# Amplifier blind testing.



## aceinc

I was telling someone yesterday about a person who offered a sum of money to anyone who could tell the difference between two amplifiers when driven within their operating range, and no one was able to cash in.

Today I went looking for the article and couldn't find it. Can anyone provide any help in finding online references? Anything might help such as the person's name making the offer, a link, anything.

Paul


----------



## jinjuku

I believe this is it.


----------



## jinjuku

Here is a link to the Carver Challenge. Good read.


----------



## aceinc

Thnks for the links.

The first one was the one I was looking for, but I had previously read both articles, and the second article tends to contradict the first, though not directly.

Paul


----------



## flyng_fool

That's why I'm probably going with Emotiva amps. They produce prodigious amounts of good, clean power and use quality components. The audiophiles snobs can keep their overpriced gear. The only downside I can see of buying an ultra-cheap amp is that use ultra-cheap components. At least with Emo I know i'm getting a good high quality, high value amp.


----------



## aceinc

I have EMO amps, two XPA-2 and one XPA-3. They work well. The only issue I have is they are not great for driving difficult speakers.

I have a pair of Carver AL-III+ speakers that have a nasty impedance curve. The XPA-2 AMP goes into self preservation mode when I drive these at high volume. A similarly inefficient pair KEF 105.4s do not upset the amp at all.

One of these days, I may try a pair of Red Dragon class D amps.

Paul


----------



## jinjuku

Try a pro audio amp like the Crown XLS Drive core. They will drive the ALIII. Cost $299.

I have a a Parasound HCA 1000A and XLS 402d. Been driving my Statements with the Crown instead of the Parasound and couldn't be happier.


----------



## JoeESP9

One of the things you pay for and get with the "high priced spread" is the ability to drive any load imaginable. Try driving some Apogees with the bargain "spread". Compared to Apogee's, Carver ALIII's are a walk in the park. Some of the older Infinity models with the Watkins woofers are almost as bad with weird phase angles and an impedance that drops to 1 Ohm. The real deal is, those difficult loads sound really good. 

Before you reject high end amplifiers you should listen to one for a couple of days. It's possible you may be surprised. If you're not you've lost nothing and gained some knowledge. Any response that says you can tell without listening is like saying Great Western Champagne tastes as good as Mums Extra Dry without tasting the Mums.


----------



## jinjuku

JoeESP9 said:


> One of the things you pay for and get with the "high priced spread" is the ability to drive any load imaginable. Try driving some Apogees with the bargain "spread". Compared to Apogee's, Carver ALIII's are a walk in the park. Some of the older Infinity models with the Watkins woofers are almost as bad with weird phase angles and an impedance that drops to 1 Ohm. The real deal is, those difficult loads sound really good.
> 
> Before you reject high end amplifiers you should listen to one for a couple of days. It's possible you may be surprised. If you're not you've lost nothing and gained some knowledge. Any response that says you can tell without listening is like saying Great Western Champagne tastes as good as Mums Extra Dry without tasting the Mums.


Just because an amp is 'high spread' (does that mean high price?) vs 'bargain spread' doesn't actually mean ANYTHING. It definitely doesn't mean what you allude to. Just another blanket statement.

If you know the load characteristics simply buy an amp that will meet those specs. It isn't rocket science and it doesn't have to cost an arm and a leg. The XTi Drive Core will drive the AL III's with no problem and do it with fidelity while being a 'bargain spread'(?).

Crown MacroTech will drive Apogees no problem. They won't cost you too much either.


----------



## JoeESP9

Have you ever listened to a Levinson, Krell, Audio Research or other high end amplifier at length or at all? If you haven't you should just say so. I merely suggested you or anyone else might find it educational to do so. 

Apparently you know everything there is to know about amplifiers. I used to think I did too. Of course, I was designing electronics for a living so I had a reason to think so. As I've gotten older I've learned I don't know everything. Now that I'm retired I'm constantly amazed by finding out some of what I thought I always knew isn't necessarily so.

Incidentally, my specialty was low signal low noise differential amplifiers with an emphasis on extremely high CMRR. I designed fully regulated power supplies for fun.


----------



## Almadacr

JoeESP9 said:


> Have you ever listened to a Levinson, Krell, Audio Research or other high end amplifier at length or at all? If you haven't you should just say so. I merely suggested you or anyone else might find it educational to do so.
> 
> Apparently you know everything there is to know about amplifiers. I used to think I did too. Of course, I was designing electronics for a living so I had a reason to think so. As I've gotten older I've learned I don't know everything. Now that I'm retired I'm constantly amazed by finding out some of what I thought I always knew isn't necessarily so.
> 
> Incidentally, my specialty was low signal low noise differential amplifiers with an emphasis on extremely high CMRR. I designed fully regulated power supplies for fun.


I could agree and disagree with you , but let`s keep it simple . We all know that amps have a long longevity since there aren`t any moving parts ( we all agree with this ) , now i heard a Classe driving Totem staff and the same Staff being driven by a Emotiva XPA-2 , the receiver was a NAD T761 on both , did i heard a difference .... nope , there is a 4000$ difference between both .

Now if you think economics normally us , consumers are changing our habits and ideas , some of us will keep our 2 channel stereos driven and some of us will upgrade to a more HT environment witch comes to play 5 Channels amp`s . For under 1000$ you can have a channel amp like Emotiva or Outlaw , would you spend 10 000$ in 1 amp that you would`t listen to any difference at all ???

Like i saw to a lot of ppl if you have the money , hey go nuts .


----------



## jinjuku

JoeESP9 said:


> Have you ever listened to a Levinson, Krell, Audio Research or other high end amplifier at length or at all? If you haven't you should just say so. I merely suggested you or anyone else might find it educational to do so.
> 
> Apparently you know everything there is to know about amplifiers. I used to think I did too. Of course, I was designing electronics for a living so I had a reason to think so. As I've gotten older I've learned I don't know everything. Now that I'm retired I'm constantly amazed by finding out some of what I thought I always knew isn't necessarily so.
> 
> Incidentally, my specialty was low signal low noise differential amplifiers with an emphasis on extremely high CMRR. I designed fully regulated power supplies for fun.


Let me know if Bryston and Classe count:rolleyesno:

You still haven't poked a hole in the point I'm trying to make. So the question that begs to be answered:

Do you think an amp like a MacroTech is going to have:

1. Problems with phase angles and low impedance loads
2. A low fidelity solution (they sure don't sell it that way)

And to turn your question around: Have you ever heard a Macrotech or MacroReference? How about a QSC PLX?

There is a thread at Stereophile where a poster is driving some Apoggee's with a Crown XLS802d vs his Krell and could only get the 802d to go into protect mode under circumstances that you really couldn't be in the same room because of the volume.

Another guy at AVS put a Peavy IPR in his rack and liked it better than his Bryston, but not as much as his Pass Labs (at more than 10X the price).

And you are 100% right, you learn something every day in this hobby.

BTW I have a standing offer to any one out there: If you believe you can hear the difference between a pro-audio and consumer class amp you are welcome to come over stone cold and evaluate a Parasound HCA 1000A and Crown XLS402d. Ears only on my Statements (no one is going to argue they aren't high-fidelity, highly revealing) with the levels matched. If you can pick the Audiophile amp 9 out of 10 flips of the coin you can walk out the door with the Audiophile amp.


----------



## JoeESP9

Guy's like you always go off half cocked. I would suggest you first read my signature. If you feel really energetic you could read a thread I started here about Crown XLS series amps. You would also read that I not only own 2 (signature) but I recommended them. I also participated in the thread on the Stereophile site where Buddha first mentioned the XLS series. 

You still haven't answered my question about listening to any high end amplifiers. Since you brought them up I'll include Classe and Bryston. I was excluding no amplifier made by anyone.

Yes, I think that DBT has some flaws. That wasn't the point of my post. Discussing DBT always leaves two armed and opposed camps. If the guy at AVS can like one amp over another why can't you, I or anyone else? That's why I asked my original question (which you still haven't answered). Liking one amp over another would seem to indicate there is some sort of difference. I'm only suggesting people other than one person at AVS (you brought up) do the same sort of investigating. As I said earlier, "You might find the results quite interesting".

Sure I like some amplifiers more than others. I like my highly modified MKIII's better than anything I've heard except for a pair of 120 Watt mono Wavac SET's. My MKIII's have only the transformers in common with the originals. Everything else is custom including the chassis'. I also like my modified Hafler's and Adcom's. The major modification to them being fully regulated power supplies.

As for your challenge; 
Do you have a preference for one over the other?
If so, which one and why?
If not, why have both and why offer the challenge?

IMO the problem with such challenges is that the tester isn't familiar with the system. If you'd like, you can bring both amps to my house. I'm willing to give your challenge a try in my dedicated treated room with a system (mine) I'm very familiar with. Some of my friends bring their amps and receivers over for exactly the same reasons. Most of the receiver owners have subsequently gotten rid of them, the exception being a Magnum Dynalab.


----------



## jinjuku

JoeESP9 said:


> Guy's like you always go off half cocked. I would suggest you first read my signature. If you feel really energetic you could read a thread I started here about Crown XLS series amps. You would also read that I not only own 2 (signature) but I recommended them. I also participated in the thread on the Stereophile site where Buddha first mentioned the XLS series.


When did figuring out the load your speaker represents and then finding a quality, cost effective, fidelity solution become half cocked. I saw your signature... It doesn't have anything to do with the price of tea in China. I am still waiting for an answer WHY the poster couldn't use an XLS Drive Core (that is 2 ohm stable) use it to drive his AL III's? Your only response to date was to go off on a tangent about high cost amplification.



JoeESP9 said:


> You still haven't answered my question about listening to any high end amplifiers. Since you brought them up I'll include Classe and Bryston. I was excluding no amplifier made by anyone.


I have had time on Classe and Bryston (my local AV dealer carries Classe and I have had a demo unit in house). I'll say what I have always said: SQ is in the speakers.



JoeESP9 said:


> Yes, I think that DBT has some flaws. That wasn't the point of my post. Discussing DBT always leaves two armed and opposed camps. If the guy at AVS can like one amp over another why can't you, I or anyone else?


But I DO like one amp over the other. My XLS vs my HCA 1000A. The 1000A simply doesn't have the power reserves. 



JoeESP9 said:


> That's why I asked my original question (which you still haven't answered). Liking one amp over another would seem to indicate there is some sort of difference. I'm only suggesting people other than one person at AVS (you brought up) do the same sort of investigating. As I said earlier, "You might find the results quite interesting".


What I have found interesting over the past 20+ years and obviously limited by what I have had ears on is that too many people get wrapped around the amplifier axle. Doesn't matter that I have had $7K worth of amp sitting in front of me there just hasn't been that night and day difference. If I have to live with something for 30/60/90 or more days just to discern a difference, then most likely that difference is in my head. My preference is simply pile as much $$ into the speakers as possible. 



JoeESP9 said:


> Sure I like some amplifiers more than others. I like my highly modified MKIII's better than anything I've heard except for a pair of 120 Watt mono Wavac SET's. My MKIII's have only the transformers in common with the originals. Everything else is custom including the chassis'. I also like my modified Hafler's and Adcom's. The major modification to them being fully regulated power supplies.


If I need any EQ I will just put one in the chain. Which is what we are talking about with amplifier roulette IMO (don't be offended please). I agree with you on the regulated supply. I have one driving my computer with pro audio sound card going directly to the Crown. No pre-amp to get in the way. 

What I would tell the poster with the AL III's is go to guitar center, pick up a Crown XLS Drive Core 1000. They have a return policy... Try it out.


----------



## JoeESP9

Almadacr said:


> I could agree and disagree with you , but let`s keep it simple . We all know that amps have a long longevity since there aren`t any moving parts ( we all agree with this ) , now i heard a Classe driving Totem staff and the same Staff being driven by a Emotiva XPA-2 , the receiver was a NAD T761 on both , did i heard a difference .... nope , there is a 4000$ difference between both .
> 
> Now if you think economics normally us , consumers are changing our habits and ideas , some of us will keep our 2 channel stereos driven and some of us will upgrade to a more HT environment witch comes to play 5 Channels amp`s . For under 1000$ you can have a channel amp like Emotiva or Outlaw , would you spend 10 000$ in 1 amp that you would`t listen to any difference at all ???
> 
> Like i saw to a lot of ppl if you have the money , hey go nuts .


I suspect that using something other than an AV receivers front end to compare amplifiers would have yielded different results. I've never heard or heard of any AV receiver doing two channel stereo justice. Try the same comparison with a dedicated two channel preamp. This is not meant to "put down" any amplifier. IMO Emotiva is a very good buy. They have good sound and looks at very good prices. I've been thinking of buying their XDA-1 DAC. Whereas current Classe amps leave me cold, I do however like their older Class A amps.


----------



## jinjuku

JoeESP9 said:


> As for your challenge;
> Do you have a preference for one over the other?
> If so, which one and why?
> If not, why have both and why offer the challenge?
> 
> IMO the problem with such challenges is that the tester isn't familiar with the system. If you'd like, you can bring both amps to my house. I'm willing to give your challenge a try in my dedicated treated room with a system (mine) I'm very familiar with. Some of my friends bring their amps and receivers over for exactly the same reasons. Most of the receiver owners have subsequently gotten rid of them, the exception being a Magnum Dynalab.


Yes, I have a preference for the Crown
I like the Crown because it has more power reserves. The Parasound simply runs out of gas where the Crown still has ~3-4 dB before clipping. That matters especially on some of my classical music. 

IMO the problem is NOT one of familiarity of setup. The problem is the audiophile that has a blanket opinion that something like a Crown (pro audio) will not sound as good as a Parasound (audiophile grade). If that is the case then it shouldn't matter if they use my setup. They are NOT evaluating speakers, they are evaluating Amps. It's simply a mechanism to push them off that particular horse. 

If someone posits that pro audio amps simply do not have the fidelity of audiophile amplification then it can safely be deduced that the only thing you are really evaluating is amplification. The usual argument will be to debate the rest of the chain. Which IMO isn't debatable in my setup: it's a PC with a regulated DC power supply (it can't be argued that the PC is a noisy environment at this point, because I can PROVE it is not), E-MU 1212M sound card (you can't argue that it's a low quality sound card), There is no Pre to even debate/argue about, then the amplification.

The Statements aren't even up for discussion about SQ/Fidelity/Transparency/Resolution etc...


----------



## JoeESP9

jinjuku said:


> When did figuring out the load your speaker represents and then finding a quality, cost effective, fidelity solution become half cocked. I saw your signature... It doesn't have anything to do with the price of tea in China. I am still waiting for an answer WHY the poster couldn't use an XLS Drive Core (that is 2 ohm stable) use it to drive his AL III's? Your only response to date was to go off on a tangent about high cost amplification.
> 
> 
> 
> I have had time on Classe and Bryston (my local AV dealer carries Classe and I have had a demo unit in house). I'll say what I have always said: SQ is in the speakers.
> 
> 
> 
> But I DO like one amp over the other. My XLS vs my HCA 1000A. The 1000A simply doesn't have the power reserves.
> 
> 
> 
> What I have found interesting over the past 20+ years and obviously limited by what I have had ears on is that too many people get wrapped around the amplifier axle. Doesn't matter that I have had $7K worth of amp sitting in front of me there just hasn't been that night and day difference. If I have to live with something for 30/60/90 or more days just to discern a difference, then most likely that difference is in my head. My preference is simply pile as much $$ into the speakers as possible.
> 
> 
> 
> If I need any EQ I will just put one in the chain. Which is what we are talking about with amplifier roulette IMO (don't be offended please). I agree with you on the regulated supply. I have one driving my computer with pro audio sound card going directly to the Crown. No pre-amp to get in the way.
> 
> What I would tell the poster with the AL III's is go to guitar center, pick up a Crown XLS Drive Core 1000. They have a return policy... Try it out.


Even though my only real comment to the OP was to listen for yourself it's taken you this long to agree. 

I don't use need or have any kind of EQ (I do use a Behringer DSP1124P, it's used only in the feed to my sub woofers from 85Hz down). If you're suggesting that tube amps have EQ built in that would apply to many if not all SET's. My tubed mono blocks are not SET's.

I don't understand what the regulated power supplies in my power amps have to do with the one in your computer it's sound card or a preamp. Other than voltage regulation there is a world of difference. 

As far as speakers are concerned; My entire system is built around my speakers. I value midrange clarity and purity over everything else. Electrostatics IMO do midrange better than any other type of speaker. Sure, they cant play loud unless you make them large. Yes they tend not to do bass. 

Well, the radiating area of my esl's is roughly the same as ML CLS2's. They only operate above 85Hz so they can play quite loud. My system with the Behringer connected to two 12" TL sub woofers is EQ'd flat to ~18Hz. I have measured (Rat Shack meter) +106db peaks at 10 feet in my listening room. I know it was louder but that's as high as my meter reads.


----------



## JoeESP9

jinjuku said:


> Yes, I have a preference for the Crown
> I like the Crown because it has more power reserves. The Parasound simply runs out of gas where the Crown still has ~3-4 dB before clipping. That matters especially on some of my classical music.
> 
> IMO the problem is NOT one of familiarity of setup. The problem is the audiophile that has a blanket opinion that something like a Crown (pro audio) will not sound as good as a Parasound (audiophile grade). If that is the case then it shouldn't matter if they use my setup. They are NOT evaluating speakers, they are evaluating Amps. It's simply a mechanism to push them off that particular horse.
> 
> If someone posits that pro audio amps simply do not have the fidelity of audiophile amplification then it can safely be deduced that the only thing you are really evaluating is amplification. The usual argument will be to debate the rest of the chain. Which IMO isn't debatable in my setup: it's a PC with a regulated DC power supply (it can't be argued that the PC is a noisy environment at this point, because I can PROVE it is not), E-MU 1212M sound card (you can't argue that it's a low quality sound card), There is no Pre to even debate/argue about, then the amplification.
> 
> The Statements aren't even up for discussion about SQ/Fidelity/Transparency/Resolution etc...


Sorry, but the speakers are the deal maker or breaker. I may not like your speakers and you may not like mine. That makes any kind of fair comparison impossible. Speakers that don't sound good to me make it impossible to listen to closely enough to hear anything let alone what may or may not be small differences. 

Let me put it this way. If it's in a box or has a horn I'm not interested in listening.

You're being awfully defensive about things that I never brought up. I never said any amp sounded better than any other. All I said was comparing them could be interesting. If you're defending your choice of amplifier it's not necessary.

Other than voltage regulation a computer's power supply has little resemblance to a fully regulated power supply for an amplifier. The two major differences being the computer has a switching supply and high current delivery is not an issue.


----------



## jinjuku

JoeESP9 said:


> As far as speakers are concerned; My entire system is built around my speakers. I value midrange clarity and purity over everything else. Electrostatics IMO do midrange better than any other type of speaker. Sure, they cant play loud unless you make them large. Yes they tend not to do bass.


And I wanted a minimal system for 2.0 with good imaging and solid bottom end. It's all about needs assessment and compromises will be made. Just nature of the beast. At some point we all just need to sit back and enjoy. I'm done chasing my tail for awhile


----------



## jinjuku

JoeESP9 said:


> Sorry, but the speakers are the deal maker or breaker. I may not like your speakers and you may not like mine. That makes any kind of fair comparison impossible. Speakers that don't sound good to me make it impossible to listen to closely enough to hear anything let alone what may or may not be small differences.
> 
> Let me put it this way. If it's in a box or has a horn I'm not interested in listening.


It depends on where you are coming from. If you aren't in the camp we have been discussing then no sweat. I generally put it out there for the people that are adamant about pro vs audiophile type amplification. I don't have any time on tube gear so I don't comment on tubed gear.


----------



## JoeESP9

jinjuku said:


> It depends on where you are coming from. If you aren't in the camp we have been discussing then no sweat. I generally put it out there for the people that are adamant about pro vs audiophile type amplification. I don't have any time on tube gear so I don't comment on tubed gear.


If you had taken the time to actually read what I've posted or read my signature you could have spared yourself and me a lot of typing. I don't care who makes it or where it's made. I use two Crown XLS402's because they provide plenty of clean good sounding inexpensive power (900 Watts @ 8 Ohms bridged) for my subs. I bought them on Buddha's (Stereophile thread) recommendation. I use my tubed mono blocks to drive mt esl's because tubes and electrostatic speakers are (IMO) a match made in heaven. 

For me it's about the results. That's why I'm thinking of trying Class D Audio's SDS-258 amplifier on my esl's. I've heard that they have a "tube like" sound. The less than $600 price for a 250WPC @ 8 Ohms amplifier with balanced inputs is a bargain. Although I have two Crown XLS series amps and am very happy with them I haven't heard as many good things about their Class D replacements.

I admit I have my eye's and wallet aimed at a pair of 120 tubed mono blocks. They are however three times the price of the Class D Audio.


----------



## phreak

It's been a good read and I thank both of you, I learned a little from both sides. It seemed like a long winded argument where the end result was that there really wasn't much to argue about, just a matter of pinpointing exactly what the other guys point of view is. I think I can summarize the thread with:
Expensive audiophile amps are far superior to cost effective pro amps, so much so that you MIGHT actually hear a difference.


----------



## tesseract

While I share your point of view about amplifiers, and am a huge Hafler/Acoustat fan...



JoeESP9 said:


> Sorry, but the speakers are the deal maker or breaker. I may not like your speakers and you may not like mine. That makes any kind of fair comparison impossible. Speakers that don't sound good to me make it impossible to listen to closely enough to hear anything let alone what may or may not be small differences.
> 
> Let me put it this way. If it's in a box or has a horn I'm not interested in listening.


You might find yourself surprised at the latest turn of events. There are box/horn bipole speakers whose goal is to mimic the reverberant field electrostatic dipoles give, while minimizing the power compression that electrostats are prone too. They are generally driven with tube amplifiers. 

There are also dynamic transducer dipoles with waveguides/horns.


----------



## JoeESP9

I'm aware of the latest "turn of events". I've heard of breakthroughs with horns and boxes ever since I switched to panels in 1976. Unfortunately those breakthrough's have never lived up to the hype. With esl's using big panels and removing the task of producing bass negates most of the power compression problems. If that's your major complaint use sub woofers like I do. I've heard all manner of open baffle and bipolar speakers. The only horns I can listen to for any amount of time are the Avant Garde Trio's. No other horn loaded speaker I've ever heard comes close to them. Most horns make my ears hurt and give me a headache. Even so none of them, horn, open baffle, bipolar or the standard "monkey coffin" come close to the transparent mid range that all esl's have. 

Mid range clarity and purity are the most important part of musical reproduction to me. I'm willing to put up with very slight power compression for that mid range. Besides, Acoustats will play louder than most other esl's. I easily see +106dB peaks (plenty loud for me) in my sweet spot ~10' from my speakers. I know they'll go louder. That's the maximum my SPL meter reads. 


IMO: 
Crisp clean highs mean treble that makes me want to cut off my ears and run away.
Clear mid range means I feel like slapping the vocalist and telling him/her to back up.
Punchy bass almost always means thumpy bloated one note bass. 

They are all descriptions usually used to describe box and horn speakers.

phreak:
I almost agree with your summation.
Expensive audiophile amps can be superior to pro amp's. Some are some aren't. Some pro amps are very good some are just okay. Some audiophile and some pro amps suck big time. I recommend staying away from Pile (Pyle).

The new Class D Crown XLS series amplifiers don't seem to be getting reviews as good as the models they replaced.


----------



## tesseract

"Being aware" is not the same as listening. Progress has been made.

I have heard the Trio and the Duo, unfortunately they are not constant directivity designs and the driver spacing creates problems. The latest constant directivity designs are superior to the Avantgardes horns, objectively and subjectively. 

IMO the best midrange does indeed come from electrostats, as long as room can be made for them (often, it cannot) and you feed them tons of power. Not everyone can accommodate the care and feeding of dipoles.


----------



## GranteedEV

> With esl's using big panels and removing the task of producing bass negates most of the power compression problems.


Such speakers have issues maintaining stable vertical image in the upper midrange, lower treble, and especially upper treble. All speakers have their tradeoffs.

You've heard a Nao Note? An Orion? An AudioKinesis Planetarium Beta? A Nola Metro Reference? A Philharmonic? Jim Holtz' Statements? Revel Salon2? Pioneer S1-EX? JBL Synthesis? None of these sounded reasonably correct to you?

I guess if visually not seeing an electrostat is enough to bias you against a loudspeaker design, it's pretty understandable that none of these ""sound"" good to you. When I see a tube amp I get pretty biased agianst it too, although i can admit tubes can sound just as transparent as solid state.



> The only horns I can listen to for any amount of time are the Avant Garde Trio's. No other horn loaded speaker I've ever heard comes close to them. Most horns make my ears hurt and give me a headache.


What you're confusing "horns" with, is the sound of poorly matched drivers, high diffraction slots, and narrow directivity (along with a lack of directivity control in the crossover)

Now the soundstage of narrow directivity can be changed, by toeing horns in in front of you. Guys like Wayne Parham and Earl Geddes have shown this to be factual. Horns aimed straight at you will sound too "intimate", whereas aiming them in front of you will give "bowling alley depth".

The fatigue you describe, or the sound of diffraction, requires more careful work. the avant gardes you describe appear to be low diffraction horns. Many modern low diffraction horns are extremely transparent. In fact many modern horns don't strive to boost sensitivity (unlike older horns IE La Scala) - the goal of many of today's horns is to have a smooth wavefront so that the sound is guided with _minimal_ diffraction, whereas older horns used diffraction to make themselves louder.

As for drivers, it appears that more flat diaphrams, with phase plugs, tend to work best in horns - which limits us to ring radiators and compression drivers. There's some really good compression drivers out there, from companies like Beyma, B&C, JBL Synthesis, and TAD.



> Even so none of them, horn, open baffle, bipolar or the standard "monkey coffin" come close to the transparent mid range that all esl's have.


I beg to differ. ESLs can sound good but have their problems, one of which is that you need your head in a vice. There's speakers out there that sound equal or even better than ESLs (IMO), and you can sit where you feel like. 

Either way, it's all preferences, but I get a strong feeling that you've formed a preconception "If it's not electrostat, it's no good" that seems to be biasing your openness.


----------



## JoeESP9

After being involved in this "hobby" since 1967 and having listened to and tried everything I could along the way I'm entitled to have a bias about what I want to hear and don't want to hear. Frankly, I'm tired of others telling me what I should or shouldn't listen to, or what I should or shouldn't hear.

With tall panels a stable vertical image is not now nor has it ever been a problem, What may be a problem is the vertical venetian blind effect. That is a horizontally related problem and relates to the "head in a vise" effect. For my purposes I listen to music sitting down. I'm not interested in moving around, doing household chores or any of the myriad of things today's multitasking person does while ostensibly listening to music.

Let me say this again, "For me nothing else gets the mid range right". Seamless crossover free sound from 85Hz up is what I want and have.

Please don't make assumptions about me confusing horns with poorly matched drivers. I know the difference and don't like either. 

I never mentioned fatigue. Unless I'm mistaken, inducing fatigue requires time. It requires no time for me to not like the sound of a horn. I don't like Bose 901's either. They also require no time for to to recognize them. The speakers that I like the least need very little if any time for me to not like them. So obviously it's not fatigue.

I've cast no aspersions on any else's choice of transducer. Why do you or anyone else feel it necessary to try and browbeat me into liking what you like. I told jinjuku I probably wouldn't like his speakers and vice versa. That applies to you too. 

However, I'm not rude enough to question another persons choice. Were I a "newbie" asking for advice your comments would have been welcomed. Since I'm not and have never indicated that I was a "newbie" or that I was soliciting advice your condescending browbeating is neither desired or needed.


----------



## JoeESP9

tesseract said:


> "Being aware" is not the same as listening. Progress has been made.
> 
> I have heard the Trio and the Duo, unfortunately they are not constant directivity designs and the driver spacing creates problems. The latest constant directivity designs are superior to the Avantgardes horns, objectively and subjectively.
> 
> IMO the best midrange does indeed come from electrostats, as long as room can be made for them (often, it cannot) and you feed them tons of power. Not everyone can accommodate the care and feeding of dipoles.


Within a 175 mile radius of Philadelphia (where I live) there are plenty of B&M stores that sell a large variety of gear. That area includes NYC, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore and Washington DC. Two of my audio buddies and myself regularly take a weekend and go to NYC (for example) just to listen, drool on and put fingerprints on the latest and greatest. So, yes, I do get out there and listen to what's available. That's what I mean by being aware.

I already stated in another post "I listen to music sitting down" so constant directivity isn't as important to me as someone who can't sit still. 

I have a dedicated acoustically treated room. Currently my front main esl's are being fed 450 SS Watts each. This will soon change to 120 Watts of tube power each. My trusty modified Dyna MKIII's are getting long in the tooth and are marginal in terms of power. So, I've retired them.


----------



## jinjuku

JoeESP9 said:


> After being involved in this "hobby" since 1967 and having listened to and tried everything I could along the way I'm entitled to have a bias about what I want to hear and don't want to hear. Frankly, I'm tired of others telling me what I should or shouldn't listen to, or what I should or shouldn't hear..


That is the hubris of being in this hobby so long: You aren't being told anything of any sort. You aren't even being asked to do anything outside of listen without visual clue's. 

If you have learned everything you want to learn, believe you have learned, that there is nothing else to learn...


----------



## tesseract

JoeESP9 said:


> Within a 175 mile radius of Philadelphia (where I live) there are plenty of B&M stores that sell a large variety of gear. That area includes NYC, Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore and Washington DC. Two of my audio buddies and myself regularly take a weekend and go to NYC (for example) just to listen, drool on and put fingerprints on the latest and greatest. So, yes, I do get out there and listen to what's available. That's what I mean by being aware.
> 
> I already stated in another post "I listen to music sitting down" so constant directivity isn't as important to me as someone who can't sit still.
> 
> I have a dedicated acoustically treated room. Currently my front main esl's are being fed 450 SS Watts each. This will soon change to 120 Watts of tube power each. My trusty modified Dyna MKIII's are getting long in the tooth and are marginal in terms of power. So, I've retired them.


Advances have been made, but mostly by small entrepreneurs. The latest and greatest designs that I am referring to won't be found in a B&M store, although the bipole horn speakers were created by a SoundLAB dealer. Funny that a bipole horn speaker is voiced like a dipole electrostat, no? Room treatments need not apply, accurate speakers work with the room, not against it. Bonus points for a wide enough sweet spot to share the music with others. 

This thread is titled "Amplifier blind testing", but speaker blind testing really turns peoples perceptions upside down, and would be a more educational endeavor. It is rare that someone can actually perform one, I certainly haven't been able to.


----------



## phreak

JoeESP9 said:


> I'm entitled to have a bias about what I want to hear and don't want to hear.


Excellent! The only bias I can approve of is one that is admitted. I have my own bias on a number of subjects. In fact I rarely claim to have an unbiased opinion on anything. On the subject at hand I have only once taken the opportunity to audition a speaker pair that did not come in a box. I didn't like it. At all. I prefer the sound of the Monitor 11. I also prefer the 10k extra staying in my account (who are we kidding...off my debt load). But hey I admit my bias and acknowledge that this is my preference. And if someone invites me over for dinner and a movie with a couple big panels 5 feet from the wall my first thought won't be "Uh-Oh". It will be "Excellent...no tv speakers"


----------



## Andre

I know this is probably the wrong thread for this but there seems to be alot of knowledged people reading this one. I have wondered for a while about amplifiers in recievers and reading their specs. It makes sence to me that I would want to see XXXwatts 20hz-20khz into Xohms with no more then X% THD at rated power All channels driven. However, this is never the case, you will see this on they high end amplifiers you folks are talking about but never those that the poor unwashed massed can afford. Is there a way (without buy test equipment) that one can translate the specs they give you into the optimal above? Or is it that it just doesn't matter. As an example:

Reciever A: 100watts @1khz into 4ohms 2 channels driven. If you drove all 7 channels with a 4 ohm nominal (dipping perhaps down to 2 at times) speaker at full range, what can you expect for output? 50watts? Would all the channels be the same? Would they all cope with load the same?

Sorry again if I should have started a new thread.


----------



## tesseract

Andre said:


> As an example:
> 
> Reciever A: 100watts @1khz into 4ohms 2 channels driven. If you drove all 7 channels with a 4 ohm nominal (dipping perhaps down to 2 at times) speaker at full range, what can you expect for output?


If you are lucky, it'll pop a fuse. If not... probably a plume of smoke? :explode:


----------



## Andre

Perhaps anothe example:

In the Onkyo spec for the NR709, each individual section (Front, Centre, Rear...etc) is given a sparate spec each of which includes the phrase "2 channels driven". Does this mean that each section can be driven at that rated power into 2 channels? Wouldn't that mean that each section has its own power supply?

Next spec, the power output listed for 8ohms is 20hz-20khz @ 0.08 THD, however when you drop to 6ohms the power increases but the measurements are now at 1kz @0.1THD, and the minimum speaker impedance is said to be 4ohms. Soooooo:

We hook up this receiver to a complete 7 channel system where all the speakers are rated at 4ohms. How much power would you get out of the receiver at full range before it clips or the THD becomes audible? I am thinking it will be Much less then what it was rated at under 8ohms.


----------



## tesseract

Andre said:


> Perhaps anothe example:
> 
> In the Onkyo spec for the NR709, each individual section (Front, Centre, Rear...etc) is given a sparate spec each of which includes the phrase "2 channels driven". Does this mean that each section can be driven at that rated power into 2 channels?


Yes.



> Wouldn't that mean that each section has its own power supply?


Unlikely. It means that the power supply is taxed only by 2 channels and has more available juice.



> Next spec, the power output listed for 8ohms is 20hz-20khz @ 0.08 THD, however when you drop to 6ohms the power increases but the measurements are now at 1kz @0.1THD, and the minimum speaker impedance is said to be 4ohms. Soooooo:
> 
> 
> We hook up this receiver to a complete 7 channel system where all the speakers are rated at 4ohms. How much power would you get out of the receiver at full range before it clips or the THD becomes audible? I am thinking it will be Much less then what it was rated at under 8ohms.


It should increase at least a little bit into a 4 ohm load, I don't see a rating for 4 ohms, though. Is the receiver getting hot? If not, you should be fine.


----------



## JoeESP9

With the gear I've been buying the last 15 years and the gear I anticipate buying in the future, distortion specs are the farthest thing from my mind. Everything I'm interested in has wide bandwidth (20Hz to 20KHz or wider) and acceptably (to me) low enough distortion and noise figures. Were I looking for bargain basement gear or an HT receiver I would probably pay more attention to specs. 

For example, the two Crown amplifiers I bought were bought because they had the amount of output I was looking for and someone's (I value his opinion) recommendation. The 120 tubed mono blocks I have my eye on have the amount of output power I'm looking for and I like the circuit design. IMO tube amps lend themselves to elegant design, schematic wise.

The life span I can expect from a given device is more important to me than noise and distortion specs. I don't ignore noise and distortion figures. Any competently designed piece of gear should have low enough noise and distortion. Of course some of this depends on the gear it's connected to. If I were using very high efficiency horns the signal to noise ratio of my preamp and power amp/s would be more important than it is now. The signal to noise ratio of phono head amps is something I pay close attention to. Many of them are noisy when asked to drive some of the lower output MC cartridges. My Ortofon MC-20 (it's an original that's been re-tipped) is an example. I'm thinking of trying a SUT (step up transformer) in place of my Marcof PPA-1. On my other LOMC cartridges the Marcof's noise level is low enough. With the MC-20 it's too high. I should have bought the the PPA-1H which has higher gain. At the time I didn't think I'd need it. I bought the MC-20 a year later. Hindsight is 20/20

As for speakers, when I hear anything that has the mid range of a stacked pair of Quad ESL57's without their crowbar protection circuit and inability to play loud enough for me, I'll buy them. Until then I'll keep my mind and ears open as I always have. In the interim I'll continue to be happy with my current esl's.


----------



## JoeESP9

phreak said:


> Excellent! The only bias I can approve of is one that is admitted. I have my own bias on a number of subjects. In fact I rarely claim to have an unbiased opinion on anything. On the subject at hand I have only once taken the opportunity to audition a speaker pair that did not come in a box. I didn't like it. At all. I prefer the sound of the Monitor 11. I also prefer the 10k extra staying in my account (who are we kidding...off my debt load). But hey I admit my bias and acknowledge that this is my preference. And if someone invites me over for dinner and a movie with a couple big panels 5 feet from the wall my first thought won't be "Uh-Oh". It will be "Excellent...no tv speakers"


If you're ever down my way stop by.:T Do current TV's have speakers? I haven't used the speakers in a TV since 1976 when I started using a Pioneer TVX-9500 (TV audio tuner) for all TV audio. Nowadays I just use the audio out and connect it to my system. 

What speaker "not in a box" did you not like? Just curious.


----------



## JoeESP9

jinjuku said:


> That is the hubris of being in this hobby so long: You aren't being told anything of any sort. You aren't even being asked to do anything outside of listen without visual clue's.
> 
> If you have learned everything you want to learn, believe you have learned, that there is nothing else to learn...


I've said nothing of the sort. I'm just tired of others always pushing their particular agenda. Those who believe in DBT are usually the worst in this regard. That's why my advice usually consists of telling the person posing the question to actually go out and listen to some examples of the gear they're asking about. 

When I hear a box speaker, any box speaker or a horn, any horn have the mid range an electrostatic speaker has I'll let the rest of the world know. As of now I don't need the absence of visual cues to "mask" the difference.


----------



## jinjuku

JoeESP9 said:


> I've said nothing of the sort. I'm just tired of others always pushing their particular agenda. Those who believe in DBT are usually the worst in this regard. That's why my advice usually consists of telling the person posing the question to actually go out and listen to some examples of the gear they're asking about.
> 
> When I hear a box speaker, any box speaker or a horn, any horn have the mid range an electrostatic speaker has I'll let the rest of the world know. As of now I don't need the absence of visual cues to "mask" the difference.


I absolutely believe in DBT. Name ONE instance where you needed to know the badge to know what you thought was pleasing to the ear?

The 'worst kind of people' advising/asking people to simply evaluate sans knowing which is which is. PURELY suggested because you are simply evaluating performance. Yes the DBT has to be setup correctly. But why would you listen and compare to an or on an incorrect setup? 

We do 'get it' you have your optimal setup. I have mine. They aren't the same and neither are our music reproduction goals. I like electrostatics for what they do. I also dislike them for what they don't. 

It's funny, on the reciprocal, I find people that do not like DBT to have the actual agenda of defending esoteric, absurdly priced amps/cables etc... They criticize it because we all know deep down that they are most likely going to fail picking it out in statistically meaningful manner.

I'll leave the merits of each approach up to the person new to all of this. Suffice it to say I haven't had a single taker on either my cable burn in challenge nor my Parasound vs Crown challenge. The silence in those regards has been deafening.


----------



## phreak

JoeESP9 said:


> If you're ever down my way stop by.:T Do current TV's have speakers? I haven't used the speakers in a TV since 1976 when I started using a Pioneer TVX-9500 (TV audio tuner) for all TV audio. Nowadays I just use the audio out and connect it to my system.
> 
> What speaker "not in a box" did you not like? Just curious.


I recently moved houses/cities/jobs and haven't had time to hook my 3.1 system to my TV. No big deal because I have only turned the TV on 2 times since I plugged it in 2 months ago. The tv speakers were tolerable for watching an hour of reno shows on DIY network, but only barely. It's only been 15 years since I bought my first TV, and I haven't had much use out of those speakers. 

The electrostatic speakers I did audition were Martin Logan, not sure which model. There was nothing "wrong" with the sound, just not my preference. Before I purchased my Paradigm monitor 11 I listened to some Polk, KEF, Monitor Audio, Boston Acoustic, Sinclair Audio, Paradigm Studio 100, and more. The Polks did not impress me at all, but to be fair they were the cheapest of the ones I listed and nowhere near the best that Polk offers. They were a fair value for the price point but I was looking for something better and the dealer didn't carry their higher end offerings. The others I just mentioned all sounded really good but the monitor 11 was my personal favorite and 2nd least expensive. 
The first time I listened to the 11's they were paired with a CC290. After 20 minutes of listening a chatted with the dealer and the topic of my hearing response came up (left ear -30 dB or worse above 1000hz, but normal below 1000). He suggested upgrading the center to the CC390, swapped the speakers our without changing any settings at all, and left the room. I watched the same clip, walked out and asked how much for the upgrade. 6 years later I haven't found anything with a better bang for the buck. I have found lots of equipment with better bang - but can only be had for a lot more bucks.


----------



## JoeESP9

jinjuku said:


> I absolutely believe in DBT. Name ONE instance where you needed to know the badge to know what you thought was pleasing to the ear?
> 
> The 'worst kind of people' advising/asking people to simply evaluate sans knowing which is which is. PURELY suggested because you are simply evaluating performance. Yes the DBT has to be setup correctly. But why would you listen and compare to an or on an incorrect setup?
> 
> We do 'get it' you have your optimal setup. I have mine. They aren't the same and neither are our music reproduction goals. I like electrostatics for what they do. I also dislike them for what they don't.
> 
> It's funny, on the reciprocal, I find people that pooh pooh DBT to have the actual agenda of defending esoteric, absurdly priced amps/cables etc... They pooh pooh it because we all know deep down that they are most likely going to fail picking it out in statistically meaningful manner.
> 
> I'll leave the merits of each approach up to the person new to all of this. Suffice it to say I haven't had a single taker on either my cable burn in challenge nor my Parasound vs Crown challenge. The silence in those regards has been deafening.


Please stop putting words in my mouth. I have defended no particular anything. In fact, I've not pooh poohed DBT or anything else. I merely said that I probably wouldn't like your speakers. That and an unfamiliar room makes me participating in a DBT in your room with your gear an waste of time.

I'm perfectly willing to do a DBT on a system and room I'm totally familiar with. In fact I've participated in several DBT's in my room and in the rooms of others who's sound I'm familiar with. In my own room I score high enough for it not to be chance with my selections. Both of my ex-wives have "GOLDEN" ears and were able to pick which amp or IC was which about 90% of the time.

My first wife was the one that convinced me that IC's sounded different. She could walk in the front door and call down to my "man cave" that I had made a change in something. She was always right. After hearing this for a while I invited her to participate in a DBT test using an ABX Box. The first time she got 18 out of twenty correct. She said that a longer listening period would allow her to produce better results. She was correct about that also.

As an Electrical Engineer I was dumbfounded. Nothing I had ever studied or learned supported there being any audible difference between IC's let alone amplifiers. Suffice to say both (wives) of them taught me a great deal about how to listen critically. That's why I'm perfectly willing to subject myself to a DBT with amplifiers, IC's or speaker cables in my room with my gear. 

Test anxiety, unfamiliar rooms and unfamiliar gear all contribute to a DBT showing no difference. If you want a fair and accurate DBT it must be done in the test subject's room with their own gear over a period of several weeks minimum. Under those conditions differences will be heard. An ABX box can keep track of the whole process most especially the results. The real question then becomes, are those differences significant. IMO any difference is significant.

Bring your IC's or cables or amplifiers and an ABX box install them in my system and give me a couple of weeks then we'll check the results.

If more women were interested in this passion we would see different results in every DBT they participated in. Frankly most of them hear a lot better than most men. Usually when they're telling you to turn it down it's because it sounds awful to them. When the ladies ask you to play music or to increase the volume then you know your system sounds good. As a bachelor who entertains women frequently I hear requests for music and more volume very frequently. Because of that I know I'm doing something right with my system.


----------



## tesseract

jinjuku said:


> I'll leave the merits of each approach up to the person new to all of this. Suffice it to say I haven't had a single taker on either my cable burn in challenge nor my Parasound vs Crown challenge. The silence in those regards has been deafening.


Incorrect, there has NOT been deafening silence. I have explained to you the flaws of your cable proposal, again and again. And again.


----------



## jinjuku

JoeESP9 said:


> My first wife was the one that convinced me that IC's sounded different. She could walk in the front door and call down to my "man cave" that I had made a change in something. She was always right. After hearing this for a while I invited her to participate in a DBT test using an ABX Box. The first time she got 18 out of twenty correct. She said that a longer listening period would allow her to produce better results. She was correct about that also.


Ok, whatever.

I do believe that an IC can be made to sound different and then that difference marketed. But that begs the question: Is it really an IC?

I'll continue to recommend the likes of Belden, Mogami, Canare. The stuff that is used in audio edit and mastering suites the world over.

Sorry but there isn't a single structured, rigid, peer review of a DBT or ABX study that backs up what you are saying.

** BTW the wife you mentioned wouldn't happen to have a first name of Teresa would she (just poking a bit of fun here folks)? She claims her mother heard the difference's in IC's while doing dishes in another room. I kid you not.


----------



## JoeESP9

jinjuku said:


> Ok, whatever.
> 
> I do believe that an IC can be made to sound different and then that difference marketed. But that begs the question: Is it really an IC?
> 
> I'll continue to recommend the likes of Belden, Mogami, Canare. The stuff that is used in audio edit and mastering suites the world over.
> 
> Sorry but there isn't a single structured, rigid, peer review of a DBT or ABX study that backs up what you are saying.
> 
> ** BTW the wife you mentioned wouldn't happen to have a first name of Teresa would she (just poking a bit of fun here folks)? She claims her mother heard the difference's in IC's while doing dishes in another room. I kid you not.


I excepted your challenge with certain conditions and all you can do is try to make very poor jokes. I already said my first wife could walk in the front door and holler down to my man cave that she heard something different. If there are any women in your life you could maybe cajole one into participating in a DBT. You might find her opinion of various IC's speaker cables and other gear very interesting.

Although I've met very few women involved in this passion, the few I've met tend to have really good gear. They say it's because "high end" gear sounds better. 

Here's a thought fellows. Ask your SO what she thinks of your system. Ask her especially what she doesn't like about it. Then ask her how you could improve it. I'll bet the answers will be very interesting.


----------



## Andre

My wife would listen to four sets of speakers, nod intelligently between each, ask the cost and pick the cheapest ones. That I can guarantee. As for me I have poor hearing and a nasty 24/7 tinnitus problem. I would be happy to hear surround sound better (i.e. the jet flying past), which most often I seem to miss. I have listened to what I consider ridiculously expensive equipment at a high end store in my city, it sounded nice, just not nice enough to warrant the price. 

I have only done an AB test once an that was many years ago. I remember a few of the components, one set of speakers were the Elipson colonne design, I beleive the amp was from Sima, one of the speaker cables was really out there, they were supposed to have a crystalline structure and came in six foot long straight boxes (you weren't supposed to bend them very much). Fun times...


----------



## tesseract

JoeESP9 said:


> If more women were interested in this passion we would see different results in every DBT they participated in. Frankly most of them hear a lot better than most men. Usually when they're telling you to turn it down it's because it sounds awful to them. When the ladies ask you to play music or to increase the volume then you know your system sounds good. As a bachelor who entertains women frequently I hear requests for music and more volume very frequently. Because of that I know I'm doing something right with my system.


I live the bachelor life, too. While I've never thought of it quite like this before, I am asked to turn it up and long listening sessions occur regularly.

What a great metric!


----------

