Will all amps with similiar wattage produce the same sound? - Page 4

Speaking about musical descriptions.....

"It will provide its new owner three “musical” channels of 200W into 8ohms (400W per channel in 4ohms). Those who are familiar with the amp know that Its design provides smooth yet very fast response. "

musical channels.....smooth yet very fast repsonse.....WTF????

Tastes like chicken.

A great example of a completely meaningless description put together by a marketing department.

EXACTLY. But no matter how many time or how many people (quite a few of them highly respected scientists in the audio field) post this along with supportive data, the nay-sayers simply won't agree. It's a faith thing. You can argue a point on the specifics of the data and you can win, but at the last resort, nobody can ever win against the faith card. As it requires not a shred of proof. When all else fails, hide behind faith or golden ears if you prefer.

EXACTLY!!!
But, here's the rub. Whay can't the golden ears be content in their own world; why do they feel the need to seduce the newbies? That's why, IMO, it is so important to keep up this debate, to keep asking for scientific validation.

I have no problem with the subjective/golden ear crowd trying to seduce people, its a free world isnt it still?

The only thing we need to do is always be right there to asking for proof! Atleast with AVS there are enough regulars (more politically correct/savvy then me!!) to make sure the truth is known.

I also agree we need to keep the debate going, I believe it should actually be a sticky!!

There is no doubt that a lot of snake oil products do exist. I do not believe in green pens, cable lifters, magic little bells and so forth. If I remember right this whole thing started in another thread by the OP about AVR's power supplies compared to those of separate amps.

I doubt if both products are equal in every respect that there would be no difference but if you were comparing say the power supplies of an AVR to those of separate amps I think you would have a clear difference in how they sound and perform.

If that's the case, then you should contact this man

http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

and win yourself an easy ten grand.

Assuming for argument's sake that the AVR's amp section and that of a stand alone amp had the same performance, why should this be?

OK, when I was younger I was cursed with golden ears. Still, being an engineer and really cheap, I learned real quick what to understand 99% is the speakers. Of the other 1%, yes there are differences. I can still hear them. But there is a lot of good cheap stuff out there. I will leave the $10,000 class A amps for those with the "inner soul need". I will prefer Denon and Rotel to Yamaha. AVR's tend to not have enough of the big expensive and bulky power supply caps found in good stand alone amps. Stand alone can usually longer term high power just as a matter of how much heat sink is available. Sound wise, slight. How cheap? the $9 blue/pink/silver amps on e-bay are not that bad. Chimp amp, good op amp, film resistors. They can drive a mid or tweet just fine. Probably the same chip amp as in $2000 AVR's.

You need to frame that in the context of the speakers used, the listening levels, the program material and so forth. Without proper qualifications the statement is too general to be of specific use.

Wow, thanks for highlighting this, I hadn't seen it before.

If you can hear and prefer a difference between amps, assuming that the amp is not into clipping, that simply means that an amp is coloring the sound and you *prefer* that coloration. Any quality amplifier that is within its power limits should sound exactly like another quality amp that does not alter the sound. If you think that's not true, then as the above post says, go win your easy $10K. Look high and low and I doubt you'll ever find a blind test where someone can hear the difference between subwoofer cables, speaker cables, or amplifiers. Speakers and the room acoustics are the weak link in nearly any system.

Bob Carver accepted a challenge to make one of his amps sound just like a higher end reference amp:
http://carvermk2.com/Docs/Carver%20S...0Challenge.pdf

It took more than just hooking two amps up and proving that they sounded the same. It took some modifications to the Carver amp to change its 'transfer function' to match that of the reference amp.

I have this amp - I've compared it to my avr's amp - they sound different. I prefer the Carver amp - so I've got it connected in via the avr pre outs.

But, I guess my personal experience doesn't account for much here....

You should go take Clarks challenge The amps in question are coloring the sound, and you just prefer it. In fact, in the very reference that you cite about Carver, it says on page 2 of 8, 6th paragraph, "We decided not to reveal the 'reference' amp's identity, saying only that the reference unit is a high-powered, very expensive stereo unit with a strong and unique sonic 'personality', with a penchant for being very finnicky about the loudspeakers it works with."

That is the whole point here... that if you can actually hear a difference, it's because it's either a really crappy amplifier, or it has been *intentionally* designed to sound different, to have a "unique sonic personality".

I don't think (and I am not saying) that all amps sound alike, but rather, and amp that has been designed to *accurately* amplify audio will be indistinguishable from another. There *are* amps that actually do sound different, generally high dollar amplifiers, but like in the case of the Carver test, it was purposely done -- probably to appeal to those "golden ears" people out there

Not true -- you are assuming that when you HEAR a difference it is actually there

In a non-blinded listening test you can definitely hear and prefer a difference even if none actually exists.

If, in a proper blind ABX test, you hear and prefer a difference, then you are correct.

Nope it isn't. Problem is that human minds are very, very, very good at making things up, changing things to fit preconceptions and flat out lying to us.

Try doing some basic research on all the ways our perceptions can be biased, tricked and deceived.

Earlier in the thread I posted a link to where a bunch of wine experts couldn't tell that a white wine dyed red wasn't a red wine.

There is LOTS more examples of this sort of thing. Hell, that's pretty much what magic acts are built around.

You have to understand the none of our personal experience matters if none of us have done scientifically validated tests. Controlled environments, statistical significance....blah, blah, blah. Its actually that simple.

You are aware that I have a Bob Carver Signature amp too (the carver challenge was pure marketing!!) When I had passive speakers I could do tests all day at 80 dBs and no one could pick if the amp was used or the AVR amp was used. I level matched then ran each test no one knew which connection was running so there was zero bias.

So you hear a difference I do not hear a difference...who is right? Who did better testing to prove things? and lastly if you truely still beleive there is a difference dont you want to know why there is a difference? Im all for things being different but for once I would like those people that "believe" in the difference to post a valid reason why its different? electronics/build specs/measurements....something that is valid....just something!

Agreed.


Again you "think", thats all you can say and that is exactly what the cable lift and magic clock people say as well.

Remember, Carver first built the best tube amp he could, then matched it's transfer function. Of course, the fact he made a point about the complexity of the function was proof enough it was not linear. I like Hafler's test better. Is the input the same as the output, just bigger? David Manley showed with large enough GIR's he could make a good tube amp sound like a cheap bi-polar amp. I am of the "if you hear a difference (and I usually can) at least one of them is wrong" camp. Adding again, they are all good enough, buy better speakers camp. I should add that as my tag line.

Gir? I know about Greens in Regulation ( not that I can hit any,) but I don't know the acronym you talk about?

I have some good news and some bad news, first - the good.

My Flux capacitor arrived yesterday and with it, I built a time traveling Delorian - Great Scott!!

The bad news...people are still arguing about this in the future

The great AMP debate of '09 continues!

-Corey

If you pre-out a receiver to an external Amp, do all receivers sound the same as well?

One obvious difference is that not all pre amp stages of receivers can drive a power amp to full power.

For example, some receivers can't output much more than 1v from their pre amp output. And some amplifiers require more than 1v of input to reach their full power. Amp's have an input sensitivity spec which tells you how much input is needed to reach full power.

So receivers may not be able to push an amp the same way thus may sound "different", is that what you are saying? What about the quality of DACs and other parts, power supply, do these things effect the sound? Thanks.

I was just pointing out that some receivers can't push some amps to full power. Differences other than that, I can't say.

When I have seen pre amp stages measured in reviews, they invariably measure ruler flat with low THD+N. Take that for what it's worth.

DACs do measure differently. They will have small differences in signal to noise ratio and THD+N. Every one I have seen measures well. By well I mean very high SN ratios and very low THD+N figures. So if there are differences in sound quality, it's not clear why, at least to me.
The important of DACs is a hotly debated topic. You can probably find a fair amount on the debate using google.

There are a lot of factors that could affect sound, at least in theory. Not even talking about analog inputs.

You have your room correction processing (from a simple parametric EQ like YPAO to the more complex Audyssey. You have your DACs, your op amps and your electronic volume control chip. Not to mention assorted resistors, diodes and such. The importance of any of these on sound quality would also be a debated topic. I am not an electronic engineer, so I won't debate it.

Hi,

The sound itself: What we seek is reproduction as close to the live performance as possible. Every single step in the recording and playback process is a variable. Each of the following affect the sound: the auditorium/room, the mikes and their placement, the mixer electronics and the ears of the individual at the controls, the recording electronics, the cutting of the master, the quality of each copy, the playback pick-up device, the playback electronics, the speakers, the listening room, and finally the ears of the listener (and I've probably missed a few). Then there is the variation of the individual components, tubes, transistors, caps, etc. That's why, for example, amp manufacturers used matched set of tubes in each amp. With the variation of material and components, I suspect that no two amps or speakers of the same brand and model sound the same. And the difference between a good lower-cost system and the most expensive system is probably indistinguishable to most listeners.

I would select components based on wide, flat frequency response and low noise. My
Amp, Preamp, Surround Processor or A/V receiver would provide the controls to adjust the sound to my environment and my listening pleasure.

That's my 0.02 cents.

Cheers,

_______
Bob

AVRS just like Pre/pros are processing the incoming signal and send it out...lots of things are happening...its that whole Anolog to Digital to Analog thing. Or Digital to Analog.

If level matching can be done (same settings) and the signal coming through the pre-out is not colored (ie measure the same) then yes they will sound the same.