Hi jafant,
I thought about this some more and I want to be sure that I do not put you off on Ayre equipment. As you know, I have a K-1xe preamp with phono and a CX-7eMP CDP. I have heard different models of their products, both up and down the scale from my models within the Ayre line and also several of their amps. I have not heard the new "Twenty" line.
Ayre equipment is best described as neutral. Not the "neutral" that some reviewers use as a cop-out descriptive for subpar equipment that is overly lean or lacking in natural harmonics and richness. I mean neutral as in: it is neither additive nor subtractive.
Check me on this: Pick any piece of Ayre equipment, old or new. Find two or three reviews on that piece from Stereophile, TAS, Soundstage, etc. I defy you to find one article where there is any criticism regarding tonal colorations, excessive sibilance or lack or openness, dullness, brightness, excessive bloat or lack of definition , issues with bass control, or less than spectacular imaging and soundstage depth/width.
What you will find on occasion is that the reviewer will say he preferred the sound of another great component from another top brand because he valued a specific strength of the competitor’s unit in one attribute at the expense of another vs the Ayre, or he preferred a coloration (deviation from neutral) in the sound of the other brand of component vs the neutrality of the Ayre.
Best to you jafant,
Dave
|
TY- Dave-
to my ears, Cardas cabling is rolled off. This could have been the culprit along w/ MF.
Happy Listening!
|
jafant,
I heard the Ayre MX-R monos/KX-R pre/Ayre TT/Ayre phono with what I think were 2.4s (definitely the Thiels were pre-3.7 and of medium size) in the Ayre room at RMAF 2010 (Michael Fremer was in the room tying up all of the attention from the Ayre folks, so I could not speak with them and soon left), but I do know they were using Cardas cables which I detest excepting their phono wire, and I thought the sound was, uh, unspectacular. Very buttoned down sounding. Not at all the lively and dynamic sound I get from my 5i’s with Krell or Classe’ and my K-1xe. I am confident that it was not the Thiels nor the KX-R preamp, so either the turntable/cartridge, the amps, the room, or the cables were holding it back. Fremer was gushing about how great it sounded...
I speculate that the older V-1xe stereo amp would be a good choice ( affordable used and resells quickly) for your 2.4s if you wanna go Ayre. You know that I like the great older SS amps with Thiels, so YMMV.
Best to you jafant,
Dave
|
Looking for an update- All
anyone using an Ayre amp w/ Thiel loudspeakers?
|
Thanks for the update. I'm not at all surprised that the combination of the 30 and Thiel subs provided the most satisfaction. Enjoy! |
Well, it's been a while but I thought I should finish off this thread. The 30A ended up beating the X250.5. It was more natural sounding, with a little less harshness to the sound, although with poorer bass control (as everyone would expect). Voices sounded much more natural through the 30A and the soundstage and imaging were also better. It actually didn't take too long to make that decision.
I also replaced my REL Storm with a Thiel SS1 (and passive crossover). The SS1 definitely integrates better and is less boomy, although there are times where I feel that the REL made a slightly better band-aid for the bass issues I've experienced. Because it wasn't perfectly crossed-over, it overlapped a bit with the Thiel 2.4s and hid some of the bass a bit more than the SS1 does. |
Cal,
I appreciate the followup information. I`m not surprised with the superior results you realized with the lower power Pass amplifier . |
The thing about the Ayre amp is that not only is it a great sounding amp, but it is absolutely stable into difficult loads...and doubles its output with decreasing impedance. Note, as I mentioned above, its best sound comes from using it in balanced mode...which means a balanced preamp. |
Thanks for the update. I look forward to reading about continuing quest. |
A thread update for future readers.
The little 30 W Pass amp just killed the 400W McIntosh. The Mac did help address the bass issue (although not a ton), but was bested in every other dimension by the Pass. Putting the Pass in the system was like lifting a veil off the music. You could hear so much more detail, a much better soundstage, and an elimination of a lot of glare in the sound. So much more delicate and natural. No contest between the two products for me.
Anyway, after this experience made me fall even harder for the INT-30A, I decided that maybe adding a sub to my system might allow me to keep all the benefits of the XA series, but also make up for the bass deficiencies I've had. Although I'd have preferred to have tried a Thiel sub, I ended up getting a decent price on an REL Storm III. I have to say that I'm extremely impressed with what this sub did to my system. Like others have commented, adding the sub opened up the soundstage and added depth to the music. I also watched Salt and listened to Tupac's All Eyes on Me (well recorded quality rap, btw), and the sub really made up for the previous bass deficiencies that had made these types of material feel flat and lifeless before. Yesterday was really the first time I've been fully satisfied with the stereo since beginning the upgrades in December.
I did end up purchasing an X250.5 to compare to the INT-30A, but only because I'd initiated that process before getting the sub. I'm actually very satisfied with the current setup and probably would have quit amp shopping if another day had passed. I will update the thread, however, after comparing these two amps.
Thanks for all the feedback folks. |
Hi all ! Yes , very happy with my current setup . Never thought I could be happy with 4 wpc . Off the subject perhaps but an article written by Steve Deckert explains why low power / hi efficiency gives greater realism to music , that article really opened my eyes . |
Brad I can understand your change in direction,you`ll be very happy. |
Hi all ! Although I have since put the Thiels on consignment , the combo worked well for me in my smallish space , I was very happy with this combo for years . Now I prefer high efficiency / low power combos . Just another adventure in this great hobby . |
Brad,
Yours and steve`s experience is another example of why actual listening will always mean more than speculation and preformed notions. |
Hi all ! this is almost the same thread I was involved with regarding my Thiel 1.6 's and my Cary v12 amp . With the cary set to triode mode (50 wpc) ,the combo was very satisfying . However , everone looked up reviews ,charts, etc to try to prove to me that my combo simply would not work . Of course, nobody had the combo I had ,but they were convinced it was horrible . I always laugh when I see a thread like this . If You like it , rock on . |
Well, I guess I'm going to try out a McIntosh 402. Double the watts from my Pass and it'll still double down as the impedance drops. It was used by the previous owners of my 2.4s. Unless I just adore it, I'll probably still try to pick up a X250.5 and then sell the loser of the two. |
As Unsound suggested earlier (nod to you bro!), you might also consider Krell, a brand I strongly recommend because I use a 400cx with my CS6s in my other system and it drives them adequately. The 6s are, in my opinion, more difficult to drive than the 2.4s. Plus, I know the 2.4s sound wonderful powered by this amp as I have tried this combination. The cx series autobiases to Class A operation, dependent on the input signal. You will need a preamp that outputs a balanced out (unless you're ready for some surgery to the amp). Also, Jeff Rowland, Audio Research, CJ 2500A (there was one on here recently) are additional candidate amps that I expect would power the 2.4s and sound great. |
Still wish Stevecham and I could just switch to see what each other's amp sounds like. I do find it difficult to consider the Pass Labs XA-30.5 to be "poor quality power"... but would love to try the CJ amp without risk. Ohh well, trial and error is a fun enough route... |
|
Unsound: Do you actually own 2.4s? |
Stevecham, the Thiel 2.4's don't measure at 88 dB 1 Watt at 1 meter. They measure 88 dB 2.83V at 1 meter.
If my understanding is correct(?), if you take into the consideration the actual impedance of the speakers, you'll find that Thiel 2.4's are actually closer to a nominal 83 dB 1 Watt at 1 meter.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs24-loudspeaker-measurements
The 77 Watts wpc into 4 Ohms is what the cj CAV50 can do when only driving one channel. When driving both channels at 1 kHz the power drops to 40 wpc. It's interesting that the power output seems to go up into 20 Hz (a moot point, as that's below the Thiel CS 2.4's capabilities) and also go up at 20 KHz (which the Thiel CS 2.4's are capable of) for those that can hear that high up.
http://www.stereophile.com/content/conrad-johnson-cav50-integrated-amplifier-measurements
Keep in mind that the Thiel CS 2.4's do have a rather challenging phase angle too. Not something that most low powered tube amps tend to appreciate. |
OK, The 2.4s measured 88 dB at 1 watt at 1 meter at 1% THD. The CJ at worst puts out 77 wpc into a nominal 4 Ohm load at 1%. So for most of my listening at 80 to 85 or so, I am using a watt or two.
Unless 1% THD is considered to be clipping...
Look, if it made a difference and improved things SONICALLY I would have GLADLY (yes I initially did the MATH experiment X 3!) kept one of the Musical Fidelity, Krell or CJ (solid sate) integrateds.
I'm done here as I feel I;ve been effective in gettign my points across;
Cal: the Thiel 2.4s are relatively easy to power, it's the quality of the power that makes the difference. |
Maybe some of the differences in opinions are related to global negative feedback. I had the CJ LP140m which uses a small amount of feedback. Comparing to another 350W no feedback amp that I have, the CJ had tighter bass control despite lower power rating. The macrodynamics of the CJ is compressed comparing to that of the 350 Watter.
I had both Thiel 2.4 and 1.6. The 1.6s are much easier load. |
|
Unsound, feel free to go ahead and invalidate my assertions and experiences. It's OK, this is common place in the world today. But is it based on experience or speculation?
There is no "well into clipping" going on here, and frankly, in this regard, you don't know what you're talking about. So while I appreciate your comments in your attempt to poo poo my CJ/Thiel rig from a non-listening distance, my sense is that this comment is one that is built on pure speculation and not on reality. But that's the luxury of the internet isn't it? |
Stevecham, I suspect that with the Thiel CS 2.4's set up as the Thiel recommends, that at 100 dB the conrad-johnson CAV50 would be well into clipping. |
Interesting action over hear folks. Thanks for all the comments. I almost bought the last 250.5 that was on here, but it was in Canada and I didn't want to pay to import it... so I'm still considering the other options. |
Unsound, I think we`re in agreement,determining reasonable proximity is subjective and as stated earlier an arbitrrary standard. |
Charles1dad, my post was a direct response to a question Stevecham asked in the previous posts. The ability to reach a certain volume level is no way the only, or the most important criterion. One can listen to such volume levels with some frequency, so long as the duration is not too long, without fear of hearing damage. Greater volume levels happen quite often during some live unamplified live musical performances. In that most of us listen in very different environments than live venues, not achieving actual potential live volume levels is probably not called for most us, but a reasonable proximity is not too much to ask for. |
Could be; I can certainly and easily get it well above 100 dB, the 95 is a nominal figure and I am sure that even on the rat shack meter, the actual peaks are 100+ dB.
High end aspirations...now there's an interesting concept. |
Hi Unsound,
I`d agree that is an arbitrary standard for sure. I sse no correlation with sound quality and volume level ability. Many systems can be built to play loud(quite loud) and yet sound rather poor. If someone has normal hearing ability and has put together a system that emphasizes natural sound with good resolution, 70-80db levels(on average) with peaks to low 90s is plenty for 'most'.
Again this is 'strictly' a personal decision and one must consider what levels are risky to their long term hearing.It seems the more a system`s resolution and noise floor are addressed/improved the more lively and involving it becomes at lower listening levels. This seems to lessen the need to crank it up in order to be satisfied.Of course YMMV. |
I know this is somewhat arbitrary, but I think a system with high end aspirations should be capable of 100 dB peaks. |
Interesting thread. Further thoughts are that, of the three much higher powered integrateds I owned for a time in this system, the CJ CA200 was the most enjoyable. What I missed though was the upper bass warmth of the CAV50; this is my second one, I too "second, third and fourth guessed" myself and finally returned to this model. Certainly that amp could drive the Thiels to much higher levels and not venture into tube glare territory. But i can get this system up to 95 dB with most music before glare sets in and that is more than I normally listen at for extended periods (I mean, how high do you guys expect to be able to go?). Fortunately I was able to find another on the 'gon and once this was back in the system, all sounded "just right" once again. I used to be very critical of the ear vs. technical issue, reading the literature on this, the Absolute Sound vs. Sterophile battles, etc., and, for a period of ten years or so, was convinced that measured specs were perfectly predictive of sonic performance. I have now at least partially moved over to the other camp in that there are component combinations that empirically defy technical predictability. Believe me, my expectations used to be more closely aligned to most of the sentiment expressed above with regard to the need to high current and Thiels.
I also have CS6s and when I was trading up from Bryston 7B monoblocks ten years ago, I first purchased a Krell 300cx amp; it was OK but I decided to try the 400cx the next day, so I took back the 300cx and traded up (full credit within 24 hours, blah blah) . The rssults were clearly heard. The more powerful Krell made a distinct improvement in dynamic swing and width and depth of staging. Bass was also improved. So there was my conclusion that high current amps are de riguer with Thiels. Until the CAV50 appeared, that is.
I really do wish you guys could hear this set up, at the very least it would make for some interesting conversation. If I hadn't "validated' it with others I trust, I wouldn't be so promotional about this. Remember it's that first watt or two that we most often listen to to drive our speakers to 80-90 dB levels in he listening position, and I can only conclude that in this case it is the quality of those first couple of watts that make the difference. I'm not using any NOS tubes either, but only low noise selected versions of JJs from tube depot.
Steve |
Yeah, I wish I could go higher in the XA line. The 60.5s are kind of in the zone, although even getting the funds for that purchase would require living with the 30.5 for a couple more years. Although Renohifi suggested that that could be a solution, Pass themselves recommended the XA100.5, followed by the 350.5, and then the 250.5 as the best matches for the Thiels. |
Any of the newer Coda amps would do a fine job with this speaker. All double down to 4 ohms and most are even 1 ohm stable. Most might recall a couple were specifically designed to drive low impedance panels and Coda OEM for Innersound/Sanders sound. Thats were I'd look.
Good Luck |
Countingbackwards, the XA30.5's the OP was using is a pretty modern design. Moving up to a more powerful XA.5 would probably be ideal, but there are budget considerations. |
Getting past discussions of how much power the Thiels would need...there's also the difference in sonics of the different amps.
Does anybody have experience hearing Pass XA series, Pass X series, and Ayre amps...preferably with Thiel speakers? That info is of more use to the OP than discussions as to how much power he needs...once he has an idea of the different lines' sonics, then it's a matter of choosing the appropriate power for his speakers.
I've heard Thiel speakers, and I've heard (and owned) Ayre amps. I suspect they'd work together reasonably well - but I wasn't a huge fan of the combo of Simaudio electronics with Thiel speakers - the combo was a bit edgy. Thiel speakers can sound a bit bright with electronics that are "modern" sounding - as such, I'd be looking for an amp that doesn't overdo the top end at the expense of the midrange. My guess is that, sonically, the Pass XA series would be better than the Pass X-series or the Ayre with Thiel speakers...so perhaps just moving up to a bigger XA-series amp is a good idea. |
Cal3713, I was just responding to your thoughts of adding an independent 20 amp line for your amp. |
|
Charles1dad, we don't know of Steve's great sonic results, only of his opinion of such. Thiel recommends more power, Pass recommends more power, and there hasn't been anything but an anecdotal reason to suggest otherwise. The measurements provided by Steve don't seem to suggest that the c-j or something very similar, would be as good, never mind better than what the OP has already tried. I would think that the point OP started this thread was to expedite the process of selecting the appropriate amp for his needs. With that in mind, I think it fair to point out that the c-j or something very similar, for the reasons I've already posted, is not as likely to satisfy the OP to that end as much as some other alternatives. |
Russellrcncom, the placement of the volume knob might not be meaningful with re: to the respective differences between power output of the different amplifiers. The amplifiers just might have different input sensitivities for full power output, and your preamps might be providing that much or more or less than that much output at a given setting to drive your amplifier to full or near full output at less than the preamps full output. For example: one amp might need 2 volts to achieve full power output, the other amp might need 2.2 volts to achieve full power output to achieve full power output, while your pre amplifier might be able to put out up to 7 volts at it's maximum setting, and up to 2 volts at it's 8 o'clock setting. |
Unsound I certainly accept your apology, no problems.
Cal I`m glad you`re getting more out of your current Pass amp.Sometimes more power is the answer, but often I find it`s not the core problem. It`s usally higher 'quality' that`s needed.
Regards, |
Unsound, sorry, but can you elaborate on how knowing that the Pass is a 15 amp draw will help me? |
It's a funny world out there... wish we could all just take disks/equipment over to each other's house to examine the true state of affairs. Even since I made this thread, my INT-30A has kept improving (I'm about a month into ownership but leave it on constantly), and it is simply jaw-dropping spectacular a lot of the time. I'm growing increasingly concerned that the only thing I'll like better on the next amp will be the bass control and I'll only notice that when I listen to the very specific types of music that the deficiencies noticeable. |
Cal3713, FWIW the Pass XA30.5 is a 15 amp draw.
|
Charles1dad, the last line of my last post was uncalled for. Please accept my apologies. |
Unsound,
The obvious point is steve`s CJ amp drove ithe Thiel and the OP`s Pass amp apparently struggles. Among other choices perhaps he may want to at least considerThe CJ amp or something very similar based on steve`s great sonic result.
Regards, |
Charles1dad, I can't and won't discount Stevecham's listening experience, but he's the one that first provided measurements to support his position. I respect that he also offered this objective argument to his position. After all, without it; it all just becomes unsubstantiated opinion. That is not to say that subjective opinion is not without merit, and that includes his as well. Bear in mind, that I also offered similar subjective opinion with similar, if not quite identical gear. Furthermore, the OP's experience has suggested that under-powering these particular speakers was less than satisfactory. FWIW, based upon the posts here on Audiogon most seem to agree with Thiel, the OP, the usual technical arguments and my experience too, rather than Stevecham's.. If Stevecham is happy with his rig, power to him, but the OP is seeking advice and I opt to provide mine too. Speaking of which, what are you providing? |
I've never understood the argument of using the efficiency rating of a loudspeaker insofar as determining power requirements for an amplifier. I'm beginning to wonder if there is more to the equation. I'm currently using the V-5xe with Hales T8's which run at 87db and have nominal impedance of 4 ohms. I've been told by experts (someone who actually sold them) that the speaker needs enormous amounts of power. With the V-5xe I have never turned the preamp volume setting past 9 o'clock. With a threshold amp (which had the same power rating), anything past 8' o'clock would shatter window panes and my ear drums. |
This commentary regarding power supplies made me start wondering about my house's (rather poor) electrical situation. I'm in a short term (2 year) rental of a house built around 1940 and much of the house is on the same circuit as my electronics (and will actually blow if my girlfriend uses a hair drier or electric heater while I'm watching TV or listening to music). Given the temporary nature of the situation, I don't think I can run an independent 20 amp line, but is there a way to check whether that circuit is impacting the amp's current draw (and therefor my system's bass response)? Aside from having noisy power, my uninformed opinion was that current delivery wouldn't be a problem unless the fuse was breaking when I tried to play music loud (which has never happened). |
