 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
196.3.50.254
In Reply to: The rebuttal has already been done. posted by Dan Banquer on June 13, 2006 at 10:41:37:
"The LNPA-150s sounds nothing like the typical hyper-detailed audiophile transistor amp"Let's examine this statement, shall we? He states that your amp sounds nothing like the typical SS amp, which means most of them. If your amps sounds as good as Lynn says, and Lynn seems to be a very straight shooter so I have no reason to doubt, then you have managed through skill or luck to do something nearly no one else has managed with this particular topology.
Personally, I think it probably has a to do with your voltage regulation and general power supply design. The ciruit you showed me was wholly unremarkable (and incorrect!). You also make claims about the grounding, I have no reason to doubt your amp is properly grounded so I believe you. You still never showed me a distortion spectrum to prove you only have 2nd order. Now independent source has measured it so I am not so sure I believe that claim.
The other question is why Lynn is comparing your amp to tube amps? Ones that surely measure much worse than yours, I am not sure why you want to quote this when you have stated more than once your disgust with tube electronics. Now your amp is being praised as sounding just like them!!! Ironic, isn't it?
I am sure that Soundmind would HATE the sound of your amp because it sounds just like SET or PP tube amps that he finds to be sonically and technically obsolete.
The truth is that so few people have actually heard your amp that no one knows for sure if you have really succeeded in the task of making a more musically compatible SS amplifier or if the resemblance is purely superficial and upon longer auditioning the result is not so astonishing afterall. I would be happy to give it a fair and unbiased review but if you are really going out of business I guess there is no point.
Other designers of SS gear have made amps they claimed were "tubelike" (not that you made this claim directly but using this quote from Lynn gives an implicit agreement) and it turned out upon serious auditioning that they were the worst of all worlds, they lacked the speed and impact of SS, and the easy transparency and harmonic correctness of tubes. I doubt that yours is like that but who would know, besides Lynn Olsen I guess?
Follow Ups:
If you have questions for Lynn Olsen you can take it up with him.
Secondly; I was in business for close to 15 years, I don't think if stayed in business for another 15 years that any of you would depart from your political ideology which has no basis in engineering reality.
d.b.
When will you realize that I don't have a political ideology, Dan? I am a pragmatist. Like I said, I have no problems giving your amp a fair shake, who knows I might love it! As I have stated, I like very much the fact that you are regulating all stages of amplification and I also like that you have a power supply for each half of the waveform. I examined your circuit with the help of my colleague and we both agreed that it is very conventional. If your amp sounds as good as Lynn and you claim it must be in areas outside the immediate signal path, which is a path tread by many failed designs.Unlike you, I don't think the Cheever thesis is full of BS and so I take what he says seriously. My own listening also resonates with what he is demonstrating and I will not ignore that. If what you claim about your amp is true then it is likely that your amp would do well on Cheever's TAD measurement and if it did I bet your objections would be much smaller.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
