What do you do when there's nothing left to upgrade then?
busb has a point.
Really, pouring money into the electronics is a waste. Providing the amp is powerful suitable, in terms of the specifications, for the speakers, then spending more on high end amps isn't going to make a world of difference at all. Keeping an inexpensive amp and pouring money into the speakers will, however, make a massive difference.
Yes, but the better, more expensive speakers are often more demanding in the power and current dept. So if you want your amplifier to control them properly, it must be up to it (Watts and amps). And high current amplifiers tend to be expensive.
Magnepan is one example of a speaker that asks for a relatively solid (and often expensive) amplifier.
The Behringer used in this test can be bought for about £150.
That amp looks identical to the Alesis RA500 that's been used in this new online blind test (which I stumbled across). One of the files is the original, the second has gone via a cheap amp and a ADC.
Files are available for download and so you can try the test yourself. Even better use the ABX comparator in foobar so you can record the result.
Of course, lots of people here will get 100%
I may give it a go later if I have time.
I'll hook up my cheap kitchen cd unit to my hifi speakers in the lounge. If I cant tell the difference then watch out in ebay.
I dont think so somehow.
Mordaunt Short Mezzo System C - 8,5,1,9.Yamaha V2065. SonyS570. Panasonic TX-P42G20B., Sky HD 1TB. Garrard 86SB. PF30. Wii. WDTV Live. Harmony One. STAX300. QED cabling. Galaxy Tab 10.1
System Photos - http://s1051.photobucket.com/user/robinkidderminster/library/?sort=3&page=1
Base trap Project - http://www.whathifi.com/forum/home-cinema/corner-base-trap-completed-project?page=1
I know the test, TrevC, but I'm not familiar with the ATC SCM12 they use. Is it hard to drive (impedance dips, high phase angles, ...)? Cos that's what my post is about. I give the example of the Maggies because I know they need a lot of current to come alive. But I'll certainly look into AL's suggestion of a NAD power amp.
The result of the test gives food for thought, obviously.
If your ears can detect depth. 3dness, scale, etc. etc. then why can't a couple of good quality omni-directional microphones hooked up to a recording device?
Level matching means ensuring that the two things you're testing are at the same volume. You cannot compare the relative merits of two sounds if one is louder than the other. I would have thought that was obvious
sorry to drag this back up, but real life...you all know how it is sometimes.
Anyhoo considering CD/file/record/tape data is fixed and source output is fixed......Makkapakka, no - you try recording with a omni-directional mic, then come back here and tell us if it sounds anything like what you hear coming from your speakers, in your room...... prrrft...
And level matching is stupid, if you are testing two devices against each other then you test them to their limits, to the point just before distortion on the very edge of integrity to the point of..... you get the idea. It's this crazy logic that makes me not take these 'hifi' test seriously. How can anyone consider a test valid if the kit is working well within its spec, whats the point?
if you compare say a 200watt Krell with the Cyrus 6a for example what the Krell could do with a pair of speakers will never be known if its limited to the spec of the Cyrus 6a 40watts - and that would be the basis for someone to claim both amps sound the same?......really?
Why you do you think Harbeth have worded their challenge so carefully.
What can you hear that can't be measured?
In terms of hifi the sound stage, scale the 3dness of the image, the depth of that image produced between the two speakers and quite a bit more actually.
Anyhoo, can someone explain the point of level matching two amps in any sort of test what would that prove, its like Top Gear (a popular motoring program on the BBC) testing cars on its tracks with the proviso they must achieve 30mph in no less and no more than 10secs and then complete the remainder of the lap at 30mph no more no less - the times would all be the same be it a f1 car or a 1970's austin allegro..... thats stupid.
That Harbeth test is a joke a laweyer must have written it up.
If you geninly believe all amps sound the same or differences are subtle at "a fixed level" ...seriously you should buy yourself a transistor radio or a mono cassette recorder and live long and prosper playing them at fixed levels. Play your kit at what ever levels you want but don't presume your budget amp can compare to more exotic kit. quality speakers WILL expose your budget equ - amps do not sound the same.
CNOevil speaks sense, listen, trust your ears and while I don't always agree with WHFI's verdict their method for testing kit is the best way.
Oh, I'm confident I could pass ABX test's ......I'd put money on it, a good amount too.
Ahaaa, Thomson, nice to have you back, been on your holibobs........?
Your posts are on an entirely different level, quite inspired.......
LOL.... I try....
Of course you do.
And very successfully too.......
We do so many shows in a row,
And these towns all look the same,
We just pass the time in our hotel room
And wander 'round backstage,
Till the lights come up, and we hear that crowd,
And we remember why we came.
What I meant was you could record it and there would be a difference - it's not about making an accurate recording, explaining it or understanding it - just showing that something is different.
I don't know exactly what Harbeth was specifying when it said level matching but in most tests that are carried out (like on the matrix site) the only level matching is the volume.
Maybe I should've qualified my (sarcastic) statement with a smiley face - it wasn't direct at you, just to those who think ABX is the only way forward
David @Frank Harvey Hi-Fi, Coventry
Vinyl now available in store!
I hope you didn't this week as I've been off
Anytime - always good to meet forum members
I don't know about that. I've heard our Blades with Bryston's 4Bsst2, 7Bsst2 monoblocks, Cyrus X300 monoblocks, Chord SPM1400 monoblocks, Yamaha MXD1 power amplifier, and Onkyo's Reference pre/power (and a few more), and to my mind, only the Yamaha and 4Bsst2 sounded similar. The others were quite different. I'd take a blind test between the Bryston, Chord and Onkyo any day.
Glad to hear it - especially when I have serious doubts regarding the effectiveness of most, if not all ABX tests. If I don't want to direct a comment at an individual - I don't quote them.
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds - the pessimist fears this is true."
James Branch Cabell
MAIN: Apple TV2, Mac Mini (controlled from various iThings using Remote), CA Azur 751BD & Panasonic P42V20B into audiolab M-DAC, feeding a Primare A34.2 class D power amp via XLRs, 2x 5m of Atlas Ascent 2 firing up Totem Arros. DALI Kubik Free in my kitchen
ON THE HOOF: iPhone 5S/Sennheiser MM450.
I suppose you must be a troll. I can't believe that someone posting here about these things doesn't understand how our ears work; specifically regarding their sensitivity to different frequencies as in equal loudness curves. Or do you just reject all science?
On the road: HP Elitebook 8540w, Sennheiser HD650, Bose Computer Mini Monitors.
Home: Denon DBP-2010, Humax, Panasonic Plasma, Monitor Audio ASB-2, AKG K240 Studio, Audio-GD NFB 12, Audio Pro Addon T8 active monitors, definitely no fancy cables.
How do you know that scientists fully understand how our hearing works?
© 2014 Haymarket Publishing