Hertz vs Kenwood Amps
12-18-2008, 10:44 PM
#31
Sorry man, you don't make the golden ear club. gotta have 20-20 within .5deebeez.
^^well put! and by the way Sasha, I've only been listening to music for 40 years now...as a professional musician and audio engineer...so I have some idea of what it should sound like, and i have my hearing tested annually...still 20hz to 16 khz @ +/- 5dbs, 16khz-18khz @-10dbs.
12-19-2008, 01:13 AM
#32
I disagree that it is pointless but will agree that it offers little insight. I will keep this really short(yeah right) as no one is ever convinced by anything.
Damping is mostly a factor of the driver itself and all the component in the chain (connections, xovers, wires, enclosure, frequency), the amp damping spec is really only a marketering term. Proof of it is most specs don't even say at what frequency it was measure at making it even less relevant. But there is lots of good info on the net here is a good one with math that explains why it is irrelevant. I would also like to point out that high amplifier damping is a source of concern for some "audiophiles" as it may indicate another distortion inducing behaviour. DP is a useless spec to look at in my mind.
Damping Factor: Effects On System Response — Reviews and News from Audioholics
The scientific method of testing is really important and is why an EQ is needed to be used when doing blind tests. Why? We know for certain that a few things will change the sound and that is :
-Volume
-EQ
They are both essentially the same and we use them eveyday to affect the sound. Knowing this when tesing an amp we would need to make sure that those are not a factor thus why we match gains (ensure that amps are the same volume) and EQ out the built in EQ in the amp. MAke no mistake about it, a bass know or treble **** even at zero is not truely zero. Once that is removed, then you can try and focus on other aspects of the amp, but so far that has always been very sufficient to make amps indistinguishable when using the human ear wich in itself is a crude measureing device. Then if the ear can't hear a difference in such a scenario then it is futile to start isolating components even further as the 2 sample amps in comparisons would presumbly not have all the same components in the first place.
This leads one to think that if all it takes is an EQ to make the amps indistinguishable to the ear (not to measuring instruments though) then one would asusme that using better components are for purpouses such as :reliability, marketing and because people ask for it because they assume it must be better.
Hearing is far from a reliable tool as to many things can affect ones perceptions. Mood, expectactions and frame of mind are some of the things that can affect how we hear things. There are many examples of the brain acting on what we hear and this is why we can see in double blind test people distinguish differences in sound when the same amp is used in both scenarios. Another example :when you are paying attention to something and you stop noticing the sound of traffic in the background. The brain can manipulate what you hear and how you hear it. It can and it does. There is a field dedicated to this type of thing.
Unscientific method is used far to often since a lot of comparisons between components are often done with systems that have different gains, components, environments, expectations, time of day, enclosures, path lenght differences aiming ect and people will still venture out without any type of realistic testing methodologie to identify what the diference in a specific sound is: "well I have heard these speakes many times before and know what they can do, but in my new install the CD player is holding them back in SQ"..."I know what I hear". This is so frequent and people convince themselves that it is relevant when in fact it obviously isn't. The sound can be different for many reasons but there is no way to pinpoint only one component in such a way. Not to mention that memory is extremely unreliable for remembering sounds like this, think about the posts or conversations about people saying that their own unchanged system sounds different at night. If the same system can sound different to a person depending on the time of day how can one be trusted to rember and identify subtle differences and attribute it to a DAC or a preamp or a specific component in the amps: oh those t03 are awesome sounding!
Here is a great example, just look at the pool results.
Does music sound better at night? - DIY Mobile Audio - Technical, Advanced & Informative
Alright rant over.
Damping is mostly a factor of the driver itself and all the component in the chain (connections, xovers, wires, enclosure, frequency), the amp damping spec is really only a marketering term. Proof of it is most specs don't even say at what frequency it was measure at making it even less relevant. But there is lots of good info on the net here is a good one with math that explains why it is irrelevant. I would also like to point out that high amplifier damping is a source of concern for some "audiophiles" as it may indicate another distortion inducing behaviour. DP is a useless spec to look at in my mind.
Damping Factor: Effects On System Response — Reviews and News from Audioholics
The scientific method of testing is really important and is why an EQ is needed to be used when doing blind tests. Why? We know for certain that a few things will change the sound and that is :
-Volume
-EQ
They are both essentially the same and we use them eveyday to affect the sound. Knowing this when tesing an amp we would need to make sure that those are not a factor thus why we match gains (ensure that amps are the same volume) and EQ out the built in EQ in the amp. MAke no mistake about it, a bass know or treble **** even at zero is not truely zero. Once that is removed, then you can try and focus on other aspects of the amp, but so far that has always been very sufficient to make amps indistinguishable when using the human ear wich in itself is a crude measureing device. Then if the ear can't hear a difference in such a scenario then it is futile to start isolating components even further as the 2 sample amps in comparisons would presumbly not have all the same components in the first place.
This leads one to think that if all it takes is an EQ to make the amps indistinguishable to the ear (not to measuring instruments though) then one would asusme that using better components are for purpouses such as :reliability, marketing and because people ask for it because they assume it must be better.
Hearing is far from a reliable tool as to many things can affect ones perceptions. Mood, expectactions and frame of mind are some of the things that can affect how we hear things. There are many examples of the brain acting on what we hear and this is why we can see in double blind test people distinguish differences in sound when the same amp is used in both scenarios. Another example :when you are paying attention to something and you stop noticing the sound of traffic in the background. The brain can manipulate what you hear and how you hear it. It can and it does. There is a field dedicated to this type of thing.
Unscientific method is used far to often since a lot of comparisons between components are often done with systems that have different gains, components, environments, expectations, time of day, enclosures, path lenght differences aiming ect and people will still venture out without any type of realistic testing methodologie to identify what the diference in a specific sound is: "well I have heard these speakes many times before and know what they can do, but in my new install the CD player is holding them back in SQ"..."I know what I hear". This is so frequent and people convince themselves that it is relevant when in fact it obviously isn't. The sound can be different for many reasons but there is no way to pinpoint only one component in such a way. Not to mention that memory is extremely unreliable for remembering sounds like this, think about the posts or conversations about people saying that their own unchanged system sounds different at night. If the same system can sound different to a person depending on the time of day how can one be trusted to rember and identify subtle differences and attribute it to a DAC or a preamp or a specific component in the amps: oh those t03 are awesome sounding!
Here is a great example, just look at the pool results.
Does music sound better at night? - DIY Mobile Audio - Technical, Advanced & Informative
Alright rant over.
12-19-2008, 01:22 AM
#33
^^well put! and by the way Sasha, I've only been listening to music for 40 years now...as a professional musician and audio engineer...so I have some idea of what it should sound like, and i have my hearing tested annually...still 20hz to 16 khz @ +/- 5dbs, 16khz-18khz @-10dbs.
It is easy for me to buy car amps, cause I have certain criteria that needs to be met, and I mainly need a regulated power supply for my own reasons. Some people hate regulated power supplies for their reasons. I am not saying I am right and everyone else is wrong. Just my .02 cents as they say.
12-19-2008, 05:26 AM
#34
Yankee
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,599
And there we have it some who swear they hear a difference and those who swear there isn't a difference and nobody has heard a difference. So if you hear a difference it is OK and if you dont that's OK too.
But if there is an audible difference how much $ is that difference worth? I think build quality and reliability are extremely persuasive arguments (as is low cost) so pick away and realize its OK your among friends. Don't think throwing money at a problem will make it go away
But if there is an audible difference how much $ is that difference worth? I think build quality and reliability are extremely persuasive arguments (as is low cost) so pick away and realize its OK your among friends. Don't think throwing money at a problem will make it go away
12-19-2008, 02:32 PM
#35
50 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 138
I am not doubting your hearing, and all that. At the time, I felt like making a comment on your statement that was something along the lines that there are no diffs in amps, but power. You are entitled to your opinion, but I disagreed for the sake of offering a different view from another person, so that nothing is cast in stone.
It is easy for me to buy car amps, cause I have certain criteria that needs to be met, and I mainly need a regulated power supply for my own reasons. Some people hate regulated power supplies for their reasons. I am not saying I am right and everyone else is wrong. Just my .02 cents as they say.
It is easy for me to buy car amps, cause I have certain criteria that needs to be met, and I mainly need a regulated power supply for my own reasons. Some people hate regulated power supplies for their reasons. I am not saying I am right and everyone else is wrong. Just my .02 cents as they say.
12-19-2008, 02:46 PM
#36
50 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 138
damn! I think the last time my hearing had those specs...if ever...was at the age of 3! As far as my audiologist is concerned, my hearing is very good for my age...most mid 40's dudes can only hear up to about 14 khz!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lastmboy
General Discussion
3
05-03-2008 01:36 PM
