richard clark says you can not hear the difference between amps - and he has $10,000 on it
BUT, his test is flawed in such a way as to make it near impossible to hear a difference if there is one.

many, many people on here will tell you that you definitely can hear a difference between some amps

you will get a much, MUCH more noticeable difference in sq by changing front speakers rather than changing amps

Without opening a big can o' worms, RC's test isnt flawed. In fact its perfect, and eliminates all the variables (as any good experiment does) bar one to prove exactly what he was intending.

In terms of Amps for Sound Quality, there will always be a detectable difference because in the real world, we dont eliminate all those variables.

If you call Audison/Alpine/DD the good brands, then yes, stepping up to them will make a HUGE difference in sound, and will always be worth the money you spend on them. Like Spyne has said, more money on the front stage will make a bigger improvement, but only to a point (until you need better amps to make them shine more!!). The next step up from those units have a marked improvement again, but nowhere near as detectable.

Sooner or later, you will hit that point where you ask the question 'is more money worth the improvement'. Trust me, you're not at that point yet!!

The biggest thing is, spending money on amps and components go hand in hand. No use buying a Butler if you're only running Jaycars, because thats just a waste.

Sometimes I think its incredible how misinformation spreads!! Richard never said there wasnt a difference, he has said that when all variables bar one is controlled (basically, brand) the any difference in the gain stage of an amplifier is inaudible.

Amps do sound different.

Can I ask what criteria did you meet to establish this power amplifier sounds different to another?



Did you eliminate soft clipping? This can be caused by a power amplifier unable to produce the expected wattage, and the electrical supply to it. Example might be a “D” class amplifier sounds better simply because it is more efficient compared to an AB class.



Most power amplifiers (and for that mater head units) have built in frequency boast attenuation, how did you test for this, and correct for differences?



Gain attenuation.

How did you match gains? You do realise the human system can pick 1 dB with ease. This cannot be set accurately by visual media.



I will do a test.



I have seven DLS A3 power amplifiers in my room, all unopened and sequential serials.



I guarantee not ONE of them will sound the same as the other, because in the real world we cannot eliminate the variables.



When I go to a shop and try another seven DLS A3 I guarantee none of these will sound the same as mine.



It looks like I am stuck going from shop to shop, hoping to find the ultimate power amplifier.



Or I could use an oscilloscope… nah they are not real.



So who wants to place bets that none sound the same?

ok my bad.....any chance of a link so i can see what this guy is saying? from what i can gather, eliminating all of the variables kind of eliminates the need for an experiment....so im guessing his $10 000 is safe with him

now for my $10 challenge....do red cars go faster than blue cars? (keeping in mind that all variables other than colour are eliminated)

just to bring it back on topic....it looks like people agree that amps are different.....just not in the case Richard Clark's test

edit: i just saw abmolech's post and was going to reply to it and then re-read it....now im confused

are you saying that amplifiers DO sound different?

of course they do, otherwise we'd all buy the cheapest ones.

do cheap amps sound better for dodgy as cd recordings/burns?..........cors

Every amplifier will sound differnt if you don't remove the variables.



One day an audison thesis is "the best", next, a audison thesis from another shop. No way can any amplifier sound the same, unless of cause you set them up the same, but no one can in the "real world"





I bet I can get a jaycar power amplifier to sound better than an audison thesis, easy to do, I will make sure the audison is setup in the most undesirable way.(Assuming they are not faulty)



Anyone want the bet?



If they measure the same do they sound the same?



I guarantee if they measure the same, then, they will sound the same.

on a dollar per unit of sound quality basis they probably do, yeah...


zion you are a wacky guy...

Depending on how bad the recording is, but a better amp will be more revealing to the data on the cd.

Do cheap watch tell the time s well as expensive ones?







I guarantee I can make any cheap power amplifier, sound better than any expensive power amplifier you can name?(assuming they are not faulty)

Anybody up for it.

No cheap watches do not tell the time as well as expensive ones due to the components in some ultra high end watches are not affected by the temperature as much as a cheap and nasty one, amongst other thing that make the high qaulity watch superior, maybe kinetik recharge off the pulse, how many cheap watches have that-indirectly that makes the expensive watch better.

Will you be modding the cheap amp with new components and ultimately only leaving the chassis of the cheap amp? Sounds like a good project though abmolech

I could alter the internals, but for the test i won't.



Still believe I can make the cheapy sound better?

I disagree. I've seen cheap and expensive watches lose time. Cheaper doesn't necessarily mean worse.

With using a flat equaliser, a close to perfect source, same speakers and same listening environment I think the better built amplifier will sound better.

I agree, however I was indicating an expensive watch that has a justified price tag with superior internals. Some expensive watches and anything for that fact are expensive for the brand name and purely because they are just expensive.

Your taking the argument way out into left field and being facetious, like saying a piece of angus fed sirloin is worse then McDonalds, but not mentioning that your adding in extra variables like the steak being cooked on a bbq until charcol. Of couse you can make a thesis sound like crap if you set the gains incorrectly and put it into clipping or adjust the crossovers so it's only playing a certain frequency range, but we aren't talking about that are we?



Straight out of the box is the comparison I think we are looking for, not introducing random variables into the test. There might be small differences which you are talking about, but eliminating this variable and coming from there is what the discussion is about. I have no idea and I will admit it, as I have never bought two of the same aplifier and compared them side by side. Hell I have enough trouble saving up enough just for one amplifier



Similar to looking a diamond. Yes there are different grades of diamond in raw form, but refining this into a finished product to get to the end result is what we are talking about. You want the best raw form to start with, the least imperfections and go from there. This is what the original post was referring to I think.



And for measuring the same and sounding the same, simple answer is no.

So what is the measurement can't measure that makes a power amplifier sound different?



And since measurement cannot define this "secret' ingredient, then surely no amount of measurable difference should over ride this "special" quality.







I guarantee you that that out of the box the gains etc are not set the same (unless a lucky coincidence)



Since when do you want to start defining variables that I can and cannot have?



You never had ANY for your tests, why should you impose any on mine.

Well your starting to reduce some variables, do you think it is fair that my "cheapy" amplifier has a boast at known "problem frequencies' and the expensive one is dead flat.



Still think it is a fair test?

better input circuitry, better output circuitry, better design.

a better sounding amp will sound better because it is better.

if an amp is not better than another amp, then how can it be called better?

the big spec left out of most lists for comparison is phase linearity. that's not in the THD or S/N or dynamic range or power output...
but it will make a difference to the sound.

also, what's the point of a 'better' sounding amp if it's gonna blow a fuse when run at high levels because they went cheap on the heat sinks?

better amps can be better in two ways: physically or sonically.
some amps are better than others in one way, sonically or physically. other amps are better in both ways.

generally a better amp will be better in both ways, and price can be a good indicator of this.

edit: I guess some amps could be better due to the higher retail price, so the person selling it makes better profit.. then that would be better too -for the salesman, not the consumer.

if it's just the SQ we are talking about, then disregard the build quality, price, profitability, availability altogether. just purely SQ.
I think the more expensive amps will still be at the top of the list.

Also using the same crossover points, the same low pass and high pass filters, and the gains both set correctly

That sounds fair enough.

Whats this cheapy amp abmolech?

How do you know there the same, by eye good enough?

Still happy if my power amplifier has inbuilt EQ to "fix" known problems?

If you close you right eye tilt your head to 87degrees from 337mm back from what you are looking at your 20/20 vision should easily be able to line it up

so your happy if the gains look the same, even though I know my cheapy has a much higher gain structure?



And still happy that mine has an inbuilt eq (fixed)



Happy that the crossovers on mine are 24 dB and the expensive one 18 dB?



Also setting the points off the marks on the knob ... mine has 50 and 5000 Hz markings only?

Are you saying the better built amp will sound better? How do you know which amps we are testing back to back? Because I am not sure which ones they are?

If it has a much higher gain structure doesnt it need the internals to back it up otherwise it will end up clipping?
Who says the expensive amp doesnt have inbuilt equalising?
We dont know the expensive amps crossovers, very well could be 18db
Set the amps to play full range frequencys

Sorry danc666... no more from me... back on topic

We could do something really unusual and measure them?

But we don't have any equipment that could do that in the "real world".





The point is a number of false statements were made, I sought to correct some of them.



Price can be a precursor to "quality", but it does depend on what feature set you want.



Audison thesis is the best power amplifier have tested, does it make it the best power amplifier?



Feature set?



Back up and support?

Known amplifier, so plenty of people to fix etc

Robust

Size

Cooling ability

Feel good factor (not to be under rated)

Fit for the task



One test you will never hear of (the marketing boys hate it)



Reactance



No problem reading the "I give up" from the cheapy's smoke signals.



Note that this NEVER featured in anybodies diatribe on power amplifiers.....

This was not meant to be an attack on yourself, however I read this talking about power ratings, not sonically, as this is what the thread was originally about. Such as listening at normal listening levels such as 25wrms.

Things such as Pulsar mentioned above will impact on how an amplifier sounds. For me, I noticed the difference when the gains on my new amplifier were set appropriately compairing a SS Van Gogh to my old sony XM444 (I think that is the model number anyway). At the same listening levels, the sound was smoother and expressed more control. No settings were changed on the HU, as it is has basic bass and treble alignment only which were manually set. I have no idea if this is down purely to power and how much the amplifier was stressed but it sounded better to my ears and was noticable.





I'll accept that and I imagine that it will be difficult and pointless for a manufacturer to do this as this is the first thing a consumer will adjust. Not to mention that it probably moves during transport.






I never even mentioned a test, however I do believe that there are differences between amplifiers, as I mentioned above from my own experiences. I do believe also that the money and time is better spent on angling and front stage as this will have the most impact on anything. The differences are small, but audible. If the



How about this;

If out of the box, the gain structure is matched, use the same crossover points for both amplifiers set from the HU, and measure at the same DB reading, no EQ adjustments then I do believe that you will hear the difference between the two. So that is why I believe out of the box, that amplifiers can sound different, and expressed the opinion above.



A question for you, do amplifiers adjust the harmonics that they receive and have different sonic characteristics? I have no idea on how they amplify the sound and am willing to learn.



Of course you can make the cheapy sound better than the 5k audison, but what is the point. You want to maximise the given potential of each amplifier, not spend $5k on something to deliberately make is sound terrible. You can keep your $10 .



Do you use DLS amplifiers? If you do why have you chosen them over say Jaycar? Aesthetics?



Maybe this should be moved to another thread?

List out some "proper" requirements.



Size

Heat dissipation

Inbuilt features? crossovers, eq etc

Number of channels

Expected frequency range

Service and support?

Price



Any brands you won't touch?

Can you please elaborate on reactance?

I presume your prepared to measure them?



How do you know there is no inbuilt eq (fixed)?



How did you know one or both were not clipping?

If I knew how to I would, but at the moment I am lacking in the technichal knowledge to measure gains.



I don't know that they were not clipping, but that would require the use of an osciliscope would it not to measure the wave form?



As for the inbuilt EQ, would this not be a characteristic of the amplifier itself. Should this be taken into the equation when evaluating amplifiers? Is this not why we spend rediculous amounts of money on equalisers?



BTW Danc666, I would spend $900 on each amplifier, both a 4 channel or mono.

I guess the question I want to ask is how do amplifiers actually amplify the sound. In this amplification stage, is anything effected?

Reactance is load (impedance) out of phase.



A resistor is a load always in phase, and this is how most power amplifiers are tested (dummy load)



You can get capacitive reactance and inductive reactance, and are normally rated in how far out of phase they are in radians.



Best example I can think of is a "scrum"



There are many packs that can take a straight resistive load, (pushing straight) What sets the good ones apart is when the "screw" the scrum and the load comes from the side.This is reactance, how well they handle side load.



Lets put it this way, I have never seen a cheap power amplifier take anything but a resistive load. One test of 50 amplifiers, only three survived.



Have a look for published results of reactive loads, DLS has done so, so have a few other quality makers.

How dare you set out almost exactly the requirements Richard Clark used to determine power amplifier differences. Bad boy.

I can tell you this is much better than working on a set of financial statements at the moment.

he's learning.



wat RC does is test the AMPLIFIER, he bypasses alot of the input circuitry as the PCB u get when u buy an 'amp' consists of an 'amp' and other input circuitry. all that EQ and all other variances on the INPUT are not included in the test of the AMP.



this is why it can be claimed that a good tube amp will sound exactly the same as a good solid state (good being technically correct, not sonically pleasant).

Ive opened this because I was enjoying the previous thread, however Off topic it was, before it was closed. As recommended, a new thread is opened for people to discuss the technical side of RC's test.

If you look closely, RC's test is obviously very clever, and he will never lose. Thats not to say its rigged, because its actually a very good controlled experiment.

His test is asking one simple question: Are there any 'attributes' to an amplifier, that are sonically detectable, and not the variables gain/power/frequency response/output impedance/noise and distortion??

Well, everyone claims to 'hear' more control, it 'sounds better', or because its a Class A or D or G it 'must' be better. However, we know these qualities can be associated with one of the above, unless someone proves otherwise (not Topology itself is not one of those above ).

Like Abmolech mentioned in the other thread, gain is a big one. Set the two amps to the same gain, via measurements to ensure less then 1dB difference, and neither amp is any longer 'louder' then the other.

And so we go with the others. Distortion or noise.... keep it out of clipping (including soft).

Frequency response (due to fixed internal EQ's/bass boost/preamp stages) can be set with an external EQ or disconnection of the settings.

Output Impedance (jump in now all you tube fans) can be set simply by increasing the impedance levels seen by one of the amps. The 'Tubey' goodness, is nothing more then relegated damping factors being really low. Wanna test it? Use a really high resistance cable on your speakers, then have a listen!!

RC is basically saying 'when you eliminate all the variables external to the amplifier gain structure, all amplifiers are sonically identical'. Which in a round about way, means you can make any amplifier sound like another simply with an EQ, a resistor and an oscilloscope.

Do I think amplifiers sound different? Of course I do. But I also know why. I don't convince myself its because of some 'sonic' property that cant be replicated external to the gain structure, I use other methods to judge whether to buy an amp. Build quality, heat dissipation abilities (doesn't get internally hot), after sales service, 'feel good' feeling in buying them, reputation etc. etc.

During your discussions, try to keep it as 'emotionless' as possible. Prevents fights and arguments, and encourages healthy discussion.

Basically what he is saying, is take everything out of the picture except the bare Amplification circuitry, and every amp sounds the same, and technically he is right.

It's everything else that makes up an "amp" as we describe it, is what makes the sonic differences.

Luke

Given that there is a great variety of Head Units that can perform advanced crossover functions and EQ, wouldn't it be great if amps started dropping those functions in the quest for sonic obscurity?

I would love to buy a reasonably priced amp that had a gain pot and 'bridge' switch only, in order to simplify the pre-amp stage as much as possibe. My home audio amps have one switch - the On/Off switch and I love it because of that. Car audio amps seem to have a massive amount of 'features' in order to sell them to the average joe blow that thinks that these features will make it sound better. How many SQ people on this forum make full use of the cross-over's and EQ available on their amps?

its a shame the other thread got closed because there was a wealth of information in it. can we reopen that thread and tack it onto this one?



anyway, i buy an amp because it sounds better!!!! pre amp gear is uber important in the amp, and i will spend money on it to get a nice sounding amp.



and its not just a freq response we r talking here. an amp will have a huge amount of impact on staging and imaging aswell.



not to mention the fact that if i run an amp with a high THD, my tweets become alot more harsh. noise is a very important consideration in relation to tweets IMO.



for example, i find that back to back between my JVC and the jaycar 4ch, i get a few holes in my image when using the jaycar 4ch.



so theres two very good reasons why i spend money on amps. but then, i run a front stage thats worth more than wat i paid for my amps to.



in the end, we spend money on the entire package because we dont have any other real choice.

not done this thread merging thing before, see how we go.....

that seemed to work - all the valid posts from the other thread are here now
/me walks around like he knows what he's doing

No no no, RC's challenge doesnt prove to you that an amp is "good".

What he actually does is detune the "better" amp to sound like the worse amp.

Lets say you have an amp with absolutely no distortion, 0% (yes i like to dream). Lets say you also have an amp that produces even order harmonics which can give the music a slightly warmer feel.
You would expect the amp with no distortion to be the absolute best for reproduction, however RC would then add even order distortion to it, to make it sound exactly like the other amp.

So now we have 2 amps that sound exactly the same, and the "better" amp has lost its "better" characterstics (or lack of?).

so effectively RC is a strathfields installer .........cors

so how does RC add crossover distortion, phase non-linearity and crosstalk - I mean those are a lot of the things that can make amps sound different too...
and then there's noise too, not all amps are 'black' like we'd wish them to be.

what is the point of trying to compare amps if you make them both sound the same???and then having to get it right 20 times (is it?) without any doubt...

I found at similar gains, that I can hear a lot of difference in tonality of some amps (with all other equipment the same) - that's good enough for me


although jitter makes more difference

if he did stuff with all the amps to get them to sound right then he would have some tuning figures to make it easy for him to do that?.We dont want RC hype we want the tune figures? if theres no figures how did he tune all the amps the same?............cors

That's just it, in real world conditions amps do sound different.

Read the test, he does NOT add distortion.



He makes each amplifier stay within the "non clipping zone". People complain this is not fair because the "better amplifier" has more head room (won't clip as early as the other amplifier). They complain that a class D amplifier sounds the same a s tube under these circumstances.



Point your paying for how an amplifier behaves when clipped.



Solution

Buy a power amplifier with enough head room to prevent clipping.

Or you can accept you prefer distortion (clipping)



If the power amplifier has a measurable frequency boast that cannot be easily defeated, he uses an EQ to make it measure flat. People moan that this is adding distortion. I am sure he could add a boost to the other power amplifier instead of removing the boost, would you expect a different outcome?



Frequency attenuation and crossovers filters are also measured and allowed for.



Operating the power amplifier so that the speaker impedance determines how the output circuit will behave (instead of the output circuit controlling the speaker), is also compensated for with a resistor (IE operating OUTSIDE the manufactures specifications)



So how audible is an doubling increase of THD on an amplifier when you speaker starts with a MINIMUM of 10 % ? (Clue it is not)



Dampening factor, when the copper wire resistance to the speaker can instantly halve it? Or more importantly when changing the "Q" of the driver (enclosure) can change it exponentially. (Ever heard of a "critically dampened")

It is insignificant to the speaker network dampening.



Loss in stereo separation (bridging). Your CD uses two separate tracks for left and right (unlike vinyl or tape). It starts with 100 % difference, sure it can be "whittled away" but as long as it doesn't drop below 60 % it cannot be heard. Chances of hearing this are close to Nil, only real occasion is using low impedance network with the signals in close proximity (Isn't going to happen in any decent electronics).



Last and somewhat fair complaint, is the test is only done with music. You can get test tones and warbling to highlight various distortion. So with the right set of tones etc, you could possibly pick the difference. You can get "noise tones" to highlight the noise floor in quiet passages for example.

Point

None of these exist in music to any useful degree, why test a power amplifier for doing something it was not designed to do? This is a "real world" test using music, people who complain should get a grip.



Is a watt a watt?



Nope a 1 kHz watt is not the same as a 2 kHz watt.



All amplifiers sound the same?



Only when music,speakers and the power amplifier is operated with its limits. And non amplifier differences are removed/accounted for. (IE filters, same gain structure etc)

Outside the limits they will sound different.



Can I get any amplifier (even the same batch) to sound different?



Sure, set them differently. Only proper way is to measure them the same.



How does the test help us?



The cheap amplifier is as good as the expensive one?

Depends what your paying for. Service, reliability, aesthetics, fit for the task, built in DAC eq etc etc.



It is getting harder to build a bad power amplifier, (same as watches) but this doesn't mean that some manufactures insist on trying to built the worst.

So its the imput and pre amp side of things that makes amps sound different?? and when all of this is removed then they will sound the same? (which it is not when you install it in your car)

btw i like reading this stuff as well just didn't ask if you can make all amps sound the same just how much to spend to get one of good quality.

and yes i think that amps sound different unless of course you take out the stuff that changes the sound not just amplifes the sound.

No, he doesnt!! That was my point. He is saying that any audible differences in the amplifiers are from gain/power/distortion/noise/output impedance or frequency response. NOTHING ELSE!! The bad amp can be made to sound like the good amp, by adding bits and pieces external to the gain structure. In his tests, he has multiple times replicated the 'tube warmth' in a non-tube amplifier. Thats the whole point.

Warmth is simply a term used to describe a higher output impedance, and therefore lower damping factor.


Yes, and Yes. Bingo.

YES!!!! we have a winner



thats exactly wat we r paying for when we buy an amp that sonically sounds better!! i certainly dont buy amps based only on physical differences such as reliability etc. i've tested all amps that i've bought on my front stage before purchasing.



why cant we buy a pure amp? probably so that manufacturers can differentiate their product. it probably ends up being about the same price point for similar performance if u were to buy an amp and a pre amp, but im only guessing here.











thanks

so why wasnt it called the $10 000 amplifier circuitry challenge?

now that ive read a bit more about it, by limiting it to the word "amplifier" indicates to me that the physical amplifier as a whole is being compared...where in this test everything that can change the sound has been removed

RC is a smart guy, but couldnt he have just written a technical article or something somewhere

to 99% of people this test would mean nothing