[[email protected]]

I recently purchased a Pioneer Elite Receiver (VSX81-TXV). WHile i
love this receiver, I recently noticed that the spec for this receiver
actually seem "worse" than the specs for my old (non-Elite) Pioneer
VSX3600 receiver, which only costs about $350 many years ago. For
example, the VSX81 has THD listed at .08%, while the VSX3600 has .05%
THD. I also seem to remember that back then, the Elite receivers had
THD specs like .008%! I also noticed that most of the specs of the
VSX3600 were slightly better than the specs of the newer "elite" class
receiver (Signal to noise ratios, etc)...

Has the quality of Pioneer receivers gone downhill over the years? I'm
just wondering if that old VSX3600 actually has a very high quality
amp that I should consider using elsewhere...

Any insight is appreciated!

Thank you!

[GregS[_3_]]

In article , wrote:
I recently purchased a Pioneer Elite Receiver (VSX81-TXV). WHile i
love this receiver, I recently noticed that the spec for this receiver
actually seem "worse" than the specs for my old (non-Elite) Pioneer
VSX3600 receiver, which only costs about $350 many years ago. For
example, the VSX81 has THD listed at .08%, while the VSX3600 has .05%
THD. I also seem to remember that back then, the Elite receivers had
THD specs like .008%! I also noticed that most of the specs of the
VSX3600 were slightly better than the specs of the newer "elite" class
receiver (Signal to noise ratios, etc)...

Has the quality of Pioneer receivers gone downhill over the years? I'm
just wondering if that old VSX3600 actually has a very high quality
amp that I should consider using elsewhere...

Any insight is appreciated!

Thank you!

One should stay away from specs in normal circumstances
Many newer units of various species are made from modules
or IC's. I don't know the specifics of those receivers. Manufacturers
advertised specs should be taken lightly. I would guess the old stuff
was better built using discrete divices and big heatsinks.

greg

[Mark D. Zacharias[_2_]]

wrote in message
...
I recently purchased a Pioneer Elite Receiver (VSX81-TXV). WHile i
love this receiver, I recently noticed that the spec for this receiver
actually seem "worse" than the specs for my old (non-Elite) Pioneer
VSX3600 receiver, which only costs about $350 many years ago. For
example, the VSX81 has THD listed at .08%, while the VSX3600 has .05%
THD. I also seem to remember that back then, the Elite receivers had
THD specs like .008%! I also noticed that most of the specs of the
VSX3600 were slightly better than the specs of the newer "elite" class
receiver (Signal to noise ratios, etc)...

Has the quality of Pioneer receivers gone downhill over the years? I'm
just wondering if that old VSX3600 actually has a very high quality
amp that I should consider using elsewhere...

Any insight is appreciated!

Thank you!

You might find the distortion spec a tad lower at a lower power level. By
that I mean the manufacturers sometimes will spec for example 105 watts per
channel at one distortion level, and 130 watts per channel at a higher
distortion level.

It is certainly true that the distortion level will be much less at lower
levels, at least until it gets down into the noise floor that is.

Your VSX3600 would not even be in the same class as your Elite.

Some of the older silver faced models were rated lower on distortion, but
lets remember, the amp sections were the major selling feature in those
days. Nowadays it's all in the surround and DSP functions. The amp sections
are mostly fairly standardized these days, though Pioneer still likes to be
"different", often using FET's instead of conventional transistors.


Mark Z.

[JANA]

For the output specs of any amplifier, you must know the output power level,
load impedance, and the reference frequencies that the measurements were
taken with. The distortion, phase accuracy, and many of the other specs for
audio equipment will vary with the type of conditions used to measure the
specifications.

There are industry standards, but many of the lower end manufactures will
vary from these standards. To have electronic equipment accurate to exact
industry standards, you will have to pay a lot more than I think you are
prepared to pay for.

Under normal conditions, it is impossible for a good audio file to hear the
differences in distortion that you are mentioning. But, the specifications
do not mean very much unless you can also compare the reference conditions
that the specs were taken with.

In your case, I would suggest going in to an audio store where they have a
demo room, and sit and listen to the different receivers and speakers. In
receivers, I think you will end up mainly going for the type that has the
required options you would like, and also can be the most practical.

Where you will find sound differences between the different models are with
speakers. You will also find that the greater you go in price, the more
accurate they will be.


--

JANA
_____


wrote in message
...
I recently purchased a Pioneer Elite Receiver (VSX81-TXV). WHile i
love this receiver, I recently noticed that the spec for this receiver
actually seem "worse" than the specs for my old (non-Elite) Pioneer
VSX3600 receiver, which only costs about $350 many years ago. For
example, the VSX81 has THD listed at .08%, while the VSX3600 has .05%
THD. I also seem to remember that back then, the Elite receivers had
THD specs like .008%! I also noticed that most of the specs of the
VSX3600 were slightly better than the specs of the newer "elite" class
receiver (Signal to noise ratios, etc)...

Has the quality of Pioneer receivers gone downhill over the years? I'm
just wondering if that old VSX3600 actually has a very high quality
amp that I should consider using elsewhere...

Any insight is appreciated!

Thank you!

[Arny Krueger]

wrote in message


I recently purchased a Pioneer Elite Receiver
(VSX81-TXV). WHile i love this receiver, I recently
noticed that the spec for this receiver actually seem
"worse" than the specs for my old (non-Elite) Pioneer
VSX3600 receiver, which only costs about $350 many years
ago. For example, the VSX81 has THD listed at .08%, while
the VSX3600 has .05% THD.

So what?

A given modern SS power amp can have as much as or as little distortion as
you want. Just run it at a different power level. In general, more power,
more distortion.

Take the same power amp and run it at say, 80 watts. It has 0.008% THD, run
it at 90 watts, it has 0.05% THD. Run it at 100 watts, it has 0.08% THD. Run
it at 120 watts, it has 1% THD.

I also seem to remember that
back then, the Elite receivers had THD specs like .008%!
I also noticed that most of the specs of the VSX3600 were
slightly better than the specs of the newer "elite" class
receiver (Signal to noise ratios, etc)...

Worry about other things first, like your speakers and room acoustics.

[[email protected]]

On Jan 25, 7:17*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
wrote in message



I recently purchased a Pioneer Elite Receiver
(VSX81-TXV). WHile i love this receiver, I recently
noticed that the spec for this receiver actually seem
"worse" than the specs for my old (non-Elite) Pioneer
VSX3600 receiver, which only costs about $350 many years
ago. For example, the VSX81 has THD listed at .08%, while
the VSX3600 has .05% THD.

So what?

A given modern SS power amp can have as much as or as little distortion as
you want. Just run it at a different power level. In general, more power,
more distortion.

Take the same power amp and run it at say, 80 watts. It has 0.008% THD, run
it at 90 watts, it has 0.05% THD. Run it at 100 watts, it has 0.08% THD. Run
it at 120 watts, it has 1% THD.

I also seem to remember that
back then, the Elite receivers had THD specs like .008%!
I also noticed that most of the specs of the VSX3600 were
slightly better than the specs of the newer "elite" class
receiver (Signal to noise ratios, etc)...

Worry about other things first, like your speakers and room acoustics.

I guess the point of my question was a little misunderstood... I
realize that I would never hear the difference between .08% THD and .
008% THD, but my point was that this old, much less expensive receiver
seemed to have better specs across the board (not just THD) than my
newer, more expensive (and "Elite" class) receiver from the same
manufacturer. I was just wondering in general if the quality is lower
on newer Pioneer receivers compared to older Pioneer receivers since
most of the specs seems to be better on the older, cheaper Pioneer.

My thinking was that if the specs were better that maybe the overall
quality of the older receiver was better as well. Obviously, the
feature set is much improved in the newer receiver. I would assume
that Pioneer still uses the same methods of measuring these specs as
they have all along, but maybe that is a bad assumption.

Thanks to everyone for all of the replies - I appreciate all of your
input!

[[email protected]]

On Jan 24, 12:15 pm, wrote:
I recently purchased a Pioneer Elite Receiver (VSX81-TXV). WHile i
love this receiver, I recently noticed that the spec for this receiver
actually seem "worse" than the specs for my old (non-Elite) Pioneer
VSX3600 receiver, which only costs about $350 many years ago. For
example, the VSX81 has THD listed at .08%, while the VSX3600 has .05%
THD. I also seem to remember that back then, the Elite receivers had
THD specs like .008%! I also noticed that most of the specs of the
VSX3600 were slightly better than the specs of the newer "elite" class
receiver (Signal to noise ratios, etc)...

Has the quality of Pioneer receivers gone downhill over the years? I'm
just wondering if that old VSX3600 actually has a very high quality
amp that I should consider using elsewhere...

Any insight is appreciated!

You have already received and undoubtedly will continue
to receive all sorts of answers and advice on your question.
Much of it is true, much of it is false, and a large part is,
as the lawyers say, "true but irrelevant."

Let me give the conclusion first: specs tell you NOTHING,
nothing at all.

To address your question directly: Pioneer's quality may
or may not have gone down over the years, but there is
absolutely NOTHING in the specs you cite, or anything
that Pioneer or any other manufacture publishes that
would tell you this or anything else that's useful.
This is because quality has many meanings, few if
any of which are addressed by published specs.

Several points:

1. Contrary to one claim, there are NO industry standards
for these specifications. Manufacturers are allowed to
pick and choose conditions for measurement, methods,
presentation, definitions as they see fit. The specs
published by manufacturers are products first of the
marketing department, second by the legal department,
and only then by engineering, and then only to satisfy
the two more important stakeholders.

Indeed, there is seldom any standard within a single
manufacturer: one model may use one set of measurement
conditions and criteria, another model something entirely
different. I have even seen cases where a new version of
an amplifier was released having much better specs, and
the ONLY change was in the published specs.

For example, I can take one receiver and measure its signal-
to-noise ratio three different ways and get three different
figures, all of which are correct. How do you compare, these
numbers (hint: you can't).

Thus, these specs provide NO basis for comparison
at all.

2. The specs you cite, again contrary to some claims, have
effectively NO substantive effect whatsoever on what the
unit sounds like. Despite claims seen here and elsewhere,
a difference between 0.08%, 0.04% and even 0.008% have
NO sonic consequences.

There may well be sonic differences between units, but they
are NOT due to differences in distortion and signal-to-noise
ratios as you have cited. And if the differences DO exist,
they are NOT going to be published in a spec sheet.

3. Specs, as a legal document, simply state the minimum
level of performance under very specific conditions the
unit has to meet in order to satisfy requirements such
as truthful advertising, implicit warranties of fitness for
purpose, and such. An amplifier can have a spec of
0.08% and, in fact, measure much lower in reality. And
even three samples of the same model can exhibit
three different measurements under the required (but
often unspecified) conditions. As long as they meet the
published spec, the consumer has no legal recourse
for financial redress in the case of a dispute over
performance.

And, once again, the differences you cite have no
sonic consequences.

4. "Quality" means many things. To you, build quality,
reliability, serviceabiltity, manufacturer's support,
functionality, compatibility with other equipment are
all FAR more important measures of "quality" than
the senseless comparisons of 0.08% vs 0.05% THD.

And there may well be elements of "quality" that are
specific to a particular use: a receiver that primarily
vents heat out through the rear may be FAR more
suitable than one that vents through the top, regardless
of what the THD figures are (and as useless as they
are) if the intended use is in a rack or cabinet where
things are stacked one on top of another.

Similarly, an amplifier with 0.1% distortion and a phono
preamp is FAR more suitable than one with 0.00001%
that has no phono preamp if playing back or transcribing
LPs is a function that's needed.

5. Even the "important" specs, like power output, take on
an irrational level of importance unless put in context. An
amplifier with a power output of 120 watts is NOT better
than one with 100 watts. Even if everything else was the
same (and everything else is not), that difference in
power is NOT going to make any real difference:

a. that difference in power represents only a 0,8 dB
difference in the LOUDEST possible output, and
difference is simply too small to be of any
consequence,

b. The absolute VAST majority of the time, your amplifier
amplifier is going to be working at power FAR lower
than that, and that difference in maximum output power
now becomes largely irrelevant.

Focus on the important things: THD, S/N and, in general,
"specs" are not among them.

[[email protected]]

On Jan 25, 10:12 am, wrote:

My thinking was that if the specs were better that maybe the overall
quality of the older receiver was better as well. Obviously, the
feature set is much improved in the newer receiver. I would assume
that Pioneer still uses the same methods of measuring these specs as
they have all along, but maybe that is a bad assumption.

That is a bad assumption.

It's altogether possible that they changed there methods
of measuring and testing to ensure a greater manufacturing
yield, for example. I have seen specific cases where a manufacturer
changed their spec in response to market feedback, without
making a single change at all to the design or build of the
unit. I've seen it go both ways.

[Arny Krueger]

wrote in message

On Jan 25, 7:17 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
wrote in message



I recently purchased a Pioneer Elite Receiver
(VSX81-TXV). WHile i love this receiver, I recently
noticed that the spec for this receiver actually seem
"worse" than the specs for my old (non-Elite) Pioneer
VSX3600 receiver, which only costs about $350 many years
ago. For example, the VSX81 has THD listed at .08%,
while the VSX3600 has .05% THD.

So what?

A given modern SS power amp can have as much as or as
little distortion as you want. Just run it at a
different power level. In general, more power, more
distortion.

Take the same power amp and run it at say, 80 watts. It
has 0.008% THD, run it at 90 watts, it has 0.05% THD.
Run it at 100 watts, it has 0.08% THD. Run it at 120
watts, it has 1% THD.

I guess the point of my question was a little
misunderstood... I realize that I would never hear the
difference between .08% THD and . 008% THD, but my point
was that this old, much less expensive receiver seemed to
have better specs across the board (not just THD) than my
newer, more expensive (and "Elite" class) receiver from
the same manufacturer. I was just wondering in general
if the quality is lower on newer Pioneer receivers
compared to older Pioneer receivers since most of the
specs seems to be better on the older, cheaper Pioneer.

I guess the point of my answer was misunderstood. My point is that quality
is an inherent property of piece of equipment, but THD isn't. When you
speak of quality, I presume you mean some holistic inherent property of the
piece of equipment that relates to things like sound quality, durabilty,
ease-of-use, etc.

The reason why I say that THD is not an inherent property of a reciever, is
that over a wide range, you can have whatever amount of THD that you want,
simply by choosing a power level (and/or a frequency).

My thinking was that if the specs were better that maybe
the overall quality of the older receiver was better as
well.

Dream on!

Obviously, the feature set is much improved in the
newer receiver. I would assume that Pioneer still uses
the same methods of measuring these specs as they have
all along, but maybe that is a bad assumption.

Yes, it is an assumption.

For fun and entertainment consider how one looks at the spec sheet for
something like a receiver. The one spec I might take at face value is the
range of frequencies that the FM section covers. Pretty much the rest of the
specs are shall we say, negotiable.

[Eisboch]

"JANA" wrote in message
...


For the output specs of any amplifier, you must know the output power
level,
load impedance, and the reference frequencies that the measurements were
taken with. The distortion, phase accuracy, and many of the other specs
for
audio equipment will vary with the type of conditions used to measure the
specifications.



I remember reading Bob Carver's take on distortion ratings years ago.
According to him, at the levels being discussed, the difference between .008
and .08 percent are academic (and even higher) are interesting to measure
but meaningless in terms of being able to detect by ear or determine the
quality of the amp. Many of his "Mag" amps had high THD distortion specs
compared to the typical standards found in other gear, yet his amps sounded
great and earned a very good reputation. I still own an old Carver Mag
Amp, along with several more modern Yamahas and Denons. The Carver is the
only one that sounds different on the same set of speakers, playing the same
source material and the difference is very pleasing.

Eisboch

[Eisboch]

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JANA" wrote in message
...


For the output specs of any amplifier, you must know the output power
level,
load impedance, and the reference frequencies that the measurements were
taken with. The distortion, phase accuracy, and many of the other specs
for
audio equipment will vary with the type of conditions used to measure the
specifications.



I remember reading Bob Carver's take on distortion ratings years ago.
According to him, at the levels being discussed, the difference between
.008 and .08 percent are academic (and even higher) are interesting to
measure but meaningless in terms of being able to detect by ear or
determine the quality of the amp. Many of his "Mag" amps had high THD
distortion specs compared to the typical standards found in other gear,
yet his amps sounded great and earned a very good reputation. I still
own an old Carver Mag Amp, along with several more modern Yamahas and
Denons. The Carver is the only one that sounds different on the same set
of speakers, playing the same source material and the difference is very
pleasing.

Eisboch


Boy, did I ever screw up the sentence structure in that on! I meant to
say that the difference between .008 and .08 percent (and even higher) are
interesting to measure ..... etc.

Eisboch

[JANA]

One thing that is interesting, is that the effect of THD is that when it is
a little on the high side, the effect is pleasing for listening. It tends to
make the sound smoother or more pleasing even though it is not realistic.
Amplifiers that have their THD up at 0.4% to 0.6% tend to have a more
pleasing effect in their sound.

The manufactures of the non professional or regular consumer amplifiers
don't publish the IMD (Inter Modulation Distortion). This is a very critical
type of distortion, and when the IMD is on the high side the quality of the
sound is not very good. Another thing that is not published in the regular
consumer amplifiers is the slew rate and the phase error. This will have an
effect on how real the sound will be.

Consumers who read specs are familiar with the simple specs that are only
part of the complete picture. They seem to be looking at these as numbers
only without really understanding what they really mean, and what their
effect is. After working in servicing and testing these amplifiers for a
number of years, you really get to know what these specs mean.

The Carver amplifier series has an excellent reputation in the industry.
They make excellent amplifiers. When going to this level of amplifier, there
can be a full trust in their specifications. What you would be mainly
looking at are the options and the power handling for the listening
application.

--

JANA
_____


"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JANA" wrote in message
...


For the output specs of any amplifier, you must know the output power
level,
load impedance, and the reference frequencies that the measurements were
taken with. The distortion, phase accuracy, and many of the other specs
for
audio equipment will vary with the type of conditions used to measure the
specifications.



I remember reading Bob Carver's take on distortion ratings years ago.
According to him, at the levels being discussed, the difference between .008
and .08 percent are academic (and even higher) are interesting to measure
but meaningless in terms of being able to detect by ear or determine the
quality of the amp. Many of his "Mag" amps had high THD distortion specs
compared to the typical standards found in other gear, yet his amps sounded
great and earned a very good reputation. I still own an old Carver Mag
Amp, along with several more modern Yamahas and Denons. The Carver is the
only one that sounds different on the same set of speakers, playing the same
source material and the difference is very pleasing.

Eisboch

[JANA]

Over the years, I have serviced and tested more than my share of high end
amplifiers for full specifications. To measure THD down at 0.008% takes a
very good distortion analyser. Depending on the model, most of the high end
amplifiers that I have tested had the THD range in the order of about 0.05
to about 0.2 at near to their full output level. I have an excellent
listening capability, and in the amplifiers that I have tested, I was never
able to hear any quality difference unless there was something defective.

IMD is a more critical type of distortion. IMD distortion is when there are
multiple frequencies in the signal content that start to generate other
frequencies that should not be present. The effect of IMD is more critical
than that of THD.

Excellent simplified explanation about audio distortion:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...audio/amp.html



--

JANA
_____


"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JANA" wrote in message
...


For the output specs of any amplifier, you must know the output power
level,
load impedance, and the reference frequencies that the measurements were
taken with. The distortion, phase accuracy, and many of the other specs
for
audio equipment will vary with the type of conditions used to measure the
specifications.



I remember reading Bob Carver's take on distortion ratings years ago.
According to him, at the levels being discussed, the difference between
.008 and .08 percent are academic (and even higher) are interesting to
measure but meaningless in terms of being able to detect by ear or
determine the quality of the amp. Many of his "Mag" amps had high THD
distortion specs compared to the typical standards found in other gear,
yet his amps sounded great and earned a very good reputation. I still
own an old Carver Mag Amp, along with several more modern Yamahas and
Denons. The Carver is the only one that sounds different on the same set
of speakers, playing the same source material and the difference is very
pleasing.

Eisboch


Boy, did I ever screw up the sentence structure in that on! I meant to
say that the difference between .008 and .08 percent (and even higher) are
interesting to measure ..... etc.

Eisboch

[Don Pearce]

On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 01:15:39 -0500, "JANA"
wrote:

One thing that is interesting, is that the effect of THD is that when it is
a little on the high side, the effect is pleasing for listening. It tends to
make the sound smoother or more pleasing even though it is not realistic.
Amplifiers that have their THD up at 0.4% to 0.6% tend to have a more
pleasing effect in their sound.

The manufactures of the non professional or regular consumer amplifiers
don't publish the IMD (Inter Modulation Distortion). This is a very critical
type of distortion, and when the IMD is on the high side the quality of the
sound is not very good. Another thing that is not published in the regular
consumer amplifiers is the slew rate and the phase error. This will have an
effect on how real the sound will be.

THD and IMD are both, physically, the same thing - the only difference
is that to measure intermodulation you need to use two or more
signals. You can't have and amplifier that produces THD, while being
low on IMD or vice versa. So having measured one of these, that figure
won't be far different from the other.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Eeyore]

JANA wrote:

One thing that is interesting, is that the effect of THD is that when it is
a little on the high side, the effect is pleasing for listening.

Not in my book.

Furthermore any effect it has depends on the harmonic structure of the
distortion. High-order odd harmonics are typically described as highly
intrusive.

Graham

[Eeyore]

JANA wrote:

The Carver amplifier series has an excellent reputation in the industry.

Does it ? News to me and I've only been in the industry 40 years ! I'd say Bob
carver's designs have a reputation for being a little oddball and technically
interesting but far from *excellent*.


They make excellent amplifiers.

Do they indeed ?

Graham

[Eeyore]

JANA wrote:

Over the years, I have serviced and tested more than my share of high end
amplifiers for full specifications. To measure THD down at 0.008% takes a
very good distortion analyser.

It's been do-able certainly since the advent of Tektronix's AA501. That goes
back over *** 25 years ***.

The standard benchmark in recent times has been Audio Precision test equipment.
I first came across their System One 20 years ago and its residual THD is TEN
TIMES better than 0.008% !


Graham

[Eeyore]

Arny Krueger wrote:

A given modern SS power amp can have as much as or as little distortion as
you want. Just run it at a different power level. In general, more power,
more distortion.

Except that it INCREASES at typical listening levels of 100mW - 1W.


Take the same power amp and run it at say, 80 watts. It has 0.008% THD, run
it at 90 watts, it has 0.05% THD. Run it at 100 watts, it has 0.08% THD. Run
it at 120 watts, it has 1% THD.

THDs at these output levels are almost an irrelevance.

Graham

[Eisboch]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


JANA wrote:

The Carver amplifier series has an excellent reputation in the industry.

Does it ? News to me and I've only been in the industry 40 years ! I'd say
Bob
carver's designs have a reputation for being a little oddball and
technically
interesting but far from *excellent*.


They make excellent amplifiers.

Do they indeed ?

Graham


Hard to describe "excellent" subjectively, but, as I mentioned before, the
Carver I have is the only one that I can distinguish a difference in sound
(by ear) when powering the same speakers and using the same source material
when compared to the various Yamaha, Denon, B&K Components or Onkyo
receiver/amps I have in my collection.

I don't use it much anymore because it's not "full featured", but it still
sounds different .... and nice to my ears.

Eisboch

[Arny Krueger]

"JANA" wrote in message


One thing that is interesting, is that the effect of THD
is that when it is a little on the high side, the effect
is pleasing for listening. It tends to make the sound
smoother or more pleasing even though it is not
realistic. Amplifiers that have their THD up at 0.4% to
0.6% tend to have a more pleasing effect in their sound.

With all due respect, that's yet another audiophile myth.

The problem is that harmonic distortion and IM distortion have the same
cause - curvature of the transfer characteristic for the amplifier. If
there is HD then there is IM, and vice versa. The only exceptions are
narrowband amplifiers such as used in radio receivers.

It is possible that the playback of a solo instrument might be somewhat
tolerant of nonlinearity, because the signal is simple and the distortion
products might be masked.

I can come up with musical sounds that make 0.1% or more nonlinearity
audible and distrubing for sensitive listeners.

However, any larger ensemble would no doubt generate a large number of IM
products that are aharmonic and unlikely to be masked. IME, one of the most
revealing types of music is choral music. Modulation products tend to be
quite conspicious.

[Mr.T]

"Eeyore" wrote in message
...
One thing that is interesting, is that the effect of THD is that when it
is
a little on the high side, the effect is pleasing for listening.

Not in my book.

Furthermore any effect it has depends on the harmonic structure of the
distortion. High-order odd harmonics are typically described as highly
intrusive.

Yes, and low order, even harmonis are often described as "euphonic".
(but not by me :-)

MrT.