Following recent discussions about distortion and an amp's ability to
reproduce without colouration, I though I'd relay a recent experience.

In an earlier thread I had pointed out that my favourite amp would be
described by many on here as noisy and of inferior design on the basis that
the sound may be coloured or because its performance seems to be sensitive
to it reaching an optimum temperature.

I swapped this amp (an Alchemist Kraken APD6a II) for an Audiolab 8000LX
which had been packed up for a short time. Many on here will be familiar
with this amp, if only by reputation.

The first thing I observed was how much more comfortable I was with the
look, feel, ergonomics and operation of the Audiolab. I can put things on
top of it, for starters (I don't block the air from circulating though the
vents, don't worry), the buttons are all cool to the touch - not *hot* like
the Alchemist, both the input and record selector switches feel the same and
it all operates with a great deal of assurance. It also has a lovely 1/4"
headphone jack on the front panel, which is very useful.

Just one problem. It's boring to listen to. I've been running the Alchemist
in exactly the same setup for a few months and in switching to the Audiolab,
and having listened for about a weeks now, I'm totally uninspired. The sound
is very clean and aesthetically it's all very balanced and even handed,
which is fine on paper, but it doesn't entertain me.

If I were a recording artist, first and foremost I'd want those listening to
my music to be entertained, inspired & moved by it. The Audiolab doesn't do
that for me, the Alchemist does. For all its supposed colour, for all its
foibles, operational quirks - whatever you like - it is by any sensible
measure of what a hifi should be and do, better.

It's a similar difference that I experience when listening to vinyl compared
with CD...

"JustMe" wrote in message
...
Following recent discussions about distortion and an amp's ability to
reproduce without colouration, I though I'd relay a recent experience.

In an earlier thread I had pointed out that my favourite amp would be
described by many on here as noisy and of inferior design on the basis
that
the sound may be coloured or because its performance seems to be sensitive
to it reaching an optimum temperature.

I swapped this amp (an Alchemist Kraken APD6a II) for an Audiolab 8000LX
which had been packed up for a short time. Many on here will be familiar
with this amp, if only by reputation.

The first thing I observed was how much more comfortable I was with the
look, feel, ergonomics and operation of the Audiolab. I can put things on
top of it, for starters (I don't block the air from circulating though the
vents, don't worry), the buttons are all cool to the touch - not *hot*
like
the Alchemist, both the input and record selector switches feel the same
and
it all operates with a great deal of assurance. It also has a lovely 1/4"
headphone jack on the front panel, which is very useful.

Just one problem. It's boring to listen to. I've been running the
Alchemist
in exactly the same setup for a few months and in switching to the
Audiolab,
and having listened for about a weeks now, I'm totally uninspired. The
sound
is very clean and aesthetically it's all very balanced and even handed,
which is fine on paper, but it doesn't entertain me.

If I were a recording artist, first and foremost I'd want those listening
to
my music to be entertained, inspired & moved by it. The Audiolab doesn't
do
that for me, the Alchemist does. For all its supposed colour, for all its
foibles, operational quirks - whatever you like - it is by any sensible
measure of what a hifi should be and do, better.

It's a similar difference that I experience when listening to vinyl
compared
with CD...



Yes, my measuring device are the hairs on the back of my neck. If I'm not
inspired, moved or entertained by a piece of kit over time then back it
goes.
Ok its a bonus if it measures well but Idon't yet know of any spectrum
analyser, scope or any test gear that is graduated in emotion. It don't
mean a thing if it ain't..etc
Now the torch is lit - let the flames begin.....

On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:48:14 +0000, Mike Gilmour wrote:

snip
Now the torch is lit - let the flames begin.....

Again, Mike? ;-)
I agree with you, its "music before measurements" for me, but I have a
definite deja vu feeling here...
:-)

--
Mick
(no M$ software on here... :-) )
Web: http://www.nascom.info
Web: http://projectedsound.tk

JustMe wrote:

I swapped this amp (an Alchemist Kraken APD6a II) for an Audiolab 8000LX
which had been packed up for a short time. Many on here will be familiar
with this amp, if only by reputation.

basically the 8000LX is the same amp as the Audiolab 8000S without the
remote control and configurable modes (pre, pre-power, int, etc).


The first thing I observed was how much more comfortable I was with the
look, feel, ergonomics and operation of the Audiolab. I can put things on
top of it, for starters (I don't block the air from circulating though the
vents, don't worry), the buttons are all cool to the touch - not *hot* like
the Alchemist, both the input and record selector switches feel the same and
it all operates with a great deal of assurance. It also has a lovely 1/4"
headphone jack on the front panel, which is very useful.

Just one problem. It's boring to listen to. I've been running the Alchemist
in exactly the same setup for a few months and in switching to the Audiolab,
and having listened for about a weeks now, I'm totally uninspired. The sound
is very clean and aesthetically it's all very balanced and even handed,
which is fine on paper, but it doesn't entertain me.

I am not familiar with the Alchemist amp, but the Audiolab is a wire
with gain ... i.e. the sort of amp you want to get if you are after
"high-fidelity" with no audible distortion.



If I were a recording artist, first and foremost I'd want those listening to
my music to be entertained, inspired & moved by it.

Of course. And the artist should make that happen by putting in an
entertaining, inspired performance.

The Audiolab doesn't do that for me, the Alchemist does.

OK, so you admit you prefer your amps to have a "boogie" factor, i.e.
alter the input signal in such a way that the output signal just isn't a
magnified version of the input signal. The Audiolab isn't the amp for
you then.

For all its supposed colour, for all its
foibles, operational quirks - whatever you like - it is by any sensible
measure of what a hifi should be and do, better.

No, that isn't what "hi-fi" should do ... the musicality should come
from the performance, not the equipment.

"Tat Chan" wrote


No, that isn't what "hi-fi" should do ... the musicality should come from
the performance, not the equipment.


Er, if you want 'Mini Me' status, you'll have to get in line - there's at
least two ahead of you....

(Wot does that fekkin' stoopid remark mean anyway - put a bit of music
through a setup that bleaches all the flavout out of it and blame the
musicians/studio for a 'poor recording' as usual...??)

Ya hafta fekkin' larf!!!

(Do you *not*???)

:-))

Keith G wrote:

(Wot does that fekkin' stoopid remark mean anyway - put a bit of music
through a setup that bleaches all the flavout out of it and blame the
musicians/studio for a 'poor recording' as usual...??)

So you DO think the SS amps remove something.

Do you also think valve amps add something or just amplify the real signal ?

Keith G wrote:

(Wot does that fekkin' stoopid remark mean anyway - put a bit of music
through a setup that bleaches all the flavout out of it and blame the
musicians/studio for a 'poor recording' as usual...??)

So you DO think the SS amps remove something.

Do you also think valve amps add something or just amplify the real signal
?

I couldn't answer for Keith, but as a consumer of hifi (rather than a
designer of the kit), and in the context of deciding which to spend cash on,
*I* don't particularly care.

To me "X" gives me greater pleasure than "Y". The value of "X" is about the
same as "Y" .'. the decision is an easy one for me.

Do *you* think that SS amps remove something?
Do *you* think that valve amps add something?

Could you quantify what you think each either removes or adds?

JustMe wrote:
Keith G wrote:


(Wot does that fekkin' stoopid remark mean anyway - put a bit of music
through a setup that bleaches all the flavout out of it and blame the
musicians/studio for a 'poor recording' as usual...??)

So you DO think the SS amps remove something.

Do you also think valve amps add something or just amplify the real signal

?

Do *you* think that SS amps remove something?

The good ones? no. Same goes for a good valve amp.

Do *you* think that valve amps add something?

Only the bad ones. Not that I deny the additions sound nice sometimes.

Could you quantify what you think each either removes or adds?

given the right equipment...

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

(Wot does that fekkin' stoopid remark mean anyway - put a bit of music
through a setup that bleaches all the flavout out of it and blame the
musicians/studio for a 'poor recording' as usual...??)

So you DO think the SS amps remove something.

Do you also think valve amps add something or just amplify the real signal
?

**I believe you have fallen into the same trap as others in this group. A
good amplifier neither adds, nor subtracts any audible information. It
matters not if the amplifying devices are solid state (SS) or hollow state
(HS).

IOW: There are good (ie: neutral) SS amps and bad (ie: distorting) SS amps.
Likewise, there are good and bad HS amps.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Keith G wrote:

"Tat Chan" wrote



No, that isn't what "hi-fi" should do ... the musicality should come from
the performance, not the equipment.



Er, if you want 'Mini Me' status, you'll have to get in line - there's at
least two ahead of you....

So people can't have their own preference then? As it happens, I share
Stewart's views on high-fidelity in audio equipment.

What about the other valvie Mini-Mes then?



(Wot does that fekkin' stoopid remark mean anyway - put a bit of music
through a setup that bleaches all the flavout out of it and blame the
musicians/studio for a 'poor recording' as usual...??)

So you think a wire with gain removes stuff from the recording?

Musicality is something that can't be measured ... it has to "do it" for
you. From memory (I can't name any specific incidents), I have been to
gigs where the band was sloshed, the lead singer going off key a few
times, the guitarist fluffling a chord or three ... but, did the band
play! There was something in the ragged performance (maybe the music?)
that actually did it, and the punters agreed.

At the other end, you have gigs where everything is note for note
perfect, and the performance sounds exactly like a replica of the CD.
I tend to find those gigs boring. If I wanted a replication of the
performance on CD, I would have stayed at home.