Power quality for speakers

[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!

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 ,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 ),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 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 ).

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.

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

 

[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

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. 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. 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 .