Sinad and THD+N are the same thing - except inverted - so 90dB Sinad is the same as -90dB THD+N
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Master Thread: Are Measurements Everything or Nothing?
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Do you have a reference for that - preferably with measurements? We often hear that "Manufacturer x" deliberately voices their product, but I've never seen it verified - I view it as part of audiophile folklore. Certainly, it is not backed up by Naim's own specifications. 0.006% THD+N certainly does not indicate audible distortion, 2nd harmonic, or anything else. (Sinad 84.44dB, which would place it halfway up the green section of the amp chart.)
solderdude
Grand Contributor
Yep, that qualifies as inaudible distortion.
And neither is H2 dominant in any way
Right so 2nd = 3rd and in general just a typical spray of harmonics - no voicing. All of them inaudible in any case.
Well, maybe this was an unlucky example, let's see another amp:
[source: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/naim-uniti-atom-review-streamer-amp.35213/ ]
Here, H3 even dominates. Maybe they reserve this special voicing only for the very high end models... Sadly, could not find any measurements from those
Sounds very much like a troll to me.
From SET to NFB triods, these amp a VOICED to sound different, not at all transparent.
What dominates on that one is power-supply noise.Well, maybe this was an unlucky example, let's see another amp:
View attachment 503590
[source: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/naim-uniti-atom-review-streamer-amp.35213/ ]
Here, H3 even dominates. Maybe they reserve this special voicing only for the very high end models... Sadly, could not find any measurements from those
Rick “Hmmmmmmmmmm” Denney
Makes you wonder why you'd be paying 2 grand for it.What dominates on that one is power-supply noise.
Rick “Hmmmmmmmmmm” Denney
but SINAD incorporates THD+N as a kind of distortion, no?
SINAD = the ratio of the total signal power level (Signal + Noise + Distortion) to unwanted signal power (Noise + Distortion).
It's not necessary for it to be totally unreliable (never right) to be inadequate for 'best practice' use. The problem is that totally reliable (never wrong) is not realistic.
drewdawg999
Senior Member
I meant expressed as a percentage. Then it's harder to tell them apart, like 0.0006% vs 0.0003%. In SINAD that's 104 vs 110, and 6 SINAD points is supposed to demonstrate superior engineering? It's an inaudible difference.
Last edited:
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 11,326
- Likes
- 20,203
Like you, I’ve always been suspicious of those claims as well for the same reasons.
A possible exception would be certain Pass amps - as I understand it N Pass has been explicit about engineering in a little bit of “ euphonic distortion” in some of his amplifier designs.
The funny thing to me is that many tube Amp Designer/manufacturers (and this seemed to be the case much more through the mid 80s up through the 90s) would declare that they were using tubes because tubes were a
“ better” amplification source which they claimed offered lower distortion signal paths.
I can’t remember a single tube amp that came with such claims measuring better than SS… virtually all of them measured higher distortion.
drewdawg999
Senior Member
Yeah they're the same thing, but can also be expressed as a percentage. I think we associate a SINAD in the 60s as sounding terrible. But for music purposes it's plenty good enough. I was actually steered away from an amp since it measured in the 60s. But 60dB SINAD is 0.1% distortion + noise, not audible so not fair to dock a product for that level of performance.
Okay I see. A lot of people don't know what the hell they're hearing, minds tend to be way too busy in modern society. I believe all senses benefit from having a calmer mind, able to focus brain energy on the task at hand.
oleg87
Addicted to Fun and Learning
SINAD set by noise, not really acceptable. Distortion, likely audible with pure tones depending on spectral profile, but it would take extremely critical listening to ABX it in typical music. Not fond of this metric lumping the two together.
I’m always suspicious about claims from tube amp manufacturers in the modern day .
When tubes where the only game in town basically all strived to make the best amp they could as linear as possibly as low output impedance they could get , as wide and flat frequency response as possible , low noise low distortion.
Now when transistors exist , all the problems you had making the best tube amp are suddenly features in modern tube amps ?
And most would sound that way too.
MattHooper
Grand Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2019
- Messages
- 11,326
- Likes
- 20,203
I’m always suspicious about claims from tube amp manufacturers in the modern day .
When tubes where the only game in town basically all strived to make the best amp they could as linear as possibly as low output impedance they could get , as wide and flat frequency response as possible , low noise low distortion.
Now when transistors exist , all the problems you had making the best tube amp are suddenly features in modern tube amps ?
Yeah.
It seems to me that even after the golden ear crowd started to alter the audiophile landscape starting in the 80s and especially through the 90s, there were still an emphasis on “ purity” and “ removing veils” and “ getting you closer to the music all that yummy information buried in the recordings.”
So there was still a sort of worship of the
“ straight wire with gain” goal. Even tube amp manufacturers didn’t want to advertise their gear as “ adding colouration” so it tended to be promoted and defended (also by tube amp aficionados) on some technical grounds.
Certain tubes and tube designs claimed to offer advantages over SS in terms of being inherently lower distortion to start off with. And the whole war against feedback by the single ended folks as some sonic corruption etc.
So there was often some technical story about how the tube amp was actually the better amplification paradigm, that it lowered distortions inherent with a solid state. As I said, I’ve never once seen a tube amp measurement back up with these claims. They virtually always measure higher distortion.
You can still see tube amp builders making similar claims, but these days it seems to me - my impression - there’s less of that and it seems generally accepted that if a tube amp is sounding different from a solid state amp, it’s just adding distortion. And tube amp fans are fine with that
Or is that just sales patter to justify his poor measurements?
I don't think so. He's long past the point where he can do what he wants - just his name will sell product. I think he believes it.
Don't think he'd have too much trouble making an amp with near perfect measurements if that's what he wanted to do.
