"Robert Morein" wrote in message


I'm a singular instance of "actually people".

Robert Morein certifies himself as having far better ears than any other
living human. That's why he does not need to educate himself by visiting
www.pcabx.com. He already knows in his mind that he can get a perfect score
on every listening test there. Why waste time actually listening?

I have a large stable of amplifiers which I use to modify the sound
of my speakers.

It's an interesting ritual. The person afflicted with amplifier speaker
adjustment dementia hooks up various amplifiers to his speakers and
perceives that he has improved the sound quality.

He hooks up amplifier "B", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "A"

He hooks up amplifier "C", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "B".

He hooks up amplifier "D", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "C".

He hooks up amplifier "A", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "D".

He hooks up amplifier "B", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "A"

He hooks up amplifier "C", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "B".

He hooks up amplifier "D", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "C".

He hooks up amplifier "A", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "D".

He hooks up amplifier "B", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "A"

He hooks up amplifier "C", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "B".

He hooks up amplifier "D", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "C".

He hooks up amplifier "A", he perceives that the sound quality improves over
that of amplifier "D".

Now quite amazingly, the sound quality is 12 times better than it was to
start with!

Pretty amazing, eh?

Makes guys like Nousaine and I, who try to adjust our equalizers to get
better sound quality look pretty foolish, eh?

Makes all those recording engineers, who try to adjust their equalizers to
get better sound quality look pretty foolish, as well!

Currently, I'm running the following in my main listening room:
Acoustat TNT-200 with KEF Reference III,
Bridged Hafler XL-280's to run NEAR 50ME and Polk LS15.
I found the KEF Reference III's to be too dull with the Haflers, and
switched them over to the Acoustat.
The Acoustat had been powering Acoustat 2+2's in my office, but the
sound was not pleasing. I tried XL280's, but ultimately chose a
Parasound HCA2200ii.
The Polk LS15s are a new acquisition, and they, too, seem a little
flat, so I'll try hooking them up to the TNT-200.
The NEAR 50ME's were at one time powered by the TNT-200, but there
was too much sizzle; hence the switch to the TNT-200.

Just replace Acoustat TNT-200 with Amplifier "A" and so on.

All of these choices are reversible; I have extras of each amplifier,
nor am I motivated to sell any, so my choices are not motivated by
economic concerns or convenience. I make whatever connections I want,
depending upon what I believe I hear.

This is the moral equivalent of one of those TV evangelist healing services,
except that through the miracles of science, Bob has dispensed with the TV
evangelist and the TV.

I've VERY impressed. Good Job, Bob!

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Makes guys like Nousaine and I, who try to adjust our equalizers to get
better sound quality look pretty foolish, eh?


Clueless, as usual.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Makes guys like Nousaine and I, who try to adjust our equalizers to get
better sound quality look pretty foolish, eh?


Clueless, as usual.

Quite clueless.
I have a bunch of parametric equalizers, but the effects which can be
obtained are not similar to the signatures of amplifiers.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Makes guys like Nousaine and I, who try to adjust our equalizers to
get better sound quality look pretty foolish, eh?


Clueless, as usual.

Quite clueless.
I have a bunch of parametric equalizers, but the effects which can be
obtained are not similar to the signatures of amplifiers.

Yes, the effects of adjustements to equalizers can be quite clearly audible
which is clearly different from what you get when you play musical chairs
with reasonably good amplifiers.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Makes guys like Nousaine and I, who try to adjust our equalizers to
get better sound quality look pretty foolish, eh?


Clueless, as usual.

Quite clueless.
I have a bunch of parametric equalizers, but the effects which can be
obtained are not similar to the signatures of amplifiers.

Yes, the effects of adjustements to equalizers can be quite clearly
audible
which is clearly different from what you get when you play musical chairs
with reasonably good amplifiers.

The effects of adustment to equalizers can be quite audible.
My XL-280 and Acoustat TNT-200 sound as markedly different as many speakers.
This does not appear to be a property of the particular sample, since I have
three TNT-200 amps, and something like six XL-280's, and I've never noticed
a difference between samples of the same model.
The Parasound HCA-2200ii is similar to the TNT-200, but clearly preferable
with my Acoustat 2+2's.
My XL-600 amps, of which I have two, do not sound distinguishably different
from my XL-280's.
My Hafler P3000 is also distinguisable from the others, but not markedly so.


These amplifiers are distinguished by membership in three groups of circuit
topology:
1. zero output gain, source-follower MOSFET: XL-280, XL-600
2. grounded gate, three-gain stage MOSFET, trademarked Transnova topology:
TNT-200, TNT-120, P3000
3. four gain stage, mosfet driver, bipolar output: HCA-2200ii

The most marked difference in sound signature is between group one and the
other groups.

I advise anyone with the chance to sample multiple amplifiers to do so. In
my case, I have a dear friend who made this possible before I accumulated my
collection of amplifiers. I had the opportunity to listen to quite a few
others, before I selected these for permanent accumulation.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


I'm a singular instance of "actually people".

Robert Morein certifies himself as having far better ears than any other
living human. That's why he does not need to educate himself by visiting
www.pcabx.com. He already knows in his mind that he can get a perfect
score
on every listening test there. Why waste time actually listening?

I choose my amps by listening.

I have a large stable of amplifiers which I use to modify the sound
of my speakers.

[snip]

This is the moral equivalent of one of those TV evangelist healing
services,
except that through the miracles of science, Bob has dispensed with the TV
evangelist and the TV.

I've VERY impressed. Good Job, Bob!

It's no great achievement.
These particular amplifiers sound quite different from each other.
I do not by that imply that all amplifiers are distinctly different.

I recommend the procedure to any audiophile.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


I'm a singular instance of "actually people".

Robert Morein certifies himself as having far better ears than any
other living human. That's why he does not need to educate himself
by visiting www.pcabx.com. He already knows in his mind that he can
get a perfect score on every listening test there. Why waste time
actually listening?

I choose my amps by listening.

Irrelevant in this context.

I have a large stable of amplifiers which I use to modify the sound
of my speakers.

[snip]

This is the moral equivalent of one of those TV evangelist healing
services, except that through the miracles of science, Bob has
dispensed with the TV evangelist and the TV.

I've VERY impressed. Good Job, Bob!

It's no great achievement.

To say the least. It's an anti-achievement.

These particular amplifiers sound quite different from each other.

I'm sure that they look different and have different circuit diagrams.

I do not by that imply that all amplifiers are distinctly different.

Some are, some aren't.

I recommend the procedure to any audiophile.

Would that be your avoidance of blind listening tests that you recommend to
all audiophiles, Bob?

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


I'm a singular instance of "actually people".

Robert Morein certifies himself as having far better ears than any
other living human. That's why he does not need to educate himself
by visiting www.pcabx.com. He already knows in his mind that he can
get a perfect score on every listening test there. Why waste time
actually listening?

I choose my amps by listening.

Irrelevant in this context.

I have a large stable of amplifiers which I use to modify the sound
of my speakers.

[snip]

This is the moral equivalent of one of those TV evangelist healing
services, except that through the miracles of science, Bob has
dispensed with the TV evangelist and the TV.

I've VERY impressed. Good Job, Bob!

It's no great achievement.

To say the least. It's an anti-achievement.

These particular amplifiers sound quite different from each other.

I'm sure that they look different and have different circuit diagrams.

I do not by that imply that all amplifiers are distinctly different.

Some are, some aren't.

I recommend the procedure to any audiophile.

Would that be your avoidance of blind listening tests that you recommend
to
all audiophiles, Bob?

I don't avoid that anyone avoid blind listening tests.
However, when you've got two amps, I suggest switching them to see which one
is preferred.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


I don't avoid that anyone avoid blind listening tests.

However, when you've got two amps, I suggest switching them to see
which one is preferred.

Or, if you have a PC with a good sound card and monitoring system, you can
do power-amp related DBTs by downloading files from
http://www.pcabx.com/product/amplifiers/index.htm . You can definitely hear
differences in power amps using files from these pages. If you can't you
probably need to upgrade your listening environment or have your ears
checked.

Three Bryston amps and three competitive amps are listed there for people's
listening pleasure. Power amp tests are tough, so I recommend that people
who are not familiar with the PCABX process start with the home page at
http://www.pcabx.com/index.htm .

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


I don't avoid that anyone avoid blind listening tests.

However, when you've got two amps, I suggest switching them to see
which one is preferred.

Or, if you have a PC with a good sound card and monitoring system, you can
do power-amp related DBTs by downloading files from
http://www.pcabx.com/product/amplifiers/index.htm . You can definitely
hear
differences in power amps using files from these pages. If you can't you
probably need to upgrade your listening environment or have your ears
checked.

Your results are of interest, but the combination of a particular amplifier
with a particular speaker are what concern the audiophile.
Nevetheless, I can't argue against the experience you provide, even though
it's useless for the purpose of choosing the combination.

Three Bryston amps and three competitive amps are listed there for
people's
listening pleasure. Power amp tests are tough, so I recommend that people
who are not familiar with the PCABX process start with the home page at
http://www.pcabx.com/index.htm .

An interesting education, which should force the conclusion that one should
test the intended amplifier/speaker combination together.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


I don't avoid that anyone avoid blind listening tests.

However, when you've got two amps, I suggest switching them to see
which one is preferred.

Or, if you have a PC with a good sound card and monitoring system,
you can do power-amp related DBTs by downloading files from
http://www.pcabx.com/product/amplifiers/index.htm . You can
definitely hear differences in power amps using files from these
pages. If you can't you probably need to upgrade your listening
environment or have your ears checked.

Your results are of interest, but the combination of a particular
amplifier with a particular speaker are what concern the audiophile.

There are no *results* posted at
http://www.pcabx.com/product/amplifiers/index.htm . The results are formed
in people's minds after they listen to and carefully compare the audio
files.

Nevetheless, I can't argue against the experience you provide, even
though it's useless for the purpose of choosing the combination.

The tragic flaw in trying to match amplifiers and speakers is that the
audible flaws in speakers and rooms are like a California wild fire, and the
audible variations among good amplifiers are like garden hoses in
comparison. If you want speaker-sized audible differences you need some kind
of equalizer, not a merry-go-round full of power amps.

Three Bryston amps and three competitive amps are listed there for
people's listening pleasure. Power amp tests are tough, so I
recommend that people who are not familiar with the PCABX process
start with the home page at http://www.pcabx.com/index.htm .

An interesting education, which should force the conclusion that one
should test the intended amplifier/speaker combination together.

Just guessing here Bob, but I'll guess you ain't downloaded and listened to
squat from http://www.pcabx.com/product/amplifiers/index.htm .

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Robert Morein" wrote in message


I'm a singular instance of "actually people".

Robert Morein certifies himself as having far better ears than any
other living human. That's why he does not need to educate himself
by visiting www.pcabx.com. He already knows in his mind that he can
get a perfect score on every listening test there. Why waste time
actually listening?

I choose my amps by listening.

[snip]


I would also mention that I have heard several Bryston amplifiers from the
80's and found them muddy and unrevealing.

Robert Morein wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message



I'm a singular instance of "actually people".

Robert Morein certifies himself as having far better ears than any
other living human. That's why he does not need to educate himself
by visiting www.pcabx.com. He already knows in his mind that he can
get a perfect score on every listening test there. Why waste time
actually listening?

I choose my amps by listening.

[snip]


I would also mention that I have heard several Bryston amplifiers from the
80's and found them muddy and unrevealing.


Were your screenplays ever described in a similar fashion?

Gregipus Slanderus libeled:

Were your screenplays ever described in a similar fashion?

Out of bounds! Out of bounds!

Bob said


I choose my amps by listening.

Arny said


Irrelevant in this context.


That just about says it all.

"S888Wheel" wrote in message

Bob said


I choose my amps by listening.

Arny said


Irrelevant in this context.


That just about says it all.

In this case, it's yet another example of sockpuppet wheel's ignorance of
the importance of context.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"S888Wheel" wrote in message

Bob said


I choose my amps by listening.

Arny said


Irrelevant in this context.


That just about says it all.

In this case, it's yet another example of sockpuppet wheel's ignorance of
the importance of context.

Like when you characterized one of my simple statements as whining. That
lack of context?
Incorrigible hypocrite.

ScottW

"ScottW" wrote in message
news:vJcnb.43010$gi2.790@fed1read01
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"S888Wheel" wrote in message

Bob said


I choose my amps by listening.

Arny said


Irrelevant in this context.


That just about says it all.

In this case, it's yet another example of sockpuppet wheel's
ignorance of the importance of context.

Like when you characterized one of my simple statements as whining.

Hey, it was simple whining.

That lack of context?

Where's your proof, Scott?

Incorrigible hypocrite.

Whatever.

ScottW

Bob said


I choose my amps by listening.



Arny said


Irrelevant in this context.


I said


That just about says it all.

Arny said


In this case, it's yet another example of sockpuppet wheel's ignorance of
the importance of context.


Nope. Just me finding a specific exchange that serindipidously symbolizes the
big picture. You just didn't get it.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"S888Wheel" wrote in message

Bob said


I choose my amps by listening.

Arny said


Irrelevant in this context.


That just about says it all.

In this case, it's yet another example of sockpuppet wheel's ignorance of
the importance of context.

There's no distortion. It's a good summary.