PS Audio PowerPlant 12 Review (AC Regenerator)

[srkbear]

You seem to think incredibly little of the intelligence of your fellow audiophiles. There is a far lower percentage of insipid ninnies in the hobby than you seem to think. As far as whatever malignancy there is in the hobby, we've certainly seen much of it on display in this thread. Thankfully, it hasn't seemed to metastasize far beyond.

"You can't hold a man down without staying down with him". -Booker T. Washington, reformer, educator, and author (5 Apr 1856-1915)

Dude, I’m starting to worry about you. You’re going off the rails in this defense of PS Audio and I can’t fathom what on earth my post triggered in you to warrant this. If you’re a PS Audio owner and I insulted your gear, please accept my amends and let it go.

The general tenor of this site includes exposing overpriced components to sunlight and this battle is going to be a long climb uphill—peace.

 

[captainbeefheart]

Predatory would only apply if the customers have no other real options.

No not really. Predatory is an intent and completely different than a monopoly. A monopoly could be predatory knowing the consumer has no other option, or they can be transparent and honest. It's a choice one makes on how to behave and that's all.

 

[LarryRS]

Dude, I’m starting to worry about you. You’re going off the rails in this defense of PS Audio and I can’t fathom what on earth my post triggered in you to warrant this. If you’re a PS Audio owner and I insulted your gear, please accept my amends and let it go.

The general tenor of this site includes exposing overpriced components to sunlight and this battle is going to be a long climb uphill—peace.

You needn't worry about me. I own very little PS Audio gear so I am not at all insulted by whether you like it or not for what it does. I actually own more Topping equipment than PS Audio. This site publishes measurements of audio equipment. If by exposing overpriced components to sunlight you mean to plot every amplifier tested on a bar graph of SINAD to demonstrate a lack of correlation between SINAD and cost, well OK then. In terms of how equipment sounds, that definitely takes a back seat. There was a recent test of an amplifier here that was taken apart and not listened to at all for the initial report. That is the purpose.

My biggest issue with many of the comments in this thread, and others, is the damning comments about gear, and in some cases people and companies, by people who have never heard the gear and who have no experience with either the equipment or the company. That tenor, which seems to be becoming more and more the norm, really detracts from the site.

 

[Deleted member 21219]

My biggest issue with many of the comments in this thread, and others, is the damning comments about gear, and in some cases people and companies, by people who have never heard the gear and who have no experience with either the equipment or the company. That tenor, which seems to be becoming more and more the norm, really detracts from the site.

You are not the first person who had said something similar. But just pause a moment and look at another side to the issue.

Consider this advertisement from long ago. What would you say about the liquid? What would you say about the people who marketed this liquid? Would you say that the product is respectable? Would you opine that the proprietors were respectable? In other words, should we, as a group, respect them? What should we think about these claims? Would your opinion be less intense or more intense if this liquid were marketed in stores today?

I don't see much difference between people who market overpriced nonsense and the purveyors of this stuff. I don't need to buy it or use it to condemn it out of hand ...... and the people who manufacture and sell it.

 

[LarryRS]

You are not the first person who had said something similar. But just pause a moment and look at another side to the issue.

Consider this advertisement from long ago. What would you say about the liquid? What would you say about the people who marketed this liquid? Would you say that the product is respectable? Would you opine that the proprietors were respectable? In other words, should we, as a group, respect them? What should we think about these claims? Would your opinion be less intense or more intense if this liquid were marketed in stores today?

I don't see much difference between people who market overpriced nonsense and the purveyors of this stuff. I don't need to buy it or use it to condemn it out of hand ...... and the people who manufacture and sell it.

That is pure hyperbole. What exactly has PS Audio claimed that falls in that category? This thread began about a PS Audio power conditioner and a number of people on this thread that have used it said it removed noise in their systems. Exactly where is the parallel here?

 

[Ricardus]

That is pure hyperbole. What exactly has PS Audio claimed that falls in that category? This thread began about a PS Audio power conditioner and a number of people on this thread that have used it said it removed noise in their systems. Exactly where is the parallel here?

Amir showed exactly what the thing does with extensive testing. Basically nothing, and in some cases it made things worse.

The rest is people claiming it improved noise in their systems, which without evidence is just an unsubstantiated claim.

 

[captainbeefheart]

I'm not twisting your words. You wrote "Paul exploits the fact the majority of his customers do not hold EE degrees." So one should have a degree in electrical engineering to make an informed decision on what sounds good to you when you play music on your audio system? Should you also have a mechanical engineering degree to take a test drive and be able to decide what car you like, or a degree in food science and nutrition to decide if you prefer marinara or carbonara?

You are again twisting words. Here I'll spell it out further for you.

My point is not that you need an EE degree to make decision on what sounds good, that's subjective. Again you are twisting very specific words into an argument that is a contrived by you alone. My point was a small percentage of consumers have an in depth understanding on how exactly how the technology functions. People that actually work with the technology everyday and know the inner workings inside and out both theoretically and empirically. That information allows one to easily cut through the ridiculous snake oil claims and also can understand the testing data and how it correlates to the conclusion of said snake oil products.

Are you a PSAudio shill? Do you work for them or affiliated with them? This is a serious question, I just can't understand why anyone would condone the behavior of this company.

 

[LarryRS]

You are again twisting words. Here I'll spell it out further for you.

My point is not that you need an EE degree to make decision on what sounds good, that's subjective. Again you are twisting very specific words into an argument that is a contrived by you alone. My point was a small percentage of consumers have an in depth understanding on how exactly how the technology functions. People that actually work with the technology everyday and know the inner workings inside and out both theoretically and empirically. That information allows one to easily cut through the ridiculous snake oil claims and also can understand the testing data and how it correlates to the conclusion of said snake oil products.

Are you a PSAudio shill? Do you work for them or affiliated with them? This is a serious question, I just can't understand why anyone would condone the behavior of this company.

"My point is not that you need an EE degree to make decision on what sounds good, that's subjective.". What exactly do you believe the purpose of this equipment is, other than to sound good?

Never met a single person (to my knowledge) that works or has ever worked for PS Audio.

 

[amirm]

My biggest issue with many of the comments in this thread, and others, is the damning comments about gear, and in some cases people and companies, by people who have never heard the gear and who have no experience with either the equipment or the company.

I don't know what there is to "hear" in this context. Measurements conclusively show that there is no sonic difference as far as fidelity. If I sold you a $5000 filter that I claim would double your gas mileage in your car if you ran your fuel through it, but lab tests showed this to not hold water whatsoever, you would only want to hear from people who have used it??? That people read and understand the report means nothing? They should stay quiet because they have not experienced such?

That is wrong, correct? The whole purpose of creating objective data is that it doesn't matter who is looking at it. Me with equipment at hand or someone not. We are both looking at the same data.

 

[amirm]

"My point is not that you need an EE degree to make decision on what sounds good, that's subjective.". What exactly do you believe the purpose of this equipment is, other than to sound good?

The company/inventor thought it would result in better sound. Proper knowledge of engineering and data that we have created by testing it shows that assumption was completely wrong. With this knowledge at hand, a proper company that thought about its customers first, would think this whole thing through and not keep selling the darn thing as if nothing has happened.

A few years ago I tested a power supply that claimed full isolation from mains. I tested it and showed that it was leaking mains input just the same. The theory was sound, real implementation not. Company owner/designer contacted me saying he was shocked at my testing. So went to one of his friends that was a power supply designer and he immediately confirmed my finding. He wrote to me that he instantly stopped sales of the product. This is real ethics. Show me where PS Audio is doing this and then we have something to talk about.

So no, the company should be in no position to think this device does something good for your sound.

 

[amirm]

That is pure hyperbole. What exactly has PS Audio claimed that falls in that category?

Their marketing material is horrible. It says it even improves picture quality of your video equipment. It further implies no system is working right without this box no matter how well designed. In what way is this defensible?

 

[captainbeefheart]

Yes well said Amir.

Someone random online claiming they heard a difference is not any validation the product works for many reasons I shouldn't need to explain. The purpose of objective testing is so the same tests can be peer reviewed and either proven or disproven. It's something we can quantify with actual real data.

If you claim without a doubt that you know for fact that there is an improvement for using said product then it should be just as simple to show the data to which you you used to come to that conclusion.

"Here in test A we use the amplifier without the P12, noise floor at output is -78db. In test B we used the P12 and now measure at output a noise floor of -89db. On average you can expect to reduce noise by between -6 and as much as -20db by using our product."

This is how you honestly sell products that actually work and anything else is unsubstantiated claims, aka predatory behavior hoping to gain profit from your trust in that the product performs as advertised.

 

[srkbear]

That is pure hyperbole. What exactly has PS Audio claimed that falls in that category? This thread began about a PS Audio power conditioner and a number of people on this thread that have used it said it removed noise in their systems. Exactly where is the parallel here?

Isn’t charging $6,000 for a power conditioner a candidate tor that category? It doesn’t do what it’s advertised to do, and what it can do can be accomplished by gear that costs a fraction of the cost.

Isn’t promoting an inferior audio connection interface as superior, from a position of authority, just so you can push more similarly overpriced units a candidate for the snake oil “hyperbole”? What does qualify for snake oil to you?

 

[srkbear]

I don't know what there is to "hear" in this context. Measurements conclusively show that there is no sonic difference as far as fidelity. If I sold you a $5000 filter that I claim would double your gas mileage in your car if you ran your fuel through it, but lab tests showed this to not hold water whatsoever, you would only want to hear from people who have used it??? That people read and understand the report means nothing? They should stay quiet because they have not experienced such?

That is wrong, correct? The whole purpose of creating objective data is that it doesn't matter who is looking at it. Me with equipment at hand or someone not. We are both looking at the same data.

It seems to me like that the folks arguing Larry’s point either aren’t looking at the data, or have a priori beliefs that motivate them to find a way to refute the data at all costs. I suspect that many of them have already bought the gear, and that’s the thing about $6,000 components—you have far too much of an investment in them to risk hearing any evidence that you’ve possibly made a misguided choice.

 

[captainbeefheart]

It seems to me like that the folks arguing Larry’s point either aren’t looking at the data, or have a priori beliefs that motivate them to find a way to refute the data at all costs. I suspect that many of them have already bought the gear, and that’s the thing about $6,000 components—you have far to much of an investment in them to risk hearing any evidence that you’ve possibly made a misguided choice.

The last part you mentioned reminds me of some bizarre parallel to Stockholm Syndrome. Where the people that got duped and purchased snake oil products for whatever reason has formed some psychological bond with their perpetrator and begin to even defend the very people that took advantage of them.

 

[JSmith]

people who have never heard the gear

How does one listen to an AC power regenerator... you serious?

In what way is this defensible?

It's not at all... in fact if PS Audio had a registered office in Australia, they may find themselves in some hot water for those TV picture quality improvement claims;

False or misleading claims

A business must be able to prove any claim they advertise. Claims should be true, accurate and based on reasonable grounds.

www.accc.gov.au

JSmith

 

[Chrispy]

You needn't worry about me. I own very little PS Audio gear so I am not at all insulted by whether you like it or not for what it does. I actually own more Topping equipment than PS Audio. This site publishes measurements of audio equipment. If by exposing overpriced components to sunlight you mean to plot every amplifier tested on a bar graph of SINAD to demonstrate a lack of correlation between SINAD and cost, well OK then. In terms of how equipment sounds, that definitely takes a back seat. There was a recent test of an amplifier here that was taken apart and not listened to at all for the initial report. That is the purpose.

My biggest issue with many of the comments in this thread, and others, is the damning comments about gear, and in some cases people and companies, by people who have never heard the gear and who have no experience with either the equipment or the company. That tenor, which seems to be becoming more and more the norm, really detracts from the site.

My problem with posts like yours are they are without much actual merit in terms of reality.

 

[Mart68]

You seem to think incredibly little of the intelligence of your fellow audiophiles. There is a far lower percentage of insipid ninnies in the hobby than you seem to think.

'Inspired ninnies' maybe not. But if we're talking otherwise intelligent, educated people who have minimal knowledge of how audio replay works and so trust the salesman? There's legions of them.

 

[Geert]

But if we're talking otherwise intelligent, educated people who have minimal knowledge of how audio replay works and so trust the salesman?

And if you watch uncle Paul's YouTube video's, that's clearly the audience he's targeting. An easy target...

 

[conman]

and that is whatever clandestine alliance Paul McGowan made with Sony, to convince them for the first time in four decades to allow PS Audio access to their SACD DRM rights.

Historically, all SACD players have been legally-mandated by Sony to downscale any digital outputs to a maximum of 48 kHz and 16 bit, purportedly because Sony owned the rights to the majority of releases available in the SACD format and were worried about folks mass-bootlegging these albums in a fidelity so much closer to the original masters than standard CDs.

So let me get this straight - your claim is that PS audio has negotiated a "backdoor" to using the higher resolution available on SACD than other manufacturers are allowed and that's why their product should sound better? For that to be true, "true" high res should be distinguishably better from the 48/16 maximum in the first place.