Benchmark AHB2 compared to Rogue Atlas Magnum III


Very different amps.  Paired with Revels F208, and a Benchmark DAC3, do you thing there will be a difference in the sound?  I am unsure if the F208's can reveal the differences.  If there were to be a difference with these speakers or an upgraded speaker, what might the differences sound like, or maybe not much difference between two great amps?  Thanks.  I have never owned a tube amp.  I have listened to this Rogue amp on different speakers though.  

12many

Showing 2 responses by tvrgeek

Difference is between virtually no distortion and able to drive anything, vs the often preferred distortions, not well quantified, from tube amplifiers. 

Just my impression, but tubes seem to be more dynamic for the power. Amps like the Benchmark somehow seem a bit stiff upper lip if you get what I mean. Could be I am so used to MOSFET amps. 

Another impression, the metal domes in Revel's ( listened to bookshelf's only) just get to me slightly from otherwise very well balanced speakers. Guess I am just a soft dome guy. ( leaning to either my own or Sonas Faber) 

Only way to make the choice is compare them both side by side. Listening one by one does not tell you much. Our memory is not that good and out subconscious bias is stronger. You will hear what you want to hear and it does not matter what you think you want to hear. 

IMHO, there is no such thing as a good speaker with stable impedance.  Some better than others, some horrible, and yes it effects the sound of an amplifier.  The better the amp, the more load invariant it will be.  I expect the Benchmark to be immune, where a Fosi V3 is a disaster.  Really ugly impedance/phase can actually cause an amp to be unstable if the feedback compensation was not well enough done. Boy to I know about his. $$

As I have improved my speakers, DACs, amps, I am in a quandary. Really good recordings sound better, but poor ones sound worse. Makes me wonder if the distortions and masking of tubes, maybe preamp, would help the overall musicality. Most of my music is "my generation" so early remasters of tape or first generation digital, so not very good. 

 

On the speaker impedance: Speakers are horribly complex loads. Unfortunately, most amps are tested with resistive loads.  Flat response into 8 Ohms etc. Well speakers have resonance peaks, phase shifts, dips or peaks due to the crossover and rising with frequency.  Typically.  Good designers can minimize these to some extent. Now a well designed amplifier is a VOLTAGE amplifier and should care not what the load does. It should supply whatever current is needed for the voltage gain.  2 to 30 Ohms from 1/4W to full power, 20 to 20K  is a fair range. One clue is if the power @ 4W is double that of 8 and they claim 2 Ohm stable.  Usually this is a function of power supply and feedback implementation.  Poor class D amps seem to have great difficulty with this.  Newer ones, just fine. ( I still don't seem to like them though). Solid State can do this. Tubes are tougher as the transformer would like to see a narrower impedance  range as a load. Probably why synergy with tubes is a litter harder than with SS. This issue is not a mystery and can be measured but it is not a single number to be advertised. 

Mastering is a problem.  Billy Joel recordings seem to have 4100 really boosted. Loudness wars peaking to 0 dB which really screws up digital filters. Moody Blues were just plain terrible. Early Beatles really hard Left and Right, not stereo.  Sheffield mastered very low level for wider dynamic range. The only thing I can think of is to evaluate and pre-process every track in the digital domain and store the processed results for playback. 

Trying to get used to my new Schiit Vidar. Quite clean. Not quite Benchmark, but clean. Different from my MOSFET ( my own). Seems to do drum impacts cleaner but less dynamic.  Better control so keeps the drivers from flopping in the breeze?  Am I used to a sloppy sound?  I converted my mains to sealed from ported at the same time, so a difference there. ( I prefer low Q sealed alignments) My main focus is on female vocals and possible sibilance, then if solo instruments sound right. Guitar, obo, flute. I gave up on pianos as I don't think one has ever been recorded well. 

Listened to a lot of speakers recently up to about 5K. Of all of them I find I liked the Sonas Faber Lumina''s the best but at medium volume. They can't really do a Beethoven crescendo.  Revels were very well balanced, but just can't take the hard dome. Not much else I liked at all. I tried a couple hard domes in my speakers (Seas ER18 paper woofers, and a series of domes and crossovers)  Back to the SB soft dome.  I was hoping the AMT's would advance now the patents expired, but nope, every one I heard is terrible. Air with a big helping of distortion to go with it. 

The end result is that is is still up to the individual. Hearing is our brains interpretation of the sound. It is not real. We all have our sensitivities and preferences so "right" is only in the eyes ( ears) or the individual.  I can't tell you what you will hear. I may know a power cord can't by the laws of physics make a difference in "air" , but that does not mean people who believe they do are making it up when they hear it. They hear it, real or not.  Our brains are the biggest liars on the planet. 

PS: I have heard soft domes break up and sizzle worse than a $2 aluminum one. So, like everything else, "it depends"  I just have not heard a metal dome I liked including the new Be uber-priced ones. I would say it is the tweeter, not the crossover as I have tried to tame several SEAS metal domes, got fine free-field response, but not liked them.