Jeff Rowland


I recently replaced my Parasound A21 with a JR M525. It has taken my system to new levels: soundstaging, spacing between instruments, tonality, and a natural midrange. The M525 is the first amp I've ever owned that presents a 3 dimensional soundstage. All that being said, now I wonder what improvements going from the M525 to the JR S2 integrated or bridged M525s will yield? Is it a night and day difference? Are bridged M525 better than the S2? My system: Aerial 7Ts, PS Audio DirectStream DAC, Bryston BDP-2, and all Wireworld Silver 7 cables.
ricred1

Showing 3 responses by guidocorona

Richard, the safe/conservative approach is not to add a second M525 chassis for a bridged configuration, but to move up the chain instead with an amp that inherently delivers greater power....

Within the Rowland line, that means the Continuum S2 integrated, which is also said to enhance all those audible parameters that you already like on M525.

On the other hand, there are reasons why Rowland was comfortable enabling bridging via a simple toggle on the rear panel... According to all reports I have heard, M525 in bridged mode does not degrade the sound quality, and delivers larger stage/images, and greater authority.

Of course, things might be different with speakers having relatively low impedance.

G.
Hi Richard, I do not expect Capri S2 to degrade the sound, but it is likely to modify the tembre very subtly.... Based on my memory of Continuum S2, which includes the Capri S2 linestage circuit, Sound might become slightly warmer, and probably the bass might acquire a little more body.... All of this after appropriate break-in of course.

If you get Capri S2, will you also get the $400 DAC card for it? I have heard that it is quite a treat!

G.
Hi Richard, the universal "true truth" non existing in audio, the ultimate beauty for one person is sometimes "not my cup of tea" for another one.

So for example, while Jon feels that the Rowland sound is somewhat dark and rolled off at the top while AYRE is extended and thusly preferable, I feel that Rowland yields my preferred kind of extended range and extreme musicality, while I perceive AYRE to be excessive in its highlighting of treble, and in fact can't listen to AYRE for more than a few minutes at a time.

Who is right and who is wrong... No one really... It depends on how we perceive sound and what turns into greater beauty in our mind.

Concerning removal of detail, I fear that any preamplifier you place in the chain is of necessity a compromise: it will inevitably remove microscopic amounts of detail, and is bound to modify the sound in some way. The issue that one needs to address is... Does the change of a particular preamp enhances your experience of beauty in sound, or overall does it detract from it?

And sometimes... Does the house sound of manufacturer "A" meet your conception of nirvana more than manufacturer "B", or viceversa, or... none of the above?

G.