2. amps-preamps
  3. 1191247271

Stereophile - MF Supercharger article-add 550W/ch.

Have you read this article in september issue of Stereophile?
It says that Supercharger pumps up your system to 550W/ch. and leaves "no sonic signature" - "Like a chameleon".

It works like this - simply connect Supercharger between your power (or integrated) amp and speakers.You only need a new set of very short speaker cables.You get 550 W/ch.,better dynamics and bass, and everything else is the same.
It is claimed that it only increases dynamics, and doesn't change "the sound" of your original amplifier.

Without questioning Stereophile's knowledge (it is my favorite magazine) i just find it hard to believe this.
My question - has anyone actually tried adding supercharger to the SET based system,2-20 Watts of primary amp. power?
And can any owner of such SET system say it didn't damage (a bit at least) the magic and "the sound" of SET tubes?
I am aware that in article Scott 299B(18 W/ch.) amp was connected with Supercharger.
I want to hear from owners of SET based systems who have tried this.Or from other people who have some opinion on this subject.I just find this hard to believe.
audiobb
Ag insider logo xs@2x
dbphd
1,624 posts
 
I haven't published in nor even looked at JASA for several decades, so I am far from current. But evolution of the human auditory system occurs very slowly, over thousands of years. You have to ask yourslef why human hearing, a system evolved for avoidance of danger and communication, would be sensitive to high-order harmonics. What might the teleological explanation be for developing such sensitivity be? For example, we can explain interaural sensitivity to timing and level in the lower frequency range as providing localization cues that could be important for survival. But what value might high-order harmonics add to our lives?

db
atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
11,651 posts
 
Hi db, I don't think high-ordered odd harmonics do add to our lives. The current state of high-end audio suggests that they don't. Their rarity in nature might mean that less brain power is required to detect the change in volume, but what is important is not the 'why?' but the fact of 'what is'.

That we react this way is easy to demonstrate BTW. If you have access to test equipment, set up a sine wave and run it through an amplifier at 0VU and listen to the result. Now run down the volume, switch to square wave, and turn it up until you get the same perceived volume level. Now look at the meter- you will be about 20-24db down compared to the original sine wave. That's 1/100th the level or so depending on your perception. If you add a filter to filter out the lower orders, you will find there is almost no change in perception.
Ag insider logo xs@2x
dbphd
1,624 posts
 
Atmasphere,

A good empiricist needs first assure an absence of artifacts in such a demonstration. The signal generator and transducer can be sources of spurious acoustics, especially with square waves. A fast scope can monitor a generator, but I don't know how to monitor a transducer to assure absence of artifacts.

db
emailists
923 posts
 
DBphd - you have a really interesting background and it seems your discipline could really add alot to so much of what we discuss here.

If you ever get the chance to hear any atma-sphere amps you should.

You might be shocked to hear how different (and how utterly un-tube like) they sound compared to the Mac gear you are so intimate with.
atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
11,651 posts
 
Dbphd, its not empirical if you don't try...

More to discover