Power quality for speakers

[TinleyJake]

I'm fairly inexperienced with hi end speakers/stereos but eagerly trying to learn on my venture in upgrading my current setup.

In auditioning hi-end speakers, on two seperate occasions I've been told that I should upgrade my receiver first due to the auditioned speakers requiring a more quality power supply to really perform to their full potential.

I have an Elite VSX-35TX that has very little milage on it which outputs 100W stereo/90W 5-channel. I'm running a 5.1 setup in a family room that is fairly small (13' x 15') and I had no thoughts of upgrading until this came about.

In everyone's opinion, do these recommendations have merit for modest HT setups. The speakers that arose these comments were the Paradigm Studio 20's and MA RS series at one store and the JMLab Chrous 706s and 707s at the other shop. Both of these were run through an ultra high end preamp/amplifier seperates and they conveniently didn't have them readily wired to a standard receiver to demo.


Thanks,
Jake

[highfihoney]

I'm fairly inexperienced with hi end speakers/stereos but eagerly trying to learn on my venture in upgrading my current setup.

In auditioning hi-end speakers, on two seperate occasions I've been told that I should upgrade my receiver first due to the auditioned speakers requiring a more quality power supply to really perform to their full potential.

I have an Elite VSX-35TX that has very little milage on it which outputs 100W stereo/90W 5-channel. I'm running a 5.1 setup in a family room that is fairly small (13' x 15') and I had no thoughts of upgrading until this came about.

In everyone's opinion, do these recommendations have merit for modest HT setups. The speakers that arose these comments were the Paradigm Studio 20's and MA RS series at one store and the JMLab Chrous 706s and 707s at the other shop. Both of these were run through an ultra high end preamp/amplifier seperates and they conveniently didn't have them readily wired to a standard receiver to demo.


Thanks,
Jake

Hey jake,some fine speaker choices you have there,as usual & expected the advice this dealer gave you was out of line,having strong amplification as these dealers were using in their demo systems is something i fully agree with but thats it,they want you to start with buying electronics???????????

When building a system pretty much from scratch speakers are always the starting point,audition (as you have)& buy the speaker you like the best sound wise then if your current reciever/amplifier dont have enough balls you can either add an external amplifier with much more power than your reciever or get a different reciever with a stronger amp section.

I would say to buy the speakers you like then if they need more power than your reciever can give look into external amplification to use alongside your current receiever.

[ParadigmDawg]

Have to agree; more power is always better but your AVR should power any of those speakers just fine. My little 659 has plenty of power in my giant room.

[mtrycrafts]

...and they conveniently didn't have them readily wired to a standard receiver to demo.


Thanks,
Jake

I wonder why that is???:D
Oh, perhaps they want to sell you on their components???

As Greg mentioned, you will be fine with what you have, especially in that room.

[ParadigmDawg]

Now if I can just talk myself out of buying an external amp...I dont really think I need one...just kind-of want one...

[Seth=L]

Many dealers try to pull this garbage on people that aren't super knowledgeable about audio. In some cases the dealers believe what they are telling you is true and in other cases they know they are filling you mind with junk.

The Studio 20's for example are pretty well rounded speakers. They have a pretty average impedance and are relatively efficient, meaning they won't be difficult for your Pioneer Elite to drive.

Adding a seperate amp to your receiver using the preouts could give you more dynamics if you like to listen to music or watch movies at reference levels or higher. There is no need to get another preamplifier when your receiver will do a perfect job.:D

Also don't let them fool you into thinking the amplifiers they carry in there store are any different as far as quality of sound than the one inside your receiver, because any well designed transistor amplifier will sound no different from another.

End rant and such...

[Nuglets]

My dealer would always try and talk me out of getting a high end receiver and tell me to only get one with features I absolutely needed. Too bad they don't have the best selection of speakers. Oh well, there are always trade-offs.

[markw]

My dealer would always try and talk me out of getting a high end receiver and tell me to only get one with features I absolutely needed.Treasure him and throw him as much business as you can. That sort of honesty should be rewarded. And, something tells me he doesn't blame you for buying speakers elsewhere.

[highfihoney]

any well designed transistor amplifier will sound no different from another.

Sorry seth but being the resident "amp heretic" that i am i couldnt pass that up.

No way Jose.........That's Hose-A:D

[Nuglets]

Treasure him and throw him as much business as you can. That sort of honesty should be rewarded. And, something tells me he doesn't blame you for buying speakers elsewhere.

Yes I always get what I can from them and make an attempt to get the word out about their product quality vs. that of a big name store like BB. I did get my speakers from them but they really don't have a large selection to choose from so I didn't have much auditioning I could do. The high end home audio in this area consists of pretty much Paradigm speakers only, which isn't bad by any means in my opinion but it's a shame that there is nothing to compare them with around here except a HTIB from BB.

I got a refurbished RX-V1400 from the internet, because there is really no way I can afford a brand new receiver of that level,and when I told him that I was looking into getting one online he actually looked it up, gave me a price that I should expect for it and told me to be careful with online retailers but didn't persuade me against it one bit. It is very nice to have a dealer that gives sound advice(no pun intended) and isn't just looking to make an extra buck by lying about one thing or another to take advantage of an uninformed costumer.

[Seth=L]

Sorry seth but being the resident "amp heretic" that i am i couldnt pass that up.

No way Jose.........That's Hose-A:D
Heh, heh, heh, amplifier heretics.:D Any well designed amplifier should be transparent.:D

[Haoleb]

Also don't let them fool you into thinking the amplifiers they carry in there store are any different as far as quality of sound than the one inside your receiver, because any well designed transistor amplifier will sound no different from another.



:rolleyes:

That emoticon pretty much sums it up.

[Seth=L]

:rolleyes:

That emoticon pretty much sums it up.
You must have done AB testing to prove that expensive amplifiers sound different.:D I am not saying that seperate amplifiers don't offer benefits, because they most certainly do. They increase dynamics, they allow for lower impedance loads in most cases, and they sound better when pushed because they have the sum of parts needed to power speakers at higher levels without clipping.

Preamplifiers make a small dent in the SQ, but speakers take the cake.

I was once a firm believer in snake oil, amplifiers that sounded different, and other nonsense. Now I believe that an amplifier that is well designed will deliver the same quality of sound while operating within it's comfortable power ratings.

[wire]

You must have done AB testing to prove that expensive amplifiers sound different.:D I am not saying that seperate amplifiers don't offer benefits, because they most certainly do. They increase dynamics, they allow for lower impedance loads in most cases, and they sound better when pushed because they have the sum of parts needed to power speakers at higher levels without clipping.

Preamplifiers make a small dent in the SQ, but speakers take the cake.

I was once a firm believer in snake oil, amplifiers that sounded different, and other nonsense. Now I believe that an amplifier that is well designed will deliver the same quality of sound while operating within it's comfortable power ratings.
Seth
Comfortable ratings on 2 of my Amps are 250 x 2 :) . They defintly sound different . Did many A/B testes with them in my Bedroom setup ( which is alot of work because of the weight of the monsters , even my tube amp is 50 lbs ) , of course like the tube amp in my bedroom .

[Seth=L]

Seth
Comfortable ratings on 2 of my Amps are 250 x 2 :) . They defintly sound different . Did many A/B testes with them in my Bedroom setup ( which is alot of work because of the weight of the monsters , even my tube amp is 50 lbs ) , of course like the tube amp in my bedroom .
Yes, at higher levels. If you were using a receiver as a pre/pro and listened to music a quiet levels with the receiver's amplifiers and then switched to the Brystons and listened to them at quiet levels using the receiver as a pre/pro it will sound the same.:)

[Haoleb]

You must have done AB testing to prove that expensive amplifiers sound different.:D

Yes, I have.

I am not saying that seperate amplifiers don't offer benefits, because they most certainly do. They increase dynamics, they allow for lower impedance loads in most cases, and they sound better when pushed because they have the sum of parts needed to power speakers at higher levels without clipping.

Preamplifiers make a small dent in the SQ, but speakers take the cake.

I was once a firm believer in snake oil, amplifiers that sounded different, and other nonsense. Now I believe that an amplifier that is well designed will deliver the same quality of sound while operating within it's comfortable power ratings.

I kind of agree with you, however when does anyone buy a system to simply play it at low levels, Low levels being something like background elevator music. Amplifiers can definetly make a difference in the right setup. I firmly believe that a difference is more noticable in a 2 channel system rather then a theater setup, They are two different worlds really.

[Seth=L]

I kind of agree with you, however when does anyone buy a system to simply play it at low levels, Low levels being something like background elevator music. Amplifiers can definetly make a difference in the right setup. I firmly believe that a difference is more noticable in a 2 channel system rather then a theater setup, They are two different worlds really.
In most cases you won't be getting really high SPLs no matter what you do. The difference between 100 watts and 200 watts is minimal, and of coarse amplifiers are rated differently. A receiver that is rated for 100 watts per channel won't likely match performance from a seperate amplifier that is also rated for 100 watts (I am using wattage loosely I realize, but the point remains).

Now for someone that lives in an apartment with sound ordinances and such, like myself, extreme SPLs is not necessary. None the less I can drive my very inefficient NHTs at reference levels with my receiver without any noticible clipping. I was watching Poseidon (2006) today loud enough to possibly agitate my neighbors, and I will more than likely hear about that tomorrow.:D

With music, and two channel setups I tend to agree. If you want to listen to demanding music with any sort demanding speaker you must have the juice to drive them constantly with decent headroom. However the OP indicates this is a home theater that we are discussing.:) So if the user finds that music at high levels is the game then getting a larger amplifier will probably render practical results. With home theater, there is almost always enough power even in larger rooms to produce room filling sound during even intense passages in movie soundtracks.

[wire]

Yes, at higher levels. If you were using a receiver as a pre/pro and listened to music a quiet levels with the receiver's amplifiers and then switched to the Brystons and listened to them at quiet levels using the receiver as a pre/pro it will sound the same.:)

Ok
I never used a midrange reciever as my pre , But i did use a Carver CT-7 ( which is a 2 Channel pre ) . at moderate listining levels ( im getting to old to push the amps anymore ) , there was a difference in the sound , between the Bryston and Carver Amp ( even more with the Sonic Holigram put on ) . The Bryston had a more livley and more depth in the vocals , the Carver had a softer sound and not as detailed as the Bryston . Still both amps are great amps and i like them both very much .
I setup the Carver in my HT set up , it really made a difference and the center channel came alive .
Hehe
Off topic again :) .

[Seth=L]

Ok
I never used a midrange reciever as my pre , But i did use a Carver CT-7 ( which is a 2 Channel pre ) . at moderate listining levels ( im getting to old to push the amps anymore ) , there was a difference in the sound , between the Bryston and Carver Amp ( even more with the Sonic Holigram put on ) . The Bryston had a more livley and more depth in the vocals , the Carver had a softer sound and not as detailed as the Bryston . Still both amps are great amps and i like them both very much .
I setup the Carver in my HT set up , it really made a difference and the center channel came alive .
Hehe
Off topic again :) .
Sonic Holigraphy is definitely going to change the sound, because it is intended to do so. The amp you mentioned is also going to sound different because it is not a traditional design. That amplifier, the TFM 35, is intended to imitate upper end tube like sound, it will also sound different from your Bryston.:D

[mtrycrafts]

Now if I can just talk myself out of buying an external amp...I dont really think I need one...just kind-of want one...

Why not? That is a great reason to get one:D

[wire]

Sonic Holigraphy is definitely going to change the sound, because it is intended to do so. The amp you mentioned is also going to sound different because it is not a traditional design. That amplifier, the TFM 35, is intended to imitate upper end tube like sound, it will also sound different from your Bryston.:D
Hehe
Good point , you do your homework , remember all i said was the 2 sound different . The hologram makes ( when the speakers are setup properly ) much easier to hear the diffences in all my amps and makes the sound stage so transparent ( you really cant tell where the speakers are placed ) .

[wire]

Why not? That is a great reason to get one:D
Yeh
I agree , test drive a few ( go to dealers that have a money back if not satisfied ) , do your research and see what you like ( if you spare the $ )

[Davemcc]

Now if I can just talk myself out of buying an external amp...I dont really think I need one...just kind-of want one...
**cough**pb12**cough**

[Joe Schmoe]

Sonic Holigraphy is definitely going to change the sound, because it is intended to do so. The amp you mentioned is also going to sound different because it is not a traditional design. That amplifier, the TFM 35, is intended to imitate upper end tube like sound, it will also sound different from your Bryston.:D

I have heard a Carver with Sonic Holography before. It was a pleasant effect, but added audible hiss to the signal, not unlike AM radio static.

[Nick250]

In auditioning hi-end speakers, on two seperate occasions I've been told that I should upgrade my receiver first due to the auditioned speakers requiring a more quality power supply to really perform to their full potential.

In everyone's opinion, do these recommendations have merit for modest HT setups. The speakers that arose these comments were the Paradigm Studio 20's and MA RS series at one store and the JMLab Chrous 706s and 707s at the other shop. Both of these were run through an ultra high end preamp/amplifier seperates and they conveniently didn't have them readily wired to a standard receiver to demo.


Thanks,
Jake

Jake I have not read the whole thread in detail do to time limitations, but I have owned a pair of Paradigm Studio 20s
for six years and have powered them with low end receivers to my current receiver, Denon 3806, with no noticible difference in the sound.

Nick

[TinleyJake]

Thanks for the feedback. My original conclusion seems to be correct that they were trying to sell me on additional electronics.

I deal with salesmen every day and I know it's their job to sell sell sell but this soured me to the point that I don't plan on going back to either of them. I'm preparing to purchase all new speakers, sub, and stands and these two with their actions took their shop right out of the mix.

Thanks again,
Jake

[mtrycrafts]

Thanks for the feedback. My original conclusion seems to be correct that they were trying to sell me on additional electronics.

I deal with salesmen every day and I know it's their job to sell sell sell but this soured me to the point that I don't plan on going back to either of them. I'm preparing to purchase all new speakers, sub, and stands and these two with their actions took their shop right out of the mix.

Thanks again,
Jake

Not the first customer with this story, yet the stores and sales people just don't get it. A chain is one thing, lots of customers walking through, a small independent with limited clientele, beyond me.:confused:

[ParadigmDawg]

Not the first customer with this story, yet the stores and sales people just don't get it. A chain is one thing, lots of customers walking through, a small independent with limited clientele, beyond me.:confused:

I think this is just a normal part of the game. The same thing happened to me when I first walked in. After 3 visits and no purchases and many phone calls and emails back and forth the dealer understood and I ended up with great discounts, so maybe patience pays off.

[ChrisJam]

...this soured me to the point that I don't plan on going back to either of them. I'm preparing to purchase all new speakers, sub, and stands and these two with their actions took their shop right out of the mix.

If you don't complain to the owner or manager, no one will ever know why you took your business elsewhere. If you do tell the owner or manager that you had a bad experience in that shop--assuming the salesman wasn't one of those people--that person might want your business so much that you might get an attractive discount, just to make you a happy customer.

Chris

[TinleyJake]

If you don't complain to the owner or manager, no one will ever know why you took your business elsewhere. If you do tell the owner or manager that you had a bad experience in that shop--assuming the salesman wasn't one of those people--that person might want your business so much that you might get an attractive discount, just to make you a happy customer.

Chris

Good point. I'm going to stop by the one shop on the way home this evening and see if I can talk to the manager...hopefully it's not the sales guy or it'll be a quick visit. I'll let you know what happens. It's a 45 minute drive so that'll give me time to get to my happy place to keep myself calm.

Thanks again
Jake

[wire]

I have heard a Carver with Sonic Holography before. It was a pleasant effect, but added audible hiss to the signal, not unlike AM radio static.

The hologram needed servicing . Ive got 3 no audible hiss .

[indcrimdefense]

tinleyjake-

unfortunately one of the more difficult things in audio is finding a dealer you can trust. find speakers your interested in & try & arrange a demo so you can hear for yourself. would seperates sound better, perhaps but perhaps not. the only way to find out is to try things at home. if you can tell a difference great, if not then you just saved alot of money. from previous trial & error, if i was building a new system i would start with the speakers & them go from there. get the speakers you want, & then get some demos of seperates & find out for yourself if you can hear a difference or not. I have owned both receivers & seperates, & generally prefer seperates. however i also have heard some great sounds from a solid receiver, good source & a solid set of speakers.

if i remember correctly from your post your in chi town, if your willing to make the drive i have a dealer i can recommend in indy, feel free to email me at indcriminaldefense@yahoo.com if interested (i dont always have the time to check audioholics as much as i would like). he's as bs free as i have found & offers competitive prices from an authorized dealer.

[PENG]

Sorry seth but being the resident "amp heretic" that i am i couldnt pass that up.

No way Jose.........That's Hose-A:D

You should be sorry highfi! (just kidding)...:)
Seth is right, a "well designed" amp is designed to be transparent. It amplifies the input signals truthfully and should be able to drive most well designed speakers without causing them to sound different than what they are designed to do. There could be a few reasons why some amps sound different than a "well designed" amp that Seth referred to, such as (I am just guessing):

1) Amps that are designed to please people who likes certain sonic characteristics such as the tube like sound, bright sound etc............

2) Amps that just happen to work well with some not so well designed speakers that have certain not so typical electrical (e.g. impedance/frequency response etc.) characteristics.

The list could go on, but I would be guessing further and further. I don't consider any amps that cater for certain speakers characteristics "well designed", because that would be a hit and miss thing mission. Honesty is the best policy, and that applies to amps as well, just amplify the signals and let the speakers reproduce the sound.

[PENG]

I'm fairly inexperienced with hi end speakers/stereos but eagerly trying to learn on my venture in upgrading my current setup.

In auditioning hi-end speakers, on two seperate occasions I've been told that I should upgrade my receiver first due to the auditioned speakers requiring a more quality power supply to really perform to their full potential.

I have an Elite VSX-35TX that has very little milage on it which outputs 100W stereo/90W 5-channel. I'm running a 5.1 setup in a family room that is fairly small (13' x 15') and I had no thoughts of upgrading until this came about.

In everyone's opinion, do these recommendations have merit for modest HT setups. The speakers that arose these comments were the Paradigm Studio 20's and MA RS series at one store and the JMLab Chrous 706s and 707s at the other shop. Both of these were run through an ultra high end preamp/amplifier seperates and they conveniently didn't have them readily wired to a standard receiver to demo.


Thanks,
Jake

I suspect most people would not consider the speakers you listed "high end". Take the Paradign as an example, they are not high end until you get to their Signature series. Even then, I am sure many people still don't considerr them high end. I have heard the Studio 100 V3 powered by a RX-V2400 and a pair of Anthem separates. They sounded great with either system, with no audible difference.

The Elite receiver should be fine for the Studio 20. It is true that high end equipment will provide your speakers with more accurate signals, but the expected theorectical improvements may not be audible to you.

[highfihoney]

I was once a firm believer in snake oil, amplifiers that sounded different, and other nonsense. Now I believe that an amplifier that is well designed will deliver the same quality of sound while operating within it's comfortable power ratings.

Seth,your still in school so hopefully your studies will procuce a big money carrer:D & if you get to the point later on where you have more play money try this,as if i didnt allready know that if you end up with a big money carrer you will spend the bulk of it on electronics,your hooked:D

Set yourself up a simple 2 channel system,nothing fancy just simple 2 channel,preamp,amp,cd player & full range speakers,no subwoofer,Listen to music only on this system for 6 months to become familar with how it sounds with every type of music you like under all listening conditions at all spl levels.

Dont move the system or speakers all over the room,dont move furniture all over the room & most importantly dont watch movies on this system.

After listening heavily to this system switch the amp with another 2 channel amp of like power & start listening again,it may take you a few days but you will notice things that sound different & not just at high spl levels.

I know you think its snake oil but you should realize that 2 channel guys listening situations are way different from the average ht listening enviroment,dont knock it till youve tried it,you might get a bit of a shock.

[Seth=L]

Seth,your still in school so hopefully your studies will procuce a big money carrer:D & if you get to the point later on where you have more play money try this,as if i didnt allready know that if you end up with a big money carrer you will spend the bulk of it on electronics,your hooked:D

Set yourself up a simple 2 channel system,nothing fancy just simple 2 channel,preamp,amp,cd player & full range speakers,no subwoofer,Listen to music only on this system for 6 months to become familar with how it sounds with every type of music you like under all listening conditions at all spl levels.

Dont move the system or speakers all over the room,dont move furniture all over the room & most importantly dont watch movies on this system.

After listening heavily to this system switch the amp with another 2 channel amp of like power & start listening again,it may take you a few days but you will notice things that sound different & not just at high spl levels.

I know you think its snake oil but you should realize that 2 channel guys listening situations are way different from the average ht listening enviroment,dont knock it till youve tried it,you might get a bit of a shock.
Don't you think it would be best to have a proposed system and use if for a determined amount of time and then AB with a different amplifier? I have owned power amplifiers before, and I know there are benefits. The benefits aren't different acoustic characteristics however. I have been AB'ing my Fisher integrated amp and the Yamaha HTR-5890 for the past couple days and I gotta say the sound nearly identical with a slight edge(meaning sounds better, not bright or edgy:D) to the Yamaha (it is newer and I would expect it to perform better as it is not 30 years old).

I will likely do AB testing with more expensive components in the future.

By the way, I don't think it is snake oil. Better amplifiers offer audible benefits in certain scenarios, snake oil category garbage does not make an audible difference.:D

I want it known I am not trying to bite anyone's heads off, this conversation will remain civil from my end. Kudos to you Levi, you keep your cool and that is very admirable.:)

[no. 5]

Speaking of amplifiers having a sound, Out of curiosity I just looked up a few amplifiers to find the tolerance in the frequency responses; the best was a $4,900 Classé CAP-2100 integrated amplifier with +/- 0.1dB, the rest of them were around +/- 3dB, mind you, the few amplifiers I looked at were in the $1,300 to $10,000 range (interestingly, a $300 Crown pro amplifier’s tolerance is +0dB -0.8dB :cool: ).

My point is that; yes as many have pointed out, any well made amp will sound transparent or at lest mostly transparent (as Seth pointed out, ABing his Fisher and Yamaha), but there is room in a amplifier’s specifications to allow for some degree of deference in sound from one amplifier to another.

I'm guessing a few people already knew that, but I found it interesting. :)

[Seth=L]

Speaking of amplifiers having a sound, Out of curiosity I just looked up a few amplifiers to find the tolerance in the frequency responses; the best was a $4,900 Classé CAP-2100 integrated amplifier with +/- 0.1dB, the rest of them were around +/- 3dB, mind you, the few amplifiers I looked at were in the $1,300 to $10,000 range (interestingly, a $300 Crown pro amplifier’s tolerance is +0dB -0.8dB :cool: ).

My point is that; yes as many have pointed out, any well made amp will sound transparent or at lest mostly transparent (as Seth pointed out, ABing his Fisher and Yamaha), but there is room in a amplifier’s specifications to allow for some degree of deference in sound from one amplifier to another.

I'm guessing a few people already knew that, but I found it interesting. :)
I really enjoy these discusions, unless they turn into flame wars or they go all technical like my "Why Bi-wiring makes no sense" thread. That thread went way to deep for but a few members to understand, and even our moderators!:eek:

[no. 5]

I really enjoy these discusions, unless they turn into flame wars or they go all technical like my "Why Bi-wiring makes no sense" thread. That thread went way to deep for but a few members to understand, and even our moderators!:eek:

likewise, it's nice to have a thread were knowledge and perceptions are changed... and no one must put on a fire suit. :eek:

As for your Bi-wiring thread, give yourself a pat on the back for stating something that seemed so simple (number of wires) and ended with a lot of formulas. :p

[highfihoney]

I will likely do AB testing with more expensive components in the future.

I want it known I am not trying to bite anyone's heads off, this conversation will remain civil from my end. Kudos to you Levi, you keep your cool and that is very admirable.:)

Hi seth,my post may not have came across to the point i was trying to make concerning how some people hear differences & others cant,im popping pain killers like anna nicole for this back injury i have so im sure i screwed my last post up from being all loopy.:p :p :p

The point i was trying to make was about listening experience with a system,,im also not equating listening experience to intelligence,im talking about a dedicated 2 channel system,in a fixed location in a dedicated listening room where nothing changes,the experience i describe only comes from having all the variables stay constant for a long time so you know every nuance of sound from the rig & know how each artist should sound on it every time you use the system.

When you have a system set up like this for long periods of time you get so used to the sound that you can tell if your wife moved a speaker a half inch,you cant pin point it right away but you hear something different,in my case i would be sitting there thinking damm,whats up with this,then i'd notice the carpet & see that she vaccumed my room,id look at the speaker placement & sure enough she moved one & did not put it back exactly.

In another case i kept thinking something was off in my room or system,i looked at everything in sight,still couldnt figure it out but i knew the sound was off,this went on for a few days until one day when i was polishing the speakers i decided to check all the drivers,all woofers sounded perfect,all mids sounded perfect,all tweeters sounded perfect,man was i pissed,then i remembered an old trick for checking tweeters.

I took a styrafoam cup & cut the bottom out of it,put one side to my ear & the other side to a tweeter,i went through most of the tweeters in the array until i hit one that had no sound,walla:eek: i found it :) ,with my line array's having a total of 46 tweeters in them i could hear the 1 bad tweeter,not from being golden eared but from being so accustomed to the sound from the system.

I have also on several occasions used 2 amplifiers set up on an a/b switcher hooked direct to the cd player with a spectrum analizer mic'ed in my listening position,when switching between the 2 amps differences in sound will show up on the screen.

Reasons like this are why i have always atributied hearing differences in amps to dedicated 2 channel systems with no sub.

Im also not saying that HT sucks but i do say that hearing differences in amps in ht are harder for many reasons,most pepole have powered subs meaning only the easiest part of the signal is being ran from the main amp,also sound is comming from every where,mains in front,rears behind the head & a sub in the corner,lots of stuff going on at once.

Even if a guy shuts down the surround,subwoofer,sets xover to full range & only runs his mains this is not the sound he is accustomed to so differences in the 2 amps are harder to hear.

Expense of the amps has little to do with hearing differences either,i want to be clear that nobody needs to buy a krell or a mac to hear a difference,if your 2 channel rig is set up long enough you can use a behringer a500 against a $300 qsc amp.

Of all the reasons i listed as being why i can hear differences in amps most other people who also hear differences would agree that most of these factors are important in discovering differences.

Also keep in mind that everything i just said could be the result of the morphine working its magic:D

[InTheIndustry]

These days I think there is a huge misconception as to what type of amplifiers are in most receivers vs. separates. I see the term on here all the time "properly designed amplifier" without anyone stopping to explain what that term means both in general and to them individually. All power & amplifiers are not the same when comparing between different receivers let alone receivers to separates, regardless of wattage claims.

There is a country mile of difference in engineering, build quality, and execution when comparing the amplifier in a 125 watt per channel receiver to something like a 125 watt Parasound Amp.

Could anyone give me a breakdown with real life practical experience as to which models of receivers have a "proper" amplifier inside and which models have "improper" amplifiers inside and then contrast them to separates?

Another question to take it a step further... With rapidly changing manufacturing practices, turnover in engineering & design teams, and the increasing pressure from consumers to lower costs can anyone tell me that these "proper" or "improper" amplifiers don't change considerably from year to year (or even quarter to quarter)? It cracks me up when people think that just because yester years "Insert receiver here" model performed well and was "properly" designed that this years will be too. Or those 125 watts from an $800 Yamaha receiver (with a zillion other features/functions) is equal to 125 watts from a Parasound dedicated amp that costs $1800. It's not true.

Back to the original post...
Bottom line when looking into a speaker upgrade: If you properly bought your equipment the last time you went shopping, your receiver/amplifier will be well mated to fit your speakers. If you do a major upgrade to high-fi speakers you need to make sure the electronics match as well. Is that the first thing you buy? Well, probably not. However, I will tell you that your stereo shop makes way way more money on selling you speakers than they do electronics. The difference is not even close. So, if they are recommending you upgrade electronics, I would sit down and listen as to why. If the salesman is full of crap and can't articulate his reasoning for doing so... leave the store immediately.

I'm not trying to flame the thread at all, but I see these terms always knocked about in generalities and without many long term, real life experiences offered. I’m just trying to understand where people are coming from with their convictions vs. those of which they’ve read from others.

[highfihoney]

I really enjoy these discusions, unless they turn into flame wars or they go all technical like my "Why Bi-wiring makes no sense" thread. That thread went way to deep for but a few members to understand, and even our moderators!:eek:


Same here,amp threads on this site used to be nuts,for quite a while i stopped posting anything in amp threads other than fluff due to all the fighting.

About your bi wire thread,kudos to you for starting thread & triple kudos for the super brains in that thread with their nuclear formula's:D ,that thread is by far my FAVORITE THREAD EVERon this site because from reading all the responses posted by the big brain guys with degrees in EE it shows that everything in audio is not as cut & dried as many believe.It also shows that the way gear responds can change with circumstances.

[highfihoney]

I'm not trying to flame the thread at all, but I see these terms always knocked about in generalities and without many long term, real life experiences offered. I’m just trying to understand where people are coming from with their convictions vs. those of which they’ve read from others.

HI industry,i cant get all tech talk with you but i can build you a 20 story show room for your new strore (shamless sales pitch:D ),all kidding aside weather im right or wrong i try to only speak of things ive experienced first hand in my own systems,if i speak of differences i hear in amplifiers its because ive heard them with gear i own with my own ears,if my testing methods are wrong or crude its because im a hobbiest & use what gear i have on hand to try my best to figure things out,i am not an EE but im also not a repeater or a google pirate.

As far as hearing differences in amps,ive never used the catch phrase "properly designed amp" to describe amps,to me that phrase is nonsense.

My leg's killin me & the pain killers have me too loopy to continue but i'll check back in the am.

[Joe Schmoe]

The hologram needed servicing . Ive got 3 no audible hiss .

Possibly. It was a fairly old unit. Sounded great with the Holography turned off, though.

[TinleyJake]

I suspect most people would not consider the speakers you listed "high end". Take the Paradign as an example, they are not high end until you get to their Signature series. Even then, I am sure many people still don't considerr them high end. I have heard the Studio 100 V3 powered by a RX-V2400 and a pair of Anthem separates. They sounded great with either system, with no audible difference.

The Elite receiver should be fine for the Studio 20. It is true that high end equipment will provide your speakers with more accurate signals, but the expected theorectical improvements may not be audible to you.

Your right, I used the term "high end" frivolously in comparison to speaker lines that would rival my daughters college tuition and monthly shopping expenses. Once she graduates I can then pursue true high end.:) :) :)

I went in to the one shop that sold Paradigm and Monitor Audio last night and did receive a nice apology. They had a pair of demo Paradigm Studio 20's for $600. He said they're a great buy because they're already broken in.:( :( :( oh well.

[Seth=L]

They had a pair of demo Paradigm Studio 20's for $600. He said they're a great buy because they're already broken in.:( :( :( oh well.
"these are the best deal, because we put in all the work and broke these speakers in for you!" LMAO:D I love when they do that.

[Seth=L]

These days I think there is a huge misconception as to what type of amplifiers are in most receivers vs. separates. I see the term on here all the time "properly designed amplifier" without anyone stopping to explain what that term means both in general and to them individually. All power & amplifiers are not the same when comparing between different receivers let alone receivers to separates, regardless of wattage claims.

There is a country mile of difference in engineering, build quality, and execution when comparing the amplifier in a 125 watt per channel receiver to something like a 125 watt Parasound Amp.

Could anyone give me a breakdown with real life practical experience as to which models of receivers have a "proper" amplifier inside and which models have "improper" amplifiers inside and then contrast them to separates?

Another question to take it a step further... With rapidly changing manufacturing practices, turnover in engineering & design teams, and the increasing pressure from consumers to lower costs can anyone tell me that these "proper" or "improper" amplifiers don't change considerably from year to year (or even quarter to quarter)? It cracks me up when people think that just because yester years "Insert receiver here" model performed well and was "properly" designed that this years will be too. Or those 125 watts from an $800 Yamaha receiver (with a zillion other features/functions) is equal to 125 watts from a Parasound dedicated amp that costs $1800. It's not true.


I totally agree that a Yamaha receiver that is rated for 125 watts per channel will never touch a Parasound 125 watt per channel amplifier. I wasn't saying that bigger and beefier amplifiers aren't better, just that in most cases they are sonically identical when operating within their respective power output capacities. I mean lets face it, 125 Yamaha watts aren't the same 125 watts the Parasound has. The Parasound can handle low impedance swings, probably rated with ACD, and a better damping factor. They do sound better, just not the way that people think of it. When many consumers are looking for an amplifier they assume there are vast differences in the "audio quality" or "sound signature" of your typical transistor amplifier. Yes there are different topologies that are completely different in physical appearance, but they are all designed to achieve the same common goal, to be transparent and not alter the signal fed to it.

[wire]

Back to the original post...
Bottom line when looking into a speaker upgrade: If you properly bought your equipment the last time you went shopping, your receiver/amplifier will be well mated to fit your speakers. If you do a major upgrade to high-fi speakers you need to make sure the electronics match as well. Is that the first thing you buy? Well, probably not. However, I will tell you that your stereo shop makes way way more money on selling you speakers than they do electronics. The difference is not even close. So, if they are recommending you upgrade electronics, I would sit down and listen as to why. If the salesman is full of crap and can't articulate his reasoning for doing so... leave the store immediately.


I agree
The highest markup is on Speakers .
Also i remmeber , when i bought bought my Polk 2B's . The best seller with those Polk SDA speakers where Carver Amps , just a good match at the time for the speaker ( i went with Bryston for mine :) ) .

[PENG]

These days I think there is a huge misconception as to what type of amplifiers are in most receivers vs. separates. I see the term on here all the time "properly designed amplifier" without anyone stopping to explain what that term means both in general and to them individually. All power & amplifiers are not the same when comparing between different receivers let alone receivers to separates, regardless of wattage claims.

There is a country mile of difference in engineering, build quality, and execution when comparing the amplifier in a 125 watt per channel receiver to something like a 125 watt Parasound Amp.

Could anyone give me a breakdown with real life practical experience as to which models of receivers have a "proper" amplifier inside and which models have "improper" amplifiers inside and then contrast them to separates?



I am not sure what "proper" or "improper" neither. Did anybody use such terms in this thread? I did support what Seth said about "well designed amp......."

By "well designed" and other comments he made in his posts I thought he must have (my assumption only) meant amps that can amplify faithfully/accurately audio signals within a bandwidth of something like 10 to 20,000 Hz +/- 0.5 dB with THD and IMD <0.05%, damping factor>100, dynamic headroom>1.5 dB, output>100WPC into 8 ohms, >150WPC into 4 ohms (2 channels) etc. Amps with specs like this and verified by lab measurements, should sound pretty much the same. Surely all amps are not designed the same way nor do they use the same components, but to believe that amps with almost identical specs would sound so different (not saying that there is no difference at all) defies logic.

[PENG]

Speaking of amplifiers having a sound, Out of curiosity I just looked up a few amplifiers to find the tolerance in the frequency responses; the best was a $4,900 Classé CAP-2100 integrated amplifier with +/- 0.1dB, the rest of them were around +/- 3dB, mind you, the few amplifiers I looked at were in the $1,300 to $10,000 range (interestingly, a $300 Crown pro amplifier’s tolerance is +0dB -0.8dB :cool: ).



Be careful, please don't just (may be you didn't) compare the tolerances without considering the bandwidth specified.

Example:

Amp A - 20 to 20,000 Hz +0 dB, -0.5 dB
Amp B: 5 to 100,000 +1 dB, -3 dB

Amp A would seem to have a tighter tolerance but if you dig in you may find this:

Amp B: 5 to 100,000 +1, -3 dB, 10 to 35,000 Hz, +/-0.5 dB

These are fictitious numbers but you will find similar specs if you look at the fine prints of some mid to high end gear.

[PENG]

After listening heavily to this system switch the amp with another 2 channel amp of like power & start listening again,it may take you a few days but you will notice things that sound different & not just at high spl levels.

I know you think its snake oil but you should realize that 2 channel guys listening situations are way different from the average ht listening enviroment,dont knock it till youve tried it,you might get a bit of a shock.

I wouldn't say your claim that amps sound different is snake oil. The way you described it, sounds reasonable. I do think that those who claim "huge/or day and night" difference is! Based on my own experience, one can fail a A/B test but can still hear a difference in sound quality, not always a matter of better or worse, just different.

In some of your other posts you mentioned that if you can see the difference you can hear it, that I am not so sure. I thought there are things that we can see but cannot hear, or we can hear yet cannot see. To make a point, the waveform of a note may not matter (e.g., triangular or sinuisoidal) if its fundamental frequency is greater than say, 30,000 Hz. You can't hear much above 20,000 Hz anyway.

[no. 5]

Be careful, please don't just (may be you didn't) compare the tolerances without considering the bandwidth specified.
I gave bandwidth a look too. :) two were 10Hz to 20kHz (both were +0dB -0.25dB), the rest were 20Hz to 20kHz.
You are quite right, however, not taking bandwidth into consideration could 'hide' (as it were) a very good amplifier, and would be something akin to saying; "a receiver that is 100 watts at 1kHz has just as much power as one that's 100 watts 20 to 20".

I wouldn't say your claim that amps sound different is snake oil. The way you described it, sounds reasonable. I do think that those who claim "huge/or day and night" difference is! Based on my own experience, one can fail a A/B test but can still hear a difference in sound quality, not always a matter of better or worse, just different.

This made me think of something; perhaps when we are righting a post concerning a deference in amplifier sound, it may behoove us to be reasonable in describing how the deference sounds - so as not to start any flame wars based on misunderstandings.

Because it is reasonable to think there could be an audible deference between two amps, but not that the deference is like that of a paper cone wizzer and a diamond tweeter. :p

Not that that sort of thing is happing, just so that it doesn’t happen. :)

[mtrycrafts]

These days I think there is a huge misconception as to what type of amplifiers are in most receivers vs. separates. I see the term on here all the time "properly designed amplifier" without anyone stopping to explain what that term means both in general and to them individually. All power & amplifiers are not the same when comparing between different receivers let alone receivers to separates, regardless of wattage claims.

There is a country mile of difference in engineering, build quality, and execution when comparing the amplifier in a 125 watt per channel receiver to something like a 125 watt Parasound Amp.

.


You may be interested in reading this paper:

David Rich and Peter Aczel, 'Topological Analysis of Consumer Audio Electronics: Another Approach to Show that Modern Audio Electronics are Acoustically Transparent,' 99 AES Convention, 1995, Print #4053.

He has been examining, testing and listening to audio for a while now.

Here is one old Yam integrated and a very expensive and I guess well regarded amp comparison. 3 people, 'golden ears' couldn't differentiate between them.

Still another one. He has been at this for a few days as well:

http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20020901.htm

One more:

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/assets/download/AmpSpekerInterface.pdf

or two:

http://webpages.charter.net/fryguy/Amp_Sound.pdf

The key in all this is within design limits.

[mtrycrafts]

I totally agree that a Yamaha receiver that is rated for 125 watts per channel will never touch a Parasound 125 watt per channel amplifier. .

Don't be so hasty;)

If you don't exceed the Yam's design limits, why would there be audible differences? They are both well designed amps. Sure, the Parasound may have some capability that the Yam doesn't, but that doesn't prevent them sounding the same if you don't exceed the design limits of the least component.

[mtrycrafts]

... but to believe that amps with almost identical specs would sound so different (not saying that there is no difference at all) defies logic.


That is what he is saying, pretty much:

David Rich and Peter Aczel, 'Topological Analysis of Consumer Audio Electronics: Another Approach to Show that Modern Audio Electronics are Acoustically Transparent,' 99 AES Convention, 1995, Print #4053.

And he has examined the circuts, measured them and listened to them, DBT:D

[mtrycrafts]

Be careful, please don't just (may be you didn't) compare the tolerances without considering the bandwidth specified.

Example:

Amp A - 20 to 20,000 Hz +0 dB, -0.5 dB
Amp B: 5 to 100,000 +1 dB, -3 dB

Amp A would seem to have a tighter tolerance but if you dig in you may find this:

Amp B: 5 to 100,000 +1, -3 dB, 10 to 35,000 Hz, +/-0.5 dB

These are fictitious numbers but you will find similar specs if you look at the fine prints of some mid to high end gear.



And, to add to this, those excursions are at either end of those limits with ruler flat in-between them. Our hearing at those ends are very poor in detecting differences. At 16kHz, no less than 1 dB spl is the JND and more likely 3 dB spl, with sensitive tones, not music:D

And:

http://www.provide.net/~djcarlst/abx_crit.htm

[Seth=L]

You may be interested in reading this paper:

David Rich and Peter Aczel, 'Topological Analysis of Consumer Audio Electronics: Another Approach to Show that Modern Audio Electronics are Acoustically Transparent,' 99 AES Convention, 1995, Print #4053.

He has been examining, testing and listening to audio for a while now.

Here is one old Yam integrated and a very expensive and I guess well regarded amp comparison. 3 people, 'golden ears' couldn't differentiate between them.

Still another one. He has been at this for a few days as well:

http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20020901.htm

One more:

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/assets/download/AmpSpekerInterface.pdf

or two:

http://webpages.charter.net/fryguy/Amp_Sound.pdf

The key in all this is within design limits.
That is probably the best way to describe it, "within design limits". This is the part that I am not sure that everyone is getting. I know that most get it, but people that are new to audio or those who have been into audio that never cared to "mind the man behind the curtain" so to speak.

I acknowledge the benefits of separates, and they definitely have great benefits. What people don't seem to understand is it isn't always necessary or beneficial to use separates. If one has the capital and the space for it, I would strongly recommend McIntosh separates, because they hold their value. McIntosh is the Bentley of the audio industry. They offer a reliable product, with low depreciation and in many cases they appreciate. So when you decide to upgrade you aren't dropping a bomb on yourself. McIntosh is not the best for people with upgrade-itus, because McIntosh is cut/dry, no frills and all the bells and whistles brand (I find many of the features on today's receivers to be rather useless)

There should be another article made for this subject, just for reference. I know enough to do what I need to do, but I know I am not geared to write an article about it.

[Seth=L]

Don't be so hasty;)

If you don't exceed the Yam's design limits, why would there be audible differences? They are both well designed amps. Sure, the Parasound may have some capability that the Yam doesn't, but that doesn't prevent them sounding the same if you don't exceed the design limits of the least component.
Well, I was being vague.:D I really should learn not to do that, but then I hate typing.

[mtrycrafts]

I gave bandwidth a look too. :) two were 10Hz to 20kHz (both were +0dB -0.25dB), the rest were 20Hz to 20kHz.
You are quite right, however, not taking bandwidth into consideration could 'hide' (as it were) a very good amplifier, ...

As I mentioned to Peng, don't forget about the inefficiency of our hearing at the two ends of the audio band. That is to hear level changes which is indicative of a frequency response fall off or boost, you need a lot to detect it with test tones and a bunch more with music.

I posted some charts but 16kHz is minimum of 1 dB with norm of 3 dB. Can you hear 20kHz? I cannot. To low end is similar, or worse.
One reason a sub is measured to 10 % THD. Axiom has conducted some distortion testing. At low frequency, they found even 100% might not be easy to detect.:D That's not me, it is research. :)

[wire]

I wouldn't say your claim that amps sound different is snake oil. The way you described it, sounds reasonable. I do think that those who claim "huge/or day and night" difference is! Based on my own experience, one can fail a A/B test but can still hear a difference in sound quality, not always a matter of better or worse, just different.

In some of your other posts you mentioned that if you can see the difference you can hear it, that I am not so sure. I thought there are things that we can see but cannot hear, or we can hear yet cannot see. To make a point, the waveform of a note may not matter (e.g., triangular or sinuisoidal) if its fundamental frequency is greater than say, 30,000 Hz. You can't hear much above 20,000 Hz anyway.
Peng
Now , i took my Bryston in for sevicing a few years ago ( great customerservce ) , I hooked up my a Sony N220 4 channel ( i bridged it for more power 100 x 2 ) for a temporary replacement for my Polk 2b's . I couldnt even listin to my system , you ppl. say speakers are the most important ( yes they are if you match them properly ) . The 2b's with sony at low levels had no nothing (bass or Mid or depth) and was hard to listin to , i wasnt going to even try to push the volume up ( scared that my tweets would say goodbye ) . Now with my 4b , everything is back , great depth ,bass and mids and the highs are so sweet .
The N220 is now strickly a AV amp (which i originally bought for ) in my AV system , which it does just fine for movies and matched with some Klipsch loudspeakers . I also picked up a back up amp for the polks , a Carver TFM-35 which i use as my center channel amp ( made my center come alive ) .
Some loudspeakers need power to make the sound Full , by the way my Polks 2b's are 89db at 1 meter and are 6ohm speakers .

[Joe Schmoe]

Don't be so hasty;)

If you don't exceed the Yam's design limits, why would there be audible differences? They are both well designed amps. Sure, the Parasound may have some capability that the Yam doesn't, but that doesn't prevent them sounding the same if you don't exceed the design limits of the least component.

That makes perfect sense. Audible differences should be a result of exceeding the Yam's limits. When operating well within the limits of both amps, neither should be better.

[TinleyJake]

You may be interested in reading this paper:

David Rich and Peter Aczel, 'Topological Analysis of Consumer Audio Electronics: Another Approach to Show that Modern Audio Electronics are Acoustically Transparent,' 99 AES Convention, 1995, Print #4053.

He has been examining, testing and listening to audio for a while now.

Here is one old Yam integrated and a very expensive and I guess well regarded amp comparison. 3 people, 'golden ears' couldn't differentiate between them.

Still another one. He has been at this for a few days as well:

http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20020901.htm

One more:

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/assets/download/AmpSpekerInterface.pdf

or two:

http://webpages.charter.net/fryguy/Amp_Sound.pdf

The key in all this is within design limits.

For my benefit I'm glad I opened up this can of worms. Being semi-ignorant in the audio field, I've learned more from this thread then I ever expected.

I think I'm finally starting to understand. If I was starting out from scratch, the correct progression is to start out with auditioning speakers and finding out what appeals to my ear. From there I would want to evaluate the nature of what the speaker demands power wise to perform to my expectations.

According to the Sound and Vision article you posted, some speakers may not audibly benefit from a seperate amplifier yet some some speakers may sound decent with an integrated preamp/amplifier but to make it really "sing" may require a dedicated certain style amplifier, tube for instance.

Don't get me wrong, one of the guys I dealt with was just downright snobbish and only wanted to talk about the $30K installs he's currently involved with. As a sales guy he seemed incapable of adapting to different customers needs.

So what the question should have been is I've decided on speaker xxxxx, would this speaker benefit from a certain style engineered dedicated amplifier or is it less demanding and would most likely perform well with most quality integrated receivers?

Jake

[Joe Schmoe]

So what the question should have been is I've decided on speaker xxxxx, would this speaker benefit from a certain style engineered dedicated amplifier or is it less demanding and would most likely perform well with most quality integrated receivers?


Something else to consider: The designers of budget speakers tend to assume that they will be driven by budget receivers, and therefore make a point of making them easy to drive. High end speakers are much more likely to be inefficient, have low impedence dips, etc.

[wire]

Something else to consider: The designers of budget speakers tend to assume that they will be driven by budget receivers, and therefore make a point of making them easy to drive. High end speakers are much more likely to be inefficient, have low impedence dips, etc.

Good point :) .

[Seth=L]

Something else to consider: The designers of budget speakers tend to assume that they will be driven by budget receivers, and therefore make a point of making them easy to drive. High end speakers are much more likely to be inefficient, have low impedence dips, etc.
There is a lot of truth in this. Many high-end speakers require the services of a high-power amplifier that is capable of handling virtually any load you can throw at it. That would be the sentiments of Krell, McIntosh, and Bryston.

[no. 5]

As I mentioned to Peng, don't forget about the inefficiency of our hearing at the two ends of the audio band. That is to hear level changes which is indicative of a frequency response fall off or boost, you need a lot to detect it with test tones and a bunch more with music.

Yeah, it might not be necessary to have a amplifier that has a flat response to within 0.07dB 20Hz to 20kHz, but it certainly would be cool. :D

I posted some charts but 16kHz is minimum of 1 dB with norm of 3 dB. Can you hear 20kHz? I cannot. To low end is similar, or worse.
One reason a sub is measured to 10 % THD. Axiom has conducted some distortion testing. At low frequency, they found even 100% might not be easy to detect.:D That's not me, it is research. :)

I used to be able to hear 20kHz :( .
About Axiom's testing; around what frequencies did they find 100% THD hard to detect? Maybe if you have a link to the whole study? Thanks. :)

[no. 5]

Having a amplifier with more power than a receiver would be good if you happen to sit fairly far away from your speakers; the amount of power needed to get to any SPL will be a bit higher if you are sitting 12 feet away from your speakers then if you are sitting only 7 feet.

But I would guess that the number of people around here that need more power because of the size of there room is small. :)

[Jey Jockey]

These days I think there is a huge misconception as to what type of amplifiers are in most receivers vs. separates. I see the term on here all the time "properly designed amplifier" without anyone stopping to explain what that term means both in general and to them individually. All power & amplifiers are not the same when comparing between different receivers let alone receivers to separates, regardless of wattage claims.

There is a country mile of difference in engineering, build quality, and execution when comparing the amplifier in a 125 watt per channel receiver to something like a 125 watt Parasound Amp.

Could anyone give me a breakdown with real life practical experience as to which models of receivers have a "proper" amplifier inside and which models have "improper" amplifiers inside and then contrast them to separates?

Another question to take it a step further... With rapidly changing manufacturing practices, turnover in engineering & design teams, and the increasing pressure from consumers to lower costs can anyone tell me that these "proper" or "improper" amplifiers don't change considerably from year to year (or even quarter to quarter)? It cracks me up when people think that just because yester years "Insert receiver here" model performed well and was "properly" designed that this years will be too. Or those 125 watts from an $800 Yamaha receiver (with a zillion other features/functions) is equal to 125 watts from a Parasound dedicated amp that costs $1800. It's not true.

Back to the original post...
Bottom line when looking into a speaker upgrade: If you properly bought your equipment the last time you went shopping, your receiver/amplifier will be well mated to fit your speakers. If you do a major upgrade to high-fi speakers you need to make sure the electronics match as well. Is that the first thing you buy? Well, probably not. However, I will tell you that your stereo shop makes way way more money on selling you speakers than they do electronics. The difference is not even close. So, if they are recommending you upgrade electronics, I would sit down and listen as to why. If the salesman is full of crap and can't articulate his reasoning for doing so... leave the store immediately.

I'm not trying to flame the thread at all, but I see these terms always knocked about in generalities and without many long term, real life experiences offered. I’m just trying to understand where people are coming from with their convictions vs. those of which they’ve read from others.

Finally someone who put my thoughts into words for me! I couldn't agree more and thank you for your insight.
Lets also remember that some people hear alot differently than others, some are more able to hear subtle changes some are not.

Chris

[PENG]

Peng
Now , i took my Bryston in for sevicing a few years ago ( great customerservce ) , I hooked up my a Sony N220 4 channel ( i bridged it for more power 100 x 2 ) for a temporary replacement for my Polk 2b's . I couldnt even listin to my system , you ppl. say speakers are the most important ( yes they are if you match them properly ) . The 2b's with sony at low levels had no nothing (bass or Mid or depth) and was hard to listin to , i wasnt going to even try to push the volume up ( scared that my tweets would say goodbye ) . Now with my 4b , everything is back , great depth ,bass and mids and the highs are so sweet .
The N220 is now strickly a AV amp (which i originally bought for ) in my AV system , which it does just fine for movies and matched with some Klipsch loudspeakers . I also picked up a back up amp for the polks , a Carver TFM-35 which i use as my center channel amp ( made my center come alive ) .
Some loudspeakers need power to make the sound Full , by the way my Polks 2b's are 89db at 1 meter and are 6ohm speakers .

Wire, just to be clear, I was referring to well designed amps that have very similar specifications that have been, or can be verified by lab measurements (see my other post). I don't know anything about your Sony but not all Sony products post specifications that follow the same standards/rules as other main stay reputable manufacturers. I do feel that my 4BSST sounds a little better than my Adcom, Denon and Sony ES receiver (one that weighs 21 kg), but no day and night differences heard by me or anyone who had visited my house. I don't have high end speakers, but I know my Veritas have more than enough resolution relative to speakers owned by some of the people who reported day and night differences simply by adding an entry level amp to their mid level receivers.

What you said about having to match amps with speakers I don't buy, well, may be I can buy it to a point... This is more science than art; it is not like matching colors and shapes. Reputable amp manufacturers would not intentionally design their amp to match a particular make of speakers. Conversely, loudspeakers manufactures are not going to design their products to match a particular make of amplifiers. There are established standards that they can based their designs on, instead of investing their time and money on something unpredictable, and bank their success on trial and error, hit and miss approach. That being said, I do agree that some speakers, usually (but not always) the more expensive ones could be more difficult to drive. Your Polk is a good example, but it is mainly to do with the power output/ability to deliver high current into low impedance and/or highly inductive loads.

[PENG]

Having a amplifier with more power than a receiver would be good if you happen to sit fairly far away from your speakers; the amount of power needed to get to any SPL will be a bit higher if you are sitting 12 feet away from your speakers then if you are sitting only 7 feet.

But I would guess that the number of people around here that need more power because of the size of there room is small. :)

no.5, you may be surprised! The inverse square rule applies only to open field. In a room, it depends on the acoustic environment. In other words, it is even possible that you get higher SPL sitting at 12 ft than 7 ft from your speakers.

[mtrycrafts]

Yeah, it might not be necessary to have a amplifier that has a flat response to within 0.07dB 20Hz to 20kHz, but it certainly would be cool. :D
[/QUPTE]

Yes, of course:D But, 0.00 dB variation would blow me away:D

[QUOTE=no. 5;254090]
I used to be able to hear 20kHz :( .
About Axiom's testing; around what frequencies did they find 100% THD hard to detect? Maybe if you have a link to the whole study? Thanks. :)


It is in the low band someplace:

http://www.axiomaudio.com/distortion.html#

[mtrycrafts]

Having a amplifier with more power than a receiver would be good if you happen to sit fairly far away from your speakers; the amount of power needed to get to any SPL will be a bit higher if you are sitting 12 feet away from your speakers then if you are sitting only 7 feet.

But I would guess that the number of people around here that need more power because of the size of there room is small. :)

One must also consider the speakers ability to output high spl, or what the limit is without audible distortion. This is not published, usually.

Here is a link to some speaker measurements, including their distortion level at 90 dB spl and 95 dB spl. Read the notes linked how they did the distortion levels. The dB difference between the two curves, converted to % of dist.

http://www.soundstageav.com/speakermeasurements.html

This link will show dB spl as distance changes, in a room, not open space as it is different. Unfortunately I cannot give you a direct page link but follow: sound and hearing, inverse square law, measurements and have at it:D

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html

[wire]

Wire, just to be clear, I was referring to well designed amps that have very similar specifications that have been, or can be verified by lab measurements (see my other post). I don't know anything about your Sony but not all Sony products post specifications that follow the same standards/rules as other main stay reputable manufacturers. I do feel that my 4BSST sounds a little better than my Adcom, Denon and Sony ES receiver (one that weighs 21 kg), but no day and night differences heard by me or anyone who had visited my house. I don't have high end speakers, but I know my Veritas have more than enough resolution relative to speakers owned by some of the people who reported day and night differences simply by adding an entry level amp to their mid level receivers.

What you said about having to match amps with speakers I don't buy, well, may be I can buy it to a point... This is more science than art; it is not like matching colors and shapes. Reputable amp manufacturers would not intentionally design their amp to match a particular make of speakers. Conversely, loudspeakers manufactures are not going to design their products to match a particular make of amplifiers. There are established standards that they can based their designs on, instead of investing their time and money on something unpredictable, and bank their success on trial and error, hit and miss approach. That being said, I do agree that some speakers, usually (but not always) the more expensive ones could be more difficult to drive. Your Polk is a good example, but it is mainly to do with the power output/ability to deliver high current into low impedance and/or highly inductive loads.
The N220 by Sony (they say its has the same inside as the ES model of that year ) is not a bad amp , its better than yammy . But it cant Amplify my Polk 2b's properly , the Bryston and Carver ( which sound different in there own right ) do a fine job and up to my standard . The speakers sound much different with these Amps ( that mightbe a tad bit hard to drive , 89db @ 6 ohms ) .
Now if thats my case , try and answer Jeys question properly :) .
I also agree with Intheindustry said in his post . I also know the markup on speakers ( thats where they make there money ), I got my 2b's way back when @ cost and there as good as new today .

[wire]

What you said about having to match amps with speakers I don't
I remmber when i bought the 2b's , the most sold amp for the SDA series was Carver . I went against the grain and went with Bryston ( alittle brighter and tighter bass ) vs the Carver series , although i needed a pre to calm the Bryston down abit and went with the Carver CT-7 .
If you go to the polk forum or the Carver forum , the same thing sticks out that the Carver amps where a great match with the SDA series . The SdA's can handle hords of good power and need alot of power to sound up to there standard and make there sound stage open up .
Note
I want to try my SP3 hooked up to the SDA's and see what they sound like :) . The SP3 is only 38 x 2 but it sounds like alot more than that .
So i have experenced there is a difference matching your speakers to a Amp/Preamp .

[Seth=L]

The N220 by Sony (they say its has the same inside as the ES model of that year ) is not a bad amp , its better than yammy . But it cant Amplify my Polk 2b's properly , the Bryston and Carver ( which sound different in there own right ) do a fine job and up to my standard . The speakers sound much different with these Amps ( that mightbe a tad bit hard to drive , 89db @ 6 ohms ) .
Now if thats my case , try and answer Jeys question properly :) .
I also agree with Intheindustry said in his post . I also know the markup on speakers ( thats where they make there money ), I got my 2b's way back when @ cost and there as good as new today .
Just because it is similar to the ES amp doesn't mean it is stable with low loads. Get some specifications then we can talk.:D

[wire]

Just because it is similar to the ES amp doesn't mean it is stable with low loads. Get some specifications then we can talk.:D

Specs :) , this thing is old , i dont have the manual . My point is it cant properly push my 2b's and its 100 x 2 , they tell me all amps at low volume sound the same .
Again this Sony N220 does just fine in my AV set up . Its 60 x 4 .

[Seth=L]

Specs :) , this thing is old , i dont have the manual . My point is it cant properly push my 2b's and its 100 x 2 , they tell me all amps at low volume sound the same .
Again this Sony N220 does just fine in my AV set up . Its 60 x 4 .
Well you can't take every thing that is said and make it fact. Most posts on the forum are not complete answers, that would take up a lot of time and space.:)

Stating that the amp does 100 watts x 2 means almost nothing. We don't know if that is from 20hz-20khz, both channels driven, and most importantly the impedance that it is rated for.

[wire]

Well you can't take every thing that is said and make it fact. Most posts on the forum are not complete answers, that would take up a lot of time and space.:)

Stating that the amp does 100 watts x 2 means almost nothing. We don't know if that is from 20hz-20khz, both channels driven, and most importantly the impedance that it is rated for.
Its a main streem little amp , probs equal to yours .

[Seth=L]

Its a main streem little amp , probs equal to yours .
Probably equal to the Yamaha, but I wouldn't bet that about the Fisher. It has a massive power consumption for it's rated power, I wish I had the specs for the thing. I could be wrong though. I will say this, it sounds no different than the Yamaha with the NHTs, which happen to be 8 ohms nominal, I don't know how low they dip.

[no. 5]

The inverse square rule applies only to open field. In a room, it depends on the acoustic environment. In other words, it is even possible that you get higher SPL sitting at 12 ft than 7 ft from your speakers.

oops, I forgot about room interaction. :o :eek:

Thanks for the correction PENG. :)

[no. 5]

Thanks for the links mtrycrafts. :)

Looks like goooood reading. :cool:

[PENG]

So i have experenced there is a difference matching your speakers to a Amp/Preamp .

As I said, I do agree with matching difficult to drive speakers with robust amps that can deliver high current on demand in order to obtain optimum performance. Beyond that I don't buy.

[mtrycrafts]

Thanks for the links mtrycrafts. :)

Looks like goooood reading. :cool:

Hey, it is better than reinventing the wheel all the time as some want to do:D

[Joe Schmoe]

As I said, I do agree with matching difficult to drive speakers with robust amps that can deliver high current on demand in order to obtain optimum performance. Beyond that I don't buy.

I agree. I think that power (including current, headroom, etc.) is the only difference between amps. I don't think that an amp has a "characteristic" sound otherwise (nor that it should.)

[no. 5]

I agree. I think that power (including current, headroom, etc.) is the only difference between amps. I don't think that an amp has a "characteristic" sound otherwise (nor that it should.)

respectfully, I disagree with some of that statement, an amplifier shouldn’t have a "characteristic" sound (that is, if you are going for absolute fidelity, if you’re going for just something that "sounds good" well.... ;) ), and as it has been pointed out many times before, they often don't.

However, as an example, in my post number 37 (http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=253537&postcount=37), I referred to the specs of a few amplifiers to the effect that (within a bandwidth of 10Hz or 20Hz to 20kHz) the frequency response can deviate up to 3dB above and below a flat response, so that would mean that two frequencies that are the same level on a recording could have up to 6dB deference in volume when played back, perhaps a somewhat extreme example, but still possible.

Personally, I feel that two amplifiers can sound deferent, there is no way the deference could be "night and day". :)
(hope I did'nt start a flame war :eek: )