Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Audio Science Review of Expert 200.
(17-Apr-2020, 12:06)ssfas Wrote: I think Devialet's problem with Expert, and I think Alan Sircom said so when he reviewed the 140, is that most people who want one will have bought one by now.
.

This was brought up in the ASR review with people complaining that it's an "old model".
Comments like "why would anyone buy one now, the Expert Pro line is so much better" etc ect

To be honest I find those comments elitist and condescending. I bought my 120 because that was all I could afford and even then I got it at a discount. I'd love to have an Expert Pro but I don't have the means to afford one.

It comes across as rude and arrogant when people effectively say "who cares about how the expert line measures, only idiots would buy that model anyway"
Reply
It's all good that you like the product that you purchased @ssfas. Enjoy!

I wouldn't like this thread to become objective vs subjective debate since it's quite pointless as we have seen in many other forums. I'm sure most of us agree that Devialet Expert sounds and looks just fine (subjective evaluation).

I'm still concerned about the measurements done by ASR (that is one of the main subjects of this thread, right?).
Bluesound Node > Matrix Audio X-SPDIF 2 > Genelec 8351B & 7360A
Devialet 1000 Pro
Bluesound Node 2i > Genelec 8330
Tampere, Finland
Reply
(17-Apr-2020, 13:24)petrik Wrote: It's all good that you like the product that you purchased @ssfas. Enjoy!

I wouldn't like this thread to become objective vs subjective debate since it's quite pointless as we have seen in many other forums. I'm sure most of us agree that Devialet Expert sounds and looks just fine (subjective evaluation).

I'm still concerned about the measurements done by ASR (that is one of the main subjects of this thread, right?).
When ASR carries out his own subjective, imperfect tests using potentially defective equipment with no prior authorisation or participation by Devialet and prints his findings as authoritative then ASR deserves no credibility at all.
Devialet 1000 Pro CI, Chord Signature Reference speaker cables, B&W 803 D3 speakers

Roon lifetime licence, Tidal.
Reply
(17-Apr-2020, 13:24)petrik Wrote: It's all good that you like the product that you purchased @ssfas. Enjoy!

I wouldn't like this thread to become objective vs subjective debate since it's quite pointless as we have seen in many other forums. I'm sure most of us agree that Devialet Expert sounds and looks just fine (subjective evaluation).

I'm still concerned about the measurements done by ASR (that is one of the main subjects of this thread, right?).
When ASR carries out his own subjective, imperfect tests using potentially defective equipment with no prior authorisation or participation by Devialet and prints his findings as authoritative then ASR deserves no credibility at all.
Devialet 1000 Pro CI, Chord Signature Reference speaker cables, B&W 803 D3 speakers

Roon lifetime licence, Tidal.
Reply
(17-Apr-2020, 15:30)Gerronwithit Wrote:
(17-Apr-2020, 13:24)petrik Wrote: It's all good that you like the product that you purchased @ssfas. Enjoy!

I wouldn't like this thread to become objective vs subjective debate since it's quite pointless as we have seen in many other forums. I'm sure most of us agree that Devialet Expert sounds and looks just fine (subjective evaluation).

I'm still concerned about the measurements done by ASR (that is one of the main subjects of this thread, right?).
When ASR carries out his own subjective, imperfect tests using potentially defective equipment with no prior authorisation or participation by Devialet and prints his findings as authoritative then ASR deserves no credibility at all.

Yes I agree if ASR would be the only one getting these results. But we have seen quite similar measurement results on the Stereophile and Miller Audio Research. Are you suggesting that all of them are not capable of measuring the Devialet Expert properly? That can be of course possible.
Bluesound Node > Matrix Audio X-SPDIF 2 > Genelec 8351B & 7360A
Devialet 1000 Pro
Bluesound Node 2i > Genelec 8330
Tampere, Finland
Reply
(16-Apr-2020, 02:55)ssfas Wrote:
(10-Apr-2020, 22:05)Greg Wrote:
(10-Apr-2020, 13:51)PeppaPig Wrote: Hi Confused,

I am not really getting why the measurement of analog input is noisy. I have a turntable connected to my 1000 Pro, no matter the MM cartridge I used before or the currentC cartridge. Both is very very quite, friend came to my house listen to it are surprised Vinly can be this clean. The Devialet background is like black black black, it’s one of the thing it surprised me. So I don’t know what those measurements reflected in real world listening.
Well, the clue is Confused has referred to low output MC cartridges which many of us use and have found with appropriate settings within the configurator,  the system sounds noisy, in particular hiss. I have no doubt that any MM cartridge will sound just fine with the configurator appropriately set. Those of us with low output MC cartridges have generally reverted to the addition of external step up transformers or a separate dedicated MC phono stage, as I have done. This issue has been communicated to Devialet and Matthew Pernot has personally looked at the problem and has concluded that the level of noise is acceptable. That is nonsense because users are troubled by the noise. As said, (considering the refusal to accept there is a noise issue) most of us in this situation have found our own solutions. I don’t blame Devialet for this because I realise how hard it is to create a noise free low output MC stage particularly when the amp has everything crammed into such a small space when low output MC cartridges benefit from expanded low noise construction requiring components in the phono amplifier section to be well spaced........not possible in a Devialet chassis. 

So, a separate MC phono amplifier absolutely works for me. My two gripes are 1, why can’t Devialet publicly recognise the problem and either acknowledge that they can’t fix it or better, do something that does fix it. My 2nd is I’m a bit pissed that I have to accommodate the space of a separate MC phono stage when one of my main drivers for going full Devialet was that I would have a simple one box system. Unfortunately, it seems that’s not going to happen. Otherwise, the sound of my 250 Pro C/I is magnificent!

I also have a 250 Pro CI and was using an Urushi 0.2mv and a high output MM 2m Mono. I did not find the Urushi dead quiet, but still very good and perfectly satisfactory for 3 years. I am now using it with an external phono, the Vertere Mk2 unit, it's excellent and very cheap. 

I now have a high output (2.3mv I think) SoundSmith Zephyr Mk3. This is a moving iron unit with a very light cantilever. It's extremely impressive and dead quiet direct into the Devialet.

A chap I know has after many years gone to an external Brinkmann phono amp on a 220 Pro (formerly a 200).
Also I have Soundsmith Zephyr Mk3 with D1000 Pro CI. Sounds excellent!
Reply
(17-Apr-2020, 13:22)whatmore Wrote:
(17-Apr-2020, 12:06)ssfas Wrote: I think Devialet's problem with Expert, and I think Alan Sircom said so when he reviewed the 140, is that most people who want one will have bought one by now.
.

This was brought up in the ASR review with people complaining that it's an "old model".
Comments like "why would anyone buy one now, the Expert Pro line is so much better" etc ect

To be honest I find those comments elitist and condescending. I bought my 120 because that was all I could afford and even then I got it at a discount. I'd love to have an Expert Pro but I don't have the means to afford one.

It comes across as rude and arrogant when people effectively say "who cares about how the expert line measures, only idiots would buy that model anyway"
I was in a similar situation and was fortunate to get a unit at a discount. Things have changed in recent years because Expert prices have come down and the 140 offers terrific value. If I was in the market now I'd probably go for that. It's £4,500 in the UK and I've seen a dealer selling one for £3,750. 

The merits of older models would seem to me to be dependent on what sources you use. Core Infinity is very good, but when I was using my unit before upgrading it I was perfectly happy with a £350 external Aries streamer connected by usb.

The first unit I heard was a D-Premier and that was impressive. 

Lots of consumer electronic products are updated annually when the previous models are perfectly good and offer bargains. I've taken advantage that with a Sony camera, iPads and some audio equipment as well. Before streaming arrived my audio system was totally unchanged for 12 years.
250 Pro CI; Innuos Zen Mk3; Claro dual turntable (Expert Stylus Denon + OL Aladdin Mk2); RCM Sensor2; Wilson Sabrina; OePhi speaker cables; Puritan PM156 conditioner and Ultimate cables.
Reply
I am actually grateful to the good people of ASR, believe it or not.  I like measurements and data, and enjoy thinking about the technical aspects of audio kit, as well as actually listening to it.  I see no conflict here, I enjoy both.  I have said before that I love the concept of ASR, but I am a little troubled by some apparent biases and some of the posting there is a little thoughtless.  But this is the internet, and I do note that in between some of the more gleeful Devialet bashing, there is some interesting, technical and considered posting going on.  OK,  I wish Amir could be a bit more considered in his approach, but I have enjoyed a bit of forum watching, and I genuinely appreciate how the ASR article has pushed some Devialet related technical issues into the spotlight.  If nothing else, it has introduced me the wonderful world of Paul Miller’s AVtech measurement site.  So maybe I would prefer a slightly different ASR, but in the absence of that I would rather we have the ASR that we have in the world rather than none at all.
  
There are some that consider measurements to be definitive.  Subjective observations are terrible things, inconsistent, unreliable.  But a measurement is definitive, repeatable.  If product X measures better than product Y, then product X is better.  Oh, and if you think product Y sounds good, that it has excellent sound quality, well good for you, but you probably just like the sound of the distortions.  You could even throw in an insult for good measure.  (accidental pun)  Oh, you think product Y sounds good?  Did your wife tell you that when she walked in from the kitchen?

Some typical “objectivist” words and thinking above, but one thing that has fascinated me recently is how the language surrounding the measurements seems to have far more power than the objective measurements themselves.  This can be seen everywhere surrounding ASR review, the ASR posting and posts here.
Consider the first part of the ASR review.  It starts with “Distortion products are quite low at < -110 dB. However, the noise floor is high in low frequencies causing our SINAD to suffer a lot, ending with a metric of 92 dB. This is well above average compared to all the amplifiers we have measured but way short of state-of-the-art:” later it states: “There are some lofty numbers like -130 dB noise floor is thrown around by Devialet. I am not sure how that is computed. Using analog Line-in for consistency with other amplifier measurements we get rather ordinary numbers:”

Interestingly, the numbers are very similar to that made by Paul Miller for the HFN review, although Paul’s amp did not fail during testing and he proceeded to measuring via the digital input, which offered even less noise and generally better measurements elsewhere.  The comments in the HFN measurements side bar stated  “The vast majority of users will, I presume, engage with the amp digitally either via USB or wired/Wi-Fi network, in which case a 0dBFs input realises exactly 100W/8ohm and 200W/4ohm at the ‘0.0dB’ position (both at 0.0007% THD). Via the analogue input this increases to 120W/8ohm and 240W/4ohm, the near perfect ‘stiffness’ of the power supply reflected in the 115W, 230W and 450W delivered under dynamic conditions into 8, 4 and 2ohm loads. Note also how distortion barely increases with reducing load impedance [see Graph 1]. Couple this with the infinitesimally low 0.003ohm (3mohm) output impedance and, provided you don’t use scrawny cables, the 170 will rule your loudspeakers with the proverbial rod of iron. Through bass and mid frequencies, ‘digital’ distortion is half that for the analogue input, the former achieving 0.0005% as opposed to ~0.001% for the same 1kHz/10W/8ohm output. The opposite occurs at very high frequencies where the line input reaches 0.006%/20kHz and the digital inputs, regardless of sample rate, increase to 0.017% (10W/8ohm). The A-wtd S/N ratio is fabulously wide at 93dB and 98dB re. 0dBW (analogue/ digital) or 118dB re. 100W/8ohm while the response(s) are fl at to +0.14dB/20kHz, –0.6dB/45kHz and –1.6dB/85kHz (48kHz, 96kHz and 192kHz media).”

The same measurements are there, but ASR thrusts the bad at you, the HFN text is so bland that nothing really grabs your attention, but similar measurements are there.  It is perhaps also worth noting that the HFN article ends with a “sound quality” score of 91%.  I have no idea how this number is established, but as a regular reader of HFN I know that scores of over 90% are VERY rare.  ASR state that using the analog input provides consistency with tests of other amplifiers, HFN state that it is assumes that most will use the amp via digital input, both valid points, but placing the emphasis in different directions.

Same numbers, different language, and we being human react accordingly.
It is the same story with the frequency sweep test.  Despite the fact that the amp failed during this test, ASR are happy to state “Turns out this amplifier cannot reproduce high frequencies reliably at 5 watts!”.

Thanks to this, a number of us have started thinking about this, posting, asking questions and speculating as to why a Devialet Expert happens to have restricted power at high frequencies.  Yet, this information has been in the public domain for well over a decade, with Stereophile reporting “By contrast, the D-Premier, given a mix of 19 and 20kHz tones at a peak level of 20W into 4 ohms (the highest level the amplifier would deliver with this signal without the power supply collapsing), performed well on this test (fig.9).”

This is a classic case of hiding in plain sight.  I have read the Stereophile review, I have read the above comment, and thought nothing of it.  Again, a bland statement that goes unnoticed, but when ASR thrust it in your face, we start thinking…  Think about this, that statement has been out there for maybe 12 years now, and nobody has cared.  I guess if nothing else this demonstrates that it genuinely does not matter.  I have never heard of anyone complaining that their D-Premier kept shutting down, but it is fascinating how the words, not the measurements get our attention.

Thinking about how words can influence something as objective as a measurement, I thought I would have a go at it myself.  In terms of amplifiers, the ASR measurement king at the moment is the Benchmark AHB2.  Stereophile have also measured this amp, and no doubt it displays incredibly good performance, truly state of the art, for a product that is not overly expensive by “high end” audio standards.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/benc...-amplifier

Some ASR contributors have noted that you could buy an AHB2 based system for a lot less money than a Devialet.  Seems a fair point to me, state of the art measurements, good price, why not?

Then we have that pesky subjective thing.  Some of the subjective comments for the AHB2 have been a bit mixed.  OK – objectively you could say that maybe it is just that some week minded folk who subjectively do not like the sound of the objectively measured superiority of the AHB2.  They actually like the distortions other amps make.  This might even be true.  To be honest, I cannot judge, I haven’t heard one myself.  (I would love to listen to the AHB2, BTW – If someone wants to lend me a couple)

But maybe it is not true, maybe there is an objective reason a Devialet could sound better?  Here goes, true objective measurements coupled with made up by me in your face language.

It is no wonder that the AHB2 sounds dreadful in comparison to a Devialet, OK the AHB2 has fractionally lower noise and distortion, but at the kind of levels we are talking about here any notion that you could “subjectively” hear this as “better” is for the fairies.  What really matters in terms of amplifier performance is the low output impedance, this any idiot could clearly hear in terms of accuracy and transparency in terms of how your amp is controlling your speakers.  And look at the numbers, these don’t lie.  The Devialet has a measured output impedance of 0.001–0.004ohm, this is state of the art.  The Benchamark measures 0.034–0.17ohm, this is an order of magnitude worse!  No wonder the Devialet crushes it for performance.

OK – The above text is something I have made up for a bit of fun.  As I said, I have not listened to an AHB2.  Who knows, if I did I might imediately sell my Devialet and swap.  Or maybe not.  The measurements in the text above are real, taken from Paul Miller’s AVtech, and the Devialet is the better of the two.  I was chatting to someone once who works for a speaker manufacturer, the topic was that I subjectively thought that the Devialet was just about the best amp I have heard in terms of bass depth and resolution.  The speaker guy suggested that low output impedance is the key here, it gives the amp better control over the speaker drivers.  And what about other things, slew rates, input impedance, transient response?
So there might be something in my words above.  There is a recent thread on Audiophile Style:

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic.../#comments

Some interesting posts in the many pages, but it strikes me that although the industry, magazines etc. are very good at taking measurements, we do not really have much of a clue what they mean for sound quality.  As an example, we can look at the noise level of a Devialet via analogue versus digital input, and the differences are clear, and yet run an external DAC into a Devialet via the digital inputs, it sounds dead quiet.  But how is it affecting the sound?  I know mine sounds a lot sharper, clearer and more detailed running digitally rather than fed via my AVR.  But what about slew rate, jitter, input and output impedance?  I love measurements, data and all the rest of it, but I would need to listen as well to have any degree of confidence as to what it means.  But one thing has become very clear to me, the language and words surrounding these little measurement numbers have huge power and influence over many of us, and I would have to include myself in that.

One irony in all this was that some people on this forum we a little disappointed the read that Devialet’s Mathieu Pernot uses measurements during product development, rather than listening.  I recall him saying something along the lines of “the measurements are the same first thing Monday morning as last thing Friday night”, implying that subjective hearing will vary, measurements not.  It is hard to disagree with this notion.  This makes me wonder just how well Mathieu might understand what measurements actually matter, in terms of actual delivered sound quality.  I have no idea, but my subjective view of the Devialet hints that he might actually be rather good at this.  In terms of R&D, there must be compromises between aspects of design, do you optimise what really matters to sound quality or what gives great headline numbers?  A fascinating topic, but one I can only guess at.

So what of Devialet?  Now we have the calls for them to explain why an Expert can only deliver 20W or whatever at high frequencies.  I might be wrong, but I suspect Thumb5 is along the right lines when he suggests this could be an inherent limitation of how ADH works, and that it does not matter one iota in terms of actual performance delivering music.

Do I expect Devialet to respond and clearly explain all this?  OK – If Devialet respond directly stating something like “yes, it is an inherent aspect of ADH, they can only produce 20W at 20kHz”, then I would be so surprised I would gladly eat my remote.  If they do respond, I would expect something more along the lines of “The ADH system is not like conventional amplifiers and it includes sophisticated protection mechanisms that can react to the input signal both dynamically and in relation to frequency response, for this reason the amplifier does place some restrictions on frequency sweep type measurements that are of zero significance in normal use.”  As for the other measurements that Devialet quote, you can find more or less equivalent numbers in the Paul Miller tests, but you have to be selective, and the Devialet quoted numbers are typically absent of the associated qualifying factors, so they can relate to “selective” measurements.  A manufacturer selectively quoting numbers to make the product look as good as possible?  It has been seen before.  

One thing to keep in mind, the numbers measured independently by Paul Miller are good – and hey – it scores 91% for sound quality.  We should all try to keep in mind that we should accept the measurements for what they are and what they mean, and if we are interested maybe we should try to understand better what they mean.  Reacting to possibly inflammatory language that may surround these measurements can lead us astray, and remember, these words can have real power.

Anyway, I have surprised myself by how much I have written here.  Time to listen to my little Devialet for a while, whilst we all wait for Devialet to respond to all this.
1000 Pro - KEF Blade - iFi Zen Stream - Mutec REF10 - MC3+USB - Pro-Ject Signature 12
Reply
(18-Apr-2020, 10:51)Confused Wrote: I am actually grateful to the good people of ASR, believe it or not.  I like measurements and data, and enjoy thinking about the technical aspects of audio kit, as well as actually listening to it.  I see no conflict here, I enjoy both.  I have said before that I love the concept of ASR, but I am a little troubled by some apparent biases and some of the posting there is a little thoughtless.  But this is the internet, and I do note that in between some of the more gleeful Devialet bashing, there is some interesting, technical and considered posting going on.  OK,  I wish Amir could be a bit more considered in his approach, but I have enjoyed a bit of forum watching, and I genuinely appreciate how the ASR article has pushed some Devialet related technical issues into the spotlight.  If nothing else, it has introduced me the wonderful world of Paul Miller’s AVtech measurement site.  So maybe I would prefer a slightly different ASR, but in the absence of that I would rather we have the ASR that we have in the world rather than none at all.
  
There are some that consider measurements to be definitive.  Subjective observations are terrible things, inconsistent, unreliable.  But a measurement is definitive, repeatable.  If product X measures better than product Y, then product X is better.  Oh, and if you think product Y sounds good, that it has excellent sound quality, well good for you, but you probably just like the sound of the distortions.  You could even throw in an insult for good measure.  (accidental pun)  Oh, you think product Y sounds good?  Did your wife tell you that when she walked in from the kitchen?

Some typical “objectivist” words and thinking above, but one thing that has fascinated me recently is how the language surrounding the measurements seems to have far more power than the objective measurements themselves.  This can be seen everywhere surrounding ASR review, the ASR posting and posts here.
Consider the first part of the ASR review.  It starts with “Distortion products are quite low at < -110 dB. However, the noise floor is high in low frequencies causing our SINAD to suffer a lot, ending with a metric of 92 dB. This is well above average compared to all the amplifiers we have measured but way short of state-of-the-art:” later it states: “There are some lofty numbers like -130 dB noise floor is thrown around by Devialet. I am not sure how that is computed. Using analog Line-in for consistency with other amplifier measurements we get rather ordinary numbers:”

Interestingly, the numbers are very similar to that made by Paul Miller for the HFN review, although Paul’s amp did not fail during testing and he proceeded to measuring via the digital input, which offered even less noise and generally better measurements elsewhere.  The comments in the HFN measurements side bar stated  “The vast majority of users will, I presume, engage with the amp digitally either via USB or wired/Wi-Fi network, in which case a 0dBFs input realises exactly 100W/8ohm and 200W/4ohm at the ‘0.0dB’ position (both at 0.0007% THD). Via the analogue input this increases to 120W/8ohm and 240W/4ohm, the near perfect ‘stiffness’ of the power supply reflected in the 115W, 230W and 450W delivered under dynamic conditions into 8, 4 and 2ohm loads. Note also how distortion barely increases with reducing load impedance [see Graph 1]. Couple this with the infinitesimally low 0.003ohm (3mohm) output impedance and, provided you don’t use scrawny cables, the 170 will rule your loudspeakers with the proverbial rod of iron. Through bass and mid frequencies, ‘digital’ distortion is half that for the analogue input, the former achieving 0.0005% as opposed to ~0.001% for the same 1kHz/10W/8ohm output. The opposite occurs at very high frequencies where the line input reaches 0.006%/20kHz and the digital inputs, regardless of sample rate, increase to 0.017% (10W/8ohm). The A-wtd S/N ratio is fabulously wide at 93dB and 98dB re. 0dBW (analogue/ digital) or 118dB re. 100W/8ohm while the response(s) are fl at to +0.14dB/20kHz, –0.6dB/45kHz and –1.6dB/85kHz (48kHz, 96kHz and 192kHz media).”

The same measurements are there, but ASR thrusts the bad at you, the HFN text is so bland that nothing really grabs your attention, but similar measurements are there.  It is perhaps also worth noting that the HFN article ends with a “sound quality” score of 91%.  I have no idea how this number is established, but as a regular reader of HFN I know that scores of over 90% are VERY rare.  ASR state that using the analog input provides consistency with tests of other amplifiers, HFN state that it is assumes that most will use the amp via digital input, both valid points, but placing the emphasis in different directions.

Same numbers, different language, and we being human react accordingly.
It is the same story with the frequency sweep test.  Despite the fact that the amp failed during this test, ASR are happy to state “Turns out this amplifier cannot reproduce high frequencies reliably at 5 watts!”.

Thanks to this, a number of us have started thinking about this, posting, asking questions and speculating as to why a Devialet Expert happens to have restricted power at high frequencies.  Yet, this information has been in the public domain for well over a decade, with Stereophile reporting “By contrast, the D-Premier, given a mix of 19 and 20kHz tones at a peak level of 20W into 4 ohms (the highest level the amplifier would deliver with this signal without the power supply collapsing), performed well on this test (fig.9).”

This is a classic case of hiding in plain sight.  I have read the Stereophile review, I have read the above comment, and thought nothing of it.  Again, a bland statement that goes unnoticed, but when ASR thrust it in your face, we start thinking…  Think about this, that statement has been out there for maybe 12 years now, and nobody has cared.  I guess if nothing else this demonstrates that it genuinely does not matter.  I have never heard of anyone complaining that their D-Premier kept shutting down, but it is fascinating how the words, not the measurements get our attention.

Thinking about how words can influence something as objective as a measurement, I thought I would have a go at it myself.  In terms of amplifiers, the ASR measurement king at the moment is the Benchmark AHB2.  Stereophile have also measured this amp, and no doubt it displays incredibly good performance, truly state of the art, for a product that is not overly expensive by “high end” audio standards.

https://www.stereophile.com/content/benc...-amplifier

Some ASR contributors have noted that you could buy an AHB2 based system for a lot less money than a Devialet.  Seems a fair point to me, state of the art measurements, good price, why not?

Then we have that pesky subjective thing.  Some of the subjective comments for the AHB2 have been a bit mixed.  OK – objectively you could say that maybe it is just that some week minded folk who subjectively do not like the sound of the objectively measured superiority of the AHB2.  They actually like the distortions other amps make.  This might even be true.  To be honest, I cannot judge, I haven’t heard one myself.  (I would love to listen to the AHB2, BTW – If someone wants to lend me a couple)

But maybe it is not true, maybe there is an objective reason a Devialet could sound better?  Here goes, true objective measurements coupled with made up by me in your face language.

It is no wonder that the AHB2 sounds dreadful in comparison to a Devialet, OK the AHB2 has fractionally lower noise and distortion, but at the kind of levels we are talking about here any notion that you could “subjectively” hear this as “better” is for the fairies.  What really matters in terms of amplifier performance is the low output impedance, this any idiot could clearly hear in terms of accuracy and transparency in terms of how your amp is controlling your speakers.  And look at the numbers, these don’t lie.  The Devialet has a measured output impedance of 0.001–0.004ohm, this is state of the art.  The Benchamark measures 0.034–0.17ohm, this is an order of magnitude worse!  No wonder the Devialet crushes it for performance.

OK – The above text is something I have made up for a bit of fun.  As I said, I have not listened to an AHB2.  Who knows, if I did I might imediately sell my Devialet and swap.  Or maybe not.  The measurements in the text above are real, taken from Paul Miller’s AVtech, and the Devialet is the better of the two.  I was chatting to someone once who works for a speaker manufacturer, the topic was that I subjectively thought that the Devialet was just about the best amp I have heard in terms of bass depth and resolution.  The speaker guy suggested that low output impedance is the key here, it gives the amp better control over the speaker drivers.  And what about other things, slew rates, input impedance, transient response?
So there might be something in my words above.  There is a recent thread on Audiophile Style:

https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/topic.../#comments

Some interesting posts in the many pages, but it strikes me that although the industry, magazines etc. are very good at taking measurements, we do not really have much of a clue what they mean for sound quality.  As an example, we can look at the noise level of a Devialet via analogue versus digital input, and the differences are clear, and yet run an external DAC into a Devialet via the digital inputs, it sounds dead quiet.  But how is it affecting the sound?  I know mine sounds a lot sharper, clearer and more detailed running digitally rather than fed via my AVR.  But what about slew rate, jitter, input and output impedance?  I love measurements, data and all the rest of it, but I would need to listen as well to have any degree of confidence as to what it means.  But one thing has become very clear to me, the language and words surrounding these little measurement numbers have huge power and influence over many of us, and I would have to include myself in that.

One irony in all this was that some people on this forum we a little disappointed the read that Devialet’s Mathieu Pernot uses measurements during product development, rather than listening.  I recall him saying something along the lines of “the measurements are the same first thing Monday morning as last thing Friday night”, implying that subjective hearing will vary, measurements not.  It is hard to disagree with this notion.  This makes me wonder just how well Mathieu might understand what measurements actually matter, in terms of actual delivered sound quality.  I have no idea, but my subjective view of the Devialet hints that he might actually be rather good at this.  In terms of R&D, there must be compromises between aspects of design, do you optimise what really matters to sound quality or what gives great headline numbers?  A fascinating topic, but one I can only guess at.

So what of Devialet?  Now we have the calls for them to explain why an Expert can only deliver 20W or whatever at high frequencies.  I might be wrong, but I suspect Thumb5 is along the right lines when he suggests this could be an inherent limitation of how ADH works, and that it does not matter one iota in terms of actual performance delivering music.

Do I expect Devialet to respond and clearly explain all this?  OK – If Devialet respond directly stating something like “yes, it is an inherent aspect of ADH, they can only produce 20W at 20kHz”, then I would be so surprised I would gladly eat my remote.  If they do respond, I would expect something more along the lines of “The ADH system is not like conventional amplifiers and it includes sophisticated protection mechanisms that can react to the input signal both dynamically and in relation to frequency response, for this reason the amplifier does place some restrictions on frequency sweep type measurements that are of zero significance in normal use.”  As for the other measurements that Devialet quote, you can find more or less equivalent numbers in the Paul Miller tests, but you have to be selective, and the Devialet quoted numbers are typically absent of the associated qualifying factors, so they can relate to “selective” measurements.  A manufacturer selectively quoting numbers to make the product look as good as possible?  It has been seen before.  

One thing to keep in mind, the numbers measured independently by Paul Miller are good – and hey – it scores 91% for sound quality.  We should all try to keep in mind that we should accept the measurements for what they are and what they mean, and if we are interested maybe we should try to understand better what they mean.  Reacting to possibly inflammatory language that may surround these measurements can lead us astray, and remember, these words can have real power.

Anyway, I have surprised myself by how much I have written here.  Time to listen to my little Devialet for a while, whilst we all wait for Devialet to respond to all this.
Phew, that was a long one! If I decided to break down all the components that make up my BMW and subjected each one to varying subjective or objective tests would that colour my perception or otherwise of the whole car. The appreciation lies with the complete package.

I know that engineers and scientists have performed all sorts of tests and analysis on the materials that make up the components that make up the complete package, such as the engine, the gear box, the differential, the brakes etc. etc. and if a charlatan like Asrim, or whatever he is called, does some sort of pseudo scientific analysis on a failed machine I would absolutely disregard his so called critique. If Devialet do not deliver a reliable complete product we paid for they will pay for it in the market place.
Devialet 1000 Pro CI, Chord Signature Reference speaker cables, B&W 803 D3 speakers

Roon lifetime licence, Tidal.
Reply
(18-Apr-2020, 10:51)Confused Wrote: I am actually grateful to the good people of ASR, believe it or not.  I like ...
That you for taking the time for writing such an excellent post. 

Having been rapidly banned by ASR, then others after me, I asked the moderator where I could find on ASR an explanation of how the measurements might in combination be used to get an understanding of likely performance. I was pointed to a thread that was no use at all.

I think I mentioned there, or possibly here, that the Expert is essentially a digital input device and RCA is going be used for phono most of the time so a little higher distortion is completely irrelevant even in the context of the best phono sources. You made the point well, but such user reasoning falls outside the ASR mindset.

The thing that struck me when I bought my unit, and I compared a Quad, Le 250 and 250 Pro, was the transient speed. That may well be a factor of the power supply and output impedance. Yes, 100% a subjective observation, but it was so blatantly obvious because it makes music sound that much more realistic. And, yes, the wife would have noticed from the kitchen. 

I appreciate their standpoint, but it is not for me, just as I appreciate the lovers of valve amplifiers that improve subjective sound with distortion. For some fun I once emulated a valve amplifier with a typical response curve using Roon.

What is objectionable is their view that only measurements count and that if anyone who forms subjective options is an audiophile, when is clearly considered the worst of all personal insults. This is premised on the assumption that EVERYTHING can be measured. The only certainty about stating an absolute scientific truth is that ultimately you will be proven wrong. Ask Newton, Einstein, ...
250 Pro CI; Innuos Zen Mk3; Claro dual turntable (Expert Stylus Denon + OL Aladdin Mk2); RCM Sensor2; Wilson Sabrina; OePhi speaker cables; Puritan PM156 conditioner and Ultimate cables.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)