I have noise harvesters in a few places on a complicated streaming system, not so much to harvest noise, but to tell me that there is noise (kind of like the “Noise Sniffer” product did with a speaker).
I know that much of my work is done when the Noise Harvesters don’t light up at all…
Great, I was hoping that you knew all of what it was you were citing.
Dark or Milk? The White is an abomination.
I normally prefer Dark, but with Toberlone, I prefer Milk.
I have four of those things. Some may even be plugged in, somewhere. It was my observation at the time that if the light blinks it is doing it’s thing. If it doesn’t blink it died. Other than that, I got nothing.
I largely agree. I’ve always maintained that if something sounds good (which for me means lifelike), and it measures poorly, then the wrong thing is being measured. Whether “the right thing” is measurable, or even identifiable, is the question. I sometimes wonder if, over our hobby’s history, the technology of music reproduction has outpaced the technology of music reproduction measurement.
What are you planning to do, arc weld or something? 
Even when someone’s says “Focals” I internalize the grimace.
Some speakers require an amp with the power of an arc welder.
Like the MBL’s I listened to yesterday at the Tampa show.
You were here too! 
I’ve been doing a bad job tracking you all!
Name me one pair?
Most arc welders take 200 amps or less
If by “amps” you mean “amperes”, all you need to know is that Watts = Amperes squared multiplied by Ohms, so Amps = square root of Watts/Ohms. So for two 8-ohm speakers at 350W each you’ll need sqrt(350/8) = 6.6Amps per speaker, for a total of 13.2A if powered from the same power supply.
By the way, these are RMS current values; peak is RMS * 1.414, so peak current is on the order of 18.7A
Apogee scintilla, stays really close to 1ohm throughout the frequency spectrum, less than 1ohm if being directly driven.
Apogee Scintilla
100 Watts each
1 ohm speakers
2 x 1 ohm speakers at 100 watts
sqrt(100/1) = 10 amps x 2 speakers for 20 amps RMS
multiply RMS by 1.414 for 28.28 amps PEAK
That’s what I would call a far cry from an arc welder, 28 amps!
I was mentioning at the top of my post “When I buy equipment, I look for a combination of sound, quality, reputation, appearance, construction and measurements.”
Measurements are important, but I do not make them my be-all or end-all criteria. By the same token, people that want to pretend they are knowledgeable audiophiles should learn a little about measurements and use this to their advantage instead of sounding off with ridiculous claims like some speakers need the power of an arc welder!
Here is something I don’t understand: I have already mentioned I have been a HAM radio operator for several years and made contacts all over the world. My Kenwood TS-990S transceiver is one of the top of the line transmitter/receivers made today. It weighs 80 lbs., cost $9000 when new and is packed full of electronics including its own power supply. I have a linear amp similar to a class D audio amp. Once again, another $8000 piece of equipment. It will transmit my signal halfway around the world at 2200 watts.
Why is it none of my equipment needs burn-in time, different power cords or special fuses that should only be inserted in one direction? I look at HAM radio equipment as more sensitive to noise, certainly more complicated, and yet there are so many similarities, frequency being the biggest difference.
Because critical listening used by most audiophiles…tends to make even the smallest changes known in the quality of sound in a high-end stereo system… that is…when using a very revealing/transparent audio system…it is something that can be heard without question! In a system not designed for critical music applications… like a ham radio set… reveals nothing of the sort!
Being able to distinguish between hearing a difference and not hearing a difference usually takes a lot of ass time in your favorite chair having a highly critical listening set of ears on…its more of an art than most people can appreciate.
I am not one of the elite, gifted audiophiles like many of you purport to be. However, in my other hobby, with critical listening, you may find that the meter doesn’t tell the whole story. I often find that gain controls need to be adjusted more conservatively than suggested by meter indications when the idea is to transmit the cleanest possible signal and ultimately the best audio.
I still don’t understand no matter how gifted you perceive yourself to be, why do your electronics sound better with burn-in and mine could care less? My quest is for the best signal-to-noise ratio but my $8000 transceiver could care less what power cord I’m using. I can, however, make a difference reducing common-mode noise by wrapping my a/c cord around a 4" type 43 toroid, something I think audiophiles should learn to do at a fraction of the cost of an elitist cord
Do you listen to your transceiver through your stereo system? Or through a small onboard speaker on your radio? This could be the answer you seek!
I am kind to my wife and use a headset 
Ted shared a graph here once that illustrated break-in. It was impressive and surprising to me. You could probably find it if you searched. I’m gonna walk my dog instead.
Somewhere I had read about the the minute aspects of amplification could be
thought of in terms of parts per million …the following from Spectral and
in summary the mention is made…so here we go …
http://www.spectralaudio.com/DMA300/DMA300.htm
Excerpt taken from Spectral Audio’s description of their DMA300 amplifier:
High Resolution and the Listening Experience
Quick response and instantaneous accuracy to the original music waveforms of live signals are the hall mark of well crafted high resolution recordings. The same requirments are necessary for reproduction. A large inherent bandwidth that is not forced by excessive correction or feedback is an essential performance foundation as it can avoid having to confront many technical complications with negative sonic consequences. Transient intermodulation, cross modulation, group delay distortion, dispersion, reactive loading are a few of the difficult to describe and understand errors that will not be found from the DMA-300. However, thermal settling associated with quickness (thermal tails) could have been an issue as it is with all fast cicuits. Advanced testing and state-of-the-art semiconductors, exceptional layouts with much dedicated engineering has been necessary to address and eliminate these distortion issues. In a waveform or time sense, the output signal from the DMA-300 traverses from point “A” to “B” of a musical event with exactly the same waveform shape as its input signal. It does this with parts-per-million accuracy that is free of memorialized unnatural artifacts either before or after the input event. This requires extreme precision. Because Spectral circuits have intrinsic speed and acccuracy, the amplification from the DMA-300 is stress free and precise and this important performance aspect preserves clarity, transparency and resolution of the very highest order.
So in summary with respect to amplifiers:
"Advanced testing and state-of-the-art semiconductors, exceptional layouts with much dedicated engineering has been necessary to address and eliminate these distortion issues. In a waveform or time sense, the output signal from the DMA-300 traverses from point “A” to “B” of a musical event with exactly the same waveform shape as its input signal. It does this with parts-per-million accuracy that is free of memorialized unnatural artifacts either before or after the input event. "
It is interesting to note the effort leading high end speaker designers/builders choose different
materials and approaches to designing their line of speakers all trying to attain the next level
of resolution…each company voices differently…
In the audio hobby even the care given to proper speaker placement with respect to
listening position to acquire the best possible soundstage, dynamics and minute details
in the 3D space in order to render these…moving things like furniture away from the
soundfield just some things done to get that last bit of retrieval.
While I’m not a ham…maybe ham it up a bit …I knew some ham operators in my youth
and not one of their ham equipment rooms were set up with regard to audio quality as
audiophile rooms are…all they were concerned with was the ability to receive a signal
as best as possible…but audiophile quality not even…
Oh well enough for now…
Best wishes