Objectivist or Subjectivist? Give Me a Break

[microstrip]

You must not be serious in that comment, if you are, now I really understand you Micro, and we are at each end of the dipole, worlds apart, my good fellow.

Tom,

I can be more straightforward : do you pretend that if you listen to the list of amplifiers I have referred, then just looking at the harmonic spectrum of distortion you will identify which is which? That you are able to predict the sound characteristics of an amplifier just by analysis of the harmonic spectra?

BTW, I am still waiting for your list of accurate amplifiers.

 

[mep]

Tom,

I can be more straightforward : do you pretend that if you listen to the list of amplifiers I have referred, then just looking at the harmonic spectrum of distortion you will identify which is which? That you are able to predict the sound characteristics of an amplifier just by analysis of the harmonic spectra?

BTW, I am still waiting for your list of accurate amplifiers.

Tom said his Hafler DH-220 was on the list.

 

[MylesBAstor]

I can be more straigtforward, spectrum analysis is the fingerprint of the amp, any amp, anywhere. The more thorough the analysis, the more accurate the fingerprint. If I get to characterize each of your amps spectrum first, then afterwards, yes, I can tell you which amp is which, 100%, just by looking at the spectrum. No magic my friend. (but I dont expect your position to shift and thats not the purpose of my posts, they are just to offer my opnion and have fun here)

Mr Lamn can predict the sound characteristics of amps by looking at the spectrum, and he said so in print. Is that a good enough answer for you on that point!

Your claim, that amp spectrum does not correlate to amp sound, is basically true when all the distortions are way below hearing thresholds. Thats why, to answer our buddy Marks post below, I said that if my amp was used within its limitatins, and compared against a similar style amp as far as circuitry and feedback and spectrum specs, I dont think anyone could tell them apart.

Speaking of that, one guy on this form is truly golden eared, opus 111, you know how you bowed out of Ethans test for generational loss Micro, well he identified all four files in the correct order. That guy has some ears on him. The rest of us could indentify the first generation and not the rest in the proper order.

I answered your question about your list in post #439 (its in bold )

And all things were equal right? Hardly. Everyone used the same system and computer speakers. Oh I forgot, they're all equivalent levels of crapability. Bet Opus 111 used a SE computer and computer horn speakers.

 

[mep]

Well, well, well. I do believe that you said you considered your Hafler to be a neutral amp. Now you are putting a whole bunch of qualifiers about your amp to micro.

Please do tell how you could look at the spectrum analysis of an amplifier and be able to identify it by brand and model number. How could you possibly know?

 

[opus111]

Speaking of that, one guy on this form is truly golden eared, opus 111, you know how you bowed out of Ethans test for generational loss Micro, well he identified all four files in the correct order. That guy has some ears on him. The rest of us could indentify the first generation and not the rest in the proper order.

I hope this doesn't come as too great a disappointment to you Tom, but I only listened to one of the four clips, on my computer speakers. I felt that no way was there enough music there to be worth connecting my computer to my system to identify the tracks by ear. So I chose to use my eyes.

 

[opus111]

Actually, we are both probably relieved a bit! I like you blog by the way.

You think I'm relieved to fess up in public? Naw, just put up my 'results' for a bit of fun. Any comments to put up on the blog? - its really rather quiet for comments over on there. Thanks for the feedback all the same.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I hope this doesn't come as too great a disappointment to you Tom, but I only listened to one of the four clips, on my computer speakers. I felt that no way was there enough music there to be worth connecting my computer to my system to identify the tracks by ear. So I chose to use my eyes.

 

[rbbert]

Well, well, well. I do believe that you said you considered your Hafler to be a neutral amp. Now you are putting a whole bunch of qualifiers about your amp to micro.

Please do tell how you could look at the spectrum analysis of an amplifier and be able to identify it by brand and model number. How could you possibly know?

That's not what I read in Tom's post; how do you get your interpretation??

As to what Tom actually said, I have little reason to doubt that it is true. With an adequate suite of measurements, it should be possible to identify different amplifiers solely by measurement; that may not (probably does not) say much if anything about how they actually sound. Just look over JA's amplifier measurements over the last few years; no two amplifiers have the same group of measurements, regardless of sound.

 

[jkeny]

That's not what I read in Tom's post; how do you get your interpretation??

As to what Tom actually said, I have little reason to doubt that it is true. With an adequate suite of measurements, it should be possible to identify different amplifiers solely by measurement; that may not (probably does not) say much if anything about how they actually sound. Just look over JA's amplifier measurements over the last few years; no two amplifiers have the same group of measurements, regardless of sound.

Tom said "spectrum analysis is the fingerprint of an amplifier". You are saying "adequate suite of measurements".
Rather than dealing in such abstract concepts can some details be put on these statements, please?
What input is being used for spectrum analysis, sine wave, single tone, multi-tone, music - into what loads; at what levels?
What does your adequate suite of measurements consist of & can you specify the details as above, please?

 

[rbbert]

Read the last part of my post. JA's suite of measurements for Stereophile seem to be adequate for this purpose. Remember, this is only to identify an amplifier; it says nothing about how it sounds or performs.

 

[microstrip]

I can be more straigtforward, spectrum analysis is the fingerprint of the amp, any amp, anywhere. The more thorough the analysis, the more accurate the fingerprint. If I get to characterize each of your amps spectrum first, then afterwards, yes, I can tell you which amp is which, 100%, just by looking at the spectrum. No magic my friend. (but I dont expect your position to shift and thats not the purpose of my posts, they are just to offer my opnion and have fun here)

Mr Lamn can predict the sound characteristics of amps by looking at the spectrum, and he said so in print. Is that a good enough answer for you on that point!

Your claim, that amp spectrum does not correlate to amp sound, is basically true when all the distortions are way below hearing thresholds. Thats why, to answer our buddy Marks post below, I said that if my amp was used within its limitatins, and compared against a similar style amp as far as circuitry and feedback and spectrum specs, I dont think anyone could tell them apart.

Speaking of that, one guy on this form is truly golden eared, opus 111, you know how you bowed out of Ethans test for generational loss Micro, well he identified all four files in the correct order. That guy has some ears on him. The rest of us could indentify the first generation and not the rest in the proper order.

I answered your question about your list in post #439 (its in bold )

Tom,

Can I assume you are giving up on establishing correlation with subjective sound quality? If you are just telling you can separate amplfiers by measurements we completely agree. But it is so useless ...

And do you consider that, assuming the data published in the Stereophile reviews, the Halcro and the Bryston, when used whiting their electrical capabilities sound the same?

http://www.stereophile.com/content/bryston-28b-sst-monoblock-power-amplifier-measurements

http://www.stereophile.com/content/halcro-dm88-reference-monoblock-power-amplifier-measurements

I have jumped out the tests because they were not for fun, as our exchange of opinions, and had an hidden intention of being used in the future as proves, as later acknowledged. I hope you do not want to bring them here!

 

[microstrip]

Tom said "spectrum analysis is the fingerprint of an amplifier". You are saying "adequate suite of measurements".
Rather than dealing in such abstract concepts can some details be put on these statements, please?
What input is being used for spectrum analysis, sine wave, single tone, multi-tone, music - into what loads; at what levels?
What does your adequate suite of measurements consist of & can you specify the details as above, please?

Completely agree with you.

 

[jkeny]

Read the last part of my post. JA's suite of measurements for Stereophile seem to be adequate for this purpose. Remember, this is only to identify an amplifier; it says nothing about how it sounds or performs.

So, apart from the IM tests, are the rest of the tests using single tone inputs? I can't quiet figure that out from JA or Stereophile!

 

[mep]

That's not what I read in Tom's post; how do you get your interpretation??

As to what Tom actually said, I have little reason to doubt that it is true. With an adequate suite of measurements, it should be possible to identify different amplifiers solely by measurement; that may not (probably does not) say much if anything about how they actually sound. Just look over JA's amplifier measurements over the last few years; no two amplifiers have the same group of measurements, regardless of sound.

I doubt that if someone gave Tom a spectrum analyzer to use and gave him 5 amplifiers that all measured well that unless he stored the data for each spectrum analysis and named each test with the amplifier under test, he wouldn’t be able to go back later and look at random pictures of the spectrum analysis and identify each amplifier correctly. The only way I see this happening is if you have five different amplifiers that all measure wildly different from each other.

 

[terryj]

I doubt that if someone gave Tom a spectrum analyzer to use and gave him 5 amplifiers that all measured well that unless he stored the data for each spectrum analysis and named each test with the amplifier under test, he wouldn’t be able to go back later and look at random pictures of the spectrum analysis and identify each amplifier correctly. The only way I see this happening is if you have five different amplifiers that all measure wildly different from each other.

So was there a reason you wanted to learn about my system mark? My response to you was fully tongue in cheek, truly a bit of mucking around. To then find out it was possibly true was a shock I admit.

Moving on, yeah I can get the urge to push a perceived weak point in the opposing argument so maybe it is fully valid to push Tom on this point. I too would be curious about whether or not he (anybody) could accomplish this. I know I am not the one being asked but here goes anyway, my gut feeling is that *most* would not be able to predict beforehand the subsequent subjective impressions of differing measurements, but would be far more likely to be able to match up AFTER any listening differences were found. I have nothing at all to back that up with BTW. Note the implication there, (for me most definitely) it implies that differences might not be adequate to predict sonic differences. There are many far far far more capable than I however.

But, back to the point I actually wanted to make regarding this push and hounding of Tom on this matter. Step up to the plate Tom, c'mon put your money where your mouth is Tom. Fully understandable and maybe even completely justified depending on viewpoint on this topic.

So which of you are going to put your money where your mouth is and actually DO a properly conducted double blind test that establishes for a fact that that these are real differences. Which one, even in a 'non enforceable forum way' will have the courage to say 'if it could be done I would be happy to do it' knowing full well that the 'bluff' could not be called. And THEN look for the measurements (if done and published), supply them to Tom and ask him to be able to identify from measurements which amp was which. That at least would be an honest real world test for Tom no? YOU would have established irrefutably that they sounded different, and maybe even had a stroke of luck to boot, you might have the pleasant surprise to find the amps measured the same thereby slaying the other dragon at the same time, amps that measure the same sound different. (of course we could do that beforehand and get amps that do measure the *same*)

What Tom is currently being asked to do is take a guess and predict listening differences which may not even exist, despite any flowery verbiage to the contrary. Further, WHOSE subjective report is he supposed to validate? After all, don't we all have different ears? Don't we all hear things differently? So which audiophile description-which can vary wildly due to an infinite number of factors-is he supposed to glean from the measurements. All he would have to do is write (using one of the audiophile random description generators available on the net) any sort of grand response. If it did not agree with YOUR thoughts on the said amp well, you don't have good enough ears do you. Or maybe it used a different dac chip from the same batch as the one you heard. Or maybe a zillion other things too, could be the latest mars rover for all I know. And, of course, it is entirely possible too that there is no actual audible sonic difference anyway.

So, by all means hound Tom (esp with the scent of blood in the water), but have the courage of YOUR convictions and supply him with two amps (or more) that YOU have found to be identifiable from listening alone.

To show we have good faith I am sure *we* would be willing and happy to reverse it, give you two dac chips from the same batch that measure identically and you can tell us which is which from sound alone.

The flood of volunteers to come willing to sit the blind test (mainly harvested from those most vociferous in hounding Tom I suspect) might overload the server, hope it can cope!

 

[mep]

So was there a reason you wanted to learn about my system mark? My response to you was fully tongue in cheek, truly a bit of mucking around. To then find out it was possibly true was a shock I admit.

Yes, there was a reason I wanted to know what gear you are listening through. When people have strong opinions about audio gear, it helps to know their frame of reference. As to your second sentence above, I didn't see your reply so I missed the "tongue in cheek" remark. I completely don't understand your third sentence above.

 

[rbbert]

I just went back three months in Stereophile and briefly looked at JA's measurement of an ARC amp and a Dartzeel amp. They aren't even close to similar. If one had those measurements beforehand and compared them to measurements of a supposedly "unknown" amp (which was one of the two), it would be easy to tell which it was. That's absolutely all I meant by my earlier comment; I mean no attempt whatsoever to correlate measurements with sound.

 

[microstrip]

I doubt that if someone gave Tom a spectrum analyzer to use and gave him 5 amplifiers that all measured well that unless he stored the data for each spectrum analysis and named each test with the amplifier under test, he wouldn’t be able to go back later and look at random pictures of the spectrum analysis and identify each amplifier correctly. The only way I see this happening is if you have five different amplifiers that all measure wildly different from each other.

Mep,

I fail to see the interest of this test. Surely any one using the proper instrumentation and knowledge will identify the amplifier!

 

[mep]

I just went back three months in Stereophile and briefly looked at JA's measurement of an ARC amp and a Dartzeel amp. They aren't even close to similar. If one had those measurements beforehand and compared them to measurements of a supposedly "unknown" amp (which was one of the two), it would be easy to tell which it was. That's absolutely all I meant by my earlier comment; I mean no attempt whatsoever to correlate measurements with sound.

If you are talking about measurements between an ARC tube amp and the Dart, there should be no surprise that the measurements are drastically different. Tube amps don’t measure like SS amps. I don’t think you will find any tube amp that can reproduce a 10kHz square wave like the big Dart amp did (looks almost text book perfect). Tube amps aren’t going to have as low distortion either. The frequency response of a tube amp isn’t going to be as flat into the bottom octaves nor as flat at the top octaves. Tube amps are high voltage/low current and high output impedance devices compared to SS amps being low voltage/high current with a low output impedance.

 

[mep]

Mep,

I fail to see the interest of this test. Surely any one using the proper instrumentation and knowledge will identify the amplifier!

I agree. I'm not interested either.