Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick250 /forum/post/0
I find this very curious. Amp design is a mature technology and their is no magic in it. Am I reading this correctly in that various manufactures induce "distortion" for want of a better word, to custom tune the sound of their amps instead of building amps that just amplify the signal they receive and nothing else?
To the poster who suggested room acoustics as an issue, kudos. It's amazing to me that so many people who are actively involved in this hobby with a lot of money invested in it don't understand that the sound one hears in the listening room is 95% speaker choice and room acoustics. Assuming reasonable quality, the electronics have very little to do with sound quality. Room treatments on the other hand lead to huge measurable improvements. Ever take a look at a recording studio and see how they maximize sound quality? Room teatments is case you do not know. You will also notice everything is hooked up by stock power cords.
Nick
I agree that room acoustics and specific speaker contribute the most to the end results. I don't know if it is 95%, but they are the major influencers. Yet, that does still leave a percentage to account for reports from people about the differences in amplifier "sound".
As a case in point, I've been making some changes in my listening room. Things started with a Denon 2805 receiver connected to Klipsch RF5's (and other Klipsch for a 7.1 system---but I'm using just he mains for this illustration). The room has wall to wall carpeting, lots of furniture and drapes in the window. In a room like this, high frequencies tend to be absorbed -- one of the reasons the Klipsch work so well. Their detailed high end isn't lost -- yet they are not overly "bright" (in this setting).
After reading so many threads on the value of an external amp, I added a Crown K1. There was an immediate change in the sound. Now, plenty of reserve power, a higher damping factor resulting in "tighter" bass, yet for want of a better word, "harshness" to the sound.
I eventually replaced the Crown with a Rotel RB1070 amp. Considerably less power, though not a problem since the Klipsch are so efficient. The sound changed again. This time, a larger and deeper soundstage and the "edge" was off of instruments such as violins.
Currently, though I still have the Denon for HT, I've replaced all the electronics in the chain with Rotel: added a pre-amp and the RCD1072 CD player. The sound changed again. An even bigger soundfield, greater depth and more separation.
So....same room, same speakers....different electronics....different results.
Now, to be fair, none of these combinations were truly "unlistenable". However, each change brought a different and, in my opinion only, a better result.
I'm about to swap out the Klipsch for a set of B&W CM 7s. While the changes in electronics brought incremental subtle changes, I suspect that the switch from Klipsch to B&W will be much more dramatic.
So, back to the original question. The designers at Denon, Crown and Rotel all apparently have different ideas about what ultimate "sound" their amps will have. Which of the three is "right"?
