Amps and Receiver
Comments
-
Of course, he can't provide that info.......he doesn't have it.
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 -
By all means, help others.
That's why I was asking for your information....
"amplifiers are free of signature sonics."
"Please list the amps that back up this theory. Please include any white papers and testing."
Back up your statements, provide solid information and not just hearsay...Now, that will help others and complete your stated mission.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 -
The request for papers is quite relevant to the discussion. You suggest that everything audible is measurable. Therefore, if amps sound the same, we should be able to see white papers suggesting it is so.
I didn't say amps sound the same. I said most amps are audibly transparent or, they don't contribute sound to the system. Certainly it is inaccurate to say that all amps "sound the same." I can't tell you why those who have done bias controlled tests don't publish results. In our case we did it for ourselves rather than for the public. My opinion is that very few properly made tests have been conducted. It is a fussy and boring process. I'm only aware of two other people who have done them. I think one of them ended up in a magazine article somewhere and the other, like ours, was never published.
I also remember that Stereophile conducted one with a pair of tube amplifiers back in the 90's. They found a subtle audible difference. If I remember the right/wrong answers were in the area of 60%/40% which would indicate a subtle audible difference. We found similar results with tube amps in our tests. I'm very clear that all amps do not sound the same. But you would be hard pressed to find two competently designed solid state amps that would show an audible difference in a bias controlled test. Not impossible, certainly, but difficult.
The point is that, in my view, it doesn't make sense to worry about amplifiers in the process of building an audio system. As long as it will drive the speakers without overheating and handle the SPL requirements without clipping, most any choice will get the job done. It makes far more sense to me to spend money on speakers and room acoustics. That is where the sound quality of an audio system really lies.
So, since I don't have any white papers for you, please feel free to view my view of things as an opinion that differs from yours.
-
The point is that, in my view, it doesn't make sense to worry about amplifiers in the process of building an audio system. As long as it will drive the speakers without overheating and handle the SPL requirements without clipping, most any choice will get the job done. It makes far more sense to me to spend money on speakers and room acoustics. That is where the sound quality of an audio system really lies..
You might benefit from actually trying a few different things, people with closed minds discover nothing. Most the time it's to convince themselves why they don't need to spend money because they have none to spend.....so they look for reasons to justify it. Regurgitated internet articles, bias controlled testing.....for 10 seconds yet, and you have your justification you seek.
Speaking of bias control, we all participate in it whenever we listen to music. We all have our own set of biases which differ from person to person and it's put into practice daily. After all, the only bias that matters is yours, not anyone elses.
The only way to confirm or deny those biases is to try different things in different price ranges within your own system, on your ears with your own personal biases. Just because you can't hear a difference in xyz, doesn't mean another person can't so those broad brushes don't work well in audio.
You've stated that your here to provide information to newbies......well, we have over 16 years of information already here, is there something you want to add that isn't here ? Because I can assure you, we have plenty of the same topics your talking about with in depth responses.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 -
Look, I'll be the first to say that some members here can be rather harsh at times with those who present dissenting views or differing opinions. However, when I read the above, it is rather difficult not to agree in this instance because what you've said makes little sense to us.
fmw has done the impossible: x is agreeing with the masses
Things work out best for those who make the best of the way things work out.-John Wooden -
I didn't say amps sound the same. I said most amps are audibly transparent or, they don't contribute sound to the system. Certainly it is inaccurate to say that all amps "sound the same."
Look, I'll be the first to say that some members here can be rather harsh at times with those who present dissenting views or differing opinions. However, when I read the above, it is rather difficult not to agree in this instance because what you've said makes little sense to us. If most amps are audibly transparent, then they have to sound the same because they are after all, audibly transparent. Mathematically speaking 0 = 0. So why do you say otherwise?
Take the converse, if it is inaccurate to say all amps sound the same, then some must sound different and therefore some can't be audibly transparent. Simply said, you can't have it both ways.
.....
From experience and an engineering perspective this rather poor advice. A well designed system is more than the sum of its parts - it has synergy.The point is that, in my view, it doesn't make sense to worry about amplifiers in the process of building an audio system. As long as it will drive the speakers without overheating and handle the SPL requirements without clipping, most any choice will get the job done.
Not all parts work optimally well with others. As we have previously established there is a lot more to "SPL requirements without clipping" that characterizes the performance of an amplifier. To discount this by saying most any choice will get the job done rather narrowly and naively defines what the job actually is. To a casual or inexperienced listener this may be so, since details about the sound may not matter all too much.
However to the moderately serious and experienced listener there is much more to it. With more experience, thought and research you should come to that conclusion.
I spent 40 years pursuing the high end audio path but it is possible that you would still call me an inexperienced listener. You are suggesting that I believe that there are no audible differences in audio beyond speakers and room acoustics. I have never said that nor do I believe that. I spent a lot of time determining what makes meaningful differences in audio systems and what does not.
There may be synergy between the various components of an audio system. I don't know but I am understandably skeptical. After all, if the whole is greater than the parts, then you would also have to understand that the whole could be less than the parts. It could be tested with a bias controlled test but I've never done such a test and have no interest in such a test because it would be very fussy to do.
As to amplifiers, with a few exceptions I have never encountered a modern hifi solid state amplifier with anything beyond a very very subtle audible difference from other similar amplifiers in a blind test. That is why I said that any properly designed amp running within its design parameters will get the job done. I've owned multi-thousand dollar amps in the past but no longer own them because they don't contribute meaningfully to the sound quality of the system for me.
But that isn't the point. My point is that speakers and room acoustics represent most of the sound quality in an audio system. Anyone looking for good sound should concentrate on those two things or improve them even if it means making compromises on the electronics. That is fundamentally good advice. I'm in the majority on that one. -
Nobody here is going to argue the importance of Speakers or the room in achieving good sound. Too many other things can play a huge part also which is why we like to say "everything matters".
Might do you well to stop in at one of the Polk get togethers to hear a variety of gear/cables on the same speakers in the same room. Where are you located ?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 -
Thanks for the invitation but I spent two years doing that. However, if you plan on doing some bias controlled comparisons, I might make the trip.
-
Thanks for the invitation but I spent two years doing that. However, if you plan on doing some bias controlled comparisons, I might make the trip.
Isn't your bias the only one that matters ?
In any event, I tossed out the invite on behalf of the membership but to tell the truth I knew you'd reject it as advancing your audio journey isn't your game plan anyway.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 -
No it is my lack of bias that matters. Yours would also matter if you were to accept it and understand it.
-
to accept it and understand it.
To accept and understand is one thing....to believe it's then end all result is closed minded.
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 -
No it is my lack of bias that matters. Yours would also matter if you were to accept it and understand it.
We all do....which is why we have preferences adjusted to our own individual biases.
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 -
Music is an art and may be perceived differently by each individual. What many call "reference songs" may not be the same as the next guy.
That's why when doing critical listening I have a half dozen or so songs that are my go too's
Those songs are the one's that dig into my soul and I could listen to a million times over. That doesn't mean the next guy feels or hears them the same way and vice versa.
The songs have subtle nuances that may be special only to me, but I can listen for those nuances that may or may not be replicated while switching gear.
Now this is where trained listening comes into play. If I point out specific nuances to someone and show him the comparisons they may hear it because it was pointed out, but if they don't hear it doesn't mean it's not there.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 -
I have no problem with that. The only issue that those individual biases change. In the audiophile that usually means some sort of equipment change. Nothing wrong with that either as long as it feels good. It just doesn't feel good to me. -
I have no problem with that. The only issue that those individual biases change. In the audiophile that usually means some sort of equipment change. Nothing wrong with that either as long as it feels good. It just doesn't feel good to me.
Well of course they change, which then lends itself into preferences, both different by definition but very similar. Which is exactly why painting audio into black and white scenario's doesn't work well along with broad brushes.
Nobody will deny biases don't exist, nor play a part in audio in general, but to encompass everything audio related to it is very narrow minded....imho of course.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 -
This is the kind of actual discussion most of us not only like but encourage.
Everyone's experiences differ. Everyone's preferences differ.
Using bias controlled testing in something that is filled with bias is fruitless (Listening to music is very subjective).
I have listened to amplifiers, which I had no interest or intent in buying that were identical on paper in their measurements but which sounded vastly different in play. Using the same speakers, pre-amp and sources along with cables.
It wasn't expectation bias. It wasn't cost bias. It was my ears listening to objects that I had no vested interest in outside of curiosity and found them to differ greatly.
My reference to psycho-acoustics shows that everyone perceives sounds like music differently. Otherwise, music would be a single tone played at a consistent level that everyone listened to."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 -
This is the kind of actual discussion most of us not only like but encourage.
Everyone's experiences differ. Everyone's preferences differ.
Using bias controlled testing in something that is filled with bias is fruitless (Listening to music is very subjective).
I have listened to amplifiers, which I had no interest or intent in buying that were identical on paper in their measurements but which sounded vastly different in play. Using the same speakers, pre-amp and sources along with cables.
It wasn't expectation bias. It wasn't cost bias. It was my ears listening to objects that I had no vested interest in outside of curiosity and found them to differ greatly.
My reference to psycho-acoustics shows that everyone perceives sounds like music differently. Otherwise, music would be a single tone played at a consistent level that everyone listened to.
I already understand that is how you feel. No problem here.
-
I have no problem with that. The only issue that those individual biases change. In the audiophile that usually means some sort of equipment change. Nothing wrong with that either as long as it feels good. It just doesn't feel good to me.
Well of course they change, which then lends itself into preferences, both different by definition but very similar. Which is exactly why painting audio into black and white scenario's doesn't work well along with broad brushes.
Nobody will deny biases don't exist, nor play a part in audio in general, but to encompass everything audio related to it is very narrow minded....imho of course.
OK, it is simply a matter of caring whether audible differences are in the bias or the equipment. I understand that you don't care. -
http://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/comment/2148240#Comment_2148240
Regarding bias: Wouldn't it make sense that I was biased towards my piece of gear? Doesn't it make sense that I wanted it to sound the best?
I'm an admitted novice at hearing small differences in gear, but I could tell a difference with every piece we put in the system. Sadly, my piece of gear wasn't the best and I fully expected that it would be.
Full disclosure: We did listened to each piece for longer than 10 seconds.
Things work out best for those who make the best of the way things work out.-John Wooden -
http://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/comment/2148240#Comment_2148240
Regarding bias: Wouldn't it make sense that I was biased towards my piece of gear? Doesn't it make sense that I wanted it to sound the best?
Of course.I'm an admitted novice at hearing small differences in gear, but I could tell a difference with every piece we put in the system. Sadly, my piece of gear wasn't the best and I fully expected that it would be.
I don't doubt that. But you should understand that you don't know whether the audible differences were in the bias or the equipment because you engaged in a sighted evaluation. It may not matter to you but it doesn't change anything I've posted.Full disclosure: We did listened to each piece for longer than 10 seconds.
That's fine. You should listen for as long as you like. You just shouldn't assume that every audible difference comes from the equipment.
-
The equipment was the only thing that changed so it would seem to be a good assumption.You just shouldn't assume that every audible difference comes from the equipment.Things work out best for those who make the best of the way things work out.-John Wooden -
Did you put your beer down Paul
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 -
Well, it isn't. But I understand where your confusion comes from. -
C'mon now Ron. I clearly stated that the ONLY thing that changed was the equipment. Beer was still firmly in handtxcoastal1 wrote: »Did you put your beer down PaulWell, it isn't. But I understand where your confusion comes from.
Enlighten me as to where my confusion comes from because I don't understand.
Things work out best for those who make the best of the way things work out.-John Wooden -
OK Dr. FMW, as I'm lieing here on the phyco couch, can you also explain my fear of internet trolls2-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 -
I have no problem with that. The only issue that those individual biases change. In the audiophile that usually means some sort of equipment change. Nothing wrong with that either as long as it feels good. It just doesn't feel good to me.
Well of course they change, which then lends itself into preferences, both different by definition but very similar. Which is exactly why painting audio into black and white scenario's doesn't work well along with broad brushes.
Nobody will deny biases don't exist, nor play a part in audio in general, but to encompass everything audio related to it is very narrow minded....imho of course.
OK, it is simply a matter of caring whether audible differences are in the bias or the equipment. I understand that you don't care.
Is there a reason why I should ? Because as long as the sound is better, for whatever reason, what else matters ? Isn't that the bottom line we all chase, better sound ?
If that's not your goal, then maybe audio isn't for you. While your opinions are noted, and certainly not the first to be represented, you'll find yourself in the minority here.
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 -
C'mon now Ron. I clearly stated that the ONLY thing that changed was the equipment. Beer was still firmly in handtxcoastal1 wrote: »Did you put your beer down Paul
OK Paul, Just wanted to make sure you were taking your deception medicine.
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 -
The type of Beer you were drinking can make a big difference, my Music always sounds better with a BECK's then a Guiness, seems more clear nor so dark and cloudy (if you know what I mean)
2 ch- Polk CRS+ * Vincent SA-31MK Preamp * Vincent Sp-331 Amp * Marantz SA8005 SACD * Project Xperience Classic TT * Sumiko Blue Point #2 MC cartridge
HT - Polk 703's * NAD T-758 * Adcom 5503 * Oppo 103 * Samsung 60" series 8 LCD -
The type of Beer you were drinking can make a big difference, my Music always sounds better with a BECK's then a Guiness, seems more clear nor so dark and cloudy (if you know what I mean)
If you really want to kick it up a notch hit up Skips cabinet for a bottle of bourbon2-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 -
I like the idea of bringing something new over each time to keep the cabinet growing
It's already a wonderful site! 2 ch- Polk CRS+ * Vincent SA-31MK Preamp * Vincent Sp-331 Amp * Marantz SA8005 SACD * Project Xperience Classic TT * Sumiko Blue Point #2 MC cartridge
HT - Polk 703's * NAD T-758 * Adcom 5503 * Oppo 103 * Samsung 60" series 8 LCD
