[Wind Chaser]

However, the description of the sound of the Ref9, and the lack of comparison with competing products is the one weak area of the review.

That's my point.  Reviewing audio gear without saying something about how the product sounds and fairs compared to other products in it's price class is pointless and irrelavent.  We're not talking about a tube tester or spectrum analyzer!     We want to know how the amplifier sounds.  A real review will also provide some insight about the rest of the system used in the evaluation.

[SSassen]

Wind Chaser,

That's a bit besides the point, I'm evaluating it on its technical merits and my years of experience in building an listening to audio equipment. Listing my system specifications or what cables etc. I use will not give the results any more credibility. Most of the gear I use is DIY, hence you will not be able to judge it by its appearance of technical specifications.

I'm quite familiar with the shortcomings (if any) in the components I use. Hence the fact that I change one component at a time in the chain of components I use (amp, cables, loudspeakers, etc.) allows me to gauge very well how that particular component performs an influences the reproduction of a recording.

It really is not an exact science, if it were we'd all have identical 10x30x30-feet listening rooms with set positions for loudspeaker, a comfortable chair to sit in, etc. so all results could be cross-referenced and compared. There's but one flaw in that ideal testing methodology, and that's the simple fact that humans themselves have preferences and your ears are not identical to mine.

To give you an impression of how I evaluate a component let me run you through a brief summary of how I normally approach this. In this case I simply substituted the amps I use in my system with the NuForce amps and started listening to them for a couple of days. Using CDs and tracks I'm familiar with. After a few days you're tuned in to the character of these amplifiers and you can better judge the pros and cons and weigh them against how your system sounds with an amplifier you're familiar with. Then it is time to change back and evaluate. This procedure is repeated a few times, and could also include switching loudspeakers, or cables etc.

After that (mind the after) I hooked them up to the measurement equipment as I don't want to start listening knowing how these amplifiers perform on paper, that might well influence my judgment, the mind is funny that way.

Best regards,

Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com

[Trashman]

However, the description of the sound of the Ref9, and the lack of comparison with competing products is the one weak area of the review.

That's my point.  Reviewing audio gear without saying something about how the product sounds and fairs compared to other products in it's price class is pointless and irrelavent.  We're not talking about a tube tester or spectrum analyzer!     We want to know how the amplifier sounds.  A real review will also provide some insight about the rest of the system used in the evaluation.

If I am not mistaken (after reading this long post), the main objective of this review was to prove Nuforce’s previous assertion.   Nuforce said the Ref 8 that was reviewed was obsolete and new Ref9 lacks some problems (RF) identified in the previous review.  This is just an opinion of one of the many reviewers and so far there are only a couple of bad reviews against Nuforce.  There is not an amp in the world that would satisfy everyone.   We just need to learn how to respect others with different views.  

Ken

[JoshK]

I thought SS's review was quite fair and grounded.  That said, I don't know SS or whether he has an agenda, but on the surface it doesn't look to be so.  Some people just can't take criticism of their beloved toys.

I have heard the Ref 9's but it wasn't in a system I was entirely familiar with so I would have needed much more time to properly evaluate them, or have had them in my system.  That being said, I neither loved nor hated them.  In the pairwise comparisons we made, they did some things really well and some things just ok.  

Sander, I think what might have been more helpful in your review, in the spirit of constructive criticism, is if you would state in which ways they did not stand up to other designs, or could improve.  You mentioned that they were wanting.  In which ways?  HTH.

Josh

[kfr01]

That's my point.  Reviewing audio gear without saying something about how the product sounds and fairs compared to other products in it's price class is pointless and irrelavent.  We're not talking about a tube tester or spectrum analyzer!     We want to know how the amplifier sounds.  A real review will also provide some insight about the rest of the system used in the evaluation.

That is fine if you want to make buying decisions that way.

I, for one, appreciate both objective technical reviews and subjective listening reviews.  

There is a place for both.

Technical reviews are not going away.  Your head is going to be pretty sore if you bang it against a brick wall every time an article is not primarily about "lifting veils" and "PRAT."  For the sake of your forehead you should probably get over it now and politely start ignoring reviews that don't meet your standards.

Sander -- it takes guts to write a negative review about a popular product.  Your review seems fair.  Some objective technical reviews are a good counterbalance to the Positive Feedback's of the world.

[TheChairGuy]

I, too, agree that the review seems fair and and unbiased.  There was some insight into how it sounds, with credible technical testing.

It's not great to be on the short end of a bad review after you just shelled out a hard earned  $1700.00+ for a pair of amps, but don't let it cloud your judgement as it seems to be a very fair write-up.

I had a Superphon DM-200 amp long ago - black box / real ugly, but biased into class A and dual mono.  I paid  $600 for it 18 years ago - a lot of money for me back then.  The amp wasn't properly biased, it wasn't well terminated /affixed to it's rca's, sounded slow and muddled and oscillated into anything but the tamest loads.  A run of Kimber 4TC put it into fits. It was awfully hard to admit it wasn't a well conceived/prepared product...especially as the accompanying preamp (Revelation Dual Mono) was so good.  Pride often goeth where truth dare not    

The Hypex/UcD review was equally well done...and also informative.  

Anyhow, let's just keep this all civil and keep it out of the Fight Club.  Nuforce is only a two year old company, still experiencing teething pains technically and operationally, but have been members in good standing here at Audio Circle for some time now.

Many thanks,

John TheChairGuy / Moderator