Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 64
  1. #26
    Phila combat zone JoeE SP9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,710
    harley .guy07

    I guess you never noticed the two Nakamichi Cassette decks listed in my sig.
    ARC SP9 MKIII, VPI HW19, Rega RB300
    Marcof PPA1, Shure, Sumiko, Ortofon carts, Yamaha DVD-S1800
    Behringer UCA222, Emotiva XDA-2, HiFimeDIY
    Accuphase T101, Teac V-7010, Nak ZX-7. LX-5, Behringer DSP1124P
    Front: Magnepan 1.7, DBX 223SX, 2 modified Dynaco MK3's, 2, 12" DIY TL subs (Pass El-Pipe-O) 2 bridged Crown XLS-402
    Rear/HT: Emotiva UMC200, Acoustat Model 1/SPW-1, Behringer CX2310, 2 Adcom GFA-545

  2. #27
    Phila combat zone JoeE SP9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,710
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    So it seems. I will start with classical recordings for now and see if it peaks my interest. However, there is a fundamental flaw in this strategy since I will be using my "digital" equipment.
    The flaw is thinking that "digital equipment" is a flaw in strategy. Both digital and analog have their pluses and minuses.
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    Once again, the measurements are largely useless because they are done with each component separately. The combined result can be very different. Speakers cause many amplifiers to react differently because of their load characteristics. Some amps are able to drive difficult loads and change their character less.
    A good example of this is Apogee ribbons or some electrostatics. Some amps just don't work well with the loads these speakers present.
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    I'm not sure I'm following. Are you suggesting that switching a component being compared and keeping everything else the same does not offer an apples to apples comparison. That there is additional "synergy" between components that could potentially enhance/improve sound reproduction? Well, that leaves the Audiophile with an endless number of combination that will never be realized.
    Essentially that's correct. Some gear works better with specific gear. Synergy is the correct term for this effect. Yes, this does complicate thing. That's why after 41+ years with this "addiction" I'm still learning.
    ARC SP9 MKIII, VPI HW19, Rega RB300
    Marcof PPA1, Shure, Sumiko, Ortofon carts, Yamaha DVD-S1800
    Behringer UCA222, Emotiva XDA-2, HiFimeDIY
    Accuphase T101, Teac V-7010, Nak ZX-7. LX-5, Behringer DSP1124P
    Front: Magnepan 1.7, DBX 223SX, 2 modified Dynaco MK3's, 2, 12" DIY TL subs (Pass El-Pipe-O) 2 bridged Crown XLS-402
    Rear/HT: Emotiva UMC200, Acoustat Model 1/SPW-1, Behringer CX2310, 2 Adcom GFA-545

  3. #28
    Forum Regular frahengeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beantown
    Posts
    178
    [QUOTE=JoeE SP9]The flaw is thinking that "digital equipment" is a flaw in strategy. Both digital and analog have their pluses and minuses.

    I was being somewhat facetious in that statement since a good number of Audiophiles seem to feel that analog recordings are better representations of the "live" recording. If that's the case, then how will I ever truly appreciate classical music using my inferior digital equipment (facetious again).
    It's a disease, really.
    -----------------------------------
    Sony
    CDP-X77ES, CDP-X55ES, TA-N90ES, TA-E90ES, 333ESXII
    Denon
    AVP-A1HDCI, POA-A1HDCI, DVD-5910CI, DVD-2500BTCI
    Oppo
    BDP-83
    Sennheiser
    HD800
    Definitive Technology
    BP2000TL, C/L/R 3000, BPX, BP1X
    Pioneer
    Pro-151FD

  4. #29
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
    Never? You're missing out on a lot.
    So it seems. I will start with classical recordings for now and see if it peaks my interest. However, there is a fundamental flaw in this strategy since I will be using my "digital" equipment.

    ...
    See under my signature for my recommendations for a classical beginner. The listed recordings are not necessarily "the best" for a given piece or even necessarily superb sounding recordings, but they are all decent.

  5. #30
    Phila combat zone JoeE SP9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,710
    [quote=frahengeo]
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
    The flaw is thinking that "digital equipment" is a flaw in strategy. Both digital and analog have their pluses and minuses.

    I was being somewhat facetious in that statement since a good number of Audiophiles seem to feel that analog recordings are better representations of the "live" recording. If that's the case, then how will I ever truly appreciate classical music using my inferior digital equipment (facetious again).
    It has been my experience that recordings made with minimal miking and little if any studio sweetening sound better. Most studio recordings have been dubbed Eq'd and re-Eq'd to the point they sound very clean and clear but have no depth. Telarc recordings are done with minimal miking and little if any studio "sweetening". They tend to sound more realistic than others. Most classical recordings don't have a lot of studio "work" done to them. Of course there are some that sound great and some that don't.
    Here's To Ben by Jacintha on Groove Note is an example of a CD that was recorded live to two track. It is a good example of how a recording should sound.

    Your "digital gear" should sound quite good playing it. Now I'm being facetious!
    ARC SP9 MKIII, VPI HW19, Rega RB300
    Marcof PPA1, Shure, Sumiko, Ortofon carts, Yamaha DVD-S1800
    Behringer UCA222, Emotiva XDA-2, HiFimeDIY
    Accuphase T101, Teac V-7010, Nak ZX-7. LX-5, Behringer DSP1124P
    Front: Magnepan 1.7, DBX 223SX, 2 modified Dynaco MK3's, 2, 12" DIY TL subs (Pass El-Pipe-O) 2 bridged Crown XLS-402
    Rear/HT: Emotiva UMC200, Acoustat Model 1/SPW-1, Behringer CX2310, 2 Adcom GFA-545

  6. #31
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    I will start with classical recordings for now and see if it peaks my interest.
    Don't get discouraged too quickly as there is quite a variation within that general type. I confess that I don't enjoy much of the standard Beethoven - Brahms - Haydn fare. Actually, there are numerous unamplified music venues. There is jazz, bluegrass, a lot of "new age" music is instrumental in nature. I get to listen to wifey play her baby grand - that certainly qualifies.

    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    However, there is a fundamental flaw in this strategy since I will be using my "digital" equipment.
    Not at all. There are quite a few exceptional recordings on the Telarc label. I had the good fortune to play a small part in one recorded in Atlanta.

    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    I'm not sure I'm following. Are you suggesting that switching a component being compared and keeping everything else the same does not offer an apples to apples comparison.
    Exactly. It is all about system synergy. What works well with one system may not do as well in others.

    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    Well, that leaves the Audiophile with an endless number of combination that will never be realized.
    One doesn't have to try every combination in order to find those that work well. But you can't mix 'n match just anything and expect an optimum result. I always begin with the speaker. Arguably, it makes the single most significant difference. Then find an amplifier that is well matched to driving it. I have three systems. The Polk monitors in the HT system are the least picky. A NAD AV receiver drives them just fine. The vintage double Advents, however, present a very low impedance load (2.3 ohms) and do have a roller coaster impedance curve, so not just any amp will do. I use an old Threshold Stasis amp originally used to drive very demanding electrostats. It damping factor and current capabilities are well matched. As for my current electrostats, they do present a challenging reactive load, but don't have the impedance swing of the Advents, Here powerful tube amps work very well with the inherently high impedance load.

    rw

  7. #32
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    See under my signature for my recommendations for a classical beginner.
    Yours is a wide collection, but it is missing a few of my favorites:

    Copland - Billy the Kid
    Copland - Third Symphony & Music for the Theatre
    Ferde Grofe - Grand Canyon Suite
    Howard Hanson - And His Orchestra (one of HP's favorites)
    Carl Orff - Carmina Burana
    Prokofiev - Lt. Kije Suite
    Prokofiev - First and Second Piano Concertos (first heard on the Dayton-Wrights)
    Satie - Three Gymnopedies
    Borodin - Prince Igor
    Holst - Wind Suites (The very first Telarc recording and incredible!)
    Rachmaninoff - Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini
    Various classical guitar pieces by Albeniz, Bach, Tarrega, et al played by Christopher Parkening

    While I have a bunch of Bach, Brahms, Beethoven, etc. I find that I listen to them very infrequently. I prefer more lively late 19th or 20th century stuff.

    Not to mention some very tasty contemporary music scores:

    John Williams - Soundtrack from E.T. (The "Abandoned and Pursued" cut is quite powerful and emotional)
    John Williams - Memoirs of a Geisha
    John Williams - Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
    John Williams - The Empire Strikes Back
    Nicholas Hooper - Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
    Nicholas Hooper - Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
    Hans Zimmer - The Thin Red Line (another HP favorite)


    rw

  8. #33
    Suspended Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    3,959
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by hifitommy
    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.
    Last edited by Smokey; 08-10-2009 at 03:43 PM.

  9. #34
    Suspended Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    3,959
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    Well, at least there are a few ways that I've observed:

    1 kHz Freq, 1 Watt, x.xx THD

    1 kHz Freq, @rated power, x.xx THD

    Single channel driven 20~20,000 Hz, @rated power, x.xx THD (for multichannel)

    All Channels Driven 20-20,000 Hz, @rated power, x.xx THD (for multichannel)

    I imagine that if the amplifier were kept as a constant, then all these methods of measurements could potentially produce different THDs. Or I am way off on this?
    If everything is kept constant and amplifier is good quality with plenty of power, then THD should stay constant and not to vary too much. If an amp is cheap or/and don't have enough power, then it will produce different THD...which is bad.

  10. #35
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    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

  11. #36
    Forum Regular frahengeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beantown
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    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"?


    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    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?"
    Last edited by frahengeo; 08-10-2009 at 06:11 PM.
    It's a disease, really.
    -----------------------------------
    Sony
    CDP-X77ES, CDP-X55ES, TA-N90ES, TA-E90ES, 333ESXII
    Denon
    AVP-A1HDCI, POA-A1HDCI, DVD-5910CI, DVD-2500BTCI
    Oppo
    BDP-83
    Sennheiser
    HD800
    Definitive Technology
    BP2000TL, C/L/R 3000, BPX, BP1X
    Pioneer
    Pro-151FD

  12. #37
    Forum Regular frahengeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beantown
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    If everything is kept constant and amplifier is good quality with plenty of power, then THD should stay constant and not to vary too much. If an amp is cheap or/and don't have enough power, then it will produce different THD...which is bad.
    My point is that I don't always see these numbers reported in the same way. More than likely intentional on the manufacturers side to report more favorable numbers.
    It's a disease, really.
    -----------------------------------
    Sony
    CDP-X77ES, CDP-X55ES, TA-N90ES, TA-E90ES, 333ESXII
    Denon
    AVP-A1HDCI, POA-A1HDCI, DVD-5910CI, DVD-2500BTCI
    Oppo
    BDP-83
    Sennheiser
    HD800
    Definitive Technology
    BP2000TL, C/L/R 3000, BPX, BP1X
    Pioneer
    Pro-151FD

  13. #38
    Suspended Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    3,959
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
    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 )

    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    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

  14. #39
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey
    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

  15. #40
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    My point is that I don't always see these numbers reported in the same way. More than likely intentional on the manufacturers side to report more favorable numbers.
    I sort of agree. A raw THD number is sometimes quoted alone without any qualification. That's pretty meaningless. Not much better is THD quoted at 1kH, full power. In general I pay no attention to distortion figures when I'm considering an amplfier.

    Hypothetically, but never seen in published specs, it would be useful to see harmonic distortion spectra at power intervals intervals, say 1 watt, 1/10 rate power, and rated power, and at frequency intervals, say 100 Hz, 1000 Hz, and 10 kHz. Here, low distortion generally and, especially, relatively low higher-order (5th and higher) distortion would be indicative of better sound.

    Complementing the HD spectra would be:
    • Intermodular Distortion measures and power and frequency intervals,
    • Slewing rates (rise times) at intervals,
    • Damping factor at state impedance,
    • Noise.
    An amp with all good numbers across these measures would sound great there's little doubt.

  16. #41
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    SS amps are measured at full power where they measure best - they measure worse at low to medium volumes where 99% of people actually listen. SET measures their best at low power and their worst at high power - guess which makers chose the standard?

    SET amplifiers are the most linear amplifying devices with no crossover distortion - all Push Pull designs and all class A/B designs suffer poor linearity. Why don't you see that measurement on the spec sheet - again look who picked the standard.

    Most tube amps still have lower distortion than most speakers - so it's irrelevant and only occurs when pushed HARD. If one has efficient speakers then the amp will never need to be pushed hard. I would far rather own an amplifier that distorts at high levels than one that distorts at low levels. SET amplifiers sound more transparent, clear, open than any SS amp I have ever auditioned - and it's not particularly close.

    Instead of reading the BS - why not listen to the actual amplifiers. Event he top SS designers in a blind test believed that a tube amp was more "realistic" and there is so much ad copy from SS saying things like "valve like sound or tube like realism" or CD player makers trying to say their cd player is more "like vinyl" which in both cases admits to the superiority of the other technology.

    Vinyl has downside - on cheaps players they aren't great and vinyl wears, needles wear, and some vinyl is badly printed to start with.

    I have Frank Sinatra on LP and several CD's - The LP version easily beats the CD. But then I'm not using a Sears turntable.

    A quote I enjoy because I find it to be true.

    all transistor amplifiers sound poor for the simple reason that transistors are inferior amplifying devices. The word “semiconductor” really means what it says and it says it all, “half”-conductor, sonically this could be translated to mean half the signal! Which is really what it sounds like. Pure and simple, transistors are highly un-linear and need a lot of correction (feedback of some sort) to have a bandwidth wide enough to be able to reproduce any music signals, they are not natural voltage amplifiers. Likewise both the pentode or tetrode requires corrective feedback to lower the load sensitivity and improve bandwidth, they are less un-linear than transistors being high impedance devices that require matching from an output transformer. Thus they sound better when used well, especially when used single-ended or in pseudo triode mode by connecting the grids together.../...we, at least understand that the test equipment is easily fooled by technical trickery such as feedback or over sampling.

  17. #42
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    SS amps are measured at full power where they measure best - they measure worse at low to medium volumes where 99% of people actually listen...Most tube amps still have lower distortion than most speakers - so it's irrelevant and only occurs when pushed HARD.
    That's a tad bit over generalized IMHO. I do agree that small signal performance is crucial. My very first "serious" amplifier was an AR Integrated. It performed exactly as you say - great at full tilt, but resolution went out the window at low levels. I have also experienced that with some tube AB amps as well. The 70s Conrad-Johnson MV-75A also fit that mold. OTOH, there are a number of SS amps that do not exhibit that behavior. My Threshold Stasis is actually two amps sharing the same input and output. One is a low power class A amp that is good for the first 4 watts / channel or so where the cascode AB current amp begins to take over. Fortunately, I rarely need more than that much power in the garage driving double Advents. Naturally, I have a DAC with a tube output stage driving it directly.

    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    Pure and simple, transistors are highly un-linear and need a lot of correction (feedback of some sort) to have a bandwidth wide enough to be able to reproduce any music signals, they are not natural voltage amplifiers.
    Here again, you really need to be careful about such sweeping commentary. The Pass First Watt F3 is a notable exception. Feedback is absent because it is a single stage single ended class A design. Read this.

    rw

  18. #43
    Forum Regular frahengeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beantown
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    Instead of reading the BS - why not listen to the actual amplifiers.
    One should be able to narrow down their search by reading Reviews and Specs, then go listen to a handful that had favorable specs/reviews/features that met one's needs. There are far too many models available to do listening tests on all. So far, some say numbers mean something, some say it means nothing.

    Again, if this sound is not measurable, then how do the manufacturers ensure quality. How do they verify that serial number xxx1 performs the same as serial number xxx2, xxx3, etc. in a particular fleet?

    Out of curiosity, how did you select your gear? How were you sure that what you chose was the best option for your price range? Did you simply go to the local hifi shop, auditioned what they carried, picked your favorite, and never looked back?
    It's a disease, really.
    -----------------------------------
    Sony
    CDP-X77ES, CDP-X55ES, TA-N90ES, TA-E90ES, 333ESXII
    Denon
    AVP-A1HDCI, POA-A1HDCI, DVD-5910CI, DVD-2500BTCI
    Oppo
    BDP-83
    Sennheiser
    HD800
    Definitive Technology
    BP2000TL, C/L/R 3000, BPX, BP1X
    Pioneer
    Pro-151FD

  19. #44
    _ Luvin Da Blues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    _
    Posts
    1,951
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    Out of curiosity, how did you select your gear? How were you sure that what you chose was the best option for your price range? Did you simply go to the local hifi shop, auditioned what they carried, picked your favorite, and never looked back?
    Hang out here long enough and you'll realize that Audio Note IS the only gear worth owning.
    Back in my day, we had nine planets.

  20. #45
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    One should be able to narrow down their search by reading Reviews and Specs, then go listen to a handful that had favorable specs/reviews/features that met one's needs.
    Once again, the specs really don't provide any useful information because sometimes *better* numbers result in worse audible performance. Read this article by Nelson Pass on the pitfalls of measurements and high use of negative feedback.

    Another challenge begins with the speaker. You really need to start here because some speakers have special requirements that simplistic specs don't begin to address. There is absolutely nothing found in standard measurements that addresses my need for an amplifier that can drive the reactive load of an electrostatic speaker. Zilch. Or that really quantifies the ability for an amp to drive the 2.3 ohm load of the double Advents in my garage system. For that, you really need to have an understanding of the amplifier's design and - quite frankly - the result of field experience. I found out about Threshold amps through a speaker rep because they were specifically designed to handle electrostats. One of the company founders had Dayton-Wrights himself and the 800A was tasked to be able to drive their notoriously nasty load.

    rw

  21. #46
    Forum Regular frahengeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beantown
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by Luvin Da Blues
    Hang out here long enough and you'll realize that Audio Note IS the only gear worth owning.
    How? Using the ol' Jedi Mind Trick?

    So where is your Audio Note gear?
    It's a disease, really.
    -----------------------------------
    Sony
    CDP-X77ES, CDP-X55ES, TA-N90ES, TA-E90ES, 333ESXII
    Denon
    AVP-A1HDCI, POA-A1HDCI, DVD-5910CI, DVD-2500BTCI
    Oppo
    BDP-83
    Sennheiser
    HD800
    Definitive Technology
    BP2000TL, C/L/R 3000, BPX, BP1X
    Pioneer
    Pro-151FD

  22. #47
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    [QUOTE=E-Stat]
    Here again, you really need to be careful about such sweeping commentary. The Pass First Watt F3 is a notable exception. Feedback is absent because it is a single stage single ended class A design. Read this.


    You are correct that there are some exceptions - I know of exactly two Pass Labs and Sugden and it's interesting that these are also my two favorite Solid State manufacturers and only the non feedback class A zero feedback designs. But one or two exceptions my generalization is more than fair.

  23. #48
    _ Luvin Da Blues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    _
    Posts
    1,951
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    How? Using the ol' Jedi Mind Trick?

    So where is your Audio Note gear?
    You should do a search for all of RGA posts, he's our local Audio Note (one note?) fan boy.
    Back in my day, we had nine planets.

  24. #49
    Forum Regular frahengeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beantown
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by Luvin Da Blues
    You should do a search for all of RGA posts, he's our local Audio Note (one note?) fan boy.
    Yeah. I'll take your word on that one. I did search this particular brand. Silver this and silver that...appeared expensive.
    It's a disease, really.
    -----------------------------------
    Sony
    CDP-X77ES, CDP-X55ES, TA-N90ES, TA-E90ES, 333ESXII
    Denon
    AVP-A1HDCI, POA-A1HDCI, DVD-5910CI, DVD-2500BTCI
    Oppo
    BDP-83
    Sennheiser
    HD800
    Definitive Technology
    BP2000TL, C/L/R 3000, BPX, BP1X
    Pioneer
    Pro-151FD

  25. #50
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by frahengeo
    One should be able to narrow down their search by reading Reviews and Specs, then go listen to a handful that had favorable specs/reviews/features that met one's needs. There are far too many models available to do listening tests on all. So far, some say numbers mean something, some say it means nothing.

    Again, if this sound is not measurable, then how do the manufacturers ensure quality. How do they verify that serial number xxx1 performs the same as serial number xxx2, xxx3, etc. in a particular fleet?

    Out of curiosity, how did you select your gear? How were you sure that what you chose was the best option for your price range? Did you simply go to the local hifi shop, auditioned what they carried, picked your favorite, and never looked back?
    Of course measurements and specs mean SOMETHING - but it is important to know which specs will give you an indicator of being effective and downright not working. The manufacturer needs consistency so that a given woofer measures sufficiently with the crossover and tweeter to get the sound they desire. 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.

    Why don't measurements matter much - well a measurement - if it matters - will correlate directly with the professional reviewer's listening experience. There is more to it than one single measurement. A speaker with a flat frequency response may look good on the graph but it may sound terrible. Conversely a speaker with dips and spikes - depending where they are may be far more desirable. And Stereophile is a prime example of this - they measure everything - some of it measures to what the editor believes to be EXCELLENT and some it pretty much off the mark - yet the reviewer's listening of it has no correlation other than individual aspects. For example my speakers have a shelved down treble, and higher than average box resonances (though that is intentional and specifically chosen to operate with these resonances). On a measurement without listening that shows up as pretty darn wonky. Yet the Stereophile reviewer after auditioning hundreds and hundreds of loudspeakers over the last 40 years and a big Quad panel owner ended up buying the speaker.

    There is nothing particularly great about the measurements of this speakers and one can hear the deficiencies - but at the same time when all factors are taken in to consideration the pluses far outweigh the minuses. The speaker was designed to be listened to at a certain distance in room and was designed factoring in corner loading floor bounce etc. measuring that speaker in the center of a room in an anechoic environment at 1 meter is frankly idiotic.

    In fact I will use Audio Note as the example because frankly I can't think of a system that would measure WORSE. Their speakers use little internal damping - no damping materials in the tweeter either. They use no speaker treatments to curb refraction. The amplifiers are high distortion SET - this is the highest distortion amplifier type. Now you have two oddball measurements - but wait let's add their zero times oversampling cd player technology which uses no error correction of any kind and no filters - the distortion here is as high as CD players get.

    You're not just talking amplifier distortion but you ADDING the CD player distortion and the weird speaker measurements - yet people tend to leave Bryston and PMC (some of the best measuring stuff available for AN and not the other way around).

    And that is generally true of single ended amplifiers - the SET was not sold in North America before Audio Note came out selling on these shores in 1990. So virtually everyone who has gone SET - left something else - and this kind of amplification is beginning to see larger and larger sales the more people "listen" to them.

    What people have to do is stop reading spec sheets and watt ratings. I can play at leave the room volume levels with a pair of 93db speakers and a generously rated 10 watt amp. 4.2 undistorted.

    It sounds deeper more fleshed out and has much better transients (attack) and decay than a Bryston anything. When you look at specs it should not be the case - the Bryston should kill my amp - believe me I could have purchased a bryston separates package for the same price - the Bryston combo had a 20 year warranty - is easier to use - bigger and badder with the specs. My amp has a lowly 1 year warranty and plain jane looks. For me to sacrifice the warranty, resale value and ease of use the sound has to be so far and away better because if it was close I would have bought the Bryston combo (or countless other SS amplifiers). Plus like many measurement lovers, there is nothing the OTO does from a typical measurements perspective that beats a Bryston - and frankly the Bryston gear even win in terms of build quality! But from one piano key press - it was completely game over for the Bryston - if you're buying sound the OTO was easily better - if you're buying audio as an appliance the Bryston is the clear choice.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •