by Michael

Sorting large amps based on their micro-dynamic capability

In the comments section of one of the previous threads we came up with the following list:

Micro Dynamics low to high:

Soulution – BAT – CAT – ARC – VTL – Pass – Krell – Boulder – Vitus – Spectral – Halcro – MBL – Goldmund – Ayre – Edge (early NL series)

The most recent question was where to put the McIntosh amps on the list:

Soulution – BAT – McIntosh – CAT – ARC – VTL – Pass – Krell – Boulder – Vitus – Spectral – Halcro – MBL – Goldmund – Ayre – Edge (early NL series)

A case can be made for swapping these amps around a bit, based on the particular model (for example, the more expensive Edge amps are more expensive than any Ayre amps and also have much better micro-dynamics than any Ayre amps), and the particular speaker being driven. I also swapped Krell and Boulder – I think that better represents the intention of the brand, and maybe reality too.

Amps also seem have better micro-dynamics as you listen to their more expensive offerings (which would imply that all brands may value this aspect of music, just some value it more than others – for some it is a high-priority, and others not so much)

But it serves to give one a sense of the overall ‘company’ sound profile.

That being able to reproduce the subtle delicacies of music, the ability to tell a real guitar from a guitar synthesizer, for example, is not a priority with many amp builders. Especially big amp builders.

Big amp builders often focus only on macro-dynamics, and some on midi-dynamics. Also, as you understand, there is a continuum between micro- and midi- dynamics, as notes can exist ANYWHERE between quite delicate or as part of the melody foreground.

MIDI-Dynamics, least to most (just making a stab at it, this list will probably change as more thought is given)

VTL – BAT – CAT – ARC – McIntosh -Vitus – Edge – Pass – Ayre – MBL – Spectral – Halcro -Krell – Soulution – Boulder

MACRO-Dynamics, least to most (just making a stab at it, this list will probably change as more thought is given)

Spectral – Vitus – Edge – Ayre – Pass – CAT – Halcro – MBL – McIntosh – Krell – Soulution – ARC – Boulder – BAT – VTL

… and then we can talk about DETAILED macro-dynamics, which acknowledges the fact that micro- and midi-dynamics occur at the beginning and end of most macro-dynamic events.

And then a couple of lists to do with harmonic color (McIntosh, ARC, MBL…) and harmonic purity (more or less reverse the macro-dynamics list…!?).

We’ll leave that for the comments or another post…

in High-end Audio HiFi and Stereo / Philosophy 21 comments
 by Michael

A Hybrid Review Approach…

… mixing the subjective and objective…

Essentially it uses a subjective analysis of objective aspects of the sound of a component.

Even more essentially, the listener gives it the old ‘college try’ and guestimates how good a component is in several pre-determined and STANDARDIZED categories.

See, if the categories are well-chosen and are standardized, and a number from 1 to 10, say, is assigned, then components can be compared.

Anyway, in the most recent Spintricity article:

Towards a Hybrid Subjective Objective Review Process

… we attempt to come up with some categories that we, at least, use here [tho in the past we have not been so disciplined as to assign a number to score a component’s performance in each category]

The idea is to create a list that we can print out and then enter or circle a number of something so that the review process can be raised up out of the muck and mire.

in High-end Audio HiFi and Stereo / Philosophy / Reviewers / Reviews / Spintricity 0 comments
 by Michael

Warning: Reading Show Reports May Be Hazardous to Your (Hi-Fi System's) Health

As I casually read what various reviewers wrote about the sound they heard at the show a few things become obvious. This is not about the sound in our rooms, about which I have read one positive and one not so positive (about the small room – but I did not hear the system after a major cable change was made – so do not know if the reporter was right or not)

1. A lot of reviewers just can’t hear. They string together a lot of good sounding ‘audiophile words’ and hope in this way to gain some advertising. This would be shocking if it wasn’t so sad.

2. Some just mention the positive things about the sound, never the negative [same ole same ole – but only a few people/mags are this honest anymore].

3. Some lie, sometimes describing sound more or less accurately, and sometimes just negative and/or positive things in order to achieve some political or economic goal they must have in mind.

As for comments on forums, take a room at random and make it the Best of Show. As far as I can see it is completely random – aka noise. Aka no information provided.

There is not any room so horrible sounding that someone, somewhere won’t post that it is the best of show.

I used to think this was akin to ‘there is no man so ugly that some woman somewhere won’t think he is handsome’.

But this has more to do with the beholder being really confused, than it does with seeing the inner beauty of someone/something. And it has to do with people being manipulated into thinking something different happened [good or bad sound] from what REALLY happened.

Of course, this cacophony of misinformation, lies, political maneuvering, sloth, etc. just mirrors that of the current state of affairs everywhere circa 2009. The difference lately has been that so called ‘trusted sources’ do not have loyalty to the traditional reporter’s ‘creed’ to tell the truth.

That, while representing yourself as being ‘independent’, but instead telling a self-serving point of view that makes you money is AOK.

The 1984 part of this is that people have been programmed to accept this as being acceptable behavior for a ‘news organization’.

The upshot of all this incompetence and deception is that it is really hard to get any real information about the sound at a show, or, to expand our focus, any component. Even if you listen to it, if the person setting it up did not have the correct associated components, you still didn’t hear it [most systems seem to be either the random Audiogon click to buy approach or some dealer putting components together because it is good ‘politics’]. It is hard to get an idea of how something really sounds [think how poorly Wilson has been represented all these years – how many people hate their speakers. This is why].

Because of all this, Spintricity is just presenting things like specs, people, how-tos and why-tos, and ads. Because of the rampant unethical behavior of the press, we can’t even think about doing reviews ourselves, of equipment or rooms at shows, without tarnishing our magazine with the stink of the current zines. [Even though we are darned good at it with having probably the most significant and wide-ranging experience with uber high-end audio of any reviewers/reporters/audiohpiles. And our personal preferences are also 1) known to us [so we can at least try to listen around them] and 2) fairly mainstream]

in High-end Audio HiFi and Stereo / Philosophy / Show Reports / Sounding Off 0 comments