Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

    Originally posted by johnnyrichards View Post
    .

    High end audio is nothing more than the ultimate expression of the Bose attack.
    And so long as you think that way, there will NEVER be progress. Beryllium tweeter, the analysis that has been done on x-overs, Finite element analsys, even Kippel to a degree, driver materials in woofers, ect. It never started with $100 speakers now, has it?

    Right there you show reverse snobbery, etc. Its NOT ABOUT COST. Its about value which is user defined. You, as anyone knows this.

    I never, at any point said anything about lacking good process in design, your speakers not performing, or anything you do as being wrong. You know I respect your design diligence, and your due process, furthermore it is amazing what you make for the inexpence you use which is a statement to you. Stop whining and realize what is actually going on here. An EE degree does not make you a subject matter expert. About 10,000-20,000 hours of direct experiences working with the technology does. I understand how an amp works, heck I may even be able to design one if I felt like it, but I am far from an expert.

    ..Then again, it is hard to fill all of these cups when they are already full.

    I'm going to design another 5.25"-6" bookshelf now... leave me alone.:rolleyes:
    .

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

      Originally posted by Deward Hastings View Post
      As to the question in the thread title . . . it depends on whether you are buying sound, or status, or resale value or whatever. A LM3886 board at $20 (not counting power supply) will equal or outperform anything out there when directly coupled to a dome tweeter. An IRS2092 (classD) board at $50 will equal or outperform anything out there when directly coupled to a cone midrange. Neither will produce any audible distortion (beyond that produced by the driver itself). And the same can be said about a number of other low-cost new-or-used amps. Whether spending more money than that is a "waste", then, obviously depends on other considerations. If someone prefers the euphonic coloration and "golden glow" of "audiophile" tube amps it's not a "waste" for them to buy them. Do what makes you happy . . .
      Deward,
      Here is the golden standard of the narrow minds that have respectable knowledge but drag this place down. If you think an LM3886 board will perform that well:

      A) Why is in not the only one on every tweeter?
      B) What do you base your explanation on, mfg specs? A singe company's market specs in its speakers, some
      pro" who has done independent testing?
      c) It is the opinion in exactly which you are mocking.

      Consider the source too: All from someone who is all active, and swears passive is the root of all evil.... So of coarse you will ivory tower the B2030a, which is a speaker which fits all of your personally preferred criteria. It is a ok to good value, but not the end of the line.

      Yet you preach here as if you are right? Sorry, I do not buy it.

      The one thing you hit is it has to be right for the "YOU" in it all. And because my right is far different than yours, doe not mean one is better than the other.

      We are suppose to celebrate differences, no? No. Lets just be bitter and cantankerous if it does not fit your ideology model, its easier.
      .

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

        I bought a pair of $2,500 monoblocks, not because of its sound quality (or lack of it), but because I wanted never to worry again about headroom (with 400W RMS @ 4 Ohm, I think I have more than enough power). :D
        Line Array: IDS-25 Clone, FE-83.
        2-2.5 Way:
        Zaph Audio's winning entry: ZA5+SB29. - Microliths: RS125+RS28. - Small Bangs: TB W4-1658SB+SEAS 27TBFC/G. - Monoliths: Peerless 830884+SEAS 27TBFC/G.
        3-3.5 Way:Miniliths: SEAS P21/CA21REX+Neo8 PDR+Neo3 PDR. - Megaliths: 2xDayton RS270+2xT-B W4-1337SB+SB29. - ZDT3.5 +: 2xDayton RS180+Dayton RS52+Vifa DQ25. Reflexos: OB 4xDayton RS150 + Neo3 PDR.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

          Originally posted by Sydney View Post
          I couldn't find the post that said that Pro-Amps have restricted bandwidth:
          I would like to know which one's specifically...
          I have a friend who retired from ProSound who had 22 Crown amps.
          There was no problem with restricted bandwidth and they would take abuse that would killed amps not designed for the conditions of touring.
          A 70V pro amp may gave restricted bandwidth.

          None of us are concerned with those though.
          :blues: Flat frequency response, a smooth sound power response free of resonance, careful driver-integration, and high dynamic range both upward and downward :blues:

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

            I also went with high wattage for dynamics and headroom(550w 4Ω @ 0.2% THD+N, 625 @ 1%). Using a LM3886 amp sounds anemic in comparison.
            "He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you." Friedrich Nietzsche

            http://www.diy-ny.com/

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

              Originally posted by Interlochen2 View Post
              it usually takes months to get to know it

              and that's after a reasonable break-in period.

              I'm convinced there is a genetic element involved.


              Are you taking your amp out on a date?
              How do you measure break-in, and how do you determine what the necessary braek-in period is?
              Does everyone with golden ears have superior genetics?

              I bought a pair of $2,500 monoblocks, not because of its sound quality (or lack of it), but because I wanted never to worry again about headroom (with 400W RMS @ 4 Ohm, I think I have more than enough power).
              Do you feel it was worth it, over an XPA-2 or Crown XLS1500? To me the only justification for that kind of money is aesthetics. Even longetivity isn't much of a selling point to me.
              :blues: Flat frequency response, a smooth sound power response free of resonance, careful driver-integration, and high dynamic range both upward and downward :blues:

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

                Originally posted by GranteedEV View Post




                So do you feel it was worth it, over an XPA-2 or Crown XLS1500?
                A large difference is in the power supply. I find pro amps can deliver the power, but usually with a good deal of noise which in a home environment is highly audible. Good home amps are exhaustive in their noise reduction.

                HOWEVER!!!!

                If you get some line isolating transformers (2.5KVA I think.... 70-80lbs) like James had, the QSC 500 he had sounded wonderful!
                .

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

                  Originally posted by mzisserson View Post
                  A large difference is in the power supply. I find pro amps can deliver the power, but usually with a good deal of noise which in a home environment is highly audible. Good home amps are exhaustive in their noise reduction.

                  HOWEVER!!!!

                  If you get some line isolating transformers (2.5KVA I think.... 70-80lbs) like James had, the QSC 500 he had sounded wonderful!
                  I think you need to take that on a case by case basis. The noise floor on my Crown is through the floor.

                  Your comment may fall into the: There are both good and bad pro/consumer class amps.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    Face excellent point....I have been wondering too. We're all audiophiles here, the people pervert the stereotype seem to be in a class warfare state ....
                    First, we're not all audiophiles. Some of us are music lovers who view the gear as a mere a conduit to the music and not something in and of itself to get overly excited about.

                    Second, there's no "class warfare" here, because there's nothing in this debate that is even tangentially related to "class" as it is usually defined (generally speaking, either social/power position by birth, or socio-economic status). Unless you want to argue that the "have nots" are those lust after various audio boxes, and the "haves" are those who have said "been there, done that, learned my lesson, amps are commodity parts, what's next?"

                    If anything, there is "sense warfare" going on here: people who have sense versus people who obsess needlessly about nonexistent differences in simple gain blocks.

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    My audiophile clients
                    So...you have a pecuniary interest in perpetuating the mythology of sonic differences in audio electronics boxes?

                    NOT disclosing that sort of thing up front in this kind of debate is a severe ethical lapse on your part.

                    So, answer the question, that we can understand whether your position is motivated by belief in mythology, or that combined with a healthy dose of rational (and hopefully cynical) self-interest: is your income now, or was it ever, derived from selling audio electronics boxes, and convincing others that they sound different from one another?

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    So they bought their system from a store, a valid option when you billout at $350/hr.
                    I'm curious, do you think that's a high figure?

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    Id also like to see the "science" dweebs purchase some measurement gear and start practicing some science...Do you think Nelson Pass thinks all his amplifier sound alike.
                    Obviously, there's a large scope shift between "practicing some science" and asking what Nelson Pass "thinks."

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    What a purposeless life...to design an amplifier to sound the same....with no hope of improvement.
                    To be sure, there are plenty of avenues to improve the audio amplifier. Amps can become more energy efficient. They can be made smaller. They can be made more power-dense. They can be made cheaper. They can be made in different form factors, with eye-catching industrial design. They can be merged with other components, such as powerful DSP's.

                    It's just the "sound" that's a given, assuming the designer seeks neutrality and not to make a low-fidelity fixed tone control.

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    Genetics is Science, and since Pallas seems to want to blow it off,
                    You don't understand why I'm "blowing it off," do you?

                    It is simply this: there is no evidence to support the claim. When alleged golden ears have to go on their ears alone - i.e. not rely on price tags and brand reputation, but just on the sound - they revert to the mean in their ability to distinguish audio electronics DUT's from one another.

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    I would assume his genetics would not limit him from playing middle linebacker for the Chicago Bears,,,,,if his Mom would just sign the permission slip he'd be out there this Sunday.....Oh yeah Pallas can't run a 4.5 forty and throw a 235lb running back to the ground with one arm....maybe genetics is the reason. So would the argument be that hearing is exempt from this sort of disparity? I think not....
                    There is plenty of good reasons that you and I and most if not all of the participants on this forum are not in a position to replace a Brian Urlacher. (Or, to use my favorite currently-playing LB, London Fletcher. Hail!) What percentage of that is because of genetics and what percentage of that is based on training/practice I take no position on, having no special knowledge in that area.

                    But by the analogously objective metrics (performance in blind tests, etc.), there is no evidence to lend credence to your position here. Likewise, studies of trained listeners vs. untrained listeners report similar conclusions, with the primary improvement offered by trained listeners being that they reach their conclusions more quickly.

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    Anyone who uses middle aged men for ABX listening tests is an idiot.
                    Given that "middle aged men" are basically the entire "high end" audio market, what they can hear matters quite a bit. But unless you can show a test showing a statistically significant variances from men vs. women, or from "middle aged men" vs. a control group that's a random sample of ages and genders, you're just blowing smoke.

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    Women hear much better and with little education can pretty much tear your weak a$$ DIY system to the ground and tell you..."I don't know how you listen to this noise" Referenced from personal experience my friends....
                    Then perhaps you and your friends need higher-quality audio systems. You could start by focusing on the loudspeakers (constant midrange directivity, multiple subwoofers, etc.) and the loudspeaker-room interaction generally, and spending less time obsessing about "subtle changes" in audio electronics boxes that don't actually exist.

                    That's my approach, and the only audio-related comments I've gotten from women have been things like the following:
                    "Wow, you have a great singing voice" (hearing me playing Barenaked Ladies' "What a Good Boy" from their live Rock Spectacle album in my bedroom at low volume, from the living room).

                    Or texts reading: "damn you, I couldn't stand to listen to the radio on the drive home," after someone ribbed me for having a vertical center channel above my television, in the same orientation and elevation as my other mains.

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    I have owned an ABX machine for almost a decade...it is not a fair test and does not represent the real world uses.
                    Nobody claimed it represents "real world uses." Neither, for instance, do loudspeaker measurements taken in an anechoic chamber. Do you argue they're useless, as well.

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    The fact that researchers have not been able to find the threshold in an ABX test were people can hear a difference with statistical regularity means that it is an invalid test.
                    That's simple not true. There is plenty of literature on the subject. Look for the term "just noticeable difference," or "JND."

                    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post
                    Ill tell you a unique test, when you change the amplifier and the client wants to listen more or less...over a 6 month period. Just time them in their listening habits. Very revealing about a components quality...
                    Actually, any differences in listening habits in that circumstance are likely to be swamped by a much more relevant variable: free time available.

                    But again, the fact that you refer to "client" is telling.

                    Why did you choose the ethical lapse over honest disclosure?
                    Last edited by Pallas; 09-17-2011, 10:45 PM.
                    --
                    "Based on my library and laboratory research, I have concluded, as have others, that the best measures of speaker quality are frequency response and dispersion pattern. I have not found any credible research showing that most of the differences we hear among loudspeakers cannot be explained by examining these two variables." -Alvin Foster, 22 BAS Speaker 2 (May, 1999)

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

                      Originally posted by mzisserson View Post
                      Deward,
                      Here is the golden standard of the narrow minds that have respectable knowledge but drag this place down. If you think an LM3886 board will perform that well:

                      A) Why is in not the only one on every tweeter?
                      B) What do you base your explanation on, mfg specs? A singe company's market specs in its speakers, some
                      pro" who has done independent testing?
                      FWIW, Linkwitz has done testing. And Geddes has stated a few times that chip-amps are excellent because their matched parts mean lower zero-crossing distortion.

                      Originally posted by mzisserson View Post
                      We are suppose to celebrate differences, no?
                      When they exist, sure. When they are figments of a misused imagination, nah.

                      Originally posted by mzisserson View Post
                      A large difference is in the power supply. I find pro amps can deliver the power, but usually with a good deal of noise which in a home environment is highly audible. Good home amps are exhaustive in their noise reduction.
                      Curious what you mean about noise here. Do you mean HF hiss, or do you mean mechanical (i.e. fan) noise.

                      Fan noise is a given for fan-cooled amps. If the amps are exposed and near the listening position, it is a good idea go to for passive-cooled amps and not fan-cooled amps. If the amps are concealed and relatively far away from the listening area, it is less of an issue.

                      I've honestly heard more HF hiss on efficient speakers from very expensive home amps than from pro amps. But yes, hiss can be an issue of one's tweeters are very sensitive. And generally speaking, amps with higher power (pro or consumer) are more likely to have objectionable levels of hiss.

                      As for background "hash," tube amps are more likely to have that problem than solid state amps.
                      --
                      "Based on my library and laboratory research, I have concluded, as have others, that the best measures of speaker quality are frequency response and dispersion pattern. I have not found any credible research showing that most of the differences we hear among loudspeakers cannot be explained by examining these two variables." -Alvin Foster, 22 BAS Speaker 2 (May, 1999)

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

                        Originally posted by Pallas View Post


                        Given that "middle aged men" are basically the entire "high end" audio market, what they can hear matters quite a bit. But unless you can show a test showing a statistically significant variances from men vs. women, or from "middle aged men" vs. a control group that's a random sample of ages and genders, you're just blowing smoke.
                        Nail meet Hammer. It's like using a group of Women to test Viagra. Why wouldn't you have an N that is made up of your target market: Middle Aged Men (on both counts:D)

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

                          Originally posted by fjhuerta View Post
                          I bought a pair of $2,500 monoblocks, not because of its sound quality (or lack of it), but because I wanted never to worry again about headroom
                          I still have my pair of Adcom GFA565 (about the same power) that I used to use to drive my Maggies and Thiels. The parallel output devices not only give more power, they reduce crossover distortion (in class AB and B amps). They sit on a shelf now, sort of the ultimate in "headroom" (unused power). I really should sell them . . .

                          The LM3886 chip amps drive my present tweeters just as loud, if not louder . . . using dedicated "per-driver" amps actually increases "headroom" despite lower total amplifier power . . . nothing is lost or "padded down" in the crossover, and the tweeter signal does not have to ride on top of whatever the power-hungry bass is doing. Much better that way. Which was the point of my previous post . . . there are less expensive ways to get audibly flawless amplifier performance than "big buck" audiophile amps (which may or may not be flawless, depending on the speaker load they're driving).
                          "It suggests that there is something that is happening in the real system that is not quite captured in the models."

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

                            Originally posted by andy19191 View Post
                            'Audiophile' is the word the OP used to describe 'audiophile' amplifiers and seems to have been understood by most people here. Examples of some of the beliefs that distinguish 'audiophiles' from others:

                            http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf

                            Audiophile is the word that people that hold these types of belief tend to use to describe themselves and the hardware that has been manufactured for their consumption over the last 35 years or so. Consequently, those that hold the more orthodox scientific view of how sound, sound perception and audio equipment works often use it to distinguish hardware targeted at audiophiles from hardware that is not.
                            "Our Nation’s interests are best served by fostering a peaceful global system comprised
                            of interdependent networks of trade, finance, information, law, people and governance."
                            - from the October 2007 U.S. Naval capstone doctrine
                            A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower
                            (a lofty notion since removed in the March 2015 revision)

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

                              This is a very serious thread..........
                              Attached Files

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: a bit OT. Is an 'audiophile' amp a waste of money?

                                Originally posted by Pallas View Post
                                First, we're not all audiophiles. Some of us are music lovers who view the gear as a mere a conduit to the music . . .
                                +1

                                Originally posted by Pallas View Post
                                If anything, there is "sense warfare" going on here: people who have sense versus people who obsess needlessly about nonexistent differences in simple gain blocks.

                                . . .

                                To be sure, there are plenty of avenues to improve the audio amplifier. Amps can become more energy efficient. They can be made smaller. They can be made more power-dense. They can be made cheaper. They can be made in different form factors, with eye-catching industrial design. They can be merged with other components, such as powerful DSP's.
                                And they can be matched specifically to the drivers they are powering, allowing simpler, more efficient and lower cost designs. The bane of any amplifier designer is the range of (sometimes simply stupid) loads that the loudspeaker designers put out. Having a defined (especially single driver) load makes designing the audibly flawless amplifier simple, and the amplifier itself cheap. Relatively few dollars can buy "as good as it gets" in sound (although not necessarily in ego-gratifying appearance and "branding").
                                "It suggests that there is something that is happening in the real system that is not quite captured in the models."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X