If all well designed amplifiers are difficult to distinguish

[FennerMachine]

If all well designed amplifiers are difficult to distinguish when level matched, what are considered well designed amplifiers?

How does a £100.00 mass produced amplifier compare to a £500.00, £1000.00 etc. amplifier?

Both in terms of measurements and ability to drive real speakers loads that may not have been measured?

I have demoed, used in demo's and/or owned quite a few amplifiers.

One demo that I remember quite well from about 15 years ago was between Denon's then flagship £2500 AVC amp and Densen pre/power stereo amps, about £1800.00. Using B&W CDM 1NT speakers.

Going from Denon to Densen I could hear NO difference. They both sounded great. But going back to the Denon I noticed that the sound stage changed. The Denon sounded flat, you could tell that the music was coming from the other end of the room.

So both amplifiers sounded almost identical, except for projecting the music into the room.

What measurements/distortion type could account for this?

Why did I not notice until switching back to the Denon?

At what point is an amplifier good enough that for average domestic use (small/medium room, reasonable but not excessive volume) it is pointless to spend more?

 

[Anderson]

Oh this is good discussion

I think that as long as your amp was built adequately, is a reasonable price (couple hundred to max one thousand), has all the features you want or need and measures well then you should be happy.

 

[dim_span]

something that I've always wanted to know ... what plays the biggest part in imaging? (amp, speakers or source?)

 

[chebby]

something that I've always wanted to know ... what plays the biggest part in imaging? (amp, speakers or source?)

Recording.

(If my small collection of 'RCA Living Stereo' hybrid SACD/CDs are anything to go by.)

 

[CnoEvil]

something that I've always wanted to know ... what plays the biggest part in imaging? (amp, speakers or source?)

IMO. The imaging is in the recording, and the system can only degrade it eg. by poor positioning of speakers; loose, badly controlled bass (amp); poor speaker design, unhelpful room acoustics and a source that doesn't pass on all the ambient info.

 

[Vladimir]

 

[bigfish786]

Over a long long time, I've heard a gentle improvement in dynamics as the price went up, to the point now where I feel I have the best amp I could possibly have. With all the power and precision I need.

i don't see a weakness in my setup at all. More importantly, I don't hear one either.

 

[iQ Speakers]

I think your post is pretty spot on. I think there is vast differance between a budget amp circa £100-300 and a good £1000-1300 amp more than that it's very subtle in sound quality. Above £2500 I have no real home experience. Having said that there are odd exeptions one being my new Abrahamsen V20 Up sold direct from manufacture at £690 delivered which punches well above its weight which is considerable!

 

[iQ Speakers]

And yes the recording has a huge influence on proceedings.

 

[dim_span]

something that I've always wanted to know ... what plays the biggest part in imaging? (amp, speakers or source?)

IMO. The imaging is in the recording, and the system can only degrade it eg. by poor positioning of speakers; loose, badly controlled bass (amp); poor speaker design, unhelpful room acoustics and a source that doesn't pass on all the ambient info.

so why do some people say certain speakers 'image well' .... or the cd player or amp creates good imaging etc?

are we saying that all amps, cd players and speakers have the same imaging? (the recordings do the rest)

 

[radiorog]

I presume good imaging is directly linked to good separation of instruments. I demoed a brio r and a audiolab 8200a side by side and the latter had a hugely different/audibly better separation and soundstage. I presumed it was the extra 10w that made the important difference. Was testing with 4ohm speakers.

 

[CnoEvil]

something that I've always wanted to know ... what plays the biggest part in imaging? (amp, speakers or source?)

IMO. The imaging is in the recording, and the system can only degrade it eg. by poor positioning of speakers; loose, badly controlled bass (amp); poor speaker design, unhelpful room acoustics and a source that doesn't pass on all the ambient info.

so why do some people say certain speakers 'image well'....

.....for the reasons I explained above. If for example, the speakers have slow ponderous bass (due to overhang etc.), the imaging will be compromised. Remember, imaging is an illusion which is easily shattered.

Imaging from a system is a bit like looking at your reflection in water....the water has to be completely still for the reflection to be sharp; but if the surface of the water starts getting wavey, the reflection is harder to make out.

 

[SteveR750]

Distortion. An amp should add nothing more than gain. The problem is the lab specs are not what you get when your amp drives a real speaker, hence "matching". In theory, an expensive amp is better designed to cope with varying loads without distortion, but cost and price often have little relationship in consumer products. They don't all sound the same because costs dictate compromises, which are revealed when you hook up expensive speakers to a cheapo amp. Great sounding speakers are rarely as easy to drive as those compromised designed to a price budget.

 

[JoelSim]

This is a bit of a silly thread. It's like saying all wine tastes the same except for the differences, or an XR3i is the same as a Ferrari beacuse they both go fast.

 

[Vladimir]

Many wines taste different, even the ones that came from the same bottle.

 

[Frank Harvey]

.

 

[FennerMachine]

After reading several recent threads, doing some research and thinking about past demo's of amplifiers I am trying to justify spending £1700.00 on a new amp...

Then reading about Harbeth using a £3000.00 amplifier for their demo at the Bristol show after saying (paraphrasing here) that well designed amps level match and not clipping/distorting sound the same, what is classed as a well designed amp? A lower powered amp was not powerful enough to fill the room.

Surely a £1000.00 Naim would out perform and sound better than a £100.00 amp?

Or a £2000.00 valve amp will out perform a 7.1 channel £500.00 solid state AV amp for stereo?

But at some point, maybe £2000.00 for example, going higher up the model range brings less improvement and its more difficult to justify?

Conversely, going lower/cheaper and you hit the opposite problem where the amp is not good enough to drive the speakers properly.

So, saying that all well made amplifiers sound the same when level matched might be true but is almost pointless when applied to real life.

 

[Happy_Listener]

This is a bit of a silly thread. It's like saying all wine tastes the same except for the differences, or an XR3i is the same as a Ferrari beacuse they both go fast.

+1 to JoelSim's comment

 

[Covenanter]

Whilst I think from personal experience that it isn't true, what I do beleive is that the amplifier, if adequate for its task, is probably the major component that makes the least difference to the overall sound. By "adequate for its task" I mean able to drive the speakers to the desired level without clipping.

Chris

 

[Jota180]

After reading several recent threads, doing some research and thinking about past demo's of amplifiers I am trying to justify spending £1700.00 on a new amp...

Then reading about Harbeth using a £3000.00 amplifier for their demo at the Bristol show after saying (paraphrasing here) that well designed amps level match and not clipping/distorting sound the same, what is classed as a well designed amp? A lower powered amp was not powerful enough to fill the room.

Surely a £1000.00 Naim would out perform and sound better than a £100.00 amp?

Or a £2000.00 valve amp will out perform a 7.1 channel £500.00 solid state AV amp for stereo?

But at some point, maybe £2000.00 for example, going higher up the model range brings less improvement and its more difficult to justify?

Conversely, going lower/cheaper and you hit the opposite problem where the amp is not good enough to drive the speakers properly.

So, saying that all well made amplifiers sound the same when level matched might be true but is almost pointless when applied to real life.

The test you're talking about is pretty specific and it says all amplifiers will sound much the same up to the point they start clipping. The clipping point is key here so if you're going to test a cheapo, low powered amp against a monster amp on tough to drive speakers you can only do the test up to the point the cheapo starts clipping. The cheapo will then determine how loud you can play the monster. (they have to be level matched for this test)

The fundamental question should be what amplifier will give me clean, unclipped sound at the SPL levels I want to listen to in my room. That means looking at your speakers requirements and the size of your room and how loud you're gonna play them.

There's little point buying an amplifier that will not give you what you want.

 

[Jota180]

This is a bit of a silly thread. It's like saying all wine tastes the same except for the differences, or an XR3i is the same as a Ferrari beacuse they both go fast.

There's also the fact that you can add red food colouring to white wine then put it in the same bottle as a red and people will think they're drinking a red. This has been done before you ask! To wine 'experts' no less.

Put a high price tag on something and many people automatically think one thing - quality, but it aint necessarily so.

Human beings are so easily fooled and yet far too many think they are immune to such tricks but in reality these tricks just play on the way the human brain works.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

something that I've always wanted to know ... what plays the biggest part in imaging? (amp, speakers or source?)?

IMO. The imaging is in the recording, and the system can only degrade it eg. by poor positioning of speakers; loose, badly controlled bass (amp); poor speaker design,  unhelpful room acoustics  and a source that doesn't pass on all the ambient info.

That makes no sense.

If nothing is moved only a single component is changed what then?

 

[Thompsonuxb]

I actually think this is a pretty clever thread. One in which the naysayers those of the 'it all sounds the same...' gang should think carefully about their replys.

Amps do not sound the same.

When input sensitivity - we are talking 0.11mV to 0.99mV - can affect how an amp presents its sound, when a DSP can manipulate the sound you hear - it's clear the electrical signal and it's 'cargo' is not the robust, unchangeable thing many are suggesting....excuses.

Clarity/resolution, bass sound stage etc can be altered - it's only logical the sum of an amps parts will make the difference.

And 'Level matching' is stupid, when comparing performance.

This is a bit of a silly thread. It's like saying all wine tastes the same except for the differences, or an XR3i is the same as a Ferrari beacuse they both go fast.

 

[MeanandGreen]

I really wish you put quotes at the top of your posts. I often read your posts thinking "what's he talking about?" Then I get to the bottom of your post and realise who and what you are talking to/about.

It gets confusing and spoils the flow of the thread reading your quotes the wrong way around.

 

[FennerMachine]

So amps do sound different when used in a real world demestic setting.

That means it's not excessive to spend £1700.00 on an amplifier if that one works well with my speakers and the rest of my system?

Nice!