What makes a high end audio amp "better" then a low end unit?

[retrolefty]

There is no simple answer on how to make good amps. If I would try to share here some of my knowledge in that area, I will be ridiculed, I suppose (I've tried in that thread I've referenced earlier and got accused in making an art out of a simple engineering task  ).

Cheers

Alex

 If you can show measurable improvement specifications for your amps Vs other reference amps, I would love to have you share your experience.

 If however you are of the "you can't measure what I hear" world then I'm not interested in what you have accomplished.

[Alex Nikitin]

There is no simple answer on how to make good amps. If I would try to share here some of my knowledge in that area, I will be ridiculed, I suppose (I've tried in that thread I've referenced earlier and got accused in making an art out of a simple engineering task  ).

Cheers

Alex

 If you can show measurable improvement specifications for your amps Vs other reference amps, I would love to have you share your experience.

 If however you are of the "you can't measure what I hear" world then I'm not interested in what you have accomplished.

Well, here are the measurements of one of my designs. As you may see, nothing to be ashamed of in a production amplifier. However no measurement would show you if an amplifier will sound good. It can show that it may sound bad in particular circumstances but there is no direct correlation between the sound quality and measurements from my experience. I always measured all my amps extensively however often a change in an amplifier would be barely noticeable on the measurements and quite noticeable in the sound quality. I've spent considerable time about 20 years ago trying to find the way to measure amplifiers so it would give me a reasonable level of confidence in relation of the sound it produces. Essentially, I've drawn blank.

Cheers

Alex

[Circlotron]

If however you are of the "you can't measure what I hear" world then I'm not interested in what you have accomplished.

"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be."

Wiliam Thompson aka Lord Kelvin. Lecture on "Electrical Units of Measurement" (3 May 1883), published in Popular Lectures Vol. I, p. 73

[Electro Fan]

If however you are of the "you can't measure what I hear" world then I'm not interested in what you have accomplished.

"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be."

Wiliam Thompson aka Lord Kelvin. Lecture on "Electrical Units of Measurement" (3 May 1883), published in Popular Lectures Vol. I, p. 73

What about people, including scientists 500 or so years ago, who thought the Earth wasn’t the the center of the Universe but who couldn’t fully prove it with measured numbers - maybe they had little of value to offer also?  Or maybe not everything that can be perceived or at least hypothesized can be fully measured?  It’s ok to hold out for measurements but to dogmatically do so might be to disregard the fact that some future knowledge made possible by superior measuremts and analysis could render current knowledge inaccurate or incomplete.

[oldway]

You can't compare the complexity of universe with a simple audio amplifier. 

However no measurement would show you if an amplifier will sound good.

100% bullshit....

With actual knowledge in analog electronics and modern instruments whe have, if you can't measure it, it does not exist...

There is no magic at all in an audio amplifier.....

[not1xor1]

What about people, including scientists 500 or so years ago, who thought the Earth wasn’t the the center of the Universe but who couldn’t fully prove it with measured numbers - maybe they had little of value to offer also?  Or maybe not everything that can be perceived or at least hypothesized can be fully measured?  It’s ok to hold out for measurements but to dogmatically do so might be to disregard the fact that some future knowledge made possible by superior measuremts and analysis could render current knowledge inaccurate or incomplete.

it is OT, but I could not resist 

ancient scientists (they were called philosophers then) did know that earth was a planet floating in to the space and made quite good measurements (taking into account what they could use) of the size of the earth and the earth-moon distance

it is just the fault of religion (and ideology) which pretends to deform the reality to conform to its own sick prejudices that made the catholic church persecute Galileo

regarding the topic, scientists have to keep an open mind so it would be wrong to dismiss the hypothesis of something still unknown about audio equipment quality evaluation and measurement, but on the other side we have plenty of proofs of the power of cognitive biases so the above mentioned hypothesis is high unlikely to be real

[_Wim_]

The more “high end” you go in amps, the more “difference” there can be. But these differences are intentional by design (sometimes also buy pure incompetence), because they want to sound different from the competition (and hopefully be perceived as “better”).

I have come across/read about amps with intentional high second harmonic distortion (tube like sound), solid state amps with very high output impedance (low damping factor),amps with a rising response towards high frequencies, rising low frequencies, amps with a pronounced mid range, etc…
Sometimes you also see very high power amps with very low THD specs, but they only quote THD at nearly max power. During normal listening barely 1 watt is used, and sometimes such amps still suffer from quite a bit of cross-over distortion making THD specs at 100mW a lot worse and potentially hearable! So watch out for those also.

So I must say I agree a bit with both parties here. The well-designed amp problem was indeed solved quite long ago, but finding one is not always as straight forward if you are in the ” audiophile world”. Typically low end mass produced gear is much better is this, because they just use design from the application note and that is it. But sometimes they do indeed suffer from too much price cuts, so they also are not good.

So, in my opinion, buying the more expensive (250€) mass produced low end amp from the typical companies like Marantz, Denon, Sansui, Yamaha, etc should get you an excellent amp. Another approach is to carefully look for detailed published specs. I like to see THD vs power, THD vs freq, output impedance vs frequency and IMD spectrum. Typically when this data is available the designer want to show they have a well-designed product. Unfortunately pushing detailed specs is something that is not common, and the typical argument is that they “do not mean anything”, while the contrary is true off course… DIY is for sure also possible, but unless you can use salvaged parts, is a lot more expensive that a mass produced amp (but also lots more fun!)
As to speakers and acoustics, this problem is not solved at all for the moment, mainly because to the major impact of  the directional behavior of the speaker, and its corresponding interaction with the room. 

Maybe with active speakers and lots of DSP power, we will be able to steer directivity of the sound better (with still a reasonable sized speaker), allowing to have a more predictable sound quality in the future.

So, if looking for a technical challenge, this would be were a invest my time in. I have built an automated rotary table to measure the directional behavior of my loudspeakers, and the more you measure this, the more you appreciate the shear complexity and trade-offs in trying to get “good” directional behavior. “Good” means a good match with the room they will be used in, so this makes the challenge even more difficult.

[_Wim_]

Well, here are the measurements of one of my designs. As you may see, nothing to be ashamed of in a production amplifier.

Very true, looks like a well designed amplifier.

However no measurement would show you if an amplifier will sound good. It can show that it may sound bad in particular circumstances but there is no direct correlation between the sound quality and measurements from my experience.

This I cannot agree with. You should always be able to measure the difference between amps when you can hear them. 

[Ing. Max Koschuh]

You can measure 'some' details of a schematic, like 'Voltage' on the output, or frequency response. This does not mean you can measure ALL variables that produce what humans would call a 'good sound'.

You can measure the size and weight of a Stradivari and a low budget violin, along with their sound levels and frequency responses. However, two violins of same size, with absolutely identical 'measurements', may sound completely different.

I just want to say: Yes, in theory you should not hear any differences in two amps having the same measurement results. But in practice, they are very likely to sound different.

This is even harder to understand if you don't have 'audiophile ears'.

I personally don't think 'audiophile ears' (like I have) are great. Because you always want to improve the sound experience of your stereo. And in normal life, you always hear and identify noise sources at night, while others say it's completely quiet. Like a cat seeing things in the dark. I can tell you, this is very annoying. If I could choose between great ears and normal ears, I would choose the normal ones.

If YOU can't hear any differences in amps having the same measurements, that's fine. This will save you a lot of time and effort in finding the right equipment. And lot's of money too. You just choose the exteriour design you like, or pick an amp with the best figures on paper, done.

Enjoy music! That's the only important thing.

[_Wim_]

You can measure the size and weight of a Stradivari and a low budget violin, along with their sound levels and frequency responses. However, two violins of same size, with absolutely identical 'measurements', may sound completely different.

2 different violin that measure the same do not exist, and if they did, they would sound the same. You need to measure the violin in ALL directions in 3D, and in ALL directions it should have the same frequency responses and resonance decay behavior. If  all of those are identical, you will not hear a difference also.

But if you would measure two violins this way (or even 2 different loudspeakers), I think you would be very surprised on how big the differences actually are. We are talking about differences as high as +30db and more (with loudspeakers at least, but I expect similar peaks and dips with violins), we are not talking about 0.01% or something like that!

[Ing. Max Koschuh]

Yes, that's true.

In fact, scientists still don't know why the Stradivari sounds that different to other makes. And if they could find an answer, the manufacturers would use it to compensate the gap.

Someone should come up with a 'sound measuring device' for hifi systems, which is not just based on the variables that we are normally used to measure.

[Loboscope]

It is a myth, that the old Stradivari violins sound better than modern violins and today´s violin makers will not reach the level of Stradivais. They do and the "gap" has been closed since a long time. There have been made double-blind-tests (sic!) with good violin players playing some Stardivaris and some (very good) modern violins. The professional colleagues - they could not see, witch violin was played - could not distinguish the Stradivaris from the new instruments.

As I mentioned already above, it is humans "expectation" what rules his perception.

[oldway]

You can measure 'some' details of a schematic, like 'Voltage' on the output, or frequency response. This does not mean you can measure ALL variables that produce what humans would call a 'good sound'.

You can measure the size and weight of a Stradivari and a low budget violin, along with their sound levels and frequency responses. However, two violins of same size, with absolutely identical 'measurements', may sound completely different.

I just want to say: Yes, in theory you should not hear any differences in two amps having the same measurement results. But in practice, they are very likely to sound different.

This is even harder to understand if you don't have 'audiophile ears'.

I personally don't think 'audiophile ears' (like I have) are great. Because you always want to improve the sound experience of your stereo. And in normal life, you always hear and identify noise sources at night, while others say it's completely quiet. Like a cat seeing things in the dark. I can tell you, this is very annoying. If I could choose between great ears and normal ears, I would choose the normal ones.

If YOU can't hear any differences in amps having the same measurements, that's fine. This will save you a lot of time and effort in finding the right equipment. And lot's of money too. You just choose the exteriour design you like, or pick an amp with the best figures on paper, done.

Enjoy music! That's the only important thing.

Million-dollar Strads fall to modern violins in blind ‘sound check’

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/05/million-dollar-strads-fall-modern-violins-blind-sound-check

Audiophile ears don't exist only audiophile brain....Blind test proove it....

To compare amplifiers, you must test them in the same conditions with the same speakers.....

[Beamin]

I kind of enjoy it when these threads get derailed I started the thread purposely with as little chance of this as possible but I am no closer to getting ideas on this question as when I asked it. Does anyone "hear" really know? Because if they don't the back and fourth is not valid; based on the fact that no one knows the answer to the technical difference that would make the sound difference. There is no "sound" argument to be made.

If someone did say "this" part/design makes "this" better then started saying why amps do/don't make a difference they would have a base to make their argument. At this point I see a lot of factless opinions and arguments based on really nothing. I guess this is why audio phoolerly is such a $$$ business. Even the technical people fall victim to it.

What kind of an answer are you looking for? I did design many good amps, had my share of awards and reviews, took part in numerous Hi-Fi shows. I made all my designs so they sound right to my ear, hoping that at least some people will share that understanding of a good sound. At home I use a production amplifier that I've designed in 1996 (it was sold for about £300 retail then) without any changes and still happy with the sound it produces. I won't change it for any high-end amp. As one well known reviewer said in 1998 "The fact is, had a bought {this amplifier} 15 years ago, I might never have become an audiophile. Instead of thinking, Something's got to sound realer than this, I would have settled back in my listening chair and thought, Sounds about right. Now, were's that copy of Don Carlos?" There is no simple answer on how to make good amps. If I would try to share here some of my knowledge in that area, I will be ridiculed, I suppose (I've tried in that thread I've referenced earlier and got accused in making an art out of a simple engineering task  ).

Cheers

Alex

So if I want to make a high end amp with very low distortion how important are specs of the components to design specs? Could I take a low end amp with a decent power supply; change out the parts that are very specific to the value they are supposed to be (take all parts that are say 10% tolerance and hand select them to 1% or less) and see an improvement? I guess my question is what makes the high end amps different then the crappy ones? Big filter caps? Big transformers? Well matched transistors (I'm guessing most amps are push/pull designs)?

[Alex Nikitin]

This I cannot agree with. You should always be able to measure the difference between amps when you can hear them.

There is no magic at all in an audio amplifier.....

If there is, I've managed to put it on a production line  . Here is what I wrote in another thread:

...it is not a problem to measure differences, the problem is to correlate these measurements with the listening experience. As I did design equipment for mass production I could not afford any of that voodoo stuff, so I had to find definite hardware reasons for variations in the sound quality  . In most cases it was possible even if sometimes with quite unexpected results.

Cheers

Alex

[b_force]

It is a myth, that the old Stradivari violins sound better than modern violins and today´s violin makers will not reach the level of Stradivais. They do and the "gap" has been closed since a long time. There have been made double-blind-tests (sic!) with good violin players playing some Stardivaris and some (very good) modern violins. The professional colleagues - they could not see, witch violin was played - could not distinguish the Stradivaris from the new instruments.

As I mentioned already above, it is humans "expectation" what rules his perception.

Exactly this (I have even seen reports with just medium priced violins, with the same outcome)
In fact there are even tests and papers were people were blindfolded to taste food.
They can easily fool you with fish that looks like steak and vice versa. No one can tell the difference. Sometimes even when people KNOW they are being tricked.

There are really billions of well described and repeated experiments how our senses fool us on a major scale.
Yet, people still don't want to believe it. Perfect way for the maqrketing departement to use these thing of course.
To mu surprise engineers even fall for it most of the time. It should be a fundamental part of the knowledge of an engineer to have a good sense about these concepts.Yet most engineers call it even "bogus and fake" science.
With all the best respect, but I think you should reframe your thoughts about science than, and go back to school to relearn a few things. Because it's a fundamental part how we humans even judge certain experiments.

Even being supported by sales; products that people think (= sound) better, are technically nnot always better. There is absolutely no correlation between that "good specs".
On the other there is (proven) a very good correlation about what people believe is better.


This is also why I don't go into much debate about it anymore. The data is all there, proven so many times over and over again. One single little subjective dubious personal experiment is not going to change that. Debating about the whole concept can be fun and interesting. People still saying, "yes, but my experience is difference and this is my poor proof", is not.

Finally what I don't understand is why it is so extremely difficult for most people to simply admit they choice certain things just because of subjective reasons. Almost like it's something bad, a heavy sin or something?

[Alex Nikitin]

So if I want to make a high end amp with very low distortion how important are specs of the components to design specs? Could I take a low end amp with a decent power supply; change out the parts that are very specific to the value they are supposed to be (take all parts that are say 10% tolerance and hand select them to 1% or less) and see an improvement? I guess my question is what makes the high end amps different then the crappy ones? Big filter caps? Big transformers? Well matched transistors (I'm guessing most amps are push/pull designs)?

No and no. There is no magic way to make a good sound from component parameters or measurements alone. Better quality components usually help but do not make a high end out of a low end unit. There are some special cases when component quality is critical, but unless the rest of the design is up to scratch, just changing some or even all components for "better" is not necessarily helpful. Sometimes - yes, if the original component  is of a really poor quality. The amplifier I've designed in 1997 (the model I still use at home) has no special components, nothing was selected (and that would be impossible at $500 retail price point). Nevertheless the same reviewer I've quoted earlier did call it a "high end" amplifier in 1998, from the sound alone (there were no looks to speak of, frankly).

Cheers

Alex

[Alex Nikitin]

Exactly this (I have even seen reports with just medium priced violins, with the same outcome)
In fact there are even tests and papers were people were blindfolded to taste food.
They can easily fool you with fish that looks like steak and vice versa. No one can tell the difference. Sometimes even when people KNOW they are being tricked.

There are really billions of well described and repeated experiments how our senses fool us on a major scale.
Yet, people still don't want to believe it. Perfect way for the maqrketing departement to use these thing of course.
To mu surprise engineers even fall for it most of the time. It should be a fundamental part of the knowledge of an engineer to have a good sense about these concepts.Yet most engineers call it even "bogus and fake" science.
With all the best respect, but I think you should reframe your thoughts about science than, and go back to school to relearn a few things. Because it's a fundamental part how we humans even judge certain experiments.

Even being supported by sales; products that people think (= sound) better, are technically nnot always better. There is absolutely no correlation between that "good specs".
On the other there is (proven) a very good correlation about what people believe is better.


This is also why I don't go into much debate about it anymore. The data is all there, proven so many times over and over again. One single little subjective dubious personal experiment is not going to change that. Debating about the whole concept can be fun and interesting. People still saying, "yes, but my experience is difference and this is my poor proof", is not.

Finally what I don't understand is why it is so extremely difficult for most people to simply admit they choice certain things just because of subjective reasons. Almost like it's something bad, a heavy sin or something?

If I would believe in all that pseudo scientific crap, I would never manage to design a good sounding amplifier  .  IMHO the DBT method is fundamentally flawed in testing the subjective experience, and your numerous examples are just confirming it. Thousands of lemmings are happily using a wrong instrument to "prove" their concepts and then call it science  .

Cheers

Alex

[oldway]

Nevertheless the same reviewer I've quoted earlier did call it a "high end" amplifier in 1998, from the sound alone (there were no looks to speak of, frankly).

A subjective test of the type "I think it sound better" done by only one person has absolutely no statistical value.

These are obviously biased comments you make on your own project.

This is not modesty that suffocates you !!!

[Fungus]

If you can hear a difference of two amps (or any other technical gear in audio), you will measure the difference. If you cannot measure a difference, then there will be no difference and all your hearing was illusion.

Yep. The human ear is far inferior to the tools available.

If some "golden ears" can hear a difference then that difference can be measured, analyzed, quantified, and used in future designs.

For amplifiers it's even easier because they output something that can be measured directly by basic measuring instruments (electrons). Characterizing an amplifier, plotting curves vs. loads, etc., is easy to do.

Of course you need a decent power supply, etc., but with today's components there's no reason you can't build an "audiophile" amplifier for under $500.

At home I use a production amplifier that I've designed in 1996 (it was sold for about £300 retail then) without any changes and still happy with the sound it produces. I won't change it for any high-end amp.

Even Mr. Naysayer agrees on that point.

[b_force]

If I would believe in all that pseudo scientific crap, I would never manage to design a good sounding amplifier  .  IMHO the DBT method is fundamentally flawed in testing the subjective experience, and your numerous examples are just confirming it. Thousands of lemmings are happily using a wrong instrument to "prove" their concepts and then call it science  .

Cheers

Alex

Believe what you wanna believe, I base my opinion on scientific papers and data. Or are we just going to ignore everything?

I don't see any reason why a double blind test would be flawed? It's maybe not perfect, but it's at least a much better method to compare things objectivily.

But what I find mostly interesting in your argumentation, is that you don't believe in things were scientists objectivily try to find methods and correlations between things. But you do believe in people who are extremely heavily biased by so many things.
The fact that millions of people use something, is not prove it's technically a better product.
That can also be prove that marketing of that company is just extremely well done for example.

[Alex Nikitin]

Nevertheless the same reviewer I've quoted earlier did call it a "high end" amplifier in 1998, from the sound alone (there were no looks to speak of, frankly).

A subjective test of the type "I think it sound better" done by only one person has absolutely no statistical value.

These are obviously biased comments you make on your own project.

This is not modesty that suffocates you !!!

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Cheers

Alex

[Fungus]

And the balance setting, what is it for? 

To compensate for the position of the speakers in the room! eg. one might be further away from your comfy chair than the other.

If you need EQ your amp and speakers aren't good enough.

That is complete and utter bollocks.

Yep. Not everybody lives in a anechoic chamber.

I will politely disagree. One of my criteria of a good system that it should sound tonally balanced at any level. If you have a problem with the room you treat the room, EQ won't help. EQ is a band-aid for poor quality systems IMHO (OK, sometimes for poor quality recordings too).

Some people have spouses who don't allow them to stick big, misshaped pieces of foam to the living room ceiling.

Also: Some people have 'parties' on Saturday nights where they want to unbalance the sound output and recreate the ambience of a discotheque.

[Fungus]

Pros perform equalization of a sound setup when its installed in a space. The placement of speakers makes a dramatic difference in how they sound. So there is no such thing as a flat response.

Nooo, Alex can set up your HiFi for you before shipping!

[Alex Nikitin]

Believe what you wanna believe, I base my opinion on scientific papers and data. Or are we just going to ignore everything?

I don't see any reason why a double blind test would be flawed? It's maybe not perfect, but it's at least a much better method to compare things objectivily.

I see many reasons. The fact that this is the only method available for a stab at objectivity in these fields doesn't make it better than it is.

But what I find mostly interesting in your argumentation, is that you don't believe in things were scientists objectivily try to find methods and correlations between things.

I am one of these people who did try to find these methods and correlations and spent considerable amount of time and effort on that subject. I did not come to my current position lightly. However, as I've said, I had to change my views if I wanted to be productive in making good sounding equipment. I've learned a lot about what you can measure in an amplifier, for example, and the published measurements of my designs confirm it. Few amps measure better in most important respects at the price point. But I can easily change a component in an amplifier to a different value (with a measurable difference if you know what to measure, but nothing changes in measurements commonly used to qualify an amp's performance) and it won't be nice to listen too.

Cheers

Alex