Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp? (Read 16892 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #50 –
Quote from: antz on
For my part, it was not my intention to sound snobby and exclusive. ... If you aren't sure about accepting it because you don't understand it, that's not something I'd criticize you for.

In hindsight, I should not have quoted your comment when I made that post, Antz.  In fact, you continued right on with a thorough point-by-point explanation which in fact was the opposite of "snobby and exclusive".  Taken out of context, your comment sounded similar to Ed's, but you were kind enough to continue right on and took time to help me understand the arguments and added that there are in fact badly built amps to be avoided. 

Sometimes I wish that the "quick edit" button still stayed with a post hours or days later - especially now that I see that quoting your post was not really an accurate example of my complaint about people who sniff at other people's various level of understanding with dismissive "it's settled science, the debate is over, you're obviously ignorant" kind of comments.

I've always interpreted short, curt comments like that as someone trying to flaunt his own understanding and gratify his ego, rather than genuinely trying to help the next guy out ... but that might just be my interpretation.

Either way, quoting you out of the broader context of your helpful comments wasn't appropriate and I apologize if I lumped you in with the "snobby and exclusive" comment.

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #51 –
AJ ... I wonder if you're still checking this thread.  I procrastinated buying the Yamaha R-S500 amp you recommended three weeks ago and only now finally sat down, credit card in hand, and went to Amazon to order the thing. 

I really appreciated the straight recommendation without too much spec-talk, as I don't understand much about what kind of wattage is appropriate for a certain speaker ... and I know nothing about ohms, hertz, etc.  It would be a lot of homework and a steep learning curve if I have to choose my next amp myself.  Much of this thread went right over my head.

You recall I'm replacing an Onkyo 5.1 amp which I've been using as my stereo amp.  I listen to music from my Mac going to the Onkyo via digital optical ... and my Onkyo has two digital optical inputs. 

As far as I can tell, the R-S500 you recommended has no digital optical inputs. 

To further complicate matters, I realize now that I can actually use two digital optical inputs because I have my Mac on my desk, which I use for recorded music ... and behind me in the same room, I have music keyboards that I want to hook up to a separate laptop to play software synthesizers.  That would create another optical out from the laptop.

I could just google stereo amps with two digital inputs, but then I'm back to not knowing what I'm doing with regard to the specs that are appropriate for my Martin Logan Motion 40's.

I also really liked that the receiver you recommended had basic tone controls (I would use those constantly) and almost no embedded menus.  A real 70's looking "everything out front" amp.  My Onkyo is a drag because it's made to amplify a 5.1 video system, with all controls displayed on an HDTV screen. 

Does an amp like the R-S500 - but with two digital optical ins - come to mind?  Again, keeping in mind the demands of Martin Logan Motion 40 speakers.  (Click for specs.)

If two optical ins is rare or unheard of for a stereo amp, is there an amp like the R-S500 with one input that you can recommend?





Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #53 –
Quote from: greynol on
AJ already gave you a link to a receiver with two optical inputs.

You're right.  The Yamaha R-N500BL.  I was so focused on the one I had chosen, I forgot that there were a couple other links in AJ's posts.

That model is discontinued, though.  I'm sure there's got to be a recent one that has the same features. 

Greynol ... if you don't mind me asking you since you read all the posts ... when I read that digital optical is supposed to sound better than analog outs (for stereo), is that improvement something that the serious listeners who post on HA would agree is readily discernible?  Or is that improvement one of those "I can tell the difference between FLAC and 320kpbs" kind of things, i.e. better in theory but indistinguishable in practical reality?




Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #54 –
Quote from: John 31415926 on
when I read that digital optical is supposed to sound better than analog outs (for stereo), is that improvement something that the serious listeners who post on HA would agree is readily discernible?
Optical is good for eliminating ground loops.  If there is audible hum with an analog connection, but not with an optical connection then clearly the optical connection will sound better.

If there isn't a problem with audible hum, and both of the DACs being compared are competently designed, then they will be indistinguishable.

It is best not to draw an analogy with lossy compression or try to shoehorn the situation into some esoteric "theoretical" category.  Psychoacoustics and hardware are apples and oranges.

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #55 –
Quote from: greynol on
If there isn't a problem with audible hum, and both of the DACs being compared are competently designed, then they will be indistinguishable.

Thanks, Greynol.

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #56 –
Quote from: John 31415926 on
Does an amp like the R-S500 - but with two digital optical ins - come to mind?  Again, keeping in mind the demands of Martin Logan Motion 40 speakers.  (Click for specs.)

If two optical ins is rare or unheard of for a stereo amp, is there an amp like the R-S500 with one input that you can recommend?

Coax and optical (AKA toslink)  inputs and outputs generally pass the identical same data, so it is the transport mechanism (light based versus electrical current) that varies. Thus  inexpensive black boxes that interconnect the two are readily available.  Google "toslink coax converter"   (without quotes) and be rewarded with many options , of which even the most inexpensive have no audible impact on the signal.

Similiarly, googling on "toslink splitter"  (again no quotes on the actual search) will reward you with many options for increasing the number of optical outputs available in your system.

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #57 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
Quote from: John 31415926 on
Does an amp like the R-S500 - but with two digital optical ins - come to mind?  Again, keeping in mind the demands of Martin Logan Motion 40 speakers.  (Click for specs.)

If two optical ins is rare or unheard of for a stereo amp, is there an amp like the R-S500 with one input that you can recommend?

Coax and optical (AKA toslink)  inputs and outputs generally pass the identical same data, so it is the transport mechanism (light based versus electrical current) that varies. Thus  inexpensive black boxes that interconnect the two are readily available.  Google "toslink coax converter"   (without quotes) and be rewarded with many options , of which even the most inexpensive have no audible impact on the signal.

Similiarly, googling on "toslink splitter"  (again no quotes on the actual search) will reward you with many options for increasing the number of optical outputs available in your system.

You seem to understand why I asked about optical vs RCA.  I haven't looked at every amp on the market yet, but of the few that I looked at, one optical input shows up on an amp that is around $300.  No problem there.  For two optical inputs, the cheapest amp I've seen is $600.  No bueno.  This was, after all, a thread about spending only as much as needed for a well built amp - and not more. 

That's why I asked about optical vs RCA.  If I have two sound sources going into the amp, but only have one optical input, then I can use RCA for the other, if the difference in sound quality is indistinguishable.  I'm willing to just take Greynol's word for that; you guys get around these things much more than I do.  Thanks too for the suggestion to look at TOSLink to coax converters.  I didn't know there was such a thing.  I've never used coax before and have no idea why it exists as something separate from RCA.  Yet more reading, I guess, to learn about that.

I know there is nothing inherently expensive about two optical inputs.  My cheapie Onkyo amp right now has two optical inputs (plus coax and multiple HDMIS) and it cost me only $399 for the amp *with* all the 5.1 speakers.  Everything works great on this thing.  But again, this amp has embedded menus that require a TV screen, no tone control knobs, etc ... not ideal for a music corner. 

Otherwise, I would just go out and get another one of these.

Jeez, I really like the vintage 70's look of these newer Yamaha amps, the one AJ recommended.  That's what amps looked like when I was young and beautiful ... and they seem to work right at my level of understanding about audio gear.  Nothing at all confusing about this interface.

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #58 –
If you need additional optical inputs, you can just get a small toslink DAC and run that into an RCA input.

Or you could get a toslink splitter, though I would personally prefer an active toslink switch rather than a splitter. A simple splitter is really nothing more than a couple of pieces of plastic and some lenses, and you manually move a knob to select a different signal. An active switch does the switching electronically, and most come with a handy remote control.

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #59 –
Quote from: KozmoNaut on
If you need additional optical inputs, you can just get a small toslink DAC and run that into an RCA input.

Good suggestion, but adaptors and converters would be my last resort.  I haven't looked at Onkyo amps yet.  If my 5.1 Onkyo has two opticals, perhaps their stereo amps do too.

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #60 –
Quote from: ajinfla on
Quote from: Northpack on
This is one example of a 50 W stereo Class D amplifier the size of a cigarette box which is well build, totally transparent
No.

Most inexpensive Class D have poor output filtering. If going Class D, stick with any of the Hypex or newer ICE chip designs.


I have one of these, and while it may not be a great amp, it works well in my workshop driving both 4 and 8 ohm speakers at satisfying volume.  I don't want a huge receiver or component amp when all I need is 30-40 Watts out and a line level in, 2 channels.  Are there any small amps with quality chip sets that don't cost $300?

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #61 –
Quote from: Nichttaub on
I have one of these, and while it may not be a great amp, it works well in my workshop driving both 4 and 8 ohm speakers at satisfying volume.  I don't want a huge receiver or component amp when all I need is 30-40 Watts out and a line level in, 2 channels.
Right. I have several of these types (Dayton, Lepai, etc) and use them with regularity, given their small, portable but potent nature.
My only contention was the statement that they were an example of a "transparent' amp. They are not. However, that doesn't make them junk. To the contrary, as long as one understands the nature of the output filtering vs load and the slight very HF variations, it can be no big deal at all. Under many circumstances, it may be difficult if not impossible to detect. That's why I use them.

Quote from: Nichttaub on
Are there any small amps with quality chip sets that don't cost $300?
Aside from these Class D types, yes, but no ICE or Hypex that I'm aware of. There could very well be some based on newer chip designs that don't exhibit this type of filtering issue as shown. Or a non class D like this LM based design

cheers
Loudspeaker manufacturer

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #62 –
Quote from: Nichttaub on
Quote from: ajinfla on
Quote from: Northpack on
This is one example of a 50 W stereo Class D amplifier the size of a cigarette box which is well build, totally transparent
No.

Most inexpensive Class D have poor output filtering. If going Class D, stick with any of the Hypex or newer ICE chip designs.

I have one of these, and while it may not be a great amp, it works well in my workshop driving both 4 and 8 ohm speakers at satisfying volume.  I don't want a huge receiver or component amp when all I need is 30-40 Watts out and a line level in, 2 channels.  Are there any small amps with quality chip sets that don't cost $300?

The most severe problem with these amps that typically leads to their non-transparency is more their typically rising frequency response due to their relatively high source impedance at high frequencies combined with the typically rising high frequency impedance of tweeters..

For example, if you use these with appropriate equalization or with speakers with moderate to excessive high frequency losses, they can sound pretty good.

With careful equalization, a restoration of transparency is possible.  So switchmode receivers with built-in self-adjusting equalization like Audyssey can work out quite well.

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #63 –
Quote from: Arnold B. Krueger on
The most severe problem with these amps that typically leads to their non-transparency is more their typically rising frequency response due to their relatively high source impedance at high frequencies combined with the typically rising high frequency impedance of tweeters..

For example, if you use these with appropriate equalization or with speakers with moderate to excessive high frequency losses, they can sound pretty good.

With careful equalization, a restoration of transparency is possible.  So switchmode receivers with built-in self-adjusting equalization like Audyssey can work out quite well.


Also, the common but not universal practice of terminating the input to the speaker with a Zobel  could be a great and perhaps even audible benefit.

Article about correcting speaker impedance curve with a zobel.

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #64 –
Thanks, all.  Looks like the LM3886 chipset is one to keep an eye open for; and I don't have to have a Class D so I'm happy to try others.  Though I love the Ebay listing with the amp whose volume control is labeled "MIN ... MXA".   :D

Re: How do "objective" audiophiles choose an amp?

Reply #65 –
Quote from: Nichttaub on
Thanks, all.  Looks like the LM3886 chipset is one to keep an eye open for; and I don't have to have a Class D so I'm happy to try others.  Though I love the Ebay listing with the amp whose volume control is labeled "MIN ... MXA".   :D

Potentially a good choice. I've seen 3886's in the schematics of a numer of highly regarded active speakers such as:

http://schematicscom.blogspot.com/2016/08/behringer-b2031-schematic-active-2-way.html

Vendor guidelines for use and reasonable expectations for performance:

http://www.ti.com/lit/an/snaa021b/snaa021b.pdf

http://www.ti.com/lit/an/sloa068/sloa068.pdf