D5PRO BC - inspired from Dartzeel NHB-108 - endgame amp or?

[Mart68]

Fair enough, but even those blind tests were conducted using high-end amplifiers, not just any typical Hi-Fi gear. Anyway, please tell me, how many $1,000 amplifiers do you know that meet the HiFi specs and can deliver 225 watts into 4 ohms? Are they really lying around everywhere?

Blind tests have been conducted on amps at all price levels.

There's a well known one from many years ago now with a Yamaha integrated against a ten grand valve amp. The owner of the valve amp was very confident going in. But he could not distinguish them.

I'm not saying that the clone doesn't represent good value for money, at least on paper. I'm not saying don't get one. I'm just saying it does not have 'special sound' and neither does the amp it is, ostensibly, copying.

 

[catabeg]

I'm well aware of the audiophile "war on sound" and the snake oil associated with overpriced gear promoted by audio marketing. I'm also confident that a $500 Behringer amplifier can sound indistinguishable from a $12,000 amplifier in some cases. But it's not always that simple. You can't take just any HiFi amplifier and claim that nobody can hear the difference only because the parameters are good on paper. Many affordable amps are colored due to compromises in design and production, where cost is a major constraint when it comes to power supply or power output. And with higher power output come greater design demands. It's not about imagining things, there truly are better and worse HiFi amplifiers. Also, there's the issue of listening fatigue, a real phenomenon that no blind test can fully account for. Even when technical measurements look acceptable, some gear still wears on the ears over time, which suggests that subjective experience matters too.

 

[Mart68]

I'm well aware of the audiophile "war on sound" and the snake oil associated with overpriced gear promoted by audio marketing. I'm also confident that a $500 Behringer amplifier can sound indistinguishable from a $12,000 amplifier in some cases. But it's not always that simple. You can't take just any HiFi amplifier and claim that nobody can hear the difference only because the parameters are good on paper. Many affordable amps are colored due to compromises in design and production, where cost is a major constraint when it comes to power supply or power output. And with higher power output come greater design demands. It's not about imagining things, there truly are better and worse HiFi amplifiers. Also, there's the issue of listening fatigue, a real phenomenon that no blind test can fully account for. Even when technical measurements look acceptable, some gear still wears on the ears over time, which suggests that subjective experience matters too.

The problem for these claims is lack of evidence to support them. How do we know that listening fatigue is related to amplifiers? Maybe there is just elevated mids or highs due to speaker/ room? Maybe the speakers are being run into severe distortion?

Load dependency can change the sound, and usually, but not always, this is the issue with cheap amps with cheap power supplies. Assuming the speaker in use is a reactive load. If not, there's no issue even with those amps.

We all can perceive differences in amplifiers and other components, even cables, until we compare using some controls. That's been demonstrated many times. It's not about people who hear differences versus those who don't. No-one has 'golden ears'.

An evidence-based approach can get us to our objective more quickly and efficiently. It's also likely to be more cost-effective.

 

[MaxBuck]

There’s no need for data — just common sense.

Uh-huh.

 

[catabeg]

The problem for these claims is lack of evidence to support them.

You probably missed this article, which proves the contrary. It presents an evidence-based approach demonstrating listening fatigue and supports the existence of people with "golden ears." Take a look at Figure 3 to see the standard deviation for certain frequencies: it's clear that some individuals have better hearing than others. It's also a well-established fact that, over time, people can lose their hearing ability, especially when their ears are subjected to prolonged abuse.
It also demonstrates that the same person can lose their ability to discern small coloration after several minutes of listening, which calls the validity of audiophile tests into question.

https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/53140

 

[BeeKay]

just like

There is no blind testing needed, experience easily does the job

 

[MaxBuck]

DarTZeel made a bold move by eliminating negative feedback, offering a different approach, and many people say it sounds better.

This sounds a lot like the "evidence" a certain US politician uses routinely to sell his bullshit.

 

[catabeg]

This sounds a lot like the "evidence" a certain US politician uses routinely to sell his bullshit.

So, I MUST provide evidence, right? It's very hard nowadays to do a Google search in order to see if it's bullshit or not. So be it then: look at the article "DarTZeel NHB-108 Model One power amplifier Measurements" by John Atkinson, who said: "But given that caveat, I was impressed by the NHB-108, and my own auditioning echoes that of both Wes Phillips and John Marks: I found it a very sweet-sounding amplifier." Looking at its measurements, your opinion is that it's bullshit, right? Okay. L.E. Joe Biden is a sick and old person. Leave him alone.

 

[BeeKay]

So, I MUST provide evidence, right? It's very hard nowadays to do a Google search in order to see if it's bullshit or not. So be it then: look at the article "DarTZeel NHB-108 Model One power amplifier Measurements" by John Atkinson, who said: "But given that caveat, I was impressed by the NHB-108, and my own auditioning echoes that of both Wes Phillips and John Marks: I found it a very sweet-sounding amplifier." Looking at its measurements, your opinion is that it's bullshit, right? Okay.

You may not like it, but here subjective sighted listening tests have no meaning. Plus, many if not all of these experts fail badly when trying to prove their findings in a DBT.

 

[catabeg]

I feel like we're going in circles. I've already stated that I agree with double-blind testing (DBT), which shows no evidence of audible "coloration" in high-end Hi-Fi amplifiers, regardless of their price. However, I've also shared links and studies indicating that it's very difficult to conduct a proper DBT. Factors like listening fatigue or the presence of ultrasonic distortions, inaudible but potentially felt, complicate the process. This remains a matter of subjectivity until we develop studies capable of detecting subtle differences in perception. At this point, it’s impossible to measure such effects objectively, but that doesn’t mean those differences don’t exist. The reality is that we currently lack the tools to measure long-term perceptual factors with consistency. For example, how can we be certain that listening fatigue is caused by one or by other variable? How can we measure that? It might take days or even weeks of real-world use before someone can honestly say, “I prefer this amplifier over the other.” It's not always something you notice in the first minute of listening, so the DBT will fail. That doesn't mean that no differences exist. We don't know yet how to measure it or where and how long to pay attention in order to sense it.

 

[Mart68]

You probably missed this article, which proves the contrary. It presents an evidence-based approach demonstrating listening fatigue and supports the existence of people with "golden ears." Take a look at Figure 3 to see the standard deviation for certain frequencies: it's clear that some individuals have better hearing than others. It's also a well-established fact that, over time, people can lose their hearing ability, especially when their ears are subjected to prolonged abuse.
It also demonstrates that the same person can lose their ability to discern small coloration after several minutes of listening, which calls the validity of audiophile tests into question.

https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/53140

That testing does not relate in any way to the suggestion that some amplifiers provoke listening fatigue and others don't. Wasn't that your contention?

Of course hearing acuity varies from person to person. That's not the defining factor in being able to detect small differences. The defining factor is whether the listener has been formally trained to identify them. Since that is effectively no-one in the general population, and probably no-one in that test (including the recording engineers) differences in hearing acuity are irrelevant.

It's customary for the typical enthusiast to put the cart before the horse - that is to say they perceive differences in casual listening and then try to find a technical explanation for them, when the starting point should be to see if they can perceive those differences in controlled listening. If they can, then we can start looking for the technical reason(s).

Almost all the time, the perceived differences in electronics disappear with controls. I appreciate that's inconvenient if someone's heart is set on improving sound quality by the simple method of buying a 'magic box' or cable and plugging it in. I would also like that to be true. It just isn't.

If you want better sound quality, concentrate your attention and budget to loudspeakers and room acoustics. There's no easy shortcut.

 

[FrantzM]

So, I MUST provide evidence, right? It's very hard nowadays to do a Google search in order to see if it's bullshit or not. So be it then: look at the article "DarTZeel NHB-108 Model One power amplifier Measurements" by John Atkinson, who said: "But given that caveat, I was impressed by the NHB-108, and my own auditioning echoes that of both Wes Phillips and John Marks: I found it a very sweet-sounding amplifier." Looking at its measurements, your opinion is that it's bullshit, right? Okay. L.E. Joe Biden is a sick and old person. Leave him alone.

Please Read this, if you care enough:

MESSAGE TO GOLDEN EARED...

 

[catabeg]

That testing does not relate in any way to the suggestion that some amplifiers provoke listening fatigue and others don't.

The study highlights a few important points. First, listening fatigue is real. It can result from loud volume, but also from distortions and other factors, we don’t yet fully understand how many variables can trigger it. Some amplifiers could contribute to listening fatigue due to poor design or other flaws, which was the first point I mentioned in my previous comments. But the point taken from this study is that listening fatigue affects our perception of tonal coloring. This becomes a serious issue in DBT scenarios. In a relaxed environment, with sufficient time, a person might be able to detect differences between amplifiers, but it's difficult to prove this under strict testing conditions. Humans are not machines. In my opinion, there are HiFi amplifiers that don't have beautiful 10 kHz rectangular shape at its output and don't sound that great, but I am more than sure that I would fail a DBT. Nevertheless, I have 100USD amplifiers that I like to listen all day long, and other, more expensive, amplifiers that I must shut them down after an hour of listening.

 

[catabeg]

Please Read this, if you care enough:

MESSAGE TO GOLDEN EARED...

I don't have golden ears, but I believe that some amplifier can "feel" better. I have amplifiers which I like, and amplifiers which I don't, so there must be an explanation, but nobody knows it (yet). The DBT is NOT enough to draw a conclusion.

 

[MaxBuck]

I don't have golden ears, but I believe that some amplifier can "feel" better. I have amplifiers which I like, and amplifiers which I don't, so there must be an explanation, but nobody knows it (yet). The DBT is NOT enough to draw a conclusion.

Your explanation makes sense, I guess, in that psychology appears to have been a major factor in your enjoyment of audio. Conversely, I've never heard any differences in competent amplifiers, and so I'm not preconditioned to expect any. Note I'm talking about amplifiers that aren't clipping.

 

[catabeg]

Your explanation makes sense, I guess, in that psychology appears to have been a major factor in your enjoyment of audio. Conversely, I've never heard any differences in competent amplifiers, and so I'm not preconditioned to expect any. Note I'm talking about amplifiers that aren't clipping.

Well, my explanation is that I like the amplifiers with a lot of bandwidth. For example, DC-250kHz +0dB/-3dB seems to favor the sound more than 20-40kHz +-1dB. Both amplifiers are regarded as HiFi. I know that I shouldn't hear ultrasonic frequencies.

 

[JeremyFife]

I don't have golden ears, but I believe that some amplifier can "feel" better. I have amplifiers which I like, and amplifiers which I don't, so there must be an explanation, but nobody knows it (yet). The DBT is NOT enough to draw a conclusion.

I'm more than happy to explore the idea that different (well designed) Amps can sound different. It's interesting.

However, there's such a compelling body of work on cognitive bias that the effects cannot be ignored.

You say that there are Amps that you like. Do you still like them the same (i.e. can identify them) when listening under controlled (blind, level matched) conditions?
If you haven't done that, you may still be right but it's entirely too subjective to share your findings meaningfully.

It's not that I don't agree with you, it's just that you're not saying anything I can agree or disagree with.

Effect of distortion is interesting, but completely measurable.
Ultrasonics are (theoretically) interesting, but there's no meaningful energy up there in music.
The paper you referenced is interesting, but is based on hearing after exposure to loud noise, so not relevant really.

 

[Mnyb]

There is another confounding matter , if we assume that the copies/clones are competent ( they are probably not ).

The DartZel is one of those broken designs with a lot of audiophile woo woo built in , it might be self fulfilling prophecy it may be broken enough to sound different and again different is better instead of boring amps that just amplifies and get you to the source material….

It’s not uncommon that ultra high end products actually perform far worse than normal HiFi products made by rational people. Instead we have products made by a man in shed thinking that feedback is bad and I must use more silver wires or something similar idiotic these brands comes and goes.

When we say that amps sounds very very similar.

We always assume a sane design to begin with , which we actually can achieve it’s literal books written about it it’s competence any good manufacturer have , it’s literally not rocket science. You have to be very clever to make the best amps , but competent gets you transparent for human listeners .

And it should be able to drive the speakers to the desired volume without clipping or go into a current limit etc etc .

 

[catabeg]

You say that there are Amps that you like. Do you still like them the same (i.e. can identify them) when listening under controlled (blind, level matched) conditions?
If you haven't done that, you may still be right but it's entirely too subjective to share your findings meaningfully.

I didn't and it's purely a subjective opinion. Anyway, as I already said, I don't "believe" in DBT. You can't really create the proper scenario in order to accurately test two systems.
Imagine you're at the market, trying to pick the ripest oranges. You usually have a fair chance of choosing the right ones by using your sight, touch, and even smell. Now, what do you think would happen if someone blindfolded you and asked you to do a double-blind test? Listening isn’t just about sound; you need other senses as well.

Ultrasonics are (theoretically) interesting, but there's no meaningful energy up there in music.

True, but ultrasonic intermodulation can cause issues within the audible range. Also, fast transient signals require wide bandwidth, and I’m quite sure you can hear the difference when the output is slower due to limited bandwidth.

The paper you referenced is interesting, but is based on hearing after exposure to loud noise, so not relevant really.

No, you missed the point: loud sounds can cause permanent hearing loss, but even at lower levels, a temporary reduction in hearing acuity can occur. This effect becomes more noticeable as the volume increases. The study focuses on a medical issue, not on audiophile debates, but its findings are still relevant. Also, to my knowledge, listening fatigue caused by signal distortion or artifacts hasn’t been thoroughly studied. There’s no funding for ego-driven research, I suppose, but that doesn’t mean this type of listening fatigue doesn’t exist or that it has no effect on hearing.

 

[catabeg]

There is another confounding matter , if we assume that the copies/clones are competent ( they are probably not ).

The DartZel is one of those broken designs with a lot of audiophile woo woo built in , it might be self fulfilling prophecy it may be broken enough to sound different and again different is better instead of boring amps that just amplifies and get you to the source material….

It’s not uncommon that ultra high end products actually perform far worse than normal HiFi products made by rational people. Instead we have products made by a man in shed thinking that feedback is bad and I must use more silver wires or something similar idiotic these brands comes and goes.

True, we just presume it's close to the original. So measurements for such a system would be in order. Anyway, measurements for darTZeel are available and they are looking good.

When we say that amps sounds very very similar.

We always assume a sane design to begin with , which we actually can achieve it’s literal books written about it it’s competence any good manufacturer have , it’s literally not rocket science. You have to be very clever to make the best amps , but competent gets you transparent for human listeners .

True, it's not rocket science, just a money pit. It costs money to build a good amplifier, starting with the power supply. You need power "reserve" and that reserve is not free. You also need a good design, and a good designer is not free. You need bandwidth, and bandwidth is not free. Faster transient, faster components. And so on. So, when you start to cut corners, it is very possible to have a system with a noticeable poor sound, but still HiFi. But this is just my opinion: competent is not always enough.