Front Stage Amp suggestions please
08-31-2007, 08:58 AM
#12
I have found that when there is a sound difference it sometimes seems to be do to power differences or using different xover setups or bass boost/trebble (I think I recall one of my MTX amps having a trebble ***)
But what I have found to be the difference most of the time was simply all in my mind.
I know people don't like to keep an open mind when it comes to this topic but one's memory is not 100% and the longer one goes between listening between setups the less the perception accuracy will be.
Not to mention, the way the brain works, you can manipulate your perception of sounds, making hearing even less reliable. The sound can be tinted with emotional response as well as expected results. Although I am not all to familiar with psychoaccoustics, it is a definite intriguing field.
So my main point is that I have a hard time trusting someone elses ears or my own for that matter to say one can perceive differences in an amp and point to the brand name as the reason.
But what I have found to be the difference most of the time was simply all in my mind.
I know people don't like to keep an open mind when it comes to this topic but one's memory is not 100% and the longer one goes between listening between setups the less the perception accuracy will be.
Not to mention, the way the brain works, you can manipulate your perception of sounds, making hearing even less reliable. The sound can be tinted with emotional response as well as expected results. Although I am not all to familiar with psychoaccoustics, it is a definite intriguing field.
So my main point is that I have a hard time trusting someone elses ears or my own for that matter to say one can perceive differences in an amp and point to the brand name as the reason.
08-31-2007, 10:56 AM
#13
This is one of those debates that will never end...as for hearing a difference, I think Richard Clark still has the challenge going...10 G's to anyone who can discern between amps in a double blind test...no body has won the money yet and it's been quite a few years running now. This is a little excerpt from Manville Smith, founder of JL audio after doing the Clark challenge, I've done my own a/b tests and now when I buy amps, it's strictly due to other factors such as appearance, reliability, warranty, and application. I honestly cannot hear a difference in amps that are comparable in power output and tuned properly. Anyway, I think this is intersting reading, and everyone has a pair of ears, so ultimately it's up to you to decide what you hear.
About ten years ago, I participated in the infamous "Richard Clark amp challenge". The two amplifiers being compared were a high-end Phoenix Gold (the one with the gold-plated circuit board) and a much less expensive Coustic amplifier. Other than level matching to within 0.1 dB no other manipulation was made to the signal feeding either amp. A pair of small studio monitors were used for the test.
As I listened, I felt pretty confident that I was hearing the difference between the two... I kept focusing on the clarity of the high frequencies and thought that I had a pretty good grasp of which amp sounded different in each of the 20 tests. I felt I had absolutely nailed it at least fifteen out of the twenty tests.
When the results were displayed, I tallied up my score and it turns out I was right 10 times and wrong ten times. In other words, I could have achieved similar results simply by flipping a coin each time. I have always considered myself to have a "good ear", so this was definitely a learning experience. If I remember correctly no one did better than 12 out of 20 in my test group.
My big hangup with the test used to be that it did not permit clipping and I felt that amps would sound different if allowed to clip... last year RC proved me wrong on that count too. I could hear no difference in the level-matched clipped sound between a JL amp, a tube amp and a Jensen amp. Even in my desperation to find an audible difference, I have to admit I could not (my audiophile ego is severely damaged and I think I need therapy... thanks a lot, RC).
So, are there audible differences between level-matched amplifiers of different types??? I think there is more evidence to the contrary than in support. Did I believe there were significant audible differences at one time?.. you bet I did. Do I believe that RC's test is an all-encompassing measure of an amplifier's worth as a device... absolutely not... and I don't believe he claims that to be the case if you really pay attention.
The point is... RC isn't trying to trick anyone with the test... he's simply saying... "if you think there are audible differences between level matched amplifiers, try the test"... but very few people actually follow through with it... they just sit behind their computer screen going "that can't be right" and engaging in tiresome semantic debates. If you haven't tried it, you have no leg to stand on.
****************************
Having known Richard for about 14 years, I can tell you that his audio knowledge base is very broad and very deep (a truly rare combination). He is not just a theorist, either... he has a ton of practical experience. He is one of the people I turn to when I want to test a statement or a theory. Do I agree with everything he says??? No, I have often disagreed with him, but I always listen to what he has to say. In doing so, I usually learn something.
People used to believe that adding batteries to a street system was a good idea... guess who was the first to explain why that was a bad idea?
He used to be a lot more willing to teach because people actually listened respectfully and didn't think they knew it all. Now, it seems that every thread turns into a raging flame war in some way connected to the freaking Buick or the freaking amp test.
A wise man once said, "You don't learn anything by talking, you only learn by listening".
Manville Smith
JL Audio, Inc.
About ten years ago, I participated in the infamous "Richard Clark amp challenge". The two amplifiers being compared were a high-end Phoenix Gold (the one with the gold-plated circuit board) and a much less expensive Coustic amplifier. Other than level matching to within 0.1 dB no other manipulation was made to the signal feeding either amp. A pair of small studio monitors were used for the test.
As I listened, I felt pretty confident that I was hearing the difference between the two... I kept focusing on the clarity of the high frequencies and thought that I had a pretty good grasp of which amp sounded different in each of the 20 tests. I felt I had absolutely nailed it at least fifteen out of the twenty tests.
When the results were displayed, I tallied up my score and it turns out I was right 10 times and wrong ten times. In other words, I could have achieved similar results simply by flipping a coin each time. I have always considered myself to have a "good ear", so this was definitely a learning experience. If I remember correctly no one did better than 12 out of 20 in my test group.
My big hangup with the test used to be that it did not permit clipping and I felt that amps would sound different if allowed to clip... last year RC proved me wrong on that count too. I could hear no difference in the level-matched clipped sound between a JL amp, a tube amp and a Jensen amp. Even in my desperation to find an audible difference, I have to admit I could not (my audiophile ego is severely damaged and I think I need therapy... thanks a lot, RC).
So, are there audible differences between level-matched amplifiers of different types??? I think there is more evidence to the contrary than in support. Did I believe there were significant audible differences at one time?.. you bet I did. Do I believe that RC's test is an all-encompassing measure of an amplifier's worth as a device... absolutely not... and I don't believe he claims that to be the case if you really pay attention.
The point is... RC isn't trying to trick anyone with the test... he's simply saying... "if you think there are audible differences between level matched amplifiers, try the test"... but very few people actually follow through with it... they just sit behind their computer screen going "that can't be right" and engaging in tiresome semantic debates. If you haven't tried it, you have no leg to stand on.
****************************
Having known Richard for about 14 years, I can tell you that his audio knowledge base is very broad and very deep (a truly rare combination). He is not just a theorist, either... he has a ton of practical experience. He is one of the people I turn to when I want to test a statement or a theory. Do I agree with everything he says??? No, I have often disagreed with him, but I always listen to what he has to say. In doing so, I usually learn something.
People used to believe that adding batteries to a street system was a good idea... guess who was the first to explain why that was a bad idea?
He used to be a lot more willing to teach because people actually listened respectfully and didn't think they knew it all. Now, it seems that every thread turns into a raging flame war in some way connected to the freaking Buick or the freaking amp test.
A wise man once said, "You don't learn anything by talking, you only learn by listening".
Manville Smith
JL Audio, Inc.
08-31-2007, 03:37 PM
#14
0 Watt CAFz'r
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 25
That is an interesting read.
I can't say I disagree with it, the therory is sound. I would like to compair class A, A/B and D, but I'm not going to go so far as to say there will be a difference untill I do.
That said, when I bought the PPI I did do a blind test before I picked it over an Xtant and a Clarion with similar ratings. We were there for close to 4 hours. We did the very best we could to level match them. They were playing full range into my Boston Pro 6.5's.
What I heard (or atleast what I thought I heard) was that the Clarion wasn't even in the ball park. The Xtant and the PPI were very close with the nod going to the PPI for slightly better depth to the sound stage and the Xtant being a little too bright. The Xtant was priced almost $100 dollars more so perception would normally be that it was the better amp, and budget wasn't a factor, the money was burning a hole in my pocket at the time.
Never the less, I think this is one of those dead horses that doesn't need to be flogged anymore. Again, thanks guys.
I can't say I disagree with it, the therory is sound. I would like to compair class A, A/B and D, but I'm not going to go so far as to say there will be a difference untill I do.
That said, when I bought the PPI I did do a blind test before I picked it over an Xtant and a Clarion with similar ratings. We were there for close to 4 hours. We did the very best we could to level match them. They were playing full range into my Boston Pro 6.5's.
What I heard (or atleast what I thought I heard) was that the Clarion wasn't even in the ball park. The Xtant and the PPI were very close with the nod going to the PPI for slightly better depth to the sound stage and the Xtant being a little too bright. The Xtant was priced almost $100 dollars more so perception would normally be that it was the better amp, and budget wasn't a factor, the money was burning a hole in my pocket at the time.
Never the less, I think this is one of those dead horses that doesn't need to be flogged anymore. Again, thanks guys.
08-31-2007, 08:45 PM
#15
but don't feel bad about choosing a quality amp which is often identified by superficial aesthetic characteristics such as features, physical looks, weight etc...
the total side of the story to learn is that you will be able to shape your sound much more by changing speakers that you will changing amps.
thus you should uhh spend more $$ on your speakers, which is often not the case.
the total side of the story to learn is that you will be able to shape your sound much more by changing speakers that you will changing amps.
thus you should uhh spend more $$ on your speakers, which is often not the case.
08-31-2007, 11:14 PM
#16
0 Watt CAFz'r
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by Mr. Marco
but don't feel bad about choosing a quality amp which is often identified by superficial aesthetic characteristics such as features, physical looks, weight etc...
the total side of the story to learn is that you will be able to shape your sound much more by changing speakers that you will changing amps.
thus you should uhh spend more $$ on your speakers, which is often not the case.
the total side of the story to learn is that you will be able to shape your sound much more by changing speakers that you will changing amps.
thus you should uhh spend more $$ on your speakers, which is often not the case.
thank you Captain Sarcasim but I'm very happy with every other aspect of the system. This is a discussion about an amp that isn't with us anymore. Please, lets keep it to that.
P.S. please save those comments for the guys asking if he should get the JVC or the Sony deck.
09-01-2007, 08:04 AM
#17
That Pro set requires some big power to really shine. If you haven't heard it with a healthy sized amp on it I highly recommend it. That PCX with ~120rms@3ohms isn't enough IMO.
I used a MTX Thunder2300 when I had my Pro set so don't be afraid to throw 200rms+ per side at it.
I used a MTX Thunder2300 when I had my Pro set so don't be afraid to throw 200rms+ per side at it.
09-01-2007, 12:33 PM
#18
Originally Posted by Calum
thank you Captain Sarcasim but I'm very happy with every other aspect of the system. This is a discussion about an amp that isn't with us anymore. Please, lets keep it to that.
P.S. please save those comments for the guys asking if he should get the JVC or the Sony deck.
P.S. please save those comments for the guys asking if he should get the JVC or the Sony deck.
I wasn't being sarcastic. nothing i wrote was intended as such. my coment is as useful for the guy who's choosing between audiovox and Alpine as it is for the person choosing between Brax and Tru, too bad you didn't get it. the discussion did seem to stray and i joined in, my bad, but your pompous reply was unecessary.
09-01-2007, 12:54 PM
#19
over at diyma you wouldn't get this kind of reaction. 
and Marco, you made a very good point.
I haven't actually heard a stunning difference in amps that I've used over the years, that includes old school mtx, monitor 1, kicker (thank you Mr.Marco
) and now PG xenons.
hey maybe I am running gear, so I better stfu, because I don't know what I'm talking about.
and Marco, you made a very good point.
I haven't actually heard a stunning difference in amps that I've used over the years, that includes old school mtx, monitor 1, kicker (thank you Mr.Marco
) and now PG xenons.hey maybe I am running gear, so I better stfu, because I don't know what I'm talking about.
Last edited by df.dima; 09-01-2007 at 12:57 PM.
09-01-2007, 06:28 PM
#20
0 Watt CAFz'r
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 25
Originally Posted by Mr. Marco
Calum,
I wasn't being sarcastic. nothing I wrote was intended as such.
I wasn't being sarcastic. nothing I wrote was intended as such.
Saying I "should uhh spend more $$ on your speakers" as I would be able to shape the sound more with them than I would with an amp also seemed like it was aimed at me, seeing as I'm the one who started this thread. While I appreciate that you are correct, that isn't what this thread was about. I could think of no reason for you to post that here other than to try to point out a lack of understanding of the subject matter on my part. If you had read the first post you'd see that I'm not trying to change the way my system sounds. I'm merely trying to replace a much-loved amplifier that has suffered an untimely demise.
