Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On an audio related list I mentioned the cash prize offered here to
identify wire in a controlled listening test and got the below. Is anyone familiar with the person mentioned and his challenge? "You could be talking of Richard Clark from car audio fame. He did the best Mr. Wizard audio presentation ever seen at the Atlanta Audio Society. When I saw the offer first hand it was 10K to tell any amp from some cheesy Yamaha amp in a double blind ABX test as many times as you would like to try it within reason. I thin Noussien was somehow involved in administering one." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 21 Apr 2004 19:53:47 GMT, Walter Bushell wrote:
In article a2Kgc.165684$K91.425151@attbi_s02, (Nousaine) wrote: wrote: On an audio related list I mentioned the cash prize offered here to identify wire in a controlled listening test and got the below. Is anyone familiar with the person mentioned and his challenge? "You could be talking of Richard Clark from car audio fame. He did the best Mr. Wizard audio presentation ever seen at the Atlanta Audio Society. When I saw the offer first hand it was 10K to tell any amp from some cheesy Yamaha amp in a double blind ABX test as many times as you would like to try it within reason. I thin Noussien was somehow involved in administering one." Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have been intentionally changed.) The Yamaha integrated amplifier was part of the Sunshine Trials (which I did proctor) between Steve Zipser anf Steve Maki. There is also a $5K wire challenge. Seems like its a no brainer to do just transform into the digital domain, retard high frequencies by 1 second per octave say and here you have and amp with the proper frequency response steady state and obviously different. Seems like a no-brainer for Richard to do the same with his amp (see the 'ringer' rules above), and then you're back to square one. There will always be clowns who'll try to cheat on such a test, but so far not one single person has been able to *prove* that e.g. a Halcro sounds better than a Rotel. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 4/22/04 1:43 PM, in article WuThc.3943$YP5.358919@attbi_s02, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote: Seems like its a no brainer to do just transform into the digital domain, retard high frequencies by 1 second per octave say and here you have and amp with the proper frequency response steady state and obviously different. Seems like a no-brainer for Richard to do the same with his amp (see the 'ringer' rules above), and then you're back to square one. There will always be clowns who'll try to cheat on such a test, but so far not one single person has been able to *prove* that e.g. a Halcro sounds better than a Rotel. I have found that you need a reasonably flat amp, and given that, the largest sound difference would be the amount of oomph a speaker needs to open up. I had an ARCAM AVR200 powering 2 Thiel 2.4's - and ended up getting another amp because the current demands of the Theils in the bass region really needed reenforcement - the low end was kind of boomy and light. With the extra power (NAD S200) the Thiels really do sound better - and to me, this is the most probable reason. I don't know about the amplifier's "inherent" characteristics or anything - but the amount of power required by the speakers seems to make a difference. And Tubes do sound different than the solid state amps I have heard - perhaps it is amp - speaker as a system that makes the difference, no? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
When I saw the offer first hand it was 10K to tell any amp from
some cheesy Yamaha amp in a double blind ABX test as many times as you would like to try it within reason. I thin Noussien was somehow involved in administering one." Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have been intentionally changed.) How about getting some Magnepan 20.1's as the speaker? I am sure that the differences between low and high power amps would be in sharp relief with that one, eh? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:WuThc.3943$YP5.358919@attbi_s02...
Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have been intentionally changed.) The Yamaha integrated amplifier was part of the Sunshine Trials (which I did proctor) between Steve Zipser anf Steve Maki. Ooohhh... thet takes me back to my days reading rec.audio.opinion Seems like a no-brainer for Richard to do the same with his amp (see the 'ringer' rules above), and then you're back to square one. There will always be clowns who'll try to cheat on such a test, but so far not one single person has been able to *prove* that e.g. a Halcro sounds better than a Rotel. I presume the test is to prove one sounds different from the other in repeated blind trials. 'Better' would be hard to quantify. Hmmm... what are rules on speakers? Something like an Apogee Scintilla could tax the Yamaha amp into distortion. (depends on the Yamaha amp in question of course) I would also have thought some valve amps (low power SETs?) might sound recognizably different to the Yamaha on repeated trials particularly with low-impedance speakers. Or use early Naim amps with something like Transparent cable with its network circuit and send the Naim into oscillation. Or how about Redgum amps which are designed with a sharply rising bass response? Jeremy |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
Regarding the 10 k prise if amps can be differentiated:
"How about getting some Magnepan 20.1's as the speaker? I am sure that the differences between low and high power amps would be in sharp relief with that one, eh?" Probably not, one of the stipulations is that the amp be used within it's designed range. Power draw enough to cause one amp audible distress would violate that. I think it is expressed as x percent of clipping for x amount of time not to be exceeded. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 23:11:41 GMT, Bromo wrote:
On 4/22/04 1:43 PM, in article WuThc.3943$YP5.358919@attbi_s02, "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote: There will always be clowns who'll try to cheat on such a test, but so far not one single person has been able to *prove* that e.g. a Halcro sounds better than a Rotel. I have found that you need a reasonably flat amp, and given that, the largest sound difference would be the amount of oomph a speaker needs to open up. Irrelevant, since both amps are required to operate *below* clipping, hence it doesn't matter which is more powerful. And Tubes do sound different than the solid state amps I have heard - perhaps it is amp - speaker as a system that makes the difference, no? No, it's the microphony and non-linearity of tube amps............ :-) -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 22 Apr 2004 23:55:15 GMT, Bromo wrote:
Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have been intentionally changed.) How about getting some Magnepan 20.1's as the speaker? I am sure that the differences between low and high power amps would be in sharp relief with that one, eh? The amps are required to operate *below* clipping. No one is suggesting that you can't hear differences due to one amp running out of power. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
(Nousaine) wrote in message news:a2Kgc.165684$K91.425151@attbi_s02...
wrote: On an audio related list I mentioned the cash prize offered here to identify wire in a controlled listening test and got the below. Is anyone familiar with the person mentioned and his challenge? "You could be talking of Richard Clark from car audio fame. He did the best Mr. Wizard audio presentation ever seen at the Atlanta Audio Society. When I saw the offer first hand it was 10K to tell any amp from some cheesy Yamaha amp in a double blind ABX test as many times as you would like to try it within reason. I thin Noussien was somehow involved in administering one." Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have been intentionally changed.) The Yamaha integrated amplifier was part of the Sunshine Trials (which I did proctor) between Steve Zipser anf Steve Maki. There is also a $5K wire challenge. How many have tried? 10,000 is quite some money. Now, I myself have not been part of amp trials. A blind test published in the Swedish MoLT issue 4 2002 revealed a difference of the Halcro dm 68 amp (7/7 correct guesses made twice) using the normal input (the Halcro dm58 has -1 dB at about 15 Hz, according to Stereophiles measurements). A before/after test was used with music with bass information down to 5 Hz (Sound track to the "Fifth element"). T |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 4/23/04 12:03 AM, in article Vz0ic.7169$_L6.776591@attbi_s53,
" wrote: Regarding the 10 k prise if amps can be differentiated: "How about getting some Magnepan 20.1's as the speaker? I am sure that the differences between low and high power amps would be in sharp relief with that one, eh?" Probably not, one of the stipulations is that the amp be used within it's designed range. Power draw enough to cause one amp audible distress would violate that. I think it is expressed as x percent of clipping for x amount of time not to be exceeded. Then this is a useless challenge - pairing a PA to the speakers is one of the more important challenges in high fidelity. If you remove that - then there is no value in the challenge other than feeding the ego if a "debunker" without understanding the true differentiators of amplifiers. Really! Geez! |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 4/23/04 1:09 PM, in article B5cic.8775$cF6.400706@attbi_s04, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote: I presume the test is to prove one sounds different from the other in repeated blind trials. 'Better' would be hard to quantify. Correct, but of course you cannot make a pronouncement on 'better', if you can't tell a difference. Given that the amplifiers' ability to drive difficult load is removed - then the challenge is removed quite effectively. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 4/23/04 1:09 PM, in article G5cic.8777$cF6.400786@attbi_s04, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote: On 22 Apr 2004 23:55:15 GMT, Bromo wrote: Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have been intentionally changed.) How about getting some Magnepan 20.1's as the speaker? I am sure that the differences between low and high power amps would be in sharp relief with that one, eh? The amps are required to operate *below* clipping. No one is suggesting that you can't hear differences due to one amp running out of power. Realisticqlly an amp running out of power is the main reason one would her distortion vs. another amp. Given the power requirements across the frequency band would reveal the differences in the amps -- the challenge is a false challenge, then! If you remove all possible differentiators between amps, then the challenge is no challenge but some sort of 'chump' bet. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 4/23/04 1:08 PM, in article D4cic.8879$YP5.732402@attbi_s02, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote: I have found that you need a reasonably flat amp, and given that, the largest sound difference would be the amount of oomph a speaker needs to open up. Irrelevant, since both amps are required to operate *below* clipping, hence it doesn't matter which is more powerful. Quite relevant, actually. My amplifier drives a difficult load - and by removing that it gives no information to someone in my shoes - and will likely steer them wrongly in choosing an amplifier that is not capable of diving the speakers that they have picked. This sounds like a bogus 'challenge' to me. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
Bromo wrote:
On 4/23/04 1:09 PM, in article G5cic.8777$cF6.400786@attbi_s04, "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote: On 22 Apr 2004 23:55:15 GMT, Bromo wrote: Richard has a standing $10,000 challenge to anyone about amp sound. He'll put up $10k of his own money to anyone who can validate he can "hear" his own amplifier compared to one that Richard has. The connditions are blind/switched and Richard gets to equalize his amplifier (this avoids the ringers that have been intentionally changed.) How about getting some Magnepan 20.1's as the speaker? I am sure that the differences between low and high power amps would be in sharp relief with that one, eh? The amps are required to operate *below* clipping. No one is suggesting that you can't hear differences due to one amp running out of power. Realisticqlly an amp running out of power is the main reason one would her distortion vs. another amp. Given the power requirements across the frequency band would reveal the differences in the amps -- the challenge is a false challenge, then! So you think any two amps with similar output power measurements would sound the same? Works for me! On the other hand, the high-enders' position is that there is something magical about the sound of expensive amps that cannot be quantized via measurements. That's what the challenge attempts to debunk. So, in your opinion, why would anyone buy a $10K 100W amp, when there are other 100W amps with low distortion available for $1K? If you remove all possible differentiators between amps, then the challenge is no challenge but some sort of 'chump' bet. There are other differentiators like price, the pedigree of the amp, etc., that are not removed at all by this challenge. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
Bromo wrote in message ...
On 4/23/04 1:08 PM, in article D4cic.8879$YP5.732402@attbi_s02, "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote: I have found that you need a reasonably flat amp, and given that, the largest sound difference would be the amount of oomph a speaker needs to open up. Irrelevant, since both amps are required to operate *below* clipping, hence it doesn't matter which is more powerful. Quite relevant, actually. My amplifier drives a difficult load - and by removing that it gives no information to someone in my shoes - and will likely steer them wrongly in choosing an amplifier that is not capable of diving the speakers that they have picked. This sounds like a bogus 'challenge' to me. There are more things, e,g, it cost 100-300 dollars and you need to be a subscriber of a car magazine or worker in car industry, as I understand it. The amp according to these rules must be a car amp. However, if I would do the challenge, I would seek up two amps with different HP filtering in the bass range (if such exist among car amps; there is nothing in the rules what I can see about the built in normal HP filtering of amps to avoid DC). Play the music to the film "Fifth Element" and use speakers with e.g. 10 x 15 inch woofers in a closed box system in a sealed small room. Play the song where there is a sweep going down to 5 Hz at loud volumes and try to "feel" the difference in the body. 1.5-3 dB difference in the 7-15 Hz region may be percieved differently. Challenge rules, see http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%2...cox.net&rnum=6 |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
Not relevant really, difficult load says something about current deleverd
to the speaker without overload, still fitting within the stipulation about not exceeding specs. The question at spicific issue here is not purchase decisions but claims about amps having an inherent difference that can be detected. Those holding the view would say that a "mid fi" amp with the exact specs as your amp would still sound different because of some "high end" majic added. Purchasing decisions can be affected if it is known that the "mid fi" amp cann't be distinguished in a listening test alone from the "high end" spread. Quite relevant, actually. My amplifier drives a difficult load - and by removing that it gives no information to someone in my shoes - and will likely steer them wrongly in choosing an amplifier that is not capable of diving the speakers that they have picked. This sounds like a bogus 'challenge' to me. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
wrote:
Bromo wrote in message .....large snips...... This sounds like a bogus 'challenge' to me. There are more things, e,g, it cost 100-300 dollars and you need to be a subscriber of a car magazine or worker in car industry, as I understand it. The amp according to these rules must be a car amp. However, if I would do the challenge, I would seek up two amps with different HP filtering in the bass range (if such exist among car amps; there is nothing in the rules what I can see about the built in normal HP filtering of amps to avoid DC). Play the music to the film "Fifth Element" and use speakers with e.g. 10 x 15 inch woofers in a closed box system in a sealed small room. Play the song where there is a sweep going down to 5 Hz at loud volumes and try to "feel" the difference in the body. 1.5-3 dB difference in the 7-15 Hz region may be percieved differently. Challenge rules, see http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%2...enge+rules+gro up:rec.audio.car&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=ISO-8859-1&group=rec.audio.car&selm =3ff8669c.126950265%40news.east.cox.net&rnum=6 AFAIK Clark brought the Challenge to a well known high-end amplifier company and left with his money. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 02:05:48 GMT, Bromo wrote:
On 4/23/04 1:09 PM, in article B5cic.8775$cF6.400706@attbi_s04, "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote: I presume the test is to prove one sounds different from the other in repeated blind trials. 'Better' would be hard to quantify. Correct, but of course you cannot make a pronouncement on 'better', if you can't tell a difference. Given that the amplifiers' ability to drive difficult load is removed - then the challenge is removed quite effectively. Why? Where did you *ever* see a 'high end' maker claim that the 'superior' sound of his amp had anything to do with sheer power? My Krell will drive a 1-ohm load continuously, but that has nothing to do with how it *sounds* on normal speakers. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 24 Apr 2004 03:11:09 GMT, Bromo wrote:
On 4/23/04 1:08 PM, in article D4cic.8879$YP5.732402@attbi_s02, "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote: I have found that you need a reasonably flat amp, and given that, the largest sound difference would be the amount of oomph a speaker needs to open up. Irrelevant, since both amps are required to operate *below* clipping, hence it doesn't matter which is more powerful. Quite relevant, actually. My amplifier drives a difficult load - and by removing that it gives no information to someone in my shoes - and will likely steer them wrongly in choosing an amplifier that is not capable of diving the speakers that they have picked. Just tell them to buy a big Rotel or Bryston, and avoid all worries! This sounds like a bogus 'challenge' to me. Then you don't understand how the 'high end' works. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 02:05:44 GMT, Bromo wrote:
On 4/23/04 12:03 AM, in article Vz0ic.7169$_L6.776591@attbi_s53, " wrote: Regarding the 10 k prise if amps can be differentiated: "How about getting some Magnepan 20.1's as the speaker? I am sure that the differences between low and high power amps would be in sharp relief with that one, eh?" Probably not, one of the stipulations is that the amp be used within it's designed range. Power draw enough to cause one amp audible distress would violate that. I think it is expressed as x percent of clipping for x amount of time not to be exceeded. Then this is a useless challenge - pairing a PA to the speakers is one of the more important challenges in high fidelity. Not really - just buy a big 'un! If you remove that - then there is no value in the challenge other than feeding the ego if a "debunker" without understanding the true differentiators of amplifiers. Really! Geez! In that case, you have not been reading the claims made by 'high end' amp makers - whose amps are frequently incapable of driving difficult speakers, but are nonetheless claimed to have superior 'air', microdynamics, soundstaging, smoother treble, deeper bass, etc etc etc. Blind testing of course shows that this is bunk, but it doesn't stop the claims. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
"Given that the amplifiers' ability to drive difficult load is removed -
then the challenge is removed quite effectively." Not so, if the amps are not driven into overload because both have ample current reserves. What we want to know is if the 20 year old integrated "mid fi" which handles the load as easily as the current amp judged to be the latest statement of "high end" and also handles it, can be heard to sound different in a listening alone test. If you say current limiting is the thing, you are not agreeing with those who say "high end" amps have some additional factor lacking in the lower price spread amps, which are similar in electrical performance. What is excluded is not the challenge but the extra factor existing in the amp. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 24 Apr 2004 15:24:40 GMT, (Thomas A)
wrote: However, if I would do the challenge, I would seek up two amps with different HP filtering in the bass range (if such exist among car amps; there is nothing in the rules what I can see about the built in normal HP filtering of amps to avoid DC). Play the music to the film "Fifth Element" and use speakers with e.g. 10 x 15 inch woofers in a closed box system in a sealed small room. Play the song where there is a sweep going down to 5 Hz at loud volumes and try to "feel" the difference in the body. 1.5-3 dB difference in the 7-15 Hz region may be percieved differently. Challenge rules, see http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%2...cox.net&rnum=6 Unfortunately, you failed to notice that in test condition no. 5, Richard is allowed to EQ the amps to have the same frequency response, negating this kind of cheap shot. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
"Realisticqlly an amp running out of power is the main reason one would
her distortion vs. another amp. Given the power requirements across the frequency band would reveal the differences in the amps -- the challenge is a false challenge, then! If you remove all possible differentiators between amps, then the challenge is no challenge but some sort of 'chump' bet." I agree about current limits being the real physical reasons an amp might sound different from another. But those advocating the inherent amp sound different view say that when with equal current capacity, amps will still sound different. Removing differentiation is the core of the exercise, especially those sources of differentiation which exist in the perception process and not in the signal the amp delivers to the speaker. Again those who hold the amps sound different view say it is in the amp, but not due to current limits, that is the source of the reported perceived difference. These are those things this kind of tests can sort out, the physical from the perception |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 4/24/04 1:15 PM, in article Jgxic.14352$YP5.1069316@attbi_s02, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote: If you remove that - then there is no value in the challenge other than feeding the ego if a "debunker" without understanding the true differentiators of amplifiers. Really! Geez! In that case, you have not been reading the claims made by 'high end' amp makers - whose amps are frequently incapable of driving difficult speakers, but are nonetheless claimed to have superior 'air', microdynamics, soundstaging, smoother treble, deeper bass, etc etc etc. Blind testing of course shows that this is bunk, but it doesn't stop the claims. I tend to ignore these claims and listen for myself. I do think that tubes have nicely sounded distortion with them and the mid range on tubes is pleasing to my ear, though. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 4/24/04 1:13 PM, in article cfxic.14174$0u6.2394685@attbi_s03, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote: Given that the amplifiers' ability to drive difficult load is removed - then the challenge is removed quite effectively. Why? Where did you *ever* see a 'high end' maker claim that the 'superior' sound of his amp had anything to do with sheer power? Power into low impedance and low to no global feedback is what I hear from most amplifier advertisements. Oh, that and a DC to daylight flatness with low distortion. My Krell will drive a 1-ohm load continuously, but that has nothing to do with how it *sounds* on normal speakers. The point is that how it can source a 1 ohm current load means you aren't restricted to 'normal' speakers (whatever those are) - and if there is a ton of current required - you have it without the amplifier going into some sort of foldback. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:2Oxic.21007$_L6.1353991@attbi_s53...
On 24 Apr 2004 15:24:40 GMT, (Thomas A) wrote: However, if I would do the challenge, I would seek up two amps with different HP filtering in the bass range (if such exist among car amps; there is nothing in the rules what I can see about the built in normal HP filtering of amps to avoid DC). Play the music to the film "Fifth Element" and use speakers with e.g. 10 x 15 inch woofers in a closed box system in a sealed small room. Play the song where there is a sweep going down to 5 Hz at loud volumes and try to "feel" the difference in the body. 1.5-3 dB difference in the 7-15 Hz region may be percieved differently. Challenge rules, see http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%2...cox.net&rnum=6 Unfortunately, you failed to notice that in test condition no. 5, Richard is allowed to EQ the amps to have the same frequency response, negating this kind of cheap shot. He states: "The sole purpose of my amplifier challenge is to determine if the differences in amplifiers are audible." A previous post of mine disapperad, but there are resports of tactile differences of vibrations in the 7-15 Hz region in non-manipulated amps driven within spec using a before/after test. This was found for e.g. Halcro dm68 from the normal input (-1 dB at approx 15 Hz) published in Swedish MoLT 2002, issue 3, using music from the "Fifth element" contaning information down to 5 Hz (14/14 correct in blind tests). The flat DC-coupled input did not reveal any differences. So I tend to agree with another poster, the test is quite meaningless. If you want to buy an amp, you should not have to correct its frequency response due to its flaws. Better to buy an amp with no flaws. Thomas |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
(Nousaine) wrote in message news:Acxic.14166$0u6.2392261@attbi_s03...
wrote: Bromo wrote in message ....large snips...... This sounds like a bogus 'challenge' to me. There are more things, e,g, it cost 100-300 dollars and you need to be a subscriber of a car magazine or worker in car industry, as I understand it. The amp according to these rules must be a car amp. However, if I would do the challenge, I would seek up two amps with different HP filtering in the bass range (if such exist among car amps; there is nothing in the rules what I can see about the built in normal HP filtering of amps to avoid DC). Play the music to the film "Fifth Element" and use speakers with e.g. 10 x 15 inch woofers in a closed box system in a sealed small room. Play the song where there is a sweep going down to 5 Hz at loud volumes and try to "feel" the difference in the body. 1.5-3 dB difference in the 7-15 Hz region may be percieved differently. Challenge rules, see http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%2...enge+rules+gro up:rec.audio.car&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=ISO-8859-1&group=rec.audio.car&selm =3ff8669c.126950265%40news.east.cox.net&rnum=6 AFAIK Clark brought the Challenge to a well known high-end amplifier company and left with his money. Just a note, I would say that at least 50% of the amps fails to be completely transparent in tests made by the Swedish Acoustical Society. The use before/after listning tests, blind, with bass-heavy music (down to 5 Hz signals). These flaws would probably never be detected in "normal" speaker systems, e.g. B/W 801. T |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 4/24/04 1:35 PM, in article Mzxic.14442$YP5.1075735@attbi_s02,
" wrote: "Given that the amplifiers' ability to drive difficult load is removed - then the challenge is removed quite effectively." Not so, if the amps are not driven into overload because both have ample current reserves. What we want to know is if the 20 year old integrated "mid fi" which handles the load as easily as the current amp judged to be the latest statement of "high end" and also handles it, can be heard to sound different in a listening alone test. If you say current limiting is the thing, you are not agreeing with those who say "high end" amps have some additional factor lacking in the lower price spread amps, which are similar in electrical performance. What is excluded is not the challenge but the extra factor existing in the amp. If neither is running out of reserves, and you can perform transient tests, the IMD and THD is really low in both cases, and you have decent but not excessive damping factor - who cares? What I would want or need to know is how good is the amplifier at powering my speakers (or any speakers) - most reviewers have really difficult loads and revealing speakers and only then can they tell the difference when being driven into compression (running out of reserves). This is why I think this is a false challenge - and does not debunk anything. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 4/24/04 1:15 PM, in article vgxic.14417$cF6.592659@attbi_s04, "Stewart
Pinkerton" wrote: Irrelevant, since both amps are required to operate *below* clipping, hence it doesn't matter which is more powerful. Quite relevant, actually. My amplifier drives a difficult load - and by removing that it gives no information to someone in my shoes - and will likely steer them wrongly in choosing an amplifier that is not capable of diving the speakers that they have picked. Just tell them to buy a big Rotel or Bryston, and avoid all worries! I bought a S200 NAD amp - basically the same deal. This sounds like a bogus 'challenge' to me. Then you don't understand how the 'high end' works. Suppose not if this is the sort of challenge that is put forth - remove any possible way of differentiating one amp from another then claim victory when you can't tell the difference! |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
On 4/24/04 1:10 PM, in article Acxic.14166$0u6.2392261@attbi_s03, "Nousaine"
wrote: AFAIK Clark brought the Challenge to a well known high-end amplifier company and left with his money. With those rules he is likely to keep it. Most amplifiers behavior into comression makes or breaks them! |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
I think you have failed to grasp what the test is to exclude in amps.
For purposes of discussion let us say two amps from different companies are to be tested. One costs 1000 k and has performance and specs very similar to another at 10000k. The latter has been reviewed wherein it was said it had night and day differences in a list of sound qualties to which a list of common audio writing labels is attached. They said specifically the obvious difference was with comparsion to the first amp. Now we do the test and no one can pick the amps from another above the level of guessing alone. The test was to see if the percieved list of quality labels attached to the second but said to be missing in the first was an artifact of the perception process or inherent in the amps. The results suggest it was not in the amps. Because the performance specs were similar, the load into which they were driven was not a variable, only the claimed "night and day" differences. Both would agree that amp limiting was not in the picture. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
|
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone know of this challenge?
|
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
ALL amps are equal?? | Car Audio | |||
Light weight system challenge | Car Audio | |||
Note to the Idiot | Audio Opinions | |||
Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing?? Help>>>>>>>>>>> | Car Audio | |||
Southeast Invitational Sound Challenge | Car Audio |