Amp question.

[Pneumonic]

Except, of course, when you do. I certainly can hear a difference between my Pass Labs X350.5, my Conrad Johnson tube amp, and my Sanders Sound mono blocs. Each has a pretty distinct sonic signature.

Are the amps operating linearly or are they clipping?

 

[ML Goat]

Rich,you don't think the Emotiva can handle the Electromotion ESL's? They sound just fine,never clip. I had them at -16 on the Onkyo thru the Emotiva XPA 200 and there was zero clipping,but I'd never listen to it that loud.

 

[Pneumonic]

Rich,you don't think the Emotiva can handle the Electromotion ESL's? They sound just fine,never clip. I had them at -16 on the Onkyo thru the Emotiva XPA 200 and there was zero clipping,but I'd never listen to it that loud.

Keep in mind that when speaking of clipping this is not something that can always be reliably heard. In order to find out for sure if an amp clips or not you need to take a measurement, via an instrument (an oscilloscope is ideal) and look to see if any clipping (brick wall distortions) shows up on the trace.

For anyone running challenging speakers this really is a must component to add to ones arsenal.

 

[bsandovalb]

I had EM-esl for about a year. Used first a marantz sr8002.... Then added an Anthem statement A5... Then changed the marantz (used as a pre with the anthem) for a Anthem avm-40... Later on tried a levinson no. 27 with them instead of the A5....

All I can tell is that there were audible differences between each gear.. The marantz alone was musical and warm... The anthem was more crisp and detailed, I liked it a lot with movies but not that very much with two channel music... The levinson had more musicality with a big and nice sounstage, great bass... A little less detailed on the upper end...

Then, changed the EM and got a pair of Odysseys with new pannels.. Currently using ARC HD220 with them, but that is another story... All I can tell is that the EM sounded different with each amp...depends on you to try different gear and decide what you like the most...

Ah!... And let me say that at the beginning I tought that the EMs with the Marantz was super nice!...but once you start experimenting you will always find something you like better!...

 

[Bernard]

Well,I know nothing about the firestorm,so is there a thread I can read? Is there a conclusion to this or is it another debate like to buy expensive cables or not?

It was one of those expensive cables debates, and more. The thread was closed by Tom.

 

[Sky Saw]

To maintain peace in here, if you wish to PM, off thread, I can help answer your questions. My advice will be based on objectivity, and not subjectivity, however.

We don’t listen to and enjoy music on our systems through objective instruments, so why use those instruments as the final arbiter of sound quality? Certainly objective measures can play an important role in the selection and improvement of audio and setup, but listening and hearing are very complex. The notion of objectivity is misused in audio, and this is mostly due to faulty double-blind experimental designs to test whether audiophiles can hear the difference between equipment/cable changes.

Double-blind tests may not be testing the ability of the listener to detect differences for a number of reasons including 1) inducing test anxiety, and 2) not engaging the critical factors used to detect differences (i.e., sufficient time, adequate number of trials or speed of change-over in trials, etc.

Let me provide an example. Hearing and memory have a very interesting relationship. Only a small proportion of the population has ‘perfect pitch’ - the ability to remember what a note sounds like so that when asked, he or she could sing an ‘A’, etc. So, if you go to a piano and play an ‘A’ and then ask most people (those who do not have perfect pitch) what the note is, they would not be able to tell you with any reliability. However, if you play an ‘A’ and then immediately play a ‘B’, everyone would be able to tell you that the ‘B’ is higher than the ‘A’. So, everyone can differentiate between ‘A’ and ‘B’ (there is no such thing as being tone deaf).

Now, let’s say we wish to put this to the test through a double-blind experiment...we play test tone ‘A’, then wait 1 minute and play test tone ‘B’ in the same octave. We wait another minute, then we randomly play test tone ‘A’ or ‘B’ at 1 minute intervals. Those people with perfect pitch, and maybe a few others who are able to focus hard enough and remember one test tone long enough to compare tones (by humming it to themselves, etc.) might be able to differentiate, but the majority of people will not be able to say which is ‘A’ and which is ‘B’. The conclusion therefore is that people cannot discern pitch, since they are not able to reliably detect differences between pitches on average. Of course, this is a faulty conclusion due to faulty experimental conditions.

Way too much hooplah is made over double-blind testing in audio, and certainly very little attention is paid to what the correct conditions should be for such a test. When I listen to different sources, I find that I can confuse myself fairly easily by quickly switching back and forth between sources. It is after extended sessions with long intervals that I begin to hear and remember what the differences are between the components.

Mark

 

[Rich]

Are the amps operating linearly or are they clipping?

Are you kidding me? Your ears would bleed before getting the Pass or the Sanders to clip. And the CJ isn't likely to except at very high listening levels, and even if it did, it would be the "soft" clipping that tubes are known for. Simple fact is that the Sanders amps' sound totally and completely neutral. Their sonic signature is a complete lack of any sonic signature. Everything is presented as it was recorded, with no coloration, but also it is a bit sterile. The Pass Labs amp, on the other hand, has a warmer sound (probably due to the Class A bias) and seem to have much more accentuation of the lower mids. It just has more depth and roundness to it, where the Sanders is a bit on the lean side. The CJ just has a sound of its own that is hard to describe. It has a much more lovely sounding midrange, with great dynamics, or what a lot of reviewers call PRAT (pace, rhythm and timing). It will get you up dancing to the music, where with the other two you would just be sitting there enjoying the music.

Now I'm not saying you can hear a difference between all amps. Many great amps sound the same to me. But these particular amps have a unique enough sonic signature that I can pretty easily tell them apart. Having quality associated components and an acoustically-treated room certainly helps.

 

[Pneumonic]

We don’t listen to and enjoy music on our systems through objective instruments, so why use those instruments as the final arbiter of sound quality? Certainly objective measures can play an important role in the selection and improvement of audio and setup, but listening and hearing are very complex. The notion of objectivity is misused in audio, and this is mostly due to faulty double-blind experimental designs to test whether audiophiles can hear the difference between equipment/cable changes.

Double-blind tests may not be testing the ability of the listener to detect differences for a number of reasons including 1) inducing test anxiety, and 2) not engaging the critical factors used to detect differences (i.e., sufficient time, adequate number of trials or speed of change-over in trials, etc.

Let me provide an example. Hearing and memory have a very interesting relationship. Only a small proportion of the population has ‘perfect pitch’ - the ability to remember what a note sounds like so that when asked, he or she could sing an ‘A’, etc. So, if you go to a piano and play an ‘A’ and then ask most people (those who do not have perfect pitch) what the note is, they would not be able to tell you with any reliability. However, if you play an ‘A’ and then immediately play a ‘B’, everyone would be able to tell you that the ‘B’ is higher than the ‘A’. So, everyone can differentiate between ‘A’ and ‘B’ (there is no such thing as being tone deaf).

Now, let’s say we wish to put this to the test through a double-blind experiment...we play test tone ‘A’, then wait 1 minute and play test tone ‘B’ in the same octave. We wait another minute, then we randomly play test tone ‘A’ or ‘B’ at 1 minute intervals. Those people with perfect pitch, and maybe a few others who are able to focus hard enough and remember one test tone long enough to compare tones (by humming it to themselves, etc.) might be able to differentiate, but the majority of people will not be able to say which is ‘A’ and which is ‘B’. The conclusion therefore is that people cannot discern pitch, since they are not able to reliably detect differences between pitches on average. Of course, this is a faulty conclusion due to faulty experimental conditions.

Way too much hooplah is made over double-blind testing in audio, and certainly very little attention is paid to what the correct conditions should be for such a test. When I listen to different sources, I find that I can confuse myself fairly easily by quickly switching back and forth between sources. It is after extended sessions with long intervals that I begin to hear and remember what the differences are between the components.

Mark

Hi, Mark. Understand that I cannot possibly offer advice to the OP as a result of my listening to his system since I am not there with him nor can I depend on what he tells me that he hears out of his system since there is a monumental variable there.

In the absence of such proof, I can offer my technical knowledge on matters that may well be important to his ultimate enjoyment of what he hears. Some of the matters that I reference are known engineering elements which are easily measured and known to impact what we hear. It is mostly these that I advise on.

 

[Rich]

Rich,you don't think the Emotiva can handle the Electromotion ESL's? They sound just fine,never clip. I had them at -16 on the Onkyo thru the Emotiva XPA 200 and there was zero clipping,but I'd never listen to it that loud.

They may have enough power that they don't clip unless played too loud, but that is not the only measure of their abilities to handle these speakers. ML electrostatic speakers require an amp that can produce a lot of current, one that can double its current delivery with a halving of impedance. These amps are not designed to handle this. Which means they are stressed by ML's capacitative loads, and they are undoubtedly rolling off the highs to a certain extent. Now, depending on the acoustics of your room, this may not be heard by you as a bad thing.

 

[Pneumonic]

Are you kidding me? Your ears would bleed before getting the Pass or the Sanders to clip. And the CJ isn't likely to except at very high listening levels, and even if it did, it would be the "soft" clipping that tubes are known for. Simple fact is that the Sanders amps' sound totally and completely neutral. Their sonic signature is a complete lack of any sonic signature. Everything is presented as it was recorded, with no coloration, but also it is a bit sterile. The Pass Labs amp, on the other hand, has a warmer sound (probably due to the Class A bias) and seem to have much more accentuation of the lower mids. It just has more depth and roundness to it, where the Sanders is a bit on the lean side. The CJ just has a sound of its own that is hard to describe. It has a much more lovely sounding midrange, with great dynamics, or what a lot of reviewers call PRAT (pace, rhythm and timing). It will get you up dancing to the music, where with the other two you would just be sitting there enjoying the music.

Now I'm not saying you can hear a difference between all amps. Many great amps sound the same to me. But these particular amps have a unique enough sonic signature that I can pretty easily tell them apart. Having quality associated components and an acoustically-treated room certainly helps.

There are indeed variables that may subject any of the amps in question into clipping mode. Have you ever looked at their outputted waveforms to tell if they are, or aren't, clipping?

Note ..... I run Innersound 800's which I have measured. I am happy to report that, in my moderately sized room, with the music material that I listen too, at my normal listening level, they don't clip. So, I don't expect them to have any sound impact (beyond what was engineered into it) on what I hear. Ditto the QSC amp that my buddy and I tested Wednesday night.

 

[snyderkv]

Quite simply ..... a capable amp would be one that doesn't clip, and add distortion, at the volume level that you require in order to listen.

I second this

His results (IMO) confirm that two amps will have equal SQ under clipping IMO (minus sonic signiture via factory pre sets) IMO

Anyone who claims that each amp has its own sonic signature is mostly correct (IMO), but may not have anything to do with the output stage or "magic watt" and might have more to do with pre defined settings from the manufacture that intentionaly colour/distort the sound using EQ, Filters, Gains etc, making the sound perceived as different, not better (IMO).

I'd imagine most people buy amps for higher SPLs and headroom to handle spikes during transients in good uncompressed source material, not because they like the manufacture pre sets (sonic signature) unless they prefer colour/tonal/distortion of the source signal IMO. When those are equalized between brands, nobody will hear a difference in SQ under clipping. Most likely why the OP cannot hear an audible difference. Once he cranks up the volume, I'm sure that will change

IMO

DTS-True symphonic rock concert/classic music (uncompressed) can swing 25db during transients (so I read). If you listen at 80db, then you'll need an amp capable of 25db overhead or 105db spikes. Depending on listening distance, room acoustics etc, this could mean anywhere between ~30 watts and x000 watts (IMO). You are obviously meeting your Onkyo's requirements or possibly both amps are equally crappy sounding!

http://www.crownaudio.com/elect-pwr-req.htm

 

[Pneumonic]

They may have enough power that they don't clip unless played too loud, but that is not the only measure of their abilities to handle these speakers. ML electrostatic speakers require an amp that can produce a lot of current, one that can double its current delivery with a halving of impedance. These amps are not designed to handle this. Which means they are stressed by ML's capacitative loads, and they are undoubtedly rolling off the highs to a certain extent. Now, depending on the acoustics of your room, this may not be heard by you as a bad thing.

Mark, in general terms you are correct. However, not all ESL's behave the same so you really would need some measuring equipment (ie scope, spectrum analyzer) to confirm the above.

 

[Pneumonic]

I second this

His results (IMO) confirm that two amps will have equal SQ under clipping IMO (minus sonic signiture via factory pre sets) IMO

Anyone who claims that each amp has its own sonic signiture is mostly correct (IMO), but may not have anything to do with the output stage or "magic watt" and might have more to do with pre defined settings from the manufacture that intentionaly color/distort the sound using EQ, Filters, Gains etc, making the sound perceived as different, not better (IMO). I'd imagine most people buy amps for higher SPLs and headroom to handle spikes during transients in good uncompressed source material, not because they like the manufacture pre sets IMO

IMO

DTS-True symphonic rock concert/classic music (uncompressed) can swing 25db (so I read) during transients. If you listen at 80db, then you'll need an amp capable of 25db overhead or105db spikes. Depending on listening distance, this could mean anywhere between 30 watts and 1000 watts

Indeed my friend. +1.

 

[Spike]

http://www.crownaudio.com/elect-pwr-req.htm

The above "Amplifier Power Calculator" from Crown Audio applies to point-source (cone) speakers which are different than the line-source nature of electro-static panels. I've posted on this topic before here:
Dynamic Range and Power Claim

 

[Rich]

Anyone who claims that each amp has its own sonic signature is mostly correct (IMO), but may not have anything to do with the output stage or "magic watt" and might have more to do with pre defined settings from the manufacture that intentionaly colour/distort the sound using EQ, Filters, Gains etc, making the sound perceived as different, not better (IMO).

Or perhaps it could be because of the circuit design, bias (A, AB, B, D), SS vs. tube, quality of components, beefyness of power supply, and a host of other reasons understood more by amp designers than the average audiophile.

 

[Pneumonic]

Or perhaps it could be because of the circuit design, bias (A, AB, B, D), SS vs. tube, quality of components, beefyness of power supply, and a host of other reasons understood more by amp designers than the average audiophile.

The nice thing is that amp guys can easily build for distortion levels under 1% with a flat 20-20 frequency response these days. Not sure if any human can detect differences at these numbers.

As such, practically, it really all boils down to how an amp performs when hooked up to a set of speakers and fed with a signal. Specifically, we need to concern oursleves with whether or not an amp is capable enough not to clip (and enter protection mode) when fed this signal. Here we look at things such as having an amp which is stable into a reactive load, and having a power supply that can supply enough output current to properly drive the speakers during low impedance conditions (ie at high frequencies) and swing enough voltage to play the speakers, to your desired volume level, without clipping.

Get this right, and the only thing you may need to concern yourself with is how well your amp stays damped and how much, if any, phase shifting and distortion, is added to the sonic equation should you be running a passive speaker xover and you hook up a set of speaker cables to it.

 

[Gordon Gray]

SET amps have measured distortion well above 1% but are considered by some to be the most musical amplifiers made today.

Manufacturers of this type amp include Cary Audio and Lamm.

GG

 

[amey01]

Or perhaps it could be because of the circuit design, bias (A, AB, B, D), SS vs. tube, quality of components, beefyness of power supply, and a host of other reasons understood more by amp designers than the average audiophile.

+1 - and to add to that, a whole lot of commensurate circuit characteristics, such as odd order / even order distortion, and how many harmonics the distortion reaches. You may well find you prefer an amplifier that has 3% distortion that doesn't go past the second harmonic, rather than an amp that has 0.00001% that dirties everything right up to the 21st harmonic!!

These are things that no specs will tell you.

 

[Pneumonic]

SET amps have measured distortion well above 1% but are considered by some to be the most musical amplifiers made today.

Manufacturers of this type amp include Cary Audio and Lamm.

GG

True indeed. However, staying on theme of the OP thread, he would hear said distortion levels and could therefore (very likely) tell the difference between this high distortion amp and, say, a low measuring one.

 

[Pneumonic]

+1 - and to add to that, a whole lot of commensurate circuit characteristics, such as odd order / even order distortion, and how many harmonics the distortion reaches. You may well find you prefer an amplifier that has 3% distortion that doesn't go past the second harmonic, rather than an amp that has 0.00001% that dirties everything right up to the 21st harmonic!!

These are things that no specs will tell you.

This is all measurable. If one wanted too they could take a number of measurements, of signals that they enjoy the sound of, analyze them, and then they'd know what distortions they enjoy. Not unlike what Bob Carver did years ago.