Amp stands- Do they work?


I recently purchased a Pass Aleph 3 and loved it so much that I "had to buy" a pair of the Aleph 2 monoblocks. I have been A/B-ing them at my home for the last 3 weeks for most of my free time. The 2s have a lot more presence, but lack the for lack of better words "musical reality" the 3 has. Forgive me for the term, but if you've heard the 3, then you probably understand. Anyway, I have asked most of the guys at Pass Labs and they essentially tell me I am hearing things- that the 2s "have all the sonic characteristics of the 3, just more of it" I have eliminated all other variables except that the 3 is on the bottom of my rack (Salamander Archetype), and the 2's are on the carpet in front of my system. I am interested in anyone's input as to the impact a reasonable stand might have on the sonics of my amps. I currently am acting on this hypothesis and have put the 3 on the floor next to the 2's. If it is of any help the components are in order- my source is a Muse Model 5 transport, Illuminati D-60 digital, EAD 7000 MkIII D/A, Kimber KCAG, Muse Model 3 preamp, WBT 5151 -great cable!!!!!, Pass Amps, Nordost Red Dawn speaker cable, B&W 804s. Counterpoint PAC-5 conditioner, API Power Wedge 4A conditioner. Marigo RMX ref power cables. Amps are using stock power cables- Nelson Pass's recommendation. Thanks for listening and I look forward to any input.
Ag insider logo xs@2xtsquared
I also thought that long term listening was the trick. But that is what it is "a trick". Listen long enough and you can hear what you want. My point behind the "tail between the legs" is about setting priorities based on logic and what is obvious and about saving income for the times when the stock market is not going through the roof (nothing more, I have seen to many audiophiles go belly up financially not to care about this addiction). Many people in this country are on the consumerism binge and have to spend to be happy. Reflect on this: When you hear a truely great, engineered recording it is drop dead obvious in the first few minutes or seconds that it is, or substantially moving the position of your speakers. These are immediate, double blind 100% positive hits most of the time. But these other tweaks are largely a sad commentary on how emotion can make a audiophile become a sucker. Years ago I avoided the "sucker" trap and am much richer for it and can give to others rather than indulge myself because times are good in the very short term. Besides I think software, speakers, and room make the biggest differences in your listening pleasure save one: Your hearing! Retire early and experience life and not nickle and time your future to death. This is no small matter, next tax season watch for the number of people who must sell quick. Or do a search under the word "baby" and you will see many people throughout the year who let their budgets get out of wack even when a baby was due and must sell at a huge loss. If you must listen for weeks to decide I would hate to see how other decisions are made? Most of all, let me assure I want to help people make common sense of their purchases and better use of their finances after seeing many get into serious financial trouble. No amount of cash is enough when you have a life style that burns it up faster than you can save for the future. Good luck in all things and take care!
Long term listening isn't a trick - it is the objective! If blind testing improves your ability to predict what will work over the long term, then fine. For me it is a pointer only. I am currently going through a choice between two DACs. I have a bias towards one rather than the other - since the latter means I will probably need to have a new equipment rack built. I am in about the sixth week of evaluations and feel I am only just getting to the point that I fully understand the trade-offs I am facing in making the decision. Needless to say (as per sod's law) the new rack is likely to be purchased. My retirement fund will be richer for ensuring I make decisions I can live with.
Redkiwi, your point is well made. And your comments about the trade off's in equipment is exactly what long term listening is about. There is no perfect sound, no perfect equipment and certainly no perfect system. The whole point is to find a combination of pieces that work, and make you happy in the LONG TERM. Sometimes that means purchasing something expensive, sometime it is extremely inexpensive. Whatever the choice, common sense in selection will keep the decisions balanced between performance and investment. People that Nanderson describe that go overboard by getting themselves in trouble over the purchase of Hi Fi, "only to have to sell at tax time," would most likely fall prey to another addiction if not for this one. Perhaps it would be the next new hot car, that wonderful speed boat, or beautiful motorcycle. I would love to acquire some of those things myself. However, my only hobby is music, and the equipment required to reproduce it. I share it with my teen age son and my wife, and my investment is not only good from a financial point of view, it rewards our family with entertainment that keeps us at home, together, often with friends. If this is bad, then I wish I had more of the same, and had discovered it sooner.
this a question for nanderson. since your saying stands don,t make a difference; how are your amp[s] set up? and why did you prefer this setup? just curious. thanks
This has become something of a cult posting. Kind of amusing actually, thanks for the intense interest. I would agree with most of the comments above in the past. I think you can convince yourself of a "better" sound. Heck, witness Stereophile doing it: Conrad Johnson 11a going from a Class C to Class A (that was probably due to president of Conrad Johnson writing in), MSB Link DAC going from Class C to Class B, B&W Nautilus 805 going from Class A to Class B and so forth. The point being that there are no clear cut winners in many cases. Often I prefer one speaker over another depending on my mood for certain music and the qualities of a speaker. That synergy thing. Yet in the end I realise that there is that realization that it is better to not trick one's self into an never ending pursuit of components and focus on improving one's software collection. No where have I heard bigger differences, assuming a certain mimimum level of audio component quality (see an early response of mine), than in poor and well engineered recordings. Regarding, the emotional defensive reactions I will not indulge those folks. There has been some careful thought given by many here. But here are some responses to some of the more thoughtful. Double blind testing can tell what will work over the long term if you set the correct criteria and keep it standard. When tuning a piano or a violin there are standard procedures that enable someone to get the job done that day not in weeks of trial and error. In fact, the longer the trial period on subjective calibrations will actually result in increased errors from a reproducible perspective. Hence you are actually testing small incremental changes in your perception, each one convincing you that the previous perception was invalid and the new one is correct. But the pathway is not linear since what you listen for one day is not the same the next and so forth. It is more like a road network with a series of dead ends, you are constantly traveling but never really getting any where. At one of those deadends, perceived sonic bliss, you take out your perceptual map only to find that you not where you want to be so get on the road again and travel to a place you will not likely reach by using these nonstandard, purely subjective measures over protracted periods of time. Pull in the dead end, stay a while, back out, go a different direction so on and so forth.