Desktop AMP for under $350 - Page 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eisenhower 

Please explain to me, apart from distortion, power output, and cross talk, how one amp can sound better than another?

You're posting the same requests to multiple forums. If you want to understand, do some independent research. It's not anyone else's responsibility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HamilcarBarca 

 

You're posting the same requests to multiple forums. If you want to understand, do some independent research. It's not anyone else's responsibility.

Because people are making the same claims without justification in multiple forums. It is not on me to defend their claims for them, it is actually their responsibility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marsson 

But since so many claim the same things (that more expensive amps sounds better) there has to be some truth to their claims.

You're kidding, right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marsson 

I'm not saying that it's COMPLETELY true, just that since it's such a widespread thing that people's talking about, i has to be based on some kind of truth?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marsson 

Yes of course the possibility of such a thing could be true. But I find it hard to believe that it's true in every single occasion. What I personally think is "Better components = Better results" (It SHOULD perform better, but it might not be true all the time)

Well, yes, but my point is that there are very well understood specifications that determine how an amp will sound. Those better components may or may not improve the specifications. If they do not (which is often the case), then they will not improve the sound quality.

Originally Posted by Eisenhower

 

Please explain to me, apart from distortion, power output, and cross talk, how one amp can sound better than another?

Any properly designed amps will not affect "bass impact" or how detailed the highs are, because they have flat frequency responses. The FiiO amps will meet this requirement.

I think most amplifiers or internal components within amplifiers meet the requirement of flat frequency response.

Let's just say they are all identical there hypothetically, to get that out of the way.  Then we have like you say power output (current and voltage) which will affect the driver and acoustic realm, this is not the equivalent to volume (SPL) which can be achieved with low power, and likewise you can still have high mA at lower volumes.

Very low THD+N and IMD tend to be indicative of a well designed circuit with good components, so even if you can't hear 0.0001% THD it's still indicative that the circuit is good.  The specifications in a high-tech lab with perfect equipment, versus real-life application will differ to an extent naturally.  Low THD+N / IMD tend to relate to fidelity and high quality sound, however an electric guitar will want very high THD and find that musical / emotional so some people veer this way in audio playback too.

Identical flat FR, identical distortion and identical crosstalk will not tell you if a sine wave looks like a triangle, or if a triangle wave looks like a square (so to speak), so the next missing chapters are

- sine wave delivery

- time

With X and Y you are missing Z, audio is not stationary like camera pictures, and it's not two-dimensional, it's holographic and in constant movement, you need Z.

In truth one amplifier can be faster than the other, and this may inspire linguistic imagery like 'sharpness' or 'brightness', even though the FR is still flat.

Like the poster above I don't have all the answers, there are always technical reasons we are not aware of which affect sound quality, so you just need to listen first and ask questions later.

The listening part requires nice transducers and honed perception (perception includes not falling victim to placebo), listening is not computer software or hardware!

Naturally there are a lot of very overpriced amps and there is a lot of snake-oil too, and shills (paid for a review), so you can't just spend $$ and listen, you need to know the answers first right?  Well the answers are not in the software and hardware, sadly.  You can find answers in the components though since an amplifier is only the sum total of all it's components, unless the manufacturers uses sandpaper to remove the lettering!

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiteki 

 

I think most amplifiers or internal components within amplifiers meet the requirement of flat frequency response.

 

Let's just say they are all identical there hypothetically, to get that out of the way.  Then we have like you say power output (current and voltage) which will affect the driver and acoustic realm, this is not the equivalent to volume (SPL) which can be achieved with low power, and likewise you can still have high mA at lower volumes.

 

Very low THD+N and IMD tend to be indicative of a well designed circuit with good components, so even if you can't hear 0.0001% THD it's still indicative that the circuit is good.  The specifications in a high-tech lab with perfect equipment, versus real-life application will differ to an extent naturally.  Low THD+N / IMD tend to relate to fidelity and high quality sound, however an electric guitar will want very high THD and find that musical / emotional so some people veer this way in audio playback too.

 

Identical flat FR, identical distortion and identical crosstalk will not tell you if a sine wave looks like a triangle, or if a triangle wave looks like a square (so to speak), so the next missing chapters are

- sine wave delivery

- time

 

With X and Y you are missing Z, audio is not stationary like camera pictures, and it's not two-dimensional, it's holographic and in constant movement, you need Z.

 

In truth one amplifier can be faster than the other, and this may inspire linguistic imagery like 'sharpness' or 'brightness', even though the FR is still flat.

 

Like the poster above I don't have all the answers, there are always technical reasons we are not aware of which affect sound quality, so you just need to listen first and ask questions later.

 

The listening part requires nice transducers and honed perception (perception includes not falling victim to placebo), listening is not computer software or hardware!

 

Naturally there are a lot of very overpriced amps and there is a lot of snake-oil too, and shills (paid for a review), so you can't just spend $$ and listen, you need to know the answers first right?  Well the answers are not in the software and hardware, sadly.  You can find answers in the components though since an amplifier is only the sum total of all it's components, unless the manufacturers uses sandpaper to remove the lettering!

But the listening part is extremely susceptible to biases. It is also extremely sensitive to volume levels - any listening comparison with the volume levels (that is decibels actually produced) between products unmatched is invalid, because we generally think that louder sounds better. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eisenhower 

 

 

But the listening part is extremely susceptible to biases. It is also extremely sensitive to volume levels - any listening comparison with the volume levels (that is decibels actually produced) between products unmatched is invalid, because we generally think that louder sounds better. 

Sigh... I really try and stay out of these discussions.   I generally come down on the side of science as well - I am an engineer after all.  That said,

1) listening is what this is all about - one does not listen to specifications, one listens to the sound coming out of the headphones.

2) Different amps sound different.  Some sound better than others to me.  Biased, sure.  I tend to feed my biases, since this is for enjoyment.

OK, going back to staying out of this discussion again...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marsson 

I'm not saying that it's COMPLETELY true, just that since it's such a widespread thing that people's talking about, i has to be based on some kind of truth?

Widespread repetition of an untrue statement doesn't make it true. Widespread rejection of a true statement doesn't make it untrue.

In this case, the statement has firm theoretical grounding. It has also been demonstrated true in practice. Denial of truth is argumentative and fruitless.

Originally Posted by Eisenhower 

 

 

But the listening part is extremely susceptible to biases. It is also extremely sensitive to volume levels - any listening comparison with the volume levels (that is decibels actually produced) between products unmatched is invalid, because we generally think that louder sounds better. 

Just because listening is flawed doesn't make measurements unflawed, they are both flawed in different ways, human listening is more accurate and perceptive than hardware in some ways, however listening is victim to lying while hardware can't lie, that's all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aamefford 

Sigh... I really try and stay out of these discussions.   I generally come down on the side of science as well - I am an engineer after all.  That said,

 

1) listening is what this is all about - one does not listen to specifications, one listens to the sound coming out of the headphones.

 

2) Different amps sound different.  Some sound better than others to me.  Biased, sure.  I tend to feed my biases, since this is for enjoyment.

 

OK, going back to staying out of this discussion again...

Quote:

Originally Posted by HamilcarBarca 

 

In this case, the statement has firm theoretical grounding. It has also been demonstrated true in practice. Denial of truth is argumentative and fruitless.

Please explain to me the "firm theoretical grounding" that amps audibly sound different in ways not obvious according to their specifications (freq. response, distortion, crosstalk). You people keep making this claim without justifying it.