Just a random thought, but I’m curious just how well the state of the art solid-state amplifiers from 20 years ago compare to some of today’s better offerings. For example, what does a pair of Mark Levinson 33Hs or a Krell FPB 600 sound like if compared to the latest offerings from Pass Labs or Ayre Acoustics?
Amplifier technology reached maturity in the seventies, when output transformers were abandoned in solid state amps. Ever since, well designed amplifiers used within their specifications have exceeded human hearing acuity. Since then, measurements have still improved somewhat, but I am not convinced this has improved sound quality (there is no point in being more perfect than audibly perfect). Already in the seventies Quad commissioned an independent research to compare Peter Walker’s three famous amplifier designs, and the test showed no audible differences: http://www.keith-snook.info/wireless-world-magazine/Wireless-World-1978/Valves%20versus%20Transistor.... I personally participated in one of these blind demonstrations, and was surprised at the time, but convinced by the science. I appreciate there are people here who believe differently, but they never subject their subjective impresions to rigorous scientific scrutiny. Of course there have been engineering advances. Manufacturing technology has changed, with cheaper and more reliable products as the main benefits. At the moment we are witnessing the more and more common inclusion of digital inputs. In the near future I expect that energy saving of the power stage will become more and more important for environmental reasons, leading to more class D designs. In Europe, we already have mandatory power consumption regulations for many domestic appliances, including televisions. I am convinced this trend will soon extend to audio equipment.
To answer your question indirectly. I had a completely refurbished, mint condition, Krell KSA-250 amplifier, sold it 5 years ago. The single most stupid mistake in my HiFi journey towards Nirvana I have ever made. Regretted the decision ever since.
Anybody remember Halcro? They claimed to have the lowest distortion and best sounding amp in the world. Where are they now? Every new amp manufacturer makes the same claim! A lot of B.S. gets thrown around! And the prices keep rising!
About 20 years ago, I had a Krell KSA-150 that sounded great, first powering a pair of BIC TPR-600s then a pair of B&W 801 Nautilus. I chose it over a Mark Levinson 23.5. Then I had the chance to hear an Ayre V-1, which to my ears sounded more musical. The V-1 was upgraded to a V-1x and then a V-1xe. Each upgrade was audible. Then after a progression of amps, I settled for awhile on a pair of Ayre MX-R Twenties. So, in theory, the MX-Rs should sound Significantly better than the 20 year old Krell. I wish I could directly compare the two.
I tend to agree with willemj (and Peter Walker of Quad). All well-designed amps with sufficiently low output impedance and operated below clipping will sound the same.These claims of superiority over rivals are mainly marketing hype!
Could not disagree more. Class D amps are indeed on the cutting edge and the future. Even better .... powered dacs. Powered dacs with room correction are another huge development. In the future there will be no such thing as a separate, stand alone Amplifier. They will simply be modules built into digital gear. Immense innovation has taken place. In 20 years amp modules will fit in the palm of your hand and be the norm.
Although design can remain the same, better capacitors, faster diodes, higher quality resistors will make a difference.
There is one variable we can not quantify, and that is "hearing"; some of us can hear better than others. Although I have never heard a class D amp, I can not imagine one as good as a tube amp; however, as good as a SS amp is conceivable.
If people listened blindly, I bet they would be willing to settle for a cheaper SS amp than the one they were lusting for, but there are those with exceptional hearing.
All the nuances in music only come through in the best systems, which is why the resurgence of analog; there's nothing like the best vinyl.
In the conversations we have, there isn't much difference between, we'll say SS amps in the high end. Those who can hear the differences, are most fortunate.
I can't subscribe to the notion that all competently measuring amplifiers sound the same. Why?? Because my ears tell me differently. Way back 20 years ago a Krell amp sounded quite different from a Mark Levinson. Just recently, I had the chance to hear both Ayre and D'Agostino amplifiers in my system. Same result. They sound Significantly different. I always have my wife, as a second set of ears, confirm what I hear. Since I know what I'm changing, I give her the opportunity to hear blindly. I won't tell her what I change. I simply ask her to describe what she hears. About 80% of the time we agree on what we hear.
Amplifier technology reached maturity in the seventies, when output
transformers were abandoned in solid state amps. Ever since, well
designed amplifiers used within their specifications have exceeded human
hearing acuity.
This statement is false.
Humans can easily hear the distortion of most modern transistor amplifiers. The brightness and hardness of solid state is well-known and a topic of endless debate- the brightness and hardness is the direct result of the fact that the human ear/brain system uses higher ordered harmonics to sense sound pressure. The slight amount of distortion is converted by the ear to a tonality. The ear has to be keenly sensitive to these harmonics because of the wide range of human hearing (140 db). So its far more sensitive to them than the lower ordered harmonics.
If anything has changed since the 1970s, its our understanding of human physiology. The audio industry has been a bit slow to respond to that knowledge though, probably because the facts are a bit of an inconvenient truth.
I doubt the "better offerings" sound much different in most cases though no two cases are probably exactly alike due to all the variables at play.
Major advances in amp technology like Class D amps are the big difference. These put more offerings in that "better offerings" class that are much smaller, much more efficient and often lower cost. These things together make them more practical for many more than the better amps of the past. I know it has for me.
besides Class D (which allows less expensive and lower power amps), Benchmark has licensed some exciting technology in just the last couple of years which greatly reduces crossover distortion (so you don't have to try and run in Class A all the time)
atmasphere did not note that we had tubes back in the '70s.... - which burn a lot of power
I am using a pair of McIntosh MC2205's for my bi-amlified speakers, these are circa 1977 if I am not mistaken, 200W with autoformers, everything is original, and they are still running. My speakers are 96dB and in bi-amplifed mode I usually can't go above 20W per channel for each amp in a very large room, this helps keep the amps relatively cool. My only problem with these are the weight, at 85 pounds each they are too heavy for my back.
I think upgraded old amps sound as good as new ones. Regarding the future direction of amps, my prediction is the biggest innovation will be the widespread use of battery power as cars and phones drive the development of battery power.
Interesting comments. I will put my old Lafayette KT-550 tube power amplifier up against anything and see how it compares to anything new (newer) in anyone's system. I have not heard anything to date that really sounds like this amplifier does. And not much in the way of best parts (newer parts) in caps or resistors. Go figure! Happy Listening. And for those KRELL people, I loved the KSA-50. Built a clone of one about 10 years ago. Loved that amplifier.
One great designer responsible for the 1st pure class A amplifier over 100 wpc, and fully regulated power supply for very low distortion and stable At even demanding conditions. James Borgiorno R.IP. his Ampzilla amplifiers, And excellent preamplifier live on. Remember Marantz,Dynaco,Sumo,and Constellation Jim worked,and designed with many founding greats. Amplifiers biased high in class A dtill have a very nsturalness To them. Digital has come along way ,May be a hybrid with tubes?
I've decided that a well-designed tube amp with large transformers sound the best of what I've heard. McIntosh tube amps pioneered this formula, and I think companies like VAC and Atmasphere have refined it.
What I hear on such amps is the ability to sustain sounds that seem to quickly deplete the power supplies or transformers (caps?) on other designs. Plus they have soft clipping. I've recently upgraded to a VAC 200 IQ, which can truly transform some tracks -- the transient speed is there, but the strength of some notes seem to extend into full flesh, when they used to decay in a more threadbare soundscape.
Perhaps Class-D can do this, also. I liked a Mola-Mola/Giya at a show.
Amps are better today, *if* we assume solid-state. Pass is better and a good number of tube lovers admit this made them ditch their gear. So, something happened.
If we believe Benchmark amp specs, noise and distortion measure lower than the 70s, when we had THD wars.
I have a Mirror Image Audio 1.1 SB. The company was around from ca 1985 to 1994. With 200 watts and up to 30 in class A, it still sounds incredible and I would put it up against anything new.
I am still using a pair of CJ Premier 12 monoblock tube amps from about 20 years ago. They still sound glorious, warm and very engaging. I've thought about having CJ upgrade the caps. Any thoughts about this?
I think they tended to build to a higher quality level years ago then they do now. The quality of design and construction not to mention they used the best parts available at the time. as the years go on the market is more about replacement then long term ownership. I know modern parts are better but I feel modern everything is built to be replaced sooner then later. there really is very few artisans around anymore.
you wont see 50 year old washers still working 40 years from now but I know of many 50 year old washers still chugging along today. Same thing with electronics really not made to last made to be replaced in a few years. say hello to capitalism and cheep labour. so when's the new IPhone 11 coming out ;-)
That said there is still some great people taking care to make great products. I tend to stay away from the conglomerates that have bought up most of the successful older audio companies and mashed them together for profit reasons. Not that profiting is bad.
I had a friend say that its too hard to make electronics really last more then 20 years reliably. I say bullpucky Voyager 1 and 2 are still transmitting and they have never been serviced in many decades.
I have mixed feelings on the subject, but in general, I feel there are not many changes or real improvements. We do have Class D now and it has developed into a viable audiophile amplifier. I own an amp that I built with Abletec modules, it is quite good. Class A or A/B .... What has improved is the linearity of parts, better outputs, lower ESR caps, these have offered us better sounding amplifiers. So what I am saying is the thing that would make a real difference is circuit design. I can see someone coming along with a killer design and creating a incredible amplifier today, but in general, solid state amps are indeed very similar for the past 30+ years. I had an old Sumo Nine that my old mentor Ed Martin from Marcof modded. He went overboard with the replacing mediocre parts with best parts available plus increased the filter capacitance 3 times. A few years ago this amp took a lightening strike and I lost it, but he has it and is working on using different outputs, but that amp would really sing, I compared to many amps and kept going back to it. On the other hand, I've heard some designs modified and it doesn't matter how many parts upgrades you do, the amp just didn't respond... So, a good design is where its at. I think that there are alot of old amps that could be improved to compete with the best today. I also believe that with the improvements in parts designs that there are plenty of great things still coming.
Thanks for this thread -- it's raising all kinds of points that make me realize how much I have to learn! willemj started his post with a statement that I don't understand: "Amplifier technology reached maturity in the seventies, when output transformers were abandoned in solid state amps. Ever since, well designed amplifiers used within their specifications have exceeded human hearing acuity. "
Could someone point me to a source that would help me understand this? I thought all power amps, even Krells, use power transformers, so he must be saying that less sophisticated amps have two transformers, one of which is on the output stage. Assuming this is correct, what is the difference in their function, and why is it bad for SS amps to have transformers on the output stage?
Sorry I'm such a newbie, but we all have to start somewhere.
Some may disagree, however I believe MID-FI gear really took a hit in the late 70's until the 90's. Much of it build wise. Pioneer had those gross tan, plastic faceplates. Technics had cheap looking "graphs" printed on the faceplate, AKAI tape deck LED meter strips only had 5 lights per channel, just junk everywhere
Amplifier technology reached maturity in the seventies, when output
transformers were abandoned in solid state amps. Ever since, well
designed amplifiers used within their specifications have exceeded human
hearing acuity.
@cheeg, As I pointed out earlier, the statement you quoted isn't correct on several counts. I did not address the output transformer bit, but other than MacIntosh, that really wasn't a thing with solid state amps even in the 1960s. It may be that what he really meant to say was 'coupling' or 'driver' transformer, as a good number of older designs from the 60s and early 70s did employ audio transformers to drive the bases of the output transistors in the design.
As far as 'their specifications have exceeded human
hearing acuity', this statement isn't true either for the reasons I stated earlier in this thread.
@atmasphere, thanks for your input — That sounds like a plausible interpretation of what willemj meant by his opening sentence. I’d be interested to hear Will weigh in here, especially if he meant something different. As far as the second part of his statement (“exceeded human hearing acuity”), I would agree that is pretty subjective, as evidenced by the many contrary opinions on this thread.
The now "40 YEARS OLD" John Curl designed Mark Levinson ML-2 Monoblocks in good condition, will blow away most of today's Tube,Class-D and even most Solid State amps. At only!!! 25w Pure Class-A per channel into 8ohms, It's said they will do 50w into 4ohm, 100w into 2ohm and 200w into 1ohm
With the exception of Class D and digital amps, I think that a 20-30yr old amp can sound as good as what is available today. Class D and digital amps are relatively new, thus do not have vintage counterparts.
There is one caveat to the above- restoration. A 20-30yr old amp may "work" in the sense that it passes an intelligible signal, it will likely not sound at its best. A vintage amp should be fully serviced, with all caps replaced, and all resisters, wiring, diodes, rectifiers etc replaced as needed. Only then can a valid comparison be made.
That said, a true high end amp from back in the day would be very competitive with a new amp of similar topology. And at a cheaper price.
The original post specified SS amps. I would expand this point to include tube amps. Audio Research, Conrad Johnson and Luxman tube amps of 30yrs ago can also be restored to great effect and value. I love the sound of my ARC V70....with new caps. The HK Citation II, after rebuild, becomes a very compelling value in todays market. And we all know about McIntosh, specifically the MC225, MC30, MC240, MC275.
The amp AB tests that I have read about...there is only a handful of them. They put people in unfamiliar rooms with unfamiliar gear and music...and of course it’s all too overwhelming to distinguish much. At audio shows you will sometimes hear people commenting that speakers start to sound the same. Anyway, we all have different hearing abilities. if someone can’t tell the difference between amps, it’s not accurate to assume that others can’t as well.
I like to listen to a lot of different components in my system and can't underscore enough system synergy. That said, my biases lean heavily to the tube side of things and vinyl- keep that in mind when reading my comments. I recently ran an interesting test where I put up a new First Watt F6 vs a Bedini 25/25 that had been recapped. Both 25 watt systems into 8 ohm doubling into 4 ohm. To my ears (and biases), the Bedini heartily outperformed the F6 being much warmer and relaxed. To me the F6 was strident, thin and just to linear- a feature to one degree or another of all the solid-state gear I've listened to over the last 40 years. But there are listeners (one a good listening buddy who loves his Pass amps) who prefer that "sound" over a warmer tube sound which is great, as long as they are pleased with their outcome. Btw- the last three years I've been listening to bi-amped systems in my primary rig- tubes on top and solid state on the bottom (vinyl, tube phono and tube line stage). I can go into lots of detail on the tube amps I've rolled through but this thread specifically asked about solid state. If the F6 represents a reasonable current state-of-the-art SS Amp and your biases lean towards a warmer sound, then at least one 40 year old SS amp can compete with today's high-end. The Bedini amps, specifically the 10/10 and 25/25 to me, are really special and are the only solid-state amps I have been Happy listening to on a consistent basis. The 45/45 and 100/100 were good but in the end I let them go along with the F6.
i just purchased the new Rega Brio integrated and it sounds very good compared to my old Rowland Model 5 and Cohearance 2 good sound is now is comparable to amps of 30 years ago at a fraction of the price. what you get from the new Brio is sound that would cost you near 10K 30 years ago
Why is it that I never read anything about the conrad johnson premier 50 tube amps or the Classic se with Phono preamps ?? I just had mine rebuilt and upgrade the latests components? Does anyone out there like Conrad Johnson amp and preamps? and who do they compare with today's stuff??? I had mine since the 1980's. Using Vandersteen 2ce Signature Speakers... By the way what Cable should I be using anyway??? Yea I am an old timer out of touch...lol
Amplifier technology reached maturity in the seventies, when output transformers were abandoned in solid state amps. Ever since, well designed amplifiers used within their specifications have exceeded human hearing acuity.
Agree. That's why I use 37-year-old amp and receiver. I've participated in blind tests. They caused me to ignore all subjective opinions. That's why I always say "If you didn't hear it blind, you didn't hear it."
I used my mid-seventies Crown DC300a’s and DC150a’s well into the early 2000’s - typically bi-amping - sometimes with stacked cabinets like larger Advents and using an out-board xover. I used them with a wide variety of pre-amps from Threshold FET 2 and FET 10 to Mac tube. Probably not sonically wonderful but, I always loved their sheer power and ability to brush-off transient high current needs. In the late 90’s I had the 300’s re-capped and new output devices installed. I just pulled 2 pairs of Advents out of storage and began using them as the fronts in my surround system (Yamaha RX-V3800) and was thinking "I sure wish I still had those Crowns" But then, I'm a sucker for nostalgia.
I have a thirty year old Threshold 400A amp and a twenty year old Threshold T2 preamp that have been upgraded with new caps, transistors and binding posts and given their age still sound wonderful. Over the years I have gone through several sets of speakers, CD players, DAC's and cables but have hung on to the Thresholds.
And so was Peter Aczel, of The Audio Critic, when he said: “Longtime readers of The Audio Critic know the drill that comes at this point: I repeat, for the nth time, that all amplifiers having high input impedance, low output impedance, flat frequency response, low distortion, and low noise floor sound exactly the same when operated at matched levels and not clipped. (Those who are unable to stomach this simple truth, proved over and over again in double-blind listening tests, should stick with Stereophile.)”
Of course, it's true that certain unique loudspeakers can present loading that will cause good amplifiers to sound slightly different; refer E. Brad Meyer's article that originally appeared in the June 1991 issue of Stereo Review. (More recently reprinted in the Boston Audio Society's monthly BAS Speaker publication.)
And while it may be theoretically possible to construct a vacuum tube-type power amplifier that will initially approach equivalent excellence, that product will also exhibit persistent and continuous degradation from the time of initial turn-on until its ultimate end in cathode depletion failure—barring other modes of premature demise (e.g. open filament, vacuum leaks, gassing, microphonics, atypical distortion, hum/noise). So vacuum tubes are not a wise choice when stable, long term circuit performance is a serious design goal.
Class D and digital amps are relatively new, thus do not have vintage counterparts.
I do say that the early Pioneer Elite Class D amps that were used in their upper end A/V receivers were not bad. I used one from 2003 for 2 channel music for a few years and was surprised how dood it sounded to stand alone class A amps that I tried.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
