Does the amplifier amplify the noise?

[restorer-john]

All that may be true, but they sold a million of these things, so it had a following of sorts.

That Was Then... NAD 3020

This legendary stereo amplifier established NAD as a serious hi-fi player

www.whathifi.com

I totally agree, it became legendary. For all the wrong reasons unfortunately.

Doesn't mean I didn't happily pick them up, restore and sell them at a vast profit back in the day.

I have not single NAD product in my collection now can I say ..

 

[restorer-john]

A Rotel RA-8xxx, RA-9xxxx was/is a way better entry level integrated IMO.

 

[danadam]

I know what I hear and do not like being called a liar.

No one calls you a liar. We just don't believe what you are saying if you don't provide any proof. There is a subtle difference there, I think.
And I would hope it is still allowed to not believe what some guy on the Internet is saying.

 

[tvrgeek]

You make it sound difficult.

One could capture the output of a couple of different units and compare those in both the frequency and time domain.
If for instance…

^This^ was true, then it is possible that the “Glare” could be an elevated high frequency,
or
That the “Glare” might be seen in the time domain.

If you showed ^that^, it would prove that there was a difference.
or
If you showed that out of 10-20 times of the blind test, you could pick out the Atom DAC+ more than just chance… then that would also have some weight to it.

However, as it stands, it is mostly a just a story.
But it is still possible that what you say is true.

Many just do not believe anyone can hear what they can't. It is one thing to be skeptical which is good, it is another to be so arragoant and say we are categorically wrong. Proclaiming NO one can hear a difference because they can't is completely against the scientific method.

To proclaim some test somewhere with some unknown music proves all sighted hearing is invalid is just plain false. The source material matters. The ancillary equipment matters. Set up a test between a $10 DAC dongle and an $1000 RME using a Parasound 2125 amp and I would venture I could not hear a difference because the amp was far worse and it masks the difference. So, valid tests or not? I can't make that judgement and neither can anyone else.

Others hear different things. I had music major friends who's skin would crawl if the turn table was offspeed. I can't tell if an A is 440 or 442, but they could. Because I can't, are they liars? We can measure it, but I can't hear it, so do we draw a line in the sand based on my hearing it, or on theirs?

My argument is against the arrogance. Arrogance is the basis for ignorance.

 

[antcollinet]

The NAD 3020 was a piece of absolute plastic garbage. I've probably had a few dozen through my hands over the years. The original did not deserve to see the light of day. By the time they got to the "3020i" it was passable, just.

There is nothing good about the original, then or now.

In my early 20's a "Nad amp" was the stuff of dreams, and the 3020 was viewed as the go to affordable model.

I think the first CD player I heard was amplified by a 3020 and I was majorly impressed. Perhaps that was just the improvement over vinyl though. I guess everything is relative to what you currently have.

 

[BDWoody]

Many just do not believe anyone can hear what they can't. It is one thing to be skeptical which is good, it is another to be so arragoant and say we are categorically wrong.

That's not what anyone is claiming or saying.

Asking for evidence isn't calling you a liar or saying that you are wrong.

My argument is against the arrogance. Arrogance is the basis for ignorance.

Some might say that feeling that you are immune to human bias itself is arrogant.

 

[sq225917]

@tvr, no one is doubting that you think you can hear what you think you hear. They're just taking the position, in lieu of evidence, that you're wrong, there is no difference and you only think you hear a difference.

They aren't calling you a liar, they just think you're wrong. The two things aren't the same.

Personally I'm comfortable that, in certain cases, we can hear things that haven't been shown in the limited subset of measurements that have been made. That's not the same as saying we can hear things which we can't measure, we can't. It's just that we haven't made all the measurements.

Ie, playing an nc400, and an ahb2 into real speakers vs fixed loads. Drop that impedance enough and the differences manifest themselves.

 

[charleski]

I have in mind that it is said that the NAD3020 was the bumblebee that could fly. The build quality was a bit so and so. It was a budget amp.
Anyway, a fun little racer . How such an old amp would measure would have been fun to see. Anyone have one that can be sent to Amir? If Amir feels like measuring up a NAD3020, if there is a general interest in taking part in such meetings, that is.

I finally tracked down an old set of measurements from Stereo Review. You can find them here (page 54):

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/70s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1979-07.pdf

It wasn’t great, but perhaps not as bad as @restorer-john makes out . THD at 5W is ~0.0025%, though IMD is a lot higher. I had one in the early 80s and it sounded just fine to me, but then all amps (and DACs) sound much the same to me .

 

[SaltyCDogg]

Personally I'm comfortable that, in certain cases, we can hear things that haven't been shown in the limited subset of measurements that have been made. That's not the same as saying we can hear things which we can't measure, we can't. It's just that we haven't made all the measurements.

That might be true. But I think the opposite is far truer. We can measure a lot more than we can hear. Looks at all the products Amir reviews that subjective reviewers have said is their product of the year and should cost 4x as much etc, but it measures like a dumpster fire. So either they can't hear that or they love the sound of a gently roasting dumpster.

 

[DanielT]

I finally tracked down an old set of measurements from Stereo Review. You can find them here (page 54):

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/70s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1979-07.pdf

It wasn’t great, but perhaps not as bad as @restorer-john makes out . THD at 5W is ~0.0025%, though IMD is a lot higher. I had one in the early 80s and it sounded just fine to me, but then all amps (and DACs) sound much the same to me .

Great, thank you. I created a new thread:

Amplifier NAD 3020 measurements from Stereo Review: 1979

Due to the discussion about NAD 3020 in this thread: https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/does-the-amplifier-amplify-the-noise.30106/page-2 .., I thought it would fit with a separate thread. If you had a NAD 3020 then what did you think of that amplifier? The NAD 3020 is a...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[solderdude]

It wasn’t great, but perhaps not as bad as @restorer-john makes out .

There was nothing wrong with the sound. Back in my repairman days these came in more often than other models.
Blown up power stages (due to the absence of emitter resistors) after a party or when someone really wanted to test the amp or connected speakers with a too low impedance. John is right about this amp.

 

[sq225917]

Did

That might be true. But I think the opposite is far truer. We can measure a lot more than we can hear. Looks at all the products Amir reviews that subjective reviewers have said is their product of the year and should cost 4x as much etc, but it measures like a dumpster fire. So either they can't hear that or they love the sound of a gently roasting dumpster.

Er, that's not the opposite, it's just saying the same thing a different way. The opposite would be stating that we can never hear things we didn't measure for.

 

[Zensō]

Some might say that feeling that you are immune to human bias itself is arrogant.

^^ This is the crux of it. Consider:

 

[jcarys]

Do speakers (passive) make noise?

For simplicity, I was using the OP word - noise. More specifically, I should have said distortion. But really crappy speakers make noise too.

 

[Holmz]

Many just do not believe anyone can hear what they can't. It is one thing to be skeptical which is good, it is another to be so arragoant and say we are categorically wrong. Proclaiming NO one can hear a difference because they can't is completely against the scientific method.

People also claim that some can hear difference when one in fact exist.
I might want to believe, but like Fox and Dana, most are looking for some evidence.

To proclaim some test somewhere with some unknown music proves all sighted hearing is invalid is just plain false. The source material matters.

Use whatever source material you want and capture the two signals in order to compare unit A with unit B.
pink noise, impulses, whatever.

The ancillary equipment matters. Set up a test between a $10 DAC dongle and an $1000 RME using a Parasound 2125 amp and I would venture I could not hear a difference because the amp was far worse and it masks the difference. So, valid tests or not? I can't make that judgement and neither can anyone else.

I have heard the “Everything matters” slogan ad nausem.
cables, power cords, sockets, the coal used in the power plant, the grade of copper or silver wire.

Others hear different things. I had music major friends who's skin would crawl if the turn table was offspeed. I can't tell if an A is 440 or 442, but they could. Because I can't, are they liars? We can measure it, but I can't hear it, so do we draw a line in the sand based on my hearing it, or on theirs?

Many turntables have speed adjustment knobs, and most use a strobe of something to set it precisely using a measurement,
Then the tone deaf and the others can arrive at 440 being the frequency.
It is not left to the user to just do it blind.

My argument is against the arrogance. Arrogance is the basis for ignorance.

Maybe.
Arrogance certainly does not help in moving from ignorance to enlightenment.
But I think one can be ignorant without being arrogant. I know I have done at least a couple of times.

 

[Lupin]

THERE IS ALWAYS ONE. I DON'T NEED TO PROVE ANYTHNG TO YOU. IF YOU BELIEVE THEY ARE ALL THE SAME, WHY ARE YOU HERE?
IF YOU BELIEVE WE KNOW EVERYTHNG AND CAN MEASURE EVERTYTHING, THEN YOU HAVE NOTHING ELSE TOLEASRN. SOME OF ARE NOT SO NARROW MINDED.

APx555 is much more sensitive and can measure things to the point we humans can't even begin to hear.

However at the same time APx555 can't measure everything that humans can hear such things like "sighted bias" and "seeking purchase confirmation".