Krell is recommending capacitively coupling the amp to resolve the glare issue-FPB is direct coupled of course. Something they recommend to do with Tube Preamps regardless, which I have. The KAV I owned before this FPB comes from the factory capacitively coupled. I personally think this is not the answer in trying to resolve sibilance, but the only thing that is compelling me to do it is the fact my KAV sounded great. Alot sweeter. If adding a capacitor into the signal path will change sibilance I will do it, but given the fact there already about 500 Caps already in the path, I have my doubts that adding one more will do much in softening glare.
Working in steps, taking deep breaths trying to be patient as I go..Otherwise, this thing is a boat anchor. : ) |
I think you might be right, and if nothing else it's the path of least resistance first. I am actually anxious to try the Auditorium 23's as they are supposed to great for the money. I guess you could say 8tc is not quite up to the task of this system now, I was just hoping not to get sucked into the expensive speaker cable trap again. But heck, if it works I am game.
I gotta tell you though, the detail and smoothness, accuracy, and speed, bass response, silence, and soundstage is everything I expected in this amp. In that respect I love it. In fact the soundstage changed enough that I had to re-toe my speakers to compensate. But...I won't completely head over heels in love with this new Krell like I was my old Krell until I resolve the glare.
My ultimate fear is that this Krell is not for me, and have to go with another amp. That would be a chore and half.
How do you like your Pass? Nice choice. |
Jc51373, better cables will certainly help.
I think now, with this amplifier, you should be able to tell difference between cables pretty easily.
You said you think that your speakers are the weakest link. I think your speaker cables are the weakest link at this point. They barely fit with the rest of your system now that you have taken it to the next level.
If you don't want to spend a lot on speaker cables, try a used pair of Acoustic Zen Satori Shotgun. They should be a very nice step up. I had these and they worked pretty good with my B&Ws. |
Another theory on this glare I am experiencing is the listening room...I have increased the soundstage of the speaker considerably blah, blah, blah. Maybe getting glare of the walls etc I was not getting before because the sound is greater. Crazy? |
Great advice Audphile1...You really know your stuff. thx!
I have Nordost Tyr from source to pre, and pre to amp. Then Kimber 8tc for speakers. My dealer has already suggested it being the speaker cables and he is going to send me a set of Auditorium 23's to audition once they come back from a current audition. If sp cables solved glare I would be shocked, not that I am doubting, I would just be very impressed by that cable.
The amp is on standby at the moment, so it warms fairly quickly, but I think it sat ALOT and did nothing, so your points are good ones. And yes the amp is ridiculously resolving. |
Naturally this amp is more resolving than your Krell KAV was. So now you probably hear more of your other components. Not that the speakers are in fault here, but could be your upstream gear.
what are your IC and sp cables?
Also, I'd suggest leaving the amp on for few days with music playing most of the time. If you just inserted the amp into your system it could be that it hasn't fully warmed up and the caps are not fully charged yet. |
Hey Aduphile1...I have not had a chance to get back there yet. I gotta be honest, I am afraid if I go back and listen to the 803d's again will walk out with them and $8k worth of debt.
I am experiencing a little glare, or glassiness if you will with this amp, and I have to diagnose what that could be. My first reaction is it is the speakers' crossover spec limitations being displayed by the amp. I have to give it more time of course, but glare is something I experienced with the MAC as well, although it was more pronounced. I am hoping the problem resolves itself as I listen more and more.
No thanks to Audphile, now I can't get my mind off the 803d's. : ) |
Jc51373, sorry I screwed things up for you by suggesting the audition of 803Ds.
My bad
:)
Have you had a chance to go back to the dealer and listen to 803S vs 803D? |
I would get a two Plinius sa 102 and bi-amp or bi-wire you would get outstanding results. |
Amp is in, first impressions are good to excellent. To be honest the amp is not even close broken in yet. Previous owner just cracked the box 10 months ago and he was using for rear channels in HT. Go figure....Wish I could use a 400cx for rear channels, must be nice...Anyway, detail and control are great, darker background. I have gone through the Krell break-in process twice before, so surprisingly I can tell with my own ear. Is that good or does that make me pathetic?
One thing I have to get used to is the heat, holy crap this thing gets hot, heats my whole room up. Thermostat is in the same room and my heat has not kicked on once since I have been listening. Have to give it more breathing room since there is only a few inches above it at the moment; not even close to enough. This thing needs freedom.
One thing is for sure, and I am not happy about it. My existing speakers are outclassed now. Need 803D's and this system will be perfection. |
Thanks guys...I will report back on my thoughts on the 803s. I don't want boomy, but I will spike them like I did my n804's which totally saps the boom right out of em.
I think long term I would just simply be happier something a smidge bigger to match the Krell (arrives next week). But, I gotta be honest, and it has nothing to do with the fact I own them now, I love my little N804s, they are a very capable speaker. I say capable because I have auditioned so much equipment over the years and they are able to reveal all the subtle differences pretty accurately, with b&w style of course.
803D's are an entirely different story altogether. |
Glad you are finally looking past the 804s for real bass. I hoped you would take my advice. But the 803 do need a pretty large room to not sound boomy. The new 804S might be just the ticket for you and shouldn't be overlooked - they sound like a bigger speaker with more meat on the bottom when compared to your N804.
Arthur |
let me know how that A/B audition goes. As I mentioned I think stepping up to 803 whether D or S will be a big step over your current speakers. Seems like you could still listen to your system but can't stop thinking about the bigger B&Ws. :)
P.S
120w/ch Mac for these B&Ws is not an amp. |
Thanks Audphile! Excellent points you make here..I think the next step is to a/b the 803Ds and the 803s. I don't know why I didn't do that when I was there before. Now that I think about it, over the years in this hobby I have never given the 803's a good listen, so I gotta do my due diligence.
I am also going to make sure they use better equipment for the next audition, since they used Mac equipment, which I don't like the sound of at all, and it was only 120 a channel. Poo!
This time, VTL and Bryston, since they don't have Krell, and I don't want to lug my FPB there. They won't let you take the Diamonds for a home audition because b&w has some strict policy about damage to those tweeters-basically because they cost so much. I fully admit, I loved the sound of the 803Ds, they reminded me of the difference I experienced when I put auditioned Levinson gear here at home, prior to settling on what I have now..Smooth, balanced, a little darker etc. But....And this is the exact same But I had with Levinson...I always thought the price did not justify the improvement in sound. More to come on that once hear the two 803's...
More importantly, I need to find some medication for this horrible disease I have come down with, Upgraditus.
|
I told ya the 803D kick ass.
The speakers that made me not want to listen to my system for about 2 days were the Wilson Alexandria run by all top of the line Levinson(33H monos, top preamp and player). other than that, I have not experienced anything yet that made me not want to listen to my system whan I got home. Well, aside from some live performances I heard of course, so....
Here is my take:
going from your speakers to 803S is a big jump in performance. Low end, soundstaging, ability to play more effortlessly, it's all there. Actually between the N803 and N804 there was a big difference when my friend was buying the speakers. He intially wanted the N804 but once he listened to the same cut on the N803 it was all over.
For me though, what actually sets apart the 803D from the 803S is not only the extra bass driver(which I love by the way because the bass has tremendous impact that my N803 can not even touch) but the tweeter.
The D tweeter is silky smooth and really detailed in the most natural way. And to me the 803Ds are the best balance of all good(including price/performance ratio) things in the B&W 800 line. The new diamond tweeter is worlds apart from the older tweeter, which if I am not mistaking is on the 803S. The 803S is like I said a very nice step up from your N804 anyway. Actually the 803S go a bit deeper in the bass than my N803. Which is nice, but the tweeter man....the tweeter....that for me is the main attraction on the 803D.
I think if you can swing the 803Ds, you will not regret it. The difference between the 803S and 803D you heard could have been limited by electronics, but with your Krell, the 803Ds should be just excellent. My opinion, but your money, so it's all up to you, but you know what the 803D sound like and you know what you are missing, but can you live without what the 803Ds do? If yes, then cool. |
Audphile1, I auditioned for only about an hour the 803d's. Smooth as silk...I actually had the dealer a/b back and forth from my current speaker 804 to the 803d, was very different.
I am not going to say I don't like the sound of my 804's anymore like I thought would happen-Phew! But the 803d is undoubtedly a better more balanced sounding speaker. Here is my contention with this potential upgrade- 1) price is a big jump from where I am now 2) Although much better, price to upgrade does not match the improvement in sound I heard 3) they are hugemungous-ginormous : ) 4) this is a personal preference, but I do not like the look of the extra driver (grills solve this).
So that leaves me with one remaining question for you...What about an upgrade to the newer 803s?? Too lateral? I am not looking to blow my head of with bass, but a nice low end usually ads to mid range smoothness and perception as well.
For the moment the 803s is more attainable, and quite honestly I like the height and look of them better.
803d's are in fact everything everyone here on the forums say they are though. |
Ok, done with this...I think I put into context very well the differences in an above response if you read through. Moving on.... |
Jc51373,
the quote "I was disappointed when I first got it. The bass was there alright, but the highs sounded harsh, voices sharp." is correct - but not the context. As I wrote as well, and mentioned in this thread, all this completely changed after the amp was burned in. Otherwise, I obviously would not have kept the 402.
I want to make a few more points.
First, I am not at all an offended Mac-owner. Like Mike, I was astonished to see your comments, because it it just the opposite what McIntosh-users, listeners and reviewers experience all over the world.
There is valid criticism of McIntosh to be made -e.g. that they are not the most detailed amps. This is true from what I have heard myself, when I exchanged my 402 for a Densen power amp. I was able to hear a detail I could not hear with the Mac.
Otherwise, however, the Densen was inferior in the areas that matter to me: a musical, weighty bass, a natural presentation, and so on. The points you make seem to be completely out of line of the typical experience, and so I highly doubt that these are valid points in general.
Moreover, I get very critical when I hear, or see, people writing in absolute terms:
"It is my belief McIntosh and Krell are in two completely diffent classes" or "I basically think the Mac is a tier below what I thought it would be, nice entry-level amp, but not for someone looking to move up from a Krell piece."
This kind of sweeping, generalizing statement is something I would never make - at least not today. My experience in two decades as an audiophile is that absolute statements of this kind are usually nonsense.
Amps, like everything else, depend on a lot of factors to work successful: cables, preamp, room acouctics, you name it. One thing I have learned is that even the own listening experiences have to be taken with a large grain of salt, and that they are not generally valid.
One example: I like LAT International cables a lot, and have recommended them to many a friend, to their benefit. Once, however, I tried the LATs in the system of a friend, who has the same speakers - Shahinian Diapason - but other equipment. The LATs, in his system, were not as good as in mine. Likewise, he gave me some Goertz Alphacore cable to try, which sounded shrill and awful in my system - but wonderful in his.
When I wrote " you may lack the experience necessary to judge components on their own merit", I did not mean you lacked the experience of listenening to the 402, but that you lack the experience of putting it into context. I stay with that statement.
And lastly: Yes, I have listened to a Krell amp in my system, I found it to offer amazing bass, but not sounding as musical as the Mac. But I do not think Mac makes the "better" amp - it is different, and works better in my system, for my taste.
Regards,
Florian Hassel |
offended Mac owners vs. offended Krell owner
Both will sound great in their respective setups of different environments ultimately based on the listener's ears and preferences.
Jc, I believe the description by Hassel you have quoted was made when the unit is not broken-in yet. |
Jc51373, I think the MAC you had probably needed more break in.....just giving it a benefit of a doubt.
I've heard the MC402 amp bunch of times and never really found the highs harsh, but did find the overall presentation uninvolving. There I completely agree with you. You have to like this type of sound to appreciate the MAC. That is why usually most people who like McIntosh gear don't like Audio Research, Krell and Pass.
I prefer the sonic presentation of ARC, Krell or Pass. They just draw a more honest sonic picture.
I also like Levinson gear, although it is more on the darker side, but still involving and musical. |
Not to be a complete ball-buster, but I saw this and just couldn't resist..Particularly since HASSEL quoted me...Right back at cha HASSEL....Here is your description in your System description of the Mc402:
"I was diappointed when I first got it. The bass was there alright, but the highs sounded harsh, voices sharp."
This is exactly what I described it to sound like, and discovering you had the same impressions, albeit it different now, is just too funny. |
Audphile1- I would LOVE a pair of Diamonds. Once I am finished with the AMP, I will look into it. They are nice. |
I think you'll be wow'd. I'd like to get my 300C upgraded to a 400CX...just haven't gotten around to it. I don't want to go "ampless" for any amount of time.
BTW - the 400CX will be slightly bigger/heavier than the 402. |
I'm kinda late getting in on this, but I have a nearly identical system except for the source. (Arcam CD93 -> VTL 5.5 -> Krell KAV 2250 -> B&W N804.) I did try some older Macs, 2105's I think, in a biamped configuration. Just wasn't to my liking as the music wasn't quite as full. I should note that these amps sounded wonderful in my friend's room with DIY speakers. Anyway, I found that the new Classe CA 2200 was excellent in my system in my room (dedicated). In fact I preferred the sound to Manley Snappers. I preferred the Snappers to the Krell, however. FWIW, my reference live music is the jazz combos and local music in New Orleans. The Snappers do a better job of making the bass sound more live than the Krells or the Classe. Go figure. However, the Classe provides a very nice tonal richness and balance that was very pleasing to listen to even at low volumes. I did hear both of these amps in my own system for 4 days each. Hope this helps, but if you've already purchased the Krells, you've made a good decision. Good luck. |
Jc, good for you! Please let us know your impressions, I enjoy reading your posts. ;-) Have fun and enjoy the music... |
Jc51373, should be an awesome amp.
If you think you may consider a speaker upgrade in the future and if you like B&W sound, I think the new 803D will impress you. |
Joeyboy, I am buying an FPB 400cx, in the process of settling on one now. |
Hi Mike, you make some good points, there may have been something wrong with the unit. It's certainly a possibility. Although it didn't sound like there were any major problems, which you can usually pick up on that pretty quickly. There was one other person here who had the exact same impression of the Mac that I had though, and I am not surprised there are more Mac owners responding than people with the same experiences that I have had.
When I described the amp midrange I also said it sounded etched, which is probably the most accurate adjective I used in describing it. It just didn't sound smooth and rhythmic to me at all, and I don't think this was because it was broken, just the way it sounded in my room etc.
When I say the Mac is a different amp than the Krell, I mean to the FPB line up, not my current Kav. I think the FPB is a different class. Neither here nor there though, as long as people like what they have is all that matters. |
JC51373,
You are certainly entitled to your opinions and I think the reason many Mac users here are having a hard time with your observations is that they are exactly opposite of all other Mac users. I don't think I have ever heard anyone, either in a professional review, this site or AA, describe a Mac amp as harsh in the mid-range, or sharp or raspy. This leads me to think there may have been a problem with the unit you had at home. I am familiar with your Krell, having auditioned one in my system. It is indeed a very good amp but to call the Mac a tier below it and an entry level piece is certainly not my experience at all, which again leads me to believe there was some serious issues with that particular Mac amp or synergy in your system. Anyway, good luck and enjoy your amp!
Mike |
Jc51373, So are you keeping the Krell? I love my Krell and would never sell it. Well, maybe for a Pass Labs amp ;-) |
One other point I would make here Florian...Have you listened to Krell and Mac, and literally A/B'd the two? If you have please forgive, but it seems you lack the experience and only have printed reviews to give you ANY insight into the Krell sound. I have put all these products in my system and listened, and take reviews at face value. |
Lack experience? I lugged this crappy amp home, listened critically for days and hours, and I lack experience? Hey Florian newsflash, you sound like an offended Mac owner. Rather than arguing and stooping to your level I will simply say, that quote was from my "First Impressions". So take what you want from whatever I wrote, where ever you want to, I could care less. The Mac is totally inferior in my system, and in comparing an FPB to the Mac is in FACT not completely accurate. One is Class A and the other Class A/B, case closed. There is a major difference in sonics.
Let me sum this up for you so people don't get the wrong message here on what I am and have been trying to say. The sound signature of the Mac amp is simply not for me. And any Krell, or Levinson amp I have EVER listened to in all my many years of experience in this hobby (not matter what the peripherals were) sounded better and more natural than the Mac. Which leads me to say the Mac is inferior in it's presentation of music in comparison to the amps I am considering. |
Jc51373,
to everybody his opinion. However, I do not think it makes sense to say a company would make a better product any time, nor does it make sense to say that McIntosh and Krell are in two completely different classes. They are different amps in the same class. People change from Krell to Mac, or the other way round.
The German magazine Audio, in its December 2006 issue, ran the McIntosh C1000 preamp and 2KW amps against Krell´s new top of the line Evolution preamp and amps. A six-editors-panel gave the nod to the 40,000 S Krell Evolution Two preamp as being a slight touch more honest than the 17,000 S C 1000 McIntosh preamp, but all preferred the 60,000 $ Mac-amps over the 50,000 Krell amps.
Also, I find it somewhat strange that you get a 402 and first write
"Mac better in every way in my system over the Krell so far. I am picking up more detail in my music, much more. Very nice sound stage, a little wider, and deeper, but much quieter, or darker if you will. Bass is taut (sp?) and punchy, appropriately so, no overly punchy, no boomy at all, balanced."
and then trash the Mac again. This makes me think that you may lack the experience necessary to judge components on their own merit.
Regards,
Florian Hassel |
That's why there's vanilla & chocolate!
I have a 'dog in the fight' as I own a MC402 amp. Sharp, rasspy and overly pronounced are not adjectives I would ever use to describe this amp. I too have been through some amps (none were Krell) and while not the last word in detail, the MC-402 I have in a very good system is worlds apart from you have experienced.
Vanilla & Chocolate...........Krell works with your gear! |
So now that I am back to my Krell I can make a better more accurate comparison in what I heard in comparing my Krell (KAV) and the MC402.
MC402- very detailed, quiet, nice bass, not overly tight, but not boomy either. Full spectrum of the music represented with the Mac, whereas some amps are weak in one area or another. Mid-range however, at moderate volumes sounded harsh and etched in my system. Highs (and this is where I noticed a big difference) sounded grainy compared to my Krell.
All around the Krell is just smoother, very much smmooooooooother, more refined...More dynamic and more balanced and emotional. Dynamic peaks came from a darker soundstage with the Krell, as opposed to the MC402, I knew the tones were coming since it was so much slower. The Krell places instruments/performers better than the Mac as well.
I can say with confidence, and this might not please those with this amp, that it is NOT a weakness or difference in my system. The reason I say this is because I have had other amps in my system and they did very well. If for some reason however, the Mac can not work with something I have, that adds to the weaknesses of this amp IMO.
It is my belief McIntosh and Krell are in two completely diffent classes, even at the KAV level of Krell. One of the things I would use as an example is the parent company of McIntosh, and the fact they have piece where they slap their own faceplace on a crappy Escient product-weak. I don't mean to slam this amp, but I guess I am. If it were worth it's salt IMO, I would rave about it. I basically think the Mac is a tier below what I thought it would be, nice entry-level amp, but not for someone looking to move up from a Krell piece.
Sorry if I offended any Mac owners, but I would suggest going to audition a Kav and see for yourself. The difference is jaw-dropping. |
I just went back to my Krell, and WOW. It feels good to be home. Sounds better in everyway, no harshness at the same volume level. Maybe I just keep this amp, the Mac gave me a new found respect for it. |
We all are entitled to our own opinion. I agree with your dealer about the B&W and Mac matching, so if there is a mis-match it is elsewhere, in my opinion.
Again, the issues you describe such as those with Cassandra are simply not issues for me. |
Sorry to be harsh on em, and I don't mean to offend..I just think this thing is overpriced for what one would get. But you make a good point on system synergy, maybe it doesn't sound good with B&W or VTL. Only thing I would say to that is that my dealer recommends them with B&W.
Who knows, bottom line it is not for me, and quite honestly I wish it were, because I don't want to continue the arduous process of auditioning. Nor do I want to pick this thing up again...I am listening to Cassandra Wilson right now, and when I get up to a moderate volume the Mid range becomes sharp, hissy, and overly pronounced. Don't get me wrong, there are some very nice qualities to this amp, just the sound is imcomplete to me. |
Jc51373, I commend you for knowing what you like, on the other hand I cannot agree with your brutal assessment of McIntosh as a whole. I mentioned above the imporatnce of system synergy and you agreed, I suspect there may be a lack of this in your system with this amp. I am not trying to make excuses for the amp, but rather own it myself, with totally different gear, and "sterile and uninvolving" is not a problem for me.
Others can explain the autoformer better than I, but in a nut shell it allows you to best match your amp to speaker impedance. |
Hassel-this is a dealer demo, not a new piece so no need for break in.
I hear different responses for different types of music....I feel overall this would be a compromise for my tastes. There is no doubt to me though, that there is just an emptiness in the sound for me with this amp. It handles the full spectrum of sound fairly equally, with some semblence of balance. But overall I am find it sterile and uninvolving. Not for me..Glad I was able to do this though, otherwise I would never have known all these details. This amp is definately not for me...And in further researching someone needs to explain to me why McIntosh uses an output transformer ("Autoformer) with their power supply??? Kind of an odd design no?
I can honestly say after hearing this piece I would never buy anything McIntosh. I have auditioned other pieces I would love to buy (levinson), but McIntosh is not for me. Krell will be the next thing I listen too. |
So strange you find the 402 aggravating and harsh at the same time as relaxed and weighty. I have never heard any amp that was that way. The Mcs I have heard are silky in the midrange and highs - almost too much so for some systems.
But also, you have to overcome familiarity. It is very hard for anyone to wrap their mind around that. I have dismissed equipment before and looking back, I am pretty sure it was simply because it wasn't like what I was used to. But if that is good enough for you, stick with my original suggestion - get a Krell.
Arthur |
Jc51373, you judge too quickly. The 402 takes weeks to brake in properly, and is in no way slow, harsh in the mids or shrill in the highs, or only enjoyable with jazz. My own 402 disappointed me in exactly the same way that you describe now, however I was told to stick to it, and everything would come out fine. Which is exactly what happened. I listen to AC/DC, Sonny Rollins, and Mahler, and the Mac is involving and lively with all kinds of music. |
I guess the question remains are there others out there that compete with the Krell sound? Plinius maybe??
If you find Mac very relaxed in its presentation, you would find Plinius even more relaxed. Seems like the Krell FPB will suit your listening preferences in driving your B&W's. Great combination in your case. |
I hear you man. That is my impression also. I've heard these amps with exact same speakers as I have. Good, but I always walked away. Never bought the amp.
Ended up with Pass Labs X250.5 and love the way this thing sounds with my B&Ws. Very fine amp. Dynamic, smooth and detailed. No fatigue. Class A bias to 35w/ch after which it switches to A/B and still manages to sound awesome. Also a beast though.....around 100lbs.
I always loved the way Krell FPB amps sounded and wanted to get the Krell, but couldn't resist the Pass Labs amp when I heard it. Especially at the price.
I went through the same thing you are going through but I did that with a cd player. I always wanted the ARC CD3MkII since the day it was released. Tried to find the alternative. Tried different players, spent $ and was never happy until I saw that CD3MkII on top of my audio rack.
Don't waste time and money. You know what you want. Nothing else will suffice. |
Audphile1, thats exactly what I feel like I am doing....Making myself like this thing, it's obviously not for me. They do have Levinson, and I may snag a 432 just so I can listen to on my system. I had a 36 DAC from ML a while back and I loved the sound, although it was a little dark, but nice overall presentation. Great for critical listening.
I honestly think in the end I will come full circle and go with Krell, seems like my heart lies there. I can honestly say, I am trying to move away from Krell and finding it VERY difficult. And this has little to do with being used to the sound of Krell. I am thrilled at the opportunity to listen to other amps and discover new things, but none of them stack up. I will try the Levinson and see if the buck stops there...If not it is FPB all the way baby!
I can honestly say in the end, I am not impressed at all with MAC other than in very relaxed presentations. |
Jc51373, go for Krell FPB. Don't MAKE yourself like this amp. If it's not for you, then that is it.
Does your dealer have anything else aside from the MAC he can let you listen to? Classe, Pass, Audio Research, Levinson? |
Screw this thing....I don't want to be pigeon-holed in one type of music. I am listening to Diana Krall right now and she sounds great, but then I move to something else and I get aggravated. Fatigues me quickly.
Krell kills this thing, even at the KAV level. Sorry guys...More time I spend listening critically to this thing the more I want to throw it off my deck...If only it weren't so obease. : ) |
This amp seems to do better with Jazz in my system This is EXACTLY what I observed when I had the MC-352. I honestly just thought I had lost appreciation for other types of music because all I wanted to listen to was quieter or simpler jazz tracks. They sounded fantastic though. Then when I got the Krell, Everything I was listening to sounded great, with more detail and emotion, plus I went back to listening to everything else again...almost immediately. It was then that I became suspicious of what was going on. |
There is something a little harsh in the mid range with this amp, in my system....It's a little annoying actually. I am trying soooo much different music and finding whether I like it or not is dependant on the recordning, and the type of music. This amp seems to do better with Jazz in my system, once I get to a recording with more musical information, the mid range sounds like it runs together more. This may be to the 'slowness' of the amp, not being able to keep up like my Krell.
Lastly, I am reading through the owners manual of the Krell stuff and it has a disclaimer in there about using Tube Preamps with FPB equipment. Says it needs to be configured to accept the DC signal. Anyone have any experience with this? |
Dbld- I have heard this too. I think the reason people might say this is because the Mac is truly a 'balanced' connection. Meaning very simply, each pin breaks off into it's own path, they are not combined inside. So....If you have a preamp that is not truly balanced, it makes no sense to use Balanced, and you would most likely get better results with the RCA connection. I have a 5.5, and it is truly balanced.
So I took this one step further tonight and put the Mac in the place my Krell is currently in. Last night I had it just sitting out in the middle of the room, and it was an eyesore. So it is in the place it would live in my system now...I have to say, I like the way it looks ALOT better this way, I was a little skeptical before since this thing looks a little Spartan. I can see why people match up all Mac stuff, looks great. Kind of a status symbol ehh??
Anway, I am listening, listening and listening this eve...Allison Kraus (Union Station) right now, very nice. Amp is alot slower than Krell though, no doubt. |
