[Freo-1]

For clarification, my above post was kept simple, just generalizations.

To delve deeper, even if the amplifier's output Z were zero (with unlimited high  damping factor) the design and parts used would still reflect varying sound quality. This is because:

1) the output stage could use a variety of output devices, each with strengths and weaknesses.

2) Manufacturer's measurements usually use sinewaves, steady state conditions, to create their specifications. I suppose there are exceptions though.

3) similarly, because of a particular designer's philosophy and education, preceding stages could and most are a compromise vs the ideal.

Cheers.

Most agreed! The designer's choices make for a unique set of operating parameters, and these choices determine how the amp will interact with the speakers.

[TONEPUB]

Hi Tonepub,

"Most good amplifiers these days measure pretty much ruler flat from 20-20k with
no real measurable distortion, so why do ten amplifiers all sound different and why
can't I just tell by the specs which one sounds which way?"

A couple of comments that might answer your question.

1) Parts and design will make a sonic difference even though a scoped sinewave will show no differences. I believe that dynamic and wide bandwidth conditions are different than sinewave, narrow bandwidth measurements.

2) The general frequency response (fr) is one measurement of electronics that does provide me with valuable info. I do see some amps and preamps that do not measure flat from 20 to 20khz.

Hope this helps.
Steve

I was actually being rhetorical with question one...

I am very aware that every component makes a difference to the final sound of an amplifier.

What doesn't seem to be able to be measured in a way that can correspond to sound
more than anything is the tonality of an amplifier.  Some sound very realistic while others
do not.  Some never seem to get the sound of acoustic instruments right, while others are
great.

Also the circuit topology isn't that big of an indicator either.  I've heard very simple circuits
sound awful and very complex ones sound great.  Every designer has their own bag of tricks.

Just as every amplifier has its list of happy customers.  And everyone thinks what they own
is the "best".

So we end up back at square one.

[Housteau]

Just as every amplifier has its list of happy customers.  And everyone thinks what they own
is the "best".

So we end up back at square one.

I think that says it all and can be extended to every component.

[BrianM]

Just as every amplifier has its list of happy customers.  And everyone thinks what they own
is the "best".

So we end up back at square one.

I think that says it all and can be extended to every component.

If that were true there wouldn't be so many people buying and selling used stuff.

[Housteau]

As some say 'the grass always seems greener someplace else'.

[Housteau]

Besides, 'the best' is usually relative to what one can afford at the time.

[darrenyeats]

This is getting very depressing and bleak. Sounds like you guys think there's no reliable way to improve sound quality in an objective way.

I suppose this "everyone hears it differently" wailing is the inevitable end point of a philosophy where sighted listening is king and objective measurements are seen as irrelevant.

When you get depressed and broken enough, perhaps you'll try a blind test and start reading up on pro audio. Then you'll feel the way forward opening up again.
Darren

[Steve]

Hi Tone,

I understand and agree, no offense meant.

Hi Darren,

Imo pro audio isn't that great either. Take a look at the junk parts (including  electrolytic capacitors, up to dozens of op amps in the signal path etc) used in most recording studio equipment.

Cheers.

[*Scotty*]

Darren, in what way do you feel the pro-audio community has reliable way to improve sound "quality" on an objective level? I am also curious as to what objective measurements that you are aware of that are reliable predictors of sound "quality"? The word quality was placed in quotations to underscore
the fact that when used in the context of this discussion it denotes an individual value judgment which has no validity to anyone other than the
one who made it. I am sure that even if everyone was blind they would still have different perception of sound quality.
I personally think progress is still being made on the sound quality front. The best example that I can currently think of to illustrate this is the LM3886
chip amp. When it is coupled with a power supply that includes Jensen 4pole electrolytic caps and a .5KVA toroid the result is quite acceptable.
I guess depression is a matter of perspective, from where I stand the future of amplification looks pretty good.
Scotty

[miklorsmith]

There are objective ways to improve sound quality.  Getting "better" in-room response helps universally.  Making sure your amp can drive your speakers is a good idea, as does ensuring it can be driven by your preamp.  Cassette tapes can almost universally be trumped by other means of signal delivery.  There are others also which escape me at the moment.

[Thebiker]

I just stumbled across this thread and didn't think I could manage to get through all 17 pages.  So, if anyone else has already gone here, consider this a second. 
If not:  Synergy.  I have heard huge $value systems sound sh*t, simply because a great system is more than the sum of its parts.  If it don't come together and really make you smile (we all know that smile).  Put the wrong parts together and it just doesn't work, no matter how good the amp is with speaker X, it may not match right with yours, same for front ends, cables ad naseum.  If it doesn't really sing as a system, its just not the right thing.

I just heard the latest Cary monoblocks with the Cary 2 piece pre and Cary 303 CDP pushing the big buck Proclaims  .  Oh for a spare $51K, synergy aplenty, but too rich for my pocket.

Walt

[TONEPUB]

I think that's where a few of us were headed, and I couldn't agree with you more!

[doug s.]

I think that's where a few of us were headed, and I couldn't agree with you more!

synergy is extremely important.  but, imo, it applies mainly to room/speaker/amp interface, imo.  room correction of course included in the equation.

i am still of the opinion that having the best source & preamp possible willalways offer an improvement, & this can be carried from one room/speaker/amp system to the next...  now, i realize that a particular source may be preferred as being warmer, more detailed, etc...  but these are small differences, compared to room/speaker/amp interface, & they will still have their sonic flavor when moved from one system to the next.

doug s.

[hmen]

FWIW, I'd rather have great speakers and a mediocre source than a great source and mediocre speakers.

[doug s.]

FWIW, I'd rather have great speakers and a mediocre source than a great source and mediocre speakers.

what difference would it make?  either way, it would sound like shite.

the point is, speaker/amp/room interface are wariable, they can change when you move, get new furniture, have a bebe, etc.  and, even if they do not change, different speaker/amp combo, while mebbe perfect in the same room, will still sound different from each other.  to get the best out of whatever speaker/room/amp interface you have, you need the best preamp & source(s).  these can remain constant whilst everything else improves or changes...

doug s.

[Russell Dawkins]

FWIW, I'd rather have great speakers and a mediocre source than a great source and mediocre speakers.

moi aussi!

[Freo-1]

FWIW, I'd rather have great speakers and a mediocre source than a great source and mediocre speakers.

moi aussi!

Tough call. Great speakers are very much compromised by mediocre source (especially amplification!!). Even moderately priced well performing speakers such as Polk LSI 15's cannot really come alive unless a quality amplifier is employed.

The amp/speaker combination is very much key to getting good sound. Again, many of the better speakers are low ohm units, and tax mediocre amps. 

[Russell Dawkins]

Actually, I was thinking of the speaker/amp combination as opposed to the "source" which I kind of think of as the CDP/turntable/tuner/preamp (if there is one).
That's just the way my perceptions seem to have evolved over time.

[satfrat]

It always amazes me how folks can quibble over components. speakers, wires and all the time they just feed crappy power thru it all. There is only 1 way to start any system that that starts with the power. Clean power along with methods of dealing with system generated EMI can take a mediocre system and make it sound great. More expensive components will always offer improvement but will it offer a great sounding system? In my eyes, system synergy starts with the purity of anything electrical in the system,,, power, audio signal, tubes, circuitboards,,,,,,, anything electrical is subject to corruption and that means corrupt interaction with itself within each component. Negate that and you'll take any mediocre system and make it sound much much better. That's what I think and I'm stickin' to it! 


Cheers,
Robin

[Russell Dawkins]

It always amazes me how folks can quibble over components. speakers, wires and all the time they just feed crappy power thru it all. ....
Cheers,
Robin

and it amazes me how people can obsess over wires and clean power and be feeding weird - sounding speakers, bizarrely placed in a very bad sounding acoustic environment - often with horrible music, but that's a different rant!

To my mind the biggest errors by far in the typical system are definitely not the dirty power or the quality of the wire, but not-so-great speakers, badly placed, and driven by not enough power, resulting in very wrong bass. And I mean fundamentally wrong, as in a bizarre twist on reality.

...and these may well be people who are worried about their wires.

And it's not like I haven't been there.

The last time I looked at my system with a sense of hopelessness, not knowing where to start next in order to make it fun again, it turned out that the amp was the culprit and replacing it was the solution. The amp that replaced it, by the way had 1/3 the rated power and cost around 1/2 the price!