I'm tired of my Marantz integrated and my Cambridge Audio CD player. I want
to upgrade my system piece meal and wanted to start with the amp.

I want to replace my speakers at some point in the future too, so I thought
perfect opportunity to swap an integrated for a pre/power combo.

I'm looking for a relatively cheap used power amp right now - eBay and
Audiogon are my destinations. I was thinking about the Adcom GFA-545 II. Any
opinions or experiences with this? It's got pretty decent reviews on
audioreview.com.

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to are
Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend more than
$275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.

Schizoid Man said:

I'm tired of my Marantz integrated and my Cambridge Audio CD player. I want
to upgrade my system piece meal and wanted to start with the amp.

I'm looking for a relatively cheap used power amp right now - eBay and
Audiogon are my destinations. I was thinking about the Adcom GFA-545 II. Any
opinions or experiences with this? It's got pretty decent reviews on
audioreview.com.

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to are
Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend more than
$275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.

I hate Adcom.

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...
I'm tired of my Marantz integrated and my Cambridge Audio CD player. I
want
to upgrade my system piece meal and wanted to start with the amp.

I want to replace my speakers at some point in the future too, so I
thought
perfect opportunity to swap an integrated for a pre/power combo.

I'm looking for a relatively cheap used power amp right now - eBay and
Audiogon are my destinations. I was thinking about the Adcom GFA-545 II.
Any
opinions or experiences with this? It's got pretty decent reviews on
audioreview.com.

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to
are
Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend more
than
$275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.

It's a Class AB low bias design. Punch, dynamic, a little harsh to my ears.
They moved away from that in their next generation, which was MOSFET.

I recommend a Hafler Transnova as far superior.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message

I'm looking for a relatively cheap used power amp right now - eBay and
Audiogon are my destinations. I was thinking about the Adcom GFA-545 II.
Any
opinions or experiences with this? It's got pretty decent reviews on
audioreview.com.

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to
are
Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend more
than
$275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.

It's a Class AB low bias design. Punch, dynamic, a little harsh to my
ears.
They moved away from that in their next generation, which was MOSFET.

I recommend a Hafler Transnova as far superior.

Thanks for the recommendation Bob.

I think the Hafler might be overkill for the application I have in mind. I
am using bookshelfs and have a fairly smallish listening room. If it helps,
my music tastes center around rock, guitar-centric jazz and electronica.

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...
I'm tired of my Marantz integrated and my Cambridge Audio CD player. I
want to upgrade my system piece meal and wanted to start with the amp.

I want to replace my speakers at some point in the future too, so I
thought perfect opportunity to swap an integrated for a pre/power combo.

I'm looking for a relatively cheap used power amp right now - eBay and
Audiogon are my destinations. I was thinking about the Adcom GFA-545 II.
Any opinions or experiences with this? It's got pretty decent reviews on
audioreview.com.

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to
are Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend more
than $275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.


The Pass designs are very, very good. Some of the other stuff sucks, like
the early GFA555 power amp. Just awful.

Cheers,

Margaret

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message

I'm tired of my Marantz integrated and my Cambridge Audio CD player. I
want
to upgrade my system piece meal and wanted to start with the amp.

I want to replace my speakers at some point in the future too, so I
thought
perfect opportunity to swap an integrated for a pre/power combo.

I'm looking for a relatively cheap used power amp right now - eBay and
Audiogon are my destinations. I was thinking about the Adcom GFA-545 II.
Any
opinions or experiences with this? It's got pretty decent reviews on
audioreview.com.

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to
are
Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend more
than
$275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.

It's a Class AB low bias design. Punch, dynamic, a little harsh to my
ears.
They moved away from that in their next generation, which was MOSFET.

I recommend a Hafler Transnova as far superior.

Or assuming that my next set of speakers will also be bookshelfs, am I just
better off with an integrated from Arcam or Rotel?

Robert Morein wrote:

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to
are
Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend more
than
$275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.

It's a Class AB low bias design. Punch, dynamic, a little harsh to my ears.
They moved away from that in their next generation, which was MOSFET.

I recommend a Hafler Transnova as far superior.

Why not at least suggest a level-matched DBT - just to make
sure.

Howard Ferstler

Schizoid Man wrote:

I think the Hafler might be overkill for the application I have in mind. I
am using bookshelfs and have a fairly smallish listening room. If it helps,
my music tastes center around rock, guitar-centric jazz and electronica.

Unless the Adcom has some gross design problems (unlikely)
or is defective or broken (also unlikely), it should sound
as good as any other good amp up to its overload point.
Don't let these idiots give you a bum steer about amplifier
sound.

Howard Ferstler

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message

Schizoid Man wrote:

I think the Hafler might be overkill for the application I have in mind.
I
am using bookshelfs and have a fairly smallish listening room. If it
helps,
my music tastes center around rock, guitar-centric jazz and electronica.

Unless the Adcom has some gross design problems (unlikely)
or is defective or broken (also unlikely), it should sound
as good as any other good amp up to its overload point.
Don't let these idiots give you a bum steer about amplifier
sound.

So does that mean that there is nothing wrong with my current Marantz? And
me not liking it any more is purely psychological?

"Margaret von B." wrote:

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to
are Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend more
than $275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.

The Pass designs are very, very good. Some of the other stuff sucks, like
the early GFA555 power amp. Just awful.

While it certainly is possible for an amp design to be poor,
it is likely that if it is designed to adhere to basic
design standards it will perform admirably and as well as
any other good amps, at least up to their respective power
limits.

Just what was wrong with this amp that made it perform so
poorly?

Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference. One would
think that the differences would have jumped right out
during the comparison, but they did not.

Howard Ferstler

Schizoid Man wrote:

I'm tired of my Marantz integrated and my Cambridge Audio
CD player.

More likely, you're tried of the way your speakers and room
sounds.

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...

"Robert Morein" wrote in message

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message

I'm looking for a relatively cheap used power amp right now - eBay and
Audiogon are my destinations. I was thinking about the Adcom GFA-545
II.
Any
opinions or experiences with this? It's got pretty decent reviews on
audioreview.com.

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to
are
Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend more
than
$275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.

It's a Class AB low bias design. Punch, dynamic, a little harsh to my
ears.
They moved away from that in their next generation, which was MOSFET.

I recommend a Hafler Transnova as far superior.

Thanks for the recommendation Bob.

I think the Hafler might be overkill for the application I have in mind. I
am using bookshelfs and have a fairly smallish listening room. If it
helps,
my music tastes center around rock, guitar-centric jazz and electronica.

You can get them really cheap on eBay.
Ridiculously cheap.
They build these things no frills for the pro market, yet they sound
exceptional, because the circuit topology is unique and the component
quality excellent.
Packaging is simple sheet steel with large heatsinks, which, depending upon
the model, are either external or internal.
Don't listen to Howard. You dislike your Marantz because you hear something.
You really do hear it.

Robert Morein wrote:

You can get them really cheap on eBay.
Ridiculously cheap.
They build these things no frills for the pro market, yet they sound
exceptional, because the circuit topology is unique and the component
quality excellent.
Packaging is simple sheet steel with large heatsinks, which, depending upon
the model, are either external or internal.
Don't listen to Howard. You dislike your Marantz because you hear something.
You really do hear it.

Only if the unit has wear/age-related problems or he is
playing it at levels that cause it to clip.

Some people just want to spend money on a new toy. Hey,
think of all the recordings one could by simply by being
satisfied with an amp that works just fine and not
purchasing that new unit.

Howard Ferstler

Schizoid Man wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message

Schizoid Man wrote:

I think the Hafler might be overkill for the application I have in mind.
I
am using bookshelfs and have a fairly smallish listening room. If it
helps,
my music tastes center around rock, guitar-centric jazz and electronica.

Unless the Adcom has some gross design problems (unlikely)
or is defective or broken (also unlikely), it should sound
as good as any other good amp up to its overload point.
Don't let these idiots give you a bum steer about amplifier
sound.

So does that mean that there is nothing wrong with my current Marantz? And
me not liking it any more is purely psychological?

Anything is possible. The amp may actually have problems.
The way to find out is to get hold of a loaner of some kind
and do a level-matched comparison. Your Marantz has volume
and balance controls, so you can match its per-channel
output to a basic power amp. One way to do this without
instruments is use a pink-noise source (a test disc should
have this) and switch back and forth between each left
channel of each amp and each right channel of each amp until
they sound the same.

Admittedly, you will have to build a switch box (with both
switches and connectors) to do this, but the money you save
might be considerable, so the box would be worth the effort.

Once those levels are matched you could do some sighted
comparing to see if the Marantz is actually distorting. I
mean, due to its age or other factors it really could be.
However, it might be working just fine. One way to find out
is do that comparison. If you think you hear differences, do
the comparing blind, with a buddy operating the switches.

I built a box using double-throw switches that I got from
Radio shack. One switch for each channel. Make sure that
both the hot and ground sections are switched, to make sure
any kind of shorting is impossible. The box will cost a few
bucks and will take a bit of time to build (soldering
required), but it is really not rocket science. Nope, it is
not an ABX device, but it is better than guesswork.

Once the switch box was built, you could loan it to buddies
to do the same kind of comparing.

Howard Ferstler

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
"Margaret von B." wrote:

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to
are Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend
more
than $275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.

The Pass designs are very, very good. Some of the other stuff sucks, like
the early GFA555 power amp. Just awful.

While it

No one cares.

Margaret

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Robert Morein wrote:

You can get them really cheap on eBay.
Ridiculously cheap.
They build these things no frills for the pro market, yet they sound
exceptional, because the circuit topology is unique and the component
quality excellent.
Packaging is simple sheet steel with large heatsinks, which, depending
upon
the model, are either external or internal.
Don't listen to Howard. You dislike your Marantz because you hear
something.
You really do hear it.

Only if the unit has wear/age-related problems or he is
playing it at levels that cause it to clip.

Yes, I definitely agree that your ears and brain are experienceing
wear/age-related problems. Your mouth is functioning excellently.

Are you copacetic with this?

"Margaret von B." wrote in message
...

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...
I'm tired of my Marantz integrated and my Cambridge Audio CD player. I
want to upgrade my system piece meal and wanted to start with the amp.

I want to replace my speakers at some point in the future too, so I
thought perfect opportunity to swap an integrated for a pre/power combo.

I'm looking for a relatively cheap used power amp right now - eBay and
Audiogon are my destinations. I was thinking about the Adcom GFA-545 II.
Any opinions or experiences with this? It's got pretty decent reviews on
audioreview.com.

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to
are Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend
more
than $275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.


The Pass designs are very, very good. Some of the other stuff sucks, like
the early GFA555 power amp. Just awful.

Cheers,

Margaret

That's what I think.
The Pass designs are at least passable.

"Howard Fustian" wrote in message
...
Schizoid Man wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message

Schizoid Man wrote:

I think the Hafler might be overkill for the application I have in
mind.
I
am using bookshelfs and have a fairly smallish listening room. If it
helps,
my music tastes center around rock, guitar-centric jazz and
electronica.

Unless the Adcom has some gross design problems (unlikely)
or is defective or broken (also unlikely), it should sound
as good as any other good amp up to its overload point.
Don't let these idiots give you a bum steer about amplifier
sound.

So does that mean that there is nothing wrong with my current Marantz?
And
me not liking it any more is purely psychological?

Anything is possible. The amp may actually have problems.
The way to find out is to get hold of a loaner of some kind
and do a level-matched comparison. Your Marantz has volume
and balance controls, so you can match its per-channel
output to a basic power amp. One way to do this without
instruments is use a pink-noise source (a test disc should
have this) and switch back and forth between each left
channel of each amp and each right channel of each amp until
they sound the same.

Admittedly, you will have to build a switch box (with both
switches and connectors) to do this, but the money you save
might be considerable, so the box would be worth the effort.

Once those levels are matched you could do some sighted
comparing to see if the Marantz is actually distorting. I
mean, due to its age or other factors it really could be.
However, it might be working just fine. One way to find out
is do that comparison. If you think you hear differences, do
the comparing blind, with a buddy operating the switches.

I built a box using double-throw switches that I got from
Radio shack. One switch for each channel. Make sure that
both the hot and ground sections are switched, to make sure
any kind of shorting is impossible. The box will cost a few
bucks and will take a bit of time to build (soldering
required), but it is really not rocket science. Nope, it is
not an ABX device, but it is better than guesswork.

Once the switch box was built, you could loan it to buddies
to do the same kind of comparing.

What are friends for!



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message
...
Schizoid Man wrote:

"Howard Ferstler" wrote in message

Schizoid Man wrote:

I think the Hafler might be overkill for the application I have in
mind.
I
am using bookshelfs and have a fairly smallish listening room. If it
helps,
my music tastes center around rock, guitar-centric jazz and
electronica.

Unless the Adcom has some gross design problems (unlikely)
or is defective or broken (also unlikely), it should sound
as good as any other good amp up to its overload point.
Don't let these idiots give you a bum steer about amplifier
sound.

So does that mean that there is nothing wrong with my current Marantz?
And
me not liking it any more is purely psychological?

Anything is possible. The amp may actually have problems.
The way to find out is to get hold of a loaner of some kind
and do a level-matched comparison. Your Marantz has volume
and balance controls, so you can match its per-channel
output to a basic power amp. One way to do this without
instruments is use a pink-noise source (a test disc should
have this) and switch back and forth between each left
channel of each amp and each right channel of each amp until
they sound the same.

Admittedly, you will have to build a switch box (with both
switches and connectors) to do this, but the money you save
might be considerable, so the box would be worth the effort.

Once those levels are matched you could do some sighted
comparing to see if the Marantz is actually distorting. I
mean, due to its age or other factors it really could be.
However, it might be working just fine. One way to find out
is do that comparison. If you think you hear differences, do
the comparing blind, with a buddy operating the switches.

I built a box using double-throw switches that I got from
Radio shack.

A really bad idea.
I actually made this mistake. I was interested in exploring ABX, so I put
together remote controlled relay boxes using Radio Shack relays.
These cheap relays have iridium plated contacts, which have signficant (to
audio) contact resistance. While entirely adequate for switching power, I am
convinced they are not transparent for audio.
As I recall, Arny did a more thorough job. He used silver relays, which
probably means silver/silver oxide, which have a much better chance of audio
transparency.

Arny?

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...


Arny?



Are you constipated?
Is that why you are conjuring up the Great ****?
You'd be off sucking prunes.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Schizoid Man wrote




I'm tired of my Marantz integrated and my Cambridge Audio CD player. I want
to upgrade my system piece meal and wanted to start with the amp.

I want to replace my speakers at some point in the future too, so I thought
perfect opportunity to swap an integrated for a pre/power combo.

I'm looking for a relatively cheap used power amp right now - eBay and
Audiogon are my destinations. I was thinking about the Adcom GFA-545 II. Any
opinions or experiences with this? It's got pretty decent reviews on
audioreview.com.

Any other recommendations? I suppose the type of brands I am limited to are
Rotel, NAD, Adcom, maybe Arcam. Ideally I would like to not spend more than
$275 to $300 on each unit, hence my desire to buy used.


Schiz, having auditioned amps/preamps from Adcom spanning the
past ten years, I've grown weary of them. To me, their contributing
sound is akin to a huge Sony boomboxes suffering from bulimia.
Their sound is clean and lean, but thin on dynamics.

"EddieM" wrote in message

Schiz, having auditioned amps/preamps from Adcom spanning the
past ten years, I've grown weary of them. To me, their contributing
sound is akin to a huge Sony boomboxes suffering from bulimia.
Their sound is clean and lean, but thin on dynamics.

Thanks, Eddie. Any experience with Arcam or Audio Refinement? I think that I
am steering towards an integrated now.

Schizoid Man wrote
EddieM wrote in message




Schiz, having auditioned amps/preamps from Adcom spanning the
past ten years, I've grown weary of them. To me, their contributing
sound is akin to a huge Sony boomboxes suffering from bulimia.
Their sound is clean and lean, but thin on dynamics.

Thanks, Eddie. Any experience with Arcam or Audio Refinement? I think that I
am steering towards an integrated now.

I have the Arcam FMJ T-21 Tuner, but I haven't heard amps from
both mfr.

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...

"EddieM" wrote in message

Schiz, having auditioned amps/preamps from Adcom spanning the
past ten years, I've grown weary of them. To me, their contributing
sound is akin to a huge Sony boomboxes suffering from bulimia.
Their sound is clean and lean, but thin on dynamics.

Thanks, Eddie. Any experience with Arcam or Audio Refinement? I think that
I
am steering towards an integrated now.

If you can afford the high prices for small amps, the British make the best
small amps. They seem to incorporate features of big American designs, such
as near-DC response, with proportionately reduced power.

I have a Sugden A48 mkII, love it.

They just don't have the bang-for-the-buck that Haflers do, and they don't
sound better.

"Schizoid Man" wrote in message
...

"EddieM" wrote in message

Schiz, having auditioned amps/preamps from Adcom spanning the
past ten years, I've grown weary of them. To me, their contributing
sound is akin to a huge Sony boomboxes suffering from bulimia.
Their sound is clean and lean, but thin on dynamics.

Thanks, Eddie. Any experience with Arcam or Audio Refinement? I think that
I am steering towards an integrated now.



Smart choice. Keep your CD player and find yourself a Plinius 8200, you
won't regret it. Lush, powerful, dynamic and unbreakable amp that will drive
almost anything for years to come. And it won't leave you wanting tubes
either. Power can be addictive.

Cheers,

Margaret

On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:22:22 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

"Robert Morein" said:

I built a box using double-throw switches that I got from
Radio shack.

A really bad idea.
I actually made this mistake. I was interested in exploring ABX, so I put
together remote controlled relay boxes using Radio Shack relays.
These cheap relays have iridium plated contacts, which have signficant (to
audio) contact resistance. While entirely adequate for switching power, I am
convinced they are not transparent for audio.
As I recall, Arny did a more thorough job. He used silver relays, which
probably means silver/silver oxide, which have a much better chance of audio
transparency.


For line level switching, use double contact relays with gold plated
contacts in parallel per channel.
For speaker level switching, use double contact relays with one gold
contact and one heavy duty silver contact in parallel per channel.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

"Arny Krueger" said:


I'm tired of my Marantz integrated and my Cambridge Audio
CD player.

More likely, you're tried of the way your speakers and room
sounds.


You may have a point.

Ever since we moved, I haven't been able to get the sound back that we
had in our old house.
Same speakers, same gear, same furniture, but different room
dimensions.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

dave weil said:

Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

There you go again, bashing Harold's religious devotions. ;-)

Sander deWaal said:

Ever since we moved, I haven't been able to get the sound back that we
had in our old house.
Same speakers, same gear, same furniture, but different room
dimensions.

The only thing that doesn't change is change itself.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:22:22 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

The fact is that Zipser could not tell the difference, he amply demonstrated
that in the test. How is that "opinion?" Let alone "opinion stated as fact?"

severian wrote:
"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:22:22 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

The fact is that Zipser could not tell the difference, he amply
demonstrated
that in the test. How is that "opinion?" Let alone "opinion stated as
fact?"


Generic excuse: blind tests make the listener(s) "stress out",
rendering their golden ears tin and making them unable to tell ****
fron shineola.

Specific excuses:
1)Zipser had a hangover
2)the testers made "noises"
3)Zipser was just "getting it" when the test was ended by a bad ABX
box.


Excuses, excuses!!

wrote in message
oups.com...

severian wrote:
"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:22:22 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

The fact is that Zipser could not tell the difference, he amply
demonstrated
that in the test. How is that "opinion?" Let alone "opinion stated as
fact?"


Generic excuse: blind tests make the listener(s) "stress out",
rendering their golden ears tin and making them unable to tell ****
fron shineola.

Specific excuses:
1)Zipser had a hangover
2)the testers made "noises"
3)Zipser was just "getting it" when the test was ended by a bad ABX
box.


Excuses, excuses!!


True, excuses excuses, but any observation or whining on his part about the
test being biased or noises preventing him or whatever does not alter the
FACT that in this test he could not tell the difference. So when dave weil
says "opinion" that's a complete piece of BS, the FACT is he couldn't tell
the difference, end of discussion. People can and undoubtedly will whine and
make excuses, but that he couldn't and didn't distinguish between the amps
in this test is not an opinion, it's a FACT. Intellectual dishonesty or
sloppiness like that is not going to win many converts to an argument.

severian wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

severian wrote:
"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:22:22 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

The fact is that Zipser could not tell the difference, he amply
demonstrated
that in the test. How is that "opinion?" Let alone "opinion
stated as
fact?"


Generic excuse: blind tests make the listener(s) "stress out",
rendering their golden ears tin and making them unable to tell ****
fron shineola.

Specific excuses:
1)Zipser had a hangover
2)the testers made "noises"
3)Zipser was just "getting it" when the test was ended by a bad ABX
box.


Excuses, excuses!!


True, excuses excuses, but any observation or whining on his part
about the
test being biased or noises preventing him or whatever does not alter
the
FACT that in this test he could not tell the difference. So when dave
weil
says "opinion" that's a complete piece of BS, the FACT is he couldn't
tell
the difference, end of discussion. People can and undoubtedly will
whine and
make excuses, but that he couldn't and didn't distinguish between the
amps
in this test is not an opinion, it's a FACT. Intellectual dishonesty
or
sloppiness like that is not going to win many converts to an
argument.


We are in complete agreement on this.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:22:22 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:

Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

My opinion: my Yamaha M-50 doesn't sound any different on my Legacy focus or
my Original large Advents than my Krell KSA-150. However, both amps are
rated at 150W, Krell is supposedly pure class A but I have heard that
debated... I think the Yamaha is AB. At normal listening I don't think I
can differentiate either from a 35 W Sansui AU-6500 that I've had for 30+
years. If I wanted to get a different sound from my system by changing
amplifiers I'd explore different technologies, perhaps some of the better
Class D amps (I don't have any real experience there) or enter the world of
tubes.

ScottW

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

I think the Hafler might be overkill for the application I have in mind.
I
am using bookshelfs and have a fairly smallish listening room. If it
helps,
my music tastes center around rock, guitar-centric jazz and electronica.

You can get them really cheap on eBay.
Ridiculously cheap.
They build these things no frills for the pro market, yet they sound
exceptional, because the circuit topology is unique

Can you be more specific? Exactly what is so unique about the Hafler
topology?

ScottW

severian a écrit :
wrote in message
oups.com...

severian wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:22:22 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:


Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

The fact is that Zipser could not tell the difference, he amply

demonstrated

that in the test. How is that "opinion?" Let alone "opinion stated as

fact?"


Generic excuse: blind tests make the listener(s) "stress out",
rendering their golden ears tin and making them unable to tell ****
fron shineola.

Specific excuses:
1)Zipser had a hangover
2)the testers made "noises"
3)Zipser was just "getting it" when the test was ended by a bad ABX
box.


Excuses, excuses!!



True, excuses excuses, but any observation or whining on his part about the
test being biased or noises preventing him or whatever does not alter the
FACT that in this test he could not tell the difference. So when dave weil
says "opinion" that's a complete piece of BS, the FACT is he couldn't tell
the difference, end of discussion. People can and undoubtedly will whine and
make excuses, but that he couldn't and didn't distinguish between the amps
in this test is not an opinion, it's a FACT. Intellectual dishonesty or
sloppiness like that is not going to win many converts to an argument.

Were you really waiting for intellectual honesty from dave
weil ?
These 2 words are at the antipode of his way of living.

:-(

On Sun, 15 May 2005 19:34:38 +0200, Lionel
wrote:

severian a écrit :
wrote in message
oups.com...

severian wrote:

"dave weil" wrote in message
m...

On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:22:22 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:


Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

The fact is that Zipser could not tell the difference, he amply

demonstrated

that in the test. How is that "opinion?" Let alone "opinion stated as

fact?"


Generic excuse: blind tests make the listener(s) "stress out",
rendering their golden ears tin and making them unable to tell ****
fron shineola.

Specific excuses:
1)Zipser had a hangover
2)the testers made "noises"
3)Zipser was just "getting it" when the test was ended by a bad ABX
box.


Excuses, excuses!!



True, excuses excuses, but any observation or whining on his part about the
test being biased or noises preventing him or whatever does not alter the
FACT that in this test he could not tell the difference. So when dave weil
says "opinion" that's a complete piece of BS, the FACT is he couldn't tell
the difference, end of discussion. People can and undoubtedly will whine and
make excuses, but that he couldn't and didn't distinguish between the amps
in this test is not an opinion, it's a FACT. Intellectual dishonesty or
sloppiness like that is not going to win many converts to an argument.

Were you really waiting for intellectual honesty from dave
weil ?
These 2 words are at the antipode of his way of living.

:-(

Perhaps you should go back and review the record. It is clear, and
even the "objectivists" were forced to admit it, that the Zipser tests
weren't conducted to the normal "gold standard" of dbts. It is also
clear that the trend, when the test was prematurely stopped, was that
Mr. Zipser was approaching getting a statistically signignicant number
of trials correct.

There were way too many flaws in the testing procedure to claim, even
using dbt proponents own standards, any sort of significant result.

dave weil said:

Perhaps you should go back and review the record. It is clear, and
even the "objectivists" were forced to admit it, that the Zipser tests
weren't conducted to the normal "gold standard" of dbts. It is also
clear that the trend, when the test was prematurely stopped, was that
Mr. Zipser was approaching getting a statistically signignicant number
of trials correct.

There were way too many flaws in the testing procedure to claim, even
using dbt proponents own standards, any sort of significant result.


What's the big deal?
I'm perfectly willing to accept that there are no audible differences
between the Yamaha and the Pass amps in a DBT.

As DBTs don't resemble everyday listening, any difference heard in
sighted listening is valid to the listener, regardless whether visual
or other clues are responsible for that. End of story.

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

"8hz" dave a écrit :

On Sun, 15 May 2005 19:34:38 +0200, Lionel
wrote:


severian a écrit :

wrote in message
egroups.com...


severian wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
om...


On Sat, 14 May 2005 20:22:22 -0400, Howard Ferstler
wrote:



Note that when Nousaine visited our little friend down in
Miami some time back, the DBT involved a pair of expensive
Pass monoblocks and a rather vintage Yamaha integrated amp,
and Zipser could not reliably hear a difference.

Opinion stated as fact.

The fact is that Zipser could not tell the difference, he amply

demonstrated


that in the test. How is that "opinion?" Let alone "opinion stated as

fact?"


Generic excuse: blind tests make the listener(s) "stress out",
rendering their golden ears tin and making them unable to tell ****
fron shineola.

Specific excuses:
1)Zipser had a hangover
2)the testers made "noises"
3)Zipser was just "getting it" when the test was ended by a bad ABX
box.


Excuses, excuses!!



True, excuses excuses, but any observation or whining on his part about the
test being biased or noises preventing him or whatever does not alter the
FACT that in this test he could not tell the difference. So when dave weil
says "opinion" that's a complete piece of BS, the FACT is he couldn't tell
the difference, end of discussion. People can and undoubtedly will whine and
make excuses, but that he couldn't and didn't distinguish between the amps
in this test is not an opinion, it's a FACT. Intellectual dishonesty or
sloppiness like that is not going to win many converts to an argument.

Were you really waiting for intellectual honesty from dave
weil ?
These 2 words are at the antipode of his way of living.

:-(


Perhaps...


Eh, eh