|
|
Post by chicagorspec on Jan 8, 2021 12:36:58 GMT -5
This thread is a prime example of the decline of this forum. Post of year nomination |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jan 8, 2021 18:21:40 GMT -5
It is very simple, pczach. all amplifiers are not tthe same into the same speakers even if they measure the same. I suspect we'd agree on that. But when you use apeaker with very high reactance in the upper octave or so and an electrostatic, at that, you simply have difficulty comparing amp. Not all amps are the same into the same reactive load. Some will fall flat, and others do well. Keith minimizes this by not mentioning it at all and going with impedance. Sure, amps can interact with a load based on high output impedance but that's not the issue. chops won't even discuss this. Or even come to the realization that like everyone else, his system is pretty much an artifact. IOW? Would my Magnepans do similar things with this same pair of amplifiers? I think that chops has a valid input. but with the lmits of not be applicible to everyone. I owned a Rotel amp once that simply fell FLAT in my system. It lasted about 4 months from new to sold. I'm not making 'fun' of anyone, but trying to help. And I'd say the same thing to your face. Or whoever I was speaking with. I have purged myself of anger. It doesn't get you anywhere. Keith mentions accuracy as reproducing the waveform. Without any reference to a real load or real world speaker conditions. Try that with an old Apogee Scintilla dropping to 1 ohm or less. (yep....they sold 'em) or with an old big-box speaker with very high internal damping and of extrememly high sensitivity. I have wishsed for a standardized Simulated Speaker with which to test amplifiers. While dozen are avaialble to be built, there is Zero agreement from amp builders about which to use. Resistors are fun and help keep your room warm in winter AND can be compared between amplifiers, but don't have full agreeement with what you hear. That accuracy thing, again. Nobody cares about your numbers or your explanations of why you are giving chops a hard time. A few of you decided that you were going to give someone crap for simply doing his own comparison test. You should be able to take it for what it is and thank him for the effort and the information. If it didn't do it for you, do your own test. I'm not mucking this thread up anymore. Just think about this for a second. What if everyone that is thinking about sharing information about their own comparison's tests is reading this thread, but don't want to go through the anal exam of a few members that will find a way to criticize anything for a variety of reasons. Why would anyone want to put themselves through that? If you want a professional review....pay for a subscription, read one online, or conduct one yourself. The whole idea of this place is for people to share info, discuss Emotiva equipment, and enjoy themselves with people that want to do the same. Tearing apart someone's comparison test when they are open about not being a professional is certainly not going to encourage anyone to waste their time to do it again....and it's rude. If you don't understand that, that's on you. Maybe you can have someone read you where I Encouraged chops to continue. It's a valid data point. Just doesn't mean much. The infatuation of many posters here with 'best' and 'upgrade' is cerainly not best use of time. And I'm aftaid that an understanding of why is a good idea. I'm not being critical. I'm pointing out how reviews don't really mean much. But the better reviewers? They will go to some trouble to find out why certain amps may sound different. 'Accuracy' to a waveform is not the same as it sounding accurate thru a real speaker. |
|
|
|
Post by chicagorspec on Jan 8, 2021 20:59:56 GMT -5
I’m not sure they’re the best amps I have, but I have a pair of DR-1s bought used, and immediately thought they were a noticeable step back from a Pass when I first hooked them up. Since, I’ve left them on 24/7 as they give off ZERO heat, and they’re sounding relatively sweet a month or so later. I’m very much enjoying music through them.
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jan 9, 2021 0:31:48 GMT -5
I’m not sure they’re the best amps I have, but I have a pair of DR-1s bought used, and immediately thought they were a noticeable step back from a Pass when I first hooked them up. Since, I’ve left them on 24/7 as they give off ZERO heat, and they’re sounding relatively sweet a month or so later. I’m very much enjoying music through them. That's ALL that counts....... |
|
|
|
Post by mack71 on Jan 9, 2021 2:30:42 GMT -5
Looking at several forums, I come to the conclusion for some time that some people have become extremely malicious and frustrated, ... maybe it is the effect of the pandemic  |
|
|
|
Post by chops on Jan 9, 2021 7:09:00 GMT -5
This thread is a prime example of the decline of this forum. Exactly. It's why I don't even come on here anymore. Too many people pretending to be snobs and know-it-alls. Some of the clowns on here (they know who they are, especially one of them) thinks that just because I did a simple comparison of two amps, that I automatically entered "pro-reviewer" status and need to have a large collection of gear to connect to these two amps to make any kind of "valid" review. That certain someone can take that magnifying glass of his and stuff it. I mean seriously, I really don't care, at least not on this forum anymore. For those that took something good away from the little review that I did, good. For the others that thought the review was crap, well, whatever. Get over yourselves. You may think you know more than me, but you don't. You may even think you're better than me, but you're not. In fact, you know nothing about me, my past, my history with electronics and loudspeaker design, or anything else for that matter. So again, get over yourselves. And lastly, thank you pczach. Okay, I'm done here. Bye. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jan 9, 2021 16:25:56 GMT -5
This thread is a prime example of the decline of this forum. Exactly. It's why I don't even come on here anymore. Too many people pretending to be snobs and know-it-alls. Some of the clowns on here (they know who they are, especially one of them) thinks that just because I did a simple comparison of two amps, that I automatically entered "pro-reviewer" status and need to have a large collection of gear to connect to these two amps to make any kind of "valid" review. That certain someone can take that magnifying glass of his and stuff it. I mean seriously, I really don't care, at least not on this forum anymore. For those that took something good away from the little review that I did, good. For the others that thought the review was crap, well, whatever. Get over yourselves. You may think you know more than me, but you don't. You may even think you're better than me, but you're not. In fact, you know nothing about me, my past, my history with electronics and loudspeaker design, or anything else for that matter. So again, get over yourselves. And lastly, thank you pczach. Okay, I'm done here. Bye. Problem is that some people take reviews such as yours TOO seriously instead of the opinion that it is. 'See! XXX thinks it's better, so it must be!' And we know nothing about your musical priorities or what / how you listen, let alone what is maybe the single most important component in this situation. The room. I'll listen to whatever you have to say and 'weigh' it according to my priorities in listening. If anyone has followed my long train of posts, I RARELY actually recommend a piece of gear or technology. What I own is open to scrutiny, but I don't make too much of it. I suppose I could make changes, but they'd be in the nature of DIY. Sound panels, maybe. Or Reframe my Magnepans in real wood. I'm sorry I can't just fall in line and be a cheerleader. Please FINISH your review. Quit whining about any minor pushback. If anyone complains, just take it and move on. And I haven't' really been harsh on you. Just pointed out that such 'single point' reviews are just artifacts. |
|
|
|
Post by chops on Jan 10, 2021 14:05:32 GMT -5
Exactly. It's why I don't even come on here anymore. Too many people pretending to be snobs and know-it-alls. Some of the clowns on here (they know who they are, especially one of them) thinks that just because I did a simple comparison of two amps, that I automatically entered "pro-reviewer" status and need to have a large collection of gear to connect to these two amps to make any kind of "valid" review. That certain someone can take that magnifying glass of his and stuff it. I mean seriously, I really don't care, at least not on this forum anymore. For those that took something good away from the little review that I did, good. For the others that thought the review was crap, well, whatever. Get over yourselves. You may think you know more than me, but you don't. You may even think you're better than me, but you're not. In fact, you know nothing about me, my past, my history with electronics and loudspeaker design, or anything else for that matter. So again, get over yourselves. And lastly, thank you pczach. Okay, I'm done here. Bye. And we know nothing about your musical priorities or what / how you listen, let alone what is maybe the single most important component in this situation. The room. I RARELY actually recommend a piece of gear or technology. Because as always, all you're doing is making moot points about things that do not matter. It DOESN'T matter what my musical tastes/priorities are. It DOESN'T matter how I listen. It DOESN'T matter how or if the room is treated. None of that matters at all, which are the same lame points you keep bringing up. The ONLY things that matter is that the amplifier is the ONLY thing that has changed in the system. Music tastes/priorities are the same with both amps. How I listen are the same with both amps. The room is the same with both amps. What does that mean? That means that any - ANY - changes I hear at all in the sound is due to the amps and the amps alone, period. And not once have I recommend anything. At any rate, have fun. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jan 10, 2021 14:46:20 GMT -5
I'll drop it now. You are obviously above it all.
But I will say one last time.....that if you expect anyone to make any sense of your 'review' that we have some idea of those musical things I mention. And listening in a concrete walled basement is certainly a lot different than listening in a large open or well 'padded' room.
By your measure, ALL reviews are of equal value, which is certainnly not the case. I'd trust your CATS before some reviewers.
Sure, listen/ with same tastes / priorities. Of which I have NO idea. You may value Imaging. I like pace / rhythm. You like 'palpable', while I value the quiet between notes.
It all matters to one degree or another.
But, like I have said 3 or 4 other times in this thread alone? Please Continue with your review.
It is good that you have't recommended anything in particular. Very steep slope there, as perhaps you'd agree.
And INDEED.......First Priority? ALWAYS? Have a good time!
Listen to your cats....
|
|
|
|
Post by audioguru on Jan 11, 2021 15:51:44 GMT -5
I'm inclined to both agree and disagree with a few things you've said...
The term "accuracy" is measured by whatever criteria you specify... However there are quite often criteria that are generally accepted to be "the most appropriate ones".
For example, if I write "1 + 1 = 2" on a math test, I'm probably going to be graded based on the resulting number, rather than on my handwriting. (But it's not quite so obvious in a contest on "conversational Spanish" - where I may be graded on grammar, or pronunciation, or both.)
If we're talking about an amplifier alone then accuracy really is "how precisely it reproduces the waveform". Of course, there are a variety of different measurements we could compare, and the specific load we use will probably affect affect the results.
And, if you're talking about a complete system, there are an incredible number of variables... For example no loudspeaker is capable of recreating the original "wave structure" of a live performance. By that I mean reproducing each waveform in the air perfectly... moving in the same direction as it left the original instrument.
With real instruments different collections of tones and harmonics exit the instrument, in different directions, according to different patterns, at the same time.
The only way to reproduce the true 3D structure of the sound coming from a piano is with a vibrating string. (So all we're really talking about is how well we can fool our limited human senses with "a good illusion of 3D".)
In another thread someone described hearing a band, live and in person, and finding that "they didn't sound right".
So, in that case, if he'd brought home a recording of that performance, and it sounded great on his system at home, then his system must be INACCURATE. (After all, if his system was perfectly accurate, the band would sound just as bad when he played the recording at home as they did in person.)
In most situations, unless we were invited to the studio during recording, we are looking for a decent rendition of WHAT WE THINK THE ORIGINAL SOUNDED LIKE. (And, even if you were there at the studio, during the final edit... we all know that our human "acoustic memory" is only accurate for ten minutes or so anyway.) So what we're really seeking is "a system that makes our favorite recordings sound like what we want or expect them to sound like"...
But, since each of us places different priorities on different factors, we end up evaluating the same data differently.
I know some people who find "3D Imax movies" to look "incredibly realistic"... I personally find the difference between "a stereo image" - which is what 3D Imax actually is - and a true 3D image to be quite jarring and annoying... (Imax 3D is the equivalent of a moving Stereopticon slide.... a ViewMaster for those who remember them... but it is not a true hologram.)
Try moving your head to the side to see something that is behind something else in a 3D Imax movie... Or try focusing on the bush in the foreground instead of the giant T-Rex glaring at you from stage center...
Both of those will fail to produce the result you expect - and in a most unnatural and jarring way... (It's up to the director to do a good job of keeping your attention focused where it belongs so that doesn't happen.)
Reproduced music is like that... The goal is always merely to accurately reproduce the stuff that you find important... And that isn't always the same stuff for me as it is for you...
Far more to accuracy than the 'mere' reproduction of a given waveform. |
|
|
|
Post by audioguru on Jan 11, 2021 15:52:04 GMT -5
I'm inclined to both agree and disagree with a few things you've said... The term "accuracy" is measured by whatever criteria you specify... However there are quite often criteria that are generally accepted to be "the most appropriate ones".
For example, if I write "1 + 1 = 2" on a math test, I'm probably going to be graded based on the resulting number, rather than on my handwriting. (But it's not quite so obvious in a contest on "conversational Spanish" - where I may be graded on grammar, or pronunciation, or both.) If we're talking about an amplifier alone then accuracy really is "how precisely it reproduces the waveform". Of course, there are a variety of different measurements we could compare, and the specific load we use will probably affect affect the results. And, if you're talking about a complete system, there are an incredible number of variables... For example no loudspeaker is capable of recreating the original "wave structure" of a live performance. By that I mean reproducing each waveform in the air perfectly... moving in the same direction as it left the original instrument.
With real instruments different collections of tones and harmonics exit the instrument, in different directions, according to different patterns, at the same time.
The only way to reproduce the true 3D structure of the sound coming from a piano is with a vibrating string. (So all we're really talking about is how well we can fool our limited human senses with "a good illusion of 3D".)
In another thread someone described hearing a band, live and in person, and finding that "they didn't sound right".
So, in that case, if he'd brought home a recording of that performance, and it sounded great on his system at home, then his system must be INACCURATE. (After all, if his system was perfectly accurate, the band would sound just as bad when he played the recording at home as they did in person.)
In most situations, unless we were invited to the studio during recording, we are looking for a decent rendition of WHAT WE THINK THE ORIGINAL SOUNDED LIKE. (And, even if you were there at the studio, during the final edit... we all know that our human "acoustic memory" is only accurate for ten minutes or so anyway.) So what we're really seeking is "a system that makes our favorite recordings sound like what we want or expect them to sound like"...
But, since each of us places different priorities on different factors, we end up evaluating the same data differently. I know some people who find "3D Imax movies" to look "incredibly realistic"... I personally find the difference between "a stereo image" - which is what 3D Imax actually is - and a true 3D image to be quite jarring and annoying... (Imax 3D is the equivalent of a moving Stereopticon slide.... a ViewMaster for those who remember them... but it is not a true hologram.)
Try moving your head to the side to see something that is behind something else in a 3D Imax movie... Or try focusing on the bush in the foreground instead of the giant T-Rex glaring at you from stage center...
Both of those will fail to produce the result you expect - and in a most unnatural and jarring way... (It's up to the director to do a good job of keeping your attention focused where it belongs so that doesn't happen.) Reproduced music is like that... The goal is always merely to accurately reproduce the stuff that you find important... And that isn't always the same stuff for me as it is for you...
Far more to accuracy than the 'mere' reproduction of a given waveform. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jan 12, 2021 21:35:16 GMT -5
I might add that somewhere in all this mess, Keith made a good point. Speakers are the weak link IF you are looking to reproduce a waveform.
than the whole thing goes off the rails. Certain issues become more important than a waveform would suggest.
|
|
|
|
Post by chops on Jan 15, 2021 15:13:28 GMT -5
My XPA-2 Gen 2 is back in its home in my audio rack. My views remain the same as in my first post.
I would be perfectly happy with either amp as they are more similar than they are different. Though in the end, if I had to choose between the two, I would still take the XPA-2 Gen 2 just because of the slightly more body/liquid in the midrange.
|
|
|
|
Post by foggy1956 on Jan 15, 2021 15:35:06 GMT -5
My XPA-2 Gen 2 is back in its home in my audio rack. My views remain the same as in my first post. I would be perfectly happy with either amp as they are more similar than they are different. Though in the end, if I had to choose between the two, I would still take the XPA-2 Gen 2 just because of the slightly more body/liquid in the midrange. Sadly, you will quite likely get flamed for that statement also😐 |
|
|
|
Post by chops on Jan 15, 2021 15:37:14 GMT -5
My XPA-2 Gen 2 is back in its home in my audio rack. My views remain the same as in my first post. I would be perfectly happy with either amp as they are more similar than they are different. Though in the end, if I had to choose between the two, I would still take the XPA-2 Gen 2 just because of the slightly more body/liquid in the midrange. Sadly, you will quite likely get flamed for that statement also😐 Sadly, I really don't care either, if you haven't already noticed throughout this mess of a thread. |
|
