If all well designed amplifiers are difficult to distinguish

[Thompsonuxb]

Wow! What a fight!

I'd agree this, IF an amp is not clipping (and that's a bigger if than you might think), IF the load is identical, IF the gain / loudness is identical (which it would be if the load was), IF it was conducted blindly, then it's feasible that a WELL designed amp might sound the same as another. However, WELL designed usually requires a bit of time and effort, which if the business is run properly means there's an associated price. The problem is that real world well designed speakers that are lower in coloration and distortion are more difficult to drive, this requiring more time and effort into designing and building an amp that is capable of doing so.

In truth, "hi fi" is in absolute terms pretty minimal gains for outrageous cost, and to our friends and family who are not quite so obsessive, we are alll "audiofools", even spending a a couple of £k on a system is for many people bonkers. Great, it's a hobby, a release, nothing more. If I want really serious music then I'll go and watch it or play it myself.  Life is really too short to take this all quite so seriously! I never hear cyclists arguing that a cheap aluminium bike is as good as £££k carbon fibre model (though there is planety of inverse snobbery - envy perhaps?), I never hear guitar players trying to denounce Gibson and Les Paul as mere foo (other than a sad minority who being unable to ever afford to buy one will try to justify their plight in such a negative way). In contrast, large parts of this forum these days reads like a string of youtube comments.?

 

This......

 

[cheeseboy]

I never hear guitar players trying to denounce Gibson and Les Paul as mere foo...

sorry steve, that's a really bad analogy. Gibson don't claim thier guitars sound better or make you play better. They just acknowledge that they are expensive because they use quality parts and in some cases (given I've played some terrible gibsons in my time) quality craftmanship. Guitar players I know with Gibsons don't sneer down at those without Gibsons and say that because they have a Gibson they can appreciate playing the guitar more, or are better than those without them, or they hear notes nobody else could possibly hear. People buy a Gibson because it's a status symbol, because it's a nice looking bit of kit and more importantly it has the name on it, and most guitar players will and do admit that. In fact, most guitar players I know (bar one single person) will quite happily admit that a cheaper guitar may play better or sound better when they try it, not instantly dismiss it because it's cheaper and therefore could never be as good.

 

[Rico]

This thread helps to stop me thiknking that I need to spend more on an amp to get a better sound, Nice to know that if I get a well made amp at £400 I don't have to spend £1000

In the end for me listening to the music is the hobby, not showing off the brand of the actual seperates on the rack..

Leftover cash shall be spent on plane tickets

And how do you intend to verify this? I'm genuinely interested.

Thats a good point, its the point of this thread really, are there £400 well made amps?

Is the Cambridge Audio Azur651A £300 a well designed amp?

Rega Brio R?

K2?

Marantz pm6005?

For the sake of fairness, an expensive amp even if it sounds the same when level matched to cheaper amp with similar power, is not the same amp, despite sound there are lots of other things in an amp to consider and things we desire.

Im here as the newbie trying to get something from this discussion, what is a well made amp?

 

[matt49]

Im here as the newbie trying to get something from this discussion, what is a well made amp?

Not necessarily an easy question to answer. You might say a well made amp is:

* reliable

* kitted out with the functions you need in a way that makes it a pleasure to use

* capable of driving a wide range of speakers to acceptable SPLs in a fair-sized domestic space

* not marred by obvious design flaws (e.g. ugly appearance, excessive energy consumption, noisy fans etc)

You might say that all looks pretty straightforward. The thing is people don’t necessarily agree on the parameters of the above. What is a wide range of speakers? What functions do you need? How loud do you like to listen? What counts as ugliness? Etc etc.

 

[SteveR750]

I never hear guitar players trying to denounce Gibson and Les Paul as mere foo...

sorry steve, that's a really bad analogy. Gibson don't claim thier guitars sound better or make you play better. They just acknowledge that they are expensive because they use quality parts and in some cases (given I've played some terrible gibsons in my time) quality craftmanship. Guitar players I know with Gibsons don't sneer down at those without Gibsons and say that because they have a Gibson they can appreciate playing the guitar more, or are better than those without them, or they hear notes nobody else could possibly hear. People buy a Gibson because it's a status symbol, because it's a nice looking bit of kit and more importantly it has the name on it, and most guitar players will and do admit that. In fact, most guitar players I know (bar one single person) will quite happily admit that a cheaper guitar may play better or sound better when they try it, not instantly dismiss it because it's cheaper and therefore could never be as good.

Either way, you get my point; in response to the criticism that those buying expensive kits are just snobs.

 

[davedotco]

I do not think I have seen such a fine measure of the intelectual capacity of some of the posters on here in quite some time.

Some years ago people like Julian Hirsch and Peter Walker (among others) tested and demonstrated power amplifiers in such a way that no hi-fi or music enthusiast could tell them apart, this is decades ago and nothing has changed since.

The conclusion that, and I paraphrase slightly, "All compedently designed power amplifiers, working correctly within their design parameters will sound the same", has been turned by the legions of the hard of thinking into "all amplifiers sound the same".

This is nonsense of the highest orde, as all amplifiers do not sound the same because,

A ) They are not compedently designed in the meaning of the original phrase.

And B ) They are nor working within their design parameters in real world applications such as a hi-fi system.

In such circumstances amplifiers will and do 'sound different'.

See, it's not difficult to understand........*dash1*

 

[cheeseboy]

Either way, you get my point; in response to the criticism that those buying expensive kits are just snobs.

Fair enough. Providing those purchasing expensive equipment don't look down on, or consider themselves superior to those that don't purchase that equipment, or wiriting it off because it's cheaper, then yes, there's no need to call them a snob. If they do those things however...

 

[Covenanter]

I do not think I have seen such a fine measure of the intelectual capacity of some of the posters on here in quite some time.

Some years ago people like Julian Hirsch and Peter Walker (among others) tested and demonstrated power amplifiers in such a way that no hi-fi or music enthusiast could tell them apart, this is decades ago and nothing has changed since.

The conclusion that, and I paraphrase slightly, "All compedently designed power amplifiers, working correctly within their design parameters will sound the same", has been turned by the legions of the hard of thinking into "all amplifiers sound the same".

This is nonsense of the highest orde, as all amplifiers do not sound the same because,

A ) They are not compedently designed in the meaning of the original phrase.

And B ) They are nor working within their design parameters in real world applications such as a hi-fi system.

In such circumstances amplifiers will and do 'sound different'.

See, it's not difficult to understand........*dash1*

I'm not sure that such common sense should be allowed on this thread!

Chris

PS 100% with you.

 

[davedotco]

Im here as the newbie trying to get something from this discussion, what is a well made amp?

It is what Matt49 said above, and a whole lot more.

A "well made amplifier" will take a music signal, amplify it and pass it on to the speakers in exactly the same form as it was recieved.

Sounds simple, but it is not, there are many reasons why this is not the case and some of them have been raised in this thread, though many have been ignored. Engineers put names to these reasons, devise ways to measure them in order to determine the ability of the amplifier, and then the marketing guys sell the results to the great unwashed.

Unfortunately the 'specs' themselves became more important than the music, so now people obsess about power output, clipping and distortion as if they know what these things actually mean when listening to music.

The reality is that many well regarded budget amplifiers have specifications that tell you they will be sound exactly the same as much more expensive amplifiers and if you have nice, easy to drive speakers, play only at modest levels with nice middle of the road music that is neither too compressed or too dynamic, the specs are probably right.

Step outside of that cozy situation, asking the amplifier to cope with some (say) dynamic recording, into complex, difficult to drive speakers at slightly higher levels and everything falls apart.

As the perception and evaluation of hi-fi is ultimately subjective, the severity or otherwise of these issues will impact different people differently, so there is a diversity of views as to the level at which increasing amplifier quality (and cost) becomes surplus to requirements. Some have suggested that a £300 amplifier is, in many circumstances, as good as you need and while I generally do not agree with that, I know from experience that a £140 Behringer A500 power amplifier will be entirely satisfactory for many people most of the time.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Im here as the newbie trying to get something from this discussion, what is a well made amp?

It is what Matt49 said above, and a whole lot more.

A "well made amplifier" will take a music signal, amplify it and pass it on to the speakers in exactly the same form as it was recieved.

Sounds simple, but it is not, there are many reasons why this is not the case and some of them have been raised in this thread, though many have been ignored. Engineers put names to these reasons, devise ways to measure them in order to determine the ability of the amplifier, and then the marketing guys sell the results to the great unwashed.

Unfortunately the 'specs' themselves became more important than the music, so now people obsess about power output, clipping and distortion as if they know what these things actually mean when listening to music.

The reality is that many well regarded budget amplifiers have specifications that tell you they will be sound exactly the same as much more expensive amplifiers and if you have nice, easy to drive speakers, play only at modest levels with nice middle of the road music that is neither too compressed or too dynamic, the specs are probably right.

Step outside of that cozy situation, asking the amplifier to cope with some (say) dynamic recording, into complex, difficult to drive speakers at slightly higher levels and everything falls apart.

As the perception and evaluation of hi-fi is ultimately subjective, the severity or otherwise of these issues will impact different people differently, so there is a diversity of views as to the level at which increasing amplifier quality (and cost) becomes surplus to requirements. Some have suggested that a £300 amplifier is, in many circumstances, as good as you need and while I generally do not agree with that, I know from experience that a £140 Behringer A500 power amplifier will be entirely satisfactory for many people most of the time.

So Dave, just to clarify you're saying while 2 amps at different price points can sound the same - ultimately if allowed to operate at their individual design specification do not sound the same...

Hence in real world terms amps do not sound the same?

 

[tonky]

There is the theoretical world. And then there is the real world dynamic of source - preamp - cable interaction (real or imagined?) - speakers - rooms.

It's nice that someone with a bit of real authority on the subject says it for what it is.

thanks dave

tonky

 

[davedotco]

Im here as the newbie trying to get something from this discussion, what is a well made amp?

It is what Matt49 said above, and a whole lot more.

A "well made amplifier" will take a music signal, amplify it and pass it on to the speakers in exactly the same form as it was recieved.

Sounds simple, but it is not, there are many reasons why this is not the case and some of them have been raised in this thread, though many have been ignored. Engineers put names to these reasons, devise ways to measure them in order to determine the ability of the amplifier, and then the marketing guys sell the results to the great unwashed.

Unfortunately the 'specs' themselves became more important than the music, so now people obsess about power output, clipping and distortion as if they know what these things actually mean when listening to music.

The reality is that many well regarded budget amplifiers have specifications that tell you they will be sound exactly the same as much more expensive amplifiers and if you have nice, easy to drive speakers, play only at modest levels with nice middle of the road music that is neither too compressed or too dynamic, the specs are probably right.

Step outside of that cozy situation, asking the amplifier to cope with some (say) dynamic recording, into complex, difficult to drive speakers at slightly higher levels and everything falls apart.

As the perception and evaluation of hi-fi is ultimately subjective, the severity or otherwise of these issues will impact different people differently, so there is a diversity of views as to the level at which increasing amplifier quality (and cost) becomes surplus to requirements. Some have suggested that a £300 amplifier is, in many circumstances, as good as you need and while I generally do not agree with that, I know from experience that a £140 Behringer A500 power amplifier will be entirely satisfactory for many people most of the time.

So Dave, just to clarify you're saying while 2 amps at different price points can sound the same - ultimately if allowed to operate at their individual design specification do not sound the same...

Hence in real world terms amps do not sound the same?

I did not say that. That is simplistic drivel.

Read my post again it is quite clear, if there is some part you do not understand, ask, and I will try to explain further.

 

[Native_bon]

Trouble is, 99.9% of all hifi enthusiasts don't agree. Pretty much everyone that spends time in this hobby thinks that amplifiers sound different even when matched as you have suggested.

....erm, genuinely not trying to be funny, but if you've read the thread, then you'd see that statement isn't correct, or pop over to over forums where the same conversations happen etc.

Well, I don't have the real stats and neither do you. I can tell you I've been involved in the hobby of 2 channel HiFi for many years and in that time I can't remember meeting anyone online or in person that had paired expensive speakers with a low priced receiver. Seems to me, people in large numbers tend to pair their expensive speakers (like Harbeth) with expensive amps. Now, maybe all these people are foolish and could get identical sound from a $300 amp, but it appears to me the vast majority of consumers do not think so.

I have done actaully & everyone thought I was mad.. It was a £750 Marantz av amp with a pair of second hand Sonus faber crenoma speakers costing 2.5k. For me the sound I was getting, I did not see any reason why the Marantz was not doing a very good job. Now the question is how far would people go to justify the price of an expensive amp. If you do the same with a cheap amp paying extreme attention to detail like an expensive amp you may get the same results from a cheap amp.

Having said that, this does not mean amps do not sound different just means price to performance ratio does not play that big a part in SQ.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Im here as the newbie trying to get something from this discussion, what is a well made amp?

It is what Matt49 said above, and a whole lot more.

A "well made amplifier" will take a music signal, amplify it and pass it on to the speakers in exactly the same form as it was recieved.

Sounds simple, but it is not, there are many reasons why this is not the case and some of them have been raised in this thread, though many have been ignored. Engineers put names to these reasons, devise ways to measure them in order to determine the ability of the amplifier, and then the marketing guys sell the results to the great unwashed.

Unfortunately the 'specs' themselves became more important than the music, so now people obsess about power output, clipping and distortion as if they know what these things actually mean when listening to music.

The reality is that many well regarded budget amplifiers have specifications that tell you they will be sound exactly the same as much more expensive amplifiers and if you have nice, easy to drive speakers, play only at modest levels with nice middle of the road music that is neither too compressed or too dynamic, the specs are probably right.

Step outside of that cozy situation, asking the amplifier to cope with some (say) dynamic recording, into complex, difficult to drive speakers at slightly higher levels and everything falls apart.

As the perception and evaluation of hi-fi is ultimately subjective, the severity or otherwise of these issues will impact different people differently, so there is a diversity of views as to the level at which increasing amplifier quality (and cost) becomes surplus to requirements. Some have suggested that a £300 amplifier is, in many circumstances, as good as you need and while I generally do not agree with that, I know from experience that a £140 Behringer A500 power amplifier will be entirely satisfactory for many people most of the time.

So Dave, just to clarify you're saying while 2 amps at different price points can sound the same - ultimately if allowed to operate at their individual design specification do not sound the same...

Hence in real world terms amps do not sound the same?

I did not say that. That is simplistic drivel.

Read my post again it is quite clear, if there is some part you do not understand, ask, and I will try to explain further.

C'mon Dave, don't be like that..... I do genuinely try to keep it simple.

But that's exactly what you said - more or less what I was saying a few pages ago.

Don't argue just clarify.

 

[CnoEvil]

---------------------------------------------------------------

 

[CnoEvil]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[davedotco]

You might try to keep it simple which is fine, simplistic claptrap is not.

Evaluating amplifiers is complex, do you take acount of the speaker being used or do you try and come to some sort of independent, non speaker dependent view of the 'goodness' of a particular amplifier? Personally I think the second option is of very little help, ideally an amplifier and speaker need to be looked at together.

The whole concept of level matching and making sure the amplifier is 'working within it's design parameters' is an attempt to determine the quality of an amplifier as an independent component, to make a comparison of 'goodness' between amplifiers an absolute, ie amplifier A is definitely better than amplifier B.

The moment you take away these criteria, then you are no longer just evaluating the amplifier and most certainly not in absolute terms, you are evaluating the performance of that amplifier into that loudspeaker, and can not argue that the results tell you any more than that.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Trouble is, 99.9% of all hifi enthusiasts don't agree.  Pretty much everyone that spends time in this hobby thinks that amplifiers sound different even when matched as you have suggested.

....erm, genuinely not trying to be funny, but if you've read the thread, then you'd see that statement isn't correct, or pop over to over forums where the same conversations happen etc.?

Well, I don't have the real stats and neither do you.  I can tell you I've been involved in the hobby of 2 channel HiFi for many years and in that time I can't remember meeting anyone online or in person that had paired expensive speakers with a low priced receiver.  Seems to me, people in large numbers tend to pair their expensive speakers (like Harbeth) with expensive amps.  Now, maybe all these people are foolish and could get identical sound from a $300 amp, but it appears to me the vast majority of consumers do not think so.

I have done actaully & everyone thought I was mad.. It was a £750 Marantz av amp with a pair of second hand Sonus faber crenoma speakers costing 2.5k.  For me the sound I was getting, I did not see any reason why the Marantz was not doing a very good job. Now the question is how far would people go to justify the price of an expensive amp. If you do the same with a cheap amp paying extreme attention to detail like an expensive amp you may get the same results from a cheap amp.

Having said that, this does not mean amps do not sound different just means price to performance ratio does not play that big  a part in SQ.

I've done the same to a lesser degree - paired a £400 receiver with £1k speakers (CD player £550 all prices @ new)

Never really felt a need to upgrade any part (did toy with the idea once ref the amp)

 

[Thompsonuxb]

You might try to keep it simple which is fine, simplistic claptrap is not.

Evaluating amplifiers is complex, do you take acount of the speaker being used or do you try and come to some sort of independent, non speaker dependent view of the 'goodness' of a particular amplifier? Personally I think the second option is of very little help, ideally an amplifier and speaker need to be looked at together.

The whole concept of level matching and making sure the amplifier is 'working within it's design parameters' is an attempt to determine the quality of an amplifier as an independent component, to make a comparison of 'goodness' between amplifiers an absolute, ie amplifier A is definitely better than amplifier B.

The moment you take away these criteria, then you are no longer just evaluating the amplifier and most certainly not in absolute terms, you are evaluating the performance of that amplifier into that loudspeaker, and can not argue that the results tell you any more than that.

Dave, I like you. Even with your huff and gruff and 'I know exactly what I'm talking about....' pompousness.

But man, would it kill you to give credit were its due.

As simple as I try to make it even I have to assume something's are a given....

Honestly..... *WALL*

 

[Rico]

Im here as the newbie trying to get something from this discussion, what is a well made amp?

Not necessarily an easy question to answer. You might say a well made amp is:

* reliable

* kitted out with the functions you need in a way that makes it a pleasure to use

* capable of driving a wide range of speakers to acceptable SPLs in a fair-sized domestic space

* not marred by obvious design flaws (e.g. ugly appearance, excessive energy consumption, noisy fans etc)

You might say that all looks pretty straightforward. The thing is people don’t necessarily agree on the parameters of the above. What is a wide range of speakers? What functions do you need? How loud do you like to listen? What counts as ugliness? Etc etc.

Thanks for breaking it down for me, makes sense, this reminds me when i was a kid at school and we were discussing whats the best car, cant get to a defitite conclusion just on performance figures alone

But im thinking after reading all the coments that hifi amplifiers suffer more from deminished returns than speakers for example, spending extra 1K on your speakers will give you more in sond quality than 1K extra on the amp?

 

[TrevC]

Im here as the newbie trying to get something from this discussion, what is a well made amp?

Not necessarily an easy question to answer. You might say a well made amp is:

* reliable

* kitted out with the functions you need in a way that makes it a pleasure to use

* capable of driving a wide range of speakers to acceptable SPLs in a fair-sized domestic space

* not marred by obvious design flaws (e.g. ugly appearance, excessive energy consumption, noisy fans etc)

You might say that all looks pretty straightforward. The thing is people don’t necessarily agree on the parameters of the above. What is a wide range of speakers? What functions do you need? How loud do you like to listen? What counts as ugliness? Etc etc.

Thanks for breaking it down for me, makes sense, this reminds me when i was a kid at school and we were discussing whats the best car, cant get to a defitite conclusion just on performance figures alone

But im thinking after reading all the coments that hifi amplifiers suffer more from deminished returns than speakers for example, spending extra 1K on your speakers will give you more in sond quality than 1K extra on the amp?

You are correct. If a cheap amp has the balls to drive your Nautilus speakers the sound will be far better than an expensive amp powering lesser speakers.

 

[davedotco]

But im thinking after reading all the coments that hifi amplifiers suffer more from deminished returns than speakers for example, spending extra 1K on your speakers will give you more in sond quality than 1K extra on the amp?

That is very much the modern approach though personally I think it is hopelessly wrong.

People confuse 'different' with 'better', so often get things wrong. It is very easy to hear the difference between speakers. more difficult with amplifiers but because the differences in speakers are often of a 'presentational' nature it is often too easy to get carried away by the more bass, less bass or bright not bright issues and completely miss what the speaker is actually doing.

Amplifiers that drive and control the speakers are the issue here, a lot of inexpensive amplifiers do not do this very well and the result is the 'bright and boomy' signature that is all so common in budget and midfi systems.

This may sound great to the non-enthusiast but once you have been around the hi-fi block a few times you really should know better. If you really want to bring big, lasting improvements to your system, get a really good amplifier.

 

[matt49]

You are correct. If a cheap amp has the balls to drive your Nautilus speakers the sound will be far better than an expensive amp powering lesser speakers.

That is very much the modern approach though personally I think it is hopelessly wrong.

People confuse 'different' with 'better', so often get things wrong. It is very easy to hear the difference between speakers. more difficult with amplifiers but because the differences in speakers are often of a 'presentational' nature it is often too easy to get carried away by the more bass, less bass or bright not bright issues and completely miss what the speaker is actually doing.

Amplifiers that drive and control the speakers are the issue here, a lot of inexpensive amplifiers do not do this very well and the result is the 'bright and boomy' signature that is all so common in budget and midfi systems.

This may sound great to the non-enthusiast but once you have been around the hi-fi block a few times you really should know better. If you really want to bring big, lasting improvements to your system, get a really good amplifier.

Nice work, lads. Now in the second half could we try to pass the ball to one another?

 

[davedotco]

You are correct. If a cheap amp has the balls to drive your Nautilus speakers the sound will be far better than an expensive amp powering lesser speakers.

If by "has the balls", you mean an amplifier that has the capability of producing the volts required to drive these speakers to the desired level, the current to sustain power into difficult and rapidly changing loads, the ability to control the speakers at the bass end where impedance drops to 3 ohms, the stability into the awkward load around the crossover points to avoid increased distortion and 'drightness', output stages with slew rate capabilities of keeping up with the fastest transients and half a dozen other criteria then you would be correct.

Good luck in finding all that in a "cheap" amplifier.

Actually, to be fair, some inexpensive 'pro' amplifiers con get quite close to those requirements in many respects but miss out in one or two key areas that makes them unsuitable for driving high resolution speakers.

 

[davedotco]

You are correct. If a cheap amp has the balls to drive your Nautilus speakers the sound will be far better than an expensive amp powering lesser speakers.

That is very much the modern approach though personally I think it is hopelessly wrong.

People confuse 'different' with 'better', so often get things wrong. It is very easy to hear the difference between speakers. more difficult with amplifiers but because the differences in speakers are often of a 'presentational' nature it is often too easy to get carried away by the more bass, less bass or bright not bright issues and completely miss what the speaker is actually doing.

Amplifiers that drive and control the speakers are the issue here, a lot of inexpensive amplifiers do not do this very well and the result is the 'bright and boomy' signature that is all so common in budget and midfi systems.

This may sound great to the non-enthusiast but once you have been around the hi-fi block a few times you really should know better. If you really want to bring big, lasting improvements to your system, get a really good amplifier.

Nice work, lads. Now in the second half could we try to pass the ball to one another?

I thought you might quite like that one, get your popcorn ready.......*biggrin*

Anyway, to thoroughly confuse our sporting metaphors, I think TrevC 'bats for the other side' on this one.

(And no, I do not mean that side)