"There can be only one!" (From Highlander)
One Amp To ‘Rule’ Them All....
Is there one amplifier that everyone can agree on as a contemporary standard? An amplifier that can be considered a standard in both the studio and in a home stereo setup?
What one amplifier does everything very well and can be found in homes and in professional audio engineering environments?
What amp covers all the bases and gives you a glimpse into all qualities of fine musical reproduction?
...something Yamaha? ...something McIntosh?
What one amplifier does everything very well and can be found in homes and in professional audio engineering environments?
What amp covers all the bases and gives you a glimpse into all qualities of fine musical reproduction?
...something Yamaha? ...something McIntosh?
138 responses Add your response
highlander? lovely. but which One? Is there one amplifier that everyone can agree on as a contemporary standard? An amplifier that can be considered a standard in both the studio and in a home stereo setup? Nope What one amplifier does everything very well and can be found in homes and in professional audio engineering environments? I seriously doubt any ‘single’ amp could ever be a concensus of opinion for domestic and pro audio purposes simultaneously. the same variables exist in pro and domestic arenas. namely, Preffs, budgets, and the intentioned speakers being used which very likely allows for an immense number of amp options. if only one or the other ball park, home, or pro audio were the OP’s ’ aim here there would still be an abundance of choices which would be corraled by budgets, sonic preffs, and the loudspeakers being used. for sheer power capability I heard at the fla. Expo AVMs MP 8.2 monos driving a pr of Raedo 2.1s (or 2.2s?). the AVMs output was 1200w @ 8!! and as I said in my account I posted elsewhere on these pages, the reproduction was concussive on the lower end, and aggressively transparent above it.. Startlingly neutral! not a sound for everyone to be sure. at retail not a outfit for many folks either. but for the purpose of knowing exactly what is being recorded without bias or influence it could be a great tool for getting the tracks laid down with integrity. OP says: What amp covers all the bases and gives you a glimpse into all qualities of fine musical reproduction? trying to erase the factor of speakers and the rest of the associated variables, and looking only at the power plant, the most organic natural sounding power I’ve experienced lately, , was again at the 2019 Fla. Expo listening to the Merrill Audio 116 300w @ 8, Elemente monos. naturally one can not distinctively account the sound was entirely due to the presence of what ever amps, yet they play a very significant role in the reproduction and this room was definitely memorable. as I’ve migrated thru the years from SS power to just having Tubes in the power train alone, the Merrill Audio amps would be or could be the amps which would make me forget about glass power. the rendition was spooky good. yet again, the entry fee for the Merrill Audio amps is prohibitive at the moment. the notion of a one size fits all in any respect is more fantasy than honesty. in audio, pro or domestic barring budgets and even synergy, individual prreffs by themselves will be the bar to a consensus for this application. |
No. With amplifiers - **all** amplifiers- its all about distortion- what distortion the amp makes and what distortion it doesn't make. Because the ear converts all forms of distortion into tonality (a fact that has been known since at least the 1930s) all amplifiers therefore also have colorations. Solid state colorations are just as audible as tube colorations hence the tubes/transistors debate which is older than the internet. Feedback reduces distortion, but adds distortions of its own (see Norman Crowhurst); we've known this fact for 60-70 years. So amps that employ feedback will be brighter and harsher than real music. So there isn't and can't be an actual amplifier that is a benchmark, that is completely uncolored. |
One ________________ To ‘Rule’ Them All.... Fill-in the blank with a noun any noun -- a thread starter for every forum in existence. This question is the definition of moot, yet I and many others replied. Sounds like the definition of irony; we must all have too much time on our hands. The better question: Is there a noun, any noun (not just audio related) to be placed in the blank that we could all agree would "Rule" Them All? |
I just think we’ve got to be able to come up with some common ground and some reference standards.... We need ‘yard sticks’ for all the subjective experiences we are always batting about. To make sure we are all talking about the same things and in the same proportions wouldn’t it be excellent to be able to point to a certain amp and say “amp A is a very good example of____________” (holographic imaging, correct scale, large scale, small scale, swing, musicality, tone, forward imaging, recessed imaging, layering, tempo/rhythm, etc...) Am I making sense? |
Keith Johnson's Anniversary Amp was the best I've ever heard. I think the unmatched speed - rise times measured in nano seconds and settling times in microseconds, makes property set up Spectral amp without peer. I've heard them trounce more expensive, more powerful amps, which can't actually deliver power to the speakers before the music has moved on. |
| Post removed |
@2psyop Why is this a silly question? We have defined many standard measures in the world. Why is it silly to want to further define our ability to communicate about the qualities of audio reproduction? If we can begin to agree on (not love, like, prefer, feel) certain pieces of gear that define/embody/reliably produce certain qualities of sound reproduction (both ‘good’ and ‘bad’) then we can all communicate more clearly about what we love/like/prefer and we can help those who build speakers, amps, etc further refine their craft and our listening enjoyment. It would make many of our discussions less about ourselves and more about growing each other’s awareness and hopefully growing this industry. We really need a heck of a lot more common frames of reference in audiophilia land! |
And just because this industry has been ‘the wild west’ for so long doesn’t mean it has to continue this way. Honest so much of it is agreed to voodoo and kept that way so very well off people can keep enjoying spending more and more money. Let’s start getting some solid points of common reference so both the industry and its consumers can make more meaningful investments. ...and generally people who use the term ‘silly’ are usually ‘snooty’. |
@cleeds yes I know we have some very exacting measures when it comes to the functional testing of gear. But do we know what causes our perceptions of certain gear? Have we defined enough our language about those perceptions? What you call ‘tonality’ I may call ‘tuneful’ or ‘natural’. What does ‘musical’ mean when we hear it in an amp and is that the same as ‘swing’ and what about that amp causes this perception? Is ‘holographic’ sound the same as ‘an excellent 3-dimensional sound stage’? What causes the perception of height or image scale with a given amplifier? What causes ‘inner detail’ or ‘good sense of tempo’ or ‘good rhythm’ in an amp? Do we know why there are supposed synergies between certain audio components? Can we begin to make better predictions when it comes to gear choices? We need more commonly decided upon points of reference that is for sure. |
“We don’t see things as they are. We see them as we are” Anais Nin Eveyone has a different standard, taste, inclination based upon many, many factors. Some audiophiles here mostly believe in measurements, others trust their ears and many people have their own ideas about what sounds good. I like to say that they like their own coloration of the sound. Without delving into deep psychology, we are products of our culture, our parents, our indidual and collective biases, our values, norms and so on. How could we agree on the “One amp to “rule” them all. And why would we want that anyway. I have two amps, one solid state and one tube. Different sounds that I both really like... I also like many flavors of ice cream and one does not rule them all. There is not a reference amp. Even if there was one, tomorrow someone would make a better one? That is why I call it a silly question. |
So since we exist in what is quite possibly an infinite universe, does this mean we should give up defining things? The rules, standards, measures we have today took time to form. In the early 1800’s electricity was explained as a fluid. In the late 1800’s and into the 1900’s we believed in luminiferous aether to explain light transmitting through a vacuum. And on topic, the first amplifiers were designed and implemented only about 100 years ago. There is much left to define and possibly even more left to discover when it comes to amplifier design and how they affect audio reproduction. Interesting how many are against what really can be seen as a scientific pursuit. I am only interested in further refining our definitions and language regarding the effects we hear in audio reproduction. To do so we will need some benchmarks. (Most of us can point to the sky and say that’s blue, we might experience it differently and some may not even see the blue but having that reference gives us all a greater ability to speak to each other regarding other colors and/or shades of blue). If we can do this more definitively with audio gear quite possibly we can build better amps or choose with better knowledge appropriate synergies of gear. Perhaps one day an amp can be made that can be tuned to your preferences. Many recording studios still have Yamaha NS-10 near-field monitors in their control rooms. A good example of a solid point of reference in the audio world. You mention ‘better’....And really what is ‘better’ anyway? Are you simply going to settle for saying “‘better’ is whatever I like now.” Cus that’s what a lot of this industry seems to be. New. Different. Better. But can you really prove it? Or does everyone just really like feeling special and/or unique supposedly hearing ‘the better’ with their feelings (and lighter pockets)? I know I do....but really, I want more than feelies. I want to know and define WHY different amplifiers do different things. And I am wondering if there are any benchmarks out there. That’s all. Can no one point to a particular amp and say “it has great tone.” How about, “this amp creates a holographic soundstage in most instances.” Or “this Amplifier has really great swing to it”. How about that, can we come up with a list of amps that people think demonstrate particular qualities in amplification? For example, I have a zh270 and it is an example of an amplifier capable of holographic reproduction. I also have a BAT VK-500 and it is a great example of tone and effortless reproduction. Yes I was hoping for one amp that is competent in most respects, but examples of amplifiers that excel at particular aspects will do as well. |
I understand your point, but I would like to say that the sky, when you start to understand atmosphere and light is not blue. It is never just blue. Look at it on any given day, and you will see all the colors of the spectrum from cool or warm gray to yellow to greenish blue to red and so on. To say the sky is blue as a reference point is just limiting and misleading and not educational. But the color of the sky is a good, if not a great, example of amplifiers. I think amplifiers, the beauty of the sounds they all make, is much like that of the beauty of the sky. Limitless in color, tonality, purity of hue and intensity. And we cannot say one skyline is better than another. If really seen deeply, they are all quite stunning. BTW I used to think solid state amplifiers sounded the best. I picked up a good, maybe not great, vacuum tube amp that I adore much more than the solid state amp. When I went to an audiophile buddy’s house he picked up a Bel Canto class d amp that he luvs. I cannot stand the sound of it, but I did not tell him. Beauty of sound is in one’s own brain. That’s it... really but I suppose anyone can learn to better at listening. |
| Post removed |
brettmccee, I understand your preference for a disciplined scientific approach to audio with standards and an agreed upon language devoted to it All words, terms and concepts would be clearly defined and their usage very strictly obeyed. I think many of us recognize you are on an enlightened path that's ultimately leading to establishing logic and order to a currently chaotic HEA environment. I believe all Audiogon members, even some of our dimmer brethren, realize we should applaud your vision and encourage your efforts towards discovering the "One Amp To Rule Them All". Now, for the Good News! (you should probably sit down before proceeding.): We all voted and decided to put you in charge of transforming the chaotic HEA environment into the inspired and orderly environment you've envisioned and detailed. Unfortunately, this is an unpaid position but you do have the remainder of your lifetime as the allotted timeframe. Best wishes on your mission and please let us know when it's completed. Tim |
michaelgreenaudio,
I spend most of my days with people in their twenties, late twenties. Kind of people whose primary and, according to them, sufficient source of music is an iPhone (or similar). When it comes to sound, they are far from those sparse few who asked you to tune their rooms. When it comes to the rest of your description of twenty-somethings, you are spot on. I am fully aware that people have hobbies and that someone’s hobby may be changing equipment or room or something else. They are no worse than those who like simplicity of on/off button and not much else. Tuning and tweaking is great for whoever likes to do it, for money or for fun, but it does not make those who do not do it any less correct. Yes, I took the cover of an amplifier off and no, it did nothing. Yes, it was "walking" and I apologize that I could not report same findings as you. It may be, at least in part, due to a lack of financial interest I have in listening to music. EDIT: One of those twenty-somethings I interact with these days finished SUNY Oneonta and highly praised the sound in that building you were involved with. Even many years later, you do get praises. I thought you might find it rewarding. |
The amps you mention are not there. If we are to take amps that are used BOTH at home and in studios, here’s a list of actuals, not suppositions: - Benchmark AHB2 - FM Acoustics - JMF Audio and the list is not much longer than that. Most amps used in studios are not used at home, and of course vice-versa... Now one amp to rule them all doesn't exist, but there's quite a long list of absolutely brilliant amps which we have all heard, read about or maybe listened to. I am using a pair of Gryphon Mephisto and I have yet to see or hear something they cant do!! my other preference goes to Pass XA amps, but I could live with any good amp, from classA, AB, ABH to D. The Benchmark are probably one of the best sounding for the cost, and the Spec for classD...absolutely excellent!! |
POWER+cable+PRE AMP+cable+AMP+cable+SPEAKER (set up)+cable+ROOM (temperature, pressure, acoustics)+LISTENER (skill, taste, etc) These are the elements, more or less, with BOLD more important ... and I ask you op... How could anything be standard in this? There is no standard. People who want standards are on the perfectionist side of the spectrum, the scientists side. You all come to music because music is the universal language of humanity. It’s not a science project to set up a room, it’s a journey into the self. You want to leave your bias in the supossed land of no bias but you are afraid. Embrace the unknown, and the unknowable. Have faith in yourself, not fear of missing out. (As far as mastering rooms that use tube amps, I have a successful and well known example right in front of me daily, but yes, they are in the minority as it’s a PITA.) |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
The perfect amplifier would be the one that works best with the particular speaker to which it would be paired. For studio speakers, like those made by Genelec, the perfect amplifier, to me, would be one that puts out 0.000 watts/channel. It is crazy to even speculate what kind of amp--solid state, tube, OTL, single-ended, pushpull--never mind the specific implementation of a particular variety. I cannot even say what type I like because my favorite amps span OTL, SET and pushpull tube amps and I've only seriously listened to a handful of solid state amps. Looking at some of the candidates mentioned here clearly shows how mush everyone's systems, taste, and experience differ. Every so often magazines like Absolute Sound and Stereophile raise the question of whether a particular amp they are raving about is the best ever or something close to perfection; their choice has been consistently disappointing to me. Remember Halcro? After hearing their amp, a friend who is in the industry mentioned how he had tears in his eyes after hearing the Halcro because it made his so nostalgic--it reminded his so much of the Phase Linear 700 (this was NOT meant as a compliment). f there is even a perfect amp for me out there, I've not heard it, and it would assuredly not be perfect for even a small fraction of others. |
Tim DiParavicini has been making some very fine products for both the studio and home for a very long time as @lukaske mentioned. EAR/Yoshino doesn’t get the respect of some American tube brands due to lack of marketing, but he makes some of the best engineered products available. The 509 monoblocks are killer! |
That’s a silly question. The only way to answer that, is to pick the greatest value product. Because it’s easy to see the greatest amps if you step into the $50k+ arena and start looking at amps like the CH Precision M1 ($94k) or the Gryphon Mephisto ($150k). But if you want an amp that an audiophile (audiophile being a person that will spend crazy money compared to someone else with the same budget) would realize is a game changer within reach, I’d go with the: NuPrime Evolution One https://totallywired.nz/nuprime-2/nuprime-evolution-one/ |
Ok ok ok....so I also think in trying to define an amp that is a common/standard point of reference, the amp needs to be somewhat common and affordable. Again I am not looking for the ‘perfect’ amp, I am looking for us to define an amp that does everything pretty well and consistently, and is something that pros and consumers have heard and can agree on as a competent piece of gear. My goal: I am interested in being able to talk more specifically and exactingly about the different qualities we know and love in audio amplification. To do this we all need a common point of reference. It does not need to be perfect but must produce most or all of the qualities inherent in ‘quality’ amplification. Why would this be adventageous? For one we could begin to define ‘how much more’ or ‘how much better’ one amp does something vs the common reference amplifier. This would help us make better choices and would probably even hep designers zero in on how to evolve certain qualities in amplification. Adcom? Yamaha? Hafler? There has got to be an amp that you could ‘live with’ that pros and consumer can agree upon. Come on people! Once we define/decide on this common reference amp we can all start doing so serious exploration!!! |
The problem with humanity is individualism. (too much chaos, no order, no future) The saving grace and answer in humanity is individualism. (chaos breaks free of dead perfected order and we gain a future) The negative proofing ’no future’ analytical mind (turns back on it’s self via elevating the record into enforced dogma) attempts to commoditize...and make all things ’safe and known’. This is fear, plain and simple. The animal that tries to be logical and fails dismally. This is the area of applied science, the numbers end of the game, where good enough tries to represent all of reality as boxes of commodities. The monkey in the moment of fear and thus attempting to control life. It is actually prediction. Which works, but only up to a point. we gave it a name. We called it 'engineering'. The creative mind, understands that facts don’t exist and are a figment of the imagination of the analytical mind. Oddly enough, this is the only fact we can ’prove’ is real -the one about facts not existing. Paradox, just like the true quantum nature of reality. This is the area of real actual science. Science which is all theory, and has a open mutable future...and most definitely a mutable past, as the past is the record, not the reality. That the record is the record it does not dictate the future’s course, it merely predicts a bit..here and there. The creative mind discovers the new and forces the record to change according to the emergent understanding of the new. It lives not in fear, it lives in anticipation of the new. That’s real and actual science. It can understand the analytical mind and sympathize with it, but also understands that applied science (engineering) needs a whack in the head every now and then to free up it’s insanity in engineering’s attempts in boxing, permanence, dogma and commoditization. It is absolutely imperative that people understand the difference between the two. To not mistake dogmatic numbers and engineering for real and actual science. Engineering is designed from the ground up to be dogma, science is designed from the ground up to the not be closed but open to change ---and is the change itself. When exploring the new and the unknown and the contestable, like here in audio, it is imperative to not let the analytical numerically oriented dogmatic engineering mind -get a hold of the conversation, as it will reduce it to projections of lies and show you the numbers to prove it. I’m not sure it is possible to be more blind and wrong headed than that. If one allows it.... the whole world will slow to a stop and circle in on itself, close the door to the future...and remain in the box it knows and is comfortable with. You’ll be somone’s comfortable commodity at that point. Engineering makes us ’safe’. But dead, as it is without change, without mutability, without the new. Science enables the potential for the existence of a future. |
Brettmcee, Even if we disregard opinion on sound quality, I don't think you will find any particular amp that a majority of people have actually heard. I bet even the most common and long-lived amps have not been heard by more than 10% of the populace. So, at a starting point, you might want to survey how many people have heard certain candidates. I can offer the NAD 3020, Crown DC 300, Dynaco ST-70, McIntosh 275, and Adcom GFA 555 as sort of serious gear that where somewhat widely experienced (i.e., not including stuff like Bose tabletop models). |
michaelgreenaudio, Do not be so harsh on yourself. I am not sure, but I do suspect it is a part of it. What can you do? We all chose different careers. Your profession happens to be our hobby. You earn, we spend. Everybody happy. I am not sure if I have ever mentioned it, but I do believe your room tuning thing actually works. I have never experienced it, but it makes sense. Explanations do not, though. |
