thought- Can equalisation be used to make cheap gear sound more "fancy"

[1200reasons]

Bear with me after my butchered title.

I was thinking about the Richard Clark $10,000 amplifier challenge, which provides a $10,000 reward to anyone who can discern between any 2 amps, after equalisation has been applied (to either amp, of the challenger's choice) to match them.

This means that a Class D amp can be compared to a tube amp, as long as equalisation is applied to either amp (of the challenger's chosing) to make it sound like the other. No one has yet won. One conclusion that seems fair to reach then is that anyone can grab a cheap class D and an equaliser and with enough time make it sound like a tube amp, or the best mcintosh.

To take this a step further- why would this not work with other gear too? I'm a vinyl guy and obviously you can't equalise a cartridge to make it track better or minimise IGD, or even extract details tight from the groove , but I can't see why you couldn't take an at95e to equalise it to sound like a grado gold? It would certainly be inferior, but it would have that grado sweetness.

I suspect that a lot of high end amps sound the way that they do purely because the makers deliberately "equalise" them internally to sound the way it does. What's wrong with external equalisation if a high-end amp only sounds the way it does due to internal equalisation?

Quick edit: A common misconception I see elsewhere about this challenge is that it requires equalisation to be put on the better amp to dull it down to the standards of the lesser amp. That isn't the case. The equalisation can be applied to the lesser amp to bring it to the same response of the better amp. The challenger gets to pick which amp sees the EQ

[RothwellAudio]

"EQ" just changes the frequency response, but since amplifiers without tone controls have a flat frequency response anyway between 20Hz and 20kHz (within a fraction of a dB) I can't see how equalisation would be any use. Cartridges, loudspeakers, microphones etc. are a different matter and EQ is certainly useful at the recording stage but I can't see how it could be used to make two amplifiers sound the same. They sound the same anyway according to Richard Clark.

[1200reasons]

Richard's test does not require that the 2 amps both be brought to a flat frequency response, but purely that one of the amps must be EQ'd to be the same as the other. Amp A might sound delightful, but not flat (because that its 'voice'). Amp B may be flat, but the challenger can choose to EQ Amp B to make it just as non-flat as Amp A. Rather than having 2 flat amps, we're left with 2 equally wonky amps.


What I'm proposing Andrew is the idea that a regular cheap amp which has a flat frequency response out of the factory could be voiced to remove the flat frequency, and give it the sound signature of a more "fancy" amp. No doubt someone has taken richard's test and brought in a 300B to compare to a class D. If so, why would I ever want to buy a 300B when I could just EQ a class D to make it the same?

[RothwellAudio]

Amp A might sound delightful, but not flat (because that its 'voice'). Amp B may be flat, but the challenger can choose to EQ Amp B to make it just as non-flat as Amp A. Rather than having 2 flat amps, we're left with 2 equally wonky amps.

Yes, but amps are not "voiced" as such and they all have a flat a frequency response. Any audible differences are due to much more subtle and complex causes such as the linearity at low levels compared to the linearity at higher levels, or the way the output interacts with reactive loads, or any number of other things which do not show up as a non-flat frequency response and cannot be mimicked or mirrored by EQ.

[Macca]

Amps can be voiced but that cannot be replicated with EQ - Clark was using EQ to compensate for valve amps rolling off early (i.e before 20khz), in other words, correcting frequency response differences.

I think the answer to the o/p is 'No'.

[struth]

amps that have similar freq responses and good psu's and are fairly noise free should sound pretty much the same

[walpurgis]

Clark was using EQ to compensate for valve amps rolling off early (i.e before 20khz)

What valve amps? Many have very extended HF response.

[Macca]

What valve amps? Many have very extended HF response.

Some valve amps - also as valve amps use output transformers their frequency response will vary with the impedance they see, so with some speakers they will not be inputting a flat frequency response. Since the challenge allows you to use any speakers you want the eq necessary, otherwise with the right amp/speaker match it would be pretty easy to win it.

[1200reasons]

What we've covered so far from this thread has that amps cant be voiced, that amps are voiced. I've learned that all amps have a perfectly flat response- except those that don't (tube amps rolling off before 20khz)

If

differences are due to much more subtle and complex causes such as the linearity at low levels compared to the linearity at higher levels, or the way the output interacts with reactive loads, or any number of other things which do not show up as a non-flat frequency response and cannot be mimicked or mirrored by EQ.

then why hasn't anyone claimed the $10,000? We say "the differences are.....", but then no one has actually sat down and identified any audible differences (in the at least 13 years of the challenge)


I find it a bit hard to believe that Head of Marketing has never said to Audio Engineer "We'd like to put this as the prestige model in our platnium series. Could you make it sound more warm and lush?", to which he's gone away and added some resistors and capacitors to tweak the FR a bit to boost and attenuate the desired areas

I'm not tryiing to be argumentative for the sake of it. Rather, I was considering that it may be an interesting idea. The prevailing opinion seems to be "it's not.". The easiest way to learn is to be wrong

[fatmarley]

It's very hard to hear differences with an unfamiliar system, unless they are quite large differences. Until I've lived with something for at least a week or two, I'd say I'm not 100% familiar with It's sound.