Are my tastes changing? I am beginning to prefer Luxman over Yamaha

[Verig]

I'm talking about speakers and dsp not amps. I thought that was clear in the end sentence.

 

[Verig]

How about both meaty and punchy (but cold, and low-res)?

View attachment 378214

Fine
Is it better if I said bring up 30-40Hz, 200-300Hz, perhaps about 800Hz for old deathmetal vocal forwardness, drop 4kHz and 8kHz slightly for less aggressive buzzsaw guitars and smoother highs at loud volume? I like my non-tech words too.

 

[dman777]

I can tell a difference between my Yamahas and Luxman.

I can even tell a difference between the Yamaha AS-3200 and Yamaha rn-2000a. I thought the AS-3200 sounded bland by itself. When I added the rn-2000a as a preamp instead, it sounds more colored which I liked.

It may not seem like big differences in the beginning. But day after to day for over a year the differences can be seem big enough to set a sonic preference. Is this going to really upset some people that I can tell a difference?

And what about reviewers like Steve Hoffman, Andrew Robinson, etc when they review amps and describe the sound characteristics? The don't say all amps sounds indistinguishable so we won't cover that.

 

[Doodski]

It may not seem like big differences in the beginning. But day after to day for over a year the differences can be seem big enough to set a sonic preference.

Peoples' memory for sound and what it sounded like or not is about maybe less than a second. 5 seconds is too much never mind 5 minutes, 5 days 5 months or 5 years.

 

[Purité Audio]

Quote,
‘And what about reviewers like Steve Hoffman, Andrew Robinson, etc when they review amps and describe the sound characteristics? The don't say all amps sounds indistinguishable so we won't cover that.’
To paraphrase Christine Keeler, they rather would wouldn’t they.
Keith

 

[Mr. Widget]

I can tell a difference between my Yamahas and Luxman.

Perhaps one or both need servicing?

Sorry... just being a wiseass, but if you set up a true blind test, with levels matched to within millivolts at the outputs and you can switch from one to the other in less than 5 seconds, then perhaps you would have an argument, though plenty here will be certain you screwed up the test.

The bottom line is as @Doodski said, we are not capable of remembering the sonic signature of two devices as infallibly as we believe we can. This fact has been proven.

 

[ahofer]

I can tell a difference between my Yamahas and Luxman.

I can even tell a difference between the Yamaha AS-3200 and Yamaha rn-2000a. I thought the AS-3200 sounded bland by itself. When I added the rn-2000a as a preamp instead, it sounds more colored which I liked.

It may not seem like big differences in the beginning. But day after to day for over a year the differences can be seem big enough to set a sonic preference. Is this going to really upset some people that I can tell a difference?

And what about reviewers like Steve Hoffman, Andrew Robinson, etc when they review amps and describe the sound characteristics? The don't say all amps sounds indistinguishable so we won't cover that.

But have you done so in a level-controlled blind test? I very much doubt it. You are swimming against what we know about sound perception and measurement.

 

[dman777]

If it was a blind test I could absolutely tell the differences. They are significant enough to where it would not be hard.

And again, what about reviewers like Steve Hoffman, Andrew Robinson, etc when they review amps and describe the sound characteristics? They don't say all amps sounds indistinguishable or it sounds like 'other amps in the same class'.

 

[Mikig]

I can tell a difference between my Yamahas and Luxman.

you're right with the two amplifiers you might hear different sounds, but I would say more: they allow the speakers to sound different.

The timbre or musical signature is the result of how an amplifier handles the speakers.

Each amplifier has a different output, distortion, different background noise, even if in modern devices these aspects are mostly overcome, they amplify a different frequency range, manage transients and peaks differently and above all they suffer the characteristics of the speakers in a different way. different, the resistance, the phase and the physical characteristics of the speaker and drivers.

It's not the amplifier that has a different "voice"; are the speakers, which, when powered in a more or less consistent way with their physical and electrical characteristics, can give a different timbral result.

 

[dualazmak]

How about to eliminate/bypass passive LCR network of your SP system, and join the league/world of DSP-based multichannel multi-SP-driver multi-amplifier fully active audio rig which has safe and flexible relative gain (tone) control over all the SP drivers not only in digital domain but also in analog domain (e.g. ref. here)??

Before joining to the league/world, you may simulate the multichannel setup even using single stereo DAC, single (integrated) amplifier, and your exsiting passive SP system as shown in this diagram.

 

[ahofer]

If it was a blind test I could absolutely tell the differences. They are significant enough to where it would not be hard.

And again, what about reviewers like Steve Hoffman, Andrew Robinson, etc when they review amps and describe the sound characteristics? They don't say all amps sounds indistinguishable or it sounds like 'other amps in the same class'.

Well then go ahead. Everyone seems to make that claim.

And again, those reviewers are not truth seekers, they are helping manufacturers sell snake oil. They haven’t demonstrated their golden ears either.

 

[Chrispy]

LOL hard to imagine it being but in your head/wallet

 

[Doodski]

you're right with the two amplifiers you might hear different sounds, but I would say more: they allow the speakers to sound different.

Other than a big difference in total power output they have good enough specs to be indistinguishable from each other as long as not at clipping. The more powerful one has a advantage because the level of power on the lower powered one is pretty low.

The timbre or musical signature is the result of how an amplifier handles the speakers.

No, it is not. It is in large majority the speakers that contribute to this and providing he chooses from 4 Ohm speaker impedance rated amps he should be good to go and then he just needs to decide on what amp he wants to get.

they amplify a different frequency range, manage transients and peaks differently and above all they suffer the characteristics of the speakers in a different way.

Yes, and at this range of power output it is best to get the more powerful amp even if it costs way less and so the Yamaha looks good.

 

[Andysu]

How about both meaty and punchy (but cold, and low-res)?

View attachment 378214

rocky 4 THX./TAP

 

[Mart68]

If it was a blind test I could absolutely tell the differences. They are significant enough to where it would not be hard.

And again, what about reviewers like Steve Hoffman, Andrew Robinson, etc when they review amps and describe the sound characteristics? They don't say all amps sounds indistinguishable or it sounds like 'other amps in the same class'.

It's very important to realise that people like that don't know what they are doing.

However I'm still open to the idea that there is a real difference between your two amps when used with the Focal speakers. You will really need to blind-test that if you want to state it as fact though.

 

[JSmith]

And again, what about reviewers like Steve Hoffman, Andrew Robinson, etc when they review amps and describe the sound characteristics?

What about them? They don't test amps properly, treating them as some kind of mystical device rather than an electrical amplification device and providing nothing of note.


JSmith

 

[raif71]

For couple of years now I have had a Yamaha 2000a that I use a preamp to the Yamaha AS-3200. I always loved the sound. A year later I bought a Luxman 595 Class A amp. I didn't like the sound of the Luxman.... I thought it sounded stuffy and did not have the openness of the Yamaha. This is over the course of about a year. But recently, I have found myself listening to the Luxman more (no preamp). I like the punch and meat it has... and although it does not have the openness of the Yamaha, it has superb holographic sound in it's own manner. When I switch back to the Yamaha, I still appreciate it's open sound (which is much better than Luxman) but I find it a bit to bright for me on some music.

It doesn't make sense to me how after all this time I can like the Yamaha so much more than the Luxman, and then begin to prefer the Luxman more and also bothered by the Yamaha's brightness. I guess my tastes are changing over time? Is that normal in this hobby? If so, it seems it could be very expensive if my tastes change like this.

Note: Everything with Focal Sopra N1 speakers, always. And in the same listening spot, always.
Note: This isn't a diss on Yamaha... I think the Yamaha is actually better than the Luxman in it's design, build quality, meters, and value.... just preferring sound signatures

It's an acquired taste...like when one is small, one doesn't like asparagus but over the years and into adulthood, one likes asparagus. No biggie

 

[Killingbeans]

Is this going to really upset some people that I can tell a difference?

Not really. We know that a lot of people can tell differences. We just disagree on the cause of the impressions

If it was a blind test I could absolutely tell the differences. They are significant enough to where it would not be hard.

Maybe if one of the amps is clipping significantly, and the other isn't. Or if one of them has a crazy load dependent output impedance curve, and the other doesn't.

But it's far more likely that an actual well executed blind comparison would blow your mind.

And again, what about reviewers like Steve Hoffman, Andrew Robinson, etc when they review amps and describe the sound characteristics? They don't say all amps sounds indistinguishable or it sounds like 'other amps in the same class'.

They wouldn't have much of a job if they compensated for cognitive bias. Also, people love the idea of amps being like delicious tapas.

The reviewers just give folks what they want; Gurus to follow and food for the imagination.

 

[Verig]

This is a bit like one other thread where op drove Focals with 26W triode. That didn't quite work. 50W pentode made a big difference. I see no problem hard to drive Focals sounding different with low powered Luxman. Personally I needed over 100W@8R amp to make things really work. While Luxman can give more juice to hair under 3Ohm than a triode it's still not very powerful and its intended use is not with speakers that dip into 2.x Ohm and hard angles.

However, I don't agree Yamaha sounding bright.
It would be interesting to have third amp as a reference. High powered nCore/Purifi should work just like Yamaha. If Yamaha still feels clearly (not by days and weeks but immediately) "bright" then perhaps there's something wrong with pre/pwr gains. Focal tweeter is very unforgiving of distortion.

 

[ahofer]

The timbre or musical signature is the result of how an amplifier handles the speakers.

Timbre is a result of the harmonic frequency spectrum of the sound. If operating within spec, most amps will send the exact. same signal to the speaker (ie they would null to inaudible if one was phase-reversed). The loudspeaker will introduce an order of magnitude more harmonic and other distortion than any decent amp (like the two in question). Only an intentionally distorting design (like some tube amps) will affect the timbre by itself.

Let’s get down to brass tacks here: is anyone alleging that there is an unmeasurable difference in amplifier sound? If so, what audible quality cannot be measured?