![]() I thought I would be good in that regard. I set the AHB2 to 4 volt input sensitivity. I thought this would be okay because the balanced output of the Spring 3 KTE is outputting like 5.8 volts I think. ![]() I was using a passive Luminous Audio Axiom II. In its defense, I did not have an active preamplifier ahead of it. What shocked me was that the AHB2 sounded extremely anemic and thin with not enough body or weight in the music. In my experience, the Bliss KTE has been the clear winner in every category. For different reasons, of course.With the Susvara, I've owned the following. Taken together, I thoroughly enjoy my poorly measuring tube amp, the one with horrible SINAD, as much as my AHB2. So if I'm listening to balls to the walls silence, if it's John Cage's 4'33" turned up to 11, then I'm at 100%. I know that with no signal, turned all the way up, the residual noise of the tube amp is evident with my ears, next to the speaker horn. could I distinguish between the two in an ABX? I don't know. And the folks at Benchmark are good guys. In fact, I think the AHB2 is pound for pound and dollar for dollar a remarkable achievement, and represents good value, for what it is. That said, I immediately 'sensed' that the AHB2 was a marked sonic improvement over a 1960s tube design I built myself. And as has been demonstrated time and time again, at the usual levels of distortion and S/N, it's all random guessing. It will only tell you whether someone is able to reliably distinguish between two audio feeds. Whether source components or amplifiers, I suspect that many on ASR believe that audible differences observed in the home are invalid and SINAD is all that is needed.Ĭlick to expand.The sort of ABX test you are describing will not tell you anything about 'listener preference'. I bought the AHB2s only after until a friend brought one over and we compared it to the ATI6002. Where BS sells, we certainly get more of that. There are examples where newer produces appear with improved SINAD performance. SINAD is a good measurement that has proven motivational to some manufacturers. There is no reason to faithfully believe that all DSP/REQ/PEQ processing paths are equally well implemented. The center channel is not measured and there are no comparative measurements with processing engaged. IMO, this is a good SINAD provides some insight of the performance of an HT processor, but very little information of the effectiveness in real use. This comparison involves the RMC-1 analog path only, so not the entire product and not indicative of HT performance. The comparison was very close and I don't think I would pass a blind. Since both the LA4 and RMC-1 have 0.5 dB volume precise (0.1 dB) matching cannot be guaranteed. The last experiment I tried was comparing these paths:ġ) Oppo UDP205 (Fixed Volume) XLR -> Benchmark LA4 (Volume Control) -> AHB2s -> Salon2sĢ) Oppo UDP205 (Fixed Volume) XLR -> Emotiva RMC-1 (Volume Control) -> LA4 (Fixed Volume) -> Salon2s A bad showing excludes consideration.įor source components, the input impedance may have a similar effect.Īs far as comparing a SOTA SINAD stack to something less, that is more difficult without introducing components into the signal path. For me, SINAD like other measurements are like a resume. Reactive loads that can impact linearity and the effectiveness of distortion control mechanisms, especially at higher frequencies. I understand the necessity for high SINAD when processing content as you always lose something after every layer of processing, but for playback, I'm curious to see what listener preferences really are when determining the importance of SINAD.Ĭlick to expand.Whether source components or amplifiers, I suspect that many on ASR believe that audible differences observed in the home are invalid and SINAD is all that is needed.įor amps, we are not measuring a representative set of reactive loads. We don't know what we don't know, so this comparison is definitely something that needs to be examined. This is a completely reasonable comparison I believe as it truly separates the emphasis paid to SINAD alone versus other considerations heretofore unknown that may take priority. Just like there is definitely a listener preference for the "Harman curve", is there a listener preference that's completely divorced of SINAD measurements? Would be interesting to see what the "listener preference" ends up being. Click to expand.Agreed! I'm surprised nobody here has attempted double blind testing of SINAD differences between the highest performing stack (all Benchmark from DAC to Preamp to Amp), a well regarded modern AVR (Denon 3700H) and an expensive but audiophile approved stack (Pass Labs solid state or McIntosh tubes).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |