On the other hand, that amp is objectively well constructed, so there is that.You spend a lot of money on interconnects. So why have the signal go right from the RCA jacks or speaker terminals into circuit boards with copper traces so thin you can hardly see them? What’s high-end about that?
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Carver Crimson 275 Review (Tube Amp)
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
I really shouldn't look hard.
I've seen worse. Of course, we don't know how well it works.
Gary_G
Active Member
Sorry to have derailed the post. I thought it looked well constructed and seemed to be well thought out. BUT, I'm no engineer.
DSJR
Major Contributor
If that PrimaLuna amp is anything like its brethren tested in Stereophile, It'll have a very high output impedance which will turn it into a graphic equaliser driving typical speaker loads and it may also have ringing at 30 - 40kHz which may add to the tin can resonances of typical metallic dome tweeters. Not that typical humans could hear that I admit..
Last edited:
The construction looks nice. No idea if the design is, errrr, sound. The ad claims are laughable.
As Paul Klipsch would say: Bullshit!
Here's your problem. There are standards for testing things like amplifiers, speakers, etc. There are different organizations that promulgate these standards (AES, ISO, etc.). To suggest that someone can come up with their own way of testing and disregard these standards is laughable. In the case of power amplifiers, there is a Federal Trade Commission regulation that specifies the manner in which amplifiers MUST BE tested and the way the power ratings are calculated. Bob is well aware of this, and he is well aware that he cannot choose to ignore it. There was so much fraud in the 70s about amplifier power ratings that honest manufacturers asked the FTC to step in. My recollection is that Bob was a huge fan of this regulation because his Phase Linear amps could really put out what they said they could. The proper way to list specifications is to list the results as tested per the standard, and then footnote any additional specifications and the precise manner in which they were tested if there is some reason the manufacturer doesn't feel the regular standard provides a true reflection of the product. This is seen all of the time with multi-channel amps, footnotes or additional specifications when the amp is used in various modes: 2 Ch, 4, 6, 8.
The federal regulation and the fact that this was spilled out in public is probably why the amp is now a "25-watt amp."
The only thing that is relevant here is whether the way it was tested for the review was "incorrect" as applied against a recognized standard (FTC Regulation). Again, there were pages and pages of discussion about this in this thread.
We don't need to ask Bob anything. You are the one with the burden of persuasion here, not the collective of the Forum. You started off your post with the goal of the review being pulled, or "corrected." Obviously, it can't be corrected if you can't articulate what's incorrect about it. You second goal was to remove the opinions of the 100+ pages that followed.
You are aware that Bob also was given an opportunity to respond in this thread? Did you read his responses? I think you will see several electrical engineers, people in audio manufacturing, etc. asked him follow up questions to which he never responded.
It for sure was a "mob" at times, and there was a bunch of stuff thrown out there by people that was utter nonsense. One example I can recall at the moment was "UL" ratings, "it didn't have a UL rating." No expensive amplifier in the US has a UL rating unless it is installed in the architecture of a building. I think people checked their amps, yep, no UL rating. It turned to something else.
However, the review, specifically the power and distortion ratings have stood the test of "peer review" and being objective.
I don't recall ever seeing anyone quote or reference such a rule, except to possibly get EU Certification. I may have missed it, but I don't recall seeing a reference to any requirements, rules, codes regarding how an audio amplifier is grounded in the US.
If you have zoned A/C, and especially a zone in your audio room/multi-media equipment closet, running tubes costs about $6 more a month than not running tubes. They have zoned a/c in the EU (mini splits), if you had a dedicated unit in the media room, high SEAR, it would be minuscule. One of the EE's on here could easily figure it out for you.
Again, there is a federal regulation, by the FTC, that specifies how power amplifiers are measured and specified in advertising. If the tests were done in a way that is outside of standard (not using neg. speaker terminal) the manufacturer is required to state the exact manner in which they tested to get the numbers they put in their specifications.
The error is they didn't report their specifications correctly in their advertising/specifications. Bob knows how to properly report specifications, he knows how to comply with the FTC regulations. Why can't you accept that he let this thing get away from him?
It sounds to me like he let the company get away from him for a time, and then he took it back? Could never get a straight answer on that. If you put your signature on a product you better be darn sure you know what's going out the door. Bob knows this. He was licensing his name until he realized it was being dragged through the dirt and, apparently, he wanted something for one of his kids?
Since you seem to know all about this, who is running this company now, who is doing the quality control, and who is doing the testing?
You are never going to be able to put the toothpaste in the tube on this one. I think Bob knows it and from what I saw he came out and said he has moved everything back to Washington under his control, and he is working to restore the damaged goodwill.
To me you are doing more damage to Bob's legacy to try and walk this back. Bob isn't trying to do it. He re-specified that amp the way it should have been done from the beginning and now he is building a pre-amp.
Why can't you accept that they rushed this to production, for profit, and somebody tested it that shouldn't have been testing it (i.e., somebody who would be selling it).
He's moved on, and realized he let it out of his hands too much and needed to reign it back in. Re-name and re-specify the amp, build a cool preamp (I guess, not idea), and keep on keeping on. He could care less about moving/convincing anyone here, and rightfully so, this isn't his "base." He made amends with his base by offering a full refund, and he is moving on. This is what, his 5th company? (if you could call it that, I think it's him and a family member or two). Before this he was building amps and selling them on ebay because he was bored.
This Forum is completely inconsequential to him, why would he engage?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #2,431
I think not or he would not have post originally. This is the other reason to care:
Notice that I just searched for Carver tube amp, not this specific unit and Google list us as the #1 result. Folks search for reviews to buy gear no matter how expensive it is. And what we did here matters.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #2,432
No, you can do more. You can have him, or Carver measure the unit like I have and show their differing results. So far, nothing like that has happened including from Bob.
That is the first condition of engaging with us. With measurements just like we did. Not word arguments. Company measurements have zero specifics so no way to gauge what they mean. In sharp contrast, mine has a ton of detail. Have them or anyone else come here with similar measurements and then we can discuss. The fact that even the company designer did not do this, should tell you that your arguments are dead ends.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
They also sell it to the EU which requires them to comply to EU certification.
It doesn't have the CE logo either, as this is self certification they either knew it would not pass EU regulations or just thought ... it doesn't apply to them.
Yep
Last edited:
Unlike the technical, testing methods, etc. that others on here are very well versed in, I am not. However, I'm very, very well-versed in defamation law. Nothing in the review, or the responses to the review, even remotely approaches the level of being libelous. It might be in China, probably is, but they don't have free debate and exchanges of ideas so there is that. It's not defamatory over here, this is just mere opinions.
What more, is that Bob can come in, and has, and can correct the record any time he wants, point out how tests were "wrong," inaccurate, misleading, whatever. Unfortunately for Bob, your first post killed him on that. Low end doesn't matter because assumed to be used with a sub, "mildly exaggerated" specs (like "kind of pregnant) and multiple other things you all acknowledge. He probably needs to come in one more time just to clarify you don't speak for him, that the powers specs could have been clearer, the offer for a refund still stands, and he will ground it for you, but he doesn't think it is necessary. Who knows, maybe he is working on a solid-state amp and he is going to send to Amir to review.
Bob did offer a full refund of the amp, a very stand-up thing to do, I think it said a lot about him. He offered to ground the 3rd prong, again, a very stand-up thing to do. If you are going to put your name on something, like McIntosh, Klipsch, Fisher, Marantz, Bozak, Lansing, and a hundred more, the buck stops with you. Wasn't this thing being made partially out of California, marketed by a guy in Chicago, with one audio dealer really driving the thing (who closed his audio store to take over sales/marketing after this debacle)?
But you are drowning yourself in a teacup. Tube amp people don't congregate here in droves. This is an objectivists Forum, the vast majority of whom feel that solid state is far superior to antiquated valve equipment which is noisy and high in distortion. I doubt very seriously that this Forum damaged his reputation in the slightest.
Well, it got a huge amount of attention across all audio forums, no doubt about that. But I could care less about him, for whatever reason he feels it necessary to be an apologist for Bob Carver. What I'm saying is that Bob Carver's "base" probably doesn't come here to get reviews on tube amps. Could be wrong, but I suspect the tube amp fans that are regulars on here are looking at other stuff.
To your point, that amp is no longer being sold with that name. I think it's a safe assumption that the review, and subsequent discussion, were the cause of that. Interesting to see a sales brochure on what I think is the same amp with a new name now lists "FTC Measurement" as "25WPC." Slick move, "well the way the bureaucrats back in Washington make us test it is thus, but in terms of real world music it's going to ack like a full 75wpc."
I don't think his reputation has been damaged in the slightest (and you should agree, you want plausible deniability if you were sued by someone, won't be Bob, but some other nut). He did the right thing, full refund, you can have a ground wire installed free of charge, full five-year warranty. We will probably never know how many were returned. He is still going, will fill rooms at audio events, etc.
solderdude
Grand Contributor
A question would be... on the Black Magic 25 is the ground pin now (properly) connected to the chassis and is that 1M resistor removed ?
There still is no 'double isolated' symbol printed on the back and a 3 prong IEC socket is still used which would be suggesting safety ground works as safetyground should work.
When it is double isolated inside then a 2 pin socket should be used that prevents 3-prong cables to be used.
I too suspect it is the same amp but different paint and naming and 'more accurate' specs.
Someone needs to send one in for testing...
There still is no 'double isolated' symbol printed on the back and a 3 prong IEC socket is still used which would be suggesting safety ground works as safetyground should work.
When it is double isolated inside then a 2 pin socket should be used that prevents 3-prong cables to be used.
I too suspect it is the same amp but different paint and naming and 'more accurate' specs.
Someone needs to send one in for testing...
Last edited:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #2,437
I can't assess anyone's reputation. I get gear, test them using same setup as every other gear, and publish it. I finish every review with asking for feedback and correction. If the company provides such, as has happened in a few times, we discuss it and get to a consensus. In this case as you know, the company hasn't provided any alternative data so my measurements stand. What that does to their reputation is theirs to figure out. I am assuming since they abandoned us, they assume all is OK as you say.
D
Deleted member 19122
Guest
FFS,go away already...You can't continually live in denial here.If you don't think ASR's honest review(Google ranked NUMBER 1) hasn't damaged his "reputation".Casually hinting at nebulous legal actions and generally being a blowhard.Man you are the worst of the worst of typical audio forum idiocy.
This is not the way we discuss here. Time to apologize.
Yeah, that was over the top. I'm not even sure what he's mad about.
Similar threads
- Poll
