|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.30.66.254
In Reply to: RE: Looking to S'phile's Rec. Comps. for help choosing preamps to audition/buy? posted by Rick W on March 23, 2015 at 10:20:27
>There's a whopping 3 (out of 25 listed) Class A pre's available for less
>than $6,000.
Yup. If someone can design a Class A-rated preamp for less than $6000,
their fame and fortune will be assured. :-)
Seriously, it is make a lot more sense for an audiophile whose budget is
constrained to go the integrated amplifier route. And there are many
affordable integrated amplifiers included in Stereophile's "Recommended
Components" listing. (See link below.)
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Follow Ups:
"If someone can design a Class A-rated preamp for less than $6000"
JA: seriously? What is the cost of materials in a stereo preamplifier? Why don't you publish that sometime in the magazine.
For 6 grand I can purchase a damn fine garden tractor with an iron chassis, a self contained internal combustion engine (which itself contains dozens of finely machined and blueprinted parts), a similarly complex transmission, power steering assembly, brakes, wheels/tires, etc etc.
R&D costs for developing electronic circuits you say? What are we talking about, 1950's era technology here??
Please.
The pricing of so much of high end audio equipment on the market today is an utter FRAUD and everybody knows it (including you I would imagine).
"The pricing of so much of high end audio equipment on the market today is an utter FRAUD and everybody knows it (including you I would imagine)."
Fraud? Not really, but it's mostly just a marketing tool. In home audio "high end" refers to price, not performance. The performance can vary all over the spectrum from supurb to sub-par but the price has to be high or it's simply not "high end". It may "punch above it's weight" or be good sounding "mid-fi" but that's about it. By the way, the price may be reasonable considering the CTM (cost to manufacture) but that's after the CTM is bloated with bling.
Now, is it a good or bad thing to sell stuff that where a significant part of the value is inflating a limp ego? Who knows? But it is a long human tradition...
Rick
All logic would tell me the ONE solid integrated unit would be better than two superb units connected with wires (bottleneck)?
"Somebody was always controlling who got a chance and who didn't. - Charles Bukowski
Actually your statement is potentially even far more accurate than you may think.IMO, I can probably take any well-enough designed middle-of-the-raod int. and make it easily outperforms separates that should be greatly superior.
Why? Because, and besides the one less pair of IC's you pointed out, there's generally:
1. One less power supply that needs to deal with noisy AC coming in from the street.
2. One less power supply inducing internally-generated vibrations that need to be controlled.
3. There's one less chassis capturing unwanted air-borne and internally-generated vibrations.Considering these two basic energies when under-controlled will induce far more sonic harm than all other distortions combined, it is completely logical that an reasonably well-designed int. amp should easily generate a superior level of musicality over separates costing many times more than the int. amp.
Regardless of the performance-oriented industry, when it comes to performance less should always be more.
If (and it is so) less is more translating to performance gains is true, then the question is, why hasn't this less-is-more concept caught on in the supposedly performance-oriented high-end audio industry?
Edits: 04/07/15
"then the question is, why hasn't this less-is-more concept [integrated amplifiers] caught on in the supposedly performance-oriented high-end audio industry?"
I long ago went with the seperate power-amp and pre-amp for the simple reason that they made managing the system over time easier. The most important thing about the power amplifier is mating well with the particulars of the speakers. The most important thing about the preamp is accomodating all of the desired sources whose characteristics tend to shift relatively rapidly over time.
Having two boxes with a simple, standard interface between them has proven to be an effective solution for me.
Rick
"then the question is, why hasn't this less-is-more concept [integrated amplifiers] caught on in the supposedly performance-oriented high-end audio industry?"
IMO, and hopefully there's at least a handful that agree with me, that "high-end" really isn't so high-end, that the industry is not really performance-oriented like other performance-oriented industries. That from a performance perspective, high-end audio is really still very much in its infancy stages rather than at a mature stage.
That high-end audio is really more about the bling bling, winning performance wars on internet forums such as this, and keeping up with the Jones.
If any of the above is true (and it is), then it makes perfect sense that the more is more philosophy remains supreme while the less is more philosophy continues to make little sense.
I challenge you log into a Formula 1 or Top Fuel Dragster forum and try to convince either one of those groups that more is more.
Maybe not the best analogy, but if "high-end" audio generally fails miserably with 2 speakers, 2 pairs of IC's, and 2 or 3 components, how in the world could more speakers, more connections, and more components bring a system any closer to the absolute sound?
Especially when almost nobody has yet discovered where the serious flaws are within our components?
"if "high-end" audio generally fails miserably with 2 speakers, 2 pairs of IC's, and 2 or 3 components, how in the world could more speakers, more connections, and more components bring a system any closer to the absolute sound?"
Well...
1. It doesn't fail miserably.
2. More channels are exactly what it needs for better accuracy with live performances.
3. There IS no absolute sound. (ever walked around a hall during rehearsals?)
4. Real performances also are watched. So it needs video too...
I don't know about your racecar analogy, I bet a dragster wouldn't say no to more traction AND more horsepower...
"almost nobody has yet discovered where the serious flaws are within our components"
"Serious" is tough to define, but in general I think just the opposite is true. I'd venture to say that most of the problems are known in general but that their thresholds of perception (and importance) individually and collectively are a gray area, especially across populations of listeners and musical genre.
I used to design electronic stuff that had both aural and visual outputs and the acuity of the experienced user's ears was just breathtaking. Amazingly subtle nuances in the sounds made all the difference to them. Seem familiar? It's not so much that the gear is too bad, it's that our hearing is too good! The cool thing is that the technology is really coming of age and many of the things that are still fuzzy will likely be well quantified and controlled by 2020.
Something to look forward too...
Rick
Rick, It seems in perhaps every point you've made here, you're talking apples and I'm talking oranges or vice versa and frankly I couldn't disagree more.
But thanks for your response.
"you're talking apples and I'm talking oranges"
Seems like it. But at least we tried...
Rick
I like apples ...:)
If Devialet is the genesis of this new circle and if we were to extrapolate , then the future will be different and quiet possibly better, making Stenho single box only theory a possibility. The single box approach is nothing new of course and IME has never bettered individual SOTA seperates , is it cost effective ? yes , better ? Never experienced such ....
Akin to having slower laptimes and then Boast about paying less for the tires .. :)
Regards..
"I like apples ...:) "
And I like Lattes! (sipping one now...)
I'm not a car fancier but I do love electronics and so know a great deal more about the latter than the former having plied the trade for over forty years from college to retirement. Based on that dubious qualification I can say with confidence that there is no singular answer.
If you give me the least provocation I'll bore you to death with the strengths and weaknesses of the tradeoffs inherent in the two approaches but the upshot is that system design and implementation is everything and that the optimum approach is a function of the environment and application. While there is no blanket answer in a given instance there may be.
At the risk of seeming trite: if your system sounds good and you listen to it a lot and love the experience: it IS good. Now that doesn't mean that it can't be improved, especially with respect to the satisfaction of a single user, but diminishing, albeit hopefully pleasant, returns are the goal. I think most folks on AA are likely already there and that is why we seem so obsessive about minutia. Once satisfaction has settled in it then becomes a matter of tuning for the most joy. Maybe an ackward way to express it but something along that line and I think we all love finding little ways of elevating our experiences even though they were already on a very satisfactory level. Sensory greed? Whatever it is it's fun to do and to chat about with other sonic addicts.
Regards, Rick
IMO,
Integrateds trade off's are mostly due to the limited space available for the PSU's, a SOTA integrated would have at least 3 PSU's to have the same or similar performance of separates and then there is poor noise rejection due to proximity ...
Most would not be interested in a 120lb integrated ... :)
Yeah go ahead, Show us, how an integrated noise box beats seperates ...
No problem, Wayne. You go out and audition 2 or 3 of the best SOTA-level playback systems you can locate in your area, then bring some cheese and crackers over and I'll be happy to show you exactly what I'm talking about.
Unless, by "show" you're one of the many who think "high-end" audio performance is best demonstrated on paper and actual levels of musicality matter not.
Please don't tell me you're one of those nonsensical types.
It's Audio , delusional sensibilities is a necessity .... :)
There is no way to match the advantage of proper chassis size and circuit layout of seperates with an integrated, the SOTA systems you are comparing your integrated to may just not be worthy ...
Then again, if an integrated hits your sweet spot , then , its a winner ....
Regards
....
So says the guy with blue lights and a amp rack .............. ROFL
Yes integrated is the way to go, first heard it with IC's, I guess chassis and circuit layout is highly overrated, so it must be true, how's that chip amp treating you ..?
You should first discover the "high-end" and not it's posers....
Regards...
Edits: 04/08/15
"Seriously, it is make a lot more sense for an audiophile whose budget is
constrained to go the integrated amplifier route"
Not for the person like me who invested $5k in a Class A rated amplifier. The thought of jettisoning a great amplifier to purchase an integrated amplifier does not really excite me.
You apparently can only find two pre's below Class A (both Parasound SS) that merit recommendation.500 recommended components - *ZERO* tube pre's under $7,500.
*ONE* passive that costs less than $5,290 recommended.
Edits: 03/23/15
> *ONE* passive that costs less than $5,290 recommended.
Yes, the Promitheus Audio Reference TVC at $890, plus two other passives
that each cost just $49, plus the excellent Parasound P 5 for $1095.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
I was wrong - just saw the Emotiva and Schitt el cheapo passives in Class D.
Guess we'll forget about all other passives between $5,290 and $49 other than the Promitheus, as well as tubed pre's under $7,500. After all, who'd be interested?
Likely NO ONE that reads Stereophile and they KNOW that.
That's the point - it ain't for "us", it's for people with a lot of expendable $$
that look to Stereophile for guidance, which is the only purpose they serve.
"We" need to look elsewhere.
Was going through some old boxes of stuff yesterday and found a couple 20 YO
copies of Sereophile someone gave me then. Took a glance at them before recycling.
NOTHING has changed except the slickness and cost of equipment has sky rocketed.
You and I weren't their target audience then and still aren't.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
Of course I do agree about what's been going on in recent years, and it seems to getting more and more skewed towards higher priced gear. But my pre ("full function" w/phono) was reviewed favorably by S'phile when I bought it in '91. Adjusting for inflation my pre would cost $1,754 in 2015 bucks, and was rated Class B at the time.
In those days there were certainly more listings below Class A, including tubed "full function" pre's like mine.
Anyway, you're correct. S'phile definitely is not aimed at me :-)
SP rates what they review and unfortunately they have not reviewed many lower priced Pre-amps lately. Yes, it would be nice for them to review more but this is just the way it is.
Don't let SP be your only source for referrals. There are more rags out there, online forums, dealers and friends systems. Also, looking back in past reviews is a great way to get an idea of what was great 5-10-15 years ago, and many of them are still great sounding.
The only thing I wish SP didn't do was come up with a class A+ rating. In this case just push everything down a grade and you have their traditional grading system of A,B,C,D without the (+).
Finally, price is not a factor of rating, sound and performance is. That is why a $5,000 pre-amp can be rated in the same class as a $25,000 pre-amp. After comparing and listening to them, I'll leave it to you to decide which is a better value and truly worthy of a class rating of A, when factoring in ultimate performance and value.
I have enjoyed SP for 30 years and find it a great read and resource, not for buying new equipment. I have a beer budget and champagne taste, so I read it for enjoyment, dreams and for future reference when picking up used equipment. For that purpose it never disappoints.
I find John A. to be very approachable and responsive to his readers. I'll miss Sam, as what he brought with his writing flair was pure entertainment. He is the Dicken's of the audio journalist world. SP or Sam should release a book, complete with all of his columns. Really, I found it that entertaining. His stories resonate far beyond the equipment he reviewed, e.g., "Lars and monkey picked tea leaves" just to mention a few. I even enjoyed Corey, Lisa Astor and Mejias.
Final, for the price of admission it has got to be the biggest no brainer, value available today.
SP, never was and never will be the last word in audio. It is just another point of light in the audio sky. For that you have your own two ears!
Ray
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: