Do equipment stands have an impact on electronics?

Wait and you will see agear.

Dave

I use the isoacoustics stands tested in the article. The difference they make in my two rooms on second level with suspended plywood floors are clear and distinct. Anyone can hear it.

Same stands in rooms on foundation level make no difference.

Same results with auralex subdude platforms I use under bottom ported Ohm Walsh speakers.

So like most things effectiveness of products depend on the context used and magnitude of the problem (floors with "give" versus inert rigid floor) which varies greatly It all depends as usual. Measurements or not.

mapman
"So like most things effectiveness of products depend on the context used and magnitude of the problem (floors with "give" versus inert rigid floor) which varies greatly It all depends as usual. Measurements or not."

eggs akley! That’s what I’ve been saying all along - Hel-loo! The seismic type vibration varies so much from location to location and even floor to floor, type of floor, local traffic, Earth seismic activity, etc. that trying to extrapolate or generalize measurements of a particular isolation device in a particular installation is probably not possible. There are too many variables. You’d have more luck trying to solve three simultaneous equations in four unknowns.

As I have also stated repeatedly the ball park performance of most isolation devices can be easily calculated from very simple equations. Performance such as percent of transmission that was provided for one of the isolation devices earlier in this thread. There is also the technique of mounting both the component and the isolation stand itself to consider and how much damping to apply to them. No one ever said it’s simple or black and white.

I suspect that when an isolation denyer comes up with negative results there is an excellent chance it’s a simple case of self fulfilling prophecy. Besides, there are many reasons why anyone can obtain negative or null results for certain audiophile devices. Shall we explore them?

geoff kait
machina dynamica

LOL, so much hand wringing (Ethan's here, oh no! A definite turn for the worse) yet no proof that isolation does anything. Of course, as mentioned in my article, I'm not talking about turntables or earthquake level vibration. Just normal sound in the air from loudspeakers playing at normal levels up to and including loud "reference" level.

So again I ask, what proof do you have? More important, if you can't prove your case, doesn't it make sense to ask yourself *why* you can't prove it, and then possibly reconsider your opinion?

Ethan stop by my place and we’ll have a listen as proof. Cheers!

In lieu of that,  in rooms where I hear a difference I can jump up and down and feel and hear floors vibrate.   In ones where I don't hear a difference jumping does nothing.  That proves the vibrations are transmitted to the floor and in some cases (not all) can be heard.

Your tests in one room do not prove anything about another either.    You might not hear or measure anything in one yet do so in another.   As you know no two rooms are usually created equal.  that goes for the floors as well.


Does that make sense?

Where is your room? Near me in western Connecticut? I’m always willing to drive up to an hour each way, or even two.

But otherwise, no, it doesn’t make sense. Just because you can feel your floor give when you jump up and down is unrelated to whether loudspeaker isolation improves or even changes the sound. Did you read the article I linked? I explain all of this, and why, in detail. And as I said at the end of the article, I’m glad to see measurements from others proving that isolation does make a difference in their situation. But so far nobody has. And calling me ignorant (not you, others here) is hardly evidence. Nothing audible that happens in a room will evade measuring with the type of software I used for my tests. So yet again I ask for measurements. As Judge Kevin Ross says at the start of each TV show, "Prove your case!" :->)

No, Central Maryland.

The only gear I have to do any tests is my ears. So I know its possible.  It is not subtle at all, perhaps one of the clearest and most obvious differences/tweaks I have heard.    The jumping test I indicated shows that it is at least possible as well. I suspect its fairly common even.

I don’t expect you to believe me though given your criteria for acceptance.

Its most apparent listening with my OHM Walsh speakers that have downward firing ports but I hear it as well with small Triangle and Dynaudio monitors in 12X12 room on second level. In same size room below at foundation level, I do not hear a difference.

That should at least make sense. Whether you believe it can be heard or measured otherwise or not is another story.

Also I would say that my explanation could account for what you measure in a single room but your measurements in a single room cannot account for any others.

In any case I hear what I hear and know what I know and I’m sure there are others with similar experiences. Bring your measuring gear on down and we can perhaps both learn something together. Or try some more tests on your own. New discoveries can happen anytime.

I've been a professional audio engineer and musician for more than 45 years, and deeply into acoustics for the past 20 years. So I have a good handle on what happens in rooms, how things sound and are measured, and - maybe most important - why people think they hear stuff that isn't real. Now, that might seem controversial or even insulting, but you probably know that there's an entire scientific field called "psychoacoustics" that deals with this sort of stuff.

So, as always, the burden of proof is on those who put forth a theory, and after more than ten years of asking for proof nobody has ever shown any. Not once, not ever. Ask yourself why that is.

Ethan, I think room acoustic software is a reasonable endpoint to measure.  There is freeware available to use to this end if people are so inspired.

Here is a video from Townsend that was circulated earlier in this thread as proof of concept but it in no way measures endpoints that are meaningful:

It isn’t hard. Anyone can try and prove to themselves. Obviously your mind is made up. All I can say is you are definitely wrong on all counts in this case so I am not impressed. Better keep on testing. I am not in the business so I have no time or desire to prove anything to anyone except myself but I stated my case and will discuss and share findings happily and honestly with anyone else who happens to care. If you claim to be an "expert" then the burden is on you for your own benefit to make sure that you really are. My advice would be to run some more tests because you are missing something of significance so far it seems.

No, the burden of proof is on those making the claim. Logic 101 teaches that you can't prove a negative.

So yet again we reach a stalemate where someone who believes in magic has time to make more than 14,000 posts (!), yet claims to be "too busy" to prove their beliefs. Or even learn how to measure this stuff. As Carl Sagan famously said, "I'd rather know than believe." Apparently some people would rather believe than know. Which is why these arguments continue. You can't argue with a belief system, and people will believe what they want in spite of all logic and evidence. Or in this case, lack of evidence.

Look, I'm sure you enjoy your system, and I bear you no ill will. I just hope you didn't waste too much money on "isolation" products because they don't affect the sound, even if you believe they did.

"Everyone understands and accepts that the placebo effect is real, but for some reason audiophiles think it never happens to them."

I'll leave you with this commentary on the current state audiophilia:

http://ethanwiner.com/hi-fi.htm

ethan_winer

No, the burden of proof is on those making the claim.

That's absurd. This is not a scientific forum, it's a hobby forum. No one here owes you anything.

Regardless, your claim is silly, because not all assertions are equal. If I tell you the earth is round, I don't need to prove to you that it's not flat. If you think it's flat, that's purely your problem, not mine.

Several experts that I know have told me that the earth isn't really round, but rather pear-shaped. I didn't insist that they "prove" it.

Okay, one more, I can't resist:

"We had an interesting incident near Humboldt State University. A new cell tower went up and the local newspaper asked a number of people what they thought of it. Some said they noticed their cell phone reception was better. Some said they noticed the tower was affecting their health. Think about how much more pronounced these effects will be once the tower is actually operational. The ability of the human brain to convince itself of just about anything is not to be underestimated." --Brian Dunning

Sweet post mr winer !

Well, if if you think we’re delusional then its up to you to prove it not us to prove to you we are not. Becasue frankly I don’t give a rat’s ass what you think there.

I’m just sharing my findings on sound that I have found useful that others might find useful or not. It’s not a life or death matter.

Whatever. It all depends really. Of course you just think you know all the answers and it’s cut and dry based on your limited test results.

The egos are big on this thread. You can bank on that one if nothing else.

Also I’ll use my time as I choose. Do not need your approval or guidance. 

Ethan Winer wrote,
Okay, one more, I can’t resist:

"We had an interesting incident near Humboldt State University. A new cell tower went up and the local newspaper asked a number of people what they thought of it. Some said they noticed their cell phone reception was better. Some said they noticed the tower was affecting their health. Think about how much more pronounced these effects will be once the tower is actually operational. The ability of the human brain to convince itself of just about anything is not to be underestimated." --Brian Dunning

But no one is saying there can never be placebo effects or other types of psychological phenomena in audio or any other field. Your problem is that it’s a logical fallacy to argue that those psychological phenomena conveniently explain *everything* you happen to be skeptical about or whatever.

ethan_winer
9 posts
12-14-2016 4:00pm
No, the burden of proof is on those making the claim. Logic 101 teaches that you can’t prove a negative.

That’s illogical, Captain. Actually, in the real world the opposite is true. In a court of law the defendant is not required to prove the plaintif’s case. It’s up to the plaintif, you know, the one bringing the charges, in this case the charge that the device in question is a hoax or fraud, who’s actually got to prove his case. So far all we’ve got from the isolation denyers is a lot of angst, drama and who shot John.

But Geoff, you’re the plaintiff. You are the one denying what science knows about how sound propagates, and what my article has proven, so it’s up to you to prove my article is wrong. You know you can’t do that, so you try to convince yourself it’s up to me to prove my case. I already did! Read my article again. Look at the graphs. Boom, there it is: proof that loudspeaker isolation is nonsense. There was more change from lowering the speaker three inches than from any of the isolation devices!

All you have to do to prove that isolation improves the sound is to measure your own isolation situation or whatever you have. Do you know how to do that? If you email me from my web site I’ll be glad to help you. Or start here:

http://realtraps.com/art_measuring.htm

It amazes me that people will argue and complain for literally years, when all they have to do is spend half an hour measuring to prove their case. Just think what a hero you would be if you could prove that isolation devices improve the sound! Heck, I’ll give you $100 if you can prove that. I really will.

I proved my case or at least offered good evidence. If you jump on the floor and hear a corresponding sound or feel corresponding movement guess what? Movement caused the floor to vibrate and make a sound.

Or play music with a good subwoofer or other speaker with good bass and use the aforementioned water test or just listen and see/hear. Its not rocket science.

In fact its a much easier and cheaper problem to address than room acoustics/room nodes. An Auralex subdude platform costs less than $100 and is very effective when needed. Maybe that's what Ethan is afraid of?  Cheap competition is a bugger.

Check the testimonials on Amazon or other sites. Are all those people deluded? Ethan apparently thinks so.



Case closed.

What’s hilarious is the companies Ethan attacks, in some sort of screwball marketing ploy, are not even his competitors. Is no one safe? What's next, is he going to go after high end cables and aftermarket fuses? 

They are his competitors. Use of their products lessens the need for his services.

If he wants to go after his real competitors he should probably consider going after Mr. Green. In fact I would pay to see that.

My advice would be worry about yourself not others and be a better listener (to what people say not just the music).

Jumping on the floor is not the same as loudspeaker cabinet vibration and expansion. One can shift the floor 1/4 inch while the other is measured in fractions of a millimeter. I’m sure you know that, and my article explains it in great detail, so now you’re arguing just to argue. My article clearly shows what sort of improvement one can get from bass traps versus isolation, so obviously isolation is no competition to actual acoustic treatment. Or maybe you don’t know how to read a waterfall plot? Tell me what parts of my article you don’t understand and I’ll be glad to explain. I think the real issue here is that some people who claim to be expert listeners (ie: audiophiles) don’t understand even the basics of how their own hearing works.

BTW, I sold my company earlier this year, and have no financial interest in whether people waste their money on isolation platforms, or who they buy acoustic products from. I’m doing new things now, better things, more fun things! Follow me on Facebook and you’ll see what I’m up to now.

As for "Are all those people deluded?" the answer is a resounding yes! This famous quote comes to mind:

"If 50 million people say a foolish thing, it's still a foolish thing." --Anatole France (1844-1924)

There were no speaker isolation stands 25 years ago. Not in the literal sense of the word, anyway. 25 years ago vibration isolation was not even a gleam in some audiophile's eye. Using the laser as you described would not give a sense of how much energy from the speakers was being fed back into the front end electronics via the floor. I’m getting that feeling again we’re not on the same page.

This statement is false. Sound Anchors was making stands for exactly that purpose prior to 1991. We showed with them at CES in 1993.

Here’s the thing: When someone makes a claim, the burden of proof is on them. It’s not up to me to prove that a 2 volt drop doesn’t have an audible effect. It’s up to the claimant to prove that it does. This is Logic 101. More important, trying to assess the affect of a power wire by measuring the AC power voltage is beside the point. The *only* thing that matters is what happens at the output of the connected equipment. Competent audio gear is immune to small changes in voltage, and routinely filters out the typically small amount of noise riding on top of the power voltage.

As always, I’m glad to be proven wrong, and I promise I’ll change my opinion immediately. But in all the years I’ve been at this, nobody has ever provided such proof.

One claim you have made is that power cords don't make a difference. But you refuse to provide any numbers (measurements) to back up your claim. So as you say the burden of proof is on you. When in one case you refer to above where we measured that 2-volt drop, it resulted in about a 30% power loss. It was not only measurable but also audible.

The problem here is that you don't get that some people run higher powered systems (not just a $600 Pioneer integrated amp like you have, but real amps that actually make a lot more power with less distortion). Those pieces (like a large Krell, Gamut, Parasound or Pass Labs) can draw enough power that you do have to take the power cord into account.

The wiring in the wall does not have to be flexible and in most modern homes as a result does not see the same voltage drop. You know you have a problem if your power cord is heating up. If the cord is built into the amp like it is in an integrated Pioneer, you won't ever be able to tell what effect the cord is having.

You say that bouncing a laser off of a cabinet of a speaker is not going to tell you anything about the effect of the cabinet, but you don't have numbers to back up your claim. You're not the only engineer that's been around 40-45 years (sheesh).

Sound Anchors did that test simply to show that of two speakers playing the same test tones, the one on the stand clearly showed that the cabinet was vibrating less. A microphone in the room verified that the speaker on the stand was making less distortion. With a lot of cheap speakers (like the ones you like to use), it happens that cabinet vibration is part of the bass output of the speaker. If you can reduce it, there is less coloration. There is a correlation between the lower vibration and the sound of the speaker (less vibration- more neutral). Sound Anchors showed this 25 years ago. One of the biggest loudspeaker manufacturers in high end audio (Vandersteen) used the Sound Anchors stands for quite a while (until they developed their own).

Ethan, you've been pretty good about your comments regarding digital. But most of your other comments really only apply to mid-fi. Despite your remonstrations you don't seem to operate in the world of high end. Instead of using hubris to make your way, maybe instead it would help to learn what some of the challenges of what happens when you have more power and **in particular** transparency.  A $600 amplifier isn't state of the art and had no intentions of it in its design- its intention was to make money off of the buyer. There's a pretty big difference in high end audio where the intention is to see how good the reproduction can get, and the envelope has been extended quite a ways past a $600 Pioneer!

atmasphere
Geoffkait:There were no speaker isolation stands 25 years ago. Not in the literal sense of the word, anyway. 25 years ago vibration isolation was not even a gleam in some audiophile’s eye. Using the laser as you described would not give a sense of how much energy from the speakers was being fed back into the front end electronics via the floor. I’m getting that feeling again we’re not on the same page.

"This statement is false. Sound Anchors was making stands for exactly that purpose prior to 1991. We showed with them at CES in 1993."

Unless the Sound Anchors had springs in them they weren’t real isolation stands. The first three real isolation stands were Townshend’s Seismic Sink, the Vibraplane and the Bright Star air bladder thingie. I'll make an exception an add the Bright Star sandbox contraption to the list.

Well we’re making progress. At least Ethan now acknowledged that speakers can "shift" the floor. Now we’re talking! I fixed my issues in my house easily and inexpensively so I’ll leave it to Ethan to fix it as needed for his customers. At least there is some hope there now! I have no doubt he’ll be doing some very careful measurements of how much shift in what kind of floors and relating that to what can be heard and/or measured and passing on his research costs to any customers that might care enough to pay.  Meanwhile I'll continue to provide my 2 cents here for free..

What’s also hilarious is that Ethan actually was measuring the wrong thing. The very low frequency vibration, the seismic type vibration, forces the room and the whole building to move - and everything in it! So, when sitting there looking at the speakers, or trying to measure their motion relative to the floor using a laser or whatever they don’t appear to move. But they are moving. Just not relative to the floor. Not only that but the motion of the building is in SIX directions, not just up and down (one direction). I suspect Ethan didn’t think about measuring rotational motion.

Atmasphere, I never said (or meant, anyway) that power cords don’t make a difference. Obviously using 22 gauge wire to feed a 1,000 watt amp is inadequate. What I’m always careful to say is that replacing one competent power cord with another is foolish. I’m certain you know you misquoted me. Why do you do this? Are you in the business of selling audio equipment?

My objection is to companies that charge hundreds or even thousands of dollars for one "upgraded" power cord based on lies that the sound quality will improve. It will not improve. If you’re really an engineer (but who can tell since you remain anonymous) you’d know this. Yet you argue anyway. Why do you do this? Do you really not understand what affects fidelity and how it’s measured?

As for my own setup, I have excellent speakers that are self-powered (bi-amp’d), so the power amps in my modest Pioneer receiver are irrelevant. Though those amps have perfectly fine specs.

And as for Geoff’s magical belief in a building moving in six directions when music plays, all I can say is LOL times 100. Actually, if that were true then the listener’s ears would be moving too, thus negating that ridiculous logic.

"As for "Are all those people deluded?" the answer is a resounding yes!"

Reminds me of a certain presidential candidate calling the heartland of America, "Deplorables". May you and your new business befall the same fate, Ethan. Go pet your cat and leave we, "the deluded", be. Consider it an early Christmas present to us all.

Santa

Atmasphere, I never said (or meant, anyway) that power cords don’t make a difference. Obviously using 22 gauge wire to feed a 1,000 watt amp is inadequate. What I’m always careful to say is that replacing one competent power cord with another is foolish. I’m certain you know you misquoted me. Why do you do this? Are you in the business of selling audio equipment?

Hmm. I can point to a YouTube video (and have in the past) where you contradicted (with vehemence) the first sentence in this paragraph.

The statement above is quite a bit different from your position that you held back when you got banned from the WBF website.

I am not aware of misquoting you; if you are now maintaining that a power cord should be a competent one then I have no beef. On that basis we can then state unequivocally that you think power cords can make a difference. Please do not accuse me of putting words in your mouth as anyone can see that is not the case. You simply maintain that a power cord should be competent (your text above), and that's good enough for me.

I'm not a particular fan of outrageously expensive power cords either. I do feel if a power cord is touted for its merits (or not), then it should be possible to measure the effects of the power cord easily enough (and have easily shown that to be the case). I don't take anything for face value as I have found that if you think about it long enough, its likely that you can find a way to measure the effects of that thing.

Regarding my anonymity, you are mistaken. I make no secret of the fact that I am associated with Atma-Sphere Music Systems; that is why my moniker is atmasphere. . Many of the people on this forum are well aware of that.

Apparently you replaced your Pioneer. What are the self powered speakers you are running now?

Regarding Geoff, I am sure you will find his posts amusing. He also maintains that signal moves through a cable via photons. And says he worked for NASA. I'm sure you'll give him as much credence as I have.

"

We had an interesting incident near Humboldt State University. A new cell tower went up and the local newspaper asked a number of people what they thought of it. Some said they noticed their cell phone reception was better. Some said they noticed the tower was affecting their health. Think about how much more pronounced these effects will be once the tower is actually operational. The ability of the human brain to convince itself of just about anything is not to be underestimated." --Brian Dunning

That's very funny. The only confounding variable is THC. Humbolt county is a suspicious location for any higher institution of learning....

Placebo effect aside, much of this issue comes down to WHAT to measure and why. A lot of audio inhabits potentially cutting edge physics, etc and so is not alway cut and dry engineering. That being said, why not try to build a body of evidence and at least try to push things forwards in a concrete way? I do not understand all the resistance.

I do want my isolation equipment to provide good sound through the most dire of circumstances:  http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/743988/Ring-of-Fire-BIG-ONE-CATASTROPHIC-earthquakes-tsunamis

Ethan Winer wrote,

"And as for Geoff’s magical belief in a building moving in six directions when music plays, all I can say is LOL times 100. Actually, if that were true then the listener’s ears would be moving too, thus negating that ridiculous logic."

Ethan, are you really that dense or are you just pretending to be dense? Like the other isolation denyers hereabout you obviously don’t even know what vibration isolation is. It doesn’t matter if your ears are moving, you silly goose. That doesn't even make sense to the guy under the bridge. The damage to the audio signal has already been done by the time it gets to your ears. Look, even if you move your head back and forth as fast as yo can while listening the sound doesn’t change. That’s because your head motion is very small compared to the speed of sound - and can be ignored. Hel-loo! As I said, you have no idea what to measure. You’re just grasping at straws.

😄

atmasphere wrote,

"He also maintains that signal moves through a cable via photons. And says he worked for NASA. I’m sure you’ll give him as much credence as I do."

Uh, all electromagnetic waves are comprised of photons, silly goose. Even radio waves and X rays. Maybe it’s time for you to give some thought to going back for a science refresh. What I said is I worked for NASA. I worked for NASA when you were still wearing bell bottoms and struggling to get your GED. You get a D on science and A on snarkiness.

http://science.hq.nasa.gov/kids/imagers/ems/consider.html

Bingo!  

Atmasphere, I got it, you must be Ralph Karsten:

http://www.atma-sphere.com/AboutUs#Company

Why don’t you just use your name? I always use my name. Even when I owned my acoustics company I used my real name. Even before the Internet, when the main gathering place for audio talk was the Music & MIDI forum in CompuServe, I used my real name.

Ralph, I find it hysterical that you sell low power tube amplifiers that don’t even quote a distortion spec, but you’re glad to criticize my choice of equipment. For the record, I still use my Pioneer receiver, and it cost all of $150 at Costco. It offers six reasonably hefty power amps with max distortion of 0.1 percent. This is not great, but it’s surely better than any tube amplifier! At full output of 110 watts with all channels driven the distortion is less than 1 percent. Since I use powered monitors and a killer powered SVS subwoofer, the Pioneer’s amp distortion is irrelevant anyway. I just use the line outputs.

I find it amazing that you agree with me about overpriced power wires, and about Geoff Kait, and probably 99 percent of everything else about audio. But to avoid alienating people you want to sell stuff to, you’d rather attack the one time I forgot to qualify power cords as needing to be competent. And to think some folks here called me a shill!

I’m new to this forum, but I can see based on the replies that many here prefer to remain willfully ignorant. That’s fine! If you peeps find the truth about audio fidelity offensive, you’re welcome to ignore facts and buy overpriced crap that makes zero difference in sound quality or is even worse than "normal" gear. It might seem that one-off boutique audio gear would be better than mass-produced amplifiers and DACs etc. In fact, it’s the opposite. If Sony makes a mistake it can cost them millions of dollars. So these large companies hire the very best engineers and designers they can. And for the most part their products reflect that. I’ll take a $400 Crown power amp over some BS $15,000 amp featured in Stereophile every day of the week!

The point is that WE DON"T CARE WHAT YOU THINK!!

Is that simple enough for you, Ethan?

Dave

For the record, I still use my Pioneer receiver, and it cost all of $150 at Costco. It offers six reasonably hefty power amps with max distortion of 0.1 percent. This is not great, but it’s surely better than any tube amplifier! At full output of 110 watts with all channels driven the distortion is less than 1 percent. Since I use powered monitors and a killer powered SVS subwoofer, the Pioneer’s amp distortion is irrelevant anyway.

You are incorrect (you must not have seen the 'Specifications' link that appears on each of our product pages), we quote a distortion spec on all of our amps and apparently its lower than your Pioneer and composed of a spectrum that is less irritating to the human ear. So- 30 watts is the lowest power we make- the largest is over 500 watts. What is the value you regard as 'low power'??

Ethan, you must be aware that tubes were considered obsolete way back in the 1960s or 70s (depends on who you talk to). But for some reason, the market has chosen to keep them around. Normally when a technology goes obsolete, the only place you see it after that is at antique shows or junk shops. This isn't happening with tubes, which suggests that they might do something that the market likes.

Turns out it has to do a lot with how the human ear/brain system perceives sound (if you are an engineer, I am now suggesting to you that understanding how sound interacts with the human physiology and then applying engineering to take advantage of those perceptual rules is the key to building better sounding audio equipment; the fact that the audio industry in general ignores these rules is why you see so many subjectivists).

It is inside of that conversation where it is possible to understand why your Pioneer actually has **more** perceptible distortion than many tube products which on the bench otherwise have a greater THD, although I agree that its use on the sub takes care of some of that problem, although I can point to other issues that make it unsuitable for playing bass correctly.

If you want to know more about this, I suggest you read the writings of two of some of the best solid state designers alive today- John Curl and Nelson Pass (both of whom can do considerably better than Crown or Sony). They both understand that it is the higher ordered harmonics to which the ear is most sensitive (and not the lower orders, the 2nd, 3rd and 4th). The ear is sensitive to the higher ordered harmonics because it uses them to ascertain how loud the sound is. Your Pioneer, which is apparently a high distortion amp by solid state standards,  has a lot more of those higher ordered harmonics than our amps do; in fact most solid state amps (even those with very low THD figures) are also higher distortion than our amps in this regard.

In case its not clear, our amps were designed specifically to not make higher ordered harmonic distortion, while at the same time keeping the lower orders and IMD down as well.

BTW, our amps are fully differential from input to output, and thus don't feature the 2nd harmonic in their THD.  Have you ever wondered, if triodes are supposed to be so linear, how come it is that tube amps usually have more distortion? A lot has to do with topography. A lot also has to do with the fact that tubes don't need as much feedback on account of that linearity. We don't use much in the way of feedback at all in our amps.

So these large companies hire the very best engineers and designers they can. And for the most part their products reflect that. I’ll take a $400 Crown power amp over some BS $15,000 amp featured in Stereophile every day of the week!

I can point you to a simple example of how one person can do what a large well-funded company can't. Google 'Rohloff hub' and you will see a 14-speed (internally geared) bicycle hub designed by a single German engineer. It is durable and refined in every sense of the word. Compare that to Shimano's Alfine 11-speed hub; Shimano came out with their 11-speed to try to horn in on the market Rohloff created; needless to say they failed miserably- the Alfine was a disaster (the hub is is weak, shifts poorly, has less gear range and fails without provocation). Shimano is one of the largest players in the bicycle parts world, and yet for all their 'expertise' they couldn't get that one right to save their lives.

BTW I happen to use a Crown power amplifier with my keyboard setup. Its not a bad amp, but in no way can it keep up with actual high end amplifiers. But it is lightweight (class D, 22 pounds) and makes good power (500 watts/channel) and so is very practical as a keyboard amp.

Dave, you are welcome to ignore me! I don't care what you think either, but I don't get bent out of shape about it and feel the need to say so IN ALL CAPS. :->)

No bingo. EM waves and photons are not synonymous. You can look it up. Google is your friend. The devil is in the details. Its been discussed in great detail here before but apparently for naught.

OK now were deluded and ignorant.   What a POW!

Thread has really jumped the shark.  Too bad,

I really like your new avatar Mapman. I can’t quite make it out. Is it a windmill?😀

Its whatever you think it is.

No actually its a lighted clock hanging on the wall above all my other cool audio toys.  Yes those ARE in fact photons staring you in the face.