Which gives the system it's particular sound, the pre amp or the amp?

[obonillaf]

Given you have your stereo system in separates, e.g. a separate amp and a separate pre-amp, is it true that what gives a system it's particular sound is the amplifier and not the pre-amplifier. I mean, as long as the pre-amplifier is not a defective unit or very bad constructed, what will define the sound will be the amplifier?

 

[skizzerflake]

Isn't that the $50 question of the high-end audio world? If you believe that a well constructed and connected pre-amp and/or amp doesn't have an identifiable "sound", then the question should be moot. You'd have to have a spare of each in order to do a bunch of swaps to determine which component has a "sound". Chances are if it did, it would not be good news for that component.

 

[AbyssalLoris]

As Skizzerflake said, neither should have any 'particular sound' if they are perfect. Any special character imparted to the sound should be interpreted as an imperfection, though one may very well find it agreeable.

I don't have any personal experience doing comparisons of components to answer your question, maybe someone around here does. But going by the principles of electronics, I'd say that no component is going to be perfect, and as such, the preamp might tend to make the signal noisy, where as the amp might tend to distort it. They are different effects, but may both affect the sound output. Quantifying each of these effects would be difficult except for someone experienced in their design.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Given you have your stereo system in separates, e.g. a separate amp and a separate pre-amp, is it true that what gives a system it's particular sound is the amplifier and not the pre-amplifier. I mean, as long as the pre-amplifier is not a defective unit or very bad constructed, what will define the sound will be the amplifier?

Only an issue if one or more component was designed to be euphonic.

Otherwise, worry about your speakers, room acoustics and the quality of the recording. these are what gives it sound.

 

[fmw]

The most important aspect of the sound of your system is the room in which it is placed. The speakers represent a distant second place. The electronics themselves aren't quite trivial but they are trivial with respect to the other two.

Modern solid state amps and preamps don't have a characteristic sound. They amplify without audible distortion or noticeable peaks or valleys in frequency response. The idea is to amplify the signals without any noticeable coloration. Modern equipment accomplishes that for the most part.

 

[indcrimdefense]

both the pre-amp & amplifier have an impact on sound quality, at times you can identify differences between different pre-amps, at times you cannot, and the same holds true for amplifiers. unfortunately you really don't know until you either buy a new component or demo one in your own system. i demoed numerous pre-amps & amplifiers before making a decision, have purchased multiple pre-amps & amplifiers, & both can make a significant impact on sound quality. however you really don't know what impact, if any, a particular component will have in a particular system in a particular room until you do a demo.

 

[PENG]

both the pre-amp & amplifier have an impact on sound quality, at times you can identify differences between different pre-amps, at times you cannot, and the same holds true for amplifiers. unfortunately you really don't know until you either buy a new component or demo one in your own system. i demoed numerous pre-amps & amplifiers before making a decision, have purchased multiple pre-amps & amplifiers, & both can make a significant impact on sound quality. however you really don't know what impact, if any, a particular component will have in a particular system in a particular room until you do a demo.

This debate will never end! Many will continue to agree with what you said and many will say well designed/made (e.g. mid level to high end) amps and preamps do not make a significant impact on SQ to human ears. Whether it boils down to a matter of perception/imagination or facts, I wish I know the answer. However, from a scientific stand point, it is hard to explain why some people could perceive the often claimed "significant" differences between high end amps/preamps, other than perhaps they have exceptional hearing capability.

 

[zhimbo]

I think the opening post was worded in a way that tilted the discussion.

Instead, it should have said: Whatever benefit one may get from using seperates over a reciever, is it because of the pre-amp or the amp section, or both?

The answer seems to be primarily the amp section, as I understand it. In fact, the pre-processing is typically more up to date in receivers. This is why many people seem to recommend getting a reciever with pre-outs, and adding a seperate amp for better dynamic range without clipping, etc. if you find you need it.

If the poster really meant "a particular sound", well, that's a different story.

 

[no. 5]

Given you have your stereo system in separates, e.g. a separate amp and a separate pre-amp, is it true that what gives a system it's particular sound is the amplifier and not the pre-amplifier. I mean, as long as the pre-amplifier is not a defective unit or very bad constructed, what will define the sound will be the amplifier?

It will be whichever component has the the most audible curves in its frequency response.

I think that either component has the possibility of altering the original waveform to the point of an audible change from the original (be it intentionally or not), so I would say it would depend on the units in question as to which is defining the "sound".

 

[fmw]

This debate will never end! Many will continue to agree with what you said and many will say well designed/made (e.g. mid level to high end) amps and preamps do not make a significant impact on SQ to human ears. Whether it boils down to a matter of perception/imagination or facts, I wish I know the answer. However, from a scientific stand point, it is hard to explain why some people could perceive the often claimed "significant" differences between high end amps/preamps, other than perhaps they have exceptional hearing capability.

I don't know if it still exists but there was newsgroup years ago called rec.audio and this debate was the centerpiece of it.

It is not a problem to explain scientifically how some people hear claimed "significant" differences. It is called the placebo effect and it affects everyone. It is a powerful effect indeed. Some people in drug tests have cured themselves on placebos. In effect for audio it means people hear what they think they should hear or what they want to hear. It isn't a psychological defect. It affects all humans without exception.

If you remove all the subjectivity from a listening test these "significant" differences often disappear. When a person doesn't know what they are hearing and different components are presented in a level matched and equal way, you find out what is audible and what is not without difficulty. As soon as you allow a subjective element to the listening test, it no longer shows real audible differences, only perceived ones.

I've subjected hard core audiophiles with "golden ears" to level matched blind tests and the golden ears have disappeared immediately. In fact, all but a very few of the hard core audiophiles I've done this with have given up subjective audiophilia and gone back to enjoying music for what it is.

I was a hard core audiophile myself for decades. I'm subject to placebo effect like anybody else. The difference between me and audiophiles is that I now understand that and live happily with the knowledge. I forgot to mention, I don't buy $8000 preamps any longer. That's a real benefit.

 

[fmw]

It will be whichever component has the the most audible curves in its frequency response.

I think that either component has the possibility of altering the original waveform to the point of an audible change from the original (be it intentionally or not), so I would say it would depend on the units in question as to which is defining the "sound".

Yes, some audio electronics do produce colored sound. In the high end world this is sometimes designed into the product. If there are real audible differences shown in level matched blind listening tests, then those audible differences will also be measurable. We have test instruments that are far more sensitive and accurate than human hearing.

Let me give you an example. Here are some specifications for a competent and reasonably inexpensive Asian made integrated amplifier. It states a frequency response from 10hz to 60hz of +1, -3 db with a THD figure of .08%. It has a signal to noise ratio of 100db. It would be difficult but possible to hear a -3db valley in the frequency response but the manufacturer doesn't tell us if this valley is even in the audible range of frequencies. Most likely it is not. It is probably right at the 60khz point which is why they specified the frequency response that way. I'm willing to bet that between 20hz and 20khz the peaks and valleys don't exceed 1 db. That is inaudible. Since THD below 1% is inaudible, the .08% measurement for this amplifier is very inaudible. A 100db noise floor is inaudible. This amplifier has no audible coloration. It will amplify a signal so that it is louder without coloring it.

It is not something esoteric or expensive. It is made by good old Onkyo. And its performance isn't anything special by today's standards. Most name brand integrated amplifiers will do about as well and sound just like this one - which means no specific sound at all.

 

[PENG]

It will be whichever component has the the most audible curves in its frequency response.

I think that either component has the possibility of altering the original waveform to the point of an audible change from the original (be it intentionally or not), so I would say it would depend on the units in question as to which is defining the "sound".

no. 5, please be reminded that as soon as the waveform is altered from the source signal, the signal is distorted (from the original form). Even a $1.5K multchannel receiver can achieve less than 0.05% distortion. Different amps will have its distortion in different forms. One of many questions that need to be asked is, can an average person hear the difference in SQ due to the different types of that >0.05% THD or TIMD?

 

[PENG]

I don't know if it still exists but there was newsgroup years ago called rec.audio and this debate was the centerpiece of it.

It is not a problem to explain scientifically how some people hear claimed "significant" differences. It is called the placebo effect and it affects everyone. It is a powerful effect indeed. Some people in drug tests have cured themselves on placebos. In effect for audio it means people hear what they think they should hear or what they want to hear. It isn't a psychological defect. It affects all humans without exception.

If you remove all the subjectivity from a listening test these "significant" differences often disappear. When a person doesn't know what they are hearing and different components are presented in a level matched and equal way, you find out what is audible and what is not without difficulty. As soon as you allow a subjective element to the listening test, it no longer shows real audible differences, only perceived ones.

I've subjected hard core audiophiles with "golden ears" to level matched blind tests and the golden ears have disappeared immediately. In fact, all but a very few of the hard core audiophiles I've done this with have given up subjective audiophilia and gone back to enjoying music for what it is.

I was a hard core audiophile myself for decades. I'm subject to placebo effect like anybody else. The difference between me and audiophiles is that I now understand that and live happily with the knowledge. I forgot to mention, I don't buy $8000 preamps any longer. That's a real benefit.

Fair enough, but would you still buy a $8000 speakers? I am still gunning for the 802D, $12,000 or may be the 803D, $8000; hopefully sooner than later. Sorry about getting off topic.........

 

[fmw]

Would I? Not any longer. I'll tell you a story. I did a blind test for members of a local audiophile club in the late 1990's. I set up a simple integrated amp, CD player and a less-than-$1000 Boston Sub Sat speaker system in my bedroom. My bedroom is long and narrow and has very nice acoustics. I was able to set up the speakers about 6 feet from the back wall and still allow another 6 feet of space behind the listening chair. In a small, square dead bedroom of my house I set up a $40,000 high end audio system with a pair of B&W Matrix 802 speakers which cost nearly 10 times as much as the Boston system in the other room.

I took each audiophile (9 of them) into each room blindfolded and played two cuts from a reference CD on each system.

Guess which one they preferred? You guessed it. They all preferred the bedroom system with the Boston speakers - all 9 of them. To say they were amazed is an understatement. The reason was not the equipment but rather the rooms themselves. Equipment cannot make up for poor room acoustics. Room acoustics are almost everything when it comes to the sound of an audio system. 5 of them gave up their audiophile hobby that very day.

Now let me put this into perspective a little. Did the bedroom system sound better when the group moved the B&W speakers there to replace the Boston's? Yes. 7 of the 9 audiphiles preferred the B&W speakers in a level matched blind test. Why not all 9? POssibly because the differences were more subtle than one might imagine given the difference in the price of the two systems. Perhaps it was just a difference in preference. Hard to say. So don't think I was suggesting that speakers don't have a sound. They do. It is just less important than the room in which they are being used.

The hard part of music reproduction for speaker systems has always been the bass. It requires big speakers moving lots of air in relatively large enclosures. Bass also requires more power. Home theaters are meant to be used with subwoofers to reproduce movie LFE. Those same subwoofers, if they have distortion pretty well under control, will do a great job handling the bass frequencies for music as well.

That will explain what this former audiophile uses as home theater speakers. My main speakers are small towers from Epos, an English company. They are two way speakers with 6" midrange/woofer. They look something like bookshelf speakers but with a tall enclosure that sits on the floor. They weren't terribly expensive but they have good quality drivers in heavy enclosures that don't resonate. They reproduce music very acurately except they are lean in the bass as you would expect. I complement these with a good quality powered subwoofer from B&W, another English company. The sub goes low enough to do a great job with movie LFE and it also provides relatively inaudibly distorted lows for music reproduction. People who hear music played in my home theater rate it as among the best they have heard (yup, I have a room with good acoustics.) These aren't state of the art components. They are well designed and made components that get the job done in my home theater. I have no motivation at all to replace them with anything else. I listen to recorded music for hours on end in my home theater system.

There you have it. Would I? Not any longer.

 

[Geno]

Most of what I'm quoting here has already been said, but here's what one of my favorite gurus, who publishes under the name "The Audio Critic" says about the subject of amplifiers:
"Any amplifier, regardless of topology, can be treated as a “black box” for the purpose of listening comparisons. If amplifiers A and B both have flat frequency response, low noise floor, reasonably low distortion, high input impedance, low output impedance, and are not clipped, they will be indistinguishable in sound at matched levels no matter what’s inside them. Of course, some of the new “alphabet soup” topologies do not necessarily satisfy those conditions.
I really believe that all this soul-searching, wondering, questioning, agonizing about amplifiers is basically unproductive and would be much more rewarding if applied to loudspeakers instead. For various reasons that I have discussed in the past, people are more willing to change amplifiers than loudspeakers. That’s most unfortunate because a new and better loudspeaker will change your audio life but a new amplifier will not."

 

[mtrycrafts]

One of many questions that need to be asked is, can an average person hear the difference in SQ due to the different types of that >0.05% THD or TIMD?

There have been test for this.
Axiom has it on their web site. Most interesting, if you have missed the link in past posts:

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

and from Ian Masters:

http://www.mastersonaudio.com/features/20040401.htm

 

[wire]

I don't know if it still exists but there was newsgroup years ago called rec.audio and this debate was the centerpiece of it.

It is not a problem to explain scientifically how some people hear claimed "significant" differences. It is called the placebo effect and it affects everyone. It is a powerful effect indeed. Some people in drug tests have cured themselves on placebos. In effect for audio it means people hear what they think they should hear or what they want to hear. It isn't a psychological defect. It affects all humans without exception.

If you remove all the subjectivity from a listening test these "significant" differences often disappear. When a person doesn't know what they are hearing and different components are presented in a level matched and equal way, you find out what is audible and what is not without difficulty. As soon as you allow a subjective element to the listening test, it no longer shows real audible differences, only perceived ones.

I've subjected hard core audiophiles with "golden ears" to level matched blind tests and the golden ears have disappeared immediately. In fact, all but a very few of the hard core audiophiles I've done this with have given up subjective audiophilia and gone back to enjoying music for what it is.

I was a hard core audiophile myself for decades. I'm subject to placebo effect like anybody else. The difference between me and audiophiles is that I now understand that and live happily with the knowledge. I forgot to mention, I don't buy $8000 preamps any longer. That's a real benefit.

I think this is close to what Bob Carver went through many years ago , when he set out to mimic a Conrad Johnson Amp , I think it was the 1.5T , 1.0T and so on for a fraction of the price .
Me personally still can't stand the Amp sections in the Yammy's recievers . there truley gutless and have been for 25+ years .
PS
I still like my Tube Amp better than SS at low level listining levels , you cant beat the softness in the voice and symbols .

 

[fmw]

I still like my Tube Amp better than SS at low level listining levels , you cant beat the softness in the voice and symbols .

There are two possibilities here. One is that you prefer its sound because you like it, not because it sound any different (placebo effect.) Warm glowing things are always pleasant in a listening room. The other possibility is that it was designed to produce a non linear frequency response on purpose to give you the valleys in the treble to which you refer. But understand that tube amplifiers don't sound any different from solid state amplifiers if they are designed with the same distortion, frequency linearity and noise floor.

In my audiophile days I owned an expensive tube amp made by Audio Research. It sounded exactly the same as similarly spec'd solid state amps in blind tests. It was very well designed and made and quite accurate. The fact that it cost 10 times as much, glowed in the dark and required occasional maintenance didn't change its sound at all thanks to some competent design work.

 

[fmw]

I should also add that it is possible to make a linear solid state amp sound like a non-linear tube amp with tone controls or, better, multiband equalizers. If you want less agressive symbols cut the frequencies around 5000hz a little. While I don't use one myself, I think the multiband equalizer is the best way to tailor sound to your preference.

 

[PENG]

There have been test for this.
Axiom has it on their web site. Most interesting, if you have missed the link in past posts:

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

and from Ian Masters:

http://www.mastersonaudio.com/features/20040401.htm

I did read the Axiom one long time ago but not Ian Masters, I mean not until now. Thanks!

As you know I cannot understand why people can hear those day and nigh type of difference between well made (and reasonably high price) preamp/amps. I do understand the Placebo effect that fmw talked about, but hard to imagine that factor alone can explain those claims.