Wow...makes me wonder, had to get to a meeting for a deal worth far in excess of the car or just not too bright?

I take it you like being called a liar?

There is no possible way to provide "supporting evidence" to what the two players sound like using my system in my theater room. That is why I supplied the player models, the cables utilized, the AVR (preamp section), the power amp model, the loudspeakers, and the CD. I was totally transparent.

Tell me, how did those two players perform in your system? Since you feel it necessary to ridicule my findings, you obviously know more about them than I do. Discuss your experience using them and, of course, provide "supporting evidence." Be sure to mention the entire system you used to conduct the test and the music you played.

Sure there is. Sound measuring device and a disc with test tones. BTW, you don't have to provide supporting evidence if you don't want to or unable to. I didn't do that. Please read my post more carefully.

There is a third option,

Any electrical device can be tested with far more accurate test instruments that give THD, IM distortion, dynamic range etc. than any human ear could ever notice. I go by those tests, never cared for any human tester yapping--give me the spec sheets please! I'll trust a test result with THD at 0.0014 and FR of 10 to 20KHz +/- 0.02dB etc. over any person talking about lifting veils. My own personal quirk, trust the test instruments over people's notions and press on.

Never use What Hi-Fi for any discussion, they review audio furniture and go on and on how it improves the sound.
If you like that sort of thing, there is also 6moons which is a laugh riot what they babble about.

Comparing audio to motorcycles is quite close--most people don't and won't ride motorcycles as most people refuse to put up with multiple subwoofers and surround speakers all over the room to get accurate HT. As with many motorcycle riders, it's all about the look which aligns itself well with some people's sound systems. Retro Triumphs and Harleys meet retro turn tables and tube amps--all good, such is the hobby.

For the record, my favorite motorcycle was a 1970's era Honda 400F...something bizarre about a little 400cc machine with 4 cylinders and a kick starter to keep it real. Enough power to get you out of trouble but not so much power to get you into trouble! To be fast on one required riding skill...fun bike when I rode it 30 years ago as a teen. I don't ride a motorcycle these days, I do have a fully suspended recumbent bicycle if that counts?

Speakers are what matters to me, the electronics part makes no difference as long as they are decent components--maybe I don't have golden ears because that little Honda Four ran less than legal pipes? It did play quite the song at close to red line.

Now audio on a motorcycle--now THAT is pure audio [email protected]#[email protected]

You got me, I didn't take the Blu-ray players to my audio laboratory and measure their performance. I am lazy sometimes.

Since you require me to provide measurements as "supporting evidence," enlighten us how you personally use test tones and instruments to measure the distance between cymbals and a singer? There is always a distance from the front of a stage to the back, so it must be measurable, right?

Instead of listening, you obviously prefer to only take measurements for every component you consider buying. Please supply us your audio measurements for the most recent Blu-ray player you purchased.

Look up the audio specifications for the Samsung and Sony players. There aren't any. Does that mean--oh, my gosh--someone might actually be forced to use his or her own ears? Are you going to stand for such heresy?

I intended to walk away. But not when I am later called a liar for speaking the truth.

I believe Alex believes what he heard. I just find the comparison poorly done to the point of being not even interesting and, let alone the creative writing fail, any conclusion he came to as meaningless accordingly. Maybe he's got a faulty disc player in one unit, or a piece of lint on the disc or a variety of actual issues but to think that in a piece of music the digits changed the location of the cymbals in the soundstage (and apparently nothing else) to be a bit beyond my belief system.

How's that Alex, feel better now?

Then you look up a test where they actually take test equipment and TEST the gear! Third party testing--how they do it with cars, motorcycles, bicycles, monitors, computers etc. etc. etc.

There is a site (from what I recall) is secrets of home theater--they not only test it, they completely take all the parts out of the device, look up the chip part numbers and reverse engineer the thing to see if they did it correctly or where they cut corners.

I found a site in Germany that tests PA audio equipment and it sure as heck is a tougher test to look at 64 channels of multiple outputs on pro mixers than a few channels on consumer items.

Would you purchase a computer server based on a person that states "It's fast!" or would you want to see the throughput numbers the thing would process?

All I'm saying is find test results for the products you desire, figure out if that spec level works for you and press on. When I spec speakers for a home theater, I find out the distance they will be located away from the speakers, how much available power from the AVR and how loud they want in comparison to reference. ONLY then do I look at speakers that would give them the required SPL at their available power.

If you want information on subwoofers, data-bass is a great site that does actual testing, uses certified equipment and does it correctly without BS numbers. Publications and websites do exist that test things--they really do!

Just don't think your Uber-tastik 5000 XPF will test perfectly--the test gear has no eyes. Good luck!

does anyone else get depressed about the state of Audio more so than the audio equipment?

i dont actively listen to music but sometimes when i do its almost depressing how poor the media is.

I feel sorry for the guys who have really high end systems and have to be subjected to the poor state of audio recording today.
squashed dynamics, awful panning and non existent soundstage, auto tune, filters everywhere, samples of samples. its just sad how bad some of it gets.

this is why I cant really worry too much about the quality of the playback medium when what Im listening to is just awful.

PS same thing with movies. watch a movie from the 80s or 70s and every line of dialouge is crisp and clear. some of todays movies are so bad its tough to make out what the actors are saying and i swear I hear some weird phasiness in newer movies that are not present in older movies. you also have a lot of surround channel "noise" that makes it even more difficult to hear the DIALOGUE

why should we spend any extra money on our sound systems when we are being subjected to such a poor level of sound craft?

On the bright side... the car made it through anyways...

We didn't see it go much further....so only the local Lamborghini mechanic might know for sure I just don't see how it didn't get in the intake....didn't see a snorkel

You continue to ridicule, call me a liar, and expect me to feel better for it? I am sure others you come in contact with wish they could be as superior as you are.

You suggest maybe the Sony player is faulty hence it not performng quite as well as the Samsung? Did you not read that I have two Sony 6500 players and they sound identical? Nor is any part of my theater-room system not performing as it should.

I mentioned other audible differences, not simply the location of the cymbals. There were further differences as well that I did not talk about, such as the Samsung's more natural bite with the brass instruments (the Sony is overly mellow). Also, Ronstadt's voice is rendered with more detail via the Samsung, along with her voice sounding closer to the microphone. In general, the Sony lacks some inner detail as one goes up the audio band. The Sony, though, may be ideal for use in an audio system that tends to be bright.

What audio system are you using that doesn't let you differentiate between disc players? What transports have you compared on it?

Good luck finding audio test measurements on Blu-ray players.

Why are you against evaluating audio performance with your own ears? You decide what components to keep based on the measurements in reviews and not on your own listening tests at home?

Also, you tell us to dismiss the Blu-ray audio tests done by the British magazine What Hi-Fi. What specific players have you tested that allows you to say their findings are incorrect and should be ignored?

The big problem with the car analogy is that when you buy a Lamborghini, it actually has the performance it advertises.

With upper level amps, there really is no proof that it's any better than a cheap Chinese amp.

If you bought a Lamborghini and end up with the same acceleration and speed as a Honda Civic after being told it was much faster, then yeah, it would make the buyer look pretty stupid and piss people off. Audio is one of the few industries I've encountered where people literally accept that they are paying a premium for imagined performance benefits.

Also, it's not that people don't believe those who buy nice amps hear something different. The problem is, it has been proven over and over that people can imagine those benefits and feel they are real. This happens with all sorts of equipment, people reporting how new cables make their music sound a lot more open and bright or that now their bass extension has significantly improved. Or how try bought the dedicated speaker stands and the speakers went from sounding like hollow boxes to premium speakers. Or straight up reporting huge performance boosts when they thought they changed equipment when they actually didn't change anything.

Hence in my eyes, when people report these differences, I understand that they can perceive differences and that in the end, it affects their enjoyment of the equipment. But I find it ridiculous when people suggest this as useful information for consumers or people out on the market.

Testimonies are fun to share but please do not be offended when we don't accept them as credible evidence.

The doubters aren't all working in absolutes. But saying we should believe it "just because" doesn't contribute anything and it makes sense that people would frown upon such comments being submitted as suggestions for those looking for advice on where to spend their money. It just makes it more difficult to navigate the audio market.

Wait, now all amplifiers sounds the same? Why don't you come out and say all speakers sound the same, to boot? With digital sources, sure, I won't waste my breath arguing diminishing returns may kick in quickly. With amps... nah. You gotta spend at least a grand, sorry. Less if you get lucky and buy used, maybe, or are into DIY and put a good Hypex design together.

wow...

Do you have both players set to bitsream their audio output? Or are the players doing the processing?

Is it possible there is a setting difference in one player vs the other that can cause your perceived difference? It sounds like dsp mode alteration to me.

The problem is that it works both ways. Having heard in my own system some CD/BluRay players that sound the same but others that sound different, why should I believe you and others that they all sound the same "just because"? Every time I have asked for "proof," I get no response. Without that proof, I will continue to believe my own ears. Not to mention all the professional reviews that discuss (with matched levels) the various characteristics of various equipment and how they differ across different equipment (whether it be amps, preamps, players, etc).

Excellent. Clearly Lamborghinis come with autoformers.

To some of the follow on posts re: amplifiers - the expectation was not that the high end amplifier will sound any better than the good-quality but no frills amplifier (in my case the no frills is an ATI amplifier). That is, again, besides the point. I would prefer a Bryston (or similar) in my set-up for a several valid reasons, but not because of some believed audible difference when played at typical listening levels (i.e. a few watts of power).

I really recommend reading a few of the articles from the Audio Critic, especially his later newsletters. I think the 'power cube' is one of the best fully objective tests of an amplifier's ability to deliver the goods in real-world conditions (e.g. drive through occasional flood waters). I would be very interested to see how a Diavalet or Hypex design performs in this type of test. They could set a new standard. Or not.

The reverse isn't the same at all. There is scientific evidence that shows the differences are negligible. Human testing in controlled conditions point to the same conclusion. Human hearing had also been proven completely unreliable as a measuring tool and is easily influenced by psychological factors. Saying you don't get a response is absolutely false. You just refuse to acknowledge studies and measurements. In reality, someone who claims a cable, DAC, etc improves their speakers is no more credible than a person who claims having set a fruit basket on their speakers has drastically improved the soundstage.

On the other hand, your argument is only supported by your ears, which is unreliable, and professional reviewers, those who make a living off the gullibility of consumer ignorance and many of which have also failed blind testing. The very nature of "professionals" makes them actually far less reliable than the average person as there is a conflict of interest.

Saying these arguments are equal doesn't make it true. There are tons of sources pointing in one way and pretty much nothing pointing in the other. One testimony is only good as another and any amateur can make countless testimonies for anything try believe.
@pablolie

Amps and speakers are not even close to the same. My SVS sub measures empirically as having deeper base extension compared to my old wharf dales with far greater output. It is also directly observable as my chandeliers shake like crazy during the same frequency sweep. Speakers in general have magnitudes more of measurable differences than amps.

Amps are slightly better than DACs from what I remember, because their is actually some extremely slight measurable difference. However, spending $1000+ minimum on an amp as a recommendation is beyond silly. First, prove what difference the amp makes. Then, prove that it is preferable and not just EQing towards your personal preference(which could just be done with processing...). I find most people who make these comments are people who have just invested a lot into something and will attempt to convince themselves and others of the logic of their actions.

From testing headphones, a $1000+ amp with fancy tube upgrades can still be easily mistaken (or indistinguishable) from an iPod nano or a portable solid state amp, but how do you think someone who bought the overpriced box would react? And this was not with solid state amps, but woo audio tube amps driving gear like the HD800 and and the beyer T1, where there is suppose to be actual coloration of the audio. It probably did change the sound but it just wasn't significant enough for people to reliably tell the difference. Neither could we possibly assess that it was even a positive change.

So no, I wouldn't recommend spending $1000+ on amps when it is likely to be unheard. In general, the idea of tube amps actually colouring the amp makes them sound just horrid anyways. I would take a cheap solid state amp over $5000 tubes if we are playing this theory stuff. But in reality, whatever difference it might make means nothing to the regular listener. With the nature of audio preference, for all we know, your fancy amps might make things generally sound worse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There area measurements out there for Hypex. Stereophile publishes the same type of measurements, and some additional ones, so not sure what makes the Audio Critic test so remarkably different. They publish a few measurements, they write a few *opinions*. To those who outsource their decision-making merely based on that, good stuff. To those who don't, also.

I will give just *one* example to prove the claim that all amps sound the same categorically false. There is a thread in these forums of a person with extremely high end horn speakers with very high sensitivity. He would hear background hiss on any amplifier he tried until he stumbled across the NAD M22 and Benchmark AHB2. And no, it is not "cheating" to not play music and focus on background hiss. If I am in a blind test why should it be forbidden for me to say "please turn up the volume all the way"? There are music passages with extreme dynamics, so hiss definitely can impact enjoyment when actively listening to music.

Don't sell ATI short. Their internal build quality equals or exceeds anyone else's. A McIntosh has more emphasis on striking appearance (to me, a Bryston isn't better looking, just different), but is an equal or lesser amp.

Technically, IMO the ATI 4000/6000 is the finest AB amp currently available. The 2000/3000 (and rebadges for Lexicon, Mark Levinson, Outlaw, etc) is, in terms of measured performance, maybe a quarter-step back.


Go actually read the articles instead of spouting off ignorantly. Stereophile doesn't do anything like a Powercube. OTOH, TAC didn't take an important measurement that Stereophile does: FR into a simulated speaker load.

Have you actually seen Powercube graphs for a Hypex based amp?

Fantastic. So please post links to all that scientific evidence. And my statement above is not false. I have asked for such evidence in numerous threads (this argument is repeated in numerous threads), and have never seen an actual response. So if you can provide said evidence, fantastic.

Ah, the fallacy of authority. :-)

I happen to have a Masters in Electrical Engineering, but hate talking about it in these forums because honestly it doesn't give me anymore authority than anyone else in these forums. I have never once worked in the audio industry (thank heavens). The PowerCube graphs, just like many other measurements in audio, doesn't really tell you a lot about a reactive load. Speakers are complicated critters. Even more so are your ears and their connection to your brain. Which means - the model you're ultimately using to decide if something works or doesn't is fundamentally flawed.

I *did* study in Munich and did minor stuff in the psychoacoustic deparment in TUM.de (associated with Max Planck Institute, your friendly inventors of MP3). They were supposed to have one of the most advanced labs for measuring all things acoustic (I didn't have, nor do I have now, the authority to ascertain why that was so, but it was a claim), but guess what they did -a lot? Listening. Not once did they entirely rely on measurements. They would always extensively test it out.

You know that to measure something, you need a model of what you're measuring something for, right? Do you think we have a working model of the human ear and hearing brain? All those precious diagrams ob dB over Hz and THD etc etc... that's not how your brain works. In a sense, it's like expecting Newtonian physics to work at a quantum level. The models aren't the same. It's useful stuff. But ultimately doesn't apply to the ultimate transaction between waves and ears and brain. It just eliminates some possible horrid design mistakes.

A high-current amplifier like an NAD C275 BEE will power any speaker way better than any mainstream AV receiver regardless of the price point and that's why it costs US $950 more than your 350-dollar Japanese AV receiver. Most decent speakers on the market need a good, high-current amp to sound their best because a lot of them dip down to 4 Ohms at certain frequencies and demand double the current compared to true 8-Ohm designs.

Ah, the pathetic flights of imagination that come from poor reading comprehension. :-)

Nobody capable of reading competently could have possibly seen any "fallacy of authority" in the following statements/questions.

"Go actually read the articles instead of spouting off ignorantly. Stereophile doesn't do anything like a Powercube. OTOH, TAC didn't take an important measurement that Stereophile does: FR into a simulated speaker load.

Have you actually seen Powercube graphs for a Hypex based amp?"

You see, my statements
a) make no claims that anyone is an authority about anything
b) contain no reference to what any authority says about the topic at hand.

So they cannot constitute an appeal to authority. Please read more carefully, and choose words that rationally relate to the text you reply to.

Please point out a figure in a Stereophile article that is (to use your words) "the same type of measurements" as a Powercube. Since you cannot, because Stereophile does not take any measurements that show voltage output into different loads and different phase angles, my comment about "spouting off ignorantly" applies whatever your alleged education may be. You spouted off, showing clear ignorance of
a) what Stereophile measures re amplifiers,
b) what the PowerCube measures re amplifiers, or
c) both.

If that is the case, what did you fail to understand in your education that leads to such bizarre and unreality-based idiocies as the following from your post at 201.

"Wait, now all amplifiers sounds the same? Why don't you come out and say all speakers sound the same, to boot? "

Did that vaunted education not teach you the difference between a solely electrical process (taking an input wave and enlarging it) and the electro-acoustic process of converting an electrical wave to physical sound? An educated person could not make such a foolish comparison.

Oh, and for future reference, when one throws out buzzwords like "fallacy of authority" and "quantum level" for no apparent reason, that just makes intelligent readers think one is lame and tries way too hard.

And your point is what exactly? That controlled listening tests of amplifiers have shown that non broken amplifiers with flat FR into the driven load, low noise floors, and sufficient oomph to drive the loudspeakers the SPL used for the test cleanly, sound the same. There is no serious (level matched, bias controlled) listening session that has yet come out differently.

That is knowledge obtained by listening! The "model I use" is listening. But dumb listening (sighted, unmatched levels) doesn't tell us anything about audibility, except in case of gross errors. It can reveal a lot about the listener's psyche/gullibility, but not about the actual components in the signal chain. That's why we have bias controls and take elementary steps obvious to anyone with a functioning brain such as matching levels.

Take your NAD C275 and attempt to power a 1 ohm iPal PA subwoofer....notice how it vomits its parts? Does this make NAD a total POS amp? Of course not, just as a "high current" amp is not better for speaker that have no use for it.

If the components are designed and built correctly, then all is well and I press on. My speakers are not 4 ohms and I refuse to buy such things for HT use--I feel low ohm speakers that quote they are "8 ohms" is just a way to lie about specs as they are tested at 2.83V to bump up their output. If the manufacturer does not have the skills to make an 8 ohm speaker or, throws out something that dips down to 3 or 4 ohms--I don't want that design.

My speakers I built for my garage dip down to 5.5 ohms in the bass passband, they run on two different amps (depending if I need fan cooling or not) one is rated for 4 ohms minimum and the other is rated at 2 ohms minimum. The only way I can tell the difference between amps is the fan cooled one makes noise...but although it costs three times what the 4 ohm passively cooled amp costs--I notice no difference in sound quality (unless I clip it).

So I learned decades ago, purchase the gear that will suit your needs and let it be overdesigned a bit--maybe more power than you'll ever need... I like power output meters so I get those as they are way more important than 0.0012% VS 0.0009% distortion. I can plug in my tablet and monitor the input, output and incoming voltage of my Uber amp through the USB port. Yep, I can be entertained with all sorts of fun things to watch through date from the USB. Does that display make it sound better? Not to me but other people think it is cool (looks cool) so it HAS to sound better.

So, when I purchase amplifiers and the like--I find actual test data to see if they meet specs...then buy the thing. Speakers are a different story, you can't just throw cables on them and go as you can with electronics--they require proper setup, room issues and the like so are much more complex than plug and play.

Here is a good site that goes through amplifiers in detail (even tubes!) Not very exciting reading but techno babble rarely is.

http://education.lenardaudio.com/en/12_amps_3.html

Sony and Samsung are not those esoteric companies making digital players with "colored" sound.


The difference you heard was most likely due to volume difference.