Buckeye Amps: 2nd Generation Purifi EIGENTAKT 1ET9040BA Amplifier

[noiseless]

You could have known before asking ...
(Why? ASR is a library full of technical stuff and skills around audio and even beyond, and reading as well as understanding all this may take months, maybe years, at actual state of data, but feel free to use search and you will get what answers the question)

Again "helpful" reply - "do your search" - thank you!
Imagine that I did my technical research here and found the following:
* 9040 is about 70% more powerful than 400 at 4Ohms
* 9040 measures better than 400
* 9040 uses different (bridged) topology with lower voltage PS rails that 400
* 9040 is twice more expensive than 400
...and after all these I still have the question - is there any audible difference between them - yes or no?
Thank you!

 

[Julf]

Will someone hear an audible difference over the 400A? Unless they were pushing the limits of the 400A and hearing distortion or clipping, probably not, no.

This.

 

[Julf]

* 9040 is about 70% more powerful than 400 at 4Ohms

That is 2.3 dB. Not a huge audible difference.

 

[noiseless]

Will someone hear an audible difference over the 400A? Unless they were pushing the limits of the 400A and hearing distortion or clipping, probably not, no.

Thank you for the informative and fair reply!

 

[Buckeye Amps]

This.

Also just realized if your original comparison regarding price differences and brand was more meant why some people sell the 9040 mono for twice (or more) than the 400a mono....that definitely makes sense.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Thank you for the informative and fair reply!

Also....there is a refresh coming to the 400a so the gap will be even closer to the 9040 (outside of power and current). Can't give specifics yet.

 

[noiseless]

That is 2.3 dB. Not a huge audible difference.

Yeah, almost double the power, but if you say so...

 

[Julf]

Yeah, almost double the power, but if you say so...

Double the power would be 3 dB. What matters is the audible result.

 

[noiseless]

Double the power would be 3 dB. What matters is the audible result.

There are circumstances when there are "audible results" - you know it, I know it, Purifi knows it and that's why they produce this model and people buy it!
Why do we even argue about this??

 

[Buckeye Amps]

There are circumstances when there are "audible results" - you know it, I know it, Purifi knows it and that's why they produce this model and people buy it!
Why do we even argue about this??

Most the time I think the argument is expected to be binary: either something is an audible difference or it isn't.

However, at the level of performance we are talking, it is not a binary answer. And a lot of variables come into play.

Which is why a lot of us use the terms Measurable difference and Audible difference.
There are certainly noticeable measurable differences...but that doesn't always translate to an audible difference.

For instance, a measured SNR of 114dB vs 109dB is certainly a measurable difference. But in a consumer setup, outside of some unique variables, it is very unlikely to be an audible difference.

 

[Salt]

Most the time I think the argument is expected to be binary: either something is an audible difference or it isn't.

However, at the level of performance we are talking, it is not a binary answer. And a lot of variables come into play.

Which is why a lot of us use the terms Measurable difference and Audible difference.
There are certainly noticeable measurable differences...but that doesn't always translate to an audible difference.

For instance, a measured SNR of 114dB vs 109dB is certainly a measurable difference. But in a consumer setup, outside of some unique variables, it is very unlikely to be an audible difference.

Very polite and correct statement to end this dispute.

 

[noiseless]

Most the time I think the argument is expected to be binary: either something is an audible difference or it isn't.

However, at the level of performance we are talking, it is not a binary answer. And a lot of variables come into play.

Which is why a lot of us use the terms Measurable difference and Audible difference.
There are certainly noticeable measurable differences...but that doesn't always translate to an audible difference.

For instance, a measured SNR of 114dB vs 109dB is certainly a measurable difference. But in a consumer setup, outside of some unique variables, it is very unlikely to be an audible difference.

Thank you for the answer, Buckeye - I got it!
In my reply to Julf I meant the "2.3dB or 70%" power difference which with certain dynamic type of music on low sensitivity speakers will produce quite audible difference!

Anyway, I am still not sure whether, for the same amount of money, I go with two 9040 mono-blocks or two 400 stereo amps for future active XO and bi-amping my 2-way speakers. On one hand they are sensitive (95dB/ 2.83V @ 1m) 15" dual concentric Tannoys but with recommended amplifier power of up to 400 W RMS into 8 Ohms and 9040 is just 375W.
What would you advice, Buckeye?
Thanks!

 

[blackiridium]

Yes, I can get that out as well once I get caught up on existing orders.

Would love to see this as well when available.

 

[Buckeye Amps]

Thank you for the answer, Buckeye - I got it!
In my reply to Julf I meant the "2.3dB or 70%" power difference which with certain dynamic type of music on low sensitivity speakers will produce quite audible difference!

Anyway, I am still not sure whether, for the same amount of money, I go with two 9040 mono-blocks or two 400 stereo amps for future active XO and bi-amping my 2-way speakers. On one hand they are sensitive (95dB/ 2.83V @ 1m) 15" dual concentric Tannoys but with recommended amplifier power of up to 400 W RMS into 8 Ohms and 9040 is just 375W.
What would you advice, Buckeye?
Thanks!

If you want to do active XO/biamping in the future, the choice would easily be (2) 2ch 400a's over the mono 9040's.

 

[noiseless]

If you want to do active XO/biamping in the future, the choice would easily be (2) 2ch 400a's over the mono 9040's.

Thank you for the confirmation!

 

[Julf]

In my reply to Julf I meant the "2.3dB or 70%" power difference which with certain dynamic type of music on low sensitivity speakers will produce quite audible difference!

Do I really want to continue this debate? I can agree with your statement *if* your use of "quite" is in the British diminutive sense (so saying "not a huge difference"). Yes, a 2.3 dB level difference is audible, but not enormous.

 

[welwynnick]

I'm always hearing that level matched AB comparisons have to be within +/-0.1dB of each-other, otherwise the difference in levels will dominate the audibility outcome.

 

[Julf]

I'm always hearing that level matched AB comparisons have to be within +/-0.1dB of each-other, otherwise the difference in levels will dominate the audibility outcome.

That is a bit tight, but yes, even very small level differences will make the louder of two otherwise identical systems sound "better". On the other hand, a 3 dB increase in sound level is barely noticeable to the human ear. In fact, you have to raise a sound level by 5 dB before most listeners report a noticeable or significant change. Further, it takes a 10 dB increase before the average listener hears “double the sound.”

 

[welwynnick]

So which is it, then?
Is 0.1 dB barely noticeable, or is 3.0 dB barely noticeable?
You can't have it both ways.

 

[Julf]

So which is it, then?
Is 0.1 dB barely noticeable, or is 3.0 dB barely noticeable?
You can't have it both ways.

3 dB is barely noticeable. 0.1 dB is not noticeable in itself, but might affect the result of an AB comparison (without being perceived as louder). By the way, I said the 0.1 dB is a bit tight - I don't think a 0.1 dB difference will affect the result. 1 dB might. Again, it won't be perceived as a volume difference, and you achieve the same by leaning in a bit towards your speaker...