Classical Music Forum banner

Amplifier upgrade

34K views 164 replies 27 participants last post by  Granate 
#1 ·
I have all my music in digital format on a Mac mini/external hard drive and, until now have used a Naim Supernait with Hi-cap2 into a pair of Neat Mystique speakers.

After many years of using Naim gear, and feeling vaguely dissatisfied with its reproduction of orchestral pieces, I have decided to jump ship. While I have enjoyed the way this brand handles rock/electric/jazz music, I do feel that it gives an unnatural presentation of classical stringed instruments which results in a very forward, steely tone.

I am looking for an alternative which will give me a less forward presentation, an open soundstage with natural sounding tone and sweeter treble.

Currently, I am tempted by the new Hegel 160 and wonder if anyone has any experience of this amplifier. Alternatively, does anyone have any recommendations which I could follow up?

Thanks for your help

Barnaby
 
#46 ·
It is impressive how in my search for better audio reproduction I have encountered two extreme poles of irrational thinking that need to be completely disregarded.

The believers of no difference when there is a difference (in my subjective opinion) - this is especially the case with amps and dacs

The believers of extortionate high cost snake oil magic audio shoot yourself in the head cause you are broke gear

It has been an absolute minefield and I am glad that by careful searching and trial of gear I got to a great sounding home audio system.
 
#56 ·
It is impressive how in my search for better audio reproduction I have encountered two extreme poles of irrational thinking that need to be completely disregarded.

The believers of no difference when there is a difference (in my subjective opinion) - this is especially the case with amps and dacs

The believers of extortionate high cost snake oil magic audio shoot yourself in the head cause you are broke gear

It has been an absolute minefield and I am glad that by careful searching and trial of gear I got to a great sounding home audio system.
This is no different in any other time that these topics come on here on TC or other audio related forums. Things get heated.....because we have people that are on both extremes.

Great that you got something that you're satisfied with.
 
#47 · (Edited)
The trick it to translate your subjective impressions of differences into objective, quantifiable, documentable differences. It is a little more work, but it can help you determine what areas are in need of improvement, and what areas aren't worth changing.

Once you know that there is a objective difference, the next step is to figure out which one is the better of the two.
 
#48 · (Edited)
There are no objective differences that can mirror the listening experience.

Measurements can quantify certain parameters of audio equipment and are an important part of designing and comparing equipment. However they cannot replace the actual listening experience. Measurements cannot be surrogate outcome measures for the sense of hearing. It is way more complicated and still not fully understood.

Just taking measurements is not a viable scientific method to completely rely on as unknown variables are not controlled.

In order to control variables including unmeasured equipment variations and the actual hearing experience much bigger studies are needed with enough power to give us a statistical result that can be generalised to the whole population. At present there are no properly conducted studies and probably there will not be as the financial implications are huge.

Blindly relying on measured criteria makes no sense as much as solely relying on biochemical processes or animal studies when a new medicine is put out.

Pharmaceutical companies base their products on large well controlled studies were variables are carefully controlled. These companies spend billions on these studies, hardly the realm of audio companies!

Telling me that there is no difference between amps or other audio equipment such as dacs (contrary to my experience), simply because measurements are in line with what is expected, does not make sense as much as telling me to invest loads of money on the latest cable made of unobtainium.
 
#61 ·
There are no objective differences that can mirror the listening experience.

Measurements can quantify certain parameters of audio equipment and are an important part of designing and comparing equipment. However they cannot replace the actual listening experience. Measurements cannot be surrogate outcome measures for the sense of hearing. It is way more complicated and still not fully understood.

Just taking measurements is not a viable scientific method to completely rely on as unknown variables are not controlled.

In order to control variables including unmeasured equipment variations and the actual hearing experience much bigger studies are needed with enough power to give us a statistical result that can be generalised to the whole population. At present there are no properly conducted studies and probably there will not be as the financial implications are huge.

Blindly relying on measured criteria makes no sense as much as solely relying on biochemical processes or animal studies when a new medicine is put out.

Pharmaceutical companies base their products on large well controlled studies were variables are carefully controlled. These companies spend billions on these studies, hardly the realm of audio companies!

Telling me that there is no difference between amps or other audio equipment such as dacs (contrary to my experience), simply because measurements are in line with what is expected, does not make sense as much as telling me to invest loads of money on the latest cable made of unobtainium.
Couldn't agree more.
The ears are the best measuring tool around and the only one that matters.
It isn't necessary to spend a fortune. It is amazing how many people will buy expensive gear only to trade them in within weeks to pick up the latest. Let them take the depreciation hit.
 
#49 · (Edited)
Is the sound going in the same as the sound coming out? What coloration or distortion is being added if any? These are simple objective ways to determine audio fidelity with any component. Once you answer those questions, it's easy to determine which is objectively better.

Better yet, why not take the time to understand the fundamentals of how digital audio works? If you understand what it is doing under the hood, you have a better chance to diagnose problems and identify weak parts of your system. Or do a little research into human perceptual limits and you'll be able to know at a glance if something is audible or not.

Or you can just throw your hands in the air and be subjective about it. Drift pleasantly with the breeze. Buy what the salesman tells you to buy. But flying blind like that can be very expensive and not very effective. Random swapping of components will just get you random results. I think it's better to be an informed consumer and have a plan for improvement myself, but your milage may vary.

By the way, I never said all amps and DACs sound the same. I said all amps and DACs SHOULD BE AUDIBLY TRANSPARENT. They shouldn't have any unique sound at all. If they do, they are either poorly manufactured, or poorly designed. There are plenty of inexpensive amps and DACs that *are* audibly transparent, so it's pretty easy and inexpensive to find one that does the job perfectly.
 
#50 ·
I have a new amp (Schiit Ragnarok) in the house with impressive measurements as my old one (Musical Fidelity M6i). I am using Monitor Audio Gold speakers to compare them. Both amplifiers are manufactured by reputable companies but they could not sound any more different!


The Schiit Ragnarok is smooth, highly resolving with impressive life like tonality. It also performs superbly with the Sennheiser HD800 headphones.


The Musical Fidelity M6i is warm, laid back but still detailed and a pleasure to listen to.

The numbers are really good, but measurements mean little compared to the actual listening experience.

Sometimes I wonder whether believing that there is no real sound signature becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Placebo effect can in fact work both ways and cannot be eliminated without properly conducted large studies (as yet not even attempted).

I also wonder how much people that rely on a simple term 'objective' really understand the term. Oversimplification of the argument by basing it on the upper limits of hearing or decibel level misses the point.

The physiology of the ear as well as the auditory pathways through which signals are processed in the brain are still poorly undersood. There have been recent studies on the way the brain reacts to sound on PET scanners that highlighted the multiple areas of the brain involved and the complicated filtering mechanisms employed. Other studies for example are focusing on the poorly understood role of NMDA receptors in the cochlea.

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this.

As long as we enjoy the music, nothing else really matters.

(Bach's BWV1060 Concerto for Oboe and Violin never sounded this good on my new amp!)
 
#55 ·
I used an SPL meter as they sound so different I was not aware of how much louder the new amp can get.

At the end this is just a hobby I have cherished these past few years. We should not take it so seriously.

Now I am just enjoying the music... for a change today I had 4 hours of non-stop Bach, then some Debussy, Stravinsky and now I am finishing off with Feldman.
 
#52 ·
Yes, let's trash science and embrace subjectivism. Because there are no studies performed in big populations, those with small samples mean nothing. That's surely the modern way. We'll have to agree on our disagreement. If your two amps sound so different there are two possible causes:

-One of them is defective or designed to have some sort of "signature" sound. Something like the tube amps, that have poor amplification capabilities at high frequencies and an special distortion that "softens" music in a way that people like it. Nothing wrong with that (you pick your own poison in a free world) as long as you dont ignore what's happening.

-Placebo effect.

All modern, well designed amplifiers are transparent. Some may have better measurements, but in ranges you cannot hear or distinguish.

All that takes to convince yourself is a well-designed honest double blind test. Beyond the science of large numbers.

However, I totally agree with your last statement. As long as we enjoy the music, we can be friends and enjoy it together. No hard feelings.
 
#54 ·
I was a hifi nut back in the 70s. We didn't have all this "poetical reviewing" back then. It was almost always solid, nuts and bolts information based on an understanding of how the machines worked. Today, someone can write a bunch of stuff about "veils being lifted" and "fourth dimensional soundstage" and "purity of the essence of the musical statement" and get away with it. That NEVER would have passed back in the old days. I remember when all this audiophoolery started creeping in. It coincided with the descent into craven advertorial in all of the hifi magazines. As soon as there started to be less to point to to set a product apart, they started making up reasons to buy one brand or model over another. Then the average hifi nut started picking it up and repeating it... then came the internet and that was all there was.
 
#62 ·
The nice thing about ears is that they are very forgiving. They'll fail to detect a lot of flaws that measurement tools pick up. Measurements are great at making mountains out of molehills.

To ears, music is music. As long as you reach a certain threshold, everything sounds good.
 
#64 ·
I think that the "all amps sound the same" sentiment is egalitarianism masquerading as objectivity.

They don't all measure the same, so they don't sound the same. Here is an interesting article: http://www.audioholics.com/audio-amplifier/the-sound-of-an-amplifier

I have been both cursed and blessed with some bad amps to know that amps can sound very different. My first amp was a Christmas gift from my parents. It was a JVC stereo receiver, and if you pushed the volume knob past 10 o'clock it started distorting badly. In grad school I ran through some dyi headphone amps back before it became a major industry. These were the days in which people that built a small number of them would post on head-fi, maybe have a website. These amps had really obvious coloration. My first AVR was an Onkyo, and it's headphone out was just a stepped down signal from the speakers. There was an audible noise floor and sounded terrible. After that I had a Denon with a headphone out with no noise floor. But it had incredibly poor bass management with my speakers.

Anyway I now use a Marantz integrated amp, and I'm pretty happy. My speakers sound great through them, and it's so simple to use.

I'm not a fan of equalizing flat, I want to hear the sound signature of the speakers that I bought. And I don't want to treat my room. The coloration that a room gives the sound is part of the experience, with both recordings and live music. I don't need my living room to be an anechoic chamber. Some of these ocd tendencies just go too far. And please no more shouting "double blind test!" Words have meaning. It is literally impossible for a single individual to double blind test their own equipment.
 
#65 · (Edited)
They don't all measure the same, so they don't sound the same.
You need to understand how specs relate to the established thresholds of human hearing. If THD measures .01% in one amp, and .0001% in another, there is obviously a measurable difference. But it isn't audible, because even the poorer rating is a full order of magnitude below the threshold of human perception.

Audiophiles spend all their time researching abstract numbers on a sheet of paper, and don't spend any time researching what those numbers mean to their own all-too-human ears. You need to compare the spec sheet of your amp to the spec sheet of your ears to give context to the numbers.

When it comes to modern amps and receivers, just about all of them exceed the thresholds of human hearing by a wide margin. However power ratings vary, and an underpowered amp can result in the "distortion at 10 o'clock" clipping you cite. Impedance mismatches can result in poor bass. Impedance and power are generally much more important than published specs. Especially with multichannel speaker systems where the power is divided up between 5 or 7 speakers. The problem is employing the right tool for the job, not the quality of the tool itself.
 
#66 ·
I would recommend anyone fond of the expression "if it can be measured it can be heard" to study a bit of sensorial physiology. The term "threshold" is important. As an example, you can weight 1 mg using a good instrument. Can you feel 1 mg in your hand?.
 
#67 ·
What you will find is that, amps do sound different.
The reason is that different manufacturers add their own "colouration" to the sound
It's a question of finding the one "YOU" like
Good luck
 
  • Like
Reactions: haydnfan
#68 ·
What you will find is that, amps do sound different. The reason is that different manufacturers add their own "colouration" to the sound
That is true of certain high end "audiophile" brands who jury rig things just to sound different for the sake of sounding different. But I have yet to find a current midrange solid state amp or receiver that doesn't have a perfectly natural balance and no audible distortion. If you get a Yamaha, Onkyo, Dennon, Sony, etc. receiver, they will all be perfectly clean and flat. The main consideration with these is the impedance/power needs of your speakers and of course the features.
 
#69 ·
Generally speaking, differences between what goes in and what comes out of an amp are accounted distortion. It's hard to understand how a maker can "add coloration" without driving measured distortion up. Bigshot can check me on that, thanks.
 
#73 ·
Well, with solid state amps distortion is almost always at an inaudible level. Tube amps are a different story. There are tube amps that sound as clean and balanced as most modern solid state amps, and there are tube amps that are all over the map. In solid state "audiophile" amps that have been jury rigged to sound different for the sake of differentness, it's usually the frequency response that is colored- usually with a high end roll off designed to be described as "analogue warmth".

It's much easier to get a balanced, clean solid state midrange amp and be done with it. For me, it's doubly important because my system has a calibrated equalization curve designed to correct for my speakers and room acoustics. If I get a new amp and it is "colored differently" (read: performing out of spec) then I have to start from scratch and recalibrate my EQ all over again. It was a lot of work getting my system balanced properly. I don't want to have to do that every time I buy a new component. Easier to correct once and then just buy equipment that isn't colored.
 
#70 ·
Marketing. Sellers of hi-fi equipment say their amps sound better. Some people believe it and buy them. Look around and watch the adds on tv. All try to catch the emotionality of the buyer. And most buyers are very ignorant of the whole thing. They dont know what they purchase, and they agree to be cheated. The marketing-publicity bussiness.
 
#72 ·
Blind faith in measurements as being the ultimate truth baffles me.

I already made my point that there are no studies published in the literature that show true internal, let alone external validity.

Measurements are very useful as long as their validity is kept in mind.

Validity is the extent to which a test measures what it is supposed to measure.

How does someone know that he is measuring all that can be measured?

Besides this, a test is good until it is superseded by another test.

A measurement is what scientists call a surrogate endpoint.

As an example blood pressure is a surrogate endpoint. If you give a medication to lower the blood pressure of a large group of persons with high blood pressure (with a placebo given to a matched group), lowering of the blood pressure to a degree is a surrogate endpoint.

A true hard endpoint is the mortality rate or heart attack rate of the group given the blood pressure medication versus the placebo group. These hard endpoints are usually avoided in small studies as it would be too expensive to follow-up patients for a number of years.

There is probably no audible difference between 0.01 and 0.001% THD.

However is THD a true hard endpoint?

The simple answer is no.

The same can be said about frequency response, intermodulation distortion, signal to noise ratio, crosstalk, output impedance, etc.

These are extremely useful especially for the engineers who design amps and when we consumers match amps with speakers.

However in my opinion, the only rational answer is that these are not the one and only truth of the listening experience.

A surrogate outcome can never replicate a true hard outcome, in our case the actual listening experience.
 
#74 ·
How does someone know that he is measuring all that can be measured?
Perception and sound reproduction have been studied for over a century. Most of the principles of audio fidelity go back to Bell Labs in the 1920s. At this point, if you discover an aspect of sound reproduction that is audible, but not measurable, you should go straight to your local university's engineering and audiology departments and let them know you've discovered something completely new. If you're correct about it and they can verify what you have discovered, they'll be MUCH more interested in your findings than a high end audio salesman will be.

As I said before, you need to compare the range of human perception to the range of measurability. There may be things far beyond the range of human perception that we can't measure accurately, but none of that is going to make a lick of difference to how your home stereo sounds to you. If an amp or player has specifications that exceed the human ability to hear, it is Audibly Transparent, and any audibly transparent component will sound identical, no matter how it measures beyond the ear's ability to hear.
 
#77 ·
If you join the AES (Audio Engineering Society) you can get access to the state of the art peer reviewed studies that are being done now, and you'd know where the line between what we know and what we don't know is drawn. I think you would be very surprised at what is being investigated, and what has already been determined.
In the scientific community whoever says we know everything about the subject is dismissed outright.

I believe that there is no market incentive to perform 'state-of-the art' population based studies to validate anyone's assertions. This is the only way to ascertain that a hypthesis is 'true' with a degree of uncertainty (usually a 95% confidence interval is accepted)/

Engineering principles delved into the subtlest details can only lead to hypothesis. A particular hypothesis can only be validated by well funded large population based trials that are simply not performed as the cost is prohibitive.

Modern amplifiers and CD players are perfectly capable of producing audibly transparent sound. So are MP3 players like the iPod. In any home stereo, the difficult part is the transducers and room acoustics. But many audiophiles have it entirely backwards. They spend all their money and effort worrying about wires and inaudible differences in electronics and totally fail to address room treatment and equalization.

I suspect it's because those aren't things that you can lay down a credit card and buy. It takes research, experimentation and work. A lot of audiophiles aren't really interested in sound quality. They are more fascinated by acquiring the electronic equivalent of high end jewelry to display as status symbols.
Everyone is different and one cannot pigeon-hole someone based on preconceived ideas.

Personally, I am a music lover rather than a hardcore audiophile.

I love listening to music so much that in the past few years I decided to invest into hifi equipment. My ultimate aim is to listen to my music and feel like being in front of a live orchestra.

Prior to any purchase I research for many months about all the options available. My latest amp purchase took one whole year of research from various sources. My latest headphone purchase (HD800) took the same amount of time.

Transducers are of course the starting point of a system, as their effect on the sound cannot be undone (unless one contemplates modding). What I disagree is your point that amps or DACs have the same audible results. In my opinion, with first hand experience, there is an audible difference between different amps and DACs irrespective of the fact that the stated measurements, leading to the term 'transparent', are similar.

It looks like we will have to just agree to disagree.

At the end of day we may well sit next to each other in a symphony hall listening to a live rendition of Sibelius' 4th and agree that nothing beats it!
 
#90 ·
In the scientific community whoever says we know everything about the subject is dismissed outright.

I believe that there is no market incentive to perform 'state-of-the art' population based studies to validate anyone's assertions. This is the only way to ascertain that a hypthesis is 'true' with a degree of uncertainty (usually a 95% confidence interval is accepted)/

Engineering principles delved into the subtlest details can only lead to hypothesis. A particular hypothesis can only be validated by well funded large population based trials that are simply not performed as the cost is prohibitive.

Everyone is different and one cannot pigeon-hole someone based on preconceived ideas.

Personally, I am a music lover rather than a hardcore audiophile.

I love listening to music so much that in the past few years I decided to invest into hifi equipment. My ultimate aim is to listen to my music and feel like being in front of a live orchestra.

Prior to any purchase I research for many months about all the options available. My latest amp purchase took one whole year of research from various sources. My latest headphone purchase (HD800) took the same amount of time.

Transducers are of course the starting point of a system, as their effect on the sound cannot be undone (unless one contemplates modding). What I disagree is your point that amps or DACs have the same audible results. In my opinion, with first hand experience, there is an audible difference between different amps and DACs irrespective of the fact that the stated measurements, leading to the term 'transparent', are similar.

It looks like we will have to just agree to disagree.

At the end of day we may well sit next to each other in a symphony hall listening to a live rendition of Sibelius' 4th and agree that nothing beats it!
I couldn't agree more with the first part of your post. It is the height of arrogance for anyone in a scientific field to think that we know all that we are ever going to know. There are probably many factors that effect they way we hear that haven't been discovered yet. The measurements we take may not mean anything for telling us what is happening between our brain and our ears and our perceptions of music. Someone who can't understand this is simply incapable of understanding the essence of Science.
I also firmly agree with the rest of your post, except the part about "It looks like we will have to just agree to disagree.". Those that believe that take measurements trumps what your ears and brain perceive won't rest until they have browbeaten everyone else into accepting their dogma.
 
#80 ·
Uh... because a member of the AES designed your stereo system and engineered most of the music you play on it. Would you trust a worldwide architect's guild for information on how to build a house, or would you ask some duffer on a internet forum somewhere who obviously is talking out of his hat?
 
#82 ·
Just because someone is a member of a peer reviewed organisation doesn't say that they have the competence to design anything! I have heard several speakers and electronics built by members of f.x AES that sounded like *****, but got rave reviews in Audiophile magazines (mostly based on how these measured), and unfortunately, the recordings of the same gentlemen (no women involved) did impress as little.
I'm sure that the bulk of AES members are distinguished, but saying that having a membership of anything makes Your product "better" is plain stupid! Sorry to be a negative twatt!

/ptr
 
#86 ·
Just because someone is a member of a peer reviewed organisation doesn't say that they have the competence to design anything!
That isn't what I said, but thanks! I was talking about the peer reviewed studies, not individual members. This is the organization where most of the research in audio reproduction comes from. Good organization. Lots of good info there for folks who are interested in learning how audio reproduction works.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top