In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

"Trevor Wilson" wrote

Coupled with hopelessly engineered recordings, a SET amp can mask all
the rubbish inserted by engineers and musicians.

Trevor. Not being in the record business yourself, you probably have no
idea of the competition within the selection process which enables one
to take even the first step in this business. Having worked for major
labels for a great many years, and been involved in selecting candidates
for training, I can tell you that only about 1% of those shortlisted
ever get to the second interview level. There are no vacancies in the
recording business:-)

I am sure the above is correct. There is probably a similar situation in
the 'meeja' where loads of people are eager to be actors, producers,
newsreaders, etc.

However the snag is that the "competition" does not necessarily guarantee
the quality of the results thus produced. Witness, for example, the recent
discussions regarding absurd levels of automated level compression on some
rock/pop CDs, etc.

Thus the action of "competition" only selects on the basis which drives it,
which *may* alas, have little to do with quality, or with any real
understanding of relevant engineering, etc.

Likewise, the demands made upon session musicians who play on the
records we make, are considerable. Can you play 64 bars from a written
part at tempo "vivace" with simultaneous transposition up or down a
minor third, prima vista without a single mistake. Makes your
profession of audio retailing look pretty tame, doesn't it? and also
probably explains the "would have been" flavour to your post:-)

The above skills would clearly be very valuable for many musicians. However
I wonder how many superb musicians would fail in a "competition" on such a
basis - yet have made recordings of, say, Jazz or Blues, which have become
highly regarded and have endured?

Be careful what you wish for - you may get it. :-)

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

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
.. .

"Trevor Wilson" wrote

Coupled with hopelessly engineered recordings, a SET amp can mask all
the
rubbish inserted by engineers and musicians.

Trevor. Not being in the record business yourself, you probably have
no idea of the competition within the selection process which enables
one to take even the first step in this business.

**Correct. I call it (mostly) from and end user perspective and partly from
the perspective of one who has dealt with recording studios on a technical
basis (I regularly did work for CBS Australia, back in the 1970s and 1980s).
I also did some work for EMI Australia in the 1970s.

Anecdote:
Sometime around 1980, I supplied some new loudspeakers to the tape
duplicating section of CBS. After using them for a few months, I received a
call, asking if I could supply an amplifier to drive them. I dutifully
arrived with an amplifier whcih was appropriate for the speakers being used.
After a couple of weeks on trial, I recieved a 'phone call from the head
engineer, which went something like this:

Engineer: "Thanks for the loan of the amp. It drives the speakers really
well, but we have a problem. When we use it, the flaws in the tapes become
more readily obvious. Do you have another amp which will mask those flaws?"

And this was form the QUALITY CONTROL section. Sheesh! Most people in the
recoding industry do not care about quality. Few ever have. (Please note: I
said FEW ever have. Not none.) I'll relate my experiences with EMI to you
sometime. They were worse. Much worse.

Having worked for
major labels for a great many years, and been involved in selecting
candidates for training, I can tell you that only about 1% of those
shortlisted ever get to the second interview level. There are no
vacancies in the recording business:-)

**That would be because 99.9% of all applicants have no talent for their
chosen profession. Do the math.


Likewise, the demands made upon session musicians who
play on the records we make, are considerable. Can you play
64 bars from a written part at tempo "vivace" with simultaneous
transposition up or down a minor third, prima vista without a
single mistake.

**Non-sequitur. I do my job competently. I expect others to do likewise.
Particularly when it comes to preserving great art.

Makes your profession of audio retailing look
pretty tame,

**Audio retailing? You need to do a lot more research, before you cram your
other foot into your mouth. My CV is significantly longer than that. My
CURRENT range of jobs is longer than that. Your personal attack is, however,
duly noted. You may care to note that I have not attacked you and will
refrain from doing so.

doesn't it? and also probably explains the "would
have been" flavour to your post:-)

I wonder what you meant by "all the rubbish inserted...." ???

**Go listen to a contemporary recording sometime. Most are appalling badly
engineered. Many classical recordings are treated similarly.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Arny Krueger wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article

.com,
wrote:
While a single Power Humpty can run the entire unit, you
can use a second Power Humpty for true dual mono
operation.

Presumably only if each is driven off its own mains
generator?
.


Blah Blah Blah with you guys and your techno wank.
It so limits your ability to be opened minded and trust
your ears.I might be romantic but you guys are tragic.It
stunts you.

No, it keeps us grounded in reality.

One of my chip amps[a parallelled 4780]was built by a
highly successful and regarded amplifier designer
maker.

Name him. 5 will get you 10 that he's a well-known charlatan.

He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps
but has also built and successfully marketed hybrids.

That's charlatan with a C.

He put extra effort into power supply and regulation on this
thing.

Given how he no doubt effectively marks up parts and labor, he's got plenty
of incentive to add as many surplus features as his technically naive market
will bear.

It is 100 watts RMS and capable of driving low
impedence speakers.

So is a Behringer A500, and with power to spare.

He built it to drive some very demanding electrostats and
because many of his respected customers were raving about
these things.He has since designed and built a KT88 amp
with a damping factor of 200 so no longer needed the chip
amp.

Respected customers? Name them! Name him. 5 will get you 10 that they are
not what you'd call technically lettered.

This guy used to slag off op amps all the time-I believe
because they are so often badly used in CD players and
phono amps.

More likely, the audio sucker market shifted and he followed the dollars.

The chip amp is not as good as his valve amps-[better
than his hybrids though]but that does not mean that it is
not still better than the vast majority of SS amps.

Whatver that means.

It
exposes their lack of dynamics,speed and clarity and
their dirty and compressed sound.

Spare us all - a pace and timing bigot!

Just my opinion-many
others don't hear it this way-but many others do.
The Rotel amps mentioned by TW don't come even close .He
has some of them too.

No doubt, it's part of his schtick - "I've got all these Rotel amps, but the
ones I build for ten times the price per watt sound better".

For people who can't relate to the transistor amp sound
the chip amps are an alternative.

Ironic given taht they are transistor amps, pure and simple.

They have a clearly
different,fresher,faster and more open sound.

Yeah, sure.

They are not
perfect[they can sound a bit cold and hard when driven
hard],but to dismiss them out of some sort of technical
elitism rather than just listening to them is pointless.

Who said anything about dismissing them? How about we build some good ones
using orthodox technology that works, and laugh all the way to the bank?

You guys will probably never agree because you hear
differently.

Yeah, its that blind listening test thing. Something about not seeing which
amp you're listening to during the evaluation.

But others who are frustrated by hearing it
another way might.[Peolpe who like SETs for example].

I just don't have much affinity for integer number percentages of nonlinear
distortion and frequency response curves that are highly dependent on the
speaker's impedance curves.

When I replied to the initial post this is who I was
trying to inform-not you mob of crusty old tech
worshiping skeptics.

Its not a matter of us worshipping tech and you not. Its a matter of us
knowing tech, and you not.


With the chip amp kits costing less than many
interconnect cables,

Ooops folks, we've got one of those!

why should people not be encouraged
to try them? Its got to beat spending a small fortune on
a SET which might not sound better.

IME its hard to find a good-sounding SET.

I am sick of this subject.

That's why you can't write much about it.

Not!

I will have to find some other wipping boy subject.

How about begging, borrowing or buying your first clue about orthodox audio
technology?

How about battery powered portable CD
players sounding better than home ones?-I haven't heard
that one for a while.

Yes you did - you just raised that old canard up again.

Then again I have a battery powered chip preamp.......

Well so do I - its a Boostaroo!


The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but
just out of curiosity and for a specific task.

I loaned my other chip amp -a Sonic Art 3876T kit to an audiophile
friend who owns and has owned all sorts of monster SS amps incuding
Pass Labs Aleph 3,Plinius,Audio Research,Luxman,M.E.850,HSA single
ended,Sugden A 21 as well as Bel Canto and ICE digital type amps.
He also agrees that this thing is a real giant killer and better than
any non valve amp he has heard.[This was using a valve preamp and
efficient speakers]
So i am not the only delusional one.

JT

wrote in message
s.com...
So i am not the only delusional one.

**No one ever suggested you were.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in
message .. .
:
: wrote in message
: s.com...
: So i am not the only delusional one.
:
: **No one ever suggested you were.
:
:
: --
: Trevor Wilson
: www.rageaudio.com.au
:
:
Please note here Trevor I do not want to get involved in
your argument with JT nor class myself as delusional but I
thought I would just make a few comments on this subject.

As you know I have a ME850/24 combo driving some large 2 Ohm
Apogee speakers and yes I do believe what I have is very
good indeed. JT has kindly loaned me one of these Chip Amps
for a comparison and we did some testing while he was still
at my place.

Now before anyone brings up DBT/ABX it would be a pointless
exercise as a slight 50Hz hum from the power supply of the
chip amp is a dead give away ;-) So even turning it on
negates any unbiased test :-( So if we forget about the
power supply and concentrate on the performance part, then I
can say that the amp does a surprisingly good job and gives
the 850 a run for it's money (so speak). Mid range is very
similar but I can pick differences at either side. What I
would say though is that it does sound like a lot of valve
amps that I have heard over the years and so can understand
why people would like them.

BTW I am yet to hear JT's good one in his system so I will
reserve final judgement ;-)

I would just like to point out that it is always difficult
to fully comprehend what someone is actually listening to on
their system unless you physically hear it for yourself ;-)

Cheers TT

"TT" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in
message .. .
:
: wrote in message
: s.com...
: So i am not the only delusional one.
:
: **No one ever suggested you were.
:
:
: --
: Trevor Wilson
: www.rageaudio.com.au
:
:
Please note here Trevor I do not want to get involved in
your argument with JT nor class myself as delusional but I
thought I would just make a few comments on this subject.

As you know I have a ME850/24 combo driving some large 2 Ohm
Apogee speakers and yes I do believe what I have is very
good indeed. JT has kindly loaned me one of these Chip Amps
for a comparison and we did some testing while he was still
at my place.

Now before anyone brings up DBT/ABX it would be a pointless
exercise as a slight 50Hz hum from the power supply of the
chip amp is a dead give away ;-) So even turning it on
negates any unbiased test :-( So if we forget about the
power supply and concentrate on the performance part, then I
can say that the amp does a surprisingly good job and gives
the 850 a run for it's money (so speak). Mid range is very
similar but I can pick differences at either side. What I
would say though is that it does sound like a lot of valve
amps that I have heard over the years and so can understand
why people would like them.

BTW I am yet to hear JT's good one in his system so I will
reserve final judgement ;-)

**Take your ME stuff over and pin his ears back. He has clearly never
actually listened to one.


I would just like to point out that it is always difficult
to fully comprehend what someone is actually listening to on
their system unless you physically hear it for yourself ;-)

**I've heard many power OP amps, many times. They're cheap, convenient, hard
to destroy and reasonable performers. Those points have never been in
contention. It is for those reasons that they are used in almost all cheap
audio systems. They are far from simple (despite what the technically
incompetent continually say). They are also incapable of equalling an ME850
(as you already know). And make no mistake: The midrange area is the easiest
area for any amp to perform well. It is the frequency extremes that cost
money.

The fact that the amp hums, suggests extreme incompetence on the part of the
constructor. It SHOULD be deathly silent.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
The fact that the amp hums, suggests extreme incompetence on the part of
the constructor. It SHOULD be deathly silent.

That occurred to me too. What's the reason - penny pinching?

--
*He who dies with the most toys is, nonetheless, dead.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
The fact that the amp hums, suggests extreme incompetence on the part of
the constructor. It SHOULD be deathly silent.

That occurred to me too. What's the reason - penny pinching?

--
*He who dies with the most toys is, nonetheless, dead.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

The hum has been attributed to a PCB fault or damage.It would probably
be easy to fix but the builder has much better things to do with his
time than hunt around for the cause.I will have a tech look into it
later.

The other chip amp [Sonic Art] is very quiet.

It would be hard to imagine a less suited speaker to a chip amp than
TTs Equinox-with its many drivers,crossover complexity and low
impedence.Very many substantial SS amps would struggle on these-as the
smaller M.E.s did.That they still sound pretty good with the buggered
one is an indication of the potential of these things on less demanding
speakers.On such speakers their bass and treble is at least up to very
good SS amps of similar power,but as TT says,it is their midrange which
is special.I would add to that their image depth and precision,their
speed and their dynamics[both macro and micro].

Trevor I cannot agree that the midrange is most easy to get right.If
anything bass is most easy to get right.Any decent P.A. amp can do
reasonable bass.Even digital ones.

JT

In article m,
wrote:



One of my chip amps[a parallelled 4780]was built by a highly
successful and regarded amplifier designer maker.

He is most famous for his valve amps and preamps but has also built
and successfully marketed hybrids.



The chip amp was built by Mick Maloney of Supratek.Not to market but
just out of curiosity and for a specific task.

if this is who you are referring to above, then I have to confess that I
can't recall having heard his name before. However the alleged "fame" of
the designer may have no real relationship to do with the actual quality of
the products.

I loaned my other chip amp -a Sonic Art 3876T kit to an audiophile
friend who owns and has owned all sorts of monster SS amps incuding
Pass Labs Aleph 3,Plinius,Audio Research,Luxman,M.E.850,HSA single
ended,Sugden A 21 as well as Bel Canto and ICE digital type amps. He
also agrees that this thing is a real giant killer and better than any
non valve amp he has heard.[This was using a valve preamp and efficient
speakers] So i am not the only delusional one.

It does not surprise me particulary if someone decides that some amps using
'chips' sound as good or better as other types. What I have found odder is
the predjudices people have on such grounds without having either tried the
items in question, or having any understanding of the engineering involved.

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

In article , TT
wrote:


Now before anyone brings up DBT/ABX it would be a pointless exercise as
a slight 50Hz hum from the power supply of the chip amp is a dead give
away ;-) So even turning it on negates any unbiased test :-(

Not so. It should be perfectly possible for *both* amps to be powered, and
driven with the same input signals, symultaneously. You can also use dummy
loads on the amp you are not listening to. Thus making largely 'common
mode' such defects.

Although personally, I would not choose to use an amp whose physical hum
was audible in use. So if it did that, the behaviour would tend to make me
choose something else.

So if we forget about the power supply and concentrate on the
performance part, then I can say that the amp does a surprisingly good
job and gives the 850 a run for it's money (so speak). Mid range is
very similar but I can pick differences at either side. What I would
say though is that it does sound like a lot of valve amps that I have
heard over the years and so can understand why people would like them.

I would just like to point out that it is always difficult to fully
comprehend what someone is actually listening to on their system unless
you physically hear it for yourself ;-)

What you can do, though is:

1) Do a form of comparison which is designed to exclude any tendency for
judgements of 'difference' to be based on factors other than the actual
results emerging from the speakers. From what you say, I think this would
be quite possible in the case you describe.

2) Examine the units and understand the implications of the engineering
involved.

So, for example, if you were to use a 'gainclone' with tiny reservoir caps,
you could check to see if the output was being accompanied by levels of
ripple intermod whose details varyied dynamically with the music. If you
found this was present at high levels, it might then explain some of the
percieved 'differences'. (Assuming you were also doing (1) so could have
some confidence that they were not extraneous.)

Similarly, if the units had markedly difference frequency response in use,
that might explain any reliably-established 'differences'.

What may be difficult is knowing what someone might 'like' as their
tastes or circumstances may differ from your own. However it is far
from clear if differences *are* always as audible as people assert,
or arise for the reasons they assume.

Sainte,

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