how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Serge Auckland wrote:
Knowing Keith's equipment, it comes as no surprise:-

His horns have a sensitivity of about 100dB/watt, so his 8 watts
will provide a level of around 109dB.

Full range?

Full enough for the purposes. The missing bottom and top are already
way down on the F-M hearing curves that they won't change the
perceived loudness to any appreciable extent. The 100dB/watt
sensitivity figures are normally given at mid frequencies anyway.


There is no 'missing top' on any of the FR drivers I use here. Lower
register is a different story and depends on cabinet/placement &c., but
is frequently preferable to the thick, woolly bass of the TLs which
renders Classic FM (on FM) unlistenable, for example....

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Serge Auckland wrote:
Knowing Keith's equipment, it comes as no surprise:-

His horns have a sensitivity of about 100dB/watt, so his 8 watts
will provide a level of around 109dB.

Full range?

Full enough for the purposes. The missing bottom and top are already
way down on the F-M hearing curves that they won't change the
perceived loudness to any appreciable extent. The 100dB/watt
sensitivity figures are normally given at mid frequencies anyway.


There is no 'missing top' on any of the FR drivers I use here.


I guess I should have said *audible* missing top - I'm not too bothered
what may or may not show up on Plowie's rectum analyser...

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Serge Auckland wrote:
Knowing Keith's equipment, it comes as no surprise:-

His horns have a sensitivity of about 100dB/watt, so his 8 watts will
provide a level of around 109dB.

Full range?

Full enough for the purposes. The missing bottom and top are already way
down on the F-M hearing curves that they won't change the perceived
loudness to any appreciable extent. The 100dB/watt sensitivity figures
are normally given at mid frequencies anyway.


There is no 'missing top' on any of the FR drivers I use here.


I guess I should have said *audible* missing top - I'm not too bothered
what may or may not show up on Plowie's rectum analyser...


I'm glad you qualified the *audible* missing top. It may not be audible,
certainly not to a 60 year old, (or one only a few years behind you), but
missing it certainly is when measured. Lowther claim 18-20kHz for their
drivers, but they don't say either how far down that is, or at what angle
from the drive unit centre. Single drive units beam very significantly, so
for younger listeners, they would most certainly have "missing" top,
especially if listening anything other than straight-on.

I don't understand the statement about the woolly bass of the TLs, as the
IMFs have about the cleanest tightest bass immaginable. Maybe they are
going sufficiently far down that they set off room resonances that your
horns don't go near. Have you tried them in your large room?

S.

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
You *are* kidding - right...???

No. I assumed you'd have such a programme given the money you spend on
mics etc and the amount of recordings you put on your site via a
computer.

No - missing the point as ever. What I was commenting on was the your
suggestion to someone who said he couldn't hear a difference that he
should *measure* it until he can...

My reasoning is it might give a clue as to what to listen for.

--
*Tell me to 'stuff it' - I'm a taxidermist.

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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
I'd suggest you try again - it's at the top of this post. If you can't
tell a resistor from a capacitor you should stick to low voltage
battery operated equipment. Valve equipment fiddled with by the
totally unskilled can be a fire risk.


Wake up FFS - try to spot when someone's taking the ****....

Very difficult with you Keith because so much you say and presumably mean
would be considered 'taking the ****' by many.

(Look up 'Socratic Irony and scale it down to *country boy* part
feigned/mostly real ignorance and you'll be in the right neck of the
woods... ;-)

Seems strange you like to poo-poo the acquiring of even vague technical
knowledge - when it suits you. Considering how much you mention the things
you've built.

--
*Organized Crime Is Alive And Well; It's Called Auto Insurance.

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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
There is no 'missing top' on any of the FR drivers I use here.

Depends on what you mean by 'missing'. And top.

--
*I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message.

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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:
Knowing Keith's equipment, it comes as no surprise:-

His horns have a sensitivity of about 100dB/watt, so his 8 watts will
provide a level of around 109dB.

Full range?

Full enough for the purposes. The missing bottom and top are already way
down on the F-M hearing curves that they won't change the perceived
loudness to any appreciable extent. The 100dB/watt sensitivity figures
are normally given at mid frequencies anyway.

That may be drawing an incorrect conclusion by misapplying the curves.

The key point will be that the music either will have audible bass/treble
when replayed with a 'flat' system or not. (By rthat, I mean that the
presence of the low bass and high treble have an audible effect.)

If it does, then using speakers that fail to reproduce the bass/treble
will
alter the audible results.

The FM curves simply imply that a higher sound pressure was required in
the
first place for the music to have the audible bass/treble.

The curves were also based on isolated sinewave audibility IIRC. This
isn't
at all the same thing as when listening to a composite sound as the
physiology, etc, of human hearing system isn't simply working by linear
superposition.

Slainte,

Jim


Indeed, and for a rigorous explanation I fully agree. However, what I was
trying to get across as that the perceived loudness mostly comes from
mid-high frequency energy, consequently missing the extreme botom and top
won't make a large difference to the perceived loudness. With music the
frequency exrtemes are already well down on the mid frequencies, and add to
that the falling sensitivity of the ear, loudness won't chenge much by
adding the extremes. It will of course make a difference to the perceived
sound quality, but that's not what we were discussing, merely loudness.

S.

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
You *are* kidding - right...???

No. I assumed you'd have such a programme given the money you spend
on
mics etc and the amount of recordings you put on your site via a
computer.

No - missing the point as ever. What I was commenting on was the your
suggestion to someone who said he couldn't hear a difference that he
should *measure* it until he can...

My reasoning is it might give a clue as to what to listen for.


Why search for what you don't want?

All 'audio reproduction' is illusion by the time it reaches the ears...

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
I'd suggest you try again - it's at the top of this post. If you
can't
tell a resistor from a capacitor you should stick to low voltage
battery operated equipment. Valve equipment fiddled with by the
totally unskilled can be a fire risk.


Wake up FFS - try to spot when someone's taking the ****....

Very difficult with you Keith because so much you say and presumably
mean
would be considered 'taking the ****' by many.


You've also never twigged that I pay back in the same coin I'm paid - if
you perceive a high level of ****take in my responses perhaps you should
look at your own posts....



(Look up 'Socratic Irony and scale it down to *country boy* part
feigned/mostly real ignorance and you'll be in the right neck of the
woods... ;-)

Seems strange you like to poo-poo the acquiring of even vague
technical
knowledge - when it suits you.



I don't poo poo technical knowledge, I only choose to restrict how much
I'm prepared to let it upset my preferred state of Blissful Ignorance
and actively avoid acquiring (or making the effort to acquire) that
which I feel I don't need to know. Summat comes up I gotta know, I ask
(have done on here millions of times) or I Google it to death until I've
learned enough to get by.

(Ask yerself, Plowie - when did you *ever* see a capacitor with 'not a
resistor' stamped on it - couldn't you see even a glimmer of humour in
that one?)


Considering how much you mention the things
you've built.


You mean how much *you* mention the things I've built...??

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Serge Auckland" wrote


Indeed, and for a rigorous explanation I fully agree. However, what I
was trying to get across as that the perceived loudness mostly comes
from mid-high frequency energy, consequently missing the extreme botom
and top won't make a large difference to the perceived loudness. With
music the frequency exrtemes are already well down on the mid
frequencies, and add to that the falling sensitivity of the ear,
loudness won't chenge much by adding the extremes. It will of course
make a difference to the perceived sound quality, but that's not what
we were discussing, merely loudness.


Exactly.

As to 'sound quality' with and/or without (audible) frequency extremes -
I'm in the middle of making multiple amp/speaker comparisons to see if I
can break the SS/TL, triode/horns *given* right now and might post some
trax when I have got to the 'bottom line'!!

(All I can say so far is 'apples and apples' it ain't!!)

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Serge Auckland" wrote


I don't understand the statement about the woolly bass of the TLs, as
the IMFs have about the cleanest tightest bass immaginable.


Let me, at this point and for the moment, change that to 'woolliness in
the bass that is available from the TLs' - as I said earlier, much of
Classic *FM* is virtually unlistenable and I have to swap to a DAB
receiver to listen to it - there are a number of factors at play here
and it is probably not the speakers on their own...


Maybe they are
going sufficiently far down that they set off room resonances that
your horns don't go near.


Possibly - the thing that sent me off down the 'horns' trail in the
first place was being unable to find 'ordinary speakers' that didn't
boom too much in the room.


Have you tried them in your large room?


No, there's only so much heaving about I'm prepared to do - I expect
they would sound fine, as do the Ruarks which were *too much* for my
small room.

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
There is no 'missing top' on any of the FR drivers I use here.

Depends on what you mean by 'missing'. And top.


In this instance, revealing no lack of 'treble' in a direct comparison
between the Lowther FR drivers in the Fidelios and the 'wideband' TLS80s
with their various tweeters and supertweeters.....

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Considering how much you mention the things
you've built.

You mean how much *you* mention the things I've built...??

How would I know what you'd built if you hadn't mentioned it here? And
usually in all the gory detail? Not that I've any objection to that, but
why write about anything you don't want commented on?

--
*Two wrongs are only the beginning *

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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
There is no 'missing top' on any of the FR drivers I use here.

Depends on what you mean by 'missing'. And top.


In this instance, revealing no lack of 'treble' in a direct comparison
between the Lowther FR drivers in the Fidelios and the 'wideband' TLS80s
with their various tweeters and supertweeters.....

But how? Just by a simple listening test by yourself? If so, you should
make that clear. Also what prog material you're using. And don't things
like off axis response matter to you? They effect other things that you do
hear too.

--
*Where do forest rangers go to "get away from it all?"

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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Considering how much you mention the things
you've built.

You mean how much *you* mention the things I've built...??

How would I know what you'd built if you hadn't mentioned it here? And
usually in all the gory detail? Not that I've any objection to that,
but
why write about anything you don't want commented on?


Comment all you like but it seems to me you mention it more than I do...

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
There is no 'missing top' on any of the FR drivers I use here.

Depends on what you mean by 'missing'. And top.


In this instance, revealing no lack of 'treble' in a direct
comparison
between the Lowther FR drivers in the Fidelios and the 'wideband'
TLS80s
with their various tweeters and supertweeters.....

But how? Just by a simple listening test by yourself?



Yes, of course - it's all I'm interested in. When the figures have been
important Don and others have been kind enough to supply them, along
with pix of traces &c.



If so, you should
make that clear.


How can that not be clear? - Usually I supply a couple of clips like
these:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/FIDELIOSmp3.mp3

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/TLS80smp3.mp3


(The clue is in the track titles...)



Also what prog material you're using.


In that instance, I have no idea what it is - but what does it matter,
it's a straight comparison..??


And don't things
like off axis response matter to you? They effect other things that
you do
hear too.


Possibly/maybe - hardly an issue to me though, I listen to a lot of
stuff from the next room in any case!!

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Also what prog material you're using.


In that instance, I have no idea what it is - but what does it matter,
it's a straight comparison..??

Because if you choose something with no extreme HF it won't matter much if
the speakers can't handle it. Same with bass.

--
*Do infants enjoy infancy as much as adults enjoy adultery? *

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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Also what prog material you're using.


In that instance, I have no idea what it is - but what does it
matter,
it's a straight comparison..??

Because if you choose something with no extreme HF it won't matter
much if
the speakers can't handle it. Same with bass.


Fair comment, but what I am principally concerned with is 'normal music'
at fairly normal levels and remember I'm more vinyl than digital.
Anyway, I've posted a couple of fairly dire sweep tones (not at all easy
to do):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/FidelioSweep.wav

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/TLS80Sweep.wav


But I've no idea what they tell us, if anything at all..??

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Keith G" wrote

Fair comment, but what I am principally concerned with is 'normal
music' at fairly normal levels and remember I'm more vinyl than
digital. Anyway, I've posted a couple of fairly dire sweep tones (not
at all easy to do):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/FidelioSweep.wav

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/TLS80Sweep.wav



Forgot to say I left the announcement of the *next* track on as a
'reference point'...!!

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote

Fair comment, but what I am principally concerned with is 'normal music'
at fairly normal levels and remember I'm more vinyl than digital. Anyway,
I've posted a couple of fairly dire sweep tones (not at all easy to do):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/FidelioSweep.wav

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/TLS80Sweep.wav



Forgot to say I left the announcement of the *next* track on as a
'reference point'...!!

Are these a sine-wave sweep, white noise or pink noise? Reason I ask is that
the sweeps all droop towards the top end, the Fidelios fall away
drastically, so I'd like to know what is *should* look like.

S.

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote

Fair comment, but what I am principally concerned with is 'normal
music' at fairly normal levels and remember I'm more vinyl than
digital. Anyway, I've posted a couple of fairly dire sweep tones
(not at all easy to do):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/FidelioSweep.wav

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/TLS80Sweep.wav



Forgot to say I left the announcement of the *next* track on as a
'reference point'...!!

Are these a sine-wave sweep, white noise or pink noise? Reason I ask
is that the sweeps all droop towards the top end, the Fidelios fall
away drastically, so I'd like to know what is *should* look like.


No idea, Serge - track 44 on this disk:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/SoundCheck2.JPG

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article , Keith G
writes

"Serge Auckland" wrote


I don't understand the statement about the woolly bass of the TLs, as
the IMFs have about the cleanest tightest bass immaginable.


Let me, at this point and for the moment, change that to 'woolliness in
the bass that is available from the TLs' - as I said earlier, much of
Classic *FM* is virtually unlistenable

Its a bloody mess on FM because they set the processor to make it sound
like a 50's radiogram!..
--
Tony Sayer

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
writes

"Serge Auckland" wrote


I don't understand the statement about the woolly bass of the TLs,
as
the IMFs have about the cleanest tightest bass immaginable.


Let me, at this point and for the moment, change that to 'woolliness
in
the bass that is available from the TLs' - as I said earlier, much of
Classic *FM* is virtually unlistenable

Its a bloody mess on FM because they set the processor to make it
sound
like a 50's radiogram!..


So someone, somewhere thinks that what people want - the 'valve
sound'...??

;-)

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
**There is little anyone can do for seriously deluded individuals.
Single driver speakers (outside electrostatics) are utterly appalling.

Which electrostatic speaker uses a genuine single full range driver?

**Acoustats, for one.


BTW I'm agreeing with you about single driver speakers. ;-)

**How could any sane person not agree?


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
**There is little anyone can do for seriously deluded individuals.
Single driver speakers (outside electrostatics) are utterly appalling.

Which electrostatic speaker uses a genuine single full range driver?

**And Martin Logan. I'm sure there are others.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in
message


S'funny, we keep getting told how 'good amps' don't have
a sound....???

**Because that is a fact.

A fact that you may quickly contradict.

The ideal amplifier has no 'sound' of it's own.

true.

No amplifier is ideal.

True, but that doesn't mean that there are no amplifiers that are sonically
transparent.

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Serge Auckland" wrote in
message


My reply was to illustrate that a SET/horn system was
capable of playing louder than a high power SS/TL system.

Can we develop any generalized knowlege from that?

I would hope that nobody tries!


I made no comment about quality. Afaiac, I would probably
prefer the sound of a loudhailer to the SET/horn, but I
would have to hear them under double-blind
conditions.....

SETs can be bad enough that the difference is so gross that the DBT could be
dispensed with, if nobody objected.

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
.. .

"Keith G" wrote


Speaker improvements? Try getting hold of a pair of cheap, 30 year old
Tannoys/Rogers/Quads/KEFs, just for starters....

**Actually, 30 years is too tight a limitation. I did say 40 years. I say
this, because I modded a pair of B&W DM7-II speakers a few years back.
After replacing the old caps and inductors, they sounded very good
indeed. They employed many of the characteristics valued in modern
speakers. They STILL sound bloody good.


Well there you go - that's a start isn't it?

**They're not 40 years old. They were less than 30. Before that, even B&W
weren't building speakers which had the characteristics of most decent
modern speakers. The DM7 was, AFAIK, the first electrodynamic speaker with
truly modern characteristics.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au




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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
**They're not 40 years old. They were less than 30. Before that, even
B&W weren't building speakers which had the characteristics of most
decent modern speakers. The DM7 was, AFAIK, the first electrodynamic
speaker with truly modern characteristics.

I thought that accolade went to the Spendor BC1?

--
*What am I? Flypaper for freaks!?

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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
.. .

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote


I own a Marantz Model 18 Receiver, dating from 1968. It originally cost
US$1,200.00 and was the most power receiver on the planet, back then.
For it's time, it was quite a sophisticated product, employing full
complementary silicon outputs, relay protection system and other nifty
stuff. It was critically appraised by reviewers at the time and when I
purchased mine (ca: 1977) I was stunned at how much better it sounded
than many contemporary amplifiers of similar (60 Watts) or even more
power. Just for yuks, I recently compared it to a more modern Marantz
amplifier (cost around AUS$1,000.00). No comparison. The modern amp was
somewhat better sounding. And, allowing for inflation, the modern amp
was MUCH less expensive. Don't even get me started on loudspeakers. The
technology for designing speakers has improved in leaps and bounds over
the last 40 years.



S'funny, we keep getting told how 'good amps' don't have a sound....???

**Because that is a fact. The ideal amplifier has no 'sound' of it's own.
No amplifier is ideal.


Therefore no amplifier has no 'sound' of its own then?

**Nope. That's not what I said.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
.. .

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
.. .

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote


I own a Marantz Model 18 Receiver, dating from 1968. It originally
cost US$1,200.00 and was the most power receiver on the planet, back
then. For it's time, it was quite a sophisticated product, employing
full complementary silicon outputs, relay protection system and other
nifty stuff. It was critically appraised by reviewers at the time and
when I purchased mine (ca: 1977) I was stunned at how much better it
sounded than many contemporary amplifiers of similar (60 Watts) or
even more power. Just for yuks, I recently compared it to a more
modern Marantz amplifier (cost around AUS$1,000.00). No comparison.
The modern amp was somewhat better sounding. And, allowing for
inflation, the modern amp was MUCH less expensive. Don't even get me
started on loudspeakers. The technology for designing speakers has
improved in leaps and bounds over the last 40 years.



S'funny, we keep getting told how 'good amps' don't have a sound....???

**Because that is a fact. The ideal amplifier has no 'sound' of it's
own. No amplifier is ideal.


Therefore no amplifier has no 'sound' of its own then?

**Nope. That's not what I said.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

The *ideal* amplifier has no sound of its own, and no amplifier is ideal.
However, for many years now, amplifiers come awfully close to the ideal, and
consequently, except for the nittiest of nit-pickers, I subscribe to the
view that no (half-decent) amplifier has a sound of its own, and
consequently all sound the same.

Certain conditions apply, like operation below clipping into loads for which
the amplifier was designed, using music signals.

S.

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

The *ideal* amplifier has no sound of its own, and no amplifier is ideal.
However, for many years now, amplifiers come awfully close to the ideal, and
consequently, except for the nittiest of nit-pickers, I subscribe to the
view that no (half-decent) amplifier has a sound of its own, and
consequently all sound the same.

Certain conditions apply, like operation below clipping into loads for which
the amplifier was designed, using music signals.

S.



I've noticed that the Audiolab's I've got are rather boring in that
respect;!.

As are the ESL's..no fun at all.. Perhaps I ought nip over to Keith and
see if he's any spare horns I could prise off him at a decent price;)
--
Tony Sayer

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
writes
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
**They're not 40 years old. They were less than 30. Before that, even
B&W weren't building speakers which had the characteristics of most
decent modern speakers. The DM7 was, AFAIK, the first electrodynamic
speaker with truly modern characteristics.

I thought that accolade went to the Spendor BC1?


Not often I agree with my distinguished UK.D-I-Y DAB radio supporter
but on this occasion he is absolutely right;)....

If anybody's looking for a pair or the ones with the BBC amps in drop me
a mail off group I know someone who has some!..
--
Tony Sayer

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Serge Auckland" wrote


The *ideal* amplifier has no sound of its own, and no amplifier is
ideal.


Now you're doing it....


However, for many years now, amplifiers come awfully close to the
ideal, and consequently, except for the nittiest of nit-pickers, I
subscribe to the view that no (half-decent) amplifier has a sound of
its own, and consequently all sound the same.


Do you really believe that *deep down*? When others were challenged here
the '300 quid entry level' condition was swiftly applied although, tbh,
I think the speakers dictate the amp and the room (and other factors)
dictates the speakers - if that results in selecting an amp that 'reads
bad but sounds good' then San Fairy Anne.....



Certain conditions apply, like operation below clipping into loads for
which the amplifier was designed, using music signals.


Nice phrase - must remember that when 'low power, valve amp distortion
boys' start up....

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
The *ideal* amplifier has no sound of its own, and no amplifier is
ideal.
However, for many years now, amplifiers come awfully close to the
ideal, and
consequently, except for the nittiest of nit-pickers, I subscribe to
the
view that no (half-decent) amplifier has a sound of its own, and
consequently all sound the same.

Certain conditions apply, like operation below clipping into loads for
which
the amplifier was designed, using music signals.

S.



I've noticed that the Audiolab's I've got are rather boring in that
respect;!.


If 'tonally grey' (not my words) cuts it for you then you have my
blessing - enjoy!




As are the ESL's..no fun at all.. Perhaps I ought nip over to Keith
and
see if he's any spare horns I could prise off him at a decent price;)



If I had a pound for everyone who's been here, heard my 'horns' and gone
off and got them himself, I could almost afford to buy a CD....

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
.. .

"Keith G" wrote


S'funny, we keep getting told how 'good amps' don't have a
sound....???

**Because that is a fact. The ideal amplifier has no 'sound' of it's
own. No amplifier is ideal.


Therefore no amplifier has no 'sound' of its own then?

**Nope. That's not what I said.



It's what it looks like to me - your words (as above): "The ideal
amplifier has no 'sound' of it's own. No amplifier is ideal." - what
conclusion could be possibly drawn from that statement other than all
amplifiers are not ideal and therefore have a 'sound'...??

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

Serge Auckland wrote:
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
.. .
"Keith G" wrote in message
...
"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
.. .
"Keith G" wrote in message
...
"Trevor Wilson" wrote


I own a Marantz Model 18 Receiver, dating from 1968. It originally
cost US$1,200.00 and was the most power receiver on the planet, back
then. For it's time, it was quite a sophisticated product, employing
full complementary silicon outputs, relay protection system and other
nifty stuff. It was critically appraised by reviewers at the time and
when I purchased mine (ca: 1977) I was stunned at how much better it
sounded than many contemporary amplifiers of similar (60 Watts) or
even more power. Just for yuks, I recently compared it to a more
modern Marantz amplifier (cost around AUS$1,000.00). No comparison.
The modern amp was somewhat better sounding. And, allowing for
inflation, the modern amp was MUCH less expensive. Don't even get me
started on loudspeakers. The technology for designing speakers has
improved in leaps and bounds over the last 40 years.


S'funny, we keep getting told how 'good amps' don't have a sound....???
**Because that is a fact. The ideal amplifier has no 'sound' of it's
own. No amplifier is ideal.

Therefore no amplifier has no 'sound' of its own then?
**Nope. That's not what I said.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

The *ideal* amplifier has no sound of its own, and no amplifier is ideal.
However, for many years now, amplifiers come awfully close to the ideal, and
consequently, except for the nittiest of nit-pickers, I subscribe to the
view that no (half-decent) amplifier has a sound of its own, and
consequently all sound the same.

Certain conditions apply, like operation below clipping into loads for which
the amplifier was designed, using music signals.

S.



I simply don't get this. I've been using 5 SS amps of late (Quad 405,
Rose power amp, Cambridge AV, Behringer A500, and that within a Pure
mini system), as well as others on and off over the years, and I feel
each has 'a sound of its own'.

But this has been done-to-death in this NG. One thing I was never clear
on is the definition of 'half-decent'. One definition (Stewart Pinkerton
IIRC) was double power into half impedance, down to 2 Ohms (50/8; 100/4,
200/2 or something, plus some other stuff), but I've never seen a
sensible money amp that could come close.

Could you name the cheapest available new amplifier that sounds the same
as (say) your own at medium-high volume?

Just curious!

Rob

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
writes
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
**They're not 40 years old. They were less than 30. Before that, even
B&W weren't building speakers which had the characteristics of most
decent modern speakers. The DM7 was, AFAIK, the first electrodynamic
speaker with truly modern characteristics.

I thought that accolade went to the Spendor BC1?


Not often I agree with my distinguished UK.D-I-Y DAB radio supporter
but on this occasion he is absolutely right;)....

I feel someone has to put the majority view on a group like that. There
just isn't the outcry about its quality by the general public that some
would have you believe. So for those who haven't heard it, it may well
provide an answer to poor FM reception and the resultant distortions that
the detractors simply don't acknowledge. If and when there are definite
plans to drop the present FM service I will happily join any protest group.

If anybody's looking for a pair or the ones with the BBC amps in drop me
a mail off group I know someone who has some!..

Remember these generally aren't the same as domestic BC1s. Depending on
age they may only have an HF 1300 and not the additional HF 2000? 'super
tweeter'. The amp is also of rather lower power than most would use. Again
maybe only early ones had a mid range 'suck out' so beloved of BBC designs
of the day. In a nutshell, sound rather different from the contemporary
domestic version.

--
*I am a nobody, and nobody is perfect; therefore I am perfect*

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

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
writes
In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
writes
In article ,
Trevor Wilson wrote:
**They're not 40 years old. They were less than 30. Before that, even
B&W weren't building speakers which had the characteristics of most
decent modern speakers. The DM7 was, AFAIK, the first electrodynamic
speaker with truly modern characteristics.

I thought that accolade went to the Spendor BC1?


Not often I agree with my distinguished UK.D-I-Y DAB radio supporter
but on this occasion he is absolutely right;)....

I feel someone has to put the majority view on a group like that. There
just isn't the outcry about its quality by the general public that some
would have you believe. So for those who haven't heard it, it may well
provide an answer to poor FM reception and the resultant distortions that
the detractors simply don't acknowledge. If and when there are definite
plans to drop the present FM service I will happily join any protest group.

Yes of course. Like the new service from G-Cap media the Jazz..

128K MP2 Mono -- if thats progress then I don't want it!..


If anybody's looking for a pair or the ones with the BBC amps in drop me
a mail off group I know someone who has some!..

Remember these generally aren't the same as domestic BC1s. Depending on
age they may only have an HF 1300 and not the additional HF 2000? 'super
tweeter'. The amp is also of rather lower power than most would use. Again
maybe only early ones had a mid range 'suck out' so beloved of BBC designs
of the day. In a nutshell, sound rather different from the contemporary
domestic version.

Well What was good for the BBC in the good old days was good enough for
most all audiophiles;)
--
Tony Sayer

how good are class D amplifiers?
 

In article ,
tony sayer wrote:
Remember these generally aren't the same as domestic BC1s. Depending on
age they may only have an HF 1300 and not the additional HF 2000?
'super tweeter'. The amp is also of rather lower power than most would
use. Again maybe only early ones had a mid range 'suck out' so beloved
of BBC designs of the day. In a nutshell, sound rather different from
the contemporary domestic version.

Well What was good for the BBC in the good old days was good enough for
most all audiophiles;)

Not really true. What is pragmatic for broadcast use may well be bettered
at home.

I'll give just one example. When your favourite FM service started in the
'50s, some listeners complained of HF 'artifacts'. None of which were
'agreed' by the duty engineer. The answer was simple. The standard
monitoring speaker in use then - the LSU10, with a Parmeko dual concentric
driver, didn't reproduce much above 10 kHz. Or 10,000 cycles per second as
it was then. ;-) Auxiliary tweeters were bought from a retail components
shop (rather like Maplin used to be) and hastily bolted to the grills.

--
*Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

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