[tomb]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif FYI even a cynic like me makes some concession to the placebo effect. I found a double-blind test which proved (listening on Sennheiser Orpheus) that even the most sophisticated listeners couldn't tell CD from 256kbps MP3. But I rip to lossless anyway - just in case!

Equating differences in headphone amps to detecting differences in music compression rates is not analogous.

I cannot afford these uber-expensive amps, either - or the headphones. However, I am not so self-assured to claim that there is no difference. Rather, after reading all the hype, I built my own CMoy to find out. Verdict: BIG difference. Was there still something lacking, but yet enough potential to signal that this was the right direction? Yes, and I continue pursuing the enjoyable hobby of DIY headphone amps.

As a matter of fact, not only are different amp designs distinguishable - particularly from one headphone to the other (they may enhance or detract from the headphone's own tendencies), but there are differences between different transistors and opamps. These differences are easily heard in many cases, and can be apparent as soon as they are switched (rolled). Tubes are even more distinct. Not only do different variants of the same tube sound slightly different, different brands do as well - GE, RCA, TungSol, EI, JJ, etc.

In the case of opamps and solid state designs, how can this be? They all have essentially the same response and SN ratio - flat and 90db++. So where does the measurement come in ... where do the differences come from? Does that mean the instrument metric is correct and there is something wrong with the listeners mind - a psychological effect? Or does it mean that an instrument meant to measure a single specific quantity simply cannot model everything that the human senses can detect all at once?

After 30 years of a career in Engineering, I've learned that when someone suggests that they can detect something when an instrument measures no difference, chances are the instrument is not measuring the quantity that is causing the difference. Psychological effects are the exception, not the norm. It's unfortunate that the modern myth contradicts that premise and is accepted by so many.

 

[Hi-Finthen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm not "trolling." I was accused of the same thing on the thread querying the importance of amps, where I dared to suggest that they weren't in fact especially important at all. I know it's off topic on this thread but the other one got closed down before I got a chance to reply to some of the posts. FYI I did not agree with the way the other guy, vai77, went off on one in that thread and I certainly don't agree with his view that you can hear a difference between CD files and lossless audio files. My point is that I find it surprising, to say the least, that so many people on here take it as given that amps have a large impact on sound quality, when both measurements and double-blind tests suggest that they have little if any impact. Maybe it's because I'm quite new to the forum and don't really have a sense of the prevailing "orthodoxies" on here. I was also extremely surprised to hear people suggest that subjective listening experience was a better guide to whether or not there is a difference between amps than either measuring instruments or DBTs. Given the prevalence of what I'd describe as "strange" claims, I can't help but feel that people in the audio industry may have been spreading views which they know full well to be false (not necessarily on this forum). Of course, if everyone here is quite happy to go out and buy their uber-expensive amps, and feels that these amps really do make a difference, then fine. It's really none of my business. But this is a large forum and unsuspecting people coming on here will use it as a source of information - I think that brings a responsibility to show at least a semblance of balance in what's posted. EG not making spurious claims like "everyone in the know believes amps make a massive difference" - as I understand, the majority of people with relevant technical expertise most certainly do not believe this. FYI even a cynic like me makes some concession to the placebo effect. I found a double-blind test which proved (listening on Sennheiser Orpheus) that even the most sophisticated listeners couldn't tell CD from 256kbps MP3. But I rip to lossless anyway - just in case!

John_M, The subject line of this thread is what you should be addressing. Ergo you are posting off topic, thread crapping and you are a troll.
You say it is none of your business, in this latest off topic thread crapping example of trolling other than defending the other novices such as your self who can read, link, cut and paste, but haven't had direct experience with high end gear appropriately set up in a system. You have been offered to have direct experience and dismiss the opportunity to hear for youself these subtle differences that can be experienced making the pursuit of high end audio reproduction gears the hobby which it is, and enjoyable on many levels. None of which, off topic, thread craping, trolling by the inexperienced has any business to participate in.

Back on topic:
I would suggest the Mapletree Ear+ Purist HD (w/5751, Sylvania/GE/Philips/RCA) design for the inexpensive utility of its one 12ax7 (sub 5751/ECC83) in V1 alone to be rolled for tone and balance control of the musics presentation.

Good luck~

 

[nightfire]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm not "trolling." I was accused of the same thing on the thread querying the importance of amps, where I dared to suggest that they weren't in fact especially important at all. I know it's off topic on this thread but the other one got closed down before I got a chance to reply to some of the posts. FYI I did not agree with the way the other guy, vai77, went off on one in that thread and I certainly don't agree with his view that you can hear a difference between CD files and lossless audio files. My point is that I find it surprising, to say the least, that so many people on here take it as given that amps have a large impact on sound quality, when both measurements and double-blind tests suggest that they have little if any impact. Maybe it's because I'm quite new to the forum and don't really have a sense of the prevailing "orthodoxies" on here. I was also extremely surprised to hear people suggest that subjective listening experience was a better guide to whether or not there is a difference between amps than either measuring instruments or DBTs. Given the prevalence of what I'd describe as "strange" claims, I can't help but feel that people in the audio industry may have been spreading views which they know full well to be false (not necessarily on this forum). Of course, if everyone here is quite happy to go out and buy their uber-expensive amps, and feels that these amps really do make a difference, then fine. It's really none of my business. But this is a large forum and unsuspecting people coming on here will use it as a source of information - I think that brings a responsibility to show at least a semblance of balance in what's posted. EG not making spurious claims like "everyone in the know believes amps make a massive difference" - as I understand, the majority of people with relevant technical expertise most certainly do not believe this. FYI even a cynic like me makes some concession to the placebo effect. I found a double-blind test which proved (listening on Sennheiser Orpheus) that even the most sophisticated listeners couldn't tell CD from 256kbps MP3. But I rip to lossless anyway - just in case!

Look if you want proof, just do this:

Wire up a 3.5mm headphone connector to your home stereo speakers, and plug it into an iPod. Crank it to full volume.

Does it sound good?

Now, rewire your speakers back to your stereo amp, and play it at the equivalent volume.

Does it sound better?

Could you pick out the difference in a blind test?

The differences between well designed amps are typically much less pronounced, but they are there.

**EDIT**

And I don't think anyone here has claimed "there is a massive difference between all amps." Some people have claimed "there is a massive difference between SOME amps." And they would be right.

As an example, a Zen or First Watt does not only sound different (and horrible), but could actually damage typical loudspeakers (due to the, yes, measurable amount of voltage it would drive past a crossover; its design tracks the current flowing to the speaker, not the voltage). Compare it with a JVC home theater amp; the JVC will sound far better.

However, take that same Zen or First Watt and hook it up to a speaker that it is suited to, and you have one of the finest sounding (and measuring) setups one can build.

It really blows my mind that you'd be arguing you don't hear a difference between tubes and solid state amps. I just don't know what to say about that.

** 2nd edit **

Oh, and expensive amps are NOT solely about sound quality. Yes, this is usually the decisive factor. But, expensive amps are often beautiful hand crafted works of art, using extremely reliable and well chosen components, thoroughly tested to their claims. Some have all sorts of useful features, and others are simply nice to look at. This is a hobbyist site. Anyone who spends $1500 or $5000 on an amplifier is looking for more than basic amplification.

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacd lover /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am trying to say this in a polite way .... but you are wrong about the SLAM PPX3. The SLAM PPX3 comes fitted with the high power 5687 output tubes standard and does not need the adapters. The SLAM designation specifically refers to amps using 5687 output tubes. The original PPX3 used 6cg7 output tubes with nine pin mini sockets and can not accept the octal base 5687 adapters. The PPX3-6cg7, however, can be returned to SP and have the tube sockets rewired and the resistor values changed to use the 5687 output tubes .... because both the 6cg7 and 5687 use the same type 9 pin mini socket. There was a short lived version of the PPX3 .... called the PPX3-6sn7 .... that amp had three octal tube sockets designed to use three 6sn7's. This amp can be converted to a SLAM PPX3 by simply adding the two 5687 tube socket adapters/ tubes to the amps output sockets. The PPX3-6cg7 has a tough time with the 701 and the PPX3-6sn7 version does too. I would not recommend either of these versions for the 701's unless you upgrade them to SLAM status and use the higher power 5687 output tubes. Now ... the 5687 equipped SLAM PPX3 will drive the 701's with authority and control. As a rule of thumb ... if you want to use a SP amp best suited with 701's .... you need to use one equipped with the 5687 or 6bl7gt/6bx7gt output tubes. If you do, you will be rewarded with ample power and superior sound quality.

X 2

 

[Hi-Finthen]

The Best Amplifier for the K701s is the PPX3 Slam, should be within your budget OP(if I've converted 1000eu to USD correctly). Not either of the two PPX3s on the for sale forums, at the moment as they are not Slams. They are examples of what sacdlover terms short lived production PPX3s which with $100 adaptors I was told, would then allow it to drive my 701s, when I enquired several months ago on these boards. The PPX3-6sn7 has three octal tube sockets designed to use three 6sn7's. This amp can be converted to a SLAM PPX3 by simply adding the two 5687 tube socket adapters($200USD) + 2ea. 5687 tubes (?USD) to the amps output sockets. And that is why I did refer you to their manufacturer. I may have misquoted my understanding of the "Slam" designation. However, it does get easily confused. And I stand corrected. The cost soon became the deciding factor in my case. Perhaps not a concern to others or yourself.

Not sure if you would be looking into used gears, but great value can be realized going this route. Especially for direct experience / comparisons within a budget.

A new PPX3 Slam balanced should be the best amplifier for your 701s and maybe within your budget too, depending upon upgrades; We know you will spend 20% higher than your budget as this is after all head-fi ;-}

Good luck~

 

[John_M]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightfire /img/forum/go_quote.gif Look if you want proof, just do this: Wire up a 3.5mm headphone connector to your home stereo speakers, and plug it into an iPod. Crank it to full volume. Does it sound good? Now, rewire your speakers back to your stereo amp, and play it at the equivalent volume. Does it sound better? Could you pick out the difference in a blind test? The differences between well designed amps are typically much less pronounced, but they are there.

I think you're missing the point a bit. The issue isn't whether there's a difference between amped and unamped. The issue is whether different amps of reasonable quality sound the same.

 

[John_M]

Lots of people saying they can hear differences. I'd be interested to know what controlled tests you've all conducted. I was criticised on the other thread for relying on DBTs without conducting my own. The reason I don't is that it would be far too time consuming and I doubt I'd be able to do it properly. I'd have to ensure both amps are playing at an equal volume - and I wouldn't be able to do this properly.

All of you who claim major differences between amps - are you creating proper test conditions when you compare the amps (eg ensuring they are playing at equal volume) - or are you simply pulling the lead out of one amp and plugging it into the next one?

 

[digitalmind]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif Lots of people saying they can hear differences. I'd be interested to know what controlled tests you've all conducted. I was criticised on the other thread for relying on DBTs without conducting my own. The reason I don't is that it would be far too time consuming and I doubt I'd be able to do it properly. I'd have to ensure both amps are playing at an equal volume - and I wouldn't be able to do this properly. All of you who claim major differences between amps - are you creating proper test conditions when you compare the amps (eg ensuring they are playing at equal volume) - or are you simply pulling the lead out of one amp and plugging it into the next one?

John, we are all saying we can hear the difference. That's because the difference is there and is not all that small either. Even if the frequency curve is the same that doesn't say much about the amp itself, how it behaves when frequency changes quickly, how good it's timing is, etc. Amp differences are quite easy to spot once you get an ear for them. Do you really believe that two very different designs will create the same sound? Sure they can get pretty close but there will be a difference, quite often a difference large enough to hear easily.

I could easily tell the difference, and describe it, between all 5 amps I had, which is why I kept the best.

Many people have different opinions, especially in audio, but when it comes to sources, amps, and headphones, allmost all will agree that those three have large differences between the different sources, amps, and headphones.

As for proper test conditions, I do 99% of my listening right here behind my desk with my gear on hand -- I think that because of that, this is the best and most "proper" test condition I could have.

 

[Hi-Finthen]

John_M : I assure you, we are not wasting our money and time, but enjoying it well spent.

You on the other hand, are a waste of my time which is of value to me.

 

[MaZa]

We should make another thread of this subject. This is something that is seriously worth of disgussing IMHO.

[DIPLOMATMODE]
BUT, you people are giving the title of "troll" way too easily. In this thread i havent noticed signs of being Troll in Johns behavior, atleast in the way i have understood Trolling. Serious thread crapping, yes, (and that is solved by making new thread) but not Trolling. Troll is one who makes others feel bad by purpose, by directly insulting and senselessly debating and hostily bringing others down.
So far he has been nothing but questioning, and he does have sources where he has based his own opinions. If those sources are flawed or not (which is the thing we are now debating, out of this threads original purpose) and bringing out his own opinion that are based on those sources doesnt make him a troll.

Note, i dont know how John_M has behaved in OTHER threads. Perhaps he really has been trolling previously, i dunno.
[/DIPLOMATMODE]

 

[John_M]

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalmind /img/forum/go_quote.gif John, we are all saying we can hear the difference. That's because the difference is there and is not all that small either. Even if the frequency curve is the same that doesn't say much about the amp itself, how it behaves when frequency changes quickly, how good it's timing is, etc. Amp differences are quite easy to spot once you get an ear for them. Do you really believe that two very different designs will create the same sound? Sure they can get pretty close but there will be a difference, quite often a difference large enough to hear easily. I could easily tell the difference, and describe it, between all 5 amps I had, which is why I kept the best. Many people have different opinions, especially in audio, but when it comes to sources, amps, and headphones, allmost all will agree that those three have large differences between the different sources, amps, and headphones. As for proper test conditions, I do 99% of my listening right here behind my desk with my gear on hand -- I think that because of that, this is the best and most "proper" test condition I could have.

You didn't answer the question - are you controlling your test properly, or are you being sloppy about it - simply unplugging and replugging? If you aren't controlling for differences in volume, it's hardly a proper test and it would be completely unsurprising if you did hear a difference.

"allmost all will agree that those three have large differences between the different sources, amps, and headphones"

Almost all will agree about headphones but they most certainly will not agree about amps or sources. Your claim is simply untrue. See e.g.:

http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf
http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20020901.htm
http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/ampin...o/subjectv.htm (go to section 2)

"Amp differences are quite easy to spot once you get an ear for them."

If this were true, people would be able to "spot" the differences in double-blind tests. But I've found four double-blind amp tests on the internet and nobody has been able to pick out a difference in any of them. Of course, those tests were properly controlled for things like volume (two amps always kept within 1dB of each other). I'm not convinced that people claiming major differences have taken a comparably rigorous approach to their listening.

 

[tyrion]

The topic of this thread is the best amp for the AKG 701. Maybe we should spend time on that subject and not discuss whether we can or can't hear differences between amps under various circumstances. This is one of those pointless arguments that will go on forever without an answer that is agreeable to all.

 

[John_M]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaZa /img/forum/go_quote.gif We should make another thread of this subject. This is something that is seriously worth of disgussing IMHO. [DIPLOMATMODE] BUT, you people are giving the title of "troll" way too easily. In this thread i havent noticed signs of being Troll in Johns behavior, atleast in the way i have understood Trolling. Serious thread crapping, yes, (and that is solved by making new thread) but not Trolling. Troll is one who makes others feel bad by purpose, by directly insulting and senselessly debating and hostily bringing others down. So far he has been nothing but questioning, and he does have sources where he has based his own opinions. If those sources are flawed or not (which is the thing we are now debating, out of this threads original purpose) and bringing out his own opinion that are based on those sources doesnt make him a troll. Note, i dont know how John_M has behaved in OTHER threads. Perhaps he really has been trolling previously, i dunno. [/DIPLOMATMODE]

Well, thanks Maza. However, let me pick out part of your post...

"Troll is one who makes others feel bad by purpose, by directly insulting and senselessly debating and hostily bringing others down."

...and now quote one of the others' posts (one of many from the poster in question!):

"John_M : I assure you, we are not wasting our money and time, but enjoying it well spent.

You on the other hand, are a waste of my time which is of value to me."

Heh.

 

[Kees]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaZa /img/forum/go_quote.gif We should make another thread of this subject. This is something that is seriously worth of disgussing IMHO. [DIPLOMATMODE] BUT, you people are giving the title of "troll" way too easily. In this thread i havent noticed signs of being Troll in Johns behavior, atleast in the way i have understood Trolling. Serious thread crapping, yes, (and that is solved by making new thread) but not Trolling. Troll is one who makes others feel bad by purpose, by directly insulting and senselessly debating and hostily bringing others down. So far he has been nothing but questioning, and he does have sources where he has based his own opinions. If those sources are flawed or not (which is the thing we are now debating, out of this threads original purpose) and bringing out his own opinion that are based on those sources doesnt make him a troll. Note, i dont know how John_M has behaved in OTHER threads. Perhaps he really has been trolling previously, i dunno. [/DIPLOMATMODE]

X2.
I already offered to continue this discussion in another thread.
The "trolling" is not so much in the subject itself, but more in the way it is introduced in this specific thread I think. As it is not wanted here, why not just take it somewhere else?

 

[elrod-tom]

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ugh. Why are people still uncritically accepting that amps make a difference to sound quality? This is a highly contentious claim but you'd never realise it to read some of these threads...

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif "Because they do." "Everybody knows that." I'm afraid those aren't answers, Phil. Furthermore, the claim that "everybody with any experience in this area knows it" is completely false. Nor am I a troll for pointing out what needs to be pointed out. It's downright irresponsible to talk as if it were accepted wisdom that you can improve the sound quality of your system with the right amp. http://www.biline.ca/critic1.htm "All of the following could be proved in court before a jury of degreed professionals--Physicists, Electrical Engineers, Acousticians, University Professors, Researchers in major electronics laboratories... ...[The importance of the amplifier is] vastly exaggerated in importance by the audiophile press and high-end audio dealers. In controlled double-blind listening tests, no one has ever (yes, ever!) heard a difference between two amplifiers with high input impedance, low output impedance, flat response, low distortion, and low noise, when operated at precisely matched levels (±0.1 dB) and not clipped." You know, Phil, I emailed headphone.com to ask why they carry data on the frequency response of different speakers but don't carry similar data on the output of amps. A very helpful (and honest) headphone.com employee replied today pointing out that, as they all sound the same, unless headphone.com were carrying a really bad amp, there would be no point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif In other words, you're completely unable to answer any of the points I raised. All I'm doing is pointing out facts. Pointing out facts isn't trolling! Making false statements like "anyone with any experience knows amps make a difference," however, might well qualify as trolling. At least in my book. For example, here we have someone with plenty of experience who says the exact opposite of what you want him to say: http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20020901.htm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm not "trolling." I was accused of the same thing on the thread querying the importance of amps, where I dared to suggest that they weren't in fact especially important at all. I know it's off topic on this thread but the other one got closed down before I got a chance to reply to some of the posts. FYI I did not agree with the way the other guy, vai77, went off on one in that thread and I certainly don't agree with his view that you can hear a difference between CD files and lossless audio files. My point is that I find it surprising, to say the least, that so many people on here take it as given that amps have a large impact on sound quality, when both measurements and double-blind tests suggest that they have little if any impact. Maybe it's because I'm quite new to the forum and don't really have a sense of the prevailing "orthodoxies" on here. I was also extremely surprised to hear people suggest that subjective listening experience was a better guide to whether or not there is a difference between amps than either measuring instruments or DBTs. Given the prevalence of what I'd describe as "strange" claims, I can't help but feel that people in the audio industry may have been spreading views which they know full well to be false (not necessarily on this forum). Of course, if everyone here is quite happy to go out and buy their uber-expensive amps, and feels that these amps really do make a difference, then fine. It's really none of my business. But this is a large forum and unsuspecting people coming on here will use it as a source of information - I think that brings a responsibility to show at least a semblance of balance in what's posted. EG not making spurious claims like "everyone in the know believes amps make a massive difference" - as I understand, the majority of people with relevant technical expertise most certainly do not believe this. FYI even a cynic like me makes some concession to the placebo effect. I found a double-blind test which proved (listening on Sennheiser Orpheus) that even the most sophisticated listeners couldn't tell CD from 256kbps MP3. But I rip to lossless anyway - just in case!.

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think you're missing the point a bit. The issue isn't whether there's a difference between amped and unamped. The issue is whether different amps of reasonable quality sound the same.

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif Lots of people saying they can hear differences. I'd be interested to know what controlled tests you've all conducted. I was criticised on the other thread for relying on DBTs without conducting my own. The reason I don't is that it would be far too time consuming and I doubt I'd be able to do it properly. I'd have to ensure both amps are playing at an equal volume - and I wouldn't be able to do this properly. All of you who claim major differences between amps - are you creating proper test conditions when you compare the amps (eg ensuring they are playing at equal volume) - or are you simply pulling the lead out of one amp and plugging it into the next one?

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif You didn't answer the question - are you controlling your test properly, or are you being sloppy about it - simply unplugging and replugging? If you aren't controlling for differences in volume, it's hardly a proper test and it would be completely unsurprising if you did hear a difference. "allmost all will agree that those three have large differences between the different sources, amps, and headphones" Almost all will agree about headphones but they most certainly will not agree about amps or sources. Your claim is simply untrue. See e.g.: http://bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf http://www.mastersonaudio.com/audio/20020901.htm http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/ampin...o/subjectv.htm (go to section 2) "Amp differences are quite easy to spot once you get an ear for them." If this were true, people would be able to "spot" the differences in double-blind tests. But I've found four double-blind amp tests on the internet and nobody has been able to pick out a difference in any of them. Of course, those tests were properly controlled for things like volume (two amps always kept within 1dB of each other). I'm not convinced that people claiming major differences have taken a comparably rigorous approach to their listening..

I don't want to pick on this member, but I thought I'd weigh in as moderator and discuss for a moment what is "wrong" with these and similar posts by others.

First of all, there are some basic rules that govern how we do things around here:

One of them concerns what we colloquially call "thread crapping". Thread crapping occurs when a member (typically with an angenda) intentionally takes a thread off-topic (often at any opportunity). This thread is entitled "Best amp for the AKG701". That assumes a few things - most obvious, that the issue of whether or not an amp is desired is not in fact an issue.

Another concerns the discussion of double-blind testing, which is not permitted on this site. This is not because the average member here is "afraid" of such a discussion. In point of fact, it's because it's the closest thing we have in audio to a discussion of religion or politics. Ultimately, threads which discuss stuff like this come down to annoying tete a tete's between opposing camps of true believers, and the thread ends up getting locked.

Personally, I find all zealots to be annoying...but there's something about the objectivist who visits a thread on a mission to inform all us rubes that it's all in our heads that is particularly annoying.

Finally, there is as always the question of the tone of the thread-crapping, DBT discussing member. Take, for example, the first post of member John_M in this thread:

Quote:

Originally Posted by John_M /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ugh. Why are people still uncritically accepting that amps make a difference to sound quality? This is a highly contentious claim but you'd never realise it to read some of these threads...

Now, forgetting for a moment that we don't like DBT discussions (and the firestorm that they invariably ignite) in general around here. The tone of this post suggests that people are fools for being so uncritially accepting of such a highly contentious subject as whether amps are needed or whether there is a difference in sound quality between amps. The "but you'd never realise it" line implies that there is some kind of brainwashing or malicious group-think that accounts for such absurdity, and that it's the job of the smarter and more educated and enlightened member to rescue us from ourselves.

It's tiresome when a new member shows up and tries to establish that he's smarter than the membership in general here. A membership that invests a lot of money, to be sure, but more importantly a lot of TIME in determining what the differences are between certain components in the chain. A certain respect for that investment and the resulting opinion is IMHO in order, the absence of which implies disrespect. Whether that is this member's intent or not, I don't know...but that's the end result, and one could reasonably conclude that from his initial post in this thread.

To wit, he OP might have responded something like this: "Because I've heard the difference repeatedly, and I don't necessarily take as gospel the word of folks (who may or may not have an agenda) whose background in high end audio I don't know, and whose opinions I therefore don't trust. I've invested a lot of time into this, as have people whose opinions I trust. That's why my thread isn't titled "do I need an amp or not".

For the record, I happen to feel like there is less difference between amps than, for example, headphones and sources...and more difference than with interconnects. Based on my own extensive listening tests, some of which actually includes AB testing, I've reached this conclusion. I don't need a member who apparently can't be bothered to fill out a profile, who has few posts (most of which are apparently strings of arguments about the same issue) ON EITHER SIDE ON AN ISSUE to explain to me what a fool I am to have reached this conclusion.

That, in essence, is what is wrong with this kind of posting. I'd like to see a lot less of it. Thank you for your time and consideration when reading this post.