They just can't say it, can they?

[pzannucci]

They didn't really sound like Khorns...they sounded like modern speakers...

Scary....[]

[pzannucci]

I own 100watt (200 @4), 250watt (500 @4), and the B.C. 500watt (1K @4) IcePower amps and the Bel Canto 1000s are definitely the most musical in most situations. I can say that having all three and multiple different speakers, it really is the pairing with the speaker that counts. Some pairings you can wonder "what is that noise", others it is like bread and butter.

I would love to hear a nice powerful 45 set in my current configuration though my bass cabinets are a little current hungry as they were made to take advantage of the REF 1000's bass capability. The 45 would likely sound wonderful on the mid/ribbon high end though.

[Mallette]

Scary....

Hey Peter! Good to hear from you...

You are not only perhaps the most "elder statesman" of the forums, but probably also have the record for the longest duration here with the lowest post count! []

Well, at least rather than blather endlessly like so many of us you make it count when you post.

Dave

[George O.]

It's been demonstrated over the years that, in a DBT, listeners can rarely distinguish between much of anything, let alone what is powering the rest of the equipment.

[Mallette]

It's been demonstrated over the years that, in a DBT, listeners can rarely distinguish between much of anything, let alone what is powering the rest of the equipment.

Not true. I have observed under numerous occasions that as long as an audiophile is provided with once piece of critical data they can distinguish easily.

$$$$$$ []

Dave

[pzannucci]

It's been demonstrated over the years that, in a DBT, listeners can rarely distinguish between much of anything, let alone what is powering the rest of the equipment.

Hmm, don't think so. I know my equipment and when I hook up the Murano Audio S200 (something like that) to my Khorns, the bass is better than the REF 1000s at first hearing it, then further listening you notice the lower end IcePower amp has a little more mono-noted bass. The REF1000 doesn't sound as strong (maybe impedance matching) but is cleaner and far from mono-toned.

Hook up the any of the other 6 or so amps I have I can tell you what it is. Likely the only two that come close are the XTi 1000 and the Panasonic. I would likely fail there.

[Fjd]

It's been demonstrated over the years that, in a DBT, listeners can rarely distinguish between much of anything, let alone what is powering the rest of the equipment.

Not true. I have observed under numerous occasions that as long as an audiophile is provided with once piece of critical data they can distinguish easily.

$$$$$$

Dave

While it is arguable and a point of contention of many that a person may or may not recognize many subtle differences between components in the short term or in DBTs, I find that longer term listening without necessarily consciously engaging critical thought to the listening may be required to understand whether a component reproduces music to your liking in your system over time. []

[Quiet_Hollow]

I can say that having all three and multiple different speakers, it really is the pairing with the speaker that counts. Some pairings you can wonder "what is that noise", others it is like bread and butter.

Agreed. ....there's definitely a synergy that takes place when all the pieces complement one another.

..and about the DBT. The difference in the chip amp sound wasn't subtle, at least in my experience.

It wasn't, "As if a veil had been lifted from the top end, a breath of fresh air." or "The bass took on a fullness...."

It went more like, "DAY-UM! Listen to those cymbals!" and "That midrange belongs in my coffee!"

[:|]

[Cut-Throat]

It's been demonstrated over the years that, in a DBT, listeners can rarely distinguish between much of anything, let alone what is powering the rest of the equipment.

It's been demonstrated with cables.......Speakers and amps are easily distinguishable.

[Mallette]

Speakers and amps are easily distinguishable.

Easily? Absolutely not, unless one or more is not accurate and if they are not accurate they are not, by definition "high fidelity." The vast majority of serious speakers, amps, and sources built for the audiophile market are at least "accurate." Differences in percieved sound are not, IMHO, departures from accuracy.

As a lover of pipe organs I've listened to hundreds over 40 years or so. Many of these from the same builder. All are "accurate." However, there are significant differences in what I like that has nothing to do with the instrument and everything to do with the space that houses it. I've heard the same instrument over a period of years when changes were made in the space that altered it significantly to my ears...but not at all to most listeners.

I've never poopooed those who hear differences in power supplies, interconnects, tubes, etc. I've no doubt they hear what they claim. However, like the average listener to a fine pipe organ expertly played who would not know a slap echo from a stomach punch, I don't hear those things nor do I want to learn how to. I just want to hear the music accurately reproduced. The number of things active and passive, electric, electronic, and mechanical, that can "flavor" a sound is functionally infinite so I choose not to go there and wander endlessly through the maze looking for the way out.

OTOH, for many, it's why they do this in the first place. Whatever floats your boat!

Dave

[Deang]

"It's been demonstrated over the years that, in a DBT, listeners can rarely distinguish between much of anything, let alone what is powering the rest of the equipment."

I think this tells us all we pretty much need to know about the validity of DBT.

I remember when I was told there wasn't going to be any discernable difference between my friend's Sansui receiver and my Son of Ampzilla/Thalia setup. Yeah, right.

[Cut-Throat]

Easily? Absolutely not, unless one or more is not accurate and if they are not accurate they are not, by definition "high fidelity." The vast majority of serious speakers, amps, and sources built for the audiophile market are at least "accurate." Differences in percieved sound are not, IMHO, departures from accuracy.

As a lover of pipe organs I've listened to hundreds over 40 years or so. Many of these from the same builder. All are "accurate." However, there are significant differences in what I like that has nothing to do with the instrument and everything to do with the space that houses it. I've heard the same instrument over a period of years when changes were made in the space that altered it significantly to my ears...but not at all to most listeners.

I've never poopooed those who hear differences in power supplies, interconnects, tubes, etc. I've no doubt they hear what they claim. However, like the average listener to a fine pipe organ expertly played who would not know a slap echo from a stomach punch, I don't hear those things nor do I want to learn how to. I just want to hear the music accurately reproduced. The number of things active and passive, electric, electronic, and mechanical, that can "flavor" a sound is functionally infinite so I choose not to go there and wander endlessly through the maze looking for the way out.

OTOH, for many, it's why they do this in the first place. Whatever floats your boat!

Dave

If you can't tell the difference between speakers, just buy a pair of "accurate' Studio Monitors and be done with it. Thats what a lot of studio folks use for monitors.

For myself, I prefer large horn systems, where I can defineitely tell a difference from Accurate Studio Monitors. To each his own!

Amps, Sure all amps sound the same! Not!

[mike stehr]

I dunno...I listened to homebrew SS 25 watt Class A amplifier with Klipschorns a few months ago and was blown away. Never heard Khorns sound like that. They didn't really sound like Khorns...they sounded like modern speakers...

Thanks for the warning!

Dave

Er, okay?

[Islander]

Then there's the "unplanned blind test", as can happen when a first-time visitor doesn't recognize the La Scalas, Belles, Klipschorns or Jubilees as speakers, and says, "Wow, that TV's got some great sound!"

[Quiet_Hollow]

The big concept to remember with the advent of the chip amp is not so much that it's a novel amplifier technology, but that it relies more so on a very specific means of dealing with the source signal.

Have you ever taken a comprehensive look at what's upstream of those RCA inputs? Count all the gain stages. When an analog amp is bench tested, by any right, it's source is simply a lab-grade function generator....not our pre-amp and certainly not our source. That's a lot of parts that don't get factored into those measurements.

We might have a real kick-@ss amp that will pass a bench test with flying colors...posting gorgeous individual specs, but how does the source signal ,ahead of it, look in the real world? Is the output of the pre-amp a good facsimile of the source? Most importantly, what about the aggregate combination? With this method, ensuring global signal integrity starts to equal parts and money, fast.

When transporting in the analog domain, it's all about the pre-amp stages along the way, no matter what.

But a chip amp, accepting a digital signal, dispatches with all of that fan fare. It can eliminate an entire input / output stage and the gear associated with it.

This approach leaves the end user (me) with more resources to handle the other two devils of playback...the speakers and the room.

[wuzzzer]

My Panasonic/Forte II combination is the best sound I've ever heard and owned. The only thing I'd ever replace my receiver with is a Panasonic SA-XR that has HDMI.

[pzannucci]

But a chip amp, accepting a digital signal, dispatches with all of that fan fare. It can eliminate an entire input / output stage and the gear associated with it.

Quiet_Hollow,

I have been a fan of pure digitial connections but there are very few chip amps that currently accept digital input. A search of Parts Express and places like ClassDAudio show most requiring analog inputs.

Do you have a list of newer receivers that have digital input and don't require a dac on the front end serving some unput such a USB and a lot of the Topping offers? The XR, Sony Direct Drive Digital amplifier, NAD, and Tact amplify in the digital domain from what I have read. Others mearly convert the digital and send it to a switching amplifier. I'd like to know if there are any amps out there with outstanding sound quality, still produced, and don't use analog inputs or a typical DAC internally.

My thoughts are that current production with HDMI and HDCP has probably just about killed hopes of having very high quality. Except for lower end audio where cost of the resulting product is going to be inexpensive, manufactures will try to squeeze by not having large component costs and not using multiples of expensive input connectors.

[Mallette]

For myself, I prefer large horn systems, where I can defineitely tell a difference from Accurate Studio Monitors.

Having spent my first 10 years in audio engineering, my opinion is the studio monitors are mid range heavy and accentuated. I found this true especially in the ubiquitous EV Sentry line and JBL. There was a good reason for this, though it's mainly tradition now where it still occurs.

"Accuracy" is a very specific term whose meaning varies radically inside the head of the individual making the judgment. We all agree on the definition. On the realization, not so much.

I've become very tolerant of audiphile opinion over the years and very slow to criticize others opinions of "accurate."

For myself, if I must render an opinion I have to hear one of a handful of first rate recordings or those of my own creation. Regardless of their merits (and I am claiming none) my own recordings give me the quickest returns because I have the "A" of the original performance to compare the "B" of the playback chain and environment against.

Dave

[Mallette]

Er, okay?

Just making a funny, Mike. Some of us ol farts LIKE K'horn sound and find the idea of something that "...didn't really sound like Khorns" something less than an endorsement. IMHO, when everything is right, Khorns have no "sound" at all but just disappear.

For years, I said the most devastating thing one could say to an audiophile was "What great sounding speakers!" Pretty much gave it up as neither audiophiles nor non-audiophiles got it.

Dave

[George O.]

It's been demonstrated over the years that, in a DBT, listeners can rarely distinguish between much of anything, let alone what is powering the rest of the equipment.

Not true. I have observed under numerous occasions that as long as an audiophile is provided with once piece of critical data they can distinguish easily.

$$$$$$

Dave

Good one that I will remember to use in the future.

There are two kinds of people. One kind brags about how much he paid for something. The other brags about how little he paid.