Got the speakers! Need advice on amp part

[MAB]

With as much discussion of blind testing that we have in this forum, I wonder how many members actually perform blind testing in properly controlled conditions? For a lot of people the logistics of doing so can be challenging. It may be diffucult to find a local audio retailer that has properly controlled conditions and has in stock each of the specific amplifiers that someone wants to compare. I guess someone can purchase all of the amplifiers they want to compare and return the ones they opt not to keep, but that can be a hassle.

As for me, in recent years I have only purchased amplifiers Amir has tested and reviewed. The data he publishes has been adequate for me to make buying decisions with which I am satisfied.

Many of us put this to bed ages ago. It's actually been studied. And discussed. The first really good test I was aware of was Clark's test of various amps.
On page 78 is a quite famous test between some very well known high-end amplifiers published in Stereo Review:
https://americanradiohistory.com/Archive-HiFI-Stereo/80s/HiFi-Stereo-Review-1987-01.pdf
The Futterman and Levinson were indistinguishable from the other amps.

This has been demonstrated time and time again. There was a good AES survey of all of the attempts over a decade for people to distinguish between properly working amps, discussed here:

Catalogue of blind tests

Do partially-sighted speaker faceoffs tally well with blind test results? If they can be shown to tally well then we we can trust many comparisons - anyone can do a face off (and many do...), while blind tests are too tricky for most to attempt. Example: Audio Musings by Sean Olive A blog...

www.audiosciencereview.com

The studies that reported distinguishable differences are noted. If we include misbiased tube amps, oscillating tube amps, studies with frequency mismatches, studies that falsely report statistical results, studies that incorrectly throw the tests where people couldn't hear differences, or compare a 10 Watt amp to a 400 Watt amp, then amps sound different. Otherwise, they are indistinguishable from each other.

I have posted differences in noise with a really high efficiency horn tweeter, but that is another corner case where most of my amps except the >40 year old Aiwa micro amp sounds different. The rest measure differently but all have inaudible hiss. All of the amps, including the Aiwa have inaudible hiss if the passive network is used. The Aiwa integrated amp with the D2 tweeter is a bit absurd, but is an example of how far you need to go to actually elicit an audible difference in amps.

 

[terryforsythe]

Many of us put this to bed ages ago.

Some haven't, and still are recommending that people do blind testing. I am not saying that is bad advice, but I think it is a bit impractical for the typical buyer. I think blind testing better serves the purpose of being an educational tool for some who want confirmation of the science.

 

[MAB]

Some haven't, and still are recommending that people do blind testing. I am not saying that is bad advice, but I think it is a bit impractical for the typical buyer. I think blind testing better serves the purpose of being an educational tool for some who want confirmation of the science.

I agree. It's really impractical. And not very fun.

Are you thinking that repeating tests Clark did will find new differences? Some of the amps in his tests had fairly high distortion and noise. If those amps all played below the threshold of human audibility, what would a contemporary amp with heroic SINAD do that is audibly different? Clark's results stand just as firmly now as they did back when he made them. Improvements in amplifiers just push the measured differences further into the realm of inaudibility.

 

[terryforsythe]

Are you thinking that repeating tests Clark did will find new differences?

No, I don't think repeating the same tests with the same equipment will change the results. But, see the video by Erin's Audio Corner, as well as the data contained therein, to which I linked in post #22 on the previous page of this thread.

 

[MAB]

No, I don't think repeating the same tests with the same equipment will change the results. But, see the video by Erin's Audio Corner, as well as the data contained therein, to which I linked in post #22 on the previous page of this thread.

We don't need a blind test to tell that amp will have un-flat frequency response, especially with a low-impedance speaker. As you say, they are hard to execute. Why would a blind test help? The effect has been known for ages, explicitly discussed in the studies I cited above. Amps with high output impedance will interact with speakers' impedance in a predictable way. Measuring the impedance of a speaker and amp is much easier, gives a much more quantifiable assessment of the effect, which is why those are included in reviews from people like Amir and Erin.

 

[terryforsythe]

We don't need a blind test to tell that amp will have un-flat frequency response, especially with a low-impedance speaker. As you say, they are hard to execute. Why would a blind test help? The effect has been known for ages, explicitly discussed in the studies I cited above. Amps with high output impedance will interact with speakers' impedance in a predictable way. Measuring the impedance of a speaker and amp is much easier, gives a much more quantifiable assessment of the effect, which is why those are included in reviews from people like Amir and Erin.

Correct. Basic electric circuit analysis all EEs learn, or should have learned, in their first networks course. But, unless I missed it, Amir and Erin do not provide amplifier output impedance graphs. Nonetheless, the effect is seen in some of the amplifier frequency response graphs.

 

[MarkS]

Amps with high output impedance

are poor designs. I do not consider them to be "properly functioning".

 

[voodooless]

Some haven't, and still are recommending that people do blind testing.

The point is that they will otherwise do an uncontrolled test, with the obvious biased results. So either you do a controlled test, or none at all.

 

[terryforsythe]

The point is that they will otherwise do an uncontrolled test, with the obvious biased results. So either you do a controlled test, or none at all.

When the average person is looking to purchase audio equipment, it is highly unlikely that they are going to do a controlled test. But, a lot of people want to hear various options before completing the purchase. That is just the way it is, and it is not going to change.

Also, in this forum we oftentimes see brainwashed "audiophiles" come in here and post nonsense. They are not the norm. The average person is not as biased. Long, long ago, just after high school, I worked part time in an audio store. People would come in, listen to various equipment, and then want more information. More often than not they would state that they could not hear a significant difference between different receivers, amplifiers, etc. They were concerned about price, features and output power. Speakers, there they could hear a difference.

 

[voodooless]

The average person is not as biased

They soon will be if you don’t tell them that uncontrolled listening sessions are pointless.

 

[MAB]

Correct. Basic electric circuit analysis all EEs learn, or should have learned, in their first networks course. But, unless I missed it, Amir and Erin do not provide amplifier output impedance graphs. Nonetheless, the effect is seen in some of the amplifier frequency response graphs.

Amir posts the frequency response into various impedances. Like this Carver with moderately high output impedance:

Erin does the same, and checks into a complex load. Like his McIntosh:

Stereophile also measures output impedance and frequency response variations from high output impedance into a few different loads including a complex one. Like this Wavac amp.

So a number of reviewers do even a bit better than impedance traces and post the actual frequency response non-linearities so we can judge if the amp is going to competently drive speakers of various impedances.

 

[WalkingBrass]

The average person is not as biased.

They soon will be if you don’t tell them that uncontrolled listening sessions are pointless.

You will be very very soon. The moment you start researching online to find out what to buy, you are immediately exposed to all those myths, feedback, and half-scientific claims about how the sound is affected by everything in the setup. And it doesn't seem to be only those people's fault; even the marketing around every piece of gear fuels this. This is exactly what happened to me.

 

[voodooless]

the marketing around every piece of gear fuels this

Yes, it’s is a deliberate industry tactic.

 

[WalkingBrass]

Yes, it’s is a deliberate industry tactic.

A tactic that I'm guessing is based on the fact that some people want it to be true. They like to think that even if they didn't buy super expensive speakers, they still have the ability to increase their sound quality by tweaking some less expensive part of their setup. Thinking that every part of a setup has an influence means that you have exponential possibilities to make it sound better.

 

[JeremyFife]

A tactic that I'm guessing is based on the fact that some people want it to be true. They like to think that even if they didn't buy super expensive speakers, they still have the ability to increase their sound quality by tweaking some less expensive part of their setup. Thinking that every part of a setup has an influence means that you have exponential possibilities to make it sound better.

That's why I check in here regularly; read the reviews and follow (mostly) the discussions. A sanity check, and occasionally entertaining

 

[Ismapics]

A Yamaha A-S501 (or 701) + WiiM Mini combo

Personally, this is the option I'd go with. You're likely to find the WiiM Amp slightly underpowered. A while ago I switched out a Yamaha A-S301 / Bluenode for a WiiM Amp Pro. I really like the WiiM Amp, but there's no question it didn't match the performance of the A-S301, even though both are rated at 60W/channel. 60W/Channel seems like a hard ceiling for the Wiim Amp, but somewhat conservative rating for the A-S301. I could crank the WiiM Amp to max volume, and, while loud, there was no headroom. The A-S301 at max volume was very loud for the relatively small space I had the system set up in.

You won't have to worry about having enough power with the A-S501. With the WiiM Amp, you may.

Hello, I had an SMSL desktop Amp and changed the speakers to Elac DBR 6.2. It could not keep up, so I bought a literally brand new A-S301 from FB Marketplace and I am loving every minute. Loads of power (for my needs) and good somewhat old fashion looks. Just wanted to share. cheers

 

[RexrothPigeon]

Some haven't, and still are recommending that people do blind testing. I am not saying that is bad advice, but I think it is a bit impractical for the typical buyer. I think blind testing better serves the purpose of being an educational tool for some who want confirmation of the science.

I don't think those recommendations are usually meant to be taken seriously but rather as important reminders of the unreliability of sighted listening evaluations and the necessity of humility and self-skepticism in the face of that perceptual incompetence.