Op-amp Rolling Using Sparkos on Fosi V3 Mono

[DanielT]

Thanks for the test Amir.

That you just have the energy and stamina to do these op amp swapping measurement tests fascinates me. Results are predictable BUT despite that it is good that you do it Amir. Good to show the imagining people with objective facts that they ... well... imagine this enormous difference in sound when swapping op amps. They would immediately counter that you (or those with golden ears) can hear differences that cannot be measured. I will leave that discussion aside, however.

 

[Mnyb]

3. 5532 do have distortion levels that is clearly measurable, and audible, I can not disregard thousands of people who have swapped their 5532 and heard an improvement.

As you clearly can see for yourself in Amirs measurements not in this application , apples and oranges ? You must compare in the context of how its used .

 

[milosz]

"...Our knowledge of engineering, confirmed by measurements and science of psychoacoustics says there is no audible difference...."

Actually, no, that's not at all correct. Only statistics from careful blind listening tests can show that. There is NO WAY that electronic measurements alone can PROVE there are no audible differences. It's a very unscientific statement to say that you know the results of any regime of careful blind listening test before such tests are actually conducted. Smacks of hubris.

I suspect that careful listening tests such as I've described would show that in fact no one can hear differences. But that's just a GUESS and this is supposed to be Audio SCIENCE Review and there's no place for guessing in real science. So where are the blind listening tests? They should accompany the electronic tests to prove the thesis that the electronic tests show no audible differences exist. Without results from blind listening tests the whole premise collapses.

 

[Talisman]

"...Our knowledge of engineering, confirmed by measurements and science of psychoacoustics says there is no audible difference...."

Actually, no, that's not at all correct. Only statistics from careful blind listening tests can show that. There is NO WAY that electronic measurements alone can PROVE there are no audible differences. It's a very unscientific statement to say that you know the results of any regime of careful blind listening test before such tests are actually conducted. Smacks of hubris.

I suspect that careful listening tests such as I've described would show that in fact no one can hear differences. But that's just a GUESS and this is supposed to be Audio SCIENCE Review and there's no place for guessing in real science. So where are the blind listening tests? They should accompany the electronic tests to prove the thesis that the electronic tests show no audible differences exist. Without results from blind listening tests the whole premise collapses.

What you say is certainly true at the edge of knowledge, where some key points have yet to be established.
Audio does not fall into this category, these are things seen reviewed, tried and tested for decades.
Would you say you can see ultraviolet or infrared? Do you need blind tests? Our senses have major limitations and are totally outclassed by any possible modern measuring instrument, continuing to perpetuate the myth of things that can be heard but not measured only helps the snake oil salesmen who wallow in this belief. Face it, in audio there is NOTHING that our ears do better or perceive or more than measuring instruments

 

[Mnyb]

What you say is certainly true at the edge of knowledge, where some key points have yet to be established.
Audio does not fall into this category, these are things seen reviewed, tried and tested for decades.
Would you say you can see ultraviolet or infrared? Do you need blind tests? Our senses have major limitations and are totally outclassed by any possible modern measuring instrument, continuing to perpetuate the myth of things that can be heard but not measured only helps the snake oil salesmen who wallow in this belief. Face it, in audio there is NOTHING that our ears do better or perceive or more than measuring instruments

Once its proven that we for example cant hear 0,01% thd regardless of spectra etc . Tou can safely translate this to any other device that measures similar

 

[AudioSceptic]

Thanks for doing this test and posting - I figured this would be the outcome, it's good to see in black and white (or red and blue).

For anyone planning to come into the thread talking about differences you heard rolling op-amps, and "just sharing my opinion", and opening gaps of doubt based on your assumption of what "science" does and doesn't know, and so on, please re-read the Discussion and Conclusions section of Amir's review.

Once the subjectivists got bored with cables they had to find something "digital" to waste time and money on, and op-amps was it. Was anyone really surprised by Amir's results?

 

[CedarX]

In fact, I bought the high-end operational amplifier of FOSI! The instrument measurement indeed shows no difference at all, but the sound does have some distinctions, hhh.

What do you mean? Care to expand?

There's also an interesting phenomenon that there are just too many types of operational amplifiers in this world, and it seems that the vast majority of them have no essential differences...

If you mean there are no differences that matter in this type of application, then yes (granted the opamp is stable…).

However there are differences that do matter in other applications, and that’s where this whole amp rolling craze comes from: because opamps can make a difference in some applications/cases, audiophiles’ take is that opamps make a huge difference in every audio application.

Then come Fosi—to pick on them—silly recommendations of opamp by musical genre to, you know, diffuse that myth!

 

[BDWoody]

"...Our knowledge of engineering, confirmed by measurements and science of psychoacoustics says there is no audible difference...."

Actually, no, that's not at all correct. Only statistics from careful blind listening tests can show that.

If there's a fence that's 5' high, there will be some that can jump over it and some that can't. If it's 30' high, there is no one on the planet who can standing jump over it. I am willing to bet everything I can beg borrow or steal on that, even without further rigorous tests.

To tell me I can't make that claim would be to misunderstand how unlikely it is.

The body of evidence supports the conclusion you casually dismiss. If someone wants to challenge the basic premise of what's audible and what isn't, they need evidence.

There is NO WAY that electronic measurements alone can PROVE there are no audible differences. It's a very unscientific statement to say that you know the results of any regime of careful blind listening test before such tests are actually conducted. Smacks of hubris.

I can see how those who don't understand would see it that way, but that doesn't make it hubris. It's just understanding.

 

[rokr]

 

[Count Arthur]

Some people aren't going to be happy.

 

[daniboun]

This is how Sparkos makes the pill easier for innocent consumers to swallow.... Fosi fans, watch this ))))

 

[JSmith]

Fosi fans, watch this ))))

Sparkos Fosi ZA3 (fixed link)

Haven't watched it yet though... what's the basic summary?


JSmith

 

[Petevid]

That should be the end of that then....

 

[pkane]

Haven't watched it yet though... what's the basic summary?

Just a guess.. Deeper soundstage, darker blacks, better instrument separation, punchier bass?

 

[Koeitje]

3. 5532 do have distortion levels that is clearly measurable, and audible, I can not disregard thousands of people who have swapped their 5532 and heard an improvement.

And yet there is no measurable difference with the Sparkos when used in an actual product. Besides, nobody doubts people have heard a difference though. It is just a question of if what people have heard was actually there, because your brain can easily fool you (points at signature).

 

[Fleuch]

Quote of the year, sir. Well said. And thanks again for proving in most use cases, an op amp is an op amp is an op amp. If the oem circuit designer has done their job properly, all is well. Shame Fosi promote rolling for genre 'perfection.'

. . . and not just Fosi

 

[Fleuch]

Thank you for this review.
Power cords in the dustbin
Speaker cables in the dustbin
Vibrating things in listening rooms dustbin
Power conditioners dustbin
Dustbin getting pretty full
On to Loch Ness

Did you read that an underwater camera, lost decades ago, has recently been retrieved (by fortunate accident). The film has been developed with the same null response - no Nessie!

Bit like a Sparkos op amp in a Fosi PCB - same as throwing $$ in the loch!

 

[Sokel]

Did you read that an underwater camera, lost decades ago, has recently been retrieved (by fortunate accident). The film has been developed with the same null response - no Nessie!

Bit like a Sparkos op amp in a Fosi PCB - same as throwing $$ in the loch!

Was watching a documentary and the scientists there said that some animals are avoiding us not out of fear but because they probably don't like us.
Nessie probably falls in this category (and for good reasons)

 

[T&T]

This is how Sparkos makes the pill easier for innocent consumers to swallow.... Fosi fans, watch this ))))

I did that and you might find severals you tubers recommendations for ZA3 with only 2 opamps and works fine and sound better with only 2 opamps, the recommend Sparkos ss3602 and V7 vivid are a bad choice opa2604 is much better.
No measurements where done by anyone using ZA3 with only 2 opamps in the XLR output.
I sold my Fosi V3 monos... sterile garbaje

 

[Mikycoud]

No it doesn't...
...apart from the buyer's wallet huh ;-)