[bigshot]

I work in the business as well, and I listen to music for enjoyment every day. I stream, play AAC files ripped from CDs, and play multichannel music recordings and movies. My system consists of a 5.1 speaker system with a Yamaha AVR, a Mac mini media server and an Oppo blu-ray player, as well as Macintosh computers. For headphones I use Oppo PM1, AirPods Pro, and AirPods 2. I have over 15,000 CDs and just as many video discs and LP records. My music collection consists of over a century's worth of music making in all genres. I'm not sure what you were looking for, but I hope this helps.

 

[gregorio]

Thx for more arm chair psycho socio behavior opinions but folks may want to accept an explanation as to why say gsx mk2 sounds different from wa33 Elite.

You’re welcome and obviously some “folks do want to accept an explanation as to why” two amps, DACs, cables, fuses, capacitors or whatever sounds different but why some folks are curious and others are not isn’t really the question. The question is, “what are they willing to accept?”, and in many cases in the audiophile world, they’re willing to accept any old marketing BS and commonly in preference to the actual facts. Anyone can see the evidence for this assertion in pretty much every forum on Head-Fi.

Right, that makes sense. The article on impedance matching was explaining the telecoms history behind the 600Ω standard, which is where that explanation was made. I was thinking about cable gauge in particular.

The issue historically for the telecoms industry has been power loss over distance, as @71 dB mentioned. That’s how the balanced 600 Ω standard came into being. The audio recording industry took almost everything it has from the telecoms industry but the advent of tape recorders in the 1950’s, especially multitrack, highlighted the fact that the recording industry had different priorities. Loss of power over distance wasn’t an issue, relatively complex routing of sources to multiple destinations was. So over time the model changed from the balanced impedance model employed in telecoms to the low output/high input impedance model common today, or rather yesterday, as routings are far more complex now than previously but are handled digitally and increasingly “virtually”.

G

 

[gregorio]

More utter idiocy from the guy … typing on a computer to a wi-fi router with a cell phone in his pocket

How many more times are you going to post insults like this before you grasp the obvious fact that you yourself are this “guy”? Maybe you just don’t realise the obvious fact that cell phones and WiFi are typical in consumer environments these days and therefore, also obviously, modern consumer equipment must by definition, actually be designed for consumer usage/environments or else be faulty/incompetently designed!

So, “anything fancy” is obviously not required, just standard/competently designed consumer equipment. Jeez, how difficult is that to understand?

G

 

[bigshot]

I had a friend who lived two blocks from an AM radio transmission tower. And growing up, my dad was a Ham radio operator. When he was broadcasting, you could hear his voice on the speakers with the stereo turned off. That’s what I’m talking about when I talk about RF interference.

If you don’t have anything like that going on in your neighborhood, line noise is more likely ground loops and noise introduced by large appliances on the same circuit. There are better ways to deal with either of those things than buying an expensive power conditioner. I have a power battery backup on my disk arrays to protect them from power outages, but I don’t see a whole lot of reason to get a power conditioner unless normal means of addressing problems haven’t worked.

In any case, if you have a problem like this, it’s not subtle- it’s obvious that you have a problem. If you don’t detect a lot of noise, a power conditioner isn’t going to do jack diddley.

 

[Whazzzup]

I am sorry if this sounds personally critical but I think it has to be said in context of your arguments here.



As seen in this image the WA33 is a very nice full tube amplifier. It has point to point wiring and lovely build quality, I had its very baby brother WA6 and I can totally understand why you would want to own the WA33. The elite version is a $16,000 investment with a bunch of “upgrades” over the normal version.

However, It is my opinion that if you feel there is some genuinely tangible benefit to owning an amplifier like this to run headphones and have not also done your own research into tube amplifier design, second order harmonic distortion and the reasons why a tube amplifier might genuinely have some audible difference to the GSX MK2, which is a rather nice $3,300 solid state amplifier that the manufacturer proudly says is “transparent”, you are not just a consumer but are actually the perfect consumer so far as the audio equipment manufacturers are concerned.

My point being that if you are that far down the rabbit hole you are possibly not especially open to accepting that some of your very nice equipment might not be doing all that you think it does. That is entirely human nature and understandable.

I did something similar on a more modest economic scale and I am not thrilled about the idea that I was somewhat duped into believing that different variations of modern DACs and amps were going to make a really profound difference to the sound I heard from my headphones and IEM as advertising, reviews and forum banter indicated it would.

What rabbit hole?, I’m the perfect customer? What did you think I thought these amps would do?
I see you were duped into thinking all upgrades/ amp design alternatives are different. I was on the hugo 1 vs hugo 2 tour and was uninspired by the differences, matter of fact I preferred hugo 1 but that’s imo. So I get the three card Monty marketing. But yes the differences in topography, component quality, design and specs are quite different between wa33 and gsx. But the sound stage differences are rather startling and Leeds to intense listening utility, getting lost in the music, and goose bumps head turning realism. Course wrapped up in a tubey ‘airbag’ it is a rather digital or ss type tube amp weighing in at over 50 lbs.
but I’m not bringing up either as to what’s better, I loved gsx had it for 9 years, the volume wheel got all staticky so I decided to get a new amp and wa33 EE was my choice to make sure the soundstage would be different and it was.
I’m not sure why sound science guys keep making this personal.

 

[bigshot]

Tube amps often sound different. They can have bigger response deviations and higher levels of distortion. We aren’t talking about coloration in tube amps here. We’re talking about high fidelity solid state amps.

 

[Whazzzup]

Thx for more arm chair psycho socio behavior opinions but folks may want to accept an explanation as to why say gsx mk2 sounds different from wa33 Elite.

You’re welcome and obviously some “folks do want to accept an explanation as to why” two amps, DACs, cables, fuses, capacitors or whatever sounds different but why some folks are curious and others are not isn’t really the question. The question is, “what are they willing to accept?”, and in many cases in the audiophile world, they’re willing to accept any old marketing BS and commonly in preference to the actual facts. Anyone can see the evidence for this assertion in pretty much every forum on Head-Fi.

Sooo, we almost made it passed the audiophile boogey man, but got hung up on “can we accept” the truth. Well that’s what I asked from the start. Can we accept the truth of differences between components (some) and are there scientific explanations in the design of these products themselves that explains this. Then there the sub thesis can we hear these differences, and in my example it’s clearly yes,and thirdly can we measure these differences outside of hearing them.

 

[Whazzzup]

Tube amps often sound different. They can have bigger response deviations and higher levels of distortion. We aren’t talking about coloration in tube amps here. We’re talking about high fidelity solid state amps.

Yes there is a certain color from this tube amp. I call it a tubey airbag, but more so it’s the imagery,low end, and mid staging that’s different, it’s more real sounding, ex drums have never sounded so good. But it’s beyound timber or tone

 

[bigshot]

There is nothing in the specs of typical amps and DACs to make one think they would be anything but audibly transparent. They aren’t generally even close to being colored.

The problem with tube amp coloration is that it’s hard wired to sound a specific way. Whether or not you like that depends on you. There are DSPs that simulate tube amp coloration with a number of adjustments. Rather than being stuck with the coloration the manufacturer sticks you with, you can roll your own.

I prefer to keep the signal clean until the end of the chain, and then add signal processing just before sending it out to the speakers. That is the most consistent and flexible way to handle it.

I have no idea how that tube amp sounds based on your description. It’s too vague. But your flowery words sound impressive on the surface.

 

[Whazzzup]

There is nothing in the specs of typical amps and DACs to make one think they would be anything but audibly transparent. They aren’t generally even close to being colored.

Coloured is a hard descriptive. Just listen to it and you’ll get it, the soundstage from low to high end pops and threatens to be scary, but never is. That’s the tubey airbag wrappes around the transparency

 

[71 dB]

I loved gsx had it for 9 years, the volume wheel got all staticky so I decided to get a new amp...

I little electronic/contact cleaner could have made the volume wheel work like new.

 

[bigshot]

Colored means different than the original signal. By definition, if two components sound different one or both of them has to be colored. An amp shouldn’t be colored. That isn’t its job. It should be a wire with gain.

Again, you’re writing poetry, not describing sound so someone else can know what you’re referring to. It helps to describe the sound, not how it makes you feel.

 

[Whazzzup]

I little electronic/contact cleaner could have made the volume wheel work like new.

Realize that but no diy, and thought it was time. Next to my music server the best thing I have done

 

[bigshot]

Shopping is fun, eh?

 

[gregorio]

But yes the differences in topography, component quality, design and specs are quite different between wa33 and gsx.

Sure, that’s often the case but the question is: What audible difference does that make? The whole issue with the audiophile community dismissing controlled listening tests (DBT/ABX) started when subjects began not being able to discern amps with vastly different topologies, designs and price points, because tube designs reached audible transparency, as did solid state designs. The DBT in bigshot’s sig is an example, some tube and some SS designs, no audible difference. Of course, it’s still possible to use an inappropriate design and audibly colour or distort the amp’s output, regardless of SS or Tube topology, although it seems to be more common with tube designs.

But the sound stage differences are rather startling and Leeds to intense listening utility, getting lost in the music, and goose bumps head turning realism. …
I’m not sure why sound science guys keep making this personal.

Huh? You list a bunch personal impressions/experiences, which by definition is “making this personal” and then state you’re not sure why we keep making this personal. How is it not obvious that the answer to this question is: We’re not making it personal, you and others asserting personal impressions/experiences are, we’re just responding to you making it personal!

[1] Coloured is a hard descriptive. [2] Just listen to it and you’ll get it …

1. It’s certainly vague but it’s not at all a hard descriptive, at least compared to many of the nonsense/meaningless descriptives and metaphors commonly employed by the audiophile community. “Coloured” is the antonym of “flat”/“unaltered” and is therefore the same as the literal meaning of “distortion”, although it implicitly indicates audibility. Most typically, it relates to EQ or harmonic distortion.
2. Get what, a personal experience/perception caused by some bias/es or an actual audible difference in EQ or harmonic distortion? If it’s the latter, then it’s easily measurable.

Yes there is a certain color from this tube amp.

Then it would be relatively easy to objectively measure exactly what it is and be more precise than just “coloured”.

I call it a tubey airbag, but more so it’s the imagery,low end, and mid staging that’s different, it’s more real sounding, ex drums have never sounded so good. But it’s beyound timber or tone

If it’s “beyond timbre or tone” then how can it be “coloured”? With drum kits, “more real sounding” and “sounded so good” are virtually always mutually exclusive and if “I [you] call it a tubey airbag”, doesn’t that mean you’re “making it personal”?

How can anyone rationally respond to all these assertions? They not only appear to be contrary to the actual facts but are clearly self-contradictory, so it’s hard to take them seriously and pretty much impossible not to respond in a way that does not include any reference to personal perception, personal opinion or personal terminology!

G