• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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!

Stereophile Amplification Product of the Year

There was an article in the UK Guardian newspaper today that stated the richest 1% in the world emit the same CO2 as the poorest 66%.

It’s probably because they buy inefficient tube jewellery like this. I used jewellery as a metaphor for s%^t
 
We strive for our equipment to have no sound at all but the sound of the recording itself,"
Well, they failed… so why is this the top amp?
he continued. "We use an evaluation method we call 'comparison by contrast.' When we audition new equipment, we do not use known recordings. We pick five or ten recordings at random, listen to each of them, and then make a judgment as to whether one or the other piece of equipment individualizes the sound of each recording, and the one that does can then be considered to add/subtract the least from the recording."'
That explains a lot :rolleyes:
 
What a load of claptrap.
They put more effort into the spin than the actual engineering. But that's how you do it in the high end world.
 
I suspect it will but if you read the subjective review (someone has to) Audionote are quite clear that they design for accuracy:

'I asked Qvortrup about the manufacturing philosophy behind Audio Note products.

"We strive for our equipment to have no sound at all but the sound of the recording itself," he continued. "We use an evaluation method we call 'comparison by contrast.' When we audition new equipment, we do not use known recordings. We pick five or ten recordings at random, listen to each of them, and then make a judgment as to whether one or the other piece of equipment individualizes the sound of each recording, and the one that does can then be considered to add/subtract the least from the recording."'
Indeed. That is the Big Lie.

Rick "relates to your other thread, doesn't it?" Denney
 
I guess they don't depend on measurements because they don't capture the all-important X Factor.
 
View attachment 328047

Here’s the review


$15000. I wonder what Amirn would make of it?
so, this was my first thought in response to the data in the OP. :)

1700507488520.png

and this was my second thought
1700507562042.png


In other words linear increase in ranking requires an exponential increase in price.
Testable hypothesis: @John Atkinson et al. need to test some $150,000 to 300,000 amps. :cool:
 
I think there are two different models. One with double CD inputs and one with a CD and phono input. Still, for the money it should have an MC option.
Yes; it should come with a permanently assigned Master of Ceremonies.
 
There was an article in the UK Guardian newspaper today that stated the richest 1% in the world emit the same CO2 as the poorest 66%.

It’s probably because they buy inefficient tube jewellery like this. I used jewellery as a metaphor for s%^t
I have to think powering their yachts may also contribute ;)
 
I suspect it will but if you read the subjective review (someone has to) Audionote are quite clear that they design for accuracy:

'I asked Qvortrup about the manufacturing philosophy behind Audio Note products.

"We strive for our equipment to have no sound at all but the sound of the recording itself," he continued. "We use an evaluation method we call 'comparison by contrast.' When we audition new equipment, we do not use known recordings. We pick five or ten recordings at random, listen to each of them, and then make a judgment as to whether one or the other piece of equipment individualizes the sound of each recording, and the one that does can then be considered to add/subtract the least from the recording."'
1700507998061.png
 
so, this was my first thought in response to the data in the OP. :)

View attachment 328081
and this was my second thought
View attachment 328082

In other words linear increase in ranking requires an exponential increase in price.
Testable hypothesis: @John Atkinson et al. need to test some $150,000 to 300,000 amps. :cool:
Seems like there is an asymptotic limit on price where even an amplifier of nearly infinitely poor ranking still costs something. Is it around $1000? Is that "cloth ear" territory?
 
This product has a weird name. Is it made in Eurasia? Also there was a cheap shot at Bauhaus design. This is more Brutalist
than Bauhaus.
I agree. Red lettering on the silver model and a black and gold model don't scream Bauhaus to me either.
 
The high cost here comes from complete over-engineering with expensive, discrete, hand-worked parts combined with British labor costs. Why use a DAC chip when you can use hundreds of hand-soldered and hand-wound, silver and gold plated components. Their 'power supplies' have multiple expensive, hand-wound transformers inside. The case-work isn't even fancy, by audiophile standards, which often is the part that drives up costs needlessly.

Not defending they're stuff. It is silly. But they employ quite a few folks building complex/over-engineered equipment very slowly. That drives up the cost. And the audiophools eat it it up... :facepalm: :cool:

 
Last edited:
View attachment 328047

Here’s the review


$15000. I wonder what Amirn would make of it?
Stereophile themselves describe the performance as "marginal".

I'd describe it as embarrassing - outperformed in every respect by cheap ~$100 class D amps you can buy on Amazon. 70dB SNR, 10% THD at 12 watt output, even if you're just comparing it to other tube amps, you can buy cheap Chinese amps or kits that perform similarly for 1/50th the price.
 
...And extremely poor performance as well. Selling this piece of garbage at that price should be illegal.
I'm not a fan of such amplifier shenanigans, but if someone who can throw that kind of money around buys it and loves it with their horn loaded 103dB/watt @ 1M speakers, well, then, I 'spoze. Ain't my cuppa tea.
 
Back
Top Bottom