Eric Desrochers wrote:

Moral of the story : maybe some yet unknown or still unmeasurable
parameter impacts the subjective quality.

Thats possible there are some ways still undiscovered to measure still
undiscovered audio properties...

But if those things DID impact subjective quality, folks would be
able to pick out one amp with these qualities from another amp
without these qualities.... Blindfolded! Don't you think????

But many of us have MANY times set up blind listening comparisons
and so far its pretty much hands down hard to find folks that can hear
any differences in controlled blindfolded comparisons....

So, maybe there is , But, what does it matter if it makes no
hearable difference?

Yes, but they are complex, reactive loads that varies dynamically.
Driver's cone are moving, remember?

Agreed, but with equal voltage and equal frequency the speakers
will not change dynamicly, they will be the same from amp A to
amp B....

Pure, sine waves into resistive load have minimal relation to real music
into actual loudspeakers.

This is often used to placify folks into not worrying about it any further.!

Yes, there is a HUGE difference between the complexity of music
to sine waves...

SINE WAVES are used because it is EASIER to find small differences,
using music it would be impossible!! Therefor it would really be
even harder for the human ear to hear the differences...
Your very good point just helps to tell folks WHY it is important to NOT
use music for many tests....

Eddie Runner
http;//www.teamrocs.com

There
aren't unknown parameters to measure.

How would you know this for sure? At one time, a hifi amp was measured
for frequency response, noise and THD at maximum level. It was later
discovered that low level performance had a BIG impact to the subjective
quality and the source of the problem was found (crossover distorsion in
class B SS designs. Then, IM distorsion and TIM distortion were
discovered and measured. More recently, damping factor and low
impedance load performance began to have importance in a quality
product...

Moral of the story : maybe some yet unknown or still unmeasurable
parameter impacts the subjective quality. I appreciate your knowledge
and experience in sensory neuroscience, but who knows...

By "parameter", I was actually referring to voltage and current. The idea
was that if the output signal was identical to the input signal (with the
exception of gain, of course), then it couldn't be distinguished. Some
folks actually disagree with this notion.

As for your comment about IMD... being able to quantify the distortion
isn't necessarily the issue. Those who were attributing what they could to
harmonic distortion and everything else to noise knew that they weren't
explaining the whole story because the noise was correlated with the signal.

But anyway, another method aside from directly measuring IMD, THD, noise,
etc is to subtract the signal from the other and look at the result. I can
assure you that the amplitude of the resultant signal will be below audible
threshold when you consider the masking effect of the "main" signal. As you
can see, we don't need to classify the signal (even though that's the
easiest way to do it because it collapses everything to one dimension). We
only need to look at differences. After all, our question is rather
simple - it's whether or not we can detect the difference; not how do we
classify the difference.



Speakers operate on voltage and
current, and nothing else.

Yes, but they are complex, reactive loads that varies dynamically.
Driver's cone are moving, remember?

Pure, sine waves into resistive load have minimal relation to real music
into actual loudspeakers.

Yep. But, again, it's the difference in the output signals of the amplifier
that are important. If the difference is negligible, then surely you'd
agree that the output from two different amplifiers with identical signals
will drive the same speaker in the same way. But yes, we know that speakers
have a profound effect on the output of an amplifier - technically, some
current is actually delivered to the amplifier from the speaker (ie. the
speaker acts as a current source).

But this goes back to Eddie's earlier statement: two amplifiers can BE MADE
to sound the same. In other words, you may have the gain settings set
perfectly between the two amps to create a matched output for one set of
speakers, but hook them up to a different set of speakers and you'll have to
re-do it.

So the big question remains: just how significant can the difference become
before we start to perceive it? Under tightly controlled conditions, this
value may be small (though I'd argue based on all the evidence I've seen
thus far that today's amplifiers achieve this). But, bringing it back to
car audio, I think it's incredibly high in a car, let alone a moving car
with the AC on!

Eddie Runner wrote: "You Les and now Tom Noiusaine and me against him..."

When did Tom start posting?

Tony


--



What's more likely? That an all-powerful mysterious god created the
universe and then decided not to give any proof of his existence? Or, that
he simply doesn't exist at all? And that we created him so that we wouldn't
have to feel so small and alone. -Eleanor Arroway, Contact

"Eddie Runner" wrote in message
...
he has Mark,
You Les and now Tom Noiusaine
and me against him...

(all pretty knowledgeable folks in the audio feild)

and he is still churnin out the bull****...
he must be tryin out for the olympic debateing team
or something.... ha ha ha

Les wrote:

"jeffc" wrote in message
...

Now if the human ear can hear distortion and measuring equipment can't,
then
there's something wrong with the measuring equipment, user or
technique.

Here is the crux of the problem with this guy. He believes that his ears
are
superior to test equipment and that there is not test equipment that is
good
enough to hear the differences!

Therefore, there is a mysterious unknown component that amp designers now
how to acheive yet have no ability to measure. Is that not what you are
attempting to say?

Les

he posted in this thread once yesterday.


Tony F wrote:

Eddie Runner wrote: "You Les and now Tom Noiusaine and me against him..."

When did Tom start posting?

Tony

All sensible explainations from you. I won't take any position about
the "sound the same" VS "sound different. I just found your comment
about *all* parameters being well known a little bold! Let's not forget
that at one time people, even scientifics thought the earth was flat...

Another thought : why are Urban, Audiovox, Pyramid and Radio-shack
equipment nowhere to be seen in high-end installations? And what is the
rational to buying high end equipment if it's no better?

--
Eric (Dero) Desrochers
http://homepage.mac.com/dero72

Hiroshima 45, Tchernobyl 86, Windows 95

Eric Desrochers wrote:

Another thought : why are Urban, Audiovox, Pyramid and Radio-shack
equipment nowhere to be seen in high-end installations? And what is the
rational to buying high end equipment if it's no better?

Folks may NEVER get it...!! NEVER!!!

Some of the smartest folks on the planet (car audio wise) are arguing
the side of this arguement that amps sound the same....!!!

BUT THATS NOT WHAT THEY ARE SAYING!
ITS NOT WHAT THEY MEAN!!

Folks just dont read what the smart folks say, then they come
up with questions like this guy just posted....

MAKES ME WANNA SCREAM!!

After weeks, and 100s of posts, how can ANYONE have
a dumb question like this???


Eddie Runner
Mark, you splain it to em!!

Another thought : why are Urban, Audiovox, Pyramid and Radio-shack
equipment nowhere to be seen in high-end installations?

Sometimes it is. About 7 years ago I had a great sounding system that at
one point had a Jensen amp and then 2 Alphasonik amps. Many so-called
audiophiles would frown upon that setup. But the installation was flawless
and, with a total of four amps in the system, I didn't skimp on power.

And what is the
rational to buying high end equipment if it's no better?

Ah, I didn't say it wasn't better. What I said was that the two amplifiers,
both operating in their linear range (ie. not yet clipping), will sound the
same. This doesn't take into account that some amplifiers have more
flexible crossovers, better durability, or simply more power than others.
Besides,even though a Jensen amp will sound the same as the McIntosh amp if
neither unit is clipping, the McIntosh amp will be better if the Jensen amp
is shutting down every time you crank it up!

It's also important to note that this discussion doesn't really echo what's
really going on most of the time. Most of the time, amplifiers are being
overdriven. Probably 90% of us in here who have aftermarket systems will be
driving our amps into clipping at least on some occasions, and it's not
always apparent until it's really severe.

"MZ" wrote in message
...

Ah, I didn't say it wasn't better. What I said was that the two
amplifiers,
both operating in their linear range (ie. not yet clipping), will sound
the
same.

Clipping isn't the only kind of linear distortion, and linear distortion
isn't the only kind of distortion. What you said is *almost* like "2 amps
that amplify perfectly will sound the same." No kidding.

"Eddie Runner" wrote in message
...
Eric Desrochers wrote:

Another thought : why are Urban, Audiovox, Pyramid and Radio-shack
equipment nowhere to be seen in high-end installations? And what is the
rational to buying high end equipment if it's no better?

Folks may NEVER get it...!! NEVER!!!

Some of the smartest folks on the planet (car audio wise) are arguing
the side of this arguement that amps sound the same....!!!

BUT THATS NOT WHAT THEY ARE SAYING!
ITS NOT WHAT THEY MEAN!!

Folks just dont read what the smart folks say, then they come
up with questions like this guy just posted....

MAKES ME WANNA SCREAM!!

After weeks, and 100s of posts, how can ANYONE have
a dumb question like this???


Eddie Runner
Mark, you splain it to em!!

Do I sense some frustration? Because I agree, it makes me want to scream as
well. People love to hung up on a word and miss the entire point. Much like
our friend jeffc.

People need to understand that there is MORE to choosing an amp than it's
SQ. Which is the main reason I argue and fight so much over the SQ issue in
regards to amps. People get too hung up on "which amp sounds better" and
never look at the important features of the amp. Power output, crossover
flexibility, number of channels, reliability, etc. Heck, even if it looks
good is a better reason to choose an amp than sound quality. But some people
have no ability to look at the bigger picture.

Now Eric, you seem like a fairly knowledgable guy. Do you honestly not know
the answer to your own question? You into pro audio right? So tell me why
you would choose Crown over Nady? I guarantee you you are not choosing it
because the Crown sounds better. It is no different in car audio.

Les

Ah, I didn't say it wasn't better. What I said was that the two
amplifiers,
both operating in their linear range (ie. not yet clipping), will sound
the
same.

Clipping isn't the only kind of linear distortion, and linear distortion
isn't the only kind of distortion. What you said is *almost* like "2 amps
that amplify perfectly will sound the same." No kidding.

Ah, didn't I already explain this to you once? And then I went out of my
way to add what I meant by "in their linear range" with what's in the
parenthesis.

There's no hope at all for you.

"MZ" wrote in message
...
Ah, I didn't say it wasn't better. What I said was that the two
amplifiers,
both operating in their linear range (ie. not yet clipping), will
sound
the
same.

Clipping isn't the only kind of linear distortion, and linear distortion
isn't the only kind of distortion. What you said is *almost* like "2
amps
that amplify perfectly will sound the same." No kidding.

Ah, didn't I already explain this to you once? And then I went out of my
way to add what I meant by "in their linear range" with what's in the
parenthesis.

Which is precisely what I was responding to, Forrest.

Clipping isn't the only kind of linear distortion, and linear distortion
isn't the only kind of distortion. What you said is *almost* like "2
amps
that amplify perfectly will sound the same." No kidding.

Ah, didn't I already explain this to you once? And then I went out of my
way to add what I meant by "in their linear range" with what's in the
parenthesis.

Which is precisely what I was responding to, Forrest.

I see. So you brought up distortion then only because you were confused.
Gotcha.

Les wrote:

Now Eric, you seem like a fairly knowledgable guy.

I studied electronics in college back in 1989 and work in the
audio-video field since.

Do you honestly not know
the answer to your own question?

No I don't. Equipment with totally identical specs may have identical
sound, but here's the catch : equipment rarely have identical specs,
hence the possible sound difference.

Let's take an example. You want an amp for powering a subwoofer. Not a
one-note wonder@45 Hz, but the real thing, full range. The Pyramid amp
have a FR that goes down to 20 Hz +- 3 dB. A PPI goes to 10 Hz +- 1 dB.
That's a full octave better with better tolerance. So the PPI will
probably sound better in that application, despite the Pyramid having
"hifi" specs.

Another example. An amp with beefier power supply, even if all the
specs are identical, will have a better control on the cone motion,
hence sound better. A pro audio rental company I know stopped blowing
18 inches drivers by changing their power amp for better ones of same
power.

Back in the early 80s, CD players were often said to have a metallic and
unnatural sound, despite perfectly hifi specs. It was later discovered
that the analog brickwall filter 20 kHz introduced artifacts. All of
this happened over 20 kHz so were initially overlooked and never showed
up in the specs. But now we know better and digital filters and
oversampling were developped and are the norm even in sub 40$ Discmans..

One last. Direct coupled amp. On the surface, the specs may be
identical to another capacitor coupled amp, but doing extensive
measurement will probably show some advantages with the phase/group
delay for the DC amp. But this won't shows in the FR, SNR or THD
figures.

You into pro audio right?

rec.audio pro and alt.audio.pro.live-sound, plus this one and a web
forum on home theater. I do live sound and other A-V and stage related
work since the early '90s and I'm heavily into high-end home theater as
a hobby. I also tinker with car audio, as you may have guessed

So tell me why
you would choose Crown over Nady? I guarantee you you are not choosing it
because the Crown sounds better.

Well, you may be right. I'd choose Crown or Crest or QSC, probably not
on the absolute sound quality but on other outstanding characteristics
that make them more suitable than a Nady, or Peavey or Mackie.

But digging more profoundly, I'm sure there exist some more desirable
specs in the Crown than in the Nady that ultimately will produce better
sound, and you won't find me using a Nady, if it's avoidable!

It is no different in car audio.

Of course. I'll add that home systems have a better chance of showing
sound differences than live sound or car audio, for a number of reasons.

Maybe the original poster really did heard a difference between his two
Adcom amps.

Audio is sure not a religion, but I'm keeping an open mind...

Regards,

--
Eric (Dero) Desrochers
http://homepage.mac.com/dero72

Hiroshima 45, Tchernobyl 86, Windows 95

Do you honestly not know
the answer to your own question?

No I don't. Equipment with totally identical specs may have identical
sound, but here's the catch : equipment rarely have identical specs,
hence the possible sound difference.

Let's take an example. You want an amp for powering a subwoofer. Not a
one-note wonder@45 Hz, but the real thing, full range. The Pyramid amp
have a FR that goes down to 20 Hz +- 3 dB. A PPI goes to 10 Hz +- 1 dB.
That's a full octave better with better tolerance. So the PPI will
probably sound better in that application, despite the Pyramid having
"hifi" specs.

This is true. However, you make two assumptions in the above analysis.
The first one is that you assume the specs are accurate. We know that
this never true. In fact, looking at a few el cheapo amps on the
carsound.com review archives (I don't know their methodology, but I
believe it was Nousaine that defended it in here before), they've benched
these amps at about -0.5 dB at 20Hz. The second assumption you've made is
that humans can detect a difference of 2dB at 20Hz.

Another example. An amp with beefier power supply, even if all the
specs are identical, will have a better control on the cone motion,
hence sound better. A pro audio rental company I know stopped blowing
18 inches drivers by changing their power amp for better ones of same
power.

I don't know what you mean by "better control on the cone motion". It
sounds like you're referring to the damping factor of the amplifier, which
has been demonstrated by Dick Pierce to be a non-issue in today's solid
state amplifiers. Here's a link: http://www.diyspeakers.net/Articles/...G%20FACTOR.pdf

Back in the early 80s, CD players were often said to have a metallic and
unnatural sound, despite perfectly hifi specs. It was later discovered
that the analog brickwall filter 20 kHz introduced artifacts.

This was known when anti-aliasing filters were first implemented. It may
have been overlooked by some, but it's never been ignored. By the way,
filter artifacts should show up in the specs.

All of
this happened over 20 kHz so were initially overlooked and never showed
up in the specs. But now we know better and digital filters and
oversampling were developped and are the norm even in sub 40$ Discmans..

One last. Direct coupled amp. On the surface, the specs may be
identical to another capacitor coupled amp, but doing extensive
measurement will probably show some advantages with the phase/group
delay for the DC amp. But this won't shows in the FR, SNR or THD
figures.

No one has suggested that THD and SNR measurements are the only important
ones. In fact, I'd suggest that IMD is a more prevalent form of
distortion than THD, yet you don't always find it classified in
benchtests (even though it usually manifests itself as THD as the end
product).

"MZ" wrote in message
...
Clipping isn't the only kind of linear distortion, and linear
distortion
isn't the only kind of distortion. What you said is *almost* like
"2
amps
that amplify perfectly will sound the same." No kidding.

Ah, didn't I already explain this to you once? And then I went out of
my
way to add what I meant by "in their linear range" with what's in the
parenthesis.

Which is precisely what I was responding to, Forrest.

I see. So you brought up distortion then only because you were confused.
Gotcha.

No, more because you don't know what "i.e." means, or "linear", or maybe
even both.

I see. So you brought up distortion then only because you were confused.
Gotcha.

No, more because you don't know what "i.e." means, or "linear", or maybe
even both.

1) According to Merriam-Webster, "i.e." means "that is". In other words,
you know damned well what I meant.
2) I explained to you in an earlier post that the terminology I used to
describe an amplifier that's not clipping is what the industry uses. Yet
you're still pretending you don't know what I mean, even though I
explained this to you already. In other words, you know damned well what
I meant.
3) You've lost. Your argument has been proven to be incorrect in every
capacity by 4 different people. Now you're trying to play the semantics game and you can't even
do that right! Pathetic.

"Les" wrote in message
...
and specs don't always tell the true tale of what the
consumer is buying or how it will sound. I don't believe you can
measure,
with instruments, how an amp will wound in the real world.

Sure you can, if you don't send it into clipping it will sound like the
rest
of them!

And yet another one who doesn't understand what distortion is.

and specs don't always tell the true tale of what the
consumer is buying or how it will sound. I don't believe you can
measure,
with instruments, how an amp will wound in the real world.

Sure you can, if you don't send it into clipping it will sound like the
rest
of them!

And yet another one who doesn't understand what distortion is.

Here you go, speaking like an authority again, even though you have NEVER
made distortion measurements of an amp, wouldn't know how to do so if you
tried, and have no idea what kinds and levels of distortion are present.
You need to step away from the audio magazines and start to get your hands
dirty. Maybe then you'll finally understand what those with experience
are trying to tell you...

"MZ" wrote in message
...
and specs don't always tell the true tale of what the
consumer is buying or how it will sound. I don't believe you can
measure,
with instruments, how an amp will wound in the real world.

Sure you can, if you don't send it into clipping it will sound like
the
rest
of them!

And yet another one who doesn't understand what distortion is.

Here you go, speaking like an authority again, even though you have NEVER
made distortion measurements of an amp

Nice try. In fact you have NEVER listened to a stereo in your life, let
alone live music.

Here you go, speaking like an authority again, even though you have NEVER
made distortion measurements of an amp

Nice try. In fact you have NEVER listened to a stereo in your life, let
alone live music.

Yeah, that must be it.

Jeff, have you ever measured distortion with test equipment?
I betcha Les has....

You really dont have any room to be pickin on him when
you have no expertise at all....

Eddie Runner

jeffc wrote:

"Les" wrote in message
...
and specs don't always tell the true tale of what the
consumer is buying or how it will sound. I don't believe you can
measure,
with instruments, how an amp will wound in the real world.

Sure you can, if you don't send it into clipping it will sound like the
rest
of them!

And yet another one who doesn't understand what distortion is.

"MZ" wrote in message
news
I see. So you brought up distortion then only because you were confused.
Gotcha.

No, more because you don't know what "i.e." means, or "linear", or maybe
even both.

1) According to Merriam-Webster, "i.e." means "that is". In other words,
you know damned well what I meant.

The problem is that your original statement is meaningless and irrelevant at
best. "What I said was that the two amplifiers, both operating in their linear
range (ie. not yet clipping), will sound the same." Are you saying that if a
signal is distorted, but clipping isn't occurring, the amp is linear? Are you
saying that clipping is the only kind of distortion possible? Are you saying
that amps that have perfectly linear output exist? Are you saying that 2
perfect amps will sound the same? Exactly what are you saying here that makes
any sense? Let the backpedaling begin anew....

"Eddie Runner" wrote in message
...
Jeff, have you ever measured distortion with test equipment?
I betcha Les has....

You really dont have any room to be pickin on him when
you have no expertise at all....

It takes "expertise" to understand that clipping isn't the only form of
distortion? Any 7th grade physics student knows that. Even before we started
measuring it, tool.

So, your saying there are other types of audio distortion
than clipping...

And your saying 7th graders know this...

And you also know this!!

WOW....


But you didnt answer my question on whether you have any
expertise with actual test equipment, or are you just armed
for this conversation with some crappy stereo magazines???

jeffc wrote:

It takes "expertise" to understand that clipping isn't the only form of
distortion? Any 7th grade physics student knows that. Even before we started
measuring it, tool.

1) According to Merriam-Webster, "i.e." means "that is". In other
words,
you know damned well what I meant.

The problem is that your original statement is meaningless and irrelevant
at
best. "What I said was that the two amplifiers, both operating in their
linear
range (ie. not yet clipping), will sound the same." Are you saying that
if a
signal is distorted, but clipping isn't occurring, the amp is linear? Are
you
saying that clipping is the only kind of distortion possible? Are you
saying
that amps that have perfectly linear output exist? Are you saying that 2
perfect amps will sound the same? Exactly what are you saying here that
makes
any sense? Let the backpedaling begin anew....

No, what I said was clear. If two amplifiers are not clipping they'll sound
the same. That's clearly what I said above. On what point are you stuck?

It takes "expertise" to understand that clipping isn't the only form of
distortion? Any 7th grade physics student knows that. Even before we
started
measuring it, tool.

Who ever said it was? Please provide a quote.

To be specific Mark
And your buddy jeffc is trying to pick you appart with specifics...

I would have to add a couple of more volumes of text to your
sentence before I would call it true....

Eddie

MZ wrote:

No, what I said was clear. If two amplifiers are not clipping they'll sound
the same. That's clearly what I said above. On what point are you stuck?

To be specific Mark
And your buddy jeffc is trying to pick you appart with specifics...

I would have to add a couple of more volumes of text to your
sentence before I would call it true....

Of course. These have been added throughout the course of this thread. I
was explaining to him what that sentence means. He's trying to attribute a
meaning to that sentence that's something other than what I intended. He's
trying to use the word "linear" in its literal form. That's fine, if the
phrase didn't already have a distinct meaning to those in the field, or if I
hadn't included in parenthesis what I meant EXACTLY by the phrase. Sheesh,
I wrote "(ie. not yet clipping)". You'd think that'd be explanation enough.

As I said to him already, taking issue with the phrase being used to
describe an amplifier that's not clipping is one thing. But to insist that
I meant something other than what I clearly stated is being downright
disingenuous.

"MZ" wrote in message
...

No, what I said was clear. If two amplifiers are not clipping they'll sound
the same. That's clearly what I said above. On what point are you stuck?

Just the fact that you're wrong. You've never measured any distortion other
than clipping? That's pretty weak.

"MZ" wrote in message
...

As I said to him already, taking issue with the phrase being used to
describe an amplifier that's not clipping is one thing. But to insist that
I meant something other than what I clearly stated is being downright
disingenuous.

Well why don't you just say "an amplifier that is amplifying perfectly will
sound like any other amplifier that is amplifying perfectly", and be done with
it? Extremely useful information, everyone here thanks you for that
groundbreaker.

"MZ" wrote in message
...
It takes "expertise" to understand that clipping isn't the only form of
distortion? Any 7th grade physics student knows that. Even before we
started
measuring it, tool.

Who ever said it was? Please provide a quote.

Why don't you explain what you mean by "operating in it's linear range" first.

MZ wrote:

Of course. These have been added throughout the course of this thread.

true...

I
was explaining to him what that sentence means. He's trying to attribute a
meaning to that sentence that's something other than what I intended.

I know

He's
trying to use the word "linear" in its literal form. That's fine, if the
phrase didn't already have a distinct meaning to those in the field, or if I
hadn't included in parenthesis what I meant EXACTLY by the phrase. Sheesh,
I wrote "(ie. not yet clipping)". You'd think that'd be explanation enough.

He doesnt understand cause he really isnt into audio other
than on a vary basic consumer level...

As I said to him already, taking issue with the phrase being used to
describe an amplifier that's not clipping is one thing. But to insist that
I meant something other than what I clearly stated is being downright
disingenuous.

He is a troll.....

jeffc wrote:

Just the fact that you're wrong. You've never measured any distortion other
than clipping? That's pretty weak.

Mark didnt say that at all...
I dont see why you keep insisting its true?

Well why don't you just say "an amplifier that is amplifying perfectly
will
sound like any other amplifier that is amplifying perfectly", and be done
with
it?

Now you're saying that an amplifier that is not clipping is "amplifying
perfectly". Finally we're in agreement. But I must ask: why have you spent
so much time arguing when you've agreed all along? Or, more directly, what
was it exactly that caused you to change your tune?

jeffc wrote:

Well why don't you just say "an amplifier that is amplifying perfectly will
sound like any other amplifier that is amplifying perfectly", and be done with
it?

Why would he have to say that?

NO AMP is perfect, yet nearly ANY amps can be set to sound the same
so as you or I cannot hear the difference betwen them....

Extremely useful information, everyone here thanks you for that
groundbreaker.

Actually Mark has been here a long long time, and he has helped alot
of folks... Im sorry that you still just dont get it...

Eddie

No, what I said was clear. If two amplifiers are not clipping they'll
sound
the same. That's clearly what I said above. On what point are you
stuck?

Just the fact that you're wrong. You've never measured any distortion
other
than clipping?

Yes, I have. The fact that your reading comprehension is so shaky that you
STILL don't know the difference between "sounds the same" and "exhibits
measurable distortion" is troubling.

Who ever said it was? Please provide a quote.

Why don't you explain what you mean by "operating in it's linear range"
first.

I already did days ago: "(ie. not yet clipping)"

"MZ" wrote in message
...
No, what I said was clear. If two amplifiers are not clipping they'll
sound
the same. That's clearly what I said above. On what point are you
stuck?

Just the fact that you're wrong. You've never measured any distortion
other
than clipping?

Yes, I have. The fact that your reading comprehension is so shaky that
you
STILL don't know the difference between "sounds the same" and "exhibits
measurable distortion" is troubling.

Oh. So you're saying that any distortion other than clipping can be
measured, but not heard. I see.

"MZ" wrote in message
...
Who ever said it was? Please provide a quote.

Why don't you explain what you mean by "operating in it's linear range"
first.

I already did days ago: "(ie. not yet clipping)"

Yeah, I know. But that's wrong. You don't know what linear means, do you?

"jeffc" wrote in message
. com...

"MZ" wrote in message
...
Who ever said it was? Please provide a quote.

Why don't you explain what you mean by "operating in it's linear
range"
first.

I already did days ago: "(ie. not yet clipping)"

Yeah, I know. But that's wrong. You don't know what linear means, do
you?



If you are such an expert on this matter then why don't you explain what it
is? You seem to have the problem with Eddie's, Mark's, and my definitions
and explanations so why don't you provide your own except "you don't know".

Les