Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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."
  #4   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Jeremy
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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

  #10   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default Does anyone know of this challenge?

On Fri, 23 Apr 2004 03:52:31 GMT,
(Jeremy) wrote:

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.


Correct, but of course you cannot make a pronouncement on 'better', if
you can't tell a difference.

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)


Irrelevant, as the amps are used *below* the clipping point - so you
*can* compare a 5-watt SET to a 1,000 watt pro-audio amp - up to 4
watts.

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.


That's possible, but I don't know if it's been tried. Besides, do you
know any SETs that are flat from 20Hz to 20kHz? :-)

Or use early Naim amps with something like Transparent cable with its
network circuit and send the Naim into oscillation.


Dead amps don't count! :-)

Or how about Redgum amps which are designed with a sharply rising bass
response?


Amps are required to be level-matched to +/- 0.1 dB across the audio
band. That sort of basic cheating has nothing to do with the claims
made by 'high end' amp manufacturers.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering



  #11   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Thomas A
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
chung
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Thomas A
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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
  #20   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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.




  #23   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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.

  #28   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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!

If you remove all possible differentiators between amps, then the challenge
is no challenge but some sort of 'chump' bet.


What it puts to rest is the idea that any or all amplifiers sound different
from one another when competent for the load.

It is a chump-bet in that Clark knows that amps is amps. But if that weren't
true then Richard would have been short his $10k by now. By the way, the
challengee is not required to put up any money of his own.
  #29   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Thomas A
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Thomas A
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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   Report Post  
Bromo
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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!

  #38   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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.

  #40   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default Does anyone know of this challenge?

Bromo wrote:


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!


This tells me you really don't understand the high-end. All the factors that
Clark includes in his prereqs are well known and well understood issues that
when viewed as problems have been solved long ago.

The subjectivist crowd and the high-end, on the other hand, claim that there
are "other" factors which cannot be measured with traditional tools that
contribute to the sound of amplifiers. Clark's prereqs could not possibly rule
out those factors as they are all standard things.

The real lesson is to get an amplifier that has adequate power for the job. No
mystery there. But if one searches for a good sounding amp for his speakers
based on those elusive factors that can't be measured then he'll by chasing his
tail.

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ALL amps are equal?? Pug Fugley Car Audio 60 August 17th 04 03:33 AM
Light weight system challenge Sonoman Car Audio 6 May 2nd 04 01:05 AM
Note to the Idiot George M. Middius Audio Opinions 222 January 8th 04 08:13 PM
Mechanic blames amplifier for alternator failing?? Help>>>>>>>>>>> SHRED© Car Audio 57 December 13th 03 11:24 AM
Southeast Invitational Sound Challenge SQ 240 Car Audio 0 August 12th 03 03:09 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:29 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"