Good read: are amps really different

Autor

Beitrag

Arj
Inventar

#1 erstellt: 05. Mrz 2006, 03:55

pdf download at

http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf

Interesting that in a group of sceptics + believers the probability of getting the amp right was the same as that of tossing a coin !! so are amps really different ?

Having been thru 3 amps i would like to think so.. but "evidence" proves otherwise.

Maybe there is more to audio than blind testing and A/B s.. but then again maybe we are all deluding ourselves as well !

Open for discussion

square_wave
Inventar

#2 erstellt: 06. Mrz 2006, 08:17

Oh yes….they are all very different.
I can give at-least five classifications. This is part of a conversation were having with an amp circuit designer. My limited experience with amps leads to the same conclusion.

a) Downright bad sound. Harsh. Painful to listen to. Leads to listening fatigue. Note that these can either measure very well or measure bad.
b) Clean sound. Ultra detailing. Does not get you to tap your foot and shake your head. You sit and stare at the speakers. Belongs to the good measurements camp.
c) Clean sound. But warm and musical too. You move to the music. Plonk a small child in the sweet spot and soon you notice the body swaying to the music.
d) Good sound but too colored to appreciate the original instruments.
e) Warm and musical sound. We generally relate them to tube gear. Even if it is solid state equipment, we say tube-like sound.

SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt

#3 erstellt: 06. Mrz 2006, 09:31

I can give at-least five classifications

a) Downright bad sound. Harsh. Painful to listen to. Leads to listening fatigue. Note that these can either measure very well or measure bad.
b) Clean sound. Ultra detailing. Does not get you to tap your foot and shake your head. You sit and stare at the speakers. Belongs to the good measurements camp.
c) Clean sound. But warm and musical too. You move to the music. Plonk a small child in the sweet spot and soon you notice the body swaying to the music.
d) Good sound but too colored to appreciate the original instruments.
e) Warm and musical sound. We generally relate them to tube gear. Even if it is solid state equipment, we say tube-like sound.

These classifications were given by Samuel..the audio wizard..

Arj
Inventar

#4 erstellt: 06. Mrz 2006, 10:23

square_wave schrieb:

Oh yes….they are all very different.

I think you missed the point

It is about "Perceiving" difference in ABX testing. which in every ABX test I have read about always gives a probability of only 50%.. if so why do people do an ABX testing ?

Regarding you point, Somehow those classifications seem very.. vague (Cant think of another word for it ! )

For eg There are at least a couple more of classifications which can be added to the above
-Neutral and Musical (It does not have to be Warm to be musical and everyone does not like warm)
-Bright and musical.
-Bright , but neithre musical nor harsh and so on and so forth.
Note: IMHO Also Warm and coloured theoretically mean the same thing.. so do Bright and coloured. and if an amp is not "Clean sounding" then it is distorting and that is not a good design

from what I understand you only have well designed amps and badly designed amps and in this context we can completely ignore the bad ones. and warm/bright/neutral may actually be more subjective than you realise !!

The above testing was for the well designed ones..

square_wave
Inventar

#5 erstellt: 06. Mrz 2006, 11:55

I agree. These words can be very confusing. But you need to describe the sound of very different sounding well designed amps. We can come up with a wide variety of words depending on one’s creativity. The choice is based on one’s personal taste and speaker demands.

stevieboy
Stammgast

#6 erstellt: 06. Mrz 2006, 12:34

highly amusing read

maybe they should start reviewing gear like this... evil grin

square_wave
Inventar

#7 erstellt: 06. Mrz 2006, 14:28

The audiophile community is divided when it comes to ABX testing for choosing your equipment. Although ABX tests are valid, it is highly debatable you will find your type of equipment using this type of testing. You need to check out any equipment for at least a week with a variety of music to know if you can live with it. I think that is a better test than fast-switching ABX.

sanathan
Ist häufiger hier

#8 erstellt: 06. Mrz 2006, 19:12

In my view some aplifiers do sound differently..Even my Non-Audiophile friends agree! There must be something wrong with the ABX system! sorry!

Arj
Inventar

#9 erstellt: 06. Mrz 2006, 19:48

Everyone knows that there are difference in amps/sources etc. No one is disputing that. But the same folks who say this are unable to differentiate them during blind testing ! perhaps other senses other than our hearing have a role to play ? or is it just phsychoacoustics or else we are unable to put the difference into words.

its not this ABX system which is wrong there have multiple scientifically done ABXs for many components including one of LP Vs CD and in everycase the success rate is not conclusive.

In fact i remember reading the case where a group of people heard a CD recording of an LP playing a classical piece (Pops and clicks included) and swore it was an LP playing

I think it was by Ayre.

Hence either we should leave science out of it or else figure out if we are measuring the wrong thing.; as our friend SBFXs signature mentions !

sanathan
Ist häufiger hier

#10 erstellt: 07. Mrz 2006, 07:03

My Strong Gut Feeling is that we still dont know what else to measure..... No Science claims absoluteness. The Laws of science are only absolute within a given susbset of the universe(i.e the known universe at a particular point of time) . We may come upon a broader realm of experimentation which will warrant an expansion of the 'current' laws of the universe. A standard example is Newtonian mechanics versus Relativity theory. It does not mean that Newton is Wrong and Einstein is correct. But actually Newtons laws are a subset of Einsteins Relativity Theory.
I think audio too falls into this category.
Also as arj thinks , I have recently read in a science clip that our subjective feeling directly influences our perception of music. This has been proved by some experiments recently.

So definitely its not delusion guys ... :-)

FOr example
A person may give different judgements when he has been asked in an ABX setup, than when he relaxes in the dead of the night and listens to his favourite music.
All my best moments in music (atleast for me) have been in the second case.

SO i think we are definitely missing something here !!!!!

Anayways Lets enjoy the music :-) :-) :-)

Krish
Stammgast

#11 erstellt: 07. Mrz 2006, 09:14

Hi,
Here is my POV.

While sound it self can be measured quite accurately, how we experience that sound, perhaps cannot.This is simply because it is so subjective. Our experience of sound is a function of many things- our predispositions, prejudices in music, our ability to dicern sounds across the audio spectrum...

Of course, different brands of HiFi sound different. Unfortunately all that an individual has at his disposal, to describe his experience of 'different', is language .And as we all know too well, the problem with language is that it lacks exactness.

This is true not just of sound, but all other sensory experience like smell, taste etc. Perhaps sound is just a little more complicated

In sum I'd say if you think that it's got the swing ( as Manek says ), it does !! No more, no less

Cheers

Amp_Nut
Inventar

#12 erstellt: 07. Mrz 2006, 10:59

The article says that the US $ 6,000 Direct Coupled Valve power amplifier ( Futterman ) and a US $ 200 Pioneer intergrated sounded particularly similar..

So much for our hearing ability.

Also came across this bit of science about the sense of taste.

Scientists have declared that Onions, Potatoes and Apples, are actually identical, except for their texture and aroma...

Anyone wanna do a ABX on these ? ? ;-)

I can only hope they now dont equate beer and single malt to horse's p*** ...

SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt

#13 erstellt: 07. Mrz 2006, 11:06

I can only hope they now dont equate beer and single malt to horse's p*** ...

dare anyone does that dear Amp_Nut..we will crack their nuts...

Krish
Stammgast

#14 erstellt: 07. Mrz 2006, 12:04

I can only hope they now dont equate beer and single malt to horse's p*** ...

Dunno about Horse***s, but I do know a lot of people, who on tasting Laphroaig for the first time liken it to drinking tincture iodine

Arj
Inventar

#15 erstellt: 07. Mrz 2006, 12:05

Amp_Nut schrieb:

Scientists have declared that Onions, Potatoes and Apples, are actually identical, except for their texture and aroma...

Anyone wanna do a ABX on these ? ? ;-)

I can only hope they now dont equate beer and single malt to horse's p*** ...

:prost

actually in case of food, Taste, Aroma as well as the looks (presentation) have a lot to do with enjoyment of it. in fact there are theories that the Taste is a combination of Aroma + taste ie we also taste thru the Nose..

perhaps that has something to do with audio as well. maybe knowing which component we are playing + its looks also adds more to the "Sound" experience than we believe

[Beitrag von Arj am 07. Mrz 2006, 12:05 bearbeitet]

Behram
Ist häufiger hier

#16 erstellt: 07. Mrz 2006, 13:00

In the good old days of audio we had stereo equipment fitted with large VU meters, graphic fluroscent displays, turntables with stroboscope and a dangling weight for antiskating etc., watching these along with the music enhanced the listening experience.

Nowadays these frills are missing as we have entered a "pure-direct mode" approach. The thrill is gone hence we are forced to concentrate on the sound and as a result feel there is an audible difference although in reality there maybe none.

Arj
Inventar

#17 erstellt: 07. Mrz 2006, 13:12

Good point Behram,

The experience of seeing a Jeff rowland amp hearing the music should have a big difference on the effect. in fact i am planning to get a ruined/distroyed high end amp off ebay and put my SI T amp inside to see if anyone i know Oohs and Aahs about it

I remember the classical definition of an amplifier.. it is supposed to be "a straight wire with a gain".

hence no adding and subtracting from the sound. hence "classically" every amplifier should sound the same.

Unfortunately (Or fortunately ?) this is not true as Every amplifier adds/subtracts from the sound..or rather colours (Distortion ?) it.

Amp_Nut
Inventar

#18 erstellt: 07. Mrz 2006, 15:49

Unfortunately (Or fortunately ?) this is not true as Every amplifier adds/subtracts from the sound..or rather colours (Distortion ?) it.

As I have said in my sign off line :

In theory.... there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is a difference !

eric_clapton
Hat sich gelöscht

#19 erstellt: 07. Mrz 2006, 17:19

As a part-time small-time tinkerer in putting together some amps, all I can say is that if the resolution of the speakers and the rest of the system permits it, and if the designer's ears are capable, minute differences can be detected quite easily.

While making a new set, I have heard reproducible differences in my system, of changing a mains cable, one resistor, one capacitor, a power supply configuration (that's a big change though)... Let alone a full amplifer. Now to explain those differences would be complex. Also added to the fact that earlier I would not have noticed those differences at all, either because of my ears or the speakers.

The issue is not whether the amplifiers sound different. it is whether we have the capability to identify the differences accurately each time, and then communicate the differences. Unfortunately, it is like food - the presentation and the taste, your state of mind, the ambient temperature, the subject of conversation at the time of consumption all add to the experience. Now try put that in words to somebody who wasn't there...

Before signing off, the last thing, was the similarity between the Futterman (that sounds gross!) and the Pioneer. I was shocked for a minute before I wanted to understand what was going on.

The OTL-1 uses about 60dB of closed loop NFB. I would imagine the Pioneer uses similar levels of NFB or a little less. Additionally the OTL-1 is rated at 40 watts/channel, very close to the Pioneer's 45 watts. (More detail available on OTL Asylum). Both are entry-level amps (True!! Read!! Search!!) in their own sense. That may go some way in explaining the perceived similarity.