2 channel pre-amp or most expensive volume control in the world? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 10:28 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
adanny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Hi Folks

I used to believe that pre-amps are the next most critical component after speakers. But I am starting to reconsider in an all digital world...

Case in point. I bought MBL 111e's and mated them to an MBL 7008 (200w at 4 ohm) integrated amp and a Wyred 4 Sound Dac2 DAC. All my sources are now digital. There is just a left/right balanced output from the DAC going into the integrated MBL amp. Audio nirvana. Just an amazing sound.

Then I realized that I need more power than an integrated. So I added 2 x 1000W belcanto mono amps. I was worried that I wold lose some musicality in by-passing the MBL SS amps with icePOWER, but I IMMEDIATELY heard a +ve difference in bass thump and dynamics, over the already amazing 7008 integrated. I could not detect any deterioration in other aspects of the music in moving from the MBL amp section to the bel cantos.

I have also played a little around with using the DIGITAL volume control on the DAC but continue to use the MBL as a pre-amp, where all it is doing now is volume control. Cant help wondering some days that I now have the most expensive volume control ($7k retail new!)? I could probably sell that less-than-one-year old unit for 4 or 5k and re-invest that elsewhere

Have others experimented with this? In an all-digital system, whats your view on using the digital volume control of the W4S Dac 2, and doing away with a pre-amp altogether? Or, options 2, am I better off replacing the MBL with some old 2-ch pre-amp (under $500 or $1k) that just serves as volume control?
adanny is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 11:45 AM
AVS Special Member
 
nashou66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: West Seneca, NY
Posts: 4,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 52
I bet its the added power in driving the woofers. More power = better control of the driver.
That is why the bass sounds better . Put a Bel canto amp that has the same power as your Int and i bet it doesnt sound as good as the 1000w'ers.

Athanasios
nashou66 is offline  
post #3 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 09:16 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
adanny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by nashou66 View Post

I bet its the added power in driving the woofers. More power = better control of the driver.
That is why the bass sounds better . Put a Bel canto amp that has the same power as your Int and i bet it doesnt sound as good as the 1000w'ers.

Athanasios

agree. that would be the best test.

But the 1000w SS amps are all at least $10k and a bit rich for my blood.
adanny is offline  
post #4 of 24 Old 01-24-2012, 12:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by adanny View Post

But the 1000w SS amps are all at least $10k

Bollocks
A9X-308 is offline  
post #5 of 24 Old 01-24-2012, 04:56 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
adanny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by A9X-308 View Post

Bollocks

Agreed that Bollocks often known to surpass 10000w/ch but mine are otherwise occupied and not free to drive the speakers!
adanny is offline  
post #6 of 24 Old 01-24-2012, 05:11 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by adanny View Post

Hi Folks

I used to believe that pre-amps are the next most critical component after speakers. But I am starting to reconsider in an all digital world...

Case in point. I bought MBL 111e's and mated them to an MBL 7008 (200w at 4 ohm) integrated amp and a Wyred 4 Sound Dac2 DAC. All my sources are now digital. There is just a left/right balanced output from the DAC going into the integrated MBL amp. Audio nirvana. Just an amazing sound.

Then I realized that I need more power than an integrated.

Interesting. According to the MBL web site, the speakers have 82 dB/w sensitivity and a maximum linear output of 106 dB. That means that they are linear for power levels up to 24 dB above one watt which is about 220 watts.

Seems to me that your MBL 7008 is either an incompetent amplifier, MBL is an incompetent speaker company who does not understand how to spec their products, or you were just about right with the MBL 7008 amplifier.

Or perhaps, you are habitually driving your speakers into their nonlinear range. Not exactly high fidelity.
arnyk is offline  
post #7 of 24 Old 01-24-2012, 05:13 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
arnyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Grosse Pointe Woods, MI
Posts: 13,654
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked: 997
Quote:
Originally Posted by adanny View Post

agree. that would be the best test.

But the 1000w SS amps are all at least $10k and a bit rich for my blood.

Absolute Bollocks. If you want really powerful amplfiers you move over to the professional sound side of the house where you can get good 2.5 KW amplifiers and change from $500.

Warning: 2.5 KW amplifiers are not consumer toys and can seriously break things! ;-)
arnyk is offline  
post #8 of 24 Old 01-24-2012, 07:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
kenglish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Posts: 5,384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Absolute Bollocks. If you want really powerful amplfiers you move over to the professional sound side of the house where you can get good 2.5 KW amplifiers and change from $500.

Warning: 2.5 KW amplifiers are not consumer toys and can seriously break things! ;-)

We used to call them "Arc Welders" .

Ken English, Sr. Engineer, KSL-TV.
"The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent the Company positions, strategies or opinions."
kenglish is offline  
post #9 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 07:55 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
adanny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Interesting. According to the MBL web site, the speakers have 82 dB/w sensitivity and a maximum linear output of 106 dB. That means that they are linear for power levels up to 24 dB above one watt which is about 220 watts.

I am no expert but I would suggestr your argument is wrong - or at least misleadingly oversimplified. When purchasing amps in the past, I have come to conclude that amplifier power in a room is a function of speaker sensitivity, desired listening volume level, the volume of the room (l w h) and distance from speakers, the room absorption coefficient/dead-aliveness, and the desired amplifier headroom for ambient peaks. Ambient peaks could be because of significant room correction applied by ARC, audyssey etc which can often be as high as 3 to 6 db. Also, they could be because certain listening passages can dip to single digit resistance loads for MBLs and martin logans (my other speakers). So amps that are stable into single digit ohms and can easily handle transient corrections of 3-6 db are desirable for speakers such as these, especially in very large rooms such as the ones I have placed mine in.


Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Seems to me that your MBL 7008 is either an incompetent amplifier, MBL is an incompetent speaker company who does not understand how to spec their products, or you were just about right with the MBL 7008 amplifier.

Or perhaps, you are habitually driving your speakers into their nonlinear range. Not exactly high fidelity.

Without factoring in all of the above factors, i think you are grossly oversimplifying. As result, all your sweeping (and patronizing) conclusions might be wrong. BTW, in full disclosure, I also might be wrong because like I said I am not an expert. The above is what I have pieced together for myself based on my readings, experiences, conversations with amp and speaker makers etc .

I think MBL is a fine amplifier and a fine company who know how to spec their products. They are more likely, but not guaranteed, to be right than you or me.

I dont habitually drive my speakers anywhere. I listen at moderate levels to low levels, ocassionally crank it up, and occasionally throw massive parties where they are driven to high levels of dancing and joy - and neither amps or speakers have ever wavered. I have been to parties where amps and speakers often cash in their chips. Mine are like gleeful labradors - always begging for more to be thrown at them.

I have not heard of any MBL or Martin Logan Summit owner who ever over-drove their speakers. I know plenty that ruint similar speakers by under powering and clipping.

I really do want to learn more about the above - although I have in past purchase cycles already investigated this a lot. I think the discussion will be far more scientific if we all knew the facts which are the following:

Room volume: The two rooms I listen in are huge (one is 39 x 22 x 11, with a 5 x 9 open door to the rest of the house) and the other (where the MBLs are) is an atrium-like family room which is 40 x 20 x 30 (w x l x h), and entirely open on one side to the rest of the house. they are currently in this atrium like room

room acoustics, absorption coefficients and reverberation times: I havent measured these but I typically assume that the rooms are "dead" versus alive. That is so I can be conservative in terms of amp-age and never ever run clipping risk. i once caculated this and i think whether your room is dead or alive makes a big difference in what a risk free amp should power. like a factor of 2 or something kind of difference

headroom for transient peaks: corrections of 3 or 6 db are not atypical in ARC or audyssey (although i dont use them - i am considering it). if im not mistaken, every 3 db desired headroom would roughly double the required amp wattage.

would love reactions to the above logic.
adanny is offline  
post #10 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 08:18 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
adanny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Absolute Bollocks. If you want really powerful amplfiers you move over to the professional sound side of the house where you can get good 2.5 KW amplifiers and change from $500.

Warning: 2.5 KW amplifiers are not consumer toys and can seriously break things! ;-)

this logic often comes up. must confess I have never heard the pro amps outside of concerts. i think there are several camps in this argument - some believe that you never need amp-age more than 100 or 200 w. For my speakers in my house, i am not in that camp. I have discussed it with numerous speaker and amp makers, and on several threads here. I feel that is too simplistic a camp.

some believe it is impossible, or very difficult, to tell one amp from another. I agree it is very, very difficult to tell one SS amp from another but i think impossible is too strong a word. of course, this topic has been debated ad nauseam here. My personal conclusion is that its in fact very difficult to tell SS amps apart at low to mid volumes with low resolution/less-revealing speakers. but at higher volumes, I can start to tell apart the "bass thump" and clarity. tough to determine whether that is because of clipping at transient volumes or some other reason

there is another camp that believes that commercial amps at 1/10th the cost are the same performance and sound quality as MBL, Pass Lab or Marl Levinson kind of amps. I am intrigued by this logic but the arc-welder nature and fan noise has kept me away. One of these days, if i can find a 1000W commercial amp that doesnt have high fan noise, i might buy it just to test it

i do buy the logic that commercial amps are built to take crap and not the highest resolution. conversely, audiophile amps have insane margins because they sell so few units and can capitalize on at least a little hype
adanny is offline  
post #11 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 08:21 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
adanny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 320
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by adanny View Post

Hi Folks
I have also played a little around with using the DIGITAL volume control on the DAC but continue to use the MBL as a pre-amp, where all it is doing now is volume control. Cant help wondering some days that I now have the most expensive volume control ($7k retail new!)? I could probably sell that less-than-one-year old unit for 4 or 5k and re-invest that elsewhere

Have others experimented with this? In an all-digital system, whats your view on using the digital volume control of the W4S Dac 2, and doing away with a pre-amp altogether? Or, options 2, am I better off replacing the MBL with some old 2-ch pre-amp (under $500 or $1k) that just serves as volume control?


This is actually what I wanted to debate although the good-old buy a behringer/crown amp discussions are never boring

Any thoughts, and particularly experiences, on digital volume control in a high end 2-ch system via a high end DAC? Any experiences or suggestions for a 2 ch pre-amp that is highly reliable and under $500k or max $1000k that I would use ONLY as volume control?
adanny is offline  
post #12 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 11:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
dknightd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,821
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Since you already have it, why not just try using the W4S volume control.

You could try using it now, instead of the MBL volume control (just set the MBL at the max you would ever use, and vary the volume with w4s).

Likely you'll find you do not need the MBL at all and can go straight from w4s to your amps. The only danger with this is if the w4s can accidentally find itself putting out full volume signal - hopefully (likely) they designed it so that this does not happen

Everything I say here is my opinion. It is not my employers opinion, it is not my wife's opinion, it is not my neighbors opinion, it is My Opinion.
dknightd is offline  
post #13 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 04:18 PM
 
AJinFLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Take a guess
Posts: 1,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by adanny View Post

i do buy the logic that commercial amps are built to take crap and not the highest resolution.

There is no logic to buy in that belief.
Quote:
Originally Posted by adanny View Post

conversely, audiophile amps have insane margins because they sell so few units and can capitalize on at least a little hype

A more apt analysis is that "audiophile" amps are built for audiophiles, "commercial" amps are built for rational, sane people.

cheers,

AJ
AJinFLA is offline  
post #14 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 04:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
dknightd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,821
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post

A more apt analysis is that "audiophile" amps are built for audiophiles, "commercial" amps are built for rational, sane people.

cheers,

AJ

Who don't mind a little fan noise ? Or is that a non-issue these days ???

edit: and it does not matter, the OP already has the amps. All he/she has to do is figure out if they can sell their existing "volume control". And I suspect they can.

Everything I say here is my opinion. It is not my employers opinion, it is not my wife's opinion, it is not my neighbors opinion, it is My Opinion.
dknightd is offline  
post #15 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 06:48 PM
 
diomania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by dknightd View Post

Who don't mind a little fan noise ? Or is that a non-issue these days ???

Non-issue when you get convection cooled commercial amps.



diomania is offline  
post #16 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 07:14 PM
 
AJinFLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Take a guess
Posts: 1,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by dknightd View Post

Who don't mind a little fan noise ?

What fan noise?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dknightd View Post

Or is that a non-issue these days ???

If you make it one.

cheers,

AJ
AJinFLA is offline  
post #17 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 08:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by dknightd View Post

Who don't mind a little fan noise ? Or is that a non-issue these days ???

If you buy the correct amps, it's a non issue. At worst it's a minor inconvenience to change out the fans for quieter units.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #18 of 24 Old 01-27-2012, 12:55 AM
Senior Member
 
Speed Daemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJinFLA View Post

TA more apt analysis is that "audiophile" amps are built for audiophiles, "commercial" amps are built for rational, sane people.

Brilliant! I want that on a T-shirt, or a challenge coin.

You get what you pay for.  For professional advice, pay the professional rate.
Speed Daemon is offline  
post #19 of 24 Old 01-27-2012, 01:14 AM
Senior Member
 
Speed Daemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by adanny View Post

Agreed that Bollocks often known to surpass 10000w/ch but mine are otherwise occupied and not free to drive the speakers!

You mean the Crown MA10000?

You get what you pay for.  For professional advice, pay the professional rate.
Speed Daemon is offline  
post #20 of 24 Old 01-27-2012, 11:09 AM
Advanced Member
 
Harrypt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 766
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by adanny View Post

Hi Folks

I used to believe that pre-amps are the next most critical component after speakers. But I am starting to reconsider in an all digital world...

Case in point. I bought MBL 111e's and mated them to an MBL 7008 (200w at 4 ohm) integrated amp and a Wyred 4 Sound Dac2 DAC. All my sources are now digital. There is just a left/right balanced output from the DAC going into the integrated MBL amp. Audio nirvana. Just an amazing sound.

Then I realized that I need more power than an integrated. So I added 2 x 1000W belcanto mono amps. I was worried that I wold lose some musicality in by-passing the MBL SS amps with icePOWER, but I IMMEDIATELY heard a +ve difference in bass thump and dynamics, over the already amazing 7008 integrated. I could not detect any deterioration in other aspects of the music in moving from the MBL amp section to the bel cantos.

I have also played a little around with using the DIGITAL volume control on the DAC but continue to use the MBL as a pre-amp, where all it is doing now is volume control. Cant help wondering some days that I now have the most expensive volume control ($7k retail new!)? I could probably sell that less-than-one-year old unit for 4 or 5k and re-invest that elsewhere

Have others experimented with this? In an all-digital system, whats your view on using the digital volume control of the W4S Dac 2, and doing away with a pre-amp altogether? Or, options 2, am I better off replacing the MBL with some old 2-ch pre-amp (under $500 or $1k) that just serves as volume control?

The problem with this can be two fold.

Problem one is that most digital volume controls throw away bits as they lower the volume. So as you lower the volume, you are listening to reduced data and dynamics. You are only hearing all your data when your digital volume control is at 0db. You'd have to look into how the digital volume works on your unit.

Problem two is that you often see level or impedence mis-matches when you plug source equipment directly into an amplifier. Preamplifiers are designed to buffer that.
Harrypt is offline  
post #21 of 24 Old 01-27-2012, 12:10 PM
Senior Member
 
Speed Daemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by adanny View Post

this logic often comes up. must confess I have never heard the pro amps outside of concerts. i think there are several camps in this argument - some believe that you never need amp-age more than 100 or 200 w. For my speakers in my house, i am not in that camp. I have discussed it with numerous speaker and amp makers, and on several threads here. I feel that is too simplistic a camp.

When you consider that power supply requirements are met in a linear function, and amplitude in an exponential function, it becomes immediately apparent that even a modest amount of dynamic range can use up massive amounts of power. I'd go so far as to say that there's no such thing as "too much power" capability, bearing in mind that the sheer economics of delivering that power will be the deciding factor 99.999% of the time.

Quote:


some believe it is impossible, or very difficult, to tell one amp from another. I agree it is very, very difficult to tell one SS amp from another but i think impossible is too strong a word. of course, this topic has been debated ad nauseam here. My personal conclusion is that its in fact very difficult to tell SS amps apart at low to mid volumes with low resolution/less-revealing speakers. but at higher volumes, I can start to tell apart the "bass thump" and clarity. tough to determine whether that is because of clipping at transient volumes or some other reason

If you strip out the weasel words and reverse the perspective, that will be much more informative IMHO.

There is a camp that insists that some amplifiers sound "better" (a weasel word that we'll have to put up with for now) and cite vague and hard to follow theories as to why that's "a fact". Trying to pin a member of this camp on specifics appears to be impossible by design. I suspect that they do that on purpose. About the only time I witnessed a member of this camp put it on paper and publish it with his name as author was when the late Harvey Rosenberg of New York Audio Labs fame.

Harvey argued that discrete transistors sounded better than op-amps, and that thermionic valves (vacuum tubes) sounded better than transistors. It was clear, to the point and a complete and total straw man argument.

What Harvey had done was to make a bulletproof case for the relative deficiencies of the three basic audio amplifier modes at the time (A, AB and C) when they were operated outside of their linear range. So while Harvey got his technical facts straight, he completely failed to prove his assertion. And he completely ignored the possibility that an engineer might design a circuit to operate within its linear range, as was customary even back then. Otherwise the book was a very useful handbook summary of amplifier design. I really mean that. As long as you took the glaring errors into account, it was actually quite informative.

I met Harvey and read his book around the time that Bob Carver of Phase Linear fame was promoting his new self-named company with a challenge to the staff of Stereophile magazine to tell the difference between a couple of highly regarded high-end amplifiers and his amplifier which was tuned to mimic the transfer function of the others. And sure enough, the golden-eared Stereophile writers lost the challenge, completely on their own terms.

My linear circuits professor scoffed at the stunt, noting that if you design an amplifier with a simple unity transfer function, that the amplifier would "have no sound at all" meaning that it acted like the proverbial straight wire with gain. Finding the components that remained perfect long enough to make a practical amplifier was a physical impossibility. And the methods used to force more linearity out of a circuit presented their own complications. And then there was the complex load of the loudspeaker and interactions that certainly affected the loudspeaker's transfer function, if not the amplifier's!

After stepping out of the academic and back into the pragmatic realm, I knew enough to see that an amplifier made from unobtanium, moon rocks and virgins' tears was indistinguishable from an amp made from tinsel and squirrel teeth as long as care was taken to keep inside the linear envelope. I also learned the dirty not-so-little secret of loudspeakers, namely that their distortion on the best of days far exceeded the sum total of the entire signal path ahead of them on the worst of days.

Quote:


there is another camp that believes that commercial amps at 1/10th the cost are the same performance and sound quality as MBL, Pass Lab or Marl Levinson kind of amps. I am intrigued by this logic but the arc-welder nature and fan noise has kept me away. One of these days, if i can find a 1000W commercial amp that doesnt have high fan noise, i might buy it just to test it

Bob Carver did win, after all.

I'm not sure what all the talk of fan noise is about. Plenty of commercial products don't have fans, and plenty of home-made ones do. I think that someone told you a fib, both about the fans and the notion that high-end stuff being knitted by nice old ladies with only your best interests in mind. If that was true, they wouldn't be taking 1000% or more profit margins!

You get what you pay for.  For professional advice, pay the professional rate.
Speed Daemon is offline  
post #22 of 24 Old 01-27-2012, 02:07 PM
Senior Member
 
Speed Daemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrypt View Post

Problem one is that most digital volume controls throw away bits as they lower the volume. So as you lower the volume, you are listening to reduced data and dynamics. You are only hearing all your data when your digital volume control is at 0db.

LOL...maybe my data...like the A/C and the fridge, the neighbors and other noises.

I've never seen a volume control with a "0dB" setting for the same reason why none went to "11" until after "This is Spinal Tap" became a hit.

All kidding aside, no volume control has magical powers to control anything more than the output of whatever it controls. So ambient noise remains as it was, regardless of volume control settings. So like it or not, turning down the volume just shifts the quieter passages down into the weeds of the ambient noise. Even if you cut out the least significant bits, the net effect is the same.

In fact, using say a 24-bit DAC to play a 16-bit music CD does in fact mean that the least significant bits, a whole 1/3 of all available bits are turned off and doing nothing. An outrage! Highway robbery! Actually it's no big deal. You're still getting every bit that you purchased. And because 24 bits can be made to represent a SPL range from the threshold of hearing to beyond the threshold of pain, any bits that might get thrown away will be done at a level so far below the threshold of hearing that even the silliest high-end propagandists can't challenge the laws of nature at such an extreme.

So in other words, adjusting volume in the digital domain works just fine, and as long as the tool is made for the use there are no drawbacks,

Quote:


Problem two is that you often see level or impedence mis-matches when you plug source equipment directly into an amplifier. Preamplifiers are designed to buffer that.

Really? I always thought that preamplifiers had at least something to do with their name.

Back in my day, we used phonographs that put out signals in the microvolt range. Back then microvolts couldn't get us any appreciable volume at the speakers, whether the impedance was buffered or not. so we pre-amplified the phono output to line levels. On the supply side we used microphones that had similar needs. If you wanted to have anything more than tape noise to play back, you used a microphone preamp.

Adding bells and whistles like input switching, volume controls, equalization and other geegaws were nice to have, of course. But without the pre-amplification, these too were useless.

I have no doubt that there were tens, maybe even dozens of people who eschewed the phonograph and only played tapes, so they didn't use the phono preamp. But this was by far the exception and not the rule. And it was only a technicality really. To record to tape they needed those microphone preamps, and to play back the tapes they needed the preamplifiers that were built into the tape decks. (Unlike phonographs that all used the same RIAA pre/de-emphasis EQ curves, the audio tape industry had no such convention, and therefore no universal tape preamp was available for them.)

Although there were undoubtedly some very unstable power amps that may have benefited from buffering, those were unusual cases, not the norm. As for impedance, that was standardized in both production and consumer playback equipment a long time ago. Even when CD players with non-standard line outputs as high as 10V came out, that was never a problem for me or anyone who I knew, even through vintage equipment that couldn't have anticipated these levels. I guess that over-engineering my stereo system paid off as well.

You get what you pay for.  For professional advice, pay the professional rate.
Speed Daemon is offline  
post #23 of 24 Old 01-27-2012, 03:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
Harrypt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 766
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speed Daemon View Post

LOL...maybe my data...like the A/C and the fridge, the neighbors and other noises.

I've never seen a volume control with a "0dB" setting for the same reason why none went to "11" until after "This is Spinal Tap" became a hit.

All kidding aside, no volume control has magical powers to control anything more than the output of whatever it controls. So ambient noise remains as it was, regardless of volume control settings. So like it or not, turning down the volume just shifts the quieter passages down into the weeds of the ambient noise. Even if you cut out the least significant bits, the net effect is the same.

In fact, using say a 24-bit DAC to play a 16-bit music CD does in fact mean that the least significant bits, a whole 1/3 of all available bits are turned off and doing nothing. An outrage! Highway robbery! Actually it's no big deal. You're still getting every bit that you purchased. And because 24 bits can be made to represent a SPL range from the threshold of hearing to beyond the threshold of pain, any bits that might get thrown away will be done at a level so far below the threshold of hearing that even the silliest high-end propagandists can't challenge the laws of nature at such an extreme.

So in other words, adjusting volume in the digital domain works just fine, and as long as the tool is made for the use there are no drawbacks,


Really? I always thought that preamplifiers had at least something to do with their name.

Back in my day, we used phonographs that put out signals in the microvolt range. Back then microvolts couldn't get us any appreciable volume at the speakers, whether the impedance was buffered or not. so we pre-amplified the phono output to line levels. On the supply side we used microphones that had similar needs. If you wanted to have anything more than tape noise to play back, you used a microphone preamp.

Adding bells and whistles like input switching, volume controls, equalization and other geegaws were nice to have, of course. But without the pre-amplification, these too were useless.

I have no doubt that there were tens, maybe even dozens of people who eschewed the phonograph and only played tapes, so they didn't use the phono preamp. But this was by far the exception and not the rule. And it was only a technicality really. To record to tape they needed those microphone preamps, and to play back the tapes they needed the preamplifiers that were built into the tape decks. (Unlike phonographs that all used the same RIAA pre/de-emphasis EQ curves, the audio tape industry had no such convention, and therefore no universal tape preamp was available for them.)

Although there were undoubtedly some very unstable power amps that may have benefited from buffering, those were unusual cases, not the norm. As for impedance, that was standardized in both production and consumer playback equipment a long time ago. Even when CD players with non-standard line outputs as high as 10V came out, that was never a problem for me or anyone who I knew, even through vintage equipment that couldn't have anticipated these levels. I guess that over-engineering my stereo system paid off as well.

Oh, why do I bother.

re: digi volume controls, all you have to do is google to learn how they work. 0db usually equals max volume on the digi volume control of a cd player. that is the point of which it is playing all the data full volume. it lowers volume by throwing away bits. Now you may be OK throwing bits away and you may not be able to hear it, but you can't say scientifically that I can't and usually people who have invested in MBL's don't want to listen to their cd's truncated to mp3 as they lower the volume control.

re: preamps you are all confused on the difference between gain and impedence. the buffer of which i spoke is between input and output impedence. has nothing to do with gain, which is also necessary based on the fact that most digi volume controls max at 0db. combined with the typically higher output impedence than an amplifer input wants to see,there is usually not enough to drive an amplifier to satisfying levels.

re: your answer... a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing so make fun all you want.
Harrypt is offline  
post #24 of 24 Old 01-27-2012, 07:30 PM
Senior Member
 
Speed Daemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrypt View Post

all you have to do is google to learn...

...a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing...

That's all I need to know, thanks.

I'm not a cruel person, so I'd never make fun of someone like you. Actually I hope that one day you might understand what I was saying, and not beat yourself up for "being so dense". Everybody starts off knowing nothing, so there's no shame in knowing less than others. The only shameful thing IMHO is to invest in ego instead of knowledge.

Cheers!

You get what you pay for.  For professional advice, pay the professional rate.
Speed Daemon is offline  
Reply 2 Channel Audio

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off