Not in my experiences. My Sony C910 with quad 20 bit Burr Brown DACs and 110db S/N ratio, optically mated with a 210, and without, sounded the same as a Clarion with a single 1 bit DAC and the stock CD player with 75db/SN ratio and a Navone L-Driver. The speakers weren't at fault (HLCD's) nor the amplifiers (Arc Audio CXL line, settings remaining constant regardless of source). Until I pass a double blind in a perfect install, it is immensley difficult for me to accept. Electrical engineering is one thing, audibility is another.

[ March 24, 2004, 11:03 AM: Message edited by: Imbroglio ]

 

^ Good point, they only negative feedback I will give is to keep an open mind. This is so that when a change that makes a difference (and shouldn’t from your point of view) it can be accepted and pursued rather then dismissed.
A lot of people say multibit or single bit is the way to go, oversampling, upsampling I try to take it all with a grain of salt, disguising hyperbole with actual technology is marketing devil-work. Marketing is the devil!
true, does a S/N of 110 sound better than a S/N of 90? What does .0002% THD sound like compared to .02%? Sometimes we measure things to determine performance (not unlike HP in a car) but it is not a measure of actual performance (power to weight ratio). I think this is true in audio in general but the things I am talking about are visual plotting reports (Melissa) but do they really tell you how a product sounds? I mean even our speakers measure very similarly but sheez they sound like night and day, and flat output just sounds "like pooh".

 

You are right and wrong. I have taken the test with amps, and my AB comparison coincided with the freq spectrum graphs, the ABX on the other hand made it very difficult to the point where my responses in the test no longer held statistical value. The amps have a small EQ (if you will) in them to give the 'house sound', perhaps a slightly shelved back HF to relax the listener, or more 1K to make you sit up and take notice etc. Quite frankly my hearing stinks (age and misuse) and the engineer running the tests points are: 1) It is all about level matching, once you level match only 1 % can point out the difference (using ABX), 2)if you EQ the output to compensate for the design curves then they sound and measure almost the same (using test instruments and ABX), 3) bottom line, properly made amplifiers do not have a house sound inherently. Bear in mind an ABX test is not scientifically valid, there can only be one variable in a scientific test (AB testing can be valid). But the ABX test is a good attention getter for the audio-nervosa folks, and everyone else as well (no fluorescent lights in the house, Tice clocks, Mpingo devices can be a little much). I agree with him to a point and disagree as well but his knowledge level exceeds mine so I sat back and learned (I am not George).
My bottom line, there is a difference and is it worth the cost of admission? Yes (to a point) but I also believe there isn’t an inherent amplifier sound, they can and do sound different, but they do not have to.

 

I too notice a diff and so do most of my customers. There is a drastic difference in sq from a Kenwood or Panasonic head unit to the Denonford, Nak or Eclipse.

 

No sub out, no CD text as far as I know. It will read CD-R's but not CD-RW as it uses a much older designed DAC rather than current ones that can. If you really need that from a headunit don't bother with the Denon/RF.

 

You are right and wrong. I have taken the test with amps, and my AB comparison coincided with the freq spectrum graphs, the ABX on the other hand made it very difficult to the point where my responses in the test no longer held statistical value. The amps have a small EQ (if you will) in them to give the 'house sound', perhaps a slightly shelved back HF to relax the listener, or more 1K to make you sit up and take notice etc. Quite frankly my hearing stinks (age and misuse) and the engineer running the tests points are: 1) It is all about level matching, once you level match only 1 % can point out the difference (using ABX), 2)if you EQ the output to compensate for the design curves then they sound and measure almost the same (using test instruments and ABX), 3) bottom line, properly made amplifiers do not have a house sound inherently. Bear in mind an ABX test is not scientifically valid, there can only be one variable in a scientific test (AB testing can be valid). But the ABX test is a good attention getter for the audio-nervosa folks, and everyone else as well (no fluorescent lights in the house, Tice clocks, Mpingo devices can be a little much). I agree with him to a point and disagree as well but his knowledge level exceeds mine so I sat back and learned (I am not George).
My bottom line, there is a difference and is it worth the cost of admission? Yes (to a point) but I also believe there isn’t an inherent amplifier sound, they can and do sound different, but they do not have to. </font>[/QUOTE]I agree. Some amplifiers have idiosyncracies that separate them sonically from others, however, it is my opinion that if this is present, the amplifier is crap (save Tube). The amplifier, at least in my functional understanding of it, serves one purpose and one purpose alone. To amplify the signal provided to it. If it does anything other than this (colouration of signal due to onboard XO features/EQ/Bassboost(same bloody thing)etc) then it's either broken, or poorly designed. Again, this is my stance on this due to the simple fact that I want accurate reproduction of what's on my CD, as that's the way it was meant to be listened to. Convenience has overshadowed quality.

You said a magical phrase within your post that 99% of everyone I see compete or otherwise, ignore. Subtle nuances from a HU, Amplifier, or other piece within the system can be EQ'd out with enough time and know-how with a 31 band EQ. I see people dropping ungodly amounts of cash (I was guilty of this once...Arc Audio does not come cheap - nor does archaic Sony ES equipment) on Amplifiers, HU's when it could be saved and put towards signal processing with money left over.

In my limited experience within the 12V industry, I see far too many people with the ability to regurgitate T/S Parameters, pumping out S/N Ratios, THD % (For some reason people neglect the fact that speakers induce more than most any amplifier...odd)and have forgotten completely how to listen.

Level matching, another thing you mentioned, is the most overlooked aspect of setups that I see around. Perhaps if this was done properly more often, the 1% of the listeners with accute enough ears to pick up on the subtle differences between equipment would actually BE 1%, instead of the 80+% of the people that claim to hear them presently.

[img]smile.gif[/img]

 

No George, it would be model dependent. Eclipse has had some great cd players over the years and some that were just so so.