merc
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 2 
|
Post by merc on May 6, 2021 22:57:14 GMT -5
In the BasX forum, I've submitted a post asking what the difference between the prior BasX A300 and the new replacement BasX A2 might be - especially, and most crucially, sonic differences.
Along the way, I've heard grumbles that Emotiva doesn't actually conduct any detailed listening to it's amplifiers, except to see how loudly they'll play in home theater applications. If true, that would mean that things that matter to high end audiophiles - such as reproduction of air, naturalness of tone, coherence, lack transistor coldness and grain, depth and breath of image, a sense of liquid presentation - aren't anything that enters into design or product testing and evaluation of Emotiva amplifiers.
Any truth to any of that?
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on May 6, 2021 23:21:39 GMT -5
I’d wonder how someone would know that rather than if it were true.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2021 23:55:21 GMT -5
In the BasX forum, I've submitted a post asking what the difference between the prior BasX A300 and the new replacement BasX A2 might be - especially, and most crucially, sonic differences. Along the way, I've heard grumbles that Emotiva doesn't actually conduct any detailed listening to it's amplifiers, except to see how loudly they'll play in home theater applications. If true, that would mean that things that matter to high end audiophiles - such as reproduction of air, naturalness of tone, coherence, lack transistor coldness and grain, depth and breath of image, a sense of liquid presentation - aren't anything that enters into design or product testing and evaluation of Emotiva amplifiers. Any truth to any of that? Only that your inference uses familiar language by reviewers to describe Emotiva amps [XPA Gen 3]. I've noted, "masculine, almost w/ a lover's touch, and transistor like" among the flowery prose that reviewers use. But AudioHTIT is probably right - sounds more like speculation unless such statement came from an insider. My most favorite flaw coverup from reviewers is "for the price point"..... Don't get me wrong - I'm not familiar at all w/ the BasX line of Emotiva amps. |
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on May 7, 2021 0:25:15 GMT -5
“things that matter to high end audiophiles - such as reproduction of air, naturalness of tone, coherence, lack transistor coldness and grain, depth and breath of image, a sense of liquid presentation” Geezz!! give me a break….are we talking amps. or getting ready to order a meal at The Ritz! Bill |
|
|
|
Post by markc on May 7, 2021 0:52:09 GMT -5
In the BasX forum, I've submitted a post asking what the difference between the prior BasX A300 and the new replacement BasX A2 might be - especially, and most crucially, sonic differences. Along the way, I've heard grumbles that Emotiva doesn't actually conduct any detailed listening to it's amplifiers, except to see how loudly they'll play in home theater applications. If true, that would mean that things that matter to high end audiophiles - such as reproduction of air, naturalness of tone, coherence, lack transistor coldness and grain, depth and breath of image, a sense of liquid presentation - aren't anything that enters into design or product testing and evaluation of Emotiva amplifiers. Any truth to any of that? Reproduction of air? Transistor grain? Liquid presentation? The last one. especially, sounds like your entire post. Diarrhoea! |
|
|
|
Post by repeetavx on May 7, 2021 1:09:04 GMT -5
Hi merc, some of us know what you're talking about.
Emotiva amps are very accurate but not the least bit sweet. During the design process they do listen to them a lot. But they are more interested in how accurately they can reproduce the sound of a car door or some other foley rather than how they reproduce the woodiness of a stringed instrument.
|
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on May 7, 2021 7:43:49 GMT -5
The amplifier should always amplify the signal as accurately as possible.
Not “sweet” enough for you….then you’re lookin’ in the wrong place. Time to rethink the loudspeakers and their acoustic environment
|
|
|
|
Post by Ex_Vintage on May 7, 2021 8:45:11 GMT -5
It seems like we want everything to be a tone control, when that function typically comes from a preamp. All sorts of comments by audiophiles on the sound differences of cables, interconnects, cable risers, room correction, room treatments, speaker placement etc. all have an effect on the final "tone" we hear. Making changes to various fixed pieces of equipment to achieve a change in "sweetness" seems like using the wrong tool for the job.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,275
|
Post by KeithL on May 7, 2021 9:58:34 GMT -5
I agree absolutely with your first though... but not with where you go from there.
We absolutely do design our amplifiers to be accurate. So, if that instrument sounds sweet, and you have a good recording, and good speakers, when you play it through our amplifier it will sound sweet. And, if that stringed instrument sounds woody, and you have a good recording, and good speakers, when you play it through our amplifier it will sound woody. We don't make it that way... our job is to enable you to hear what's there without altering it in any way. (And, yes, if you have a bad recording, you'll get to hear all that badness in all its awful glory too.)
You could get yellow tinted windows in your home so every day looks sunny... Or you could get blue tinted windows to make every day look slightly overcast... Bot most people choose to get transparent uncolored windows that simply allow them to see what the world really looks like. (And the best quality "museum glass" they put in picture frames is virtually invisible.)
And that is exactly how we believe an amplifier should treat your music. IT should enable you to hear exactly what's there...
There is no magic to "reproducing woodiness" or "reproducing brassiness"... If you simply reproduce everything accurately then they will ALL come out right...
And that is our goal.
There are two areas where many "audiophiles" seem to become confused...
First of all it is in fact possible for a given piece of gear to simply be limited in such a way that it fails to reproduce certain things accurately. For example, some speakers cannot handle the transients from horns well, and so they don't sound especially realistic with brass band music. However, they are NOT "failing to make the music sound brassy"... What they are doing, assuming you have a good recording to begin with, is "failing to accurately reproduce the brassiness that is present in the recording"... And the solution is not to design an amplifier that "adds brassiness to everything you play through it"...
The solution is to find an amplifier that properly reproduces everything - including "brassiness".
Second, some devices, especially speakers, ADD coloration. So, for example, if you had a speaker that "makes everything sound a bit like a horn"....
It might make brass band music sound very nice... In fact, it might even make some really BAD recordings of brass bands sound decent (much as a yellow window can brighten a rainy day).... (If you add "fake brassiness" to a recording that otherwise "lacks brassiness" the end result may sometimes be pleasing - like a colorized movie.) HOWEVER, if that's what's happening, then it's also going to make a flute, or a violin, or a piano, or even your favorite singer, sound a bit like a trumpet... which will sound... odd.
The audiophile myth is that "woodiness" or "brassiness" are actual things that are separate from "the signal". They are not... these terms are simply words we use to describe how our brain interprets specific sorts of signals. If you reproduce THE SIGNAL accurately (and the recording is accurate to begin with), then it WILL have the proper amount of woodiness, or brassiness, and the singer will sound correct too. (And, yes, if you reproduce the signal correctly, the the sounds of car doors slamming, and birds tweeting, and even glass breaking, will also come out right.)
Hi merc, some of us know what you're talking about. Emotiva amps are very accurate but not the least bit sweet. During the design process they do listen to them a lot. But they are more interested in how accurately they can reproduce the sound of a car door or some other foley rather than how they reproduce the woodiness of a stringed instrument. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,275
|
Post by KeithL on May 7, 2021 10:07:43 GMT -5
I agree entirely... However note that a lot of "high-end audiophile preamps" don't HAVE tone controls ("because they wouldn't want tone controls to color the sound")... Then they spend MORE money looking for ways to alter or adjust the tone without using tone controls... The real catch with doing it that way, other than the cost, is that you limit your choices... For example, you may be able to pair an amplifier that's "bright" with speakers that are "a bit laid back"... But, if you attempt to upgrade or replace either later, you will be forced to try and match the performance of the one you're replacing.
It's much better to simply choose components that are accurate and neutral individually...
Rather than trusting the individual colorations and quirks of multiple pieces of gear to cancel out perfectly.
(Or deliberately adding coloration - while repeating over and over to yourself "it's system synergy - it's not just a tone control".)
It seems like we want everything to be a tone control, when that function typically comes from a preamp. All sorts of comments by audiophiles on the sound differences of cables, interconnects, cable risers, room correction, room treatments, speaker placement etc. all have an effect on the final "tone" we hear. Making changes to various fixed pieces of equipment to achieve a change in "sweetness" seems like using the wrong tool for the job. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2021 10:17:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by MusicHead on May 7, 2021 10:43:22 GMT -5
Simple (or simplistic) explanation: this allows to pick a "house sound". It helps with branding and market differentiation. |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs 
Posts: 18,494
|
Post by DYohn on May 7, 2021 10:50:23 GMT -5
My intestines have been "reproducing air" more frequently as I get older.
|
|
|
|
Post by siggie on May 7, 2021 12:13:22 GMT -5
I thought my XPA-7 had a liquid presentation, but it turns out the dog was responsible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 7, 2021 15:53:12 GMT -5
In the BasX forum, I've submitted a post asking what the difference between the prior BasX A300 and the new replacement BasX A2 might be - especially, and most crucially, sonic differences. Along the way, I've heard grumbles that Emotiva doesn't actually conduct any detailed listening to it's amplifiers, except to see how loudly they'll play in home theater applications. If true, that would mean that things that matter to high end audiophiles - such as reproduction of air, naturalness of tone, coherence, lack transistor coldness and grain, depth and breath of image, a sense of liquid presentation - aren't anything that enters into design or product testing and evaluation of Emotiva amplifiers. Any truth to any of that? ROTFLMAO - I've talked to Big Dan personally, and I can tell you that HE does listen to his gear. And he has good enough ears that when he was telling me what he heard on a specific amp, it was exactly what I'd already heard. The company as a whole may be steering toward the direction of the HT cesspool, but what they DO sell in the stereo world is still good stuff. The BasX gear is a miracle for its sound quality at its price, and knowing the company and Dan, I'm confident that they aren't replacing a successful and popular amp for any of the wrong reasons (cheaper to make, they'll never miss that feature, etc.). No - If a new BasX product is coming out, you can bet that it's not only going to sound better but also be a better value (and usually, a MUCH better value). Now that said, some claim that Emo's riding on its laurels with its supposedly premier X-series. I'm not convinced of that, but the consensus seems to be that the previous generation two sounded better. I've heard both (hell, I've owned both), but never for a side-by-side shoot-out. So my opinion on this one is moot. Nevertheless, I'll throw my vote of confidence to any BasX product that Emotiva comes out with. I haven't found a dog in the bunch yet. And in case you missed it - I'm a stereo ONLY listener and have the luxury of being able to pretty much request most any gear I want for review (and at pretty much any price). Know what's in my living room just now? An Emotiva BasX TA-100 and a Black Ice Audio tube integrated. I can switch them back & forth on the fly, and have great fun doing so. I've also got: Audio-gd HE-1 preamplifier Emotiva PA-1 mono block power amps Heathkit 12-watt mono tube amps Yamaha stereo receiver (old one) MOSFET "Pro" power amp And whatever kit is kicking around in the back of my closets. Stereo Uber Alles! Boomzilla |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 7, 2021 16:13:28 GMT -5
... some devices, especially speakers, ADD coloration. So, for example, if you had a speaker that "makes everything sound a bit like a horn"... Thanks, Keith - I agree with your post 100%. And the quoted comment inspires me to make a comment of my own. Traditionally, horn-loaded speakers sounded like...horns. It was the price you paid for the dynamics and efficiency that such speakers normally offered. The "Voice of the Theater" by Altec was one of the prime examples, although Klipsch, JBL, and Electro Voice were in there too. However, I'm pleased to report that apparently computer-based analysis software (and a lot of hard work) seem to have tamed the traditional "horn honk." Both Klipsch's "Tractix" designs and JBL's newer horns have, at least to my ears, no trace of the traditional "horn sound." And having lost the "honk," they, very fortunately, still retain the dynamics and "jump factor" that go so far in making live music sound live. "Horn dynamics without the horn honk" has been one of the fondest desires in my audio journey, and now the grail seems to be in reach. For youse guys who haven't heard the latest horn generations from Klipsch & JBL, it's time to take an audition! Boomzilla |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on May 7, 2021 21:53:58 GMT -5
In the BasX forum, I've submitted a post asking what the difference between the prior BasX A300 and the new replacement BasX A2 might be - especially, and most crucially, sonic differences. Along the way, I've heard grumbles that Emotiva doesn't actually conduct any detailed listening to it's amplifiers, except to see how loudly they'll play in home theater applications. If true, that would mean that things that matter to high end audiophiles - such as reproduction of air, naturalness of tone, coherence, lack transistor coldness and grain, depth and breath of image, a sense of liquid presentation - aren't anything that enters into design or product testing and evaluation of Emotiva amplifiers. Any truth to any of that? Hi merc. So when you say things that matter to high end audiophiles, you might be surprised to find that audiophiles don't always look for the same things. I think there are two types of audiophiles though several people tend to be a mix of the two as well. There are people that like an unedited version of the sound. Generally considered a "flat" or "neutral" presentation. Emotiva would side towards this type of sound. You will usually find this in good transistor based gear. Then there are people who want it to sound GOOD but are unconcerned about flat or neutral response. Here is where things get a little hazy. See they are concerned with a particular character of sound that they find entrancing. (Keep in mind good neutral sound is also very entrancing). But in this case, they are wanting a particular presentation. Often you can find this kind of stuff in tube gear. Not always, but a lot of tube gear doesn't measure well, can fall short in max power output. But, nevertheless, you can get very interesting sound. So for instance, I heard a Conrad Johnson preamp. It was obviously colored in sound but it had great presence on rock. I heard B'zilla's modified Heathkit mono tube amps and this amp is also somewhat colored in the treble. But it's one of the best sounding amps I've ever heard producing just a few watts per channel. The Bob Latino tube amps have this very nice holographic sound but fall short in the higher treble frequencies and the bass extension is limited and a bit loose sounding. So in these cases, people are after a sound and this type of gear can definitely give it to them. But it's very different from what Emotiva does. As for Emotiva amps, I have been underwhelmed with almost all their new offerings, except for the Emotiva A-100 (for its great headphone amp) and the Emotiva PA-1 (fantastic amps!) - which is discontinued. Nevertheless, I don't think Emotiva has ever made a bad sounding piece of gear. None of their products are dogs or the cheap junk you can find in retail stores. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on May 9, 2021 18:13:34 GMT -5
Not all of this is exact.....
Sure....If you are putting a given signal INTO an amp and have a scope on input AND output, you can compare.
The problem comes with REAL Speakers, for which no adequate standard test exists. ALL speaker / amp combinations....can have No to Many problems.
Not all combinations are equal. Some amp / speaker combos are golden while trying to get a 4ohm current hungry panel working with an HT receiver is probably a waste of time.
And yes.....different strokes for different folks. Slam? Detail? Air? Rhythm? Pace? Timing? That's why MOST reviews are GAS. Except for YOUR knowledge of the reviewer and how
that jives with YOUR values.......Agree or DISagree.
And since much duty for the entry line of EMO amps is HT amp replacement duty? No problem with the generally benign load of such speakers. Nobody knows what a movies is supposed to sound like, anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by DavidR on May 10, 2021 19:41:03 GMT -5
My intestines have been "reproducing air" more frequently as I get older.
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on May 11, 2021 15:06:44 GMT -5
Eat MORE Roughage?
|
|
