versa. Not gonna reach an agreement here.

I think with high resolution audio like Blu-Ray, the argument is pretty much over

[E-Stat]

If one is looking at transparency in their amp, then any thing higher than 0.3% THD mean sound coloration and should look elsewhere.

Based upon exactly what?

Yes that is true, but you are not looking at the whole picture. Since vinyl have much lower dynamics (more compresed) than digital...

I'm talking about the real world, not theory.

rw

[Smokey]

Based upon exactly what?

Based on assumption that THD above 0.3% is audible.

These companies have sophisticated measuring tools - just because the end result may have a higher measured distortion doesn't mean anything - they will ensure that all their amps measure the way they want them or need them to measure.

In actuality what you are saying is that you let somebody else (designer) decide how an amp should sound and what specifications it should have. Because when you buy their amp, you are also buying their vision of what does “sound” good and what doesn’t.

And for all we know, the designer might be deaf in one ear and can’t hear out the other

[E-Stat]

Based on assumption that THD above 0.3% is audible.

Assumption? LOL! Why not test your own ability? Mine was only slightly above 1.6%. My assumption is that you can't even get close to that, much less go all the way to -45 db (which is only 0.56%). Good luck!

Distortion Test

In actuality what you are saying is that you let somebody else (designer) decide how an amp should sound and what specifications it should have.

In actuality what I continue to say is specifications remain useless and I use my own ear as the judge.

rw

[RGA]

In actuality what you are saying is that you let somebody else (designer) decide how an amp should sound and what specifications it should have. Because when you buy their amp, you are also buying their vision of what does “sound” good and what doesn’t.

And for all we know, the designer might be deaf in one ear and can’t hear out the other

No - what you are saying is to design equipment requires no listening whatsoever but merely calculations from a textbook. I have no doubt this is how most stuff is designed because even the engineers at such places after listening to their gear have been shown to like 20 year old tube amps at a fraction of the price better.

The goal of Audio Note - a SET maker is "Rather than try design out the deficiencies in the software, we try to retain as much of the information as possible, good or bad, it is not for the equipment manufacturer to change the sound of the software, if the software sounds bad, write an insulting letter to the recording and balancing engineers, not to us!!"

What counts is which "system" makes a Beethoven Piano Sonata sound more like a piano. As I already posted in the Stereophile link - the top SS makers know which one sounded more like a piano - the tube guys already know and most people leave SS for tubes and don't go back.

However your quote does illustrate something - people who have poor hearing and don't know what a piano sounds like will no doubt 'buy" based on measurements - they need to because they can't trust their ears to say system A sounds like a piano and system B does not. Yes "some" makers may design to their ears and what they like but what you assume, incorrectly, that I am buying based on "their" preferred sonic aesthetic. One buys based on their "own" preferences. If it is your preference to buy an amplifier with less than .03% THD or as some poster's buy based on the measurements traits found by Floyde Toole based on "other people's" blind listening sessions that is up to you and them. It saves them from trusting their ears which they obviously have zero confidence in. That's a real shame.

[frahengeo]

I look at specifications such as Power, Dynamic Headroom, THD, frequency response and noise figures as foundation to a good amp.

Those specs, especially Dynamic Headroom, can be indicative of a good piece of hardware. However, there must be a way to standardize this test, such that the figures can't be tampered with.

There are probably alot of “good sounding” amp that don’t measure up to mentioned specifications, but one have to ask themslef..”Does this amp color the sound or is it transparent?” And if an amp does not measure up to the specifications, then the answer would be that sound is colored.

Speaking in terms of a flat frequency response, I agree. Is there another way to measure "coloration"?

I still can't believe some of you guys still saying that vinyl playback is better than digital systems. Vinyl are low dynamic and high noise fornat, and no matter how expensive the system is, one still can not do better than what the source is feeding the system.

You're kidding, right? We haven't reached an agreement since 1981. Analog guys can't convince the digital folks, and vice versa. Not gonna reach an agreement here.
Again, the discussion was something like: " How do you know whether an audio gear is reproducing the recording properly, since the listener/reviewer was not likely present during the recording session?"