Changing variables in a review
- Thread starter PeterA
- Start date
That's one way to look at it.
I think tweekgeek sells it by the can. Compressed.
It has says nothing about how the amp sounds...all one can conclude from it is that it is a solid power supply but not whether it is a good amp or not.
Yes, exactly - well put.
I want to hear and report on the product as it comes out of the box. That establishes a baseline against which mods or accessories can be assessed. That is what the manufacturer expects. What he does not expect is a review of someone else's power cord with his product.
@Al M. - when you start reviewing for publication and don't use a product as delivered, tell me what feedback you get on your approach.
Well, Tim, try to refute my logic in post #41 then, which shows that, when you look at the whole power delivery chain, the argument of having to use stock power cords quickly leads to absurdity.
Besides, reviewers do seem to use audiophile power cords. For example in Audiobeat, a magazine that you have written reviews for (your fascinating review of Shunyata Triton/Typhon greatly made me desire these components at the time), the column at the end of reviews for "Associated Equipment" often lists power conditioners and power cords. I cannot remember a statement by a reviewer that he did *not* use these components in the review at hand. So do they use the product as delivered? Methinks not.
Last edited:
Not quite.
As you should. But a potential problem there is if the new product out of the box is replacing an old product that's more than out of the box, your reference is potentially skewed right out of the starting gate. And first impressions for some can be difficult to overcome. I get the baseline thing as I pretty much mentioned as much in my previous post. But this is a performance-oriented industry and a baseline is just that. It's the beginning hopefully and not the end.
Besides, I would think the baseline in this case is really only for the reviewer for a reference to begin from not end with.
Yeah, I get that. But designers live/work in closets just like reviewers possibly even more than the rest of us. They've got their own preconceived narratives to battle (what works and what doesn't) just as the rest of us. But when reviewing product who is your intended audience?
It's not so rare for a reviewer to review/audition multiple products at the same time in the same system. It's also not so rare for a reviewer to seek to continually improve their playback system.
As for your comment above, things are a bit skewed in this industry, fer sure. But when a reviewer receives a product to review and installs it on their grandma's antique coffee table or premier rack of the day while the designer performed the vast majority of his R&D on his test bench and perhaps a few stints on other platforms including his own, from a performance perspective isn't the "out-of-the-box" baseline theory already shot to hell just by that one act?
IOW, in theory baselines serve as an excellent starting point for a reviewer's reference and for which the designer may even openly commend you for your supposed due diligence. However, theories rarely have much to do with realities.
Last edited:
For every review there is what is called a review context' in which the review takes place. Typically this is the reviewer's own audio system at the time along, with his audio room if he is fortunate enough to have one. Sometimes this is described in a special section called 'review context' or it can be dribbled out across the review. I'm not always consistent though many of my reviews include a few paragraphs about .Context
An example of such context is an audio room having dedicated lines to each outlet or having 10 gauge wire for their dedicated circuitry. I have a few audiophile power cords and signal cables available to me and various footers and other tweak products along with a couple of racks. Most of that stuff may list as associated equipment, although I am not using much of it although I do use my racks all the time. Every system has a physical context.
So when a review amp comes along it enters that context. The total product that is the review amp includes a power cord. The validity of the logic of your argument is irrelevant, and It simply does not matter if the reviewer has other power cords or whether the manufacturer is aware that people may use different cords with his product. The fact that I have 10 gauge wire in my room does nothing to invalidate plugging the amp into my wall using the power cord that comes with it. Any comparison product? Same socket. The product under review is what the manufacturer sent for review. It is that simple.
I've beaten this horse dead surely. Terrier on if you must but this is my last post on the topic.
Feedback from readers or from the manufacturer? And, what are you suggesting? I'd guess most amplifier manufacturers don't give a shit about power cords.
Looks like tima has left but he had an emphasis on one word - Context.
To that my response is... Exactly. But whose context?
On a side note, I actually find it odd about the word context. It's like if context is mentioned as a means of clarification, at the blink of an eye we're all instantaneously on the same page or understanding from the same or similar contexts? Maybe another preconceived narrative?
I don't think I have to say much about that, I already had a couple of amps on the table. repair or bias adjustment superbly engineered strict dual mono amp. i was also able to hear these amp in my own system. trust me this amp is one of the top 3 solid stage amplifiers I know. it is not only good for individual criteria such as bass or stability. it is a complete package where there is nothing wrong with it,had a very rich, full-bodied, dynamic sound.
I've heard it with MartinLogan CLS II too sounds amazing
What an awesome amplifier.looks very well made.
it is possible to build a set amp so that it has the same or better distortion values as an OTL amp. Frank Blöhbaum builds the MTA principle if you want to know more buy these items at Linearaudio. There you can also find tips for building your own and building suggestions for 211 tube amps ... etcNow you are talking!
Author | Linear Audio
linearaudio.net
Exsample ucl 11 tube set amp 3.5watt with 0.05 %THD
I can't say what that sounds like in the end, I just know that many are enthusiastic about this principle
Why not simply evaluate the amplifiers with the stock power cords that they came with, at least for a review that involves a direct comparison. If you then find that some other power cord or footer or whatever improve the sound of your system, have at it.
No. Evaluate the amp with the cable that was in your previous amp
No. Evaluate the amp with the cable that was in your previous amp
There are a few thoughts on this:
1) The amp designer is a cable “denier” and sees no point in aftermarket Power cords because What we hear it can’t be Measured.
2) Believes but doesn’t want jack up the price of his product with an aftermarket cord but still wants to deliver a functional product
3) Believes and doesn’t bother to include a rubbish cord expecting the high wonder to have his own favored cord.
I suspect most fall into camp 2 but a fair % will be camp 1. Not many products come without a cord.
With my old Pass Labs amplifiers, the stock Chinese Ching Chang power cords they came with the amplifiers sounded better than any aftermarket power cord I tried. To my taste my system context my preferences. I would summarize them as doing the least harm which all the aftermarket audio file power cords did by spotlighting certain frequencies and changing the total balance of my system.
i’ve been improved on the stock power cords with NOS cheap Chinese industrial Ching Cheng power cords. The improvement was slightly more information coming through but still little harm. These are now the only power cords I use throughout my system.
i’ve been improved on the stock power cords with NOS cheap Chinese industrial Ching Cheng power cords. The improvement was slightly more information coming through but still little harm. These are now the only power cords I use throughout my system.
Maybe I never heard the exact Ching Changs you had but I used stick cords for a long time...not believing they made much difference but I would not go back...I had only 1 aftermarket cord that sounded worse and it was also very cheap. A friend of mine who has recently gotten into the hobby was utterly shocked when he replaced his cord with a modest upgrade (pricewise) on his amp. The sound upgrade was not modest...
I don't think there are only high end pricey cords and rubbish cords. Audio Research supplied 20A cords are excellent. Stock Lamm cords are just fine. I suspect many audiophiles are at the point of simply assuming any stock cord must be replaced. Aftermarket cords almost always sound different in some way - that is what they are built to do. Listeners who hear a difference may assume it sounds better because it costs hundreds of dollars more. As David suggests you don't really get to hear what you have with wires designed to change a components soud.
I understand. It all depends what you want and what you like. Al M swore by stock power cords for years. Now he has all Zenwave. I tried Zenwave in my system as well.
Similar threads
