[vai-777]

If you think its going to sound better it will. Now you cant trick your mind into believing that a sony amp will sound better than a INSERT FAVORITE HIGH END AMP HERE because in your subconscious you KNOW it cant.

However if you have a $400 amp and someone lets you hear a $5k amp you will HEAR a difference because your subconscious is telling you to do so. "Theres no way the $400 can beat the 5k amp right?" So you will listen more critically with the more expensive gear.

The mind is more powerfull than we would like to believe and can make anything amp cdp ect... sound better than the other as long as we have a preconceived notion that it SHOULD. Blind however I would tend to think if you had a 100 or 1000 "AUDIOPHILES" in a room in a blind test the results would be 50/50 as well.

It just like the guy who froze himself to death because he was locked in a refrigerated truck- funny thing is the refrigeration unit wasnt working and the temp never dipped below 50 degrees.

There was a thread on this forum about the "MUZAK VERSION OF TICKET TO RIDE" being leftover on the source tape of the last song on DARK SIDE OF THE MOON. People would hear it with thier "GOOD" headphones or ones that they precieved to be TRANSPARENT, but not on other "CHEAP/BAD" sets of phones. Or some couldnt hear it on the REDBOOK cds while on the HDCD they could. Believe me if you want to hear it you can do do so with a poorly ripped mp3 out of an ipod with colby headphones.


Its in your head if you think the differenes between amps are night and day. Small differences i will agree to but thats it.

 

[Hi-Finthen]

BTW a major flaw is revealed in this your source :http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf

Who in their right mind would run magnepans with a 50 Watt amplifier? Talk about fixing the facts to prove the thesis...Laughable as well as incredible!

 

[John_M]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hi-Finthen /img/forum/go_quote.gif Looking to see the difference in terms of words you want to win a typical online arguement. Whereas the proof and evidence you seek would be sharred, if asked to do so politly, at a meet and by your own ears.

The test I think you're proposing would be flawed. If you've ever studied experimental psychology, you will know about the "experimenter expectancy" effect. This means that people tend to perceive what they want to perceive, or believe they should perceive. Someone who knows he is listening to a $10,000 amp will be likely to "hear" better sound than he hears when he knows he is listening to a $250 amp. Particular care should be taken to guard against the "experimenter expectancy" effect when the results of the experiment in question are something as subjective as your impressions of sound quality. Hence the need for double-blind testing. As far as I know, nobody's been able to pick out differences between amps on a double-blind tests. That's why I'm sceptical about expensive ones.

Remember that an amplifier is supposed to amplify - that's all.

Quote:

Presupposed your experience with whatever referance you historically are coming from has taught you the fine art of listening to music. Many of the members here have a background of music appreciation, at least by listening to referance grade gears playing material of recognised artist. And many are musicians with at least some instrument hands on experience knowing the live sound of a violin or acoustical guitar etc as a real referance... First let us establish what is being listened to at its source, IE the music, a bastardized term as well as the product that claims its definition in this age of the business. This is criteria for what a writer / reader on the internets would need to establish first when trying to argue what they don't hear or do hear.

I don't really follow any of this...

Quote:

Other than to say it is my experience all amps do have some distint differences and the fact that given a level of construction the more expensive ones do in fact sound better and that is why they exist in a capitalist system where only the better products that do preform stay in business. There is your evidence!

That might equally be evidence that easily led people are being ripped off.

 

[John_M]

One more point. The test I posted addressed the issue of whether there were differences between amplifiers. Maybe, if you look hard enough into the data, you can see evidence of very slight differences (although that wasn't the conclusion of the person who wrote the article). However, no mention is made of whether these "differences" are good or bad differences.

It may be (although I haven't seen any proof of this) that there is a very slight difference between the output of a super-expensive amplifier and a high street one. But, even if there is such a difference, that difference could easily be a distortion of the original sound rather than an improvement. As I said, amplifiers are only supposed to amplify. So the tester shouldn't have merely asked the two groups to pick out which amplifier was which; he should have asked them to pick out which amplifier they preferred.

 

[Hi-Finthen]

Of course you don't follow any of this and that is the source of your misconception.

Research Magnepan speakers and requsit wattage advised: Sensitivity: 85dB @ 2.83V/m (500Hz)
Power handling: 100–250W recommended
Frequency response: 34Hz–40kHz, +/-3dB
@ 4ohm

Which the speaker themselves are known to not produce bass levels at all well below 50hz even with advised wattage of over 100w - 250w.... Gee, you didn't know that? Yet the test you quote compares 50W amps to conclude, they sound hardly different at all... Look over to the magnepan speakers group and you will not see a 50w amplifier amongst the owners, and that is one of the drawbacks of magnepan and all electrostatic speakers, they NEED high watt amps (yes 200w-250w) and even then they do not run without a subwofer. So in this test you point to, the amps were being overdriven into clipping without a doubt! And @ 4ohm rather than those amps preferance of 8ohms...BIG problem!!!!!

Further I'll point out for your education. The preamp component used will always level the playing field amongst amps pluged into it as sounding more so similar. A huge factor also in terms of the preamp, is that simply pre A will always have better synergy with amp A vs B and a knowledgable tester with an adgenda in thesis could choose to better match, even a low cost amp beter suited to pre A than to amp B to skewer results looking to be proved in terms of sound quality. Lots of variables with big problems with your evidence as quoted in this article.

Listen to your pioneer from the headpone out to??? What are your transducers? And you're a winner

P.S. I also get the feeling you think in terms of amplifier = volume and never have experienced resolution, dynamics, cresendos with imaging and seperation of instuments across a soundstage with the notes of the music well defined, plucked with attack to each leading edge of notes and their decay with realistic tone, well recorded when played by artist! Just a thought as to what is music, and what we listen to as our referance, makes a huge difference amongst us who type hearing a difference or not between amplifiers. Just a hunch as to why you may not get "IT"! other than volume....

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vai-777 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The mind is more powerfull than we would like to believe and can make anything amp cdp ect... sound better than the other as long as we have a preconceived notion that it SHOULD.

About two years ago, I compared a Meridian CDP costing about $4000 new (which I had purchased) to a Bel Canto DAC costing bout $1200 new. I had always wanted to own a Meridian CDP, but had the opportunity to compare it to the Bel Canto by chance, since one found its way into my possession. I preferred the sound of the cheaper Bel Canto in my system, and ending up buying it and returning the Meridian. Explain how the "expectation" worked in that instance to trick me.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif But, as I said in my last post, let's see the proof. Do you have any evidence of an audible difference between any $5,000+ amp and any high street brand $250-$750 amp? Saying "of course there is a difference," or "such a notion is ridiculous" or "you must have something wrong with your hearing" does not, I'm afraid, count as evidence.

John, what headphone amps have you listened to, in what systems, and what were your conclusions based on your listening?

P.S. Do you have any proof that the average factory-installed car radio sounds better than a $25,000 high fidelity audio system? Any scientific studies that "prove" that? I guess it's open to debate then.

How about something closer to home. Seen any studies comparing different tubes in amps? I don't think I've seen a DBT establishing that people can hear differences in NOS tubes. Where's the evidence that different tubes sound different; maybe they all sound the same?

 

[chesebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by vai-777 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well i may try the heed but if i cant hear a difference to the onboard amp of my marantz ( by difference i mean better sound not worse) its really going to confirm my belief that LESS IS MORE. And im not going out and getting a $1k cdp because there have been blind tests conducted where no one could tell the differene between 3k players and $200 players. In fact i have a $600 rotel so maybee ill A/B that against the matrantz with the HEED. its an old rotel 1996 but it was the top of the line and has very low hours on it.

ah..you have not been exposed to the good stuff yet

just be glad you can't hear the difference or refuse to. I have no problem telling the difference between $1k CDP and $3k CDP, and 6K CDP. Here is the trick: use good speaker. much much easier to tell the difference on speaker cuz there is actually a soundstage!!! go figure!

 

[seacard]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif ah..you have not been exposed to the good stuff yet just be glad you can't hear the difference or refuse to. I have no problem telling the difference between $1k CDP and $3k CDP, and 6K CDP. Here is the trick: use good speaker. much much easier to tell the difference on speaker cuz there is actually a soundstage!!! go figure!

Interesting... I have a hard time telling things apart with speakers, but it's pretty easy with headphones. Having said that, everyone has good points on this thread. I've run a number of blind tests on amps that I've bought, and there are many times when I liked the cheaper amp better than the much more expensive ones. I am surprised that everybody doesn't run these kinds of tests to make sure they are not just throwing away their money. Just have your friend/significant other/family meber/etc. change between amps or cables or sources and see if you (a) can tell them apart at all and (b) like one better than the other on a consistent basis. If out of 10 trials, you pick the HR-2 or GS-1 or PPX over the $200 PPA or something similar, then it may be worth it for you to buy the expensive amp. I will never keep another piece of equipment without running a blind test against the equipment I have now and seeing if I like it better.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have no problem telling the difference between $1k CDP and $3k CDP, and 6K CDP. Here is the trick: use good speaker. much much easier to tell the difference on speaker cuz there is actually a soundstage!!! go figure!

This indicates, I think, how each one of us is senstive to different things. I find the differences between CDP's to be more noticeable with headphones. Yes, the soundstage is diminshed, but I find it easier to hear other audible differences in the presentation and easier to focus on the nature and extent of the differences.

 

[chesebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif This indicates, I think, how each one of us is senstive to different things. I find the differences between CDP's to be more noticeable with headphones. Yes, the soundstage is diminshed, but I find it easier to hear other audible differences in the presentation and easier to focus on the nature and extent of the differences.

interesting. I need like to listen to great spkr so when CDP throws up a huge soundstage, I can cherry pick each instrument out, their layering, interplay, etc.
I also listen to voice and try to see how easily I can be fooled into thinking the singer is standing in front of me (like literally standing in my room)

the more expensive CDP gives me the goose bumps (see my WTB in sig

There is also a huge difference on the dynamics of the CDP, IMO easier to detect on a good set of spkr with big symphony.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by seacard /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've run a number of blind tests on amps that I've bought, and there are many times when I liked the cheaper amp better than the much more expensive ones.

I referenced the Meridian CDP example above, but I've compared many items with blind tests and sighted tests, and on many occasions have preferred the less expensive item. With a few exceptions,

the vast majority of the experienced audiophiles on this site are not idiots who simply choose the most expensive component they can afford, and then conclude based on the price tag that it is the best sounding. We choose what sounds best in our system. Sometimes, perhaps often, it may be a more expensive piece of gear but not always.

And there may be reasonable debates about whether cables make audible differences, or whether components other than transducers need to be burned in, etc. But it's silly to argue that we should treat as the operative proposition the notion that all headpone amps and CDP's sound the same, merely because some DBT's don't establish the contrary. All you have to do is have decent hearing and some decent high fildelity listening experience -- and a fair opportunity to compare these components in your listening room with your music under normal listening conditions -- to prove to yourself the there are audible differences between amps and CDP's. Whether the differences are subtle to most, or significant, or whatever, is another question. But there is no doubt that there are audible differences, a fact accepted by almost every experienced audiophile.

 

[chesebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by seacard /img/forum/go_quote.gif Interesting... I have a hard time telling things apart with speakers, but it's pretty easy with headphones. Having said that, everyone has good points on this thread. I've run a number of blind tests on amps that I've bought, and there are many times when I liked the cheaper amp better than the much more expensive ones. I am surprised that everybody doesn't run these kinds of tests to make sure they are not just throwing away their money. Just have your friend/significant other/family meber/etc. change between amps or cables or sources and see if you (a) can tell them apart at all and (b) like one better than the other on a consistent basis. If out of 10 trials, you pick the HR-2 or GS-1 or PPX over the $200 PPA or something similar, then it may be worth it for you to buy the expensive amp. I will never keep another piece of equipment without running a blind test against the equipment I have now and seeing if I like it better.

your legal reasoning may ultimately limit your musical enjoyment.

 

[PhilS]

Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif the more expensive CDP gives me the goose bumps (see my WTB in sig

Ah, the "goose bump" test. I agree that the goose bump is something I generally experience much more often with a good speaker system.

 

[chesebert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilS /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ah, the "goose bump" test. I agree that the goose bump is something I generally experience much more often with a good speaker system.

always trustworthy, never fails

no goose bump, not worth the upgrade, unless you are gradually upgrading to your 1st goose bump, then you upgrade on every goose bump. see isn't this easy?