McIntosh Amps

[pimpnyou204 10+ year member]

I think that is probably the biggest reason people think all amps sound the same. 192kb mp3's are NOT the music to be using to tell the difference in amplifiers

Agreed most ppl take compressed files off the net even iTunes still uses some compressed files. There's so much more than just an amplifier when trying to go with sq.

 

[danno14 10+ year member]

A few quotes and my comments.... valued at what they cost ($zero)

People believe their opinion to be correct, otherwise they change their opinion (credit- me)

"because Ive heard of" - one of the most frequent comments on the interweb. As opposed to "Because I heard/experienced first hand"

"Is a 9 second Civic as good as a F430?" It depends upon the person... to me the F430 rules but I can appreciate my buddies 8.3s civic. Just don't want a ride in it as I will probably puke.

"highend zapco, lunar, arcs ideally sound extremely similar I really doubt you could choose them"- I probably couldn't.... but some people could, and comparing high end vs. high end is the playground I want to be on.

"You test this by determining whether the human ear can distinguish between one or the other" Not my ears.... limited ability above 16k, and too much time spent with Barney/Elmo/Backyardigan's on an endless loop in my environment! Doesn't mean I don't want to try. Heck, most folks cannot tell the difference between MP3 and FLAC, nor do they care to try. Sad state for our hobby.

"Ears cannot be trusted" by Zaph. Note my comment above. My ears lose their calibration fairly quickly, as do most peoples. Talk to any audiologist if you want "proof" from someone with credentials. Also, if the "golden standard" you are referencing is to use ears to discern the difference, but the authority you are quoting states that ears cannot be trusted, doesn't that blow a hole in the validity of your argument?

"I just work at mcintosh part time" Lucky bastich!

"you will 110% be able to tell the difference" I hope I can with my system, but I would hope all others could too. BUT, if you cannot, it's not really my problem. It's MY system (home or car) and if I like it and how it sounds, that's ultimately what matters! (to me) Even if it's because of the pretty blue/red/green/flashing/whatever lights.

"not worth the price though."-Probably not if hair tricks are what you are trying to achieve (attempt at humor). This is the most subjective of statements! What it's worth it to you differs greatly from what it's worth to me. The same goes for pretty much everything- the hot wife, car, job, single malt, etc. Luckily there's "stuff" out there to cover both our wants and discretionary incomes.

"when it comes to sound quality, it's the first watt that is most important! " An interesting concept.... I would honestly love to hear the justification. My instinct would be "it's the last watt" as the last would be the onset of distortion. My mind is open and willing to change on this one.

One last- "Everyone is entitled to their opinion, even if it's wrong" (credit- me)

Interesting dialog, if not already run to the ground.

Happy Holidays all!

D

 

[perfecxionX 10+ year member]

"Ears cannot be trusted" by Zaph. Note my comment above. My ears lose their calibration fairly quickly, as do most peoples. Talk to any audiologist if you want "proof" from someone with credentials. Also, if the "golden standard" you are referencing is to use ears to discern the difference, but the authority you are quoting states that ears cannot be trusted, doesn't that blow a hole in the validity of your argument?

Your equivocating on my use of the word ear. The reason I call a double blind the golden standard is to emphasize the importance of eliminating any type of placebo effect, subconscious bias, or observer effect. Its not just the physiology of the ears that is a problem but the hardware/software those ears are plugged into, the brain/mind. This is the larger reason why ears cannot be trusted as precise measuring devices. So you use a double blind study to eliminate subconscious bias and see if people can detect the difference between amplifiers. If people cannot tell a difference then you may conclude that indeed the physiology of the ear (and other features of anatomy necessary in the sense of sound) are imperfect enough to justify McIntosh over Yamaha (issues of durability/reliability ignored).

"because Ive heard of" - one of the most frequent comments on the interweb. As opposed to "Because I heard/experienced first hand"

You'll notice in that sentence i chose my words carefully enough to use the word

"I'll say that there may be a noticeable difference between a tube amplifier vs solid state but I only say that because Ive heard of double blind studies demonstrating this."

I was not saying this as a matter of fact, I was only acknowledging that I have heard mention of such things from people whom I regard as much more knowledgeable than myself.

 

[danno14 10+ year member]

We are on the same page with more of this than you realize. I have participated/run many of the aforementioned double blind tests that you are referring to, back when my hearing was more able to discern nuances. There are variables that may be rendered moot with said tests and others that may not: hearing accuity along with the ability to recognize what is different (doesn't always go hand in hand) is something that DB tests cannot resolve for instance. Age, exposure and even Listening fatigue can render a person unable when they are normally capable. What DB handles very well is the psychoacoutic and ego laden factors. I will include discretionary income in this as well //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

Ultimately what you can hear is not (usually) the same as what I can.... And there are those who can hear/recognize better than either of us. Couple that with the automotive environment and MOST listeners cannot tell the difference.

I was not saying this as a matter of fact, I was only acknowledging that I have heard mention of such things from people whom I regard as much more knowledgeable than myself.

 

---------- Post added at 11:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:10 AM ----------

 

We are on the same page with more of this than you realize. I have participated/run many of the aforementioned double blind tests that you are referring to, back when my hearing was more able to discern nuances. There are variables that may be rendered moot with said tests and others that may not: hearing accuity along with the ability to recognize what is different (doesn't always go hand in hand) is something that DB tests cannot resolve for instance. Age, exposure and even Listening fatigue can render a person unable when they are normally capable. What DB handles very well is the psychoacoutic and ego laden factors. I will include discretionary income in this as well //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

Ultimately what you can hear is not (usually) the same as what I can.... And there are those who can hear/recognize better than either of us. Couple that with the automotive environment and MOST listeners cannot tell the difference.

I was not saying this as a matter of fact, I was only acknowledging that I have heard mention of such things from people whom I regard as much more knowledgeable than myself.

 

[danno14 10+ year member]

Darn double post!

 

[perfecxionX 10+ year member]

We are on the same page with more of this than you realize. I have participated/run many of the aforementioned double blind tests that you are referring to, back when my hearing was more able to discern nuances. There are variables that may be rendered moot with said tests and others that may not: hearing accuity along with the ability to recognize what is different (doesn't always go hand in hand) is something that DB tests cannot resolve for instance. Age, exposure and even Listening fatigue can render a person unable when they are normally capable.

I dont know if there are studies that have controlled for these variables but it doesnt seem that it would be so difficult to do so. For example, using human subjects that are the same age, gender, and perform similarly in hearing tests.

Dont worry about the triple post, i read it at least 3x:nerd:

 

[danno14 10+ year member]

And my blasted phone isn't letting me get back to edit!!!

Will try later

Be well!