Where do you stand on accuracy vs euphonics wrt amplification

[square_wave]

And thus my position that measurement is everything .....

Ps : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

I think you are missing the main point.

Measurements are the bedrock upon which good amplifiers are built upon. It is not everything.

If you believe it is everything, then just buy the best measuring amp.

 

[prem]

Spaace, since you are convinced that performance of an amp is purely based on its measurements, just go ahead and buy the Benchmark amp. I don’t think you’ll find any amp in that price range or even in a much higher price range beating it on measurements.

 

[spaace]

Gents, i am sorry if i came across as headstrong or arrogant.

I was simply trying to explain how i had understood it.

Raghu has kindly agreed to help me to learn how to listen. So i will be trying to do justice to his time.

Its just that until i get a satisfactory answer i keep asking why, like a bad record. No offence intended. I appreciate all of you spending your time to read and answer and trying to educate me of course. Thank you.

 

[prem]

Spaace, there is nothing wrong in going for an amp that measures fabulously. Just make sure that all the software you listen to is also mastered impeccably and your source can reproduce those masterings accurately. Else you will end up with an analytical sound which could border on edginess

 

[raghupb]

Gents, i am sorry if i came across as headstrong or arrogant.

I was simply trying to explain how i had understood it.

Raghu has kindly agreed to help me to learn how to listen. So i will be trying to do justice to his time.

Its just that until i get a satisfactory answer i keep asking why, like a bad record. No offence intended. I appreciate all of you spending your time to read and answer and trying to educate me of course. Thank you.

Well ...
I don't know if I can help anyone learn how to listen, that's very personal.
But will share my journey of how I got here.
There are certain things I try to listen or search for during assessment of a system.
For me, numbers and measurements are not the main criteria.
So one can say I am on the other side of the spectrum from where you are

In any case when you come home, hear out three very different sounding power amps.
I think the Outlaws and Parasound measure reasonably well (at least the relevant numbers).
AKSA, I don't have any documentation.
Give each of them a listen, all things being the same (viz., the rest of the chain).
You should get an idea even if they are not level matched or instantaneously swapped.
You will need about 5 mins of audio memory to accommodate for cable swap.

Cheers,
Raghu

 

[jls001]

Here is a mind-bogglingly good measuring amp. Details discussed in-depth here too.

And to reiterate what square_wave said above, to design any amp, first and foremost one needs a very good understanding of circuit theory and associated mathematics, good understanding of circuit layout especially with respect to keeping the ground clean, a good understanding of how component choices affect and voices the final sound, and the instruments to measure and confirm that the end product actually conforms to the design parameters. However, designers do the final tuning of the sound by listening with their ears.

Someone mentioned how pro audio guys decide based only on measurements and numbers. This is simply not true. They also have favoured cables, they like and choose to use particular mixers, and just like us, they speak in terms of sound being bright or mellow or balanced. And I'm talking about PA pros. Studio guys are even more finicky.

In my opinion, those who champion only measurements completely miss out on the subjective aspects of sound. In general, very good measuring amps more often than not tend to sound too clean. They are often guilty of throwing away harmonic overtones inherent in acoustic, and even electronic, instruments. They therefore sound very clean and focused yet incomplete.

 

[Hiten]

Here are some options.

former member cranky also makes quality amplifiers. Member Shaan too. Here is a Shaan design. Fourth Revision. It measures well and much appreciated by people in the know.

PeeCeeBee V4 GB!

Hello guys! A fresh new PeeCeeBee is here, the V4! In this thread group-buys for the printed circuit boards are arranged. It's a Lateral MOSFET based Class-AB amplifier with symmetrical "current feedback", evolved from from the diverse PeeCeeBee series, and now with excellent sonics coupled...

www.diyaudio.com

Regards

 

[mpw]

i looked up the meaning of euphonics..

yesterday heard a live performance by a group of amateur but well trained carnatic classical vocalists including the mridangam and the violin..the accompanying instruments..

this is a completely different experience hearing live music in your own living room where resides your mighty music system...

ultimately its is the ear that decides and yesterday the vocalists won hands down....IMO

i am all for going by the ear in case of purchase of home audio - measurements can take a walk..as long as the speakers are fed adequate power with good headroom for the transients.

( But in case of building your own stuff - then you will need good measuring tools and instruments that help you get the product right... )

PS : Post the program a few of the vocalists wanted to know how the turntable works and i had a chance to spin 1 side of a south indian classical carnatic music vinyl... thats for another time maybe..

regards

 

[Hiten]

Raghu is right. Short listening sessions are good for evaluating different sound. Also it is collective wisdom to listen to the music that you are familier with because that will be what you will be listening. I slightly have different view. one can listen to some unknown well recorded music too and see if that 'moves' you SQ wise. All good fun as there are no rules that it should be done only some particular way. Give it your unique thought process. Thats what this hobby is about.

hee hee and dont worry if god forbid that you buy an amp that is a little bit off from technical point of view. we have all been through this change in perspective as we move along.
All the best.

 

[raghupb]

Here are some options.

former member cranky also makes quality amplifiers. Member Shaan too. Here is a Shaan design. Fourth Revision. It measures well and much appreciated by people in the know.

PeeCeeBee V4 GB!

Hello guys! A fresh new PeeCeeBee is here, the V4! In this thread group-buys for the printed circuit boards are arranged. It's a Lateral MOSFET based Class-AB amplifier with symmetrical "current feedback", evolved from from the diverse PeeCeeBee series, and now with excellent sonics coupled...

www.diyaudio.com

Regards

And there is FM @Aniket's design detailed here ...
If you are open to DIY/Kit amp route.

Discrete Dynamics Class A/B Power & Pre-Amp - A New Star is Born

I have been owning Amp Camp Amp and Le Monstre Jean Hiraga for a few years now; after trying out multiple class AB and D amps. Till a few months ago I believed that nothing can come closer to class A amps in terms of musicality. The only amp that pleased me apart from the class A amps has been...

www.hifivision.com

Numbers look good on both versions.

Ping the forum; I'm sure both PeeCeeBee and DD amps are in some Bangalore FMs home.
Cheers,
Raghu

 

[square_wave]

What Prem said is a very loaded statement. If you want a very linear sounding music system, then everything including the music recording characteristics, room, all the gear in the chain, your expectations... all these need to be very linear as well. In almost all practical situations, this is not the case.

An example ( there are so many other use case scenarios as well....this is just one of problems );
There are so many product management / marketing related decisions that goes into the final voicing of a loudspeaker at differing price points keeping in mind the target demographic the product is aimed at. This means the speaker itself might not scale up linearly w.r.t expectations after a point. Product managers usually keep in mind the " typical amplifiers " that the user base will buy and " user expectations for that demographic ". There are tricks built into the speaker design to make it sound right for that user base. In some ways, the audio industry is just as dirty as any others out there. It is not a crime. It is the truth for all products out there. Speakers are not an exception. This means, that any speaker out there might sound better if you spend some time listening to some amps rather than going by some numbers you see in the product literature. Speakers are the least linear product in the audio chain hence synergy is the only solution. After a point, well informed horizontal moves will yield better results depending upon the speaker you own.

There are of course loudspeaker manufacturers who does not resort to such tricks, but they are a minority. Their line-up and target demographic is such that it allows them to do that.

 

[Enkay78]

Well, I may be a newbie with a very limited experience in Class A amps.....but at my age of 47 with my clinical background, I would rather bank on more modern amps like Class D Hypex (especially NC400). Read enough of these both objectively and subjectively to arrive to this rationale for the decision: less pricey, very less distortions, more dynamic range, more transparent......and more climate friendly


And later on when I want changes in SQ, I suppose change the speakers will be the dictum. So why not the Magnepan LRS.

(Somehow I balk at the boutique gears with the exhorbitant price. I mean I want to enjoy my music .....not my affordability for premium.)

Since I have less chance for auditions, I can only rely on these measurements and hope can trust the honesty of the selected manufacturers (off course after careful selection).

 

[spaace]

So i re-read the Carver experiment ensuring my bias towards measurements do not come into play and here are my conclusions .

What does the Carver experiment prove:

It disproves myths around materials and types of construction. You can get any type of sound from any type of construction provided its tuned accordingly. So gold wire, weight of your amp, quality of capacitor etc does not mean that is the only way to get a to a sound signature.

You can generate any type of sound by tweaking the signals appropriately.

It was a pure electrical experiment to establish you dont need to spend crazy amount of money on a sepcific type of material or construction to get a particular signature sound.

Yes Carver used the measurements to duplicate the electrical signals to achieve a certain sound. His only aim was to prove that he can duplicate the same sound without using any fancy construction or materials. That does not prove he knew how those signals interacted in our ear-brain.

So the end result in terms of euphonics of these signals, is not established in one way or another.

It does not prove that good measurement = euphonics
It does not prove that good measurement <> euphonics.

"Bob admits that he is not sure himself about the audible effects of some of the parameters he juggled to match the transfer functions of his amp to that of our reference"

How the signal or distortions create that subjective effect within our brain is a much larger topic and that is not established by the experiment.

 

[arj]

How the signal or distortions create that subjective effect within our brain is a much larger topic and that is not established by the experiment.

The effect of variation of amplitude has been studied and is different for each ear ..thats what I had referenced in my first post on the fletcher munson curves which have been taken further by several people.

If looking at only euphonics, sound creation in the head can be looked upon quite philosophically and yes one can be very very happy with music even with a decent headphone pair and a mobile as well

If you are looking at euphonic sound + accuracy and details then its a different ball game and which each of us are chasing with different endpoints and paths.

 

[Mi_10]

Everyone talks of accuracy in audio reproduction but no one really know what degree of accuracy was the music recorded in the first place ! we can only bring in subjective opinions like well-recorded, or well mastered vs bad recording. Nobody can tell what is the degree of badness that makes it bad or vice versa.

All reproduction systems are built around compromises. Some of them are known, others unknown, some of them noticeable by average ears, few unnoticeable even with golden ears!

Accuracy is for Audio, Harmony is for Music !
Audio is science , Music is Magic
Audio makes you think, Music makes you sink

Great, accurate and clinical systems can be easily acknowledged by many, But an Euphonic system always disappears behind the Music it plays.

For me it is always how the system sounds over how it measures up on a piece of paper

PS: I use the word system, because i don't believe in measuring equipments in silos

 

[liverpool_for_life]

Where do most people stand on this?

My stand: The two (accurate and euphonic) are not mutually exclusive. If you have an accurate baseline and don't like it, you can always season to taste.

 

[arj]

Everyone talks of accuracy in audio reproduction but no one really know what degree of accuracy was the music recorded in the first place ! we can only bring in subjective opinions like well-recorded, or well mastered vs bad recording. Nobody can tell what is the degree of badness that makes it bad or vice versa.

I would not say no one, but most of us would not., and I do agree with most of your post

Accuracy need not necessarily mean it sound exactly as it was recorded (since the recording engineer also does change the sound) , but sounds as "natural" - eg Amitabh or a Jagjit singh's voice or claptons guitar should sound exactly (almost) as it sounds.

Folks who are exposed to live music or studio recordings or a musicians themselves generally get it. People like me rely on the ears of others to guess the same.
Eg someone like a Prem or Asit in this forum would be people whose ears I would trust on this.

 

[jls001]

Transparency and accuracy are minefields in their own rights

Both do sound "scientific" and perhaps even "objective" but both falter on the same question: how do we know the reproduction is close or far from the original? Do we know the original (even the one on the recording) actually sounds?

 

[Enkay78]

Accuracy is for Audio, Harmony is for Music !
Audio is science , Music is Magic
Audio makes you think, Music makes you sink

Cannot disagree with this.

However I have one issue at a very personal and philosophical level: how can I be assured that those who have the 'golden ears' (and who are typically aged more than the middle age) have really golden ears and hears what they claim hears? How can I be assured that their cohorts are not resorting to a series of indoctrinated, conditioned conformational bias?

And how can I correlate with their subjective evidence to lined up with my subjective perception without a conformational bias of my own?

Music is highly subjective : that is proven beyond doubt. That's why we have all these genres and charts of different songs...and music styles - some with a universal appeal and some only sectoral.


So the issue is this: it's quite a tough job to accept any subjective reviews without a backup of measurable objective evidence to really assimilate his/her findings as it is at a personal level. The reviewers taste experience and even his/her hearing acuity may not line up with one's own 'experience/perception/taste'. So to simply rely on such reviews means a whole lot of permutations and combinations of a varied factors. (These can be bang on target even depending on an individual's mood ......heck forget about the mood of the reviewer's at the time of review)

Hence we have results in double blind test where even experienced listeners fails (now I am not saying these are be all end all)....we have ample amount of evidences which slays most of the audiophile myths and 'facts'.

Maybe we are still in the process of developing a more reliable test for the subjectivity of music.....but one can notice the culprit of conformational bias plays still a strong deterrent to evolve one. (And this is the big human factor).

So one suppose it's prudent that we go ahead with more evidence based suppositions .....to test what we experience. Even to ask do we really hear the difference? If there is difference what could measure it objectively? And if measurable, to document it.

Currently I am personally interested in finding : Do good amps really sound different with same sets of speakers? (With the null hypothesis that different speaker will sound different with same system and same speaker will sound similar with different systems)

 

[spaace]

Both do sound "scientific" and perhaps even "objective" but both falter on the same question: how do we know the reproduction is close or far from the original? Do we know the original (even the one on the recording) actually sounds?

I had a brief class in college that dealt with the exactly the question you posed ...

Idealism - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Belive me thats a rabbit hole you dont want to go into.

For this discussions lets assume that

"You cant rerecord the performance and therefore this is the only source you have."

The only practical question at hand is if the subjective effects can be attributed to the measurements we have ....

Since there are no amplifiers that are *rated* (not described), wrt depth or other euphonics, i guess there are no reliable measures of those.

I wonder why warm cant be measured though ...that is now understood as caused by the tube distortion and iam sure the quantity of that can be measured.

In any case, i do understand from the responses here that there are folks who extremely care and believe they can distinguish the euphonic qualities arising from amplification alone. Therefore for these folks these measurements are immaterial unless those euphonics can be demonstrably achieved.

I get it. Thank you. That was the question i had asked. I guess its been answered.