General Amp question

[jayswizz]

I first want to thank everyone who has helped me to learn about HT when posting questions on this site. When upgrading an amplifier can sound actually get better with less wattage if it is a higher end amp? For example, I am using a B&K Ref 7250 and one day will probably want to upgrade. This amp is rated at 200x5. If I were to buy a Mark Levinson at 100x5, would the sound actually be better? Mark Levinson seems to be a higher end amp than the B&K that is why I use it as an example. Does wattage really matter when it comes to higher end amplifiers? I hope this makes sense as a question?

 

[Seth=L]

Which one weighs more?

 

[markw]

finish the question.

Which one weighs more?

A pound of feathers or a pound of lead?

Actually, watts are kinda like money. If you've got enough to accomplish what you want, then it doesn't matter. It's only when you don't have enough does it matter.

 

[Seth=L]

I was asking which amp, the B&K or the Mark Levinson, weighs more.

H/K is the owner of Mark Levinson, so it could be possible the Mark is underated on wattage. The reason I asked which weighs more, they both probably have larger power transformers, but the one with the biggest transformer will likely have the most power.

But here is the thing, I did not find the Mark Levinson so if I could have the model # to that it would be helpful. What I found on the B&K was this. Looking at the new versions of the same exact amplifier they have two versions, a 5 channel and a 7 channel. The weight difference is only 2 lbs. The 5 channel weighs 74 lbs and the 7 channel weighs 76 lbs. So each uses the same power transformer, meaning either the 5 channel model is underated or the 7 channel is overrated. It would not be cost effective to have the 5 channel be underrated, so it is likely the latter.

Mark Levinson's amplifiers are very heavy, I looked at a dual mono amp with 200 watts per channel and it weights a little over 100 lbs, consider it has two power supplies. Mark Levinson is known to have a very consistant neutral sound, i.e. less colorations.

 

[majorloser]

I recently replaced my B&K 7270 with seven Behringer A500's. All bridged for 500 wpc. They are pro audio amps, not home audio. But they are a HUGE improvement over the B&K amp.

Weight ain't everything.

EDIT: Let's see, 18.5 pounds X 7 = 129.5 pounds

 

[Seth=L]

Sounds like you have weight on your side.

 

[Nick250]

Mark Levinson is known to have a very consistant neutral sound, i.e. less colorations.

I am curious, given that amplifier design and technology is, by all accounts well understood, is there a hurdle to overcome or are we already there?

Nick

 

[Seth=L]

How do you mean "accept"?

 

[Nick250]

How do you mean "accept"?

I must have been editing my post when you first read it. I think's it's more clear now.

Nick

 

[Seth=L]

The goal would be to make the perfect amplifier, one with no colorations in sound. But the only problem is that it is nearly impossible to do so. And as it is many people like to have different sound characteristics. Someone who is interested in a very warm sound would look to tube amplifiers or single ended transistor amplifiers for specialized sound that only matches the right set of speakers by design.

Lets face it, there isn't ever going to be a perfect amplifier or perfect sound for that matter. It would be downright impossible to have an amplifier that does't have some affect on the sound. Having said that everyone has a different view on what sounds best in any aspect, down to the original musical performance or original sound of the actors speaking to one another in a motion picture.

 

[jaxvon]

The goal would be to make the perfect amplifier, one with no colorations in sound. But the only problem is that it is nearly impossible to do so. And as it is many people like to have different sound characteristics. Someone who is interested in a very warm sound would look to tube amplifiers or single ended transistor amplifiers for specialized sound that only matches the right set of speakers by design.

Lets face it, there isn't ever going to be a perfect amplifier or perfect sound for that matter. It would be downright impossible to have an amplifier that does't have some affect on the sound. Having said that everyone has a different view on what sounds best in any aspect, down to the original musical performance or original sound of the actors speaking to one another in a motion picture.

Unless you're using a POS amplifier or some esoteric tube amp, any modern amp will be transparent. You will not be able to detect distortion or FR anomalies. And as for perfection, Halcro is essentially there.

 

[WmAx]

The goal would be to make the perfect amplifier, one with no colorations in sound. But the only problem is that it is nearly impossible to do so. A

If this is true, then why it is so difficult to pass a level matched double-blinded test, as has been established time and time again? The only time the claimed obvious coloration seems to exist, is when a non-blinded[open to mental bias/perception], non level-matched condition is used for comparison. That, or simply very bad/defective item(s). Malfunctioning solid state and typical working SET tube amps are in this category.

-Chris

 

[Seth=L]

right

So we should all just buy a Sony receiver or a Kenwood?

 

[stratman]

The hearing condition of the listener will also be an indicative factor describing the sound of an amp. As a person gets older they loose the ability to hear higher frequencies, so it's very likely (though I personally have never blind tested for this)that an older person might perceive the sound signature of a given amp quite differently than a younger person with undamaged hearing.

 

[PENG]

Which one weighs more?

Please!!! Not again..............
You cannot based on weight alone, when comparing amplifiers or recievers of different design and/or manufacturers. Try comparing the weights of a HK635, NADT773 and a Arcam AVR300, a lot of people would take the much lighter Arcam. Or your can compare weights of transformer of different designs and will find that in some cases the lighter ones have more power capability. Or you can compare the weights of Al and Steel. Then you will understand why some chassis are much lighter than others yet offer the same or better rigidity. Same deal for planes, cars, the list can be endless.

Everything else being equal than you may consider weight. So please don't keep quoting HK as though they are the bench mark. Nothing against them, I almost bought a AVR7200 myself, and may still get one some day, perhaps a AVR7500. I won't touch their much less powerful lower models though but that's just me.

 

[PENG]

The hearing condition of the listener will also be an indicative factor describing the sound of an amp. As a person gets older they loose the ability to hear higher frequencies, so it's very likely (though I personally have never blind tested for this)that an older person might perceive the sound signature of a given amp quite differently than a younger person with undamaged hearing.

I think you are right. However, I have hard time understanding why my kids always told me my amps/receivers all sound the same, and that I was imagining the differences. They don't listen to anything loud and I have no reason to believe they have more hearing loss than me. Go figure!

 

[PENG]

So we should all just buy a Sony receiver or a Kenwood?

I use my 18 year old Kenwood CD player that weighs 22 lbs for RB CDs. It has quite a few power supplies in it (7 I think but not 100% sure). The Kenwood still sounds just as good as but not better than my much lighter Denon 3910 when playing regular CDs. In this particular case, weight is not relevant to their sound quality and yes, Kenwood does make products of reasonable quality, and sometimes, heavy.

My first 7.1 receiver was a Sony that weighs 21 kg (1kg=2.204 lbs). I replaced it with a Denon that weighs only 17 kg but is more powerful than the Sony.

Sorry I know you didn't direct the question to me but since I own/owned both Sony and Kenwood products, I would say that obvioiulsy not everyone would buy Sony or Kenwood for various reasons, but perhaps you should if you believe so much in weights

 

[Ampdog]

"Perfect" amplifiers

Let us first define what we mean (or should mean):

This forum is limited to audio. Thus, such an amplifier should add (or subtract) nothing audible to/from the signal. That in itself is relatively simple - we know the thresholds of audibility including distortion products, and one only needs to measure that, either absolutely or by output/input comparison. Those familiar with Douglas Self's articles would have come across his definition of a "blameless" amplifier.

Preference by people on the other hand will differ according to their hearing characteristics, taste etc. as mentioned. Some like it a little warmer (i.e. probably with some 2nd and 3rd harmonics added), or treble a little accentuated because of age, etc. The listener is hardly ever in a position to make a direct comparison with what is recorded. If the balance of such a programme was not to his liking, then the excellent sound system's result would not be either. Preference therefore will always include some personal "bend", however small or large. It means that most people will prefer an instrument that is to some small degree a musical instrument!

I am not sitting in judgement on that; it's everybody's money spent on his preference. Thus it might be academic, but just to point out that one must not be too quick to brand amlifier A better than B. Preferable is not the same as better, however well developed one's sense of music. (Just think of the difference in acoustic balance between different positons in a concert hall. Which seat does one prefer - and for which must the engineer design?)

 

[Seth=L]

OK, I can agree that weight does not descimate all. But it can be one of many helpfull factors in chosing an amplifier without actually hearing it.

Amplifiers do sound different, it is insane to say that they all sound almost alike. I have owned many receivers and a few amplifiers. One example of an amplifier comparison: I had a Carver 5 channel amplifier rated for 80 watts per channel, and a Kenwood 2 channel rated for 150 watts per channel. The Carver defeated it in every test. Note that I used a Rotel Preamp and a Pioneer Elite CD player and PSB floorstanding speakers in the comparison. The Kenwood made noise, didn't have much headroom, and sounded if it was just squeezing by, no dynamics, and it was bright.

Different companies have different approaches to amplifier designs, so there is no way for them to sound the same.

I am not saying that all Kenwood receivers and Sony products are bad, just more times than not they are not as good as the competitors. I am using a Sony receiver right know and it is not anywhere near as good as the Onkyos, the Denon, or the Pioneer Elite that I have used before.

 

[JoeE SP9]

Seth=L
If you feel that way get rid of your receiver(s) and get some separates. The resale value is much higher if you don't like something and you get a lot more flexibility. The resale value on your average new receiver is zip next year. That Adcom, NAD or ARC preamp will be an item you can sell 2 or three years from now with little or no loss. Buying this kind of stuff used keeps you from having to deal with the initial depreciation. The same goes for power amps from these and other companies.

majorloser
Are those Behringer amps OK in bridged mode for 4ohm or lower loads and continuous operation?