You know, this sort of thinking (that specs are the
only important aspect in determining if an amplifier is "good enough" and that expensive/quality amplification is pointless) is exactly the short sighted "reasoning" that proclaimed that early cd technology was "perfect sound forever" and that 16/44 was good enough because it captured sound in a range that was more than adequate for human ears.
That turned out to be wrong on
so many levels!
It's the same kind of "reasoning" that insists that a Soundblaster card is as good at digitizing audio as a high end converter. It's just not true in the real world. Maybe the specs are technically the same, but the quality of the outcome is very different.
Whether it's high end or low end, all audio gear is not created equal.
Using just science and cold hard data only tells part of the story.
Some cheap gear sounds great. Axiom speakers sound great and are a bargain!
But most cheap audio gear sounds like crap to someone with good ears.
I've never been able to find a decent sounding cd player for under $300.00. I've bought (and taken back!) lots of cd players that(theoretically) had the exact same technical specs but
sounded very different. I would try them out on music I was very familiar with and try to find the one that was the most musically accurate and pleasing.
Tubes, transistors, wiring, components etc. have a lot to do with how an amplifier will
sound.
I'm surprised that with all the talk about how an amplifier is just a way to amplify an electrical signal, no one ever talks about the actual quality of the
power supply itself. But that's a whole other topic...
One thing I've noticed is that people who claim that high end audio gear is not "worth" it are the same people that say flying first class is just a waste of money.
Those people have never flown first class.
