Bad news for the IA80.1

[Tenacious 32]

Since everything was done wrong even though none of claim to have read the review, please enlighten us as to what he did wrong? .9 volts is not going to net you another 2k+ 

 

Like I said, I'll wait for the retest. 

But, but, but, it didn't do rated. It has to be flawed.... 

[shizzzon 461]

Since everything was done wrong even though none of claim to have read the review, please enlighten us as to what he did wrong? .9 volts is not going to net you another 2k+ 

 

Like I said, I'll wait for the retest. 

But, but, but, it didn't do rated. It has to be flawed.... 

 

 

But but but.. the owner said he will retest because all testing prior to marketing is correct and will retest.. 

However once he said that.. many people started bashing the "potential" for his other products to be flawed, etc.. 

 

I only trust the owner and\or companies who do this for a living.

 

If one person can be trusted to "fail" an amp publicly, then all companies might as well shut their businesses down because you know what they say..

The customer is always right...   

 

So professional testing must be pointless..  

 

We don't care about getting close

We, as a business community, care about doing it right.

 

Why would a business rely on a customer's test as the official ruling of their products potential.

 

That is the dumbest thing i've seen this year so far and that's pretty damn bad.

 

But keep supporting the "close testing".

We'll support professional test results.

[95Honda 486]

Some of you guys are missing the point.  It has nothing to do with the power made.  Even if there is a retest and the results are different it is not a valid test, that is the point.

 

If the amp would have made a gazillion watts I would have taken one glance at the test equipment and laughed...

 

I have had brand new, un-calibrated other than factory cal, Fluke 97 IIIs that were off by 30VAC (while reading 120VAC)...  These were true RMS, $500 DMMs...  It isn't common, but it happens...

 

Is the load non-inductive?  Is it cooled?  Is it rated for that kind of power?  How much ripple is on the DC input?

 

Then you throw in all the really cheap garbage test equipment that you can't really trust...  The stuff is good for troubleshooting, but not for validating performance measurements...

 

I could care less about IA's amplifier performance.  But when I see tests that are obviously flawed, I think it is worth pointing out...

 

Stop riding the internet bandwagon and use your brain...

[Tenacious 32]

 

Since everything was done wrong even though none of claim to have read the review, please enlighten us as to what he did wrong? .9 volts is not going to net you another 2k+ 

 

Like I said, I'll wait for the retest. 

But, but, but, it didn't do rated. It has to be flawed.... 

 

 

But but but.. the owner said he will retest because all testing prior to marketing is correct and will retest.. 

However once he said that.. many people started bashing the "potential" for his other products to be flawed, etc.. 

 

I only trust the owner and\or companies who do this for a living.

 

If one person can be trusted to "fail" an amp publicly, then all companies might as well shut their businesses down because you know what they say..

The customer is always right...   

 

So professional testing must be pointless..  

 

We don't care about getting close

We, as a business community, care about doing it right.

 

Why would a business rely on a customer's test as the official ruling of their products potential.

 

That is the dumbest thing i've seen this year so far and that's pretty damn bad.

 

But keep supporting the "close testing".

We'll support professional test results.

I'm fairly sure you can consider Taylor's tests "professional." Your average consumer doesn't have a bank of fixed resistance and all of the equipment to properly test amplifiers like he does,

[95Honda 486]

That is the point, the equipment in the video wasn't that of a professional.  It was mostly cheap, run of the mill, hobbyist grade stuff.  Again, great stuff for troubleshooting, but not for trying to give accurate certification of claimed specifications.  This kind of why most "clamp" tests are out the window.

 

And, for the record, the equipment is out there to do proper testing, it just costs a lot more and isn't really justified for 99% of us...

 

Who knows, that amp might make less power with the proper test equipment, but it is irrelevant...

 

But this is falling on deaf ears, so I won't try and get you to understand this anymore.

[Impious 1,476]

 

Since everything was done wrong even though none of claim to have read the review, please enlighten us as to what he did wrong? .9 volts is not going to net you another 2k+ 

 

Like I said, I'll wait for the retest. 

But, but, but, it didn't do rated. It has to be flawed.... 

 

 

But but but.. the owner said he will retest because all testing prior to marketing is correct and will retest.. 

However once he said that.. many people started bashing the "potential" for his other products to be flawed, etc.. 

 

I only trust the owner and\or companies who do this for a living.

 

If one person can be trusted to "fail" an amp publicly, then all companies might as well shut their businesses down because you know what they say..

The customer is always right...   

 

So professional testing must be pointless..  

 

We don't care about getting close

We, as a business community, care about doing it right.

 

Why would a business rely on a customer's test as the official ruling of their products potential.

 

That is the dumbest thing i've seen this year so far and that's pretty damn bad.

 

But keep supporting the "close testing".

We'll support professional test results.

I'm fairly sure you can consider Taylor's tests "professional." Your average consumer doesn't have a bank of fixed resistance and all of the equipment to properly test amplifiers like he does,

He doesn't have the equipment to PROPERLY test amplifiers. That's the problem.

[Impious 1,476]

Since everything was done wrong even though none of claim to have read the review, please enlighten us as to what he did wrong? .9 volts is not going to net you another 2k+

Like I said, I'll wait for the retest.

But, but, but, it didn't do rated. It has to be flawed....

No one here arguing against clamp tests gives two shits what the "test" showed for power compared to rated. Why? Because the test isn't a valid test to start with, so no matter what the results should be discarded. We've always stated the same thing regardless of manufacturer, regardless of who did the test, regardless of what the claimed results were.

Props to Taylor for trying. But trying hard doesn't make the results any more meaningful. I don't care if the amp is in fact over rated. Just prove it with a valid test.

[Tenacious 32]

So, what is he supposed to use to test the amp? Is the extra "0.01v of precision" from better tools supposed to completely change the results?

[shizzzon 461]

you are still missing the point..... 

 

You keeping siding with his testing as being accurate.

 

Let me ask you a simple question.

 

Why would you trust a person in this hobby who loves it as much as anyone else to perform a test on an amp, and regardless of the results, believe the results over what the manufacturer is about to present?

[Tenacious 32]

you are still missing the point..... 

 

You keeping siding with his testing as being accurate.

 

Let me ask you a simple question.

 

Why would you trust a person in this hobby who loves it as much as anyone else to perform a test on an amp, and regardless of the results, believe the results over what the manufacturer is about to present?

The manufacturer is very biased toward their own product, so that statement could go both ways. 

[shizzzon 461]

lol.. Nick?  no.. 

 

It sounds like you do not know IA well enough to say that.

 

But by you saying that.. it sounds easily like you care less what IA says in their upcoming retest just for the hell of it.

So i'm done.

[Tenacious 32]

lol.. Nick?  no.. 

 

It sounds like you do not know IA well enough to say that.

 

But by you saying that.. it sounds easily like you care less what IA says in their upcoming retest just for the hell of it.

So i'm done.

And you're saying the same thing about Taylor.

[Impious 1,476]

So, what is he supposed to use to test the amp? Is the extra "0.01v of precision" from better tools supposed to completely change the results?

Blind leading the blind.

His equipment isn't calibrated.....so how do you know it's only off .01V

That's one of the points....you don't. I don't. He doesn't. Therefore we can't call the test accurate. Because we don't know. And that's just one of the many reasons.

[KyleBrown 121]

More useless information and talking in circles. Had there been no validity to the test, I doubt Nick would have responded in person on facebook and CACO. At the same time, it shows Nick truly cares about his product wants to further investigate it. Had this test been complete bull shit, would he have bothered with it? I don't think so.  So there's good and bad coming from this test. 

[Tenacious 32]

More useless information and talking in circles. Had there been no validity to the test, I doubt Nick would have responded in person on facebook and ****. At the same time, it shows Nick truly cares about his product wants to further investigate it. Had this test been complete bull shit, would he have bothered with it? I don't think so.  So there's good and bad coming from this test. 

Finally, someone with some sense.

[jcarter1885 995]

More useless information and talking in circles. Had there been no validity to the test, I doubt Nick would have responded in person on facebook and CACO. At the same time, it shows Nick truly cares about his product wants to further investigate it. Had this test been complete bull shit, would he have bothered with it? I don't think so.  So there's good and bad coming from this test. 

Finally, someone with some sense.

 

Or two people without sense, just depends at how you look at the glass.

[Tirefryr 1,742]

More useless information and talking in circles. Had there been no validity to the test, I doubt Nick would have responded in person on facebook and CACO. At the same time, it shows Nick truly cares about his product wants to further investigate it. Had this test been complete bull shit, would he have bothered with it? I don't think so.  So there's good and bad coming from this test. 

Nick is doing it because people like the OP, yourself, and MR. Tenacious just do NOT understand what is going on here.  You think you do, and no matter what more intelligent people tell you or point out, you continue to think you grasp what is happening.  Therefore, his company's reputation is unjustly soiled due to people who know enough to cause damage and nothing else.

[Tenacious 32]

More useless information and talking in circles. Had there been no validity to the test, I doubt Nick would have responded in person on facebook and ****. At the same time, it shows Nick truly cares about his product wants to further investigate it. Had this test been complete bull shit, would he have bothered with it? I don't think so.  So there's good and bad coming from this test. 

Nick is doing it because people like the OP, yourself, and MR. Tenacious just do NOT understand what is going on here.  You think you do, and no matter what more intelligent people tell you or point out, you continue to think you grasp what is happening.  Therefore, his company's reputation is unjustly soiled due to people who know enough to cause damage and nothing else.

Don't get too cocky.

Edited January 3, 2014 by Tenacious

[Tirefryr 1,742]

It's not cockiness.  It has nothing to do with myself at all, so it matters not how I am. 

 

The fact is, there are several membera here who understand what is happeningand whom have attempted to explain this so us remedial people can better understand the complexity of the situation.  Members whom have more knowledge and experience than those who continue to find ways to contradict this knowledge with ZERO fact and nothing more than what they believe makes sense.

 

I understand how and why you and Kyle think and feel as you do, but you are not seeing the bigger picture here.  People are not challenging your intelligence, but simply trying to open your mind and teach you, but you see it as a negative challenge and you block out even the possibility that your own theory or understanding is incorrect. 

[///M5 2,833]

Don't get too cocky.

I suppose you guys can measure nanometers with a yardstick too? Probably report the digits all the way into tenths at the same time without declaring any uncertainty. Real logical.

[Tenacious 32]

Don't get too cocky.

I suppose you guys can measure nanometers with a yardstick too? Probably report the digits all the way into tenths at the same time without declaring any uncertainty. Real logical.

Invalid analogy. 

[///M5 2,833]

Don't get too cocky.

I suppose you guys can measure nanometers with a yardstick too? Probably report the digits all the way into tenths at the same time without declaring any uncertainty. Real logical.

Invalid analogy.

Exaggerated, yes but completely valid. Of course the most important is stating uncertainty in the measurement, but that is metrology 101.

[Impious 1,476]

More useless information and talking in circles. Had there been no validity to the test, I doubt Nick would have responded in person on facebook and CACO. At the same time, it shows Nick truly cares about his product wants to further investigate it. Had this test been complete bull shit, would he have bothered with it? I don't think so. So there's good and bad coming from this test.

Nick probably responded because there were multiple pages of people bashing his products and questioning his integrity and he wanted/needed to defend himself and his products. I wouldn't read much more into than that.

Otherwise the only useless information in this thread is the link to the clamp test and those comments supporting the method.

[TaylorFade 0]

You guys crack me up.

[onebadmonte 235]

You guys crack me up.

Who invited this guy?