Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 19:25:32 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

I had an interesting experience this morning. I have been helping a hi-fi
newbie at work choose his first AV system. When it came to amplifiers I
had advised him to try the Arcam AVR300 which suited his requirements and
would nicely fit on his tv/hi-fi rack. Plus I knew of Arcam's excellent
after sales service and I have an AV8/P7 which I am very happy with.

All was well until someone suggested that it might be interesting to try
the Denon amp at a similar price as it was getting good reviews. It was
wired in to exactly the same cables and speakers and the speaker levels
(balance) were set the same.

My newbie mate was first to indicate his feelings. The Denon was, to my
ears considerably more alive and dynamic than the Arcam both on CD and
DVD
music videos. The Arcam was warm and cuddly but very laid back. He
decided
on the Denon and it was easy to have a preference.

This friend of mine had never been in a hi-fi dem in his life before and
because we were using a projector for the music DVDs the room was in
almost total darkness there was no subtle facial expressions guiding him
at all. Don't anyone ever tell me all good amps sound the same, they
simply don't,

Yes, they do.

unless of course these amps are both not good. I will
concede that it could have been the DACs that were so different as we did
not use an analogue source but even so...

Incidentally, I wouldn't think the shop wanted that result as the Denon
was 300UKP cheaper.

Try it again under level-matched DBT conditions. Been there, done that
many times. Without LMDBT, it don't mean a thing.


I bet you £1000 I could.

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 18:47:56 +0100, Chris Morriss
wrote:

In message , Stewart
Pinkerton writes
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 13:19:20 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 19:25:32 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

[Snip]

Yes, they do.

No they B. don't.

Sure they do - why wouldn't they?

Another example, My Yamaha amp (recently retired) always
sounded hard and harsh to me, I purchased it from a box shifter as it was
a good price and I fancied a dabble with surround sound. On swapping to
the Av8/P7 the improvement in sound was staggering and it mattered not
which was played the loudest the AV8/P7 blew away the Yamaha by a good
margin.

It probably had high HF IMD, pretty common in that range, and I
suspect that was what gave away the AX-570 in my own tests. OTOH, if
you haven't tried that comparison under *blind* level-matched
conditions, then your opinion is not of any real value.


SNIP SNIP.

I've certainly measured amplifiers that are almost identical into an 8R
load, but do sound different into speakers. The truth is that the amps
are not equally good. If you measure the intermodulation when driving a
reactive (imitation speaker) load then the differences emerge quite
clearly.

Shoosh! You can *not* post to this newgroup with any suggestion that -
heaven forfend! - there could possibly be any connection between
measurements (boo, hiss!) and sound quality! :-)

IME, amps with wide bandwidth *and* low HF IMD (while driving a
simulated speaker load, as you suggest) are what Doug Self would call
'blameless', i.e. they don't add any sound of their own.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 19:21:19 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:

[Snip]

You were not making a statement of belief - read what I quote from you
"I don't think this, I know". So you actually deny that it is belief,
but is fact. So make your mind up - do you believe it, or do you know
it? There is a huge difference.

I do know that amplifiers sound different because I proved some years ago
with an Hitachi mosfet amp. I did prove it.

How did you 'prove' it? Not that I'm necessarily disagreeing with you
regarding this particular amp, just curious, BTW, you did not prove
that 'amplifiers sound different', only that a particular amplifier
sounded different. No one denies that there are many *bad* amplifiers
out there.

Anyway, how exactly do you think (believe if you like) you are
advancing the argument by posting such unmitigated ********?

Is there any need for that kind of language. People who use such terms in
a public forum always make me think they're at the very least people of
dubious standards.

********.

If you believe you are helping your side of the picture, think again -
you are just sounding stupid - almost as if you were religious or
something.

Oh I see, I don't agree with you and I know form personal experience about
one amplifier characteristic you decide I sound stupid. How open minded of
you.

If you say that you know that the moon is made of green cheese, you'll
get a similar response. Some things are just obvious, and amps
varying their sound depending what they're sitting on is an obvious
load of ******** - except for a *very* badly designed valve amp.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 20:21:37 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:50:06 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

[Snip]

He's not 'personalising' the argument, he's pointing out that anyone
who makes such a claim as you did above, does his credibility no good.
BTW, it was not a 'statement of belief', you claimed that you *know*
it to be the case.0, whereas any reasonable person would consider such
a claim to be highly dubious at best. Certainly, it qualifies as an
extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary proof. Do you have any?

I have reported the story before on this group and frankly I am aware that
nothing I say or do will convince you (no I'm not going to drive to your
place to take the 1000UKP test).

I've read the story, and it's entirely unconvincing. Even if it *were*
a genuine effect, it would indicate a staggering sensitivity to
vibration, and hence just a sign of an extremely bad amplifier.

I note that, given an oportunity to *prove* your case, you are ducking
out. What a surprise................

I feel it is time someone stood up and disagreed with the big posters on
here that keep saying 'you can't hear this and can't hear that' when I
darn well can.

Well, we know you *think* you can..............

I feel sorry for people trying to build their systems and
only hearing one side on this group. Funny how most, if not all of them
are techies who think they know it all and therefore don't need to listen
at all.

That is of course just a pathetic lying strawman argument. Now, if you
actually had any *real* arguments to put forward, I'm sure that we'd
all be interested.

Although I understand electronic principles and cannot explain what I
hear, I do hear it and therefore the theory of all this is missing
something somewhere.

What's missing is your use of proprly controlled *listening*.

But this is how science has always worked, it is
always best theory at the time which often gets improved when something
shows up which does not match the model. The only problem is translating
what people hear into what can be measured and this is where the problem
lies I think, I don't think the techies are measuring *all* the right
things.

Utterly irrelevant. The problem is not in measurements, it's in
*listening* techniques. The money is still on the table for anyone who
can demonstrate a difference between amplifiers under level-matched
DBT conditions. If you're so convinced that *you* can 'hear things'
(voices, perhaps?), then bring it on!

I am happy that at some point the reason for the differences I and others
hear will become apparent as I'm not arrogant enough to think I know all
there is to know about what happens at electron level in an audio system
playing music into real speakers.

You are however arrogant enough to think that *you* can 'hear things',
yet you duck out of a chance to prove it - and collect a wad of cash
into the bargain. Why is that?

If I'm continually fooling myself, why is it I consistently cannot hear
some things and consistently can hear others? Surely if I was convincing
myself this would not happen.

Nope, just basic reinforcement - psychology 101.

Just for the record..

I can hear..

Interconnects - too easy.

Utter ********! Now you really are making me larf. OK, big boy, put
your wad where your gob is. I will bet you £10,000 that you can *not*
hear the difference between two nominally competent (i.e. level
matched, but I dount this would be necessary) interconnects.

Speaker leads - sometimes subtle sometimes more obvious. I've certainly
heard them change the brightness. Some have punchier bass.

Utter ********! Now you are making me larf again. OK, big boy, put
your wad where your gob is. I will bet you £10,000 that you can *not*
hear the difference between two nominally competent (i.e. level
matched, but I dount this would be necessary) speaker cables.

Platforms under amps - again varies - once for me, quite astonishing.

Utter ********. Aside from the vague possibility that you built a real
stinker of an amp kit at one time, and excluding valve amps, this is
sheer nonsense. Bring along any commercially available SS amp you
like, and I'll make the same bet - no need for level-matching this
time, of course!

I would say that almost anything placed in the analogue signal path which
is not audible is very much the exception.

You are a self-deceiving idiot - and I'll be happy to prove it.

I can't hear..

Absolute phase
Green pens
Day/night mains effects.
Miracle sticky pads or whatever PB comes up with.

Neither can anyone else(apaert from one) - nor can they hear the
******** that you claim you *can* hear. BTW, you are wrong about one
of the above - guess which one?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:49:02 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 20:21:37 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

[Snip]

You don't actually live that far from Stew. If you are not full of
crap, but sincerely believe you have these abilities, then I think the
trip would be well worthwhile for you - both in terms of shutting the
rest of us up once and for all, and of course the small detail of a
huge wedge of cash in your pocket. As you stand at the moment you are
simply hot air.

I refuse to respond to that due to its provocative and insulting nature. I
don't mind an argument, I don't want a pub brawl with a thug.

You are however just 'all e-wind and ****' at the moment, as Don says.

I suggest you take your favourite high quality interconnects with you
as they will absolutely guarantee you walking away with the money.

Did I say I had "high quality interconnects"? I have some QED things
because they were the best I was able to afford and I wanted longer
lengths which the shop had a limited choice of.

Anyway Stewart can come here and tell me he can't hear these speaker
cables.

Make it a straight *bet*, and you're on. Surely you can't lose? BTW,
when did you change from interconnects to speaker cables?
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 20:31:51 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

In article ,
Stewart Pinkerton wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 13:19:20 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

[Snip]

No they B. don't.

Sure they do - why wouldn't they?

As a guess because amplifiers are not measured playing music into real
loads or because not all the important audible factors are getting
measured at all. It is likely we don't know it all, science has a history
of this.

I'm talking about *listening* tests, not measurements.

But can't you see that this is all degrees, all amps sound different it is
just that some are closer than others.

********, I have tried at least a dozen amps which are *totally*
indistinguishable. I can of course predict your next comment.......

Just try it.

Listen mate, I've been building my own amplifiers and speakers for over 40
years and I do try things this is why I can hear things.

You can't hear jack **** - you're making this more obvious with every
post.

It is the
Electronic know alls that coincidentally are deaf because they don't need
to listen they know it can't sound different.

By that comment alone, you demonstrate that you are the arrogant one
who is all wind and ****. Come on over and *prove* your case (and make
a pile of cash) or keep your half-assed opinions to yourself.

Besides I don't know anyone that listens to their hi-fi in an LMDBT
manner they just switch it on and turn up the wick until it sounds
right, that's what we did and the Denon was better QED.

Bull****. Just *try* it.

I won't respond to that.

Clearly not. I wonder why..................

What would you have people do, buy the cheapest amp that had the
facilities they need and ignore the sound?

I'd have them buy the cheapest amp that had the power and facilities
required, and that sounded just like any other good amplifier. That's
the other reason I keep the Krell - it's a useful reference.

So at the end of the day you have to listen to amps to find the one you
prefer because amps do sound different and none of them are perfect. Give
me strength.

That is of course just the kind of lying distortion that we've come to
expect - because you have *no* substantive argument, you're just wind
and ****.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 00:57:14 +0000 (UTC), "neutron"
wrote:


"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 19:25:32 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

I had an interesting experience this morning. I have been helping a hi-fi
newbie at work choose his first AV system. When it came to amplifiers I
had advised him to try the Arcam AVR300 which suited his requirements and
would nicely fit on his tv/hi-fi rack. Plus I knew of Arcam's excellent
after sales service and I have an AV8/P7 which I am very happy with.

All was well until someone suggested that it might be interesting to try
the Denon amp at a similar price as it was getting good reviews. It was
wired in to exactly the same cables and speakers and the speaker levels
(balance) were set the same.

My newbie mate was first to indicate his feelings. The Denon was, to my
ears considerably more alive and dynamic than the Arcam both on CD and
DVD
music videos. The Arcam was warm and cuddly but very laid back. He
decided
on the Denon and it was easy to have a preference.

This friend of mine had never been in a hi-fi dem in his life before and
because we were using a projector for the music DVDs the room was in
almost total darkness there was no subtle facial expressions guiding him
at all. Don't anyone ever tell me all good amps sound the same, they
simply don't,

Yes, they do.

unless of course these amps are both not good. I will
concede that it could have been the DACs that were so different as we did
not use an analogue source but even so...

Incidentally, I wouldn't think the shop wanted that result as the Denon
was 300UKP cheaper.

Try it again under level-matched DBT conditions. Been there, done that
many times. Without LMDBT, it don't mean a thing.

I bet you £1000 I could.

Done. Bring it on.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 21:49:02 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 20:21:37 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

[Snip]

You don't actually live that far from Stew. If you are not full of
crap, but sincerely believe you have these abilities, then I think the
trip would be well worthwhile for you - both in terms of shutting the
rest of us up once and for all, and of course the small detail of a
huge wedge of cash in your pocket. As you stand at the moment you are
simply hot air.

I refuse to respond to that due to its provocative and insulting nature. I
don't mind an argument, I don't want a pub brawl with a thug.

I suggest you take your favourite high quality interconnects with you
as they will absolutely guarantee you walking away with the money.

Did I say I had "high quality interconnects"? I have some QED things
because they were the best I was able to afford and I wanted longer
lengths which the shop had a limited choice of.

Anyway Stewart can come here and tell me he can't hear these speaker
cables.

Cheers,

Bob.

No need for a brawl. Bob. This is just a case of you putting your
money where your mouth is. I suggested interconnects because in your
list you described them as "easy".

But you are clearly uneasy about stealing Stewart's cash from him over
such a trivial test, so how about this? Since the odds are stacked so
heavily in your favour, you can collect the cash if you win, but if
you fail you can add a grand of your own to the pot.

But of course that isn't going to happen - is it?

Incidentally, Stewart's criteria for winning are so slack that he can
expect about 5% of respondents to win by chance alone.

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

In article , Bob Latham
wrote:
In article , Don Pearce
wrote:

[Snip]

You were not making a statement of belief - read what I quote from you
"I don't think this, I know". So you actually deny that it is belief,
but is fact. So make your mind up - do you believe it, or do you know
it? There is a huge difference.

I do know that amplifiers sound different because I proved some years
ago with an Hitachi mosfet amp. I did prove it.

I'm afraid that your statement seems at best ambiguous.

By "amplifiers" do you mean:

A) all amplifiers in existence

or

B) the selection of amplifiers you listened to in the specific circumstance
in which you listened.

Also, by "proved" do you mean:

A) An objective and testable method which demonstrates your assertion

or

B) You decided you could hear a difference in the circumstances

FWIW my experience is that there are cases/circumstances/examples where I
think I can hear differences between amplifiers, and others where I can't.
My impression is that some similarly qualified statement would apply for
other people as well. However I then deduce from this that:

A) Some amplifiers may not be "good" if your definition of "good" means
that they should sound the same. (This seems to me to follow by simply
logic from the claim that "good amps all sound the same".[1] )

B) That this depends upon the circumstances of use. Thus some amps may be
indistinguishable with some music at some levels with some speakers, etc,
but show differences when used with different circumstances of use. Hence
"good" here may depend upon the details of use.

I can't say that "all amplifiers sound different" as I haven't heard them
*all*, and I can't cover all possible circumstances of use.

Slainte,

Jim

[1] Wether you (or someone else) would *prefer* an amp that met this
definition requirement or not is another matter. Your definition of "good"
might mean one that affected the sound in a way you preferred. If so, your
money, your ears, your choice.

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Good amps all sound the same do they?
 

In article , Bob Latham
wrote:
In article , Stewart
Pinkerton wrote:
On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:50:06 GMT, Bob Latham
wrote:

[Snip]

He's not 'personalising' the argument, he's pointing out that anyone
who makes such a claim as you did above, does his credibility no good.
BTW, it was not a 'statement of belief', you claimed that you *know*
it to be the case.0, whereas any reasonable person would consider such
a claim to be highly dubious at best. Certainly, it qualifies as an
extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary proof. Do you have any?

I have reported the story before on this group and frankly I am aware
that nothing I say or do will convince you (no I'm not going to drive to
your place to take the 1000UKP test).

What puzzles me is that you claim you can "prove" this and - above - then
say both that "nothing I say or do will convince Stewart" and that you
refuse to participate in the one test he has said (IIRC) would convince
him. By "nothing I say or do" do you mean "nothing I am prepared to do"?

I find it odd that you feel strongly enough to make your claims despite the
opposition, and insist upon saying you have "proved" this, but then seem
unwilling to take the test you mention. If you do not want to pursade
anyone one, why post your claims? If you *do* wish to pursaude people that
your claim is reliable, why not do so and also get 1000 UKP from Stewart's
pocket? :-)

I feel it is time someone stood up and disagreed with the big posters on
here that keep saying 'you can't hear this and can't hear that' when I
darn well can.

But do you think that simply making claims without being willing to show
others they are reliable is 'standing up to them'?

I have no idea if your claim is right or wrong. For all I know, you may be
able to hear differences which have passed me by. However since your
experience disagrees with mine I think it is reasonable to ask for some
evidence beyond a simple assertion on your part *if* you wish to pursuade
me. If you don't care about pursuading me of your view, I am then puzzled
by why you bothered to post your claims in the first place.

I feel sorry for people trying to build their systems and only hearing
one side on this group. Funny how most, if not all of them are techies
who think they know it all and therefore don't need to listen at all.

Although I understand electronic principles and cannot explain what I
hear, I do hear it and therefore the theory of all this is missing
something somewhere. But this is how science has always worked, it is
always best theory at the time which often gets improved when something
shows up which does not match the model. The only problem is translating
what people hear into what can be measured and this is where the problem
lies I think, I don't think the techies are measuring *all* the right
things.

You are probably correct. However science does not advance simply by saying
"something is wrong/missing". It advances by then devising and carrying out
tests that provide reliable evidence upon which to base better ideas. Hence
if you wish to make progress it isn't enough to just say "our current ideas
and measurements miss things". You then have to be systematic about testing
for what may be being missed. We also have to test for being mistaken in
our views. (This includes all of us, including yourself.) Thus it seems to
me that if you wish to do more that simply make an unsupported claim you
should either take Stewart's test and/or suggest some *testable* idea of
where the differences you beleive you hear come from if it isn't covered by
the usual measurements and ideas.


Interconnects - too easy. Speaker leads - sometimes subtle sometimes
more obvious. I've certainly heard them change the brightness. Some have
punchier bass. Platforms under amps - again varies - once for me, quite
astonishing.

I would say that almost anything placed in the analogue signal path
which is not audible is very much the exception.

Then why not get 1000 UKP for showing your claims are well founded? You do
not lose any money if you fail.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html