|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
|
|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
In Reply to: Re: Your are still being pathetic posted by theaudiohobby on March 2, 2007 at 01:15:43:
Audiohobby,You said: Sigh....I, (TG1954) do not know that I do not know or I know that I do not know and I am embarrassed by it. It is those that lack knowledge or are insecure that carry on a discussion like I do.
Hobby, I honestly don't understand how or why you'd expect me to address you civilly when you start your posts by berating me like this. I'm going to use the same basic analogy I used with POLLYinFLA. If a person keeps poking a dog with a stick and then the dog turns & bites him, does that mean the dog is vicious? I'd say no, but rather the dog was simply responding to being provoked. It's the same way when you poke me with questioning my intelligence and poke me with questioning my character and then poke me once again with the suggestion I need to see a psychiatrist. But when you get bit with name-calling you want to proclaim it is I who has a bad
temperment. Truly Hobby these words & actions of yours are those of either a pompus or unintelligent person.In fact when I first began to read this post and your comment of "But as for me I am satisfied that you are a foul-tempered and foul-mouthed ignoramus." I was inclined to respond to you once again in a similair manner. However I changed my mind and decided apon a different course that will hopefully foster an intelligent exchange of beliefs. I have decided to be the bigger man and just ignore your insults this time & answer your question in the hopes that you really want to know the answer to your question & not simply waste my time exchanging insults! Only time will tell if that was a wise choice on my behalf, or not.
====================================================================
Hobby you asked me to tell us why I disagree with Aczel comments or think that his comments on amplifiers' sound is wrong. Let's begin by examining Aczel own words, "As I have pointed out innumerable times, a properly designed amplifier has no sound of its own. It is impossible for two amplifiers to sound different at matched levels if each has high input impedance, low output impedance, flat frequency response, low distortion, low noise floor, and is not clipped."I'm going to address Aczel's statement one part at at time, ok? Let's start with Aczel's use of the term "Properly Designed" shall we? First who the heck is Aczel to decide what does & doesn't defines being a "Properly Designed" amplifier? Search though I may I cannot find a definition anywhere of what constitutes a "Properly Designed" audio amplifier. Nor can I find any peer reviewed, published studies that support the term "Properly Designed" amplifier as Aczel chooses to use it. It would appear that Aczel wants people to simply accept as fact, his subjective opinion that a "Properly Designed" amplifier is one that sounds the same as all other "Properly Designed" amps. This is revealed in his statement: "if" the amplifier is "Properly Designed" it is impossible for two amplifiers to sound different! I would have to take acception to that statement as tt's my contention that the Mastersound Reference 845 is a "Properly Designed" amp that uses SET topology.
Ok I can hear your protest already that Aczel had other prerequisites when testing "Properly Designed" amplifiers. Thus we see that according to Aczel a "Properly Designed" amp is one that has a) high input impedance, b) low output impedance, c) flat frequency response, d) low distortion and e) low noise floor. Then when testing these "Properly Designed" amps if the levels are matched and neither amp is clipped that's when it is impossible for these two "Properly Designed" to sound different. However even stated as such I still have a problem with Aczel's subjective opinion of "Properly Designed" amps, because IMHO there's still too many variables. I'll grant that it's fairly easy to match the levels and monitor if the amps are clipping or not. However lets look at these other numbers more closely. Hobby I'd like you to answer some questions for me, ok? After you do that I'll expound apon my points.
1) What exactly is the point when the impedance represents high input impedance?
2) What exactly is the point when the impedance represents low output impedance?
3) What exactly is the max deviations both + & - dB from ruler flat that is still considered flat response?
4) What figure is low enough to be considered low distortion?
5) What figure is sufficiently low to represent low floor noise?Hobby I have a BIG problem with Aczel's concept of what constitutes a "Properly Designed" amp and people's willingness to simply accept Aczel's subjective opinion as if it is fact! This can only lead us all down a path of audio mediocrity. For Example: What if someone has been testing amps for years using Aczel's method. In the end he'd probably end up with all his amps sounding the same, because as Aczel states if they are all "Properly Designed" and it's impossible for two amplifiers to sound different at matched levels if each has high input impedance, low output impedance, flat frequency response, low distortion, low noise floor, and is not clipped. However what happens if some years later a new manufacturer comes along. Our local amp tester decides to compare this new amp to one of the many of the "Properly Designed" ones that sounded the same. So here's our local amp tester with two different amplifiers to compare. As he always does 1) he made sure the levels are matched, 2) he checked and each has high input impedance, 3) both had low output impedance, 4)the frequency response if flat on both when tested, 5) both amps exhibit low distortion, 6) they both have low noise floor, and 7) neither amp is clipped while being tested. However something strange happens during the testing. Our local amp tester hears a distinct difference when using the new manufacurer's amp! Even after going back and rechecking everything & verfiying all of Aczel's prerequisites are being met, there's a difference in how this amp sounds. Not only is there a difference but the difference is one everyone readily admits is a marked improvement in sound quality. Under these circumstances Aczel proposes the only conclusion that can be reached is the new amplifier is not a "Properly Designed" amplifier. After all everyone knows "if" the amplifier was "Properly Designed" it would be impossible for two amplifiers to sound different! So even though the new amp sounds better to everyone it's considered an "Improperly Designed" amplifier. Hopefully you can see where I'm going with this scenerio. I'll admit it's pure conjecture on my part, but the truth is so is Aczel's notion that all "Properly Designed" amps sound the same.
The notion of a "Properly Designed" amp is an attempt by Aczel to enable objectivists to appear to be armed with scientific proof when they espouse a "golden-ear's" hearing acuity is delusional or when citing a subjectivist's amp only "sounds" different because it's an "improper design". What's really sad is how many objectivists have swallowed this subjective opinion of Aczel's hook, line & sinker. While knowing full well there's no peer reviewed, published studies that support the usage of term "Properly Designed" amplifier Aczel intends to use it! To use such vague, unqualified & unverified terms such as "Properly Designed" "Well Made" or even "Well Designed" as many objectivists do here on PHP, or to cite "properly-designed" as a basis for defining an amplifiers performance, is yet just one more form of objectivist voodooscience which is not unsimiliar to the objectivist practice of proclaiming all the virtues of ABX/DBT's while not once providing any detailed, documented proof that these beliefs are truly scientifically supported. Although they'll make claims of the proof DBTs have provided over the years, not once has any proponent of them provided peer reviewed published studies that prove their assertions are correct. Unfortunately it appears they never can provide the proof they claim exists. So as I see it this very much akin to what Aczel is now doing. To both of these ideas "Properly Designed" amps & ABX/DBTs I state that without proof these claims which were made in the name of science are revealed as being bogus, voodooscience or psuedoscience. In the end these people are only making Subjective opinions using scientific terms to fool the unknowing amongst us into believing they are actually being scientific. When they might as well be reading tea leaves in the bottom of a tea cup.
Thetubeguy1954
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Why I Believe Aczel Is Wrong. (Long) - thetubeguy1954 12:48:03 03/02/07 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
