Negative feedback Amp=more faithful reproduction?


Negative feedback (NFB) vs zero negative feedback (ZNFB). There seems to be unsubstantiated contention that ZNFB amps sound more realistic. I know this is an age old debate favoring the ZNFB design, but I think most audiophiles have never bothered to look into this matter and believe the advertisements and proponents of zero NFB design. I have been in that camp until recently. My own experience and research into articles on this matter leads to me believe NFB is needed for faithful reproduction of music. I'm not saying NFB design is more "musical", which is a highly subjective term and usually means more euphonic or colored. I've posted a similar question awhile back, but I was hoping we can have a more evidence based discussion on this matter. Perhaps, we need clarification of descriptive terms we use to describe sound. My contention is, in general, NFB designs produces a more accurate or faithful reproduction of music than ZNFB designs. Here is a very good article on feedback and distortion:

http://sound.westhost.com/articles/distortion+fb.htm
dracule1
OK, so I will go out on a limb and agree with Kijanki that educated application of NF = more faithful reproduction, in a pure technical sense, though as we all know, no solution is perfect and there are always potential drawbacks to deal with. In the case of NF, it would seem to be potentially higher IM distortion that just so happens to come into play in the most sensitive region of the human hearing spectrum where it matters most. That would up the ante to get it all done right!

Now I will go back and do more listening to determine further for myself who has done it right and who has not.
"Mapman:
The answer to your question is to do away with reproduction altogether. Sell all your equipment and go to stadiums, concert halls, jazz clubs, auditoriums, amphitheaters, subways, bathrooms, etc. Go live!"

Agreed! Live is the reference standard! Everything else is a reproduction all of which are flawed in some way. Choose your poison!

Abstract art is regarded by many as the most enjoyable! Its also one of the most highly distorted forms of art compared to other styles. The art is represented by the distortions. A photo would work best to reduce the distortions. A three dimensional hi res CGI model perhaps could do the best! Which of these would you prefer? Does it matter? As long as it affects you, I'd say it realy does not matter. I like variety! I'll take one of each!

Still the hi res CGI model is probably the most faithful technically, though still surely noticably imperfect.

Give it time. Technology will continue to advance to the point where the remaining distortions are below the threshold of human perception.

Sound reproduction is not as data intensive and will probably get there faster. I tend to think it may already be getting there in some cases these days.

Unfortunately, audiophiles may always still be futilely sweating the details that really no longer matter, though I suspect the #s that obsess on doing such things will continue to dwindle significantly.
Edwyun, Yes, we have to realize that when they talk about zero feedback they mean global feedback. Amplifier can have many local feedbacks and they might still call it ZNFB. Why? Because ZNFB became catch phrase and sells amplifiers.

You stated the you would buy amplifier with zero output impedance, infinite bandwidth zero distortions etc. but I'm not sure everybody would. Some people would complain that it doesn't have good bass with their speakers (zero output impedance), others would call sound analytical and sterile (lack of distortion and zero noise) while some would call it bright (infinite bandwidth) since their system has tendency for it. In addition many people like warm sound (enhanced even harmonics) and would not be happy with this amplifier.

Shallow global feedback, properly used, can reduce distortions, widen bandwidth and lower output impedance WITHOUT introducing Transient Intermodulation.

As for getting rid of the equipment, I think you're right. For the money some people constantly spend on audio they could hire Symphony Orchestra to play for them.
NFB is a subtractive process, although as proved by GE long ago, it increases the perceived odd order harmonic distortion. NFB removes some of the signal, and not in real time, either,due to propagation delay within the amp. Although I prefer to trust my ears, and could not care less about the theories involved, theory does match what I hear: with NFB it sounds less "alive". Deadened. Something essential has been deleted from the signal along with the improvement in distortion specs. There does sound like slightly less distortion, but the baby is thrown out with the bathwater. I personally think those who cite the "improved" specs from NFB are missing the point, but to each his own. Not so different from those who prefer SS over tubes, who often cite the "less distortion" specs. No, I don't enjoy listening to distortion, just unwilling to sacrifice aural immediacy to lower it.