@djones51 https://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_ledr.phpThank you so much for this webpage. I'm going to make good use of this. Really looks great!
I've added photos to my system — which is still very much in "proto type" aesthetically and cord management-wise, but which is measuring and sounding quite good.
https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/9064@mapman @lowrider57 @parker65310 @pwerahera Agree that it's a combination of many factors, including how the recording is made, speakers setup, and room acoustics; yes, these *all* determine "exactly how those cues are rendered and imaging and soundstage actually produced." That is why I am comparing exactly the same *very, well done and rich sound-staged* recordings. (I'd have to be using good recordings otherwise what would be the point of trying to compare amps?)
Also, these are being played on the same streaming service, in the same room, with the same speakers, in the same position. The interconnects are all the same. The power conditions, the room, etc. are all the same. *The* thing changing is the amplifier. As a friendly reminder, I'm trying to frame a precise question with stable conditions in order to isolate a single factor and elicit information about just that factor.
The Bel Canto and Ohm combination sounds interesting. A similar Bel Canto would run, say, $6k right now? That's almost 3x the price of the AVA, but knowing that a SS (Class D) CAN produce such impressive soundstage says something about the original question. Mbl's are much more, I understand.
@aubreybobb obb The SS amps are not at 600 -800 hours yet. Maybe 100 hours, at the most. As for resonance and vibration, I've never heard that "tube amps are more resistant to this factor." I always thought they were LESS resistant, because of the glass tubes. That's a startling claim and I have never heard that before.
@jjss49 I wish I had those other amps for comparison with the AVA. I know that Pass voices his amps, and Paul McGowan has spoken about this extensively. I don't know if he still believes this, but Van Alstine has said (14 Sep 2006)
"I have no clue about "voicing" an amplifier. It is NOT a musical instrument. It is not supposed to "sound good". The best it can do is to not screw up the information presented at its inputs and drive whatever load is connected to it without interacting with or being modified by the load….We will leave "voicing" to trumpets and tubas and such, and keep doing basic evaluation of circuit electronics…..We did not spend any time "voicing", only refining our engineering knowledge and the application of that." [Source:
https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=76587.20 ]
That's a surprising thing to hear from someone who makes good gear. Surely he listens to what his customers say, he goes to shows, listens to gear, etc. He may have said this as some kind of retort to someone else's overly-mushy (from an engineer's standpoint) statements. But without that kind of charity for him, it betrays an unenviable bull-headedness.
@wolfie62 may be right when saying, "Amplifier design is critical for achieving, or not, really good imaging/soundstaging."
If it is the case that tube amps do this quite typically but solid state do not, it may NOT be attributable to the kind of device at work but results speak the loudest, I suppose. Maybe it is merely that fewer solid state designers focus or try to accomplish a sonic objective that tube designers do. That's an important difference for some, but probably not for the end user who wants a rich sound stage.
