All Amps Sound the Same....


A guy posted this on another forum:

"This is my other expensive hobby and while I agree with you about low end receivers, once you get to mid-priced (~$600-1000 street price) multichannel receivers you're into pretty good gear...Keep in mind that an amplifier sounds like an amplifier and changing brands should add or subtract nothing to/from the sound and that going up the food chain just adds power output or snob appeal to a separate amplifier...These days most audiophiles either use a good quality multichannel receiver alone or use a mid-priced multichannel receiver to drive their amps even for 2-channel."

Wow, where do they come up with this? Lack of experience?
128x128russ69
For the overwhelming majority of music listeners the statements make very good sense. If you download your music from popular/non-audiophile sites, don't use acoustic room treatments, don't have a dedicated listen room, haven't meticulously positioned your loudspeakers and don't seat in a sweet spot, then why spend over $1k on an amplifier?

There's no need for snobbish bashing.
Head for the high ground. This thread may quickly morph into another version of "do power cords really make a difference?" Onhwy61 makes a good point though, consider the source and the intended audience before lobbing invective.
a sales pitch IMO

"Once you get to this price point it is safe to buy because thay all sound the same"

In other words, buy from me, do not look around...

just a thought
If the history I've read is correct, the big magazines refused blind testing after one of them tried it on a range of amps and found that they couldn't reliably tell the expensive ones from the cheap ones.

That's not the same thing as saying they sounded the same, but it might hold true today that your ears alone won't drive you to prefer a costlier amp or a new amp over a vintage amp.