How does this forum think about objectivity in audio?

[christoffeldg]

Hey guys,

I'm an avid lurker of this board, and usually I am a fan of the unbiased opinion. However I was very surprised when I read this thread:
http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/threads/stereo-amplifier-for-dali-opticon-6.106450/

I read there that based on specs alone some users apparently think the Lyngdorf amplifier would not sound very different from a home theater receiver? This seemed to me very odd, as an amp with such an elaborate DSP can't realistically sound similar to any other setup.

Is this really how some of you think? That specs tell the story and the rest is subjective bias? Or am I interpreting the thought process behind this wrong? To me it feels like negative bias, where people are "too" convinced there is bias making them ignore obvious differences.

 

[shadyJ]

While most of the regular posters here are quite objectivist, there are varying degrees of objectivism. This isn't a hive mind where we all have the same exact opinion or perspective.

Personally I think that audible differences can be established in blind listening tests. Those will filter out any sort of bias.

 

[Pogre]

While most of the regular posters here are quite objectivist, there are varying degrees of objectivism. This isn't a hive mind where we all have the same exact opinion or perspective.

Personally I think that audible differences can be established in blind listening tests. Those will filter out any sort of bias.

I think blind listening tests pretty much say it all. There may be very small differences, but when all things are equal and people cannot consistently identify one from the other that makes them trivial and unimportant, imo. If someone is looking to improve sound quality it is always in the speakers, sub and placement in the room. I don't believe in buying expensive amplifiers to eq the sound. Imo, with a good amp there should be no coloration at all.

If I had a ton of cash and wanted glowing dials and actually quite beautifully built amplifiers in the upper echelon I'd have one, but I'd have my speakers sorted first. That's where the bulk of your budget should go, IMO, IME, YMMV and all that good stuff.

 

[everettT]

Subsitute Lyndorf for McIntosh for Levinson for etc. I've owned McIntosh, Krell, Pass Labs, Hafler, Crown and a couple of others. Crown has/ is the most dependable, followed by Hafler. Sound wise couldn't pick one from the other. The McIntosh was with autoformer and probably the second most low ohm stable behind the Crown. That's amps, I've owned flagship AVRs from Yamaha and Integra and I couldn't tell a difference for the amps without processing applied fwiw. The Hafler was still my favorite amp because of the simplicity and lack of problems from the VC to the output.

 

[christoffeldg]

I think blind listening tests pretty much say it all. There may be very small differences, but when all things are equal and people cannot consistently identify one from the other that makes them trivial and unimportant, imo. If someone is looking to improve sound quality it is always in the speakers, sub and placement in the room. I don't believe in buying expensive amplifiers to eq the sound. Imo, with a good amp there should be no coloration at all.

If I had a ton of cash and wanted glowing dials and actually quite beautifully built amplifiers in the upper echelon I'd have one, but I'd have my speakers sorted first. That's where the bulk of your budget should go, IMO, IME, YMMV and all that good stuff.

I own the Lyngdorf TDAI 2710 and what you're saying is not true. The DSP has a very big impact on the sound that is audible immediately, it has a button to switch it on and off for comparison so it is not difficult to check.

Without the DSP, the lack of background noise is also very apparent and can be easily checked by listening at very close range.

 

[PENG]

May be I am missing something, I thought the OP said:

"This seemed to me very odd, as an amp with such an elaborate DSP can't realistically sound similar to any other setup."

I am not aware of anyone on this forum ever said with DSP engaged the amp would sound similar to "any setup". I do see members often said in pure direct mode, when all DSPs are out, well designed amps operating well within their limits will sound similar, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[PENG]

I own the Lyngdorf TDAI 2710 and what you're saying is not true. The DSP has a very big impact on the sound that is audible immediately, it has a button to switch it on and off for comparison so it is not difficult to check.

I don't think anyone would disagree with you on this point.

 

[lovinthehd]

So you want to compare the Lyngdorf Room Perfect dsp to that provided by avrs with Audyssey, ARC, YPAO, Trinnov, Dirac etc in 2-ch mode? Or rather, did you? How did you do so?

 

[Pogre]

I recently bought the Monolith 7, an amp built by ATI. I was just using my receiver (SR6011) to power everything, now it just handles the surrounds and acts as my pre for the amp to power my fronts.

I have the same processing applied as I did when I was just using my receiver and I couldn't tell you the difference between the two. The Monolith runs cooler? More headroom? That's about it. More headroom is nice, I'll admit, but as far as sq my receiver sounded just as good as the amp does driving my mains.

 

[Pogre]

I own the Lyngdorf TDAI 2710 and what you're saying is not true. The DSP has a very big impact on the sound that is audible immediately, it has a button to switch it on and off for comparison so it is not difficult to check.

Without the DSP, the lack of background noise is also very apparent and can be easily checked by listening at very close range.

You're talking about sound processing. What I'm talking about is the amp section without processing. If I turn Audyssey off on my receiver it's a huge difference. Dsp will differ from receiver to receiver. I believe Audyssey XT32 to be very competent with room correction. What you're talking about is subjective. I may very well prefer Audyssey over Lyngdorf's room perfect. Does that mean my avr is better?

 

[christoffeldg]

So you want to compare the Lyngdorf Room Perfect dsp to that provided by avrs with Audyssey, ARC, YPAO, Trinnov, Dirac etc in 2-ch mode? Or rather, did you? How did you do so?

I own a Denon X4300H with Audyssey XT32 for AVR and the Lyngdorf TDAI 2170. There's a very big difference in quality between both. The DSP is by far better on the TDAI for stereo and really does improve the sound a lot. Also the background noise is very different, this is especially apparent when connecting the Lyngdorf to the AVR's pre-out with an analog cable.

 

[Pogre]

I own a Denon X4300H with Audyssey XT32 for AVR and the Lyngdorf TDAI 2170. There's a very big difference in quality between both. The DSP is by far better on the TDAI for stereo and really does improve the sound a lot. Also the background noise is very different, this is especially apparent when connecting the Lyngdorf to the AVR's pre-out with an analog cable.

As I alluded to in my previous post, that's your preference. What if someone prefers Audyssey? Are they wrong? Would that mean Denon and Marantz make a superior product?

 

[lovinthehd]

I own a Denon X4300H with Audyssey XT32 for AVR and the Lyngdorf TDAI 2170. There's a very big difference in quality between both. The DSP is by far better on the TDAI for stereo and really does improve the sound a lot. Also the background noise is very different, this is especially apparent when connecting the Lyngdorf to the AVR's pre-out with an analog cable.

Well, the 2710 is only a stereo unit, so hard to compare them to multi-ch differences in the dsp. How did you compare them directly? Level matched with some sort of switching device? Still, use of dsp is merely a preference and hasn't got a lot to do with objectivity....

 

[christoffeldg]

As I alluded to in my previous post, that's your preference. What if someone prefers Audyssey? Are they wrong? Would that mean Denon and Marantz make a superior product?

What is the difference between what you're saying and the preference between a budget satellite and a high end tower?

 

[lovinthehd]

Well, the 2710 is only a stereo unit, so hard to compare them to multi-ch differences in the dsp. How did you compare them directly? Level matched with some sort of switching device? Still, use of dsp is merely a preference and hasn't got a lot to do with objectivity....

ps Did you setup Audyssey only for 2ch mode as well?

 

[christoffeldg]

Well, the 2710 is only a stereo unit, so hard to compare them to multi-ch differences in the dsp. How did you compare them directly? Level matched with some sort of switching device? Still, use of dsp is merely a preference and hasn't got a lot to do with objectivity....

I combine both actually, Audyssey (Surround) and RP (Stereo). RP doesn't really touch the character of the speakers.

I have multiple connection options. Using Chromecast through HDMI, my PC with USB, using the pre out of the receiver, turning the DSP on and off with the switch of a button. I also can't stress enough the impact of the background noise has on the overall sound, listening through the amp directly makes the music feel less "stressed" and more relaxed.

If you buy a TDAI 2170, you're basically buying the DSP. It's odd to suggest removing the DSP out of the equation when that is really one of the main reasons to buy it.

 

[Pogre]

What is the difference between what you're saying and the preference between a budget satellite and a high end tower?

Bass extension, build quality, better crossovers and drivers, measureable differences in sound quality that can be quantified.

 

[christoffeldg]

Build quality, better crossovers and drivers, measureable differences in sound quality that can be quantified.

But some people might prefer a speaker even if the build quality sucks, because they like big bass for example.

And development of a DSP is also very much reliant on the software and algorithm that is used to create it. There's also quality there that can be measured.

 

[Pogre]

But some people might prefer a speaker even if the build quality sucks, because they like big bass for example.

And development of a DSP is also very much reliant on the software and algorithm that is used to create it. There's also quality there that can be measured.

So, you would buy a dsp before getting better speakers to improve on sq? That's just plain silly.

And if someone can't hear the difference between a budget satellite and a high end tower, then they would be very happy for very little money. You have a preference for Lyngdorf's dsp and room correction. Great. I happen to love what Audyssey does for my room.

I'll ask again, what if someone (or more) people were to prefer Audyssey over room perfect? I suppose that would mean that the 4300 is superior to the Lyngdorf then, right?

 

[lovinthehd]

I combine both actually, Audyssey (Surround) and RP (Stereo). RP doesn't really touch the character of the speakers.

I have multiple connection options. Using Chromecast through HDMI, my PC with USB, using the pre out of the receiver, turning the DSP on and off with the switch of a button.

If you buy a TDAI 2170, you're basically buying the DSP. It's odd to suggest removing the DSP out of the equation when that is really one of the main reasons to buy it.

I was more asking how you compared the two different units using the same speakers and level matched with quick switching (and blinded preferably) and whether you setup Audyssey using only the two speakers.

You get the amp free when you buy Room Perfect that way as opposed to a stand-alone unit?