The "sound" of amplifiers: Denon vs. Parasound vs. Bryston
David S. Hansen
S3 ) - this has replaced the internal amp on my Denon AVR3300
receiver.
On certain program material, I *think* I can hear a difference between
them, but do not have the appropriate controls in place to rule out
placebo effect. For much program material, I find it very difficult
to discern a difference at all, but ultimately, my sighted comparison
led me to believe that the A23 gave a slight improvement in, if
anything, stereo imaging of certain SACD program material.
I have been told that the Bryston 3B-SST would be a much better
amplifier for my mains, with lower output impedance which would give
my system a tighter grip on the speakers.
My first question is to owners or auditioners of Parasound and Bryston
equipment who may be able to comment on any sonic differences between
these amps( or in general, just parasound versus bryston in terms of
engineering competence, etc ).
My second question is specifically to Arny Kreuger, who I have read in
archived postings that he has actually done an ABX test between
bryston and parasound amps and was able to get statistically
significant results in discerning differences. If you remember doing
these tests, what were the differences, and which amp do you prefer,
in terms of transparency ?
Arny Krueger
news:944fe23d.03050...@posting.google.com
> My second question is specifically to Arny Kreuger, who I have read in
> archived postings that he has actually done an ABX test between
> Bryston and Parasound amps and was able to get statistically
> significant results in discerning differences. If you remember doing
> these tests, what were the differences, and which amp do you prefer,
> in terms of transparency ?
Actually, what I have is tests that compare the
Bryston 2BLP Power Amplifier
Bryston 4Bnrb Power Amplifier
Bryston 4Bst Power Amplifier
Crown Macrotech 5000VZ Power Amplifier
Parasound-HCA-1000A Power Amplifier
QSC USA 850 Power Amplifier
Driving a loudspeaker-like load, to a straight wire.
You can audition these tests for yourself if you have a PC with a very good
sound card and good monitoring system attached. You do this by downloading
files from http://www.pcabx.com/product/amplifiers/index.htm .
Since a straight wire is an absolute reference, you can mix and match these
test files as you wish, simulating comparisons between the respective
amplifiers.
A unique feature of these tests is the ability to listen to each amplifier's
colorations in a mode of operation where audio has been routed through the
amplifiers 5 times in a row. You can listen to the amplifiers operating at
power levels of 1, 10 and 100 watts.
Hearing the coloration of these amplifiers is, as a rule fairly difficult.
Successful experience with the PCABX listener training course at
http://www.pcabx.com/training/ is a worthwhile prerequisite.
You might only have success with the "5 times" files. If you are able to
hear the effects of these amplifiers on musical sounds being played through
them, you will probably hear it as slight changes in the timbre of sounds in
the upper midrange and treble.
As I said before, using these files effectively demands that your PC have an
extremely fine sound card and monitoring system. A LynxTWO or Card Deluxe
sound card directly driving Sennheiser HD-580 high impedance stereo
headphones would be an example of an appropriate auditioning system.
The tests obviously involve passing the signal through analog/digital
converters. The Converters used in these tests have been shown to have no
audible effects after at least 10 passes. You can also audition this mode of
operation of these converters through up to 20 passes for yourself at
http://www.pcabx.com/product/cardd_deluxe/index.htm.
Nousaine
wrote:
>My first question is to owners or auditioners of Parasound and Bryston
>equipment who may be able to comment on any sonic differences between
>these amps( or in general, just parasound versus bryston in terms of
>engineering competence, etc ).
>
>My second question is specifically to Arny Kreuger, who I have read in
>archived postings that he has actually done an ABX test between
>bryston and parasound amps and was able to get statistically
>significant results in discerning differences. If you remember doing
>these tests, what were the differences, and which amp do you prefer,
>in terms of transparency ?
I currently own three Parasound and four Bryston amplifiers. I've had one
Parasound that was taken out of service as well. Over the course of the past 15
years I've had the following experience; one Parasound channel failed (it ws
purchased used for $200 in 1988.)
Only one Parasound was acquired new.
All the Brystons were purchased new shortly after the introduced the 20-year
warranty. So far two of the Brystons have been back to the factory for service
twice and another one will soon be on its way. (First two were channel
failures; current problem is scratchy level control.)
All these amplifiers have been involved in bias controlled listening tests over
the years. So far none of them, in nornally reverberant conditions, has been
found to be sonically distinguishable from each other or a dozen other
amplifiers.
Regarding reliability Parasound wins by a fair distance.
Leon North
frenzy:
> Actually, what I have is tests that compare the
>
> Bryston 2BLP Power Amplifier
> Bryston 4Bnrb Power Amplifier
> Bryston 4Bst Power Amplifier
> Crown Macrotech 5000VZ Power Amplifier
> Parasound-HCA-1000A Power Amplifier
> QSC USA 850 Power Amplifier
>
> Driving a loudspeaker-like load, to a straight wire.
>
> You can audition these tests for yourself if you have a PC with a very good
> sound card and good monitoring system attached. You do this by downloading
> files from http://www.pccrap.com/product/amplifiers/index.htm .
>
> Since a straight wire is an absolute reference, you can mix and match these
> test files as you wish, simulating comparisons between the respective
> amplifiers.
>
> A unique feature of these tests is the ability to listen to each amplifier's
> colorations in a mode of operation where audio has been routed through the
> amplifiers 5 times in a row. You can listen to the amplifiers operating at
> power levels of 1, 10 and 100 watts.
>
> Hearing the coloration of these amplifiers is, as a rule fairly difficult.
> Successful experience with the PCABX listener training course at
> http://www.pccrap.com/training/ is a worthwhile prerequisite.
>
> You might only have success with the "5 times" files. If you are able to
> hear the effects of these amplifiers on musical sounds being played through
> them, you will probably hear it as slight changes in the timbre of sounds in
> the upper midrange and treble.
>
> As I said before, using these files effectively demands that your PC have an
> extremely fine sound card and monitoring system. A LynxTWO or Card Deluxe
> sound card directly driving Sennheiser HD-580 high impedance stereo
> headphones would be an example of an appropriate auditioning system.
>
> The tests obviously involve passing the signal through analog/digital
> converters. The Converters used in these tests have been shown to have no
> audible effects after at least 10 passes. You can also audition this mode of
> operation of these converters through up to 20 passes for yourself at
> http://www.pccrap.com/product/cardd_deluxe/index.htm.
This is one of the funniest things I have +ever+ seen on usenet. Krooger, you
have to be one of the stoopidest motherfuckers to have ever been spawned. This
just kills me - Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
You remain crushingly stoopid.
I remain,
LN
--
"Bamborough, I = ER is a fact" - A. Dimbulb Krooger
Margaret von Busenhalter
> I recently purchased a Parasound Halo A23 to power my mains( B&W 603
> S3 ) - this has replaced the internal amp on my Denon AVR3300
> receiver.
>
> On certain program material, I *think* I can hear a difference between
> them, but do not have the appropriate controls in place to rule out
> placebo effect. For much program material, I find it very difficult
> to discern a difference at all, but ultimately, my sighted comparison
> led me to believe that the A23 gave a slight improvement in, if
> anything, stereo imaging of certain SACD program material.
>
> I have been told that the Bryston 3B-SST would be a much better
> amplifier for my mains, with lower output impedance which would give
> my system a tighter grip on the speakers.
>
> My first question is to owners or auditioners of Parasound and Bryston
> equipment who may be able to comment on any sonic differences between
> these amps( or in general, just parasound versus bryston in terms of
> engineering competence, etc ).
>
I smell a rat...
> My second question is specifically to myself, who I have read in
> archived postings that he has actually done an ABX test
...yes, it is Mr. Shit himself!
HAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!
This is the stupidest, most amateurish, most pathetic attempt yet from
Krueger to bolster his tarnished image.
>between
> bryston and parasound amps and was able to get statistically
> significant results in discerning differences. If you remember doing
> these tests, what were the differences, and which amp do you prefer,
> in terms of transparency ?
You can wipe your face now.
Cheers,
Margaret
David S. Hansen
>
> You can audition these tests for yourself if you have a PC with a very good
> sound card and good monitoring system attached. You do this by downloading
> files from http://www.pcabx.com/product/amplifiers/index.htm .
>
Thank you. This has been quite illuminating, actually. For
reference:
I grabbed the comparitor, went through the training sessions enough
times that I was able to pass all the "harder" tests with < 5% chance
of guessing, then went on to compare the 4BST and HCA1000A samples at
10W. These tests were carried out on a Creative Audigy 2 -> Headroom
Little headphone amp -> Sennheiser HD600.
Eventually I was able to pass 20/20 trials between these two, once I
identified a critical difference in the tympani samples - the decay of
the final drum hit seemed indefinably "different" in the left channel.
That said, I really don't think I would notice any differences in
these amplifiers on regular program material. It required sampling A
and B perhaps 40 times each to recognize a difference pattern - this
would not ordinarily happen in real life.
I think you may have saved me $1200.
> Since a straight wire is an absolute reference, you can mix and match these
> test files as you wish, simulating comparisons between the respective
> amplifiers.
Do you have plans to roll out more sample sets for more hardware in
the future ?
> Hearing the coloration of these amplifiers is, as a rule fairly difficult.
> Successful experience with the PCABX listener training course at
> http://www.pcabx.com/training/ is a worthwhile prerequisite.
Yes, at first I managed to fail even the "easy" trials for noise +
distortion =(
Joseph Oberlander
> I think you may have saved me $1200.
Amazing isn't it? Most amplifiers use the same 30+ year old circuit
designs before the marketing and case design gurus get to it.
George M. Middius
David S. Hansen said to Shit-for-Brains:
> I think you may have saved me $1200.
May God have mercy on your "soul".
Arny Krueger
> times that I was able to pass all the "harder" tests with < 5% chance
> of guessing, then went on to compare the 4BST and HCA1000A samples at
> 10W. These tests were carried out on a Creative Audigy 2 -> Headroom
> Little headphone amp -> Sennheiser HD600.
> Eventually I was able to pass 20/20 trials between these two, once I
> identified a critical difference in the tympani samples - the decay of
> the final drum hit seemed indefinably "different" in the left channel.
> That said, I really don't think I would notice any differences in
> these amplifiers on regular program material. It required sampling A
> and B perhaps 40 times each to recognize a difference pattern - this
> would not ordinarily happen in real life.
> I think you may have saved me $1200.
I think you've found what some of the rest of us have found - slight audible
differences between good amplifiers, but they are slight, and their subtlety
brings into question how much time and money to put into them. In contrast,
changes related to speakers and rooms can be pretty obvious.
>> Since a straight wire is an absolute reference, you can mix and
>> match these test files as you wish, simulating comparisons between
>> the respective amplifiers.
> Do you have plans to roll out more sample sets for more hardware in
> the future ?
At this time I don't have any plans one way or the other. My impression is
that the whole PCABX project was something that is taking quite a while to
gain wide enough acceptance to go further with it, even though tens of
thousands of people have participated in it. I can't possibly provide tests
for the many models of equipment that continue to proliferate all by myself.
There are other web sites that are providing files, but the greatest area of
interest has been MP3 encoders, not power amplifiers.
>> Hearing the coloration of these amplifiers is, as a rule fairly
>> difficult. Successful experience with the PCABX listener training
>> course at http://www.pcabx.com/training/ is a worthwhile
>> prerequisite.
> Yes, at first I managed to fail even the "easy" trials for noise +
> distortion =(
While I was developing the PCABX web site Jim Johnson was on RAO beating the
drum for formalized listener training. I really couldn't get a lot out of
him about what he meant by that so I was somewhat on my own when I developed
the listener training course that is there. I'm glad it helped, I know from
personal experience and the experience of my friends that it is really a
necessity.
David S. Hansen
considered impolite. That said, let's move on:
"Margaret von Busenhalter" <doubl...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message news:<tWFta.37323$8e7.1...@twister.austin.rr.com>...
> "David S. Hansen" <hap...@haploid.com> wrote in message
> news:944fe23d.03050...@posting.google.com...
>
> > My second question is specifically to myself, who I have read in
> > archived postings that he has actually done an ABX test
This is not the original text of my posting, and such alterations are
morally reprehensible. I suggest you recant.
> ...yes, it is Mr. Shit himself!
>
> HAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!
>
> This is the stupidest, most amateurish, most pathetic attempt yet from
> Krueger to bolster his tarnished image.
>
I will suppose from this ill-conceived collection of ramblings that
you are suggesting I am Arny Kreuger. You have no evidence of this,
and in fact the evidence is to the contrary. Please examine the
headers of this and my other posts for IP address origins, resolve
them to locations from the ARIN database, then do a whois on
haploid.com, then do a DNS lookup on the MX record for haploid.com.
Unless Mr. Kreuger has taken up residence in Arizona, your claim has
been shown to be baseless, ridiculous, and - dare I use your own term
- amateurish. I suggest you recant.
> >between
> > bryston and parasound amps and was able to get statistically
> > significant results in discerning differences. If you remember doing
> > these tests, what were the differences, and which amp do you prefer,
> > in terms of transparency ?
>
> You can wipe your face now.
Your asinine behavior toward an RAO newcomer is puzzling. Mr. Kreuger
treated my post rationally and maturely, with what appeared to be a
genuine desire to help. You, on the other hand, respond to the same
post with baseless claims of mistaken identity, oustanding levels of
irrationality, and a genuine desire to piss me off. If this is some
new way of endearing newcomers to the subjectivist viewpoint, I assure
you it is not at all effective.
George M. Middius
David S. Hansen said:
> This is not the original text of my posting, and such alterations are
> morally reprehensible. I suggest you recant.
> I will suppose from this ill-conceived collection of ramblings that
> you are suggesting I am Arny Kreuger.
> I suggest you recant.
> Your asinine behavior toward an RAO newcomer is puzzling. Mr. Kreuger
> treated my post rationally and maturely, with what appeared to be a
> genuine desire to help. You, on the other hand, respond to the same
> post with baseless claims of mistaken identity, oustanding levels of
> irrationality, and a genuine desire to piss me off. If this is some
> new way of endearing newcomers to the subjectivist viewpoint, I assure
> you it is not at all effective.
You should make a pilgrimage to Michigan.
Arny Krueger
> Let me begin by reminding you that top-posting a running thread is
> considered impolite. That said, let's move on:
> "Margaret von Busenhalter" <doubl...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:<tWFta.37323$8e7.1...@twister.austin.rr.com>...
>> "David S. Hansen" <hap...@haploid.com> wrote in message
>> news:944fe23d.03050...@posting.google.com...
>>> My second question is specifically to myself, who I have read in
>>> archived postings that he has actually done an ABX test
> This is not the original text of my posting, and such alterations are
> morally reprehensible. I suggest you recant.
The whole point of this "Busenhalter" personal appears to be as morally
reprehensible as the man behind it can make it.
>> ...yes, it is Mr. Shit himself!
>>
>> HAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!
>>
>> This is the stupidest, most amateurish, most pathetic attempt yet
>> from Krueger to bolster his tarnished image.
> I will suppose from this ill-conceived collection of ramblings that
> you are suggesting I am Arny Kreuger.
Spelling my name incorrectly was a nice touch!
<Don't worry about it - my name can't be spelled precisely in English and is
translated about 6 different ways in the US >
>You have no evidence of this,
> and in fact the evidence is to the contrary. Please examine the
> headers of this and my other posts for IP address origins, resolve
> them to locations from the ARIN database, then do a whois on
> haploid.com, then do a DNS lookup on the MX record for haploid.com.
It's good evidence but under some circumstances it could be falsified. We
have a number of posters who specialize in making their posts untraceable,
but fairly ordinary means suffice.
> Unless Mr. Kreuger has taken up residence in Arizona, your claim has
> been shown to be baseless, ridiculous, and - dare I use your own term
> - amateurish. I suggest you recant.
Don't hold your breath. The person behind "Busenhalter" doesn't apologize
and mean it, even if they do apologize.
>>> between
>>> bryston and parasound amps and was able to get statistically
>>> significant results in discerning differences. If you remember
>>> doing these tests, what were the differences, and which amp do you
>>> prefer, in terms of transparency ?
>> You can wipe your face now.
> Your asinine behavior toward an RAO newcomer is puzzling.
Think arrogance. The person behind "Busenhalter" has zero accountability.
Once they ruin their reputation under one name, they just make up another.
Probably 1/3 or more of the posts here are from a very small group of people
who are trying to support their viewpoint by making it appear that a vast
number of people share it.
>Mr. Kreuger
> treated my post rationally and maturely, with what appeared to be a
> genuine desire to help.
Hey you showed what seemed to be a genuine interest. What am I supposed to
do, spit in your face? <BTW according to the Busenhalter clique, that is
exactly what I'm supposed to do.>
> You, on the other hand, respond to the same
> post with baseless claims of mistaken identity, oustanding levels of
> irrationality, and a genuine desire to piss me off.
You're a quick study!
>If this is some
> new way of endearing newcomers to the subjectivist viewpoint, I assure
> you it is not at all effective.
The subjectivists on RAO would like to comport themselves like they still
rule. In that context, newbies have little value.
Silas Opdengraeff
wrote:
><Don't worry about it - my name can't be spelled precisely in English and is
>translated about 6 different ways in the US >
Mr Shit, Mr Crap, Mr Scat, Mr Excrement, Mr Faeces, Mr Poop--what's
wrong with those spellings?
--
Roy Briggs
Arny Krueger
news:didfbvot1q8oht4ui...@news.usanon.net
The real problem is that for you Briggs, they are autobiographical.
Now roll over so the nice lady can change that filthy Depends, please?
Silas Opdengraeff
wrote:
>> Mr Shit, Mr Crap, Mr Scat, Mr Excrement, Mr Faeces, Mr Poop--what's
>> wrong with those spellings?
>
>The real problem is that for you Briggs, they are autobiographical.
Haven't you figured out how to reply with something *other* than an
IKYABWAI?
>Now roll over so the nice lady can change that filthy Depends, please?
Now roll over so the train doesn't miss this time.
--
The Briggsengraeff
dave weil
wrote:
>"David S. Hansen" <hap...@haploid.com> wrote in message
>news:944fe23d.03050...@posting.google.com
>
>> Let me begin by reminding you that top-posting a running thread is
>> considered impolite. That said, let's move on:
>
>> "Margaret von Busenhalter" <doubl...@satx.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:<tWFta.37323$8e7.1...@twister.austin.rr.com>...
>>> "David S. Hansen" <hap...@haploid.com> wrote in message
>>> news:944fe23d.03050...@posting.google.com...
>
>>>> My second question is specifically to myself, who I have read in
>>>> archived postings that he has actually done an ABX test
>
>> This is not the original text of my posting, and such alterations are
>> morally reprehensible. I suggest you recant.
>
>The whole point of this "Busenhalter" personal appears to be as morally
>reprehensible as the man behind it can make it.
>
>>> ...yes, it is Mr. Shit himself!
>>>
>>> HAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!
>>>
>>> This is the stupidest, most amateurish, most pathetic attempt yet
>>> from Krueger to bolster his tarnished image.
>
>> I will suppose from this ill-conceived collection of ramblings that
>> you are suggesting I am Arny Kreuger.
>
>Spelling my name incorrectly was a nice touch!
>
><Don't worry about it - my name can't be spelled precisely in English and is
>translated about 6 different ways in the US >
Sure it can.
Arny Krueger
news:49efbvshslkqnm9i1...@4ax.com
> Sure it can.
Right.
1. Krueger
2. Kreuger
3. Kroger
4. Kruger
5. Kreger
6. Krieger
to name the 6 ways that I run into the most often.
Netty Jenderblancher
wrote:
>to name the 6 ways that I run into the most often.
1. Idiot
2. Twat
3. Prick
4. Shit-head
5. Paedo
6. Psycho
--
The Nettygraeff
dave weil
wrote:
If you're being sarcastic, I would note that number one on your list
is absolutely correct, either in English *or* in German. A "u" with an
umlaut can *always* be rendered as "ue" in place of the umlaut, even
in German.
Therefore, it *can* be spelled precisely in English. In fact, I'll bet
that most of your legal documents such as driver's licenses, bank
statements, IRS stuff and the like aren't umlauted. Just out of
curiousity, is it umlauted on your birth certificate?
Of course, this is coming from someone whose branch of the Weil
conglomeration pronounces their name *incorrectly* for whatever
reason. Some Weils do it correctly (i.e. While - note to Stewart, none
that I know of turn the W into a V - even *they* "Anglicise" it in
that regard) and the minority pronounce it as my family does -
"Wheel". Maybe it was because my family settled in the south and
that's just the way their neighbors pronounced it.
If you *aren't* being sarcastic, then thanks for acknowledging my
correction.
>1. Krueger
>2. Kreuger
>3. Kroger
>4. Kruger
>5. Kreger
>6. Krieger
>
>to name the 6 ways that I run into the most often.
How about Bamborough? You want to list the various variations that you
have produced?
Netty Jenderblancher
wrote:
>Just out of curiousity, is it umlauted on your birth certificate?
That empty roll has long since been discarded, I'm afraid.
--
The Nettygraeff
George M. Middius
dave weil said to Shit-for-Brains:
> How about Bamborough? You want to list the various variations that you
> have produced?
The one time Krooger admitted the truth was the one that sticks in my
mind: "Scares me shitless".
Arny Krueger
news:2nmfbv8m2rs9shcen...@4ax.com
Given that Bamborough seems to have totally lost the ability to participate
in an intelligent, on-topic conversation, your words must describe him
pretty well.
Arny Krueger
> news:<4hudnbCcrPZ...@comcast.com>...
>>
>> You can audition these tests for yourself if you have a PC with a
>> very good sound card and good monitoring system attached. You do
>> this by downloading files from
>> http://www.pcabx.com/product/amplifiers/index.htm .
>>
>
> Thank you. This has been quite illuminating, actually. For
> reference:
>
> times that I was able to pass all the "harder" tests with < 5% chance
> of guessing, then went on to compare the 4BST and HCA1000A samples at
> 10W. These tests were carried out on a Creative Audigy 2 -> Headroom
> Little headphone amp -> Sennheiser HD600.
>
> Eventually I was able to pass 20/20 trials between these two, once I
> identified a critical difference in the tympani samples - the decay of
> the final drum hit seemed indefinably "different" in the left channel.
Thanks for the feedback. Regrettably, I did a review of the samples on the
PCABX site and found that 4BST timpani 10 watt sample had its channels
reversed at the time you downloaded it. If you compare the 10watt 4BST
timpani file you downloaded to the timpani reference file with a digital
editor like Goldwave or Cooledit, you will notice a pretty obvious visible
difference between the channels from 0.618 to 0.694 seconds. Compare this to
the reference file and you should see what I mean.
I've just corrected this problem, so you should download the 4BST timpani
file again and repeat your listening test.
My deepest regrets for this error.
Netty Jenderblancher
wrote:
>Given that Bamborough seems to have totally lost the ability to participate
>in an intelligent, on-topic conversation, your words must describe him
>pretty well.
Keep your electric eyes off me, babe!
;-(
--
The Nettygraeff
Netty Jenderblancher
wrote:
You couldn't mop up vomit with your own vomit-gobbling dustbin flap of
a mouth.
>Thanks for the feedback.
No problem. Now tell me why the 'wogs' are so funny.
--
The Nettygraeff
George M. Middius
Netty Jenderblancher said:
> You couldn't mop up vomit with your own vomit-gobbling dustbin flap of
> a mouth.
>
> >Thanks for the feedback.
>
> No problem. Now tell me why the 'wogs' are so funny.
You mean "Living Next Door to the $*&%ing Kumars"? They're going to
make an American version next year.
Netty Jenderblancher
<Spam-...@resistance.org> wrote:
>You mean "Living Next Door to the $*&%ing Kumars"? They're going to
>make an American version next year.
No 42. I've always hated that number, even when hilarious 'wogs' were
living at it.
--
Krooger S Poitier