 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
92.14.60.111
In Reply to: RE: What makes an amp sound "boring" ? posted by peppy m. on November 26, 2024 at 02:16:17
Accuracy, as found by measurements, is not a reason to think an amp is great to listen to.
I home demo'd a dozen ss amps when I decided to move from tubes, the first being one recommended by a user of similar speakers. I was far from impressed - it was "boring" compared with what I was used to.Reviews had shown that this particular amp was about the best measuring amp on the market - but it was still drearily dull. Amongst the other amps I tested several sounded far less "boring", so I chose one of those after this 2-year search. It also measured well, but it sounded so much more entertaining.
PS - Since other are happy name-dropping, I'll say that my drearily dull amplifier was the excellent-measuring Benchmark AHB2.
Edits: 11/27/24Follow Ups:
They won't find it boring, they'll find it to be proper reproduction, which they will enjoy.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
I don't know that is true but if an amplifier that is proven to add the least to the signal is not as entertaining as one that is proven to add more what is the reason? Could the latter pass some un-measurable quintessence that the former can't or do the added imperfections enhance the sonics?
Of course, what is preferable is the right choice though, I think, for some/many, they expect their preference/choice to also be superior in some objective sense too. So if it turns out that accuracy is boring don't tell anyone.
Given that I have found rather consistently that the most boring amps I have heard are the ones that use copious amounts of negative feedback to get the numbers down to where they are.
Cheever noted that those great measuring amps are not linear at all when the feedback loop is removed. He looked at the Hafler DH500, which has very good measurements even today, and he found that when he removed the feedback loop the amp produced 25% THD at a modest power. The distortion FFT was a wide spectrum of high order harmonics that will sound rather nasty.
Compare that to a no feedback Class A triode amp where you will find at modest power typically <1% THD and nearly all of that is 2nd-5th order harmonics.
His hypothesis was that the more linear an amp is open loop (i.e. no feedback) the better it will sound and that feedback obscures the picture because, it does improve the horrible measurements that nearly all SS amps would have if not for feedback but seems to also take away something from the sound...not jsut distortion. Feedback suppresses low order harmonics more than higher order harmonics and even generates additional harmonics (see Baxandal paper and Crowhurst).
If you had two amps where one essentially made all music uninteresting to listen to regardless of the source, speakers, cables etc. and another amp that gave a wide range of results depending on the recordings played. Some sound dull, some sound exciting and alive and most sound somewhere inbetween. Let's further say that the dull sounding one measures significantly better even though in listening it kind of made everything sound dull. Would you say then that the better measuring but subjectively dull amp is more "accurate" or would you take the worse measuring amp that shows more variety from recording to recording as the more accurate? I would choose and consistently choose the latter.
Is a distorting amplifier preferable because of or in spite of the imperfections? Does a 'blameless' amplifier sound non-preferable because it destroys some unidentified musical quintessence or because we prefer a little flavor? These are rhetorical questions but worth asking, IMO. I think most audiophiles think that what they prefer is somehow better and expect it to be objectively better in some manner too. See my post on Critics about Tom Martin of TAS and his implicit assumption that digital does something bad because it doesn't sound as good as vinyl where the simplest explanation would be that vinyl is not 'better' but preferable. Maybe the only way to 'prove' anything with regard to amplifier distortion is the create music samples with known distortion spectra and see if there is any preference or non-preference. Keith Howard took a look at this, see link, and his conclusion was that any added distortion pattern does not enhance the sound. There is an app available to add predetermined distortion spectra to music samples so anyone can repeat this for themselves. KH was looking for added euphony but not that low order distortion can/does mask high order distortion so that might be worth investigating for anyone curious - which is probably only me and I'd prefer to listen to an LP, frankly.https://distortaudio.org/
What the question doesn't need is another 'review' of the people who think distortion 'takes something away from the sound' without any idea how. If an amplifier is designed to use a decent amount of feedback it will not work sensibly open loop. When I am made Secretary of Audio Design in the new administration some designers will be sent back to school. They won't be obliged to use feedback but they will be obliged to understand it.
Feedback suppresses non-linearity - the dominant distortions will be corrected most, which are usually low order. If the inherent level of high order harmonics is already low then feedback could increase them. Baxandall's case was a mathematical non-real example. The question, then, is are those high harmonics now not masked by the low orders and becoming objectionable or is just lowering the low harmonics making the sound less nice?
In summary, I do agree that people should listen to what they prefer (though I am of the opinion that a lot of preferences would not hold up to unsighted listening tests but that is for a different post:))
Edits: 12/05/24
I'd suggest that measuring kit for "accuracy" is a waste of time as long as it isn't obviously poor. Music instruments (that produce the music we actually listen to) isn't measured, apart from tuning by ear, so why should our amps?
> Music instruments (that produce the music we actually listen to) isn't measured,
> apart from tuning by ear, so why should our amps?
Based on your statement above, perhaps it's the music that's boring instead of the amplifier. I find this to be the case in my system. I have lots of music that excites me yet I have other albums that just don't sound very good. I guess you could call them boring. I certainly don't think my amplifiers and speakers are boring, though.
Oh, well. To each his own!
What you are describing is boring MUSICIANS, rather than boring musical instruments!
Yes, I agree there are lots of those, but my point is that the obsession by some to examine SINAD and other boring measurement statistics and choose their amps on this basis is bonkers. An amp may measure brilliantly but sound dull. No better way than to buy or borrow a few amps and try them with your speakers in your own room. I did that a few years ago after buying a boring amp that disappointed me, despite its excellent measurements. The one I decided on also measures well but offers so much more listening pleasure and excitement.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
