Re: how good are class D amplifiers?

In article <6bOdneKZUvwVmMXbnZ2dnUVZ8v-dnZ2d@xxxxxx>, Rob
<remove_patch_oulian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article <Y8mdnf9VUrCSh8vbRVnyiQA@xxxxxx>, Rob
<remove_patch_oulian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>


and surprisingly (to me) there doesn't seem to have been many
rigorous tests to underpin the 'little if any difference' thesis.

You would need to clarify what you mean as I am unsure of the point
you are making.

I'll try.

1. It is maintained that most amplifiers sound the same;
2. I haven't see many tests that support (1)

That does not seem to me to be the same point as you made above. :-)

Nor it is clear to me who "maintains" this as it isn't something I've
said. :-) I've seen various people say variations on "well designed
and appropriately used" amps give indistinguishable results. But that
isn't statement (1). So are you asking for evidence for a claim no-one
has made?

Is your concern simply that the evidence is based only on all the cases
tried? If so, it is open to you or anyone else to collect more evidence.
i.e. to carry out more comparison tests of appropriate kinds.

To do this you would have to define what you mean by "most". i.e.
do you mean more than half of all amps in use, or more than half
the designs, or more than half of those ever used, etc? e.g. can
we ignore the amps in TVs and portable radios and cheap 'music
centers'? If so, we have to define the line that rules in/out
a given amp, and give a plausible basis for doing so.

You would then have to devise a performable test/experiment and do
so on a basis that deals with why you feel all the tests thus far
have somehow been 'unrepresentitive' of "most" amplifiers. This means
giving a plausible and testable reason for why the previous tests
all 'selected' amps such that none of them were in the same alleged
catagory as "most" according to your claim.

You would then have to *perform* the tests and collect the evidence.
There would have to be a statistically significant number of tests
and you'd have to be able to establish the level of significance.

Then a decision could be based on that *evidence*.

If the above isn't done, then your idea is a speculation which the
current evidence seems not to support. This puts it into the "teapot
orbiting the sun" class. i.e. a fanciful speculation which can't be
tested and which the evidence we have shows no sign of supporting.

It is easy to make up speculations that remain untested or are
essentially intestable. However this means we can invent an infinite
number of them which may all conflict. Given this, it seems to me
to be a waste of time to take them seriously *unless and until*
someone does the above process to find evidence from a test whose
outcome had the ability to either conflict or support the idea.


I can only point out that "most" (indeed all) the relevant tests I know of
showed no sign that those who listened could distinguish one amp from
another - given a fairly basic set of requirements like level matching.
Interestingly, this includes cases where I and others were quite surprised
that those involved *couldn't* distinguish as there were quite large,
easily measureable, differences. Indeed, in more than one case the
amps compared were deliberately chosen with the aim of being able to find
clear differences. Some of the participants chose them for this reason,
but then failed when tested to tell one from another.

This means that we have in audio a history of people who are confident
they can 'hear differences', but when tested fail to show they can hear
what they believe. In this context it seems reasonable to be wary of
claims - although it is quite clear that some differences are indeed
audible, and hence are not contentious. So, for example, tests generally
proceed on the basis of level matching as it is generally accepted that
a change of level can be audible if reasonably large.

Given this, I'd be interested in *evidence* to the effect that it isn't the
case that 'most' amps *don't* sound indistinguishable in an appropriate
comparison - excepting for reasons which are uncontenious and already
understood/accepted. Alas, arguments, discussing the meanings of words,
opinions, speculations, etc, aren't evidence

Of course, if your point is that 'most' exhibit problems in use like
obvious distortions, changes in response, etc, then I can see why you would
be concerned. There may well be 'many' amplifiers that produce audibly
different results - indeed there are various ways to cause audible
changes if we wish. However note the qualifications I have made about
what was being compared, and how.

However in the absence of evidence I can't see much point in what you are
now saying.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: how good are class D amplifiers?
    ... Is your concern simply that the evidence is based only on all the cases ... amplifiers can sound different. ... do you mean more than half of all amps in use, ... have somehow been 'unrepresentitive' of "most" amplifiers. ...
    (uk.rec.audio)
  • Re: how good are class D amplifiers?
    ... to design two amps so that they do. ... i.e. they are found not to 'sound different'. ... As 'evidence' of 'fact' I'd agree that it's flimsy. ...
    (uk.rec.audio)
  • Re: how good are class D amplifiers?
    ... it is open to you or anyone else to collect more evidence. ... SS amplifiers can sound different. ... do you mean more than half of all amps in use, ... It is important that the distortion of the crosstalk be below ...
    (uk.rec.audio)
  • Re: One for the bottleheads
    ... there would be a very small result in favour of an audible difference. ... but that does not make them test evidence. ... But that when the amps are similar in terms of these well-known factors, ... FWIW I've now found more references to articles in USA consumer mags. ...
    (uk.rec.audio)
  • Re: Someone in RGP seriously believes OJ didnt d
    ... have doubt about other evidence. ... Anything beyond that is speculation. ... Unless you know that the suspected tainter was in a ... absolutely no reason to doubt all of it. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)