Warm up time or is it my ears?
Comments
-
afterburnt wrote: »
15 years ago I shot the Lake Front Bate House owner because he had a sign "Worms Guaranteed to Catch Fish" didn't catch anything....he wouldn't give me a refund
2-channel: Modwright KWI-200 Integrated, Dynaudio C1-II Signatures
Desktop rig: LSi7, Polk 110sub, Dayens Ampino amp, W4S DAC/pre, Sonos, JRiver
Gear on standby: Melody 101 tube pre, Unison Research Simply Italy Integrated
Gone to new homes: (Matt Polk's)Threshold Stasis SA12e monoblocks, Pass XA30.5 amp, Usher MD2 speakers, Dynaudio C4 platinum speakers, Modwright LS100 (voltz), Simaudio 780D DAC
erat interfectorem cesar et **** dictatorem dicere a -
Damned sorry I opened this can of worms
-
Agreed... Just give me those offensive boat anchors Ron. I will send you a Crown XPS. Everybody knows they sound EXACTLY the same.txcoastal1 wrote: »
The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD
“When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson -
nooshinjohn wrote: »
Agreed... Just give me those offensive boat anchors Ron. I will send you a Crown XPS. Everybody knows they sound EXACTLY the same.txcoastal1 wrote: »
HMMMM it is hot down here in the south, would make since.....LOL2-channel: Modwright KWI-200 Integrated, Dynaudio C1-II Signatures
Desktop rig: LSi7, Polk 110sub, Dayens Ampino amp, W4S DAC/pre, Sonos, JRiver
Gear on standby: Melody 101 tube pre, Unison Research Simply Italy Integrated
Gone to new homes: (Matt Polk's)Threshold Stasis SA12e monoblocks, Pass XA30.5 amp, Usher MD2 speakers, Dynaudio C4 platinum speakers, Modwright LS100 (voltz), Simaudio 780D DAC
erat interfectorem cesar et **** dictatorem dicere a -
txcoastal1 wrote: »Stereo imaging is determined at the mixing console. Nobody is suggesting that you can't hear the imaging. My comment was that changing amplifiers won't change the imaging. Changing speakers or speaker placement, however, can do so.
Once again, your ignorance and/or lack of experience on the matter comes shining through.
On another note, I see you're not very good at keeping your word, but I'm far from surprised.
My lack of experience, huh? That made me chuckle. I came back because a member of this forum asked me to. He explained that you and a few others are the loud mouthed bullies that try to get people who dissent from your beliefs to leave. I honored the request. Now, would you like to debate what I said or are you just a loud mouthed bully?
So what guarantees can you post that you are unequivocally correct other than you and some others said it was so....
Not a debate just a question
Nothing. It has no more guarantee than your posts or anybody else's. -
I am curious as to what measuring instrument I should be using to determine that a guitar solo is originating approximately 3' to the left of my left channel? Or that the lead vocals are just to the right of dead center, but a little higher than the top of the speakers?
But since we are stuck on bias control testing, and not sitting in my den enjoying some excellent Steely Dan, never mind. You win.
Stereo imaging is determined at the mixing console. Nobody is suggesting that you can't hear the imaging. My comment was that changing amplifiers won't change the imaging. Changing speakers or speaker placement, however, can do so.
Just to be clear, you are saying my NAD 2150 and a pair of Pass mono blocks will create the same soundstage, and only my sighted bias can tell the difference?
Yes. If an amplifier has an inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, there isn't any way for it to affect imaging. If it has audible variances then it could make content at those frequencies to vary subtly from amp to amp. However, if such an audible difference did occur, I would suggest that one of the amps is not well designed or defective. Almost all solid state amps these days have an audibly flat frequency response. I assume your amps have an audibly flat frequency response. Did you compare it one that did not? -
Yes. If an amplifier has an inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, there isn't any way for it to affect imaging. If it has audible variances then it could make content at those frequencies to vary subtly from amp to amp. However, if such an audible difference did occur, I would suggest that one of the amps is not well designed or defective. Almost all solid state amps these days have an audibly flat frequency response. I assume your amps have an audibly flat frequency response. Did you compare it one that did not?
So, you do concede amplifier design can affect soundstaging?Polk Lsi9
N.E.W. A-20 class A 20W
NAD 1020 completely refurbished
Keces DA-131 mk.II
Analysis Plus Copper Oval, Douglass, Morrow SUB3, Huffman Digital
Paradigm DSP-3100 v.2 -
We should all hold such a narrow view of audio, save ourselves a boat load of money.
....but then, that's exactly why some hold those narrow views isn't it ?HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
Yes. If an amplifier has an inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, there isn't any way for it to affect imaging. If it has audible variances then it could make content at those frequencies to vary subtly from amp to amp. However, if such an audible difference did occur, I would suggest that one of the amps is not well designed or defective. Almost all solid state amps these days have an audibly flat frequency response. I assume your amps have an audibly flat frequency response. Did you compare it one that did not?
Thank you for proving how utterly naive you really are.
You're going to say that a pure class A amp has the exact same sound as a class a biased A/B or class D amp? Oh boy, thanks for proving exactly how off the rails your thinking really is.
"Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."
"Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip -
Yes. If an amplifier has an inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, there isn't any way for it to affect imaging. If it has audible variances then it could make content at those frequencies to vary subtly from amp to amp. However, if such an audible difference did occur, I would suggest that one of the amps is not well designed or defective. Almost all solid state amps these days have an audibly flat frequency response. I assume your amps have an audibly flat frequency response. Did you compare it one that did not?
So, you do concede amplifier design can affect soundstaging?
No, I said it could affect imaging. Perhaps we need to agree on terminology. -
I just love the ignore feature... Just as effective as a can of Troll-b-Gone.The Gear... Carver "Statement" Mono-blocks, Mcintosh C2300 Arcam AVR20, Oppo UDP-203 4K Blu-ray player, Sony XBR70x850B 4k, Polk Audio Legend L800 with height modules, L400 Center Channel Polk audio AB800 "in-wall" surrounds. Marantz MM7025 stereo amp. Simaudio Moon 680d DSD
“When once a Republic is corrupted, there is no possibility of remedying any of the growing evils but by removing the corruption and restoring its lost principles; every other correction is either useless or a new evil.”— Thomas Jefferson -
My position is that amplifiers with inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, inaudible distortion and inaudible noise won't contribute anything to the sound of a system. That is a good thing. Fortunately, most modern hifi solid state amplifiers meet those parameters.Yes. If an amplifier has an inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, there isn't any way for it to affect imaging. If it has audible variances then it could make content at those frequencies to vary subtly from amp to amp. However, if such an audible difference did occur, I would suggest that one of the amps is not well designed or defective. Almost all solid state amps these days have an audibly flat frequency response. I assume your amps have an audibly flat frequency response. Did you compare it one that did not?
Thank you for proving how utterly naive you really are.
You're going to say that a pure class A amp has the exact same sound as a class a biased A/B or class D amp? Oh boy, thanks for proving exactly how off the rails your thinking really is.
We did have a class A amplifier in our amplifier tests and it proved not to have a sound of its own. Again, that is what we should want. Amplifiers are not good equalizers. They are not adjustable nor defeatable. So that is a positive statement. Since you have never compared a class A amp to a class A/B amp in a bias controlled test, then it is easy to see why you haven't gone off the rails like have.
-
"Bias controlled" because we can't all actually be rational and logical.
The only way to completely eliminate bias altogether is to eliminate the human factor. So again, you are naive to think that you can remove bias from the equation.
You, yourself show bias in simply thinking that bias can be removed from the equation. You show bias in trying to debunk anything that does not agree with your *opinion*.
All you do is show how truly clueless you really are.
Every single human being hears differently and processes sounds differently than the next one. Maybe, to someone, a certain song was being played while they were being injured or harmed in some way. Their experiences dictate how they react to that particular song.
A person's mood will dictate how they perceive a song.
You can try and minimize bias but controlling bias is about as impossible as controlling the tides or controlling what time the sun will rise and set. To think that you are above it is naive at best and ignorant at worst.
Put a class D amplifier up against a pure class A amplifier, blind, sighted, naked or otherwise and I will easily point out the difference 100 times out of 100.
Fly out here. Put your money where your mouth is. I have 5 amplifiers in house right now and can easily distinguish between each and every one of them. And guess what? They all meet your criteria of being flat frequency response, inaudible distortion and inaudible noise but all have distinctly different sound signatures which I can easily distinguish between using the same preamp, same source material and the same speakers."Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."
"Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip -
Stereo imaging is determined at the mixing console. Nobody is suggesting that you can't hear the imaging. My comment was that changing amplifiers won't change the imaging. Changing speakers or speaker placement, however, can do so.
Wrong again. All components have different parts and pieces designed in different ways. Those parts, pieces, designs all interact differently amongst each other and also when a load (speaker) is present or when a signal is sent to be amplified. Ergo ---> all gear will sound different. To think otherwise is ludicrous, short sighted and extremely naïve. Not too mention unintelligent, counterintuitive, mindless, ignorant and comical.
H9
"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
leftwinger57 wrote: »Guys I've said this many times and it does hold true for me. The instant I turn on my Adcom 555 and what ever source I hear absolutely no difference from start up or for hours running. Now for the tubers I get it they do need the time and here's a little story. I bought some speakers years ago from a dude in his Florida room. I said this is nice stuff,so what do you use for your personal use. He says I usually don't show my house but since your not a kid I'll give you a look. At 1st I almost bumped in these huge Albert Van Alstines I think the TOTL models. Then on the floor were 2 giant mono blocks (brand not known) and I asked if I could hear these things. He said no they need a GOOD HOUR TO GET TO PRIME LISTENING FULFILMENT. An hour kishmeirinkuchas, I need instant gratification which my Adcom gives me.....
And that's alright. Perhaps your ears aren't able to discern differences or you aren't sure what to listen for. That's all good, but the difference between you and the troll is you aren't saying differences don't/can't occur, you're saying you aren't able to hear them.
H9"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
FMW,
While your certainly entitled to your opinion on the subject, you won't find many here in agreement. Might be best to move off the subject matter as nothing positive is going to come about from this back and forth.HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
Anyway, I can see you can't reason with ignorance, so good day
Cheers
H9
"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
Stereo imaging is determined at the mixing console. Nobody is suggesting that you can't hear the imaging. My comment was that changing amplifiers won't change the imaging. Changing speakers or speaker placement, however, can do so.
Wrong again. All components have different parts and pieces designed in different ways. Those parts, pieces, designs all interact differently amongst each other and also when a load (speaker) is present or when a signal is sent to be amplified. Ergo ---> all gear will sound different. To think otherwise is ludicrous, short sighted and extremely naïve. Not too mention unintelligent, counterintuitive, mindless, ignorant and comical.
H9
Well all gear does not sound different and that is test results not opinion based on hearing bias. That is not to say all things audio sound the same. But generally it is accurate to say that one should spend the money on speakers and room acoustics where the sound quality is and worry less about the electronics which are pretty transparent these days. But I sure appreciate the insults. They ring hollow to someone like me reading a rant from someone without the same experience. -
"Bias controlled" because we can't all actually be rational and logical.
The only way to completely eliminate bias altogether is to eliminate the human factor. So again, you are naive to think that you can remove bias from the equation.
I disagree. To handle hearing bias only three things are necessary.
1. products must be accurately level matched
2. the listener cannot know which product is which
3. there must not be any clues during the test which play to non hearing biasesYou, yourself show bias in simply thinking that bias can be removed from the equation. You show bias in trying to debunk anything that does not agree with your *opinion*.
All you do is show how truly clueless you really are.
Same to you. However my opinions are test results.Every single human being hears differently and processes sounds differently than the next one. Maybe, to someone, a certain song was being played while they were being injured or harmed in some way. Their experiences dictate how they react to that particular song.
A person's mood will dictate how they perceive a song.
I know that intimately from our tests.You can try and minimize bias but controlling bias is about as impossible as controlling the tides or controlling what time the sun will rise and set. To think that you are above it is naive at best and ignorant at worst.
You must be thinking of blind preference tests. Our tests were only for audible differences so time of day, mood, tides and so forth were the same for both products being compared. The naivete is on your part since you don't the experience I have.Put a class D amplifier up against a pure class A amplifier, blind, sighted, naked or otherwise and I will easily point out the difference 100 times out of 100.
Fly out here. Put your money where your mouth is. I have 5 amplifiers in house right now and can easily distinguish between each and every one of them. And guess what? They all meet your criteria of being flat frequency response, inaudible distortion and inaudible noise but all have distinctly different sound signatures which I can easily distinguish between using the same preamp, same source material and the same speakers.
If they meet the criteria then they will prove to be free of audible differences in a bias controlled test 100% of the time. I understand clearly that you can distinguish one amp from another in a sighted comparison even while naked. So can I. -
nooshinjohn wrote: »I just love the ignore feature... Just as effective as a can of Troll-b-Gone.
That is an effective way to hide from the truth. Hope you feel better now. -
nooshinjohn wrote: »I just love the ignore feature... Just as effective as a can of Troll-b-Gone.
That is an effective way to hide from the truth. Hope you feel better now.
We feel better knowing that your "truth" is the only one. LMAO !!HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
nooshinjohn wrote: »I just love the ignore feature... Just as effective as a can of Troll-b-Gone.
That is an effective way to hide from the truth. Hope you feel better now.
We feel better knowing that your "truth" is the only one. LMAO !!
Glad I could make you feel better.
-
Don't forget guys, it only takes 10 seconds to make these determinations.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
Don't forget guys, it only takes 10 seconds to make these determinations.
......and that's about how much time I'm going to invest in his thoughts.....even then, it's too long.
HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
You seem pretty firm in your beliefs about this subject, and that's OK, but honestly
My position is that amplifiers with inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, inaudible distortion and inaudible noise won't contribute anything to the sound of a system. That is a good thing. Fortunately, most modern hifi solid state amplifiers meet those parameters.Yes. If an amplifier has an inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, there isn't any way for it to affect imaging. If it has audible variances then it could make content at those frequencies to vary subtly from amp to amp. However, if such an audible difference did occur, I would suggest that one of the amps is not well designed or defective. Almost all solid state amps these days have an audibly flat frequency response. I assume your amps have an audibly flat frequency response. Did you compare it one that did not?
Thank you for proving how utterly naive you really are.
You're going to say that a pure class A amp has the exact same sound as a class a biased A/B or class D amp? Oh boy, thanks for proving exactly how off the rails your thinking really is.
We did have a class A amplifier in our amplifier tests and it proved not to have a sound of its own. Again, that is what we should want. Amplifiers are not good equalizers. They are not adjustable nor defeatable. So that is a positive statement. Since you have never compared a class A amp to a class A/B amp in a bias controlled test, then it is easy to see why you haven't gone off the rails like have.
I was just wondering, can you provide us with the exact parameters used for these tests you conducted? We already got that the test time was only 10 seconds, so with that in mind ---
Which amps (you did say you had a Class A, right?), speakers, source(s), cables, room size, room treatments, etc?
If those simple things can be easily answered, then perhaps you can also explain why you conducted them as well. I really am interested in how these results were obtained, heck I might have to give them a try myself, I've been looking to try Class A or a good tube amp anyway!
So, are you willing to put forth a little effort or are you happy sitting in your skeptical poo pile?
http://audiomilitia.proboards.com/ -
Let's see: all amps sound the same, all cables render the same sound, a certain bit rate of MP3 cannot be distinguished from lossless CD sound, Double Blind testing in units of 10 seconds is the gold standard (but would fail to produce an **** in most cases, lol), An amateur and a seasoned audiophile can hear the SAME differences in a recording because there is NO learning curve in perceiving and interpreting stereophonic sound? _____________________________________________and a blank for anything I have missed.
I realize the above are pearls of wisdom that most people who know nothing about sound would not know. But wait, those judgments are exactly what the average person would think even if they have no testing data to refer to. Isn't all that "common sense" and isn't common sense the Highest form of Knowledge?
And to think we had to be educated about such things? What is it that we're learning that we don't already know? Anamnesis, anyone? What would Plato say?Currently orbiting Bowie's Blackstar.!
Polk Lsi-7s, Def Tech 8" sub, HK 3490, HK HD 990 (CDP/DAC), AKG Q701s
[sig. changed on a monthly basis as I rotate in and out of my stash] -
You seem pretty firm in your beliefs about this subject, and that's OK, but honestly
My position is that amplifiers with inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, inaudible distortion and inaudible noise won't contribute anything to the sound of a system. That is a good thing. Fortunately, most modern hifi solid state amplifiers meet those parameters.Yes. If an amplifier has an inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, there isn't any way for it to affect imaging. If it has audible variances then it could make content at those frequencies to vary subtly from amp to amp. However, if such an audible difference did occur, I would suggest that one of the amps is not well designed or defective. Almost all solid state amps these days have an audibly flat frequency response. I assume your amps have an audibly flat frequency response. Did you compare it one that did not?
Thank you for proving how utterly naive you really are.
You're going to say that a pure class A amp has the exact same sound as a class a biased A/B or class D amp? Oh boy, thanks for proving exactly how off the rails your thinking really is.
We did have a class A amplifier in our amplifier tests and it proved not to have a sound of its own. Again, that is what we should want. Amplifiers are not good equalizers. They are not adjustable nor defeatable. So that is a positive statement. Since you have never compared a class A amp to a class A/B amp in a bias controlled test, then it is easy to see why you haven't gone off the rails like have.
I was just wondering, can you provide us with the exact parameters used for these tests you conducted? We already got that the test time was only 10 seconds, so with that in mind ---
Which amps (you did say you had a Class A, right?), speakers, source(s), cables, room size, room treatments, etc?
If those simple things can be easily answered, then perhaps you can also explain why you conducted them as well. I really am interested in how these results were obtained, heck I might have to give them a try myself, I've been looking to try Class A or a good tube amp anyway!
It is a fairly long story but I will simplify. I was on a forum years ago and read a discussion about the audibility of digital cables. I couldn't think of a law of physics that could explain how a cable transmitting digitally encoded audio could have a sound since it doesn't become sound again until after conversion. So I visited my friend the audio dealer and borrowed some digital cables. I did some bias controlled comparisons with my wife assisting and confirmed that there was no reason for anyone to believe that a digital interconnect cable could have a sonic signature.
One thing led to another. 10 men from our local audiophile group decided to do all kinds of bias controlled tests and so we did so over the next 2 years.
We used two venues for the tests. One was the dealer's showroom and the other was in my home. The speakers were B&W Matrix 801 at the dealer and B&W Matrix 802 at my home. At the dealer's location we used several amps and preamps and CD players. At my home those products were all made by Audio Research - the dealer's top product line.
We did the standard double blind testing sometimes using a switchbox, sometimes the dealer's speaker switching system and sometimes manual cable changes. We level matched to .01 volt at the speaker terminal. The process was to play the test products for each listener sighted and identify them as A and B. Then during the tests we would play music snippets (CD's provided by the listeners themselves) and play them about 20 times switching between A and B randomly and scoring the blind ID. Then the responses were scored with results ranging from 50% correct (same as guessing) and 100% (clearly audible.)
The class A amp that I can recall was a Krell - a big heavy stereo amp and a very good one despite not being very efficient. We tested a few tube amps ranging from Audio Research to Dynaco. We tested several amps, CD players, DAC's etc. over the period of time.
The easiest bias controlled test is comparing cables. No level matching is required and all you need is someone to make cable changes where you can't see what is going on. We tested 15 internconnect cables and found one that had a sonic signature. It was Japanese made and had the conductors wound into a tight coil. Since then I have tested a couple MIT cables which have little black boxes attached to them. They both acted like filters with some cut in the low treble. Give it a shot.
-
Yes. If an amplifier has an inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, there isn't any way for it to affect imaging. If it has audible variances then it could make content at those frequencies to vary subtly from amp to amp. However, if such an audible difference did occur, I would suggest that one of the amps is not well designed or defective. Almost all solid state amps these days have an audibly flat frequency response. I assume your amps have an audibly flat frequency response. Did you compare it one that did not?
So, you do concede amplifier design can affect soundstaging?
No, I said it could affect imaging. Perhaps we need to agree on terminology.
Sorry but I find the two to be intertwined. If a lesser design blurs the imaging it also tends to flatten the soundstage. The better amp the sharpens the imaging... the result being a deeper and wider field. That's all I was getting at.Polk Lsi9
N.E.W. A-20 class A 20W
NAD 1020 completely refurbished
Keces DA-131 mk.II
Analysis Plus Copper Oval, Douglass, Morrow SUB3, Huffman Digital
Paradigm DSP-3100 v.2 -
Let's see: all amps sound the same, all cables render the same sound, a certain bit rate of MP3 cannot be distinguished from lossless CD sound, Double Blind testing in units of 10 seconds is the gold standard (but would fail to produce an **** in most cases, lol), An amateur and a seasoned audiophile can hear the SAME differences in a recording because there is NO learning curve in perceiving and interpreting stereophonic sound? _____________________________________________and a blank for anything I have missed.
I realize the above are pearls of wisdom that most people who know nothing about sound would not know. But wait, those judgments are exactly what the average person would think even if they have no testing data to refer to. Isn't all that "common sense" and isn't common sense the Highest form of Knowledge?
And to think we had to be educated about such things? What is it that we're learning that we don't already know? Anamnesis, anyone? What would Plato say?
-
Yes. If an amplifier has an inaudible variance from a flat frequency response, there isn't any way for it to affect imaging. If it has audible variances then it could make content at those frequencies to vary subtly from amp to amp. However, if such an audible difference did occur, I would suggest that one of the amps is not well designed or defective. Almost all solid state amps these days have an audibly flat frequency response. I assume your amps have an audibly flat frequency response. Did you compare it one that did not?
So, you do concede amplifier design can affect soundstaging?
No, I said it could affect imaging. Perhaps we need to agree on terminology.
Sorry but I find the two to be intertwined. If a lesser design blurs the imaging it also tends to flatten the soundstage. The better amp the sharpens the imaging... the result being a deeper and wider field. That's all I was getting at.
OK, I understand but disagree.
