yup, some of us hear better then others mmmm not. pay more attition.:yes:
Amplifiers all sound the same
- Thread starter Vistance
- Start date
- Status
yup, some of us hear better then others mmmm not. pay more attition.:yes:
Ramblin' Rob
Member
Give a listen to Brian Eno's ''Another Green World'' Apart frm being a great work of art, it'll make your system shine or show its weaknesses.
Here's a link to wikipedia for disc info.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Another_Green_World
Here's a quick link to the disc on youtube for a ''pre-listen''
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVCkmIwRrc0
Well... I don't know. Listening to the system isn't always a relaxing experience.... depends on what one chooses to listen to on any particular occasion. Some music is designed for high stress while some is composed for relaxation, introspection and peaceful thoughts, but it all involves listening to the system. I actually enjoy this kind of mostly thoughtful bantering which ranges from amusing to highly biased somewhat defensive opinions to honest and well thought out expressions concerning one's experiences with different pieces of equipment. It is a nice slice of life in the audio world and a very fun thread in which everybody contributes that I enjoy reading.
A number of amps built to identical specs would represent a particular model from a manufacturer coming off an assembly line and if fact they will all sound the same in an identical system. Different models though... some of them... from different manufactures sometimes do have a characteristic sound, characteristic for that manufacturer during certain years of production. It might be a matter of factors not wholly understood but I am more of the opinion it is a matter of purposeful design... the differences are designed into them. I don't know why but some designs just sound good... and my experience has been that generally the best sounding units use the most basic competent designs. Top designers of audio equipment don't hold their position simply because they've been there the longest... there are market forces at work... it's because their designs sell to the market for which they are produced.
chicks
Lunatic Member
JA uses a simulated speaker load in his amp tests in Stereophile, which helps to reveal any defects that might cause a poorly-designed amp to have issues with real speakers.
Three guesses where he got the design for it. Hint: he's a widely respected AK member.
Hmmm... I'm trying to make the connection you've presented. With music I actively listen to whether it's enjoyable or not I always do both... mentally engage the music and focus on the sound... be it Rap, Lenard Cohen, Stevie Ray Von, or Beethoven's Fifth. It's something I've always done. I listen to lectures that way, read books that way... delivery, style, and content... it's all part of it.
ken kantor
Fowl Humor
Indeed! It used to be very relaxing when we thought of amps as essentially transparent. Then, reviewers started claiming all amps sounded vastly different from one another, and you had to obsess over which brand and model to buy. After Stereophile and TAS inherited the mantle of the mainstream audio press, all kinds of things we had learned to ignore became sources of anxiety and expenditure, driving customers away in droves, and driving nails into the coffins of many decent amplifier brands.
I long for the days when people had their priorities straight, and listening to music on a great system involved no obsession, second-guessing and worry.
-k
whoaru99
Epic Member
What is the "that" to which you refer? Objectivity?
BadassBob
Digitally rendered
Not objectivity, but subjectivity. The listeners own mental state is the biggest factor in how their system sounds to them. One day it may sound great and no fault can be found, but if your mental state changes a bit you may be put off by something you otherwise thought sounded good. Some become overly critical of their gear to the point they listen for their own perceived flaws instead of enjoying the music.
There it is, that's what I was getting at in my long-winded reply in the previous page :thmbsp:
Last edited:
Centropolis
Member
For me, I have not done any tests between amps. Just based on what I think, I spent the most of my audio system budget on my speakers.
I purchased my integrated amp NAD BEE320 used. CD player is a $25 used cheap Sony 5-disc player with digital outs connected to a Cambridge Audio DAC Magic (bought used) and to a pair of Monitor Audio RX2.
I always believe that if you don't know what you're missing, you won't find a need for them. So I avoid listening to really expensive equipment. It's like before Hi-Def TVs, no one ever thought the regular def TV sucked.
I purchased my integrated amp NAD BEE320 used. CD player is a $25 used cheap Sony 5-disc player with digital outs connected to a Cambridge Audio DAC Magic (bought used) and to a pair of Monitor Audio RX2.
I always believe that if you don't know what you're missing, you won't find a need for them. So I avoid listening to really expensive equipment.
It's like before Hi-Def TVs, no one ever thought the regular def TV sucked.Things we had learned to ignore? Like hearing deeper into the recording? LOL! Anxiety? Speak for yourself!
While I find listening to my office system enjoyable (streaming local classical station in low rez MP3), there's nothing more relaxing than losing myself in the main system upstairs that transports me much closer to the live (unamplified) experience.
I just find it amusing how much ink is spilled by those who attempt to convince others the world is flat. Let us tell you all about what we don't experience.
When I worked in audio in college long ago, we had a customer we called "Al Gear" which was close to his real name. He was never satisfied with a purchase and constantly followed what others thought. He bought a pair of DQ-10s. Said they were great. Sold them. Purchased a pair of Magnepan MG-IIs. Said they were great. Sold them. Bought a second pair of DQ-10s. This all in the space of about a year. Once, he invited some guys from the shop to listen to his system. While it was nice using Audio Research electronics, what we noticed first was his record collection - or lack thereof.
14 records.
There are certainly folks who are constantly changing gear seeking some unknown nirvana. There are some who constantly fiddle with their system and apply all sorts of tweaks to pave that same road. I just don't dwell on those caricatures.
As for me, my mentors and friends, we are passionate about the music and experiencing the live event. Over the past thirty years, I've owned only two different speakers. Three amplifiers. Ok, I kept one for only two years. I still have the first 31 years later. The current one is 13 years old. Two preamplifiers. Just replaced my '96 SP9 with one that was worth the wait. Two turntables. Still have the original purchased new in 1975.
As for uncomfort, I agree there are many folks who speak passionately from non-exposure. Let me tell you all about what I've never experienced.
chicks
Lunatic Member
Over the past thirty years, I've owned only two different speakers. Three amplifiers.
As for uncomfort, I agree there are many folks who speak passionately from non-exposure. Let me tell you all about what I've never experienced.
So, sounds like you're speaking from non-exposure.
.
sheltie dave
Addicted Member
You are right, science cannot prove. However science can provide the framework to PREDICT and MODEL and MEASURE. Science was behind the space trips to the Moon, it predicted how much thrust was needed to achieve space flight; it modeled what trajectory and what velocity was needed to circumnavigate the Moon, it measured how far the Apollo had to travel before attempting a landing, and it led to a successful mission.
So even a disbeliever like you must admit that science can be useful, and when used in a properly described set of paradigms, science is either "right" or can "prove things."
Are you familiar with the difference between owning and auditioning?So, sounds like you're speaking from non-exposure.
If your frame of reference is a PAT4, you'll never understand a REF10.
Last edited:
I don't disagree with what makes the bigger difference and recently experienced your point with a new SP20 replacing my SP9. Some would say, however, that my SP9 is essentially perfect sounding!As I said, Tubes and SS sound different - but the biggest difference for me, if you use say SS amps as an example, is the pre-amp (same speaker and source). That is where the biggest difference occurs - why? I have 3 pre-amps - 2 SS and one tube. You would expect the tube pre to sound different but the SS pre's are night and day sound - I like both even though they are different.
How is that for experience?
It's just sad when folks say that it just doesn't get any better than 70s Dynaco gear (yes, I've actually heard that before). That sentiment lacks exposure, interest or musical acuity. Or point to a Youtube video of a guy attempting to prove that the Redbook digital format is Perfect Sound Forever using an oscilloscope.
I just have to smile and be thankful for what I have.
chicks
Lunatic Member
Always fun to spar with you, E-Stat. We both have come to the same conclusion about speakers; hard to beat 'stats.
I just don't hear these differences in amps that you and other claim to hear, having tried many, and having a fairly sophisticated knowledge of the electronics principles behind them.
My satisfied smile while listening is as big as yours, I'll wager.
To be fair, I have been amazed at how close sounding some amps are even though they vary greatly in price and generation. The amps I have settled on now I own because they all sound good to my liking (on my speakers) but sound quite different from each other. I enjoy the effect of each depending on the type of music I want to play and how loud I want to play it.
Last edited:
mhardy6647
Lunatic Member
So, it seems to me that an active preamplifier (i.e., as a hifi component) serves to perform one (or more) of the following three functions:
* An amplifier (fundamentally no different than a power amplifier if the latter also adds gain).
* An equalizer (which does, by design, alter the input signal)
* A buffer or impedance matching device (which is generally designed to be as neutral as possible).
Other than the EQ function (which could be thought of as deliberate introduction of distortion of one sort or another relative to the input waveform) -- why would all preamps not sound the same if all (linear) power amplifiers sound the same?
* An amplifier (fundamentally no different than a power amplifier if the latter also adds gain).
* An equalizer (which does, by design, alter the input signal)
* A buffer or impedance matching device (which is generally designed to be as neutral as possible).
Other than the EQ function (which could be thought of as deliberate introduction of distortion of one sort or another relative to the input waveform) -- why would all preamps not sound the same if all (linear) power amplifiers sound the same?
- Status
