Anything as " fast" as SPECTRAL gear?

Without question Spectral amps and preamps that I use get 'faster' with improved AC conditioning and isolation. I was amazed at the improvement a separate isolation transformer for my digital yielded. I would call it jaw dropping--and I already had a very good setup. It just shows you can't evaluate gear in a vacumn. Comparisons are truly edifying.

Fast and slow can apply to speakers where by i find horns faster than fabric domes.

Naim

Bel Canto C5i integrated fits that profile perfectly. My dynamic monitors more than ever sound faster and more detailed like Electrostats with this amp. Also less bright than with most any other SS amp I have used them with prior.

I hate to say this but when you hear a system that really is fast you'll know it when you hear it.

Things to look for: good decay (lots of it- good lower level detail), nice sound stage that is expansive rather than stuck as a little window right in the middle of the speakers (that 'wall to wall' soundstage can only occur if you have the bandwidth to prevent phase shift in the upper portions of the audio range), 'blackness' in the silent spots, but things like cymbals and strings have an effortless, relaxed quality...

Brightness is usually **not** an indication of speed (brightness is either a tonal coloration or the product of distortion); in fact a relaxed quality is a much better indication. Relaxed (even with the volume turned up!) yet excellent detail in the highs. The two go hand in hand if you have a fast system. Another thing- you might react more viscerally to the sound when there is speed. If you are tending to analyze the sound then its probably not fast.

I read through most of the posts - filtered the rants, and am still struggling to understand how does a high "speed" amplifier "sound" as compared to a slow one. I completely get the notion of "speed" as it relates to speakers and bass performance so I'm assuming this is the same concept but applied to the amplifier. Am I completely off-base?

As I continue to refine my system with isolation and conditioning--I find correct polarity ever more enjoyable.  Wishing all listeners get to that level of refinement...

I sold MIT for over 6 years and I owned the best powercabels they had. But mannnn MIT is not only slowwwwwww, you will loose a lot of details in the high frequencies. Beside this the diversity in the middle frequency is very limited as well.

When you focus on the properties of Spectral there are 2 essential parts which are very limited. Voices and instruments are very small in demension and very direct. But also very sharp foccused. It looks like the forgot this part.

The most important part in music and emotion is diversity in the middle frequencies. This is also very limited. What does the speed add to the limitations it owns?

Ptss, amplifier damping factor is usually specified based on the assumption that speaker impedance is 8 ohms. So:

DF = (8 ohms)/(output impedance, expressed in ohms)

and equivalently,

Output impedance (expressed in ohms) = (8 ohms)/DF

As you can see, DF itself is not measured in ohms or any other units, being a ratio of two quantities that are measured in ohms.

In the case of tube amps that have output transformers and provide both 4 ohm and 8 ohm taps, DF is sometimes specified separately for the 4 ohm tap. Although the 4 ohm and 8 ohm DF’s will usually not be greatly different, as the output impedance of the 4 ohm tap can be expected, roughly speaking, to usually be in the general vicinity of half of the output impedance of the 8 ohm tap.

Regarding the frequency upon which the specified DF is based, it probably doesn’t matter in most cases because in contrast to speaker impedances amplifier output impedance will not usually vary enough over the frequency range to matter.

Enjoy the brandy! Best regards,
-- Al

@Mapman ... I seem to recall Ralph (Atmasphere) posted comments some years back about the impact and import of high damping factors (DF) on woofer control. DF, of course is simply speaker impedance at a particular frequency (usually in the bass range), divided by the amp's output impedance at the same frequency. 
I'm just enjoying warm brandy and reviewing this old thread--and this statement confuses me. If it's correct how can an amplifier have a DF in its specs?

Sorry, my mistake.
I meant Fourier.
What a dope I am!

-
Wow, very interesting reading in this post. Better than most!
I don't know what "Fast Gear" is. I would steer away from such terms.
Low noise, low distortion. That's what sounds good.
As for transient response, that's what it's all about. Laplace showed that awhile ago.
Steady state is dead when it comes to music!
-

Psag. Our departed Harry Pearson gave them all the guide. Be part of a system reproducing the sound of orchestral instruments as heard live.

Omsed. Hope you feel better now. There,there.

I find it helpful to know what the designer of a particular piece of equipment is trying to achieve. Of course there is frequently some added marketing hype, but that's to be expected. The alternative is 'black box' audio- guaranteed to make your system sound better, but no idea how.

Audiolabyrinth, have you considered that it might just be the level of distortion you don't like when you hear Spectral, and not that it's "fast"? Fast or not, who cares about speed if a product just does not sound like music, no matter what the product is? Course, I have JBL 67000, maybe they are just not FAST enough to showhow great those fast amps sound!

I concur with you Jm about tastes and choice. I don't see the relevence of his equip tastes. However, on that side "if" I were to win the lottery I would love to buy the big JBL DD6700 music makers :-). Cheers ( and I'm a classical/jazz guy)

03-05-15: Ptss
I appreciate your comments Audiolabrinth. Interesting how some can make offhand comments about gear with information that "just comes to them" or have a bias for or against different manufacturers -- that they feel just 'has to be announced'. Perhaps more music would relax and refresh :-). I'll toast that idea.

Careful you don't get too chummy with Audiolabyrinth. He just follows me around like a gnat because he is upset when folks find out that he hooks up $600 JBL speakers to his $24K Tara Labs speaker cables. ;^)

No, I have never owned Spectral gear or had any in my home. I would ask both you and Audiolatrine, would you buy equipment that never sounded good to you in auditions? Do you seek out gear that sounds bad to you to buy? I didn't think so.

If you enjoy Spectral gear, good for you, there's nothing wrong with that. It's never been my cup of tea, but that is why they make so many different flavors.
Enjoy the music.

"03-04-15: Omsed
"XXX brand is 'fast' and that makes it better" is just so much marketing hype. I find that threads like this have little to do with listening to music and more to do with wanting to fall in love with gear based on notions that some company puts forth to grab potential buyers. You plant an idea in someone's head, some meaningful percentage of folks will perceive that artifact due to the power of suggestion."

It seems to me that most of us are trying to describe speed as we hear it. I don't know how that equates to marketing hype, other than to try and avoid it. If you look back to some of the earlier posts, Csontos asked for a subjective description/definition of speed, and I suspect that most of us are just trying to answer that question.

I appreciate your comments Audiolabrinth. Interesting how some can make offhand comments about gear with information that "just comes to them" or have a bias for or against different manufacturers -- that they feel just 'has to be announced'. Perhaps more music would relax and refresh :-). I'll toast that idea.

"XXX brand is 'fast' and that makes it better" is just so much marketing hype. I find that threads like this have little to do with listening to music and more to do with wanting to fall in love with gear based on notions that some company puts forth to grab potential buyers. You plant an idea in someone's head, some meaningful percentage of folks will perceive that artifact due to the power of suggestion.

Listen for the similarity, or lack thereof, to real music and not to claims, features, specs, et al. You'll be much happier and less frustrated, if happiness with your system is the goal. Course, some folks are drawn to a perpetual state of stress.....

Zd. " we can only focus on so much". Couldn't agree more. One simply has to look Much Music videos to confirm visually. I think music alone can be just as busy.

02-05-15: Jmcgrogan2
Spectral gear is about as fast as anything I've ever heard, as in I couldn't get out of the room fast enough. ;^)

That is why it is often mated with slow, rolled off cables, like MIT, to balance the sound.
I would not take his word, ask Him if he ever owned spectral equipment before, or if he has ever used other cables with spectral in his home?, I doubt it!

Hello friends.
Our differing perceptions are addressed,circumspectly, in an interesting way, way out of our field, in these BBC news articles. I hope you find them interesting. I include the one on memory so you understand me better. I had a head injury in 1989,and, 26 years later, am still learning about it's effects and how to work with them. Suffice to say that I live in the present-(with no choice in the matter) :-)
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150225-secrets-of-alice-in-wonderland
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120719-awoken-from-a-2d-world
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120209-do-we-all-see-the-same-colours
I will submit more; however, do not think polarity or absolute phase is non-existant or irrelevant; as I've said, it's something you may not see until someone points it out; but, after that you will be aware and will appreciate it "can" or 'may" add to your listening pleasure- your appreciation of the composer or player---and your equipment!!! (and electricity conditioning--who will put regular gas in a Ferrari??? Hint; no one who pays for one.)
Cheers, I've survived my 3rd heart surgery--yahoo!!

ZD, nicely put, I agree completely and appreciate you taking the time to elucidate. I think you are one who really contributes to this forum.

FWIW, my understanding of the "50/50 rule" is that it basically means that, on the average, the ultimate polarity of the recording (or any single track in it) is essentially random due to the many factors that Al and others have elucidated. That does not mean that some people hear a difference between inverted and non-inverted polarity. If it increases your enjoyment of the music, then feel free to flip whatever switch you want (even that nasty old Fletcher-Munson loudness contour). If it stresses you out, ignore it. ;-)

Great post just above, ZD. I agree completely.

Regarding your post just above that one, I think that Ptss's comment you quoted was addressing my post, not yours. I don't have first-hand knowledge of recording industry practices, or of the design of the elaborate mixing consoles that are commonly used. However my understanding is that the widely held notion that a recording stands a 50-50 chance of having correct polarity, and that inverting the signal will correct the polarity of those recordings which do not have correct polarity, is a misconception. Especially in the case of recordings having many performers, and given that the majority of recordings (both classical and popular) tend to be heavily multi-mic'd.

My understanding is that the pickups from each of those many mics will typically be subjected to processing in the consoles which differs from mic to mic, making it likely that in the final mix some of the instruments and/or singers on the recording will have one polarity, and other instruments and/or singers will have the opposite polarity.

Unless, that is, the recording was produced using "purist" techniques, i.e., a minimal number of microphones and minimal post-processing. That being the exception rather than the rule, in most genres including classical.

Best regards,
-- Al

"02-25-15: Ptss
ZD. Again, perhaps for you to easily appreciate the difference you should invite me to tune up your system."

I don't doubt at all that this issue is something that you can easily hear. But we don't all perceive what we hear the same way. For example, we can both listen to the same system and have very different opinions on it. It doesn't mean one of us has more skill, or is a better listener, etc..., or anything else like that. We develop different priorities as to what we hear and don't hear, and if we like it or not. For me personally, I'm very sensitive to high frequencies. If the highs are not just as I like them, I can't listen to it. But, I know people that are just the opposite. They're not so picky about HF's, but they are with low frequencies. If the bass is not just right for them, they can't listen to the speaker. If I listen to that same system, though, I probably won't hear anything wrong with the bass. Or if I do, I would probably be able to tolerate it.

So, going back to our discussion on polarity, that may be one of the qualities that you're sensitive to. When we both listen to the same system, we can only focus on so much, but what we focus on may be completely different. The funny part of it all, is that we're not always aware that this type of thing is going on. And that's exactly why you really can't "force" recommend components to others like so often is the case. (Not accusing anyone here of that. Its just a general comment from what I see on this site overall.)

"02-25-15: Ptss
Also. I don't dispute That the recording process isn't often flawed; but I find the majority of classical and jazz very good. The people doing the recordings are serious about doing a good job."

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I didn't mean to imply the recording process was flawed. The way I've always understood it is that its like a coin toss. About half of the recordings are one polarity, and the other half are the opposite. But that doesn't mean that there's anything with the recording, and the "fix" would be to just hit the polarity button on your preamp or source.

Also. I don't dispute That the recording process isn't often flawed; but I find the majority of classical and jazz very good. The people doing the recordings are serious about doing a good job.

ZD. Again, perhaps for you to easily appreciate the difference you should invite me to tune up your system.

Almarg. I feel I should have stated my comments applied to Spectral Audio gear as that is what I researched, bought and continue to own and follow. Their website will clarify their designs. Regarding subtlety, I certainly acknowledge that the more refined your system the clearer the difference exhibits. If your system is not well set up you won't hear or care about polarity, just like if you were listening with ear muffs on : - )

"2)I disagree with the notion of a 50/50 split, because I believe that for most recordings neither setting can be thought of as being correct."

Just to clarify that, the 50/50 split seems to be the established mainstream opinion. Personally, I can't verify it, and think of as a rule of thumb that most people seem to go by.

"02-24-15: Ptss
I also believe most natural instrument music lovers will learn to appreciate the difference very easily when they have some coaching by a knowledgeable person who is not simply interested in selling a piece of equipment."

We may not be talking about the same thing. The polarity inversion that I'm referring to is a very subtle difference. So subtle in fact, that even though I could hear something happening when I invert phase, I couldn't even decide what position sounded better. Only in the last few years, and with a very detailed system that has excellent overall timing, can I reliably hear differences. But the difference is still fairly small.

Just to add one small thing to the discussion, most good CD players and digital separates also have a phase invert switch. So if your preamp doesn't have that feature, your digital source may.

Regarding absolute phase/polarity, I would make two points:

1)It should be kept in mind that if a preamp provides a polarity switch, when the setting of that switch is changed not only is the polarity of the signal being inverted, but the circuit configuration that is being used within the preamp is being changed. In the case of a preamp having a balanced internal signal path, such as Ralph's designs, I would expect that to not be of much if any significance from a sonic standpoint, since the polarity change can be implemented in balanced designs by simply interchanging signal connections somewhere in the signal path. However in the case of preamps having an unbalanced internal signal path, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that the preamp's sonics could change noticeably when the setting of that switch is changed. Perhaps more noticeably than the resulting "correction" of the polarity of the recording.

2)I disagree with the notion of a 50/50 split, because I believe that for most recordings neither setting can be thought of as being correct. My suspicion is that on 90+ percent of recordings the whole concept of maintaining absolute phase or polarity is meaningless. The great majority of pop recordings, and the majority of classical recordings as well, are captured with a multitude of microphones (dozens in the case of many orchestral recordings), and then the signals from all of those mics are processed through elaborate multi-track consoles where they are mixed, equalized, compressed, limited, and subject to who knows what additional effects. The end result, when it comes to absolute phase or polarity, is inevitably in those cases a random hodge-podge of different sounds with different phases.

So if one setting of the polarity switch on a preamp sounds better than the other on a particular recording it figures to be more likely the result of random synergy and subjective preference than the result of the system preserving the "polarity" of the recording.

I therefore agree with Ralph that the benefit of a well implemented polarity changing function in a preamp will primarily be to the unfortunately very small percentage of recordings that are engineered using minimal/purist mic techniques, and that are engineered with minimal post-processing. But then again, those tend to be the kind of sonically high quality recordings that many audiophiles (including me) particularly seek out.

Regards,
-- Al

ZD. I'm with you when you say it's a timing issue.

I also believe most natural instrument music lovers will learn to appreciate the difference very easily when they have some coaching by a knowledgeable person who is not simply interested in selling a piece of equipment. Maybe there is an opportunity for me to establish a consulting service for those who really want their system properly set up-- not sell gear? Now I'm single and son is grown and on his own consulting and travelling may be quite enjoyable. Hmm. Any thoughts? Ideas? Would that service be of value to anyone?

ZD, I appreciated a post you made about I/C's or speaker cables and mentioned that if one can't hear a difference they shouldn't claim there IS no difference - only state "they" don't hear a difference. Correct polarity and absolute phase are the same. However, the whole system has to be refined enough-- and set-up well enough - for one to be able to clearly notice the difference.

ZD, it's the very fact it's a 50/50 split that it is essential to have a polarity switch on the preamp. Don't forget the engineer is operating with / and listening to the system he's using and all may sound fine - in that set up.

Well Atmasphere I think it's good you at least have the polarity switch for those of us who have systems refined enough to be desirous of the correct polarity for "every single orchestral piece" we sit down to enjoy (I say we assuming there are many others like me : ) . Same for our Jazz or even solo flute or violin recordings. How about solo guitar, anyone? I remember being bothered years ago by Jazz recordings by CTI recordings. Different instruments having different polarity. Only years later did I discover this was done purposely ; maybe something to do with the "big" 'wall of sound' popular with the people with crappy equipment and white metal zip cord of about 20 gauge for speaker wire. :( And yes i think it also isn't too important for those listening through iPhones either; just like the majority of old cassette decks. Oh dear. Thank goodness SPECTRAL and MIT, EQUITECH and SOUND APPLICATION gear is there for those of us who don't want to listen to "fuzz". This reminds me that now I'm retired I should go into "Consulting" ; setting up systems so the owners will be properly thrilled by their good quality equipment - from wall plugs to speaker placement and damping to seating positions. Heck I understand the average lack of sensitivity to these items. It's true that most won't hear - and won't care - ( until maybe it's pointed out to them). I have gone into a number of shops selling high end gear only to have to point out they have the channels reversed - and I think it's because countless "sound advisors" have never been to a live orchestral concert in a decent hall. Polarity comes up next when they or I put on a solo piano, played and recorded beautifully, only to have it sound like the artist is playing with gloves on. Yuck. I have always appreciated my dearly beloved hi-fi enthusiast HARRY PEARSON who had the ears and sensitivity that a good system "properly set up" should come close to achieving the sound of real instruments in real space. My hat remains doffed to his lofty goal.

Psag, agreed. However you can hear it and recognize you're hearing it in comparison.

"02-24-15: Atmasphere
We've had a polarity switch on our preamps since 1989. Its only audible if the recording uses a minimalist microphone technique, like two mics to record everything."

It took me years to finally hear that. Everyone always said that it was a bass issue, but to me, it sounds like a slight timing issue.

" Does anyone out there appreciate appropriate polarity for the recording?"

Its kind of hard to when the recording engineers don't. Its about a 50/50 split.

We've had a polarity switch on our preamps since 1989. Its only audible if the recording uses a minimalist microphone technique, like two mics to record everything.

It's interesting some don't feel you can hear speed : - ). That's ok; many don't think one can hear polarity );? Does anyone out there appreciate appropriate polarity for the recording?

"When distortion is low, the music sounds good."

Can't say it any simpler than that except that it applies when noise is low as well. Low noise + low distortion = good sound.

^^ Noise can obscure low level detail, which includes minor soundstage cues. So getting rid of noise should reveal more detail and more depth.

The 'fastness' (or 'slowness') of circuitry isn't something that can be picked out by ear. When distortion is low, the music sounds good. Making circuits 'faster' is just one way among many of lowering distortion.

I would have to agree. However no conditioning here except for dedicated lines. But not sure how noise floor plays into this. I have no poor examples to compare but the ones with the lowest noise floor have seemingly infinite depth.

I'm with you Atmasphere. Soundstage is a far 'deeper'effect of speed. Even with just the Spectral gear I use (supposedly 'fast') I've had an education on speed with experimentation of AC isolation and conditioning. The cleaner the signal the faster my equipment sounds. My experience is the faster the end signal the better the clarity of the different instruments and their place in the mix. "Speed" provides a deeper experience of the 'timbre' and 'nuance'of the instruments and the sense of air around them, delicacy in spite of a complex orchestral piece. For smaller combos speed provides a greatly enhanced appreciation of the genius of the players. Without "speed" these emotionally exciting cues simply don't have time to be created. Speed is far more than that immediate crash of the cymbals; and it gives me a deeper pleasure in all types of music. Slow is simply far less involving.

^^ that has been my experience. The ear/brain system is the final arbiter and not enough is known about how we perceive sound to be able to go off of bench specs (which rarely have anything to do with human perceptual rules) to create a good design. Those who rely entirely on a goal of good bench specs tend to make lousy sounding equipment.

I get that Ralph. But even the alchemists were careful not to make the same mistake after an explosion. I don't know why I thought it was basically cut and dried. I don't have two amps that sound the same, even among identical examples. I guess I just think it should be entirely straight forward as to how to achieve a pre-conceived sonic result. I thought the differences are borne entirely of preference and not ability. IOW, lots of designers need conceptual adjustment. I suppose it's yes and no/know.