But it can be bypassed with a switch for fixed gain.No, it is variable gain from 8,5 db to 28,5db, looks like potentiometer is used there. So there might be some channel imbalance in different gain settings. I am sure I am nitpicking here.
But it can be bypassed with a switch for fixed gain.No, it is variable gain from 8,5 db to 28,5db, looks like potentiometer is used there. So there might be some channel imbalance in different gain settings. I am sure I am nitpicking here.
True, but input sensitivity will be 1,43v which is not a good match with 4,2v from my dac that I used as a preamp - could hear hissing from the speakers from 0,5mBut it can be bypassed with a switch for fixed gain.
Channel imbalance would not affect the decay of notes.No, it is variable gain from 8,5 db to 28,5db, looks like potentiometer is used there. So there might be some channel imbalance in different gain settings. I am sure I am nitpicking here.
Channel imbalance would not
Not sure that investigation of the reasons for what I heard is needed since it was not a proper blind test or even an a/b comparison with matched volume. Could have been just my bias or mood during that period. It was my purely subjective opinion.Channel imbalance would not affect the decay of notes.
6 years! Nice. I'm still unsure if I go separates for my 2ch listening or with an all in one like the NAD M33. That's been favorably tested and has a lot of customers who attest to its reliability. (Yes, before we get sidetracked, I am aware there are some who are very vocal about "NAD QC issues" and would take issue with my statement.) I'd most likely pair the M23 with an M66 (if it ever gets released) and Perlisten S7t. My longing for a multichannel/Atmos theater died with going to movies and buying physical media. (Besides, nobody but me appreciates the rumble of "Edge of Tomorrow" or the overhead sounds in "Pearl Harbor". They do however, love the nostalgia of putting on a record from the 60s/70s and enjoying the crackles over drinks.) The fact I get the best of both worlds (ease of HDMI w/fantastic audio reproduction) while watching my Judge Judy is a bonus.Wow, impressive how one word can lead to 2 pages of discussions.
Anyway, going back to Nad M23, i got tempted by the price for a demo unit and bought it for my second system to drive Dynaudio Evoke 20. Kef r5 are still not sold, tried with those too and m23 sounds great with both.
I will just say it sounds transparent and will reserve extensive comparisons with c298 i also had to myself. I can just say that based on the measurements alone m23 has the best power supply of all the Purifi and Hypex class d versions. Also multitone is as good as that of topping d90 se dac! Most here will say it does not matter and not audible and I will not argue since I no longer have c298 or Boxem or Nilai to compare. I can say that I sold c298 because i felt it lacked decay of notes. Was my perception biased? Perhaps, but I was quite curious to discover after selling c298 that multiple reviewers commented on the same. I had not read those reviews prior to purchasing c298. Coincidence that several people described c298 issues with exactly the same language? I have no similar complaints with m23 now or had no complaints when i had m23 before.
If money is not an issue, I believe it is one of the best amps out there. Regarding warranty, my unit has 6 years of warranty but only in Norway. It is tranferable to another buyer. So i have no worries with regard to it failing.
Understood. I suspect that pinning the control at either extreme will minimize tracking differences. FWIW, when I used that control on the C298, I check for interchannel differences with a voltmeter on the output terminals.True, but input sensitivity will be 1,43v which is not a good match with 4,2v from my dac that I used as a preamp - could hear hissing from the speakers from 0,5m
And, yet, I still kept the C298s and used them with the Benchmarks in multichannel.I would put more weight to the comments from Kal Rubinson where he found c298 less clear, transparent, and detailed in the upper midrange than benchmark ahb2. I know it is not apples to apples comparison but an interesting observation nonetheless.
Debating between m33 and m23+m66 is a nice problem to have I had m33 around a year ago in the hope to cure my audiophool syndrom. I wanted to stop trying new dacs, amplifiers etc. I liked the sound of m33 but not Dirac. Of course, I limited correction to around 250hz but it still affected impulse response / time domain. It made my room less lively I felt. I tried to measure a larger area and that reduced the negative effect to some extent. I had better results with a simple peq. Room perfect and ARC Genesis were also excellent. Also I did not use a sub or a phono stage and hence felt I was paying for functions I was not using.6 years! Nice. I'm still unsure if I go separates for my 2ch listening or with an all in one like the NAD M33. That's been favorably tested and has a lot of customers who attest to its reliability. (Yes, before we get sidetracked, I am aware there are some who are very vocal about "NAD QC issues" and would take issue with my statement.) I'd most likely pair the M23 with an M66 (if it ever gets released) and Perlisten S7t. My longing for a multichannel/Atmos theater died with going to movies and buying physical media. (Besides, nobody but me appreciates the rumble of "Edge of Tomorrow" or the overhead sounds in "Pearl Harbor". They do however, love the nostalgia of putting on a record from the 60s/70s and enjoying the crackles over drinks.) The fact I get the best of both worlds (ease of HDMI w/fantastic audio reproduction) while watching my Judge Judy is a bonus.
Why? He also used no basic controls to determine this dubious conclusion.I would put more weight to the comments from Kal Rubinson where he found c298 less clear, transparent, and detailed in the upper midrange than benchmark ahb2.
Interesting that there exist other methods in academia to confirm/ reject a hypothesis or answer a research question but here I see that only a blind test (controlled experiment) being considered the only valid approach on this forum (edited).Why? He also used no basic controls to determine this dubious conclusion.
In sensory science (as well as most other science involving human response), double blinding as a basic control is an absolute necessity, whether in academia or industry. If you think it's only at ASR, you really need to get out more.Interesting that there exist other methods in academia to confirm/ reject a hypothesis or answer a research question but here I see that only a blind test (controlled experiment) being considered the only valid approach on this forum (edited).
You DO need to get out more.Ok, some address the switching time issue but i have not seen the test with 2-3 second repeating extracts from a song.
How do you know that the people haven't read each other's (or some common other) opinion/review, and been influenced by it?If I read 10 random reviews on the internet of people not influenced by each others opinion and they describe the sound of an amplifier or differences between amplifiers in the same way, with purifi being smoother than Benchmark, it takes care of the lack of controls such as being blind or not having perfect volume matching.
I am sure we are all very keen to see the results of your tests that "go all the way".In other words, i have yet to see a blind test of amplifiers or dacs on this forum that went all the way to address this issue. Ok, some address the switching time issue but i have not seen the test with 2-3 second repeating extracts from a song. Most just switch at random place in a song while the song continues. The extract heard with one amplifier cannot be then repeated after 3 seconds because next amplifier gets the next extract.
If I understand you correctly, you are referring to foobar? To test amplifiers, do I then need to both switch the output on the abx switcher while at the same time switching on the foobar for another loop? Sounds like a lot more than just «getting off your lazy ass». In any case, whenever somebody here runs a half-baked blind test that is very poorly designed to be discriminatory for amplifier differences, noone is criticising the design but whenever a positive result is presented, a person who has performed the test is being grilled.You DO need to get out more.
In any case, the software to do this is free, get off your lazy butt and do it instead of complaining that your hand-wavey objections aren't being met.
Your personal dislike has been noted.I do not like black and white approach to amplifiers
Any links to the test? Have the results been independently verified or replicated?Especially when there have already been tests (guessing whether amplifier is in the chain vs not in the chain) by swedish audio society
Again, your personal opinion/belief is noted.I do not share a consensus that all amplifiers with sinad over 80 and not clipping sound the same.
But much higher than most audiophiles think.The number of truly transparent amplifiers is not that high.
Even if you use 80 SINAD as the benchmark for transparency, I disagree with your statement. Most, if not all amps SINAD are power, load and frequency dependent. I don't believe even the Hypex is 80 SINAD from 20Hz to 20kHz regardless of load and power before knee.But much higher than most audiophiles think.
You can of course disagree. On the other hand, I believe SINAD at 20 kHz is irrelevant. You won't hear the distortion nor the noise.Even if you use 80 SINAD as the benchmark for transparency, I disagree with your statement. Most, if not all amps SINAD are power, load and frequency dependent. I don't believe even the Hypex is 80 SINAD from 20Hz to 20kHz regardless of load and power before knee.
If you check the thread started by pma, it was observed that hypex started to oscillate at a lower switching frequency and all that rubbish post 20khz came inside the audio band. Of course, the load was too extreme, and no speakers exist in real life that would pose such a load on to the amplifier. However, it begs the question of how the distortion profile would look like with realistic but still very complex load. Nilai performed better but in the Audioxpress test, still saw a large increase in thd.You can of course disagree. On the other hand, I believe SINAD at 20 kHz is irrelevant. You won't hear the distortion nor the noise.
I disagree with that statement as well.You can of course disagree. On the other hand, I believe SINAD at 20 kHz is irrelevant. You won't hear the distortion nor the noise.
Your personal dislike has been noted.
Any links to the test? Have the results been independently verified or replicated?
Again, your personal opinion/belief is noted.
But much higher than most audiophiles think.
If you wish, but it wouldn't be my first choice. @pkane 's software is far better and more versatile. Transparent high-quality recordings of amplifier outputs are trivially easy to make these days to make a file.If I understand you correctly, you are referring to foobar?