"Rich.Andrews" wrote:
Howard Ferstler wrote in
:
I posted this elsewhere in somewhat different form as a
response to another post, but I was so happy with it that I
decided to post it again as a brand-new comment. It is not
really long, because I have to get back to my
home-improvment and shop-expansion work.
FIRST POINT. You know, if I am WRONG about amp sound (my
view being that "amps are pretty much amps," with good cheap
models able to sound as good as the best of the best
expensive jobs) then those who have spent big bucks on amps
may be able to justify the cash outlay. I mean, they will
have spent a LOT of money to get a very, very slight
improvement in sound reproduction that probably would go
unnoticed during typical, music-oriented listening. Only
during the most rigorous AB comparison could such
differences be notice. Yep, the big-spending crazies might
actually be able to crow about this, provided they have the
hearing acuity of a healthy 18 year old.
Continuing for the moment to assume that I am wrong, on the
other hand, the neighbor down the block who purchased the
cheaper amp will still not have to feel bad, because for a
fraction of the cash outlay they will get 99.9% of the
performance. Yep, he can be completely happy, and it is
likely that his big-spending buddy would not be able to hear
any differences between the two amps.
SECOND POINT. However, if I am CORRECT about amp sound then
those who have spent big bucks on amps will just have to
feel like idiots. (At least if they are thinking that the
money they spent gained them better sound and not just a
more solidly built unit.) I mean, they will be not getting
any better sound-quality performance than the guy down the
block who purchased a Pioneer, Yamaha, Onkyo, Denon, etc.
receiver.
And that person who purchased the cheaper gear will now be
able to feel better than ever, because not only did he save
big bucks on his amp purchase and get two-channel sound as
good as his big-spending neighbor down the street, but he
will also get a tuner and surround sound thrown in for free.
As far as I am concerned, most of the freaking out here that
happened when I mentioned that I think cheap amps can sound
as good as expensive ones is the result of many of you
having spent big bucks on amps. It must be killing some of
you to think that your pride and joy would sound the same as
a mainstream receiver in an AB comparison.
Howard Ferstler
Howard,
For the most part you are correct
I appreciate the complement and support. Your comments are
quite in contrast to the others on this thread.
but there are a few other factors that
come into play when people purchase a high priced amplifier.
Probably. Remember, this was a fast-written post on amps in
general. My "formal" review of a high-end unit will be in an
upcoming issue of TSS (along with electrical analysis of the
unit by David Rich), and I am going out of my way with the
review to outline the rationale behind spending big bucks
for amps instead of spending much less and putting the money
saved into additional recordings.
First is the relative performance of the amp. There are a few people who
can hear low levels of distortion. "Ewing Nunn... could hear it
[distortion] until we improved the system to where that was down to a
fraction of 1/100th of a percent." http://www.roger-russell.com/mcgg1.htm
Generally, people who do this are listening in such a way
that the musical content eludes them. I rather think that if
someone can hear differences between an exotic and expensive
amp and a more mainstream model (not a budget job, but a
good mid-priced mainstream unit) the exotic probably has
problems. If they can hear differences between models that
bench check to high standards they are probably deluded.
This assumes that they are not doing the comparing DBT
style.
The other factor is aesthetics. I have had some wonderfully performing
pieces that really looked bad for a variety of reasons. No matter how
good a given piece of equipment performs, people will not buy ugly
equipment.
The unit I am reviewing is quite attractive, and was
engineered by one of the most notable amp designers in the
business. I must admit that having it currently installed in
my middle system (driving Dunlavy Cantatas) is an uplifting
experience. (This from Mr. Skeptic himself.) The amp sounds
like all my other amps, but it sure is fun to have it in
operation, and it has a certain romanticism about it that
cheaper amps would not have. Note that this does not mean I
would spend big money for the amp. For that kind of money I
would prefer to purchase more recordings, food, power tools
(for my almost expanded woodworking shop), and/or other
audio gear that makes a genuine difference.
People will, for the most part, buy attractive looking crap.
Yes. One can tell that by looking at the ads in the tweako
magazines for tube gear that looks like machine art. That
stuff must be selling to somebody or they would not bother
to print the ads.
Other factors are pride of ownership, resale value and longevity. Why
should I buy a piece of gear that is nearly junk in 7 or 8 years?
A buddy of mine has a Yamaha receiver that is 15 years old
and still working fine. My old Carver M500 is over 20 years
old and still sounds as good as that upscale amp I am
reviewing.
Wouldn't it make more sense to purchase something that will last nearly a
lifetime?
Ironically, many tweakos spend big bucks for gear, love it
for a while, and then trade up when the new upgraded version
appears. Either that, or they change brands and go through
the same cycle all over again. These guys are equipment
junkies, not music enthusiasts. They do not compare with
precision, because they are into the hobby for factors
involving mysticism.
I wouldn't be so quick to slam the purchasers of high dollar amplifiers.
Well, the published review will cut those guys some slack,
provided they can easily afford the amps. However, if they
have to scrimp and dig for the money they are jerks. Sorry,
but that is how I feel.
They may be the ones that end up using that equipment for many years for
free or at least very close to free.
For free? Those guys must have some pretty good connections
to get upscale amps for free or close to it. They must be
product reviewers for tweako magazines.
The only other negative to the whole situation is the speaker systems. I
don't know anyone that has a $300.00 receiver driving $15,000 speakers.
Admittedly, I am in agreement with you. However, I see no
problem with having a $600 receiver driving, say, $5000
speakers. Better yet, instead of a $5000 pair lets have a
$5000 6.1 speaker package and get us some surround sound.
Usually if the receiver is $300.00 the speakers are worth the same or less
and they sound like it too.
Actually, I have reviewed some speakers in that price
category that do very well, indeed, at least if they are
coupled with a good subwoofer. I would probably want to have
a receiver a bit more upscale than that $300 job, however.
Howard Ferstler