Do more expensive amplifiers make a difference?

[busb]

What can you hear that can't be measured?

In terms of hifi the sound stage, scale the 3dness of the image, the depth of that image produced between the two speakers and quite a bit more actually.

Anyhoo, can someone explain the point of level matching two amps in any sort of test what would that prove, its like Top Gear (a popular motoring program on the BBC) testing cars on its tracks with the proviso they must achieve 30mph in no less and no more than 10secs and then complete the remainder of the lap at 30mph no more no less - the times would all be the same be it a f1 car or a 1970's austin allegro..... thats stupid.

That Harbeth test is a joke a laweyer must have written it up.

If you geninly believe all amps sound the same or differences are subtle at "a fixed level" ...seriously you should buy yourself a transistor radio or a mono cassette recorder and live long and prosper playing them at fixed levels. Play your kit at what ever levels you want but don't presume your budget amp can compare to more exotic kit. quality speakers WILL expose your budget equ - amps do not sound the same.

CNOevil speaks sense, listen, trust your ears and while I don't always agree with WHFI's verdict their method for testing kit is the best way.

Oh, I'm confident I could pass ABX test's ......I'd put money on it, a good amount too.

Everyone believes that they can pass ABX tests until they fail one. Although I suspect I'm banging my head needlessly - it's not your ears that fool you - it's your brain that does that. Just like everyone else that listens to music. If your brain didn't do such a good job at fooling you, music would sound incomprehensible! All our senses get "fooled" - they wouldn't work otherwise!

 

[manicm]

Mellifluousness. Don't forget the mellifluousness.

....and euphoniousness, but certainly melliflousness.

Just you wait, they'll devise measurements for these things too :rofl:

 

[Frank Harvey]

Everyone believes that they can pass ABX tests until they fail one. Although I suspect I'm banging my head needlessly - it's not your ears that fool you - it's your brain that does that. Just like everyone else that listens to music. If your brain didn't do such a good job at fooling you, music would sound incomprehensible! All our senses get "fooled" - they wouldn't work otherwise!

Maybe we should all buy a £50 system from Argos and be done with it, because it sounds like we're all letting ourselves be fooled and are too stupid to know.

 

[plastic penguin]

Well I do keep offering you my PMCs...

I know - you're a gentleman.

You really don't fully appreciate what you have until its gone. :shhh:

 

[John Duncan]

They paved paradise and put up, well, a Tescos.

 

[DocG]

We all know this forum has software to edit out bad language. What's the chances of WHF developing a BS detector.

They have an emoticon. That's a start! It goes like :hs: (I know a horse isn't a bull, but it's good enough for me )

 

[Covenanter]

What can you hear that can't be measured?

In terms of hifi the sound stage, scale the 3dness of the image, the depth of that image produced between the two speakers and quite a bit more actually.

Anyhoo, can someone explain the point of level matching two amps in any sort of test what would that prove, its like Top Gear (a popular motoring program on the BBC) testing cars on its tracks with the proviso they must achieve 30mph in no less and no more than 10secs and then complete the remainder of the lap at 30mph no more no less - the times would all be the same be it a f1 car or a 1970's austin allegro..... thats stupid.

That Harbeth test is a joke a laweyer must have written it up.

If you geninly believe all amps sound the same or differences are subtle at "a fixed level" ...seriously you should buy yourself a transistor radio or a mono cassette recorder and live long and prosper playing them at fixed levels. Play your kit at what ever levels you want but don't presume your budget amp can compare to more exotic kit. quality speakers WILL expose your budget equ - amps do not sound the same.

CNOevil speaks sense, listen, trust your ears and while I don't always agree with WHFI's verdict their method for testing kit is the best way.

Oh, I'm confident I could pass ABX test's ......I'd put money on it, a good amount too.

Everyone believes that they can pass ABX tests until they fail one. Although I suspect I'm banging my head needlessly - it's not your ears that fool you - it's your brain that does that. Just like everyone else that listens to music. If your brain didn't do such a good job at fooling you, music would sound incomprehensible! All our senses get "fooled" - they wouldn't work otherwise!

I think you are probably wasting your time. There are a lot of people who post here who truly believe that their ears/brains can't be fooled.

Chris

 

[TrevC]

Everyone believes that they can pass ABX tests until they fail one. Although I suspect I'm banging my head needlessly - it's not your ears that fool you - it's your brain that does that. Just like everyone else that listens to music. If your brain didn't do such a good job at fooling you, music would sound incomprehensible! All our senses get "fooled" - they wouldn't work otherwise!

Maybe we should all buy a £50 system from Argos and be done with it, because it sounds like we're all letting ourselves be fooled and are too stupid to know.

Well, if you replaced the cheap speakers with good ones you might be surprised....

 

[Electro]

What can you hear that can't be measured?

In terms of hifi the sound stage, scale the 3dness of the image, the depth of that image produced between the two speakers and quite a bit more actually.

Anyhoo, can someone explain the point of level matching two amps in any sort of test what would that prove, its like Top Gear (a popular motoring program on the BBC) testing cars on its tracks with the proviso they must achieve 30mph in no less and no more than 10secs and then complete the remainder of the lap at 30mph no more no less - the times would all be the same be it a f1 car or a 1970's austin allegro..... thats stupid.

That Harbeth test is a joke a laweyer must have written it up.

If you geninly believe all amps sound the same or differences are subtle at "a fixed level" ...seriously you should buy yourself a transistor radio or a mono cassette recorder and live long and prosper playing them at fixed levels. Play your kit at what ever levels you want but don't presume your budget amp can compare to more exotic kit. quality speakers WILL expose your budget equ - amps do not sound the same.

CNOevil speaks sense, listen, trust your ears and while I don't always agree with WHFI's verdict their method for testing kit is the best way.

Oh, I'm confident I could pass ABX test's ......I'd put money on it, a good amount too.

Everyone believes that they can pass ABX tests until they fail one. Although I suspect I'm banging my head needlessly - it's not your ears that fool you - it's your brain that does that. Just like everyone else that listens to music. If your brain didn't do such a good job at fooling you, music would sound incomprehensible! All our senses get "fooled" - they wouldn't work otherwise!

Surely the better the Hifi system the less your brain needs to fool which allows you to relax and enjoy without your brain having to work so hard fooling you .

This may be why people want to upgrade their systems from one that produces an almost incomprehensible sound to one that does not make your brain hurt .

The less you are fooled the better you feel ( hear )

 

[BigH]

What can you hear that can't be measured?

In terms of hifi the sound stage, scale the 3dness of the image, the depth of that image produced between the two speakers and quite a bit more actually.

Anyhoo, can someone explain the point of level matching two amps in any sort of test what would that prove, its like Top Gear (a popular motoring program on the BBC) testing cars on its tracks with the proviso they must achieve 30mph in no less and no more than 10secs and then complete the remainder of the lap at 30mph no more no less - the times would all be the same be it a f1 car or a 1970's austin allegro..... thats stupid.

That Harbeth test is a joke a laweyer must have written it up.

If you geninly believe all amps sound the same or differences are subtle at "a fixed level" ...seriously you should buy yourself a transistor radio or a mono cassette recorder and live long and prosper playing them at fixed levels. Play your kit at what ever levels you want but don't presume your budget amp can compare to more exotic kit. quality speakers WILL expose your budget equ - amps do not sound the same.

CNOevil speaks sense, listen, trust your ears and while I don't always agree with WHFI's verdict their method for testing kit is the best way.

Oh, I'm confident I could pass ABX test's ......I'd put money on it, a good amount too.

Everyone believes that they can pass ABX tests until they fail one. Although I suspect I'm banging my head needlessly - it's not your ears that fool you - it's your brain that does that. Just like everyone else that listens to music. If your brain didn't do such a good job at fooling you, music would sound incomprehensible! All our senses get "fooled" - they wouldn't work otherwise!

Surely the better the Hifi system the less your brain needs to fool which allows you to relax and enjoy without your brain having to work so hard fooling you .

This may be why people want to upgrade their systems from one that produces an almost incomprehensible sound to one that does not make your brain hurt .

The less you are fooled the better you feel ( hear )

But if it does not sound good on your expensive system then your brain will hurt. Best to stick to a cheap system and then not worry.

 

[Frank Harvey]

Just sell your expensive stuff, buy something cheap, expect it to sound better, and you're sorted

 

[plastic penguin]

They paved paradise and put up, well, a Tescos.

Yeah, but the Taxi is in for repairs.

 

[busb]

Everyone believes that they can pass ABX tests until they fail one. Although I suspect I'm banging my head needlessly - it's not your ears that fool you - it's your brain that does that. Just like everyone else that listens to music. If your brain didn't do such a good job at fooling you, music would sound incomprehensible! All our senses get "fooled" - they wouldn't work otherwise!

Maybe we should all buy a £50 system from Argos and be done with it, because it sounds like we're all letting ourselves be fooled and are too stupid to know.

I never used the term stupid nor implied it. If I had, it would apply to myself in equal measure. Instead of putting words into my mouth David, please try to understand differing points of view to your own - not asking for agreement but to not deliberately misread. The fact our brains are "fooled" is not down to our stupidity but how miraculous nature is.

Take sight as an example. we "see" it as being like a movie being played in out heads. Technically that is true but our brains do a lot of very clever processing or filtering of uneeded information quite automatically - if it didn't filter so much out - driving a car or riding a bike would be virtually impossible because we would be completely over-whelmedb- it would be too much imformation. Same with hearing. We are at a party talking to some guests - our phone rings so we answer it & carry out a conversation with the person on the other end, the other guests work out who it is & interject, we translate their ideas while we listen to both but manage to filter out the background conversations. Again, all this happens seamlessly without thinking about the process. Our brains are doing a huge amount of processing in near real-time. To me this is an amazing feat we do day-in, day-out so even the stupid amounst us are far from stupid.

As for music, we can quite naturally listen to a familar & much loved piece of music & "hear" different aspects or nuances on each listen. We may play another song to discover we are not in the mood for it. Our appreciation shifts according to our emotional state, mood & wakefulness even if we prefer to blame it poor mains quality.

David, if you read my initial post in this thread, you'd have read that I thought that better amplifiers do make a big difference & was agreeing with your point that expensive doesn't always mean better. So, to suggest I stated or imply spending so little when I splashed out £1400 on a 2nd hand power amp last Christmas does not add up.

 

[TrevC]

SETs are probably not the best examples to use in any amplifier comparison.

The biggest issue is the generally high output impedance that causes all but the simplest of loudspeakers to modify the amplifiers frequency response to degrees that would nomally be considered unacceptable in any other amplifier.

Probably more sensible to use push-pull, either triode or pentode. In the original quad challenge, Peter Walker set up the 8 watt II amplifier, the 30 watt 303 and the 100 watt 405, driving ELS57s at 'normal' levels and no one could tell the difference.

That is valve push-pull, class AB and the current dumper, all very different designs.

Yes the high output impedance and high damping factor may well alter the frequency response in certain areas by a db or two. With some speakers that might be a modification in the right direction. With others it will be a modification in the wrong direction.

I have a SET valve amp and a push pull valve amp. Both use 300b valves. I strongly prefer the SET. More detailed, better clarity, more transparent. I am confident that I could them apart in a blind ABX test with my source and my speakers. I don't see anything sensible about using my push pull amplifer when it sounds worse than my SET.

With a bit of eq you can make any amp sound similar to a SET. Not the same, because the SET produces a load of distortion.

 

[TrevC]

Mellifluousness. Don't forget the mellifluousness.

....and euphoniousness, but certainly melliflousness.

Just you wait, they'll devise measurements for these things too :rofl:

What are they?

 

[davedotco]

With a bit of eq you can make any amp sound similar to a SET. Not the same, because the SET produces a load of distortion.

Are you Bob Carver and can I claim my £5....... :shhh:

 

[floyd droid]

Ha ha, nice one Davedotco.

 

[davedotco]

Ha ha, nice one Davedotco.

Met Bob a few times back in the 70's, pre the Stereophile challenge, when he was selling a whole bunch of his Phase Linear 700 power amplifiers to, appropriately enough, Pink Floyd.

 

[KidKomet]

Everyone believes that they can pass ABX tests until they fail one. Although I suspect I'm banging my head needlessly - it's not your ears that fool you - it's your brain that does that. Just like everyone else that listens to music. If your brain didn't do such a good job at fooling you, music would sound incomprehensible! All our senses get "fooled" - they wouldn't work otherwise!

Maybe we should all buy a £50 system from Argos and be done with it, because it sounds like we're all letting ourselves be fooled and are too stupid to know.

Y'know David, I walk past Frank Harvey every day but it's usually late and you're closed. I feel like I owe it to you to walk past when you're open, come in, shake your hand a buy you a beer for this comment.

 

[KidKomet]

.

 

[phydeau]

+1

 

[altruistic.lemon]

busb has a point.

Really, pouring money into the electronics is a waste. Providing the amp is powerful suitable, in terms of the specifications, for the speakers, then spending more on high end amps isn't going to make a world of difference at all. Keeping an inexpensive amp and pouring money into the speakers will, however, make a massive difference.

 

[DocG]

busb has a point.

Really, pouring money into the electronics is a waste. Providing the amp is powerful suitable, in terms of the specifications, for the speakers, then spending more on high end amps isn't going to make a world of difference at all. Keeping an inexpensive amp and pouring money into the speakers will, however, make a massive difference.

Yes, but the better, more expensive speakers are often more demanding in the power and current dept. So if you want your amplifier to control them properly, it must be up to it (Watts and amps). And high current amplifiers tend to be expensive.

Magnepan is one example of a speaker that asks for a relatively solid (and often expensive) amplifier.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

I agree they can be difficult loads, but something like a NAD C356BEE would be fine. The point is that any amp which matches speaker requirements will drive said speakers adequately, irrespective of price.

 

[Covenanter]

busb has a point.

Really, pouring money into the electronics is a waste. Providing the amp is powerful suitable, in terms of the specifications, for the speakers, then spending more on high end amps isn't going to make a world of difference at all. Keeping an inexpensive amp and pouring money into the speakers will, however, make a massive difference.

+1 - If this thread was "Do more expensive peakers make a difference?" I don't think there would be much controversy!

Chris