How much is too much?

[microstrip]

(...) Back to the subject... It seems that many of us audiophiles holds the view that it is never too much as long as they can rationalize the product worth. As KeithR so pointedly asked, what is revolutionary about of these megabucks products? I don't seem to see anything really new .. I am however not an expert in Audio circuits, I could be missing a lot ... Could someone illuminate objectively my engineering (but this morning foggy) mind? :_

I have been told by a designer that one of the biggest issues about high-end design is reproducibility or the performance. You can design a great circuit, built a prototype, tune it to sound excellent and when you build the final product it sounds different from what you listened in the prototype. Or during production you are obliged to make a little change because of some component unavailability and the sound changes drastically.

Every electronic amplifying device has its sonic signature. May be we can consider that the signature is due to the intrinsic signature of the components and a sonic signature imposed by the design of the circuit who has to complement the sonic signatures of components. IMHO, great high-end designers manage to work in a way the "cancel" or complement the "bad" sonic signatures with their circuits. Sometimes they need to use high stability and precision components that are expensive, with known strong sonic signatures because other way the sonic signature of the device is not controllable any more. Also IMHO arbitrary changing the type of components of a known design for more expensive ones is not a good think, unless you have long experience and large knowledge of audio design.

Surely, if you think all decently designed electronics sound the same, this is coffee-talk.

 

[DaveyF]

Hi


Back to the subject... It seems that many of us audiophiles holds the view that it is never too much as long as they can rationalize the product worth. As KeithR so pointedly asked, what is revolutionary about of these megabucks products? I don't seem to see anything really new .. I am however not an expert in Audio circuits, I could be missing a lot ... Could someone illuminate objectively my engineering (but this morning foggy) mind? :_

I would also wander what is revolutionary, however, I'm not so sure that revolutionary is required. A 'sharpener' like Ken Stevens or Bobby Palkovic can still bring out a product that is SOTA and neither had to re-invent the wheel.

 

[JackD201]

Why must something be revolutionary to be better? What's wrong with evolutionary?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

What's that old source first cliche - garbage in, garbage out? That principle alone is enough to say that vinyl cannot be objectively better than a tape that is a generation younger, probably a couple of generations older, for that matter. But the word "objectively" in there is, of course, the wrench in the works. People hear what they hear.

Tim

 

[FrantzM]

Hi
The discussion focused on the brutal assault on people wallet that dealing with the highest end of Audio has become. I guess it is all fair as long as the market (the term that came to mind was herd) bears it. What is even more intesting is the willingness to rationalize these prices...
Since we are into car example, the Veyron is spectacular and in its own right better at what car fanatics lust than any other cars in existence. There could be one or two prototype that outdo it in term of sports car performance not anything in regular production (if you can call the less than 1000 Veyron in existence "regular production" ...) ... Contrast that to almost anything from high End AUdio in the "too much" IME category: What do they objectively do better than "regular" high End Audio products? That is where I think our hobby is slowly devolving into Wine-tasting , thus luxury, category. Heck even the subjective vocabulary could be compared... To the "bouquet", "big", "Austere", "biscuity", "blowzy" or "charming" we have our black background and as many other terms to describe our subjective impressions ... There is a hierarchy: There is an implied superiority almost anointed to the highest priced items at times unconciously by us audiophiles and to repeat myself almost systematically by reviewers. It is really assumed by many of us that these stupendously priced products are better and we find ways to justify that belief by granting the "Audio designers" and by some interesting extensions some reviewers the status of gurus. I am not saying there aren't great designers that consistently design great products or conduct serious, repeatable research in the area of Audio by the way. I take an example that irksome to no end, frankly because I have heard some of them in the past and whie they were good they didn't stop me and their owner dead in our tracks: The FM Acoustic line of electronics. Rare, expensive and anointed the status of "best" SS by many and of course priced accordingly ... I would think they are in the Goldmund territory and I have heard goldmund and extensively and I would not give the better spectral to the what I did hear then from Goldmund brutal price and all that ..

Tome the debate is settled: It seems for audiophiles , it is never too much, if there is a limit it is so high as to be virtually non-existent. Don't venture however into car comparisons though, it is in some cases, open and shut. For example the Veyron performances are nonpareil or a Lexus 560h is more silent or has smoother ride than its competition, we are left with a vacuous subjectivity in our Audio quest .. and I don't see an end to it...just an end to the High End as we know it.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Hi
The discussion focused on the brutal assault on people wallet that dealing with the highest end of Audio has become. I guess it is all fair as long as the market (the term that came to mind was herd) bears it.

You're a wise and reasonable man, Frantz. I know this because I agree with you so often . Not sure I agree with this, though. I don't think there is a real market for the highest end. $150k preamps? There are probably fewer of those out there in use than there are Veyrons. That's not a market, that's a handful of very wealthy people buying whatever is deemed "the best" by virtue of status, and I wouldn't care in the slightest, but for the effect it seems to have on the real market. It should be viewed with the same functional credibility as the gold-plated commodes on a sheik's ship, instead, this hobby seems to assume that (absurd) price is related performance, not bling and status. Too many of us aspire to climb as high up that diamond-encrusted ladder as far as we can, stars in our eyes, reason, and real performance criteria left on the ground below.

Thus the common, derisive moniker: Audiophools. I often find it hard to resist myself.

Tim

 

[Gregadd]

Indulging in luxury is not foolish if you have the means to afford it. Assembling a full range system capable of high SPL is an expensive task.

 

[Orb]

Hi
The discussion focused on the brutal assault on people wallet that dealing with the highest end of Audio has become. I guess it is all fair as long as the market (the term that came to mind was herd) bears it. What is even more intesting is the willingness to rationalize these prices...
Since we are into car example, the Veyron is spectacular and in its own right better at what car fanatics lust than any other cars in existence. There could be one or two prototype that outdo it in term of sports car performance not anything in regular production (if you can call the less than 1000 Veyron in existence "regular production" ...) ... Contrast that to almost anything from high End AUdio in the "too much" IME category: What do they objectively do better than "regular" high End Audio products? That is where I think our hobby is slowly devolving into Wine-tasting , thus luxury, category. Heck even the subjective vocabulary could be compared... To the "bouquet", "big", "Austere", "biscuity", "blowzy" or "charming" we have our black background and as many other terms to describe our subjective impressions ... There is a hierarchy: There is an implied superiority almost anointed to the highest priced items at times unconciously by us audiophiles and to repeat myself almost systematically by reviewers. It is really assumed by many of us that these stupendously priced products are better and we find ways to justify that belief by granting the "Audio designers" and by some interesting extensions some reviewers the status of gurus. I am not saying there aren't great designers that consistently design great products or conduct serious, repeatable research in the area of Audio by the way. I take an example that irksome to no end, frankly because I have heard some of them in the past and whie they were good they didn't stop me and their owner dead in our tracks: The FM Acoustic line of electronics. Rare, expensive and anointed the status of "best" SS by many and of course priced accordingly ... I would think they are in the Goldmund territory and I have heard goldmund and extensively and I would not give the better spectral to the what I did hear then from Goldmund brutal price and all that ..

Tome the debate is settled: It seems for audiophiles , it is never too much, if there is a limit it is so high as to be virtually non-existent. Don't venture however into car comparisons though, it is in some cases, open and shut. For example the Veyron performances are nonpareil or a Lexus 560h is more silent or has smoother ride than its competition, we are left with a vacuous subjectivity in our Audio quest .. and I don't see an end to it...just an end to the High End as we know it.

The new McLaren MP4-12C was faster around the Top Gear circuit (in fact faster than anything else), has superb relaxed suspension for normal roads, and importantly costs a fraction at £130k.
But if comparing to high end selling, one needs to consider like with like so Veryon would be a mature high end and superb engineering audio company such as Ayre/McIntosh/ARC/etc, as I mentioned if thinking of the products that seem insane such as the quoted preamp in other posts this is closer to my other example of garage built esoteric cars such as the E-Type for over £500k.

Cheers
Orb

 

[MylesBAstor]

The funny thing is, in a year or two, the designer of the 150K pre-amp comes out with a new reference! ! ! So, after 20 years and 10 references, each one not getting any better THD (the simplest yardstick to less distortion..we all know what a tone control many of these things are) the cycle continues...and the churn continues...and we still have plain old stereo...and the herd is conditioned to think that yes, indeed, this new reference is better than the old reference, and then there are folks like me, with30 year old gear (electronics) that are still pleasing me, and using tone controls or processing to feed the need to "change" the sound..that does not by the way apply to source electronics or transducers, which I think are much improved over the years.

Tom

So Tom, tell us what SOTA equipment you've compared to your own equipment in your system.

You're still stuck on 1960s measurements and designers have moved onto bigger and better measurements.

Harmonic distortionMain article: Clipping (signal processing)
Harmonic distortion adds overtones that are whole number multiples of a sound wave's frequencies.[1] Nonlinearities that give rise to amplitude distortion in audio systems are most often measured in terms of the harmonics (overtones) added to a pure sinewave fed to the system. Harmonic distortion may be expressed in terms of the relative strength of individual components, in decibels, or the Root Mean Square of all harmonic components: Total harmonic distortion (THD), as a percentage. The level at which harmonic distortion becomes audible is not straightforward. Different types of distortion (like crossover distortion) are more audible than others (like soft clipping) even if the THD measurements are identical. Harmonic distortion in RF applications is rarely expressed as THD.


And sorry, you can't tell me that a cj Premier 1 or ARC D250 sounds better than a cj ART or ARC Reference 250. Nor can you tell me that the older Spectral or Krell or JRDG amps sound better than their current models. Sorry, not in a high resolution system. Maybe if you're system isn't up to the task of revealing what they can do eg. transparency, resolution, frequency extension, dynamics, lowered distortion it is.

 

[Peter Breuninger]

I think Myles B. needs to hear a rebuilt CJ Premier One

 

[mep]

And sorry, you can't tell me that a cj Premier 1 or ARC D250 sounds better than a cj ART or ARC Reference 250. Nor can you tell me that the older Spectral or Krell or JRDG amps sound better than their current models. Sorry, not in a high resolution system. Maybe if you're system isn't up to the task of revealing what they can do eg. transparency, resolution, frequency extension, dynamics, lowered distortion it is.

I guess I'm screwed then! But, I promise you that I will hear transparency, resolution, frequency extension, dynamics, and lower distortion of any component I insert in my systems assuming it has it to be heard. Are today's components always better than those they replaced? I would say there are bigger differences between older tube gear and newer tube gear. Modern tube gear has lower distortion than yesteryear's tube gear and in some cases, better output transformers. For the most part, tubes haven't gotten better since all of the giants exited the scene when SS took over the world. I don't think anyone would trade a stash of say NOS Mullard FX-1 big base EL-34s for any Russian or Chinese EL-34. Tube lovers around the world are now chasing the same ever diminishing pile of NOS tubes.

As for SS, I really don't know if there any better transistors being made now than what the business had to play with 20 years ago. In fact, some OEMs have bought life-time buys of certain transistors because nothing is being made today that is as good in some cases. I just don't have the experience with any particular line of electronics to say that all of their newer gear sounds better than the gear it replaced. I just wouldn''t take it as gospel that it is a foregone conclusion.

 

[FrantzM]

Orb

Interesting ... where they both driven on the same track by the same driver or was it a competition in which the skill of the drivers had something to do with he outcome? Because if you put Nikki Lauda on a Veyron and a normal driver on an BMW M3, the outcome to me on a race track are certain ...Nikki... Anyway, there you have it .. More performance for less money ...Nothing new ... Happens all the time ... I will grant some that THD is not indicative of Audio performance... The reasons are various but not the subject of this debate .. which is: How much is Too much?

 

[mep]

The reasons are various but not the subject of this debate .. which is: How much is Too much?

I guess the bottom line is that no matter how high the price tag is, if people are willing to pay it because they can, then there never really is a "too much" point.

 

[FrantzM]

<snip> I just wouldn''t take it as gospel that it is a foregone conclusion.

Indded you shouldn't ... Testing procedures are too fuzzy to come up with such sweeping conclusions. For speakers it is a slam-dunk (sigh ... No NBA seems like ...oh! well! back on topic) for preamps and amps, I, also wouldn't be categoric ... As for cables ... Cables !!! ???

 

[FrantzM]

I guess the bottom line is that no matter how high the price tag is, if people are willing to pay it because they can, then there never really is a "too much" point.

Well if it is a market for the seriously wealthy that's fine. I believe however that even for those of us able to afford the more expensive products there comes a level at which they can call with all honesty " No Mas!!! There has to be a point where the performance are not in line with the price asked in the estimation of an audiophile... I am for example amused by the notion of the soft bass of the Constellation coming from many quarters ... At that price it should do every insanely well including a cup of Latte There wile somewhere a person willing to buy 10 Constellation to power their HT ... yet the underlying question remains : Are the Constellation really better than the Spectral DMA 360 or the Bryston 28for example or a pair of Burmester 911 MK III in mono configuration?

 

[MylesBAstor]

I guess I'm screwed then! But, I promise you that I will hear transparency, resolution, frequency extension, dynamics, and lower distortion of any component I insert in my systems assuming it has it to be heard. Are today's components always better than those they replaced? I would say there are bigger differences between older tube gear and newer tube gear. Modern tube gear has lower distortion than yesteryear's tube gear and in some cases, better output transformers. For the most part, tubes haven't gotten better since all of the giants exited the scene when SS took over the world. I don't think anyone would trade a stash of say NOS Mullard FX-1 big base EL-34s for any Russian or Chinese EL-34. Tube lovers around the world are now chasing the same ever diminishing pile of NOS tubes.

As for SS, I really don't know if there any better transistors being made now than what the business had to play with 20 years ago. In fact, some OEMs have bought life-time buys of certain transistors because nothing is being made today that is as good in some cases. I just don't have the experience with any particular line of electronics to say that all of their newer gear sounds better than the gear it replaced. I just wouldn''t take it as gospel that it is a foregone conclusion.

Let me give an example of what I was trying to say

Years ago, I would read HP's reviews, get copies of his reference recordings and then listen to them on my system. In many cases, didn't hear what he was talking about. HP would talk about the air conditioner noise on the recording or the underground passing under Kingsway Hall and I'd be damned if I could hear it (now I know some will pick on this as non-musical crap--but it was an obvious instance and the same exists for discerning different instruments, hearing the additional echo added or walls and ceiling of the hall). Over the years, as my system improved, I began to hear more of what HP was talking about in addition to even more things on the recordings--and R2R tapes. And when I had the opportunity to hear those recordings over at HP's, sure enough, they were there!

So for instance, if one hasn't spent time optimizing their system for a low "noise floor" or say the difference between Teflon and polystyrene caps, then low level information, spatial information and harmonics textures will be lost. And no matter what I put in that system, that quality will never be heard.

Just as it wouldn't make much sense putting a Ferrari engine in a Volkswagen

 

[DaveyF]

And sorry, you can't tell me that a cj Premier 1 or ARC D250 sounds better than a cj ART or ARC Reference 250. Nor can you tell me that the older Spectral or Krell or JRDG amps sound better than their current models. Sorry, not in a high resolution system. Maybe if you're system isn't up to the task of revealing what they can do eg. transparency, resolution, frequency extension, dynamics, lowered distortion it is.

Myles, I really think that you cannot generalize like that. Unless of course you truly believe that all newer gear is superior to yesterday's model


As an example of what I am talking about, IMO the newer class D Jeff Rowland gear is actually in many ways inferior to his older 1,6,8, and 9 series....

 

[Gregadd]

Let me give an example of what I was trying to say

Years ago, I would read HP's reviews, get copies of his reference recordings and then listen to them on my system. In many cases, didn't hear what he was talking about. HP would talk about the air conditioner noise on the recording or the underground passing under Kingsway Hall and I'd be damned if I could hear it (now I know some will pick on this as non-musical crap--but it was an obvious instance and the same exists for discerning different instruments, hearing the additional echo added or walls and ceiling of the hall). Over the years, as my system improved, I began to hear more of what HP was talking about in addition to even more things on the recordings--and R2R tapes. And when I had the opportunity to hear those recordings over at HP's, sure enough, they were there!

So for instance, if one hasn't spent time optimizing their system for a low "noise floor" or say the difference between Teflon and polystyrene caps, then low level information, spatial information and harmonics textures will be lost. And no matter what I put in that system, that quality will never be heard.

Just as it wouldn't make much sense putting a Ferrari engine in a Volkswagen

So you mean sighted, repeatable, verifiable observations. What an audiophool.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Myles, I really think that you cannot generalize like that. Unless of course you truly believe that all newer gear is superior to yesterday's model


As an example of what I am talking about, IMO the newer class D Jeff Rowland gear is actually in many ways inferior to his older 1,6,8, and 9 series....

Ok the vast majority. Of course there are clunkers every now and then. But I do think the vast majority of todays SOTA is better than yesteryears. OTOH, I think that some of the mid-priced gear is also better than some of the best from yestayear And of course, there are some classic designs out there--but even these have some significant limitations compared to gear today.

Vis a vis JRDG. I haven't heard his latest in my system (and I've wanted to) but those amps up to the D's were better than older versions. One thing Jeff improved was the JRDG "signature" namely a soft and darkened sound. Mind you, back then, it was probably a better alternative to the vast majority of ss amps.

 

[Gregadd]

If a THD of 1.5% and max power of 140 watts driving most modern speakers qualifies for a high resolution system, I am then lead to believe that someone prefers musicality over accuracy, and high resolution system means musical and not actual accurate to the recording..fine..then why don't the manufactures just come out and say, hey dudes an dudets, we have determined that the signal from your 50K turntable or other source sort of sucks, so we are going to throw in about 1.5% distortion so it will be more musical to you!

Tom

The ML3 has no overall feedback loop, however the amplifier features an option that allows the user to introduce a small amount of local feedback in the output stage. Furthermore, there is a choice of two amounts of such feedback: NFB1 and NFB2, which differ in their levels. Therefore, there are three options regarding feedback use in the amplifier: no feedback, NFB1 or NFB2

Taken from the LAMM website.


It would appear that some actually do that. They would not phrase it they way you do. As you point out achieving vanishingly low distortion should be easy. Some feel the methods of achieving it compromises the sound in other ways.

My own guess for the Direct Heated Triodes is the money goes into making it a full range device and wringing a whopping 32 watts out of it.