Audiophile?

[Vladimir]

I usually got that with too many open glass surfaces, tiles and letaher furniture. Bright and harsh. I suspected it was the speakers or the amp, but throwing some wool rugs and thicker curtains solved it. Don't know if you have the same situation.

 

[FennerMachine]

Nice suggestion. It might be room acoustics.

 

[Infiniteloop]

As for fidelity, I doubt most people would be able to tell the difference between the S8 and my Devialet 200 in a line matched blind test.

Quite possibly, or in fact the A500 that TrevC aludes to below. I'm pretty sure it would be just as good (in a line matched blind test). So yes, I still think valves are very low in VFM.

If I ever need an amp again, I'd probably simply go for a decent Yamaha AV receiver to be honest, something with all the bells and whistles. It too would be impossible to tell apart in a line matched blind test.

I'm sure the Behringer is a very fine Amp, particularly if you're on a budget. So it's somewhat surprising that it isn't seen as a 'reference standard' product (although that's what Behringer claim). If it's so good, why isn't everyone using one?

I had a Sony ES (can't remember which one) receiver some years ago. Did lots of things very well, including Dolby 5.1 surround sound (I bought it for my home cinema). Music through it was awful though.

Almost certainly mostly expectation bias.

Think about it, they make AV receivers, as you say for film. Some film soundtracks are amazing rich high dynamic range masterpieces. So do they sound awful? Nope.

Suddenly when it's only stereo music, it sounded "awful". Unlikely to be true to be honest.

So now you're calling me a liar?

Read what I said. You¨'re obviously intelligent. Did I at any point imply you were lying? No, I thought not.

How does "unlikely to be true" in response to my comment about music through that Amp being "awful" not constitute you calling me a liar?

Like I said, re-read what I said. In fact my opening gambit was the mention of expectation bias. That's what I believe it is.

Which by definition means you are not lying. You believe you hear the difference because of other factors in your brain other than auditory.

I have no doubt "some" people lie about these things, but in all honesty, I doubt many do. But one thing that we can't really trust, is our ears, especially when other senses are feeding the brain information.

Utter, utter rubbish.

 

[FennerMachine]

One place I can think of testing that is a local Hi-Fi dealer.

I demoed Quad and Roksan there, having this issue. I more recently demoed Marantz amps there, but Marantz sounded OK. They moved the demo room around between though. I could demo the same amps again to test if can hear the issue in the Roksan amp again.

 

[TrevC]

My speakers are rated at 88bd/w/m.

So for 72db I need about 0.03w, correct? For 67db I need only 0.008w.

Could crossover distortion be audible at those power levels?

Too many variables. Have a listen. It's very distinctive, not unlike a sticking speaker cone. If the sound remains smooth then you can't hear any.

 

[FennerMachine]

Maybe that is what I've heard with many ss amps then?

A harshness, or lack of smoothness to the music.

Across multiple genres of music, different sources, speakers, rooms.

Experienced this with some amps but not others.

 

[Vladimir]

Nothing special in Marantz amps that makes them soft and woolly. It's just a stereotype that drones on since the 70s and the silver monster receivers they made. You expect a Quad to be powerfull and transistory because Peter Walker publicly said many times how they engineer amps with math and physics and they don't do listening but measuring.

Now add the expectation bias, plus room acoustics and positioning, plus the current state of your metabolism, and you get too many variables to pinpoint anything to make valid conclusions.

The best thing to do is not bother with trivial things like listening for differences in amps and actually listen to how they make you feel when you listen to music and as an owner. Yes, including aesthetics, brand bias, power, etc. If expensive blingy valve amps make me enjoy music more, I'll stuff my snobish ego as much as I want. It's my money.

However, we are discussing absolutes here, laws of physics, not subjective worlds. When Infiniteloop says his 24Wpc valve amp is as good as a Devialet and better than a Behringer A500, he is talking absolutes about quality, not his subjective perception of things. I will never tell him that he should not enjoy his S8 as much as he wants.But when he cmes on a public forum to tell me his amp is better than some other amp, I get to poke him with a stick. It's fun!

 

[TrevC]

Maybe that is what I've heard with many ss amps then?

A harshness, or lack of smoothness to the music.

Across multiple genres of music, different sources, speakers, rooms.

Experienced this with some amps but not others.

Only at very low volumes, don't forget. I would have thought it unlikely, I've never heard it on a hifi amplifier.

 

[FennerMachine]

[font="ProximaNova-Light, arial, verdana, sans-serif"][style="font-size: 14pt"]My Marantz demo was half blind – I had no expectations.[/font][/style]

[font="ProximaNova-Light, arial, verdana, sans-serif"][style="font-size: 14pt"]I [/font][/style][font="ProximaNova-Light, arial, verdana, sans-serif"][style="font-size: 14pt"]get the other points though such as expectation bias, room, mood causing problems. Also, a more powerful ss amp is more powerful, hence being called more powerful.[/font][/style]

[font="ProximaNova-Light, arial, verdana, sans-serif"][style="font-size: 14pt"]I suppose if a valve amp works well with particular speakers at modest volumes then why not? But valves clearly have problems that well designed ss amps should solve, but not always.[/font][/style]

 

[pauln]

As for fidelity, I doubt most people would be able to tell the difference between the S8 and my Devialet 200 in a line matched blind test.

Quite possibly, or in fact the A500 that TrevC aludes to below. I'm pretty sure it would be just as good (in a line matched blind test). So yes, I still think valves are very low in VFM.

If I ever need an amp again, I'd probably simply go for a decent Yamaha AV receiver to be honest, something with all the bells and whistles. It too would be impossible to tell apart in a line matched blind test.

I'm sure the Behringer is a very fine Amp, particularly if you're on a budget. So it's somewhat surprising that it isn't seen as a 'reference standard' product (although that's what Behringer claim). If it's so good, why isn't everyone using one?

I had a Sony ES (can't remember which one) receiver some years ago. Did lots of things very well, including Dolby 5.1 surround sound (I bought it for my home cinema). Music through it was awful though.

Almost certainly mostly expectation bias.

Think about it, they make AV receivers, as you say for film. Some film soundtracks are amazing rich high dynamic range masterpieces. So do they sound awful? Nope.

Suddenly when it's only stereo music, it sounded "awful". Unlikely to be true to be honest.

So now you're calling me a liar?

Read what I said. You¨'re obviously intelligent. Did I at any point imply you were lying? No, I thought not.

How does "unlikely to be true" in response to my comment about music through that Amp being "awful" not constitute you calling me a liar?

Like I said, re-read what I said. In fact my opening gambit was the mention of expectation bias. That's what I believe it is.

Which by definition means you are not lying. You believe you hear the difference because of other factors in your brain other than auditory.

I have no doubt "some" people lie about these things, but in all honesty, I doubt many do. But one thing that we can't really trust, is our ears, especially when other senses are feeding the brain information.

Utter, utter rubbish.

That's that then. Years of research by dozens of scientists refuted by infinite loop's impeccable reasoning.

 

[fr0g]

As for fidelity, I doubt most people would be able to tell the difference between the S8 and my Devialet 200 in a line matched blind test.

Quite possibly, or in fact the A500 that TrevC aludes to below. I'm pretty sure it would be just as good (in a line matched blind test). So yes, I still think valves are very low in VFM.

If I ever need an amp again, I'd probably simply go for a decent Yamaha AV receiver to be honest, something with all the bells and whistles. It too would be impossible to tell apart in a line matched blind test.

I'm sure the Behringer is a very fine Amp, particularly if you're on a budget. So it's somewhat surprising that it isn't seen as a 'reference standard' product (although that's what Behringer claim). If it's so good, why isn't everyone using one?

I had a Sony ES (can't remember which one) receiver some years ago. Did lots of things very well, including Dolby 5.1 surround sound (I bought it for my home cinema). Music through it was awful though.

Almost certainly mostly expectation bias.

Think about it, they make AV receivers, as you say for film. Some film soundtracks are amazing rich high dynamic range masterpieces. So do they sound awful? Nope.

Suddenly when it's only stereo music, it sounded "awful". Unlikely to be true to be honest.

So now you're calling me a liar?

Read what I said. You¨'re obviously intelligent. Did I at any point imply you were lying? No, I thought not.

How does "unlikely to be true" in response to my comment about music through that Amp being "awful" not constitute you calling me a liar?

Like I said, re-read what I said. In fact my opening gambit was the mention of expectation bias. That's what I believe it is.

Which by definition means you are not lying. You believe you hear the difference because of other factors in your brain other than auditory.

I have no doubt "some" people lie about these things, but in all honesty, I doubt many do. But one thing that we can't really trust, is our ears, especially when other senses are feeding the brain information.

Utter, utter rubbish.

E

jit

 

[Infiniteloop]

Nothing special in Marantz amps that makes them soft and woolly. It's just a stereotype that drones on since the 70s and the silver monster receivers they made. You expect a Quad to be powerfull and transistory because Peter Walker publicly said many times how they engineer amps with math and physics and they don't do listening but measuring.

Now add the expectation bias, plus room acoustics and positioning, plus the current state of your metabolism, and you get too many variables to pinpoint anything to make valid conclusions.

The best thing to do is not bother with trivial things like listening for differences in amps and actually listen to how they make you feel when you listen to music and as an owner. Yes, including aesthetics, brand bias, power, etc. If expensive blingy valve amps make me enjoy music more, I'll stuff my snobish ego as much as I want. It's my money.

However, we are discussing absolutes here, laws of physics, not subjective worlds. When Infiniteloop says his 24Wpc valve amp is as good as a Devialet and better than a Behringer A500, he is talking absolutes about quality, not his subjective perception of things. I will never tell him that he should not enjoy his S8 as much as he wants.But when he cmes on a public forum to tell me his amp is better than some other amp, I get to poke him with a stick. It's fun!

Poke all you want. It changes nothing.

 

[fr0g]

As for fidelity, I doubt most people would be able to tell the difference between the S8 and my Devialet 200 in a line matched blind test.

Quite possibly, or in fact the A500 that TrevC aludes to below. I'm pretty sure it would be just as good (in a line matched blind test). So yes, I still think valves are very low in VFM.

If I ever need an amp again, I'd probably simply go for a decent Yamaha AV receiver to be honest, something with all the bells and whistles. It too would be impossible to tell apart in a line matched blind test.

I'm sure the Behringer is a very fine Amp, particularly if you're on a budget. So it's somewhat surprising that it isn't seen as a 'reference standard' product (although that's what Behringer claim). If it's so good, why isn't everyone using one?

I had a Sony ES (can't remember which one) receiver some years ago. Did lots of things very well, including Dolby 5.1 surround sound (I bought it for my home cinema). Music through it was awful though.

Almost certainly mostly expectation bias.

Think about it, they make AV receivers, as you say for film. Some film soundtracks are amazing rich high dynamic range masterpieces. So do they sound awful? Nope.

Suddenly when it's only stereo music, it sounded "awful". Unlikely to be true to be honest.

So now you're calling me a liar?

Read what I said. You¨'re obviously intelligent. Did I at any point imply you were lying? No, I thought not.

How does "unlikely to be true" in response to my comment about music through that Amp being "awful" not constitute you calling me a liar?

Like I said, re-read what I said. In fact my opening gambit was the mention of expectation bias. That's what I believe it is.

Which by definition means you are not lying. You believe you hear the difference because of other factors in your brain other than auditory.

I have no doubt "some" people lie about these things, but in all honesty, I doubt many do. But one thing that we can't really trust, is our ears, especially when other senses are feeding the brain information.

Utter, utter rubbish.

That's that then. Years of research by dozens of scientists refuted by infinite loop's impeccable reasoning.

Indeed.

 

[Infiniteloop]

As for fidelity, I doubt most people would be able to tell the difference between the S8 and my Devialet 200 in a line matched blind test.

Quite possibly, or in fact the A500 that TrevC aludes to below. I'm pretty sure it would be just as good (in a line matched blind test). So yes, I still think valves are very low in VFM.

If I ever need an amp again, I'd probably simply go for a decent Yamaha AV receiver to be honest, something with all the bells and whistles. It too would be impossible to tell apart in a line matched blind test.

I'm sure the Behringer is a very fine Amp, particularly if you're on a budget. So it's somewhat surprising that it isn't seen as a 'reference standard' product (although that's what Behringer claim). If it's so good, why isn't everyone using one?

I had a Sony ES (can't remember which one) receiver some years ago. Did lots of things very well, including Dolby 5.1 surround sound (I bought it for my home cinema). Music through it was awful though.

Almost certainly mostly expectation bias.

Think about it, they make AV receivers, as you say for film. Some film soundtracks are amazing rich high dynamic range masterpieces. So do they sound awful? Nope.

Suddenly when it's only stereo music, it sounded "awful". Unlikely to be true to be honest.

So now you're calling me a liar?

Read what I said. You¨'re obviously intelligent. Did I at any point imply you were lying? No, I thought not.

How does "unlikely to be true" in response to my comment about music through that Amp being "awful" not constitute you calling me a liar?

Like I said, re-read what I said. In fact my opening gambit was the mention of expectation bias. That's what I believe it is.

Which by definition means you are not lying. You believe you hear the difference because of other factors in your brain other than auditory.

I have no doubt "some" people lie about these things, but in all honesty, I doubt many do. But one thing that we can't really trust, is our ears, especially when other senses are feeding the brain information.

Utter, utter rubbish.

E

jit

So are you saying that you don't hear differences between Amplifiers? - If you don't, could it be that because you seem to believe that specs say it all, you are expecting them all to sound the same and so to your ears they do? - in other words, 'expectation bias'?

Name calling is pretty childish and is usually reseved for those who have run out of argument.

 

[manicm]

Not trusting your ears is rubbish, because sometimes you can't even rely on memory. So fr0g et al pick on ears to suit their specific arguments. In fact memory would be the biggest limiting factor in any testing.

 

[Vladimir]

In fact memory would be the biggest limiting factor in any testing.

Indeed.

 

[CnoEvil]

Crossover distortion is only audible at very low power outputs, so it isn't really a problem to forward bias the output stage enough to make it inaudible. Have you heard it? You used to get it on cheap radios. It produces a scratchy sound.

My favorite amps have all been full Class A. My next favorite amps have been ones that are known to run witha high bias in Class A and Arcam's Class G. The reason for this may well be the removal of Crossover distortion, but I certainly can't prove it....though it's a reasonable assertion.

 

[Vladimir]

I think the benefits of Class A topology are indirect and may not have anything to do with the reduced crossover distortion old men claim they hear louder than turkey matting calls.

When you build a class A amp you really can't cheapen out on components and do a sloppy job. The margins are very tight, components need to be closely matched and everything overengineered to put up with the abuse of constantly being turned fully on at oven baking temperatures. Good luck building a 30W JLH or Hiraga amp otherwise.

 

[Vladimir]

*mating calls, pardon my misspelling.

 

[CnoEvil]

I think the benefits of Class A topology are indirect and may not have anything to do with the reduced crossover distortion old men claim they hear louder than turkey matting calls.

When you build a class A amp you really can't cheapen out on components and do a sloppy job. The margins are very tight, components need to be closely matched and everything overengineered to put up with the abuse of constantly being turned fully on at oven baking temperatures. Good luck building a 30W JLH or Hiraga amp otherwise.

That is a fair point but I have also heard some pretty expensive AB amps and would still take my 35i over all of them (even though the 35i was cheaper).

 

[Vladimir]

I think the benefits of Class A topology are indirect and may not have anything to do with the reduced crossover distortion old men claim they hear louder than turkey matting calls.

When you build a class A amp you really can't cheapen out on components and do a sloppy job. The margins are very tight, components need to be closely matched and everything overengineered to put up with the abuse of constantly being turned fully on at oven baking temperatures. Good luck building a 30W JLH or Hiraga amp otherwise.

That is a fair point but I have also heard some pretty expensive AB amps and would still take my 35i over all of them (even though the 35i was cheaper).

It's all halucinations. You like your 35i due to your spouse secretly dosing you with N,N-Dimethyltryptamine. Or you could be an absinthe afficionado, we will never know. *unknw*

 

[Vladimir]

Is it Sunday yet?

 

[CnoEvil]

I think the benefits of Class A topology are indirect and may not have anything to do with the reduced crossover distortion old men claim they hear louder than turkey matting calls.

When you build a class A amp you really can't cheapen out on components and do a sloppy job. The margins are very tight, components need to be closely matched and everything overengineered to put up with the abuse of constantly being turned fully on at oven baking temperatures. Good luck building a 30W JLH or Hiraga amp otherwise.

That is a fair point but I have also heard some pretty expensive AB amps and would still take my 35i over all of them (even though the 35i was cheaper).

It's all halucinations. You like your 35i due to your spouse secretly dosing you with N,N-Dimethyltryptamine. Or you could be an absinthe afficionado, we will never know. *unknw*

*crazy* *wacko* *music2* *dirol*

 

[CnoEvil]

I think the benefits of Class A topology are indirect and may not have anything to do with the reduced crossover distortion old men claim they hear louder than turkey matting calls.

When you build a class A amp you really can't cheapen out on components and do a sloppy job. The margins are very tight, components need to be closely matched and everything overengineered to put up with the abuse of constantly being turned fully on at oven baking temperatures. Good luck building a 30W JLH or Hiraga amp otherwise.

That is a fair point but I have also heard some pretty expensive AB amps and would still take my 35i over all of them (even though the 35i was cheaper).

It's all halucinations. You like your 35i due to your spouse secretly dosing you with N,N-Dimethyltryptamine. Or you could be an absinthe afficionado, we will never know. *unknw*

*crazy* *wacko* *music2* *dirol*

 

[Infiniteloop]

I think the benefits of Class A topology are indirect and may not have anything to do with the reduced crossover distortion old men claim they hear louder than turkey matting calls.

When you build a class A amp you really can't cheapen out on components and do a sloppy job. The margins are very tight, components need to be closely matched and everything overengineered to put up with the abuse of constantly being turned fully on at oven baking temperatures. Good luck building a 30W JLH or Hiraga amp otherwise.

It's the same when building an 845 Valve Amp.