DIFFERENCES IN SQ & AMPS, ETC.

[ODS123]

56 minutes ago, Shakeydeal said:

 

 

Ok, I'll bite.

 

If all amps (within their specific power rating) sound the same, what criteria do you judge the one you purchase by? Is it bells and whistles, color of the case, how much it weighs? Or what?

 

I mean if a 100 watt per channel receiver that costs 200.00 has all the gew gaws you desire in such a piece of crap, why would you buy a 500.00 amplifier with the same power rating and same gee gaws? They will certainly sound the same right?

 

I have never been able to quite wrap my head around the "scientific objectivist methodology" of  how you guys choose equipment. I know how I do it, by which thing sounds the best. But when that is discarded, there isn't a whole lot left...........

 

Actually, it's not so hard at all to explain.

 

In choosing an amp I look at feature set, build quality, industrial design, a good warranty and reputation for reliability.  I bought a McIntosh MA6600 integrated b/c I love it's features, it's build-quality, the way it looks and feels when I operate it.  And I like that the meters can help prevent over-driving my speakers.  .But do I believe it sounds any better than the NAD 375BEE that had before it - that is, when not pushed beyond it's power limits?  ..Nope.  And I have excellent hearing and a keen sense for musical nuance honed from a lifelong devotion to music.

 

Just because I know all modern-day amps that are engineered to be linear will sound the same doesn't mean I don't have an appreciation for other aspects of their design.

 

[ODS123]

 

33 minutes ago, MerkinMuffley said:

How good is our short term and working memory? See here: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_memory

 

The entire premise of AB/X is based on a working memory that can differentiate between two massive data sets. Impossible.

 

So explain how we can reliably (ie., to  satistically significant degree) distinguish b/w speakers using AB/X testing?  ..And I don't see where in the website you reference this is specifically addressed.

[MerkinMuffley]

This scope photo is 1.7uS of music. In a ten second music clip, 5,880 more frames** like this will pass through your ears. Call that Sample X - the one you must identify as either A or B. Having heard X, you must now compare that to a previously heard 5,880 frames called Sample A, AND another 5,880 frames called Sample B. You must decide if X is equal to A or B. 

 

Consider that Amp A might make some of the pointed peaks a little more rounded, or some of the taller peaks a little shorter, or some of the rounded peaks a little more pointed than Amp B. So now you have THREE massive data sets (5,880 "frames of sound") to juggle. Is the 5,880 frames worth of X more like A or more like B. Good luck. Not convinced? Add these "curve balls" to the mix. 1. You probably will NOT be able to play EXACTLY the same sample length for A, B, and then X. 2. Even breathing can change your hearing sensitivity. 3. Moving your head will dramatically change the stereo mix in your brain. All of that means this: every time you hear A, you are probably hearing a different A, and the same goes for B. 

 

That's why no one can pass the AB/X test - because we don't have the brain that can do it. Meanwhile, every notable, successful amplifier designer, from Bob Carver to Nelson Pass to John Curl, to George Wright to Dennis Had firmly believe that amplifiers sound different. 

 

**it's not really frames, just a continuous stream.

[MerkinMuffley]

1 minute ago, ODS123 said:

 

So explain how we can reliably (ie., to  satistically significant degree) distinguish b/w speakers using AB/X testing?  ..And I don't see where in the website you reference this is specifically addressed.

Because speakers have very GROSS differences.  Very dramatic difference. Amps electronics are far too subtle to be detected with working memory.

[MerkinMuffley]

"Excellent hearing" BTW, is a red herring. Hearing acuity is unrelated to how our memory works. The AB/X challenge isn't just a measure of hearing acuity, it is a process of memory manipulation and differentiation. A completely different process from mere hearing. 

 

AB/X does prove one thing: Short term memory is lousy.

[Max2]

With the right content that one has listened to for years in a single setup or their personal listening environment, its easy to pick out a difference in amps or sources in instances.   Now you have a group show up even in a crappy room (which surprisingly so many demonstrations happen in) and listen to something in this new environment with AVR power and then jump to a tube setup, its very plausible.   Even different Amp classes like a D vs A/AB, maybe.   Different AVR's, my money would be on a no.

[Shakeydeal]

16 minutes ago, Max2 said:

With the right content that one has listened to for years in a single setup or their personal listening environment, its easy to pick out a difference in amps or sources in instances.   Now you have a group show up even in a crappy room (which surprisingly so many demonstrations happen in) and listen to something in this new environment with AVR power and then jump to a tube setup, its very plausible.   Even different Amp classes like a D vs A/AB, maybe.   Different AVR's, my money would be on a no.

 

Good post

 

Different AVR's, my money would be on a no.

 

Different flavors of crap still = crap........

 

Shakey

[babadono]

All I can say or add is the biggest difference in SQ is the SPEAKERS and the room they're in.

Welcome to the Klipsch forum.

[Max2]

1 hour ago, babadono said:

All I can say or add is the biggest difference in SQ is the SPEAKERS and the room they're in.

Welcome to the Klipsch forum.

Spot on.

Enough basic, simple sound panels and a large rug can make drastic changes to any room.  Its something you can never appreciate in an unfamiliar room, but throw them in your environment and you're wondering why you didn't use them decades ago. 

[Audio Flynn]

1 hour ago, Shakeydeal said:

 

Good post

 

Different AVR's, my money would be on a no.

 

Different flavors of crap still = crap........

 

Shakey

AVRs to me have so much jitter. Then if you are using a jittery digital source the listening fatigue is even worse.

 

I have not used an AV receiver or preamp since 2011 and then it was only for movies.

[willland]

2 hours ago, Audio Flynn said:

I have not used an AV receiver or preamp since 2011 and then it was only for movies.

As many on this forum know, I am completely blown away by the Luxman R-117 that I used to own.  That thing made my Heresys sing better than every stereo receiver, AVR, preamp/amp, and integrated amp that I have used before and after it.  With that said, my flagship NAD T773, circa 2004, performs close to 90% as well as the R-117 with my Heresys in my room.  So well that I have had many pieces pass through my home and they could not knock the old NAD from it's perch.  Most of my AVR experience with stereo music has been acceptable but no where near great so this NAD surely can hold it's own.

 

Please don't misunderstand though, a well designed 2-channel preamp/amp combo or integrated amp will trump most, if not all, AVR's in the stereo music department.

 

Bill