Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:02:56 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 23:26:57 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote

snip

I remain surprised by just how good a well-mixed Dolby 2.0 track can
be, at generating ambience well outside the speaker plane.

What, like a valve amp....??

Yup - but with SS you can turn the effect *off* when not watching a
movie!

Wot, like go back to planar sound only? Why *on earth* would anybody want
to
do that?

It's too much of a pest to change speakers!


Huh?

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:08:16 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Tat Chan" wrote in message
...
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:12:58 +1000, Tat Chan
wrote:


Stewart Pinkerton wrote:


On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 14:13:44 +1000, Tat Chan
wrote:



Stewart Pinkerton wrote:



This old warhorse gets dragged out regularly. I use insensitive
3-ohm
speakers, and while my Audiolab (and several other amps) sounds just
like the Krell, it gets *very* hot after half an hour or so at high
SPLs. Hence, the Krell is there because it drives the speakers with
ease, not because it sounds different.


so did you get the Krell or the Apogees first?
And what speakers were you using before the Apogees?


I got them at the same time, and Maggie 1Cs, which my older Audiolab
8000P drove quite happily.

Ah, so the Apogees were a significant improvement over the Maggies
then?


Yes, a massive improvement, although to be fair, they were also *much*
more expensive. A better competitor would have been the Maggie IIIC,
with the classic ribbon tweeter. Comparing those two, I thought the
Apogee was sweeter and more coherent through the wide midband (where
most of the music lies), and had noticeably deeper bass. The high
treble of the Maggie however, remains as good as it gets.


and the bass on your Apogees is good enough to warrant not having a
subwoofer?


I may be wrong, but I don't think it's that simple - I'm awaiting delivery
of a cheap sub (from the same outfit as the ch*nky amp :-) as I type. My
speakers go very low but I'm not happy that the amp is delivering the '.1'
stuff to them, especially as we don't use a centre speaker. I want a sub
just to pull these frequencies off (ie tell the amp there *is* a sub) -
now,
is anybody going to tell me I've got that all screwed up??

If you set the processor to 'no sub', the .1 LFE signal should be fed
to the 'large' speakers. It doesn't matter if you're using a phantom
centre.


Have you had a hard day or summat?

Read the words - I bloody *know* that, ie I want to be able to tell the amp
(processor, if you prefer) that there *is* a sub to 'relieve' the front
speakers of the LFE burden. (I'm not worried about 'centre speaker' as the
sound is perfectly fine without one and the speech comes 'straight from
their mouth', IYSWIM....)

When I was using the mission sub there was a much better overall sense of
space, even when there was little or no s/w activity - it ain't all about
'tectonic bass'....

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:33:10 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Kurt Hamster" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 12:47:15 +0100, Ian Molton used
to say...

Richard Wall wrote:
The other explanation is that the device you used for comparing the
frequency response and phase responses was not sufficiently resolving to
see
the differences. I note you say almost identical so there was a
difference
?
I note Stewart has pointed out that you cannot test without LMDBT. It
is
most important that levels are exactly matched but I do not agree on the
merits of DBT.

I dont see how you can fail to agree on the merits of DBT - it removes
both the testers AND the subjects bias.

If you are making the amps then yes it would be a good thing, but if it
is for the purposes of buying one then why should the listener's bias'
be ignored?


There's a lot of stuff *fundamental* to the design and manufacture of good
audio gear that can be safely left behind when the punter bolts his crappy
speakers to it and sets it up in a hideous 'acoustic environment'.....

From what I can see (comix, ads etc.) people want 'warm' these days rather
than 'accurate'.....???

Depends. My speakers are definitely 'warm' by the 'shrieking metal
tweeter' lowest common denominator - but they are very lifelike, and
hence accurate. Most experienced designers (and audiophiles) agree
that a gently (and smoothly!) falling response in the far field is
more accurate - but this isn't what you get with far too many modern
speakers.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:46:35 +0100, Ian Molton wrote:

Kurt Hamster wrote:

Having been the unwitting victim of my own bias once or twice, I can
answer that - it MUST be ignored.


For you it should, but why should that be the case for anyone else?

Are you suggesting that the bulk of psychological research into this is
wrong? or just that you happen to differ from the *entire* human race?

Most of us aren't rodents, to be sure! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

Kurt Hamster wrote:

Are you suggesting that the "bulk of psychological research" has been
done to answer why you don't have a clue as to what amplifier to buy?

You really have lost the plot, mate...

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:46:35 +0100, Ian Molton wrote:


Kurt Hamster wrote:


Having been the unwitting victim of my own bias once or twice, I can
answer that - it MUST be ignored.


For you it should, but why should that be the case for anyone else?

Are you suggesting that the bulk of psychological research into this is
wrong? or just that you happen to differ from the *entire* human race?


Most of us aren't rodents, to be sure! :-)

LOL ;-)

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

Yup, what you described wasn't perfect pitch, but being able to tell the
interval between one note and another.


Which should be trivial to a musician.

Trivial! Try humming some Stockhausen. Or even an improvised line to Giant
Steps. There's intervals and intervals, mate!

=== Andy Evans ===
Visit our Website:- http://www.artsandmedia.com
Audio, music and health pages and interesting links.

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

Tat Chan wrote:

The Radfords are transmission line speakers, right?
Still, 12 - 15 Hz is pretty low for speakers.

No, they arent.

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
Tat Chan wrote:

The Radfords are transmission line speakers, right?
Still, 12 - 15 Hz is pretty low for speakers.

No, they arent.


Ok, got that - now how about the loopy bit??

(Admirably 'pink' reply, if I may say so! :-)

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

Ian Molton wrote:

Having been the unwitting victim of my own bias once or twice, I can
answer that - it MUST be ignored.
For you it should, but why should that be the case for anyone else?

Are you suggesting that the bulk of psychological research into this
is wrong? or just that you happen to differ from the *entire* human
race?

The point is that you should buy what makes you happy. If your criterion of
happiness in the context of audio gear is something that's 'accurate', then
that's what you should buy. If having the 'right' looks or brand is a
factor, then account for it.

I don't review gear - I tend to take a chance on something that'll give me a
step-change improvement, and then see if I like it after a few weeks or
months. One of my criteria is that I have to be able to live with it, and
the only real way to test that is to live with it. Sooner or later, I'll
completely forget about the system and start doing my normal thing with
music. If I get the right experience, then I'm happy with the bit of kit. I
don't care about accuracy as such - I don't actively look for it. While it's
nice to be able to listen to a live recording and feel that you're there,
there's much more to music than that pure replication aspect.


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk