Another seldom checked SS / tube difference is DC offset. A tube amp w OPT has none and an SS amp likely has some. DC is a voice coil heater. When voice coils heat, their resistance changes. Resistance changes cause corner frequency changes with passive crossovers.
Let me end the Premp/Amplifier sound debate ...
I'm old enough to remember Julian Hersch from Audio magazine and his very unscientific view that all amplifiers sounded the same once they met a certain threshold. Now the site Audio Science Review pushes the same.
I call these views unscientific as some one with a little bit of an engineering background as well as data science and epidemiology. I find both of these approaches limited, both in technology used and applied and by stretching the claims for measurements beyond their intention, design and proof of meaning.
Without getting too much into that, I have a very pragmatic point of view. Listen to the following three amplifier brands:
- Pass Labs
- Luxman
- Ayre
If you can't hear a difference, buy the cheapest amplifier you can. You'll be just as happy. However, if you can, you need to evaluate the value of the pleasure of the gear next to your pocket book and buy accordingly. I don't think the claim that some gear is pure audio jewelry, like a fancy watch which doesn't tell better time but looks pretty. I get that, and I've heard that. However, rather than try to use a method from Socrates to debate an issue to the exact wrong conclusion, listen for yourself.
If you wonder if capacitors sound different, build a two way and experiment for yourself. Doing this leaves you with a very very different perspective than those who haven't. You'll also, in both cases, learn about yourself. Are you someone who can't hear a difference? Are you some one who can? What if you are some one who can hear a difference and doesn't care? That's fine. Be true to yourself, but I find very little on earth less worthwhile than having arguments about measurements vs. sound quality and value.
To your own self and your own ears be true. And if that leads you to a crystal radio and piezo ear piece so be it. In my own system, and with my own speakers I've reached these conclusions for myself and I have very little concern for those who want to argue against my experiences and choices.
197 responses Add your response
Not in the context of a relative measurement to set levels for comparing things… And not in the context of understanding that 90dB is 10dB more than the 80dB reading.
Personally I would not likely use Carver’s name in an “appeal to authority” based argument. On a video I saw, his shill also gave me the creeps… it was an unattractive mix of sycophantism and other things. Sort of like a combo of qualudes and whisky seeing those two operate together. |
@holmz your post on different systems sounding loud at different SPL is fascinating and fits my experience too. Listening to a friends system, records and tubes and high efficiency speakers I was shocked it measured 100+ Db but didn’t sound’ loud’. My system can be at 50db and be plenty loud. But I don’t understand that at all. Do you have some insight? Hopefully this is on-topic but so it goes. |
No insight I would say is objective and provable. But I think it is about distortion and and higher order harmonics. The “quiet loudness” is something I do not hear often. Mostly because I do not hear nice systems too often. |
Dear @erik_squires : " but I find very little on earth less worthwhile than having arguments about measurements vs. sound quality and value. " Specific in audio measurements were not developed to have a direct relationship to an specific sound reproduction characteristics. Measurements can't tell us which will be the sound quality level of " that " audio item. Today measurements helps for we can have an " idea " if " that " audio item could handle " my " speakers but certainly not how those speakers will sound paired with. Measurements can't do that because in audio MUSIC/sound individual perception/sensitivity we are really complex and exist to many parameters that has direct or indirect relationship with what we " like ", including each one room/system targets. We all have some first hand experiences that has not a " measurements " explanations. I experienced not one but more times that I was in audio " heaven " listening my system and with out change anything and listening the same source tracks next day at the same hour that " magic " just disappeared ! !. Many times in audio happens " unexpected things " that happens because those to many parameters that surround all what we hear. Our ears as ears per sé are not good enough to listen MUSIC the first problem is that are frequency limited fortunatelly we listen/hear through all our body and we have a brain that receives the electrical information from million of body sensors that pick-up the overall " sound ". But not only the sound information that is pick-up is what we are listening, exist something that has a direct and critical effects in what we are listening and that " something " is our " mood/emotions " at the time of listen sessions and till today does not exist measurements regarding those sensors and far away measurements on how affects our listening time " mood ". Our bones, sking, hair and all our senses detect/tell us minute changes in SPL, movement, faster/slow, temperature, distance and the like, even can detect when " some one " is looking directly to us. The frequency range of our body is really wider of what we could think even over gentlemans of 70 years old. We can " listen " from below 4hz-5hz to over 60khz. Even what we wear affects our " perception " of what we are listening. If we wear natural fabrics as cotton or wool against synthetic fibers as polyester and the like our sound perception changes. Any one can make a test ( I already did it ) and listen " naked " with no wear and you can listen the change for the better other that we don't feel confortable in naked fashion because we are not accustom to. Ouir brain/body is the best measurements laboratory over the world that unfortunatelly exist not yet scientific studies on the whole subject. Is to complex, even to create a mathematics model of it. What we like in audio has a direct relationship with our audio life experiences and MUSIC live events experiences , it's of what we are accustomed and accustom to. Of course that quality designs and excecution of that design of our room/systems audio items have a relationship too because is what we experienced through our audio life and what we today are listening to. There are important item specs that we have to take in count when we want to buy a new audio item: frequency range, THD, IMD, sensitivity, output level, headroom, overload level, accuracy, output/input impedance, , etc, etc. Specs can tell us, more or less, if an audio item could be a good match in our system but can't tell us the grade of quality improvement we will have till we listen it. Almost all of us can hear " differences " through item comparisons/evaluations/tests or change of electronics inside devices if we know what to look for. We need references, nothing can be at random our brain has in stock millions and millions of references when we are doing any kind of system evaluations that " modulate " what we like what we preffer. Two months ago I decided to change the power supply 24K capacitors in my Levinson monoblocks and I don't decided because the amplifiers been running with a " problem ". I decided because those monobloks have over 30 years that were manufactured, so I did not wait to change it when the amps showed a failure that could be " catastrophic ". I was not waiting for any improvement due that the amps were working truly fine. I ordered those four Vishay electrolytic caps ( same caps as the original ones. ) and made the change, obviously that after the caps change I wanted to listen and I did it and just from the first MUSIC note I heard a significant improvement that was truly unexpected. Good for my system and my MUSIC enjoyment. I have pother similar experiences and I could tell were and are learning experiences. Good that exit measuremenst and good that STPH magazine does it, always welcomed. As better, wider and higher measurements we have as better decisions we can take . The histories like the Carver ones are reference of nothing, we are in 2022 where many past/vintage " things " already changed several years ago.
Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R.
|
That is my experience as well. I've said this many times: the mark of a good system is it does not sound loud. The reason a system sounds 'loud' is distortion; from poor higher ordered harmonics from the amp, poor anti vibration control in the turntable (also poor cartridge condition or setup) or CD transport, early reflections and/or slap echoes in the room and breakups in the loudspeakers.
|
If all acoustic cues are there at the minimal volume, the lowest possible before being inaudible, whitout any loss between them, the audio system is well embedded and well chosen, and synergetically matched... Thanks to these 2 posters remarks for this important reminder....BUT For sure the "listener envelopment factor", which is rarely mentionned in audio threads but which is a very important one, will ask though, particularly in some room size and geometry, for an optimal sound level which will not be high but not too low if you wanted it optimal,unlike the other acoustic factors like timbre and dynamic or imaging for example which will not be changed by a substantial loudness lowering.... The listener envelopment though depends not on sound optimal level "per se" but "on having strong lateral reflections arriving at the listener 80 ms or more after the direct sound "....The sound level being optimal for the room which is my point... By the way a better ionization of the room will help for the listener envelopment factor if the audio system/room acoustic controls can give it to begin with because this factor is a bit more difficult to get it right than imaging and soundstage only, you cannot have it before having a great imaging and soundstage already, the listener envelopment will come after like an ultimate refinement of the room/listener position in using a better timing between direct and lateral reflections but also back/front reflections and in the right amount of reflections for sure...Balance between diffusion, reflection and absorption is an art of listening here.... Anyway people with the habit of listening at too high sound level have a problem (80 decibels is the LIMIT for any long listening ) , be it their ears or the system/room , or the music choices.... Sorry .... 😁😊
|
We are, if all the measurements are actually made and often they are not. I think I outlined what is needed to know the sound of any amplifier earlier in this thread. I find it interesting that those interested only in the specs discount the subjective aspect so vehemently. I think this arises out of not understanding that all forms of distortion are audible as tonality. That's a bit of connecting the dots. But once you understand that simple fact, the whole idea of things being 'audible and not measurable' goes away. But you have to also understand what the measurements are saying. |
Priceless remarks indeed like usual... I will only add to "tonality" what is called "timbre" .... The micro dynamic of the tonal playing instrument timbre reveal much about the system/room interaction... In acoustic CORRELATION between measures and subjective timbre perception is crux of the matter... Same in electronic engineering design like say atmasphere... Then dividing subjectivist amd objectivist camp is preposterous .... For sure it is always measurable but not always with a material external tool only like some claim but always measurable in the sense of correlating a tool measure with the subject hearing interpretation...It becomes after that a standard in acoustic and in engineering... |
Dear @erik_squires : I know I arived late to your thread, an interesting one.
" And if that leads you to a crystal radio and piezo ear piece so be it. " well that could be something " extreme ". In general audio improved through the years and today any one can listen " differences ", only a deaf can't hear.
" to remember Julian Hersch from Audio magazine and his very unscientific view that all amplifiers sounded the same once they met a certain threshold. Now the site Audio Science Review pushes the same. " In those vintage years electronics were designed and builded using the active and pasive devices that existed. Designers have not " hundred " of options about and along that the today high-end meaning was non-existent so de electronics designs were manufactured with way different targets than today units. In the other side the room treatment concepts was almost something new even for reviewers. Because of all those and several other reasons the systems were not high resolution ones and with this real limitation was not easy to find out quality differences.
I don't know today why ASR says " amps sounds the same " because I don't have the specific link where they attest about. But today it's almost imposible that 2 different manufacturer designs can sound the same. As I said audio improved through the years, today passive and active devices improved really over those vintage years and exist more options that in the past. In the other side normally each designer has his own whole targets on what he will design and build. The circuit layouts are not the same in those 2 different manufacturer electronics and not only that but not only that because a designer can choose smd passive devices instead true hole and the power supply design of those amps will be different too with different choosed parts even the input/output connectors and internal wiring came from different parts manufacturers.Heatsinks are different too and even the amp class operation or the global feedback levels. All those parameters/characteristics modulates each one amp quality performance and yes we can listen the differences no matters what because our system today has way higher resolution than in the past. Active/passive parts and design has its sound signature/coloration and this coloration is what we listen it. A few months ago I wanted to improve my external crossovers in the speakers and I posted a thread in Agon looking for help on capacitors: I was running V-caps and Soniccraft but already used Duelund/Mundorf/Jantzen/Audyn, Audicap, MIT/etc/etc suddenly I remembered that I have a lot of Wima caps that in the past I changed for " better " caps soI try the MKP10 and to my surprise it performed with higher quality levels, I finished using the FKP1 in combination with Kemet caps but I was using at the input of my monobloks ( cappacitor coupled. ) very expensive teflon cooper V-caps and I tested there the FKP1 and wonder what: outperforms the V-caps ! !Al these " unexpected ". Today if electronics are working inside its specs develops very low distortions and when today amps are developing high distortion levels that we can listen is because those amps are been overloaded are been out of its headroom. Today is extremely difficult that we can listen amp distortions because those amp designs are well designed and the designer know that his competition just does not do it, today manufacturers puts high care about. Again, if the amp/preamp is running inside its design specs we normally will not hear distortions or almost no distortions.
@glennewdick " are we even measuring the correct things for human hearing parameters? " Please re-read my last post because those kind of measurements you are asking for just does not exist and in my posts I try to explain about. Of course I can be wrong.
R.
|
That depends on how successful a design is with regards to its application of feedback. If there is enough feedback then issues of coupling caps and power supply design are rejected by the feedback itself. So two very different designs can sound the same if they have sufficient feedback and Gain Bandwidth Product. But it needs to be a lot in both cases, and such is really rare even today (as opposed to 20 or 50 years ago).
Certainly they do! But as I explained earlier, usually such measurements are not published if they are even made. So we have the 'obviously' persistent myth that we can hear something we can't measure. |
When they have zero distortion, then by definition they will sound the same. If we have one amp with only 2nd order harmonics, and another with only the orders of 3-N…. If their SINAD values are same (not zero), they will sound way different. So SINAD becomes most useful when the value is getting towards zero. If it is a long ways from zero, then we have a preference for the type of distortion that is listenable. Maybe Mr Hirsch was hopeful that the ”certain threshold” was going to arrive sooner? |
Dear @holmz : I’m not talking of theory as you and other gentlemans but about what we live day by day and what we listen through our room/systems.
The true is that does not exist measurements that can explain with certainty why we like what we are listening . In theory everything could be measured but in the audio real life those measurements does not exist and if exist any then any of you that like so much the theory just shows one real example with tests/facts: not theory.
Zero distortion? in which galaxy?, I’m not talking of " illusions " but real life.
If some of you can’t prove with real facts what you are posting then is better to take away that " scientific " attitude and come back to the " land " come back to live your real life.
@erik_squires posted: " To your own self and your own ears/brain be true, " Today we listen and experience what we have we can’t listen to " illusions " or hypothesis.
It’s true that in the same quality range of design several amps with more or less similar measurements will sound alike but never the same. I think that we have to use our common sense at the end science came and comes by the common sense those gentlemans used to their results. I think and said several times that to be truer or nearer to the recording we have to have every kind of developed distortions at minimum. Even that two different room/systems coul have distortions at minimum will not sound the same: different kind of distortions/colorations. I can know yet measures in a preamp/amp can tell us hw that units sounds for our brain. Could you or any one explain it with facts?
R. |
As some one who was involved in the daily design and manufacturing of electronic equipment in the mid to late 1980’s when Julian Hirsch was still very much alive and well, I can say this paragraph has been based with very little actual knowledge of the manufacturing supplies of the time, let alone the brands that flourished then either. To give you some sort of reference, the first CD was released in 1982, but analog semiconductor electronics had been flourishing for a long time. You make it seem as if we were still making transistors by hand. The manufacturing of semiconductors for analog electronics was as robust as it is today.
|
@erik_squires : I know that over time bipolars, fet, mosfets, resistors, capacitors improved in several ways. Nothing is steady in audio and especially with manufacturer suppliers. All devices improvesd? maybe not but many did it. I look your post as trying to argue or trying to tall me I’m wrong. In my posts I posted: I can be wrong. So no problem in this issue, fine with me.
But reality exist: today electronics are and have higher resolution than in the past and not only because past electronics designs were manufactured with way different targets than today high-end units but because the today improved part devices . At any period of time exist good, excellent and average designs. I can see in your vitual Agon system that you use today " magic " caps. Why's that? Btw, I owned the Luxman C5000 ( I neme it because you own Luxman. ) that in its time was a very good unit but can't compare with today units.
Anyway, measurements are an excellent tool to help audiophiles to choose the " best " alternative to match their systems’s targets and self priorities.
R. |
"However there was a dramatic change around 1970 when Sound Technology appeared on the scene. ... The 1000A was quickly followed by the model 1700A which was a state of the art audio measuring system which could read distortion (THD) down to 0.001%" from Sound Technology Test Equipment ST 1700A was introduced in 1971 and thus made with late 1960’s level technology. IMO, the biggest improvements have come from capacitors, resistor precision and less costly, higher quality drivers which let the music through. Solid state devices, like tubes, so far exceed audio frequency requirements as to be nearly irrelevant. |
Well that Benchmark AHB2 has a SINAD of 120dB. |
Dear @holmz : Nothing really new down there. Remember the vintage Sansui japanese electronics manufacturer ( I owned before Luxman c-5000 ).:
https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/sansui/super-feedforward-system.shtml https://audio-database.com/SANSUI/amp/au-d707f-e.html http://www.hifi-classic.net/review/sansui-au-d11-332.html https://www.vinylengine.com/library/sansui/products.shtml One of those papers says technology came from 1928. I remember that I like the Sansui electronics ( I left Pioneer for Sansui. ) but nothing more than that. Remember the Halcro DM58?. Here some of its specs: Solid-state monoblock power amplifier, with active power-factor correction. Inputs: 1 unbalanced, 1 balanced. Output power: >200W into 8 ohms (23dBW), >350W into 4 ohms (22.4dBW). Distortion: at full power output, all harmonic distortion orders <-114dB up to 20kHz (<4000 parts per billion or <0.0004%). THD: <-128dB at 1kHz, or <400 ppb. Intermodulation products: all <-114dB relative to power output """
R.
|
@rauliruegas if you say that they are all sounding different with the same speakers, then I’ll defer to you… as I have not heard them. |
Dear @holmz : What you and other technical oriented gentlemans posted here means that if we take the Sansui, the Halcro, the Benchmark and Devialet amps and we listen to all in the same system and even that those four amps are way different whole designs using way different active/passive parts/board material/layout and the like we will listen no difference in the room/system quality performance. Rigth? I know that no one has Zero distortions but all are just really near of that. Now and accepting that " theory and obviously with out been/experienced in a test like what I mentioned comes/came to my mind this question: it's that " fact " what we MUSIC lovers and audiophiles are looking for or what need we to be in an audio system true " heaven "? ? ? !!! I think that exist several questions or even maybe more questions than answers around that " zero distortions " units behavior and those questions could be not necessarily technical oriented even that we can't " close " our eyes if exist clear and precise technical evidences/tests. That question in other way: could any one of us imagine or think think how will be the high-end on each of us home systems with electronics that performs the same. Advantages or disadvantages? and what could happen with all electronic items manufacturers? Yours point of view certainly are welcomed . holmz and the OP ? R. |
I think we would need to A/B those four to make a determination. As you lead with, “Other technically oriented gentlemen…” then I think in my case that searching for some musical nirvana is an endless game. I am leaning more towards accuracy in signal quality. Now if the speaker load was purely resistive then a cogent argument might be to choose the lowest distortion amp. If one has the capability to determine the distortion after the speaker, then the system with the lowest distortion (particularly in the 3rd harmonic and beyond, as well as IMD) would be closer to being high fidelity. Again I am more leaning toward fidelity over a musical flavour. That said, however, I am running a tube stereo amp at the moment. Which does sound nice. The gorilla is the speakers, their distortions and resonances, their sometimes difficult to drive loads. I am somewhat under the belief that the passive crossover much of the problem. If we got rid of that we might have less of a phase versus frequency dependency. However we currently have this mishmash of amps and speakers where we need to find synergy. And this leads us to listening to determine what works. Ideally the speakers would be easy for the amps to drive. Anyhow, at some point the experience is to listen to music. I have had pretty good results with my first amp (Class-A/B) it was a bit grainy but that might have been the recordings? I have heard a class-D Purifi powering some smaller speakers and that system was also pretty magical with 125 w/channel. The whole analogue side is getting an upgrade. It was very nice sounding, and all of it was last millennium stuff. But I want to try low output cartridges and need more phono gain. These all seem like first world problems, and other than the speakers and subs making huge differences, the rest of the gear, pre and amp(s), are usually more in the category of nuanced to me, than being super obvious. |
Dear @holmz : You posted: " When they have zero distortion, then by definition they will sound the same." "" It is getting down towards the theory side of “close to zero” distortion. "" I took both statements to post that example of 4 amps with really " near " closer to the Zero distortion " ideal "/target. I mean that in my example I took the assumption that all four really have zero distortion and from there came my questions I posted. If those amps have " zero distortion " and are running inside its operational specs and obviously with speakers the amps can handle then according with what you and other gentleman posted in theory those amps will sounds the same. I doubt that could happen till we listen to it. " I am leaning more towards accuracy in signal quality. " that's good and critical because with out system accuracy we will far away of the recording. "" I am more leaning toward fidelity over a musical flavour. "" of course because in that way you will be near to the recording.
R.
|
Well I answered your question truthfully @rauliruegas and I have no practical way to subjectively listen to every amp, nor to go through every subjective review. So I go somewhat by others using similar speakers have found to work, as well as using objective measurements to try and exclude gear. However my last two amp are one that my friend with the Mangaplanners sold to be secondhand. For Class A, A/B, and D distortion and IMD do give some indication of the quality. Most people are not likely to mod their amps with different capacitors as the OP had mentioned, so shooting equipment can be a complicated path.
Usually it is measured in the frequency domain... rather than statistically. |
Dear @holmz : I have an audio friend that own the Halcro DM-58 amps, I will contact him to share the idea to listen in his system against the Benchmark or Divialet problem is to find out these last amps. Anyway, your points in the subject were welcomed for me including the last one: "" Usually it is measured in the frequency domain... rather than statistically.
R. |
The fundamental error of Julian Hirsch, and most 'Alikists' is believing there is a correlation between a static measurement and a complex dynamic process. At best there is a Venn diagram-like overlap. Another poster mentioned that no component can be evaluated 'in exclusis'. With which I agree completely. Also, I encourage people to read the book 'Cork Dork' by Bianca Bosker. Besides a fun read, there is an excellent chapter on the science behind how palates are trained to pick up subtle differences simply lost on others. The parallels to audio are striking and I think valid. No one would state that two wines of equal alcohol content taste the same. |
Thanks for book recommendation and your interesting post...
|
+1 Amplifiers with insufficient feedback (which is to say: most amplifiers...) can have chaotic reactions to an actual audio signal, which can change depending on the exact volume level. This is due to bifurcations caused by non-linearities at the feedback node.
|
The question to my mind is, always, is this an intellectual desire or a desire of the heart? Does your heart want a straight wire with gain or does it want something engaging? Sometimes those match, sometimes they do not. Much of our joy and passion in audio comes from pursuing loftiness. Big ideals, and, to me, denying our passion which has no ruler to use when enjoying music. |
BTW, my point to this whole thread is that there are those of us with experience, who are confident in it, and those who lack it. The gap cannot be closed by argument. The proof is in the number of posts this thread has already. The debate here is endless. Go get experience for yourself and then decide what to do. The trap is that with enough discourse something better emerges, or a position that needs no defense can be defended. I don't care if you believe me or not. You need to believe yourself. The second worst outcome in audio is "I spent a ton of money on an amp this guy on Audiogon said was his favorite but I can't tell a difference between it and my $10 earbuds." |
From the musician onward through the instrument, studio or venue, microphone, cables, pre-amp, mixing desk, recorder... everything adds coloration. Some only listen to chamber music, others acid rock, so their preferred distortions are widely divergent. Neither would likely prefer a SWwG system over their flawed but cherished one. Oh, and btw, Masters make about 50% more than PhDs. 😏 |
It isn't. An amplifier often has to behave as a voltage source, since most speakers are meant to be driven by such. A wire is incapable of this behavior, even if it had gain 😉 |
