2. amps-preamps
  3. 126624-10101

My Long List of Amplifiers and My Personal Review of Each!

So I have been in a long journey looking to find the best amplifiers for my martin logan montis. As you know, the match between an amplifier and speakers has to be a good "marriage" and needs to be blend exquisitely. Right now, I think I might have found the best sounding amplifier for martin logan. I have gone through approximately 34-36 amplifiers in the past 12 months. Some of these are:

Bryston ST, SST, SST2 series
NAD M25
PARASOUND HALO
PARASOUND CLASSIC
KRELL TAS
KRELL KAV 500
KRELL CHORUS
ROTEL RMB 1095
CLASSE CT 5300
CLASSE CA 2200
CLASSE CA 5200
MCINTOSH MC 205
CARY AUDIO CINEMA 7
OUTLAW AUDIO 755
LEXICON RX7
PASS LABS XA 30.8
BUTLER AUDIO 5150
ATI SIGNATURE SERIES 6005

With all that said, the amplifiers I mentioned above are the ones that in my opinion are worth mentioning. To make a long story short, there is NO 5 CHANNEL POWER AMP that sounds as good as a 3ch and 2ch amplifier combination. i have done both experiments and the truth is that YOU DO lose details and more channel separation,etc when you select a 5 channel power amplifier of any manufacturer.
My recollection of what each amp sounded like is as follows:

ATI SIGNATURE SERIES 6005 (great power and amazing soundstage. Very low noise floor, BUT this amplifiers NEEDS TO BE cranked up in order to fully enjoy it. If you like listening at low volume levels or somewhat moderate, you are wasting your time here. This amp won’t sound any different than many other brands out there at this volume. The bass is great, good highs although they are a bit bright for my taste)

NAD M25 (very smooth, powerful, but somewhat thin sounding as far as bass goes)
Bryston sst2(detailed, good soundstage, good power, but can be a little forward with certain speakers which could make them ear fatiguing at loud volumes)

Krell (fast sounding, nice bass attack, nice highs, but some detail does get lost with certain speakers)

rotel (good amp for the money, but too bright in my opinion)

cary audio (good sound overall, very musical, but it didn’t have enough oomph)

parasound halo (good detail, great bass, but it still holds back some background detail that i can hear in others)

lexicon (very laid back and smooth. huge power, but if you like more detail or crisper highs, this amp will disappoint you)

McIntosh mc205 (probably the worst multichannel amp given its price point. it was too thin sounding, had detail but lacked bass.

butler audio (good amplifier. very warm and smooth sweet sounding. i think for the money, this is a better amp than the parasound a51)

pass labs (very VERY musical with excellent bass control. You can listen to this for hours and hours without getting ear fatigue. however, it DOES NOT do well in home theater applications if all you have is a 2 channel set up for movies. The midrange gets somewhat "muddy" or very weak sounding that you find yourself trying to turn it up.

classe audio (best amplifier for multi channel applications. i simply COULDNT FIND a better multi channel amplifier PERIOD. IT has amazing smoothness, amazing power and good bass control although i would say krell has much better bass control)

Update: The reviews above were done in January 2015. Below is my newest update as of October 2016:



PS AUDIO BHK 300 MONOBLOCKS: Amazing amps. Tons of detail and really amazing midrange. the bass is amazing too, but the one thing i will say is that those of you with speakers efficiency of 87db and below you will not have all the "loudness" that you may want from time to time. These amps go into protection mode when using a speaker such as the Salon, but only at very loud levels. Maybe 97db and above. If you don’t listen to extreme crazy levels, these amps will please you in every way.

Plinius Odeon 7 channel amp: This is THE BEST multichannel amp i have ever owned. Far , but FAR SUPERIOR to any other multichannel amp i have owned. In my opinion it destroyed all of the multichannel amps i mentioned above and below. The Odeon is an amp that is in a different tier group and it is in a league of its own. Amazing bass, treble and it made my center channel sound more articulate than ever before. The voices where never scrambled with the action scenes. It just separated everything very nicely.

Theta Dreadnaught D: Good detailed amp. Looks very elegant, has a pleasant sound, but i found it a tad too bright for my taste. I thought it was also somewhat "thin" sounding lacking body to the music. could be that it is because it is class d?

Krell Duo 300: Good amp. Nice and detailed with enough power to handle most speakers out there. I found that it does have a very nice "3d" sound through my electrostatics. Nothing to fault here on this amp.
Mark Levinson 532H: Great 2 channel amp. Lots of detail, amazing midrange which is what Mark Levinson is known for. It sounds very holographic and will please those of you looking for more detail and a better midrange. As far as bass, it is there, but it is not going to give you the slam of a pass labs 350.5 or JC1s for example. It is great for those that appreciate classical music, instrumental, etc, but not those of you who love tons of deep bass.

 It is articulate sounding too
Krell 7200: Plenty of detail and enough power for most people. i found that my rear speakers contained more information after installed this amp. One thing that i hated is that you must use xlr cables with this amp or else you lose most of its sound performance when using RCA’s.

Krell 402e: Great amp. Very powerful and will handle any speaker you wish. Power is incredible and with great detail. That said, i didn’t get all the bass that most reviewers mentioned. I thought it was "ok" in regards to bass. It was there, but it didn’t slam me to my listening chair.

Bryston 4B3: Good amp with a complete sound. I think this amp is more laid back than the SST2 version. I think those of you who found the SST2 version of this amp a little too forward with your speakers will definitely benefit from this amp’s warmth. Bryston has gone towards the "warm" side in my opinion with their new SST3 series. As always, they are built like tanks. I wouldn’t call this amp tube-like, but rather closer to what the classe audio delta 2 series sound like which is on the warm side of things.

Parasound JC1s: Good powerful amps. Amazing low end punch (far superior bass than the 402e). This amp is the amp that i consider complete from top to bottom in regards to sound. Nothing is lacking other than perhaps a nicer chassis. Parasound needs to rework their external appearance when they introduce new amps. This amp would sell much more if it had a revised external appearance because the sound is a great bang for the money. It made my 800 Nautilus scream and slam. Again, amazing low end punch.

Simaudio W7: Good detailed amp. This amp reminds me a lot of the Mark Levinson 532h. Great detail and very articulate. I think this amp will go well with bookshelves that are ported in order to compensate for what it lacks when it comes to the bass. That doesn’t mean it has no bass, but when it is no Parasound JC1 either.
Pass labs 350.5: Wow, where do i begin? maybe my first time around with the xa30.8 wasn’t as special as it was with this monster 350.5. It is just SPECTACULAR sounding with my electrostatics. The bass was THE BEST BASS i have ever heard from ANY amp period. The only amp that comes close would be the jC1s. It made me check my settings to make sure the bass was not boosted and kept making my jaw drop each time i heard it. It totally destroyed the krell 402e in every regard. The krell sounded too "flat" when compared to this amp. This amp had amazing mirange with great detail up top. In my opinion, this amp is the best bang for the money. i loved this amp so much that i ended up buying the amp that follows below.

Pass labs 250.8: What can i say here. This is THE BEST STEREO AMP i have ever heard. This amp destroys all the amps i have listed above today to include the pass labs 350.5. It is a refined 350.5 amp. It has more 3d sound which is something the 350.5 lacked. It has a level of detail that i really have never experienced before and the bass was amazing as well. I really thought it was the most complete power amplifier i have ever heard HANDS DOWN. To me, this is a benchmark of an amplifier. This is the amp that others should be judged by. NOTHING is lacking and right now it is the #1 amplifier that i have ever owned.

My current amps are Mcintosh MC601s: i decided to give these 601s a try and they don’t disappoint. They have great detail, HUGE soundstage, MASSIVE power and great midrange/highs. The bass is great, but it is no pass labs 250.8 or 350.5. As far as looks, these are the best looking amps i have ever owned. No contest there. i gotta be honest with you all, i never bought mcintosh monos before because i wasn’t really "wowed" by the mc452, but it could have been also because at that time i was using a processor as a preamp which i no longer do. Today, i own the Mcintosh C1100 2 chassis tube preamp which sounds unbelievable. All the amps i just described above have been amps that i auditioned with the C1100 as a preamp. The MC601s sound great without a doubt, but i will say that if you are looking for THE BEST sound for the money, these would not be it. However, Mcintosh remains UNMATCHED when it comes to looks and also resale value. Every other amp above depreciates much faster than Mcintosh.

That said, my future purchase (when i can find a steal of a deal) will be the Pass labs 350.8. I am tempted to make a preliminary statement which is that i feel this amp could be THE BEST stereo amp under 30k dollars. Again, i will be able to say more and confirm once i own it. I hope this update can help you all in your buying decisions!


jays_audio_lab

Showing 50 responses by viber6

viber6
2,454 posts
 
Nobody has mentioned whether they heard the GT fully toed in the way I tried them at Steve's home.  Fully toed in to maximize the clarity, I agree with klh007 that the clarity of the GT and several smaller ML is comparable, from my listening to the same music of mine although at different times.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
MBL speakers, at least the flagship, is an omnidirectional one.  Most omni's have less clarity even if they create spatial effects.  Another illustration of the supreme importance of clarity above everything else.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
thezaks,
Exactly.  Each listener to any speaker has his own preferred location, whether it is the theoretically perfect sweet spot or his own taste.  At public shows, it is not possible to give more than a few listeners the ideal seat, so speakers are usually placed where more than 1 person can hear approximately the same sound, even if that sound is not as perfect as the 1 person in the sweet spot.  From the GT Audio website pictures, it appears that the speaker was not fully toed in the way I prefer.  The good news is that this speaker has even better clarity than what people heard at the show, using my preferred toe-in.  Sometimes manufacturers and even composers do not know how to get the very best out of their products.  Designers and manufacturers are certainly adept at developing their products with technical knowhow, but they may not be as creative as an experienced listener like me.  On the other hand, I have some great ideas for a perfect speaker, but I have zero knowledge of manufacturing techniques.  In classical music, Igor Stravinsky conducted modern recordings of his compositions, but other conductors have been acknowledged to have better conducting skills and have made better recordings of Stravinsky's works, as mentioned by guidocorona a few months ago.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
klh007,
Some confusion. By full toe-in, I mean the speaker pointed at you, in the approximate manner faxer just described with the laser. At his home, I eyeballed the toe-in so that the midpoint of the panel faced me. This is slightly different than what he described. The narrow 0.5 inch inside tweeter has excellent HF dispersion, so it is fine for the tweeter to be a little off-axis. But a panel that is 10 inches wide will exhibit off-axis rolloff especially for HF but a little in the upper midrange as well. Wider panels exhibit even more rolloff, which is why the larger curved ML panels are more compromised than the smaller ones. The Kingsound stats use a flat relatively narrow 3 inch tweeter panel, used down to 1200-1600 Hz depending on the model, which I found has very good HF dispersion, so full toe-in is not as critical. The Sanders 10e panel is fairly wide at about 15 inches, so toe-in the way I described is absolutely essential. Unfortunately, with even this toe-in, the inner and outer parts of the panel are 7.5 inches off axis, so they lose the benefits of the toe-in, since the summation of the full HF of the midpoint with progressively less HF as you get away from the midpoint creates time smearing. He used to have a narrower model 11 which was 11 inches wide, a better design for clarity. The best planar/ribbon design is the Alsyvox, whose supertweeter+midrange/tweeter ribbons together are only 5+15=20mm wide. Covering the range of 850 Hz-40 kHz, this should give the best focus/clarity, and toe-in is much less critical, if at all. It is worth a visit to the Laurel, Md dealer to hear them.  Is the Tintoretto worth $65K for clarity, or is the GT almost or as good, for much less money?  I believe that anyone who heard the GT at the show could obtain even greater clarity with my slightly different positioning of it, even if it was already very impressive.  If the Tintoretto is still the best, it is worth putting the money toward that speaker, rather than super costly cables, etc. The ultra-rich can then add the accessories which certainly make a difference, but less so than the speaker.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
jetter,
I was thinking that klh007 admires the KLH Nine electrostatic speaker, which was famous in the day.  Or maybe as 007, James Bond, he is super KLH.  

I saw your 3/24/19 post on the Merrill Element forum.  It seems we both like class D and await the Merrill Element amps.  What is your reference amp now?
viber6
2,454 posts
 
faxer,
I would love a friendly shootout between GT and Alsyvox.  Even if the Alsyvox is more detailed, the GT is the best value out there.  If GT is better, then you win the gold medal.  I would really like to see the press give coverage to the excellence of both of these speakers, rather than the huge upright funeral caskets of dinosaur dynamic speakers.  John Atkinson of Stereophile is basically a bass-head.  His reviews emphasize the bass and give superficial analysis to accuracy of midrange/HF.  He won't allow reviews of Alsyvox or GT because they don't have much retail store distribution.  GT beats the heck out of all Stereophile's class A rated monsters.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
faxer,
What are the changes in the 3.1 version compared to what I heard over a year ago that account for the increased clarity?  As for the Alsyvox, the disadvantage of it is the electronic crossover which may detract from clarity, compared to the GT which has no crossover.  Still, I don't understand how both the tweeter ribbon and the planar magnetic drivers in the GT are driven DIRECTLY by the amplifier, without a crossover.  But the advantage of the Alsyvox is that from 850 to 6000 Hz the more nimble 15 mm narrow ribbon is used, which may be better than the planar driver of the GT in this freq range.  The net result for clarity will be whether the advantage of the possibly better drivers plus more robust speaker weight and construction outweigh the disadvantage of the crossover in the Alsyvox.   Only comparative listening will tell.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
jetter,
I also posted some to you.  What reference amp are you using?
viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
If the new secret amplifier is so good, why get rid of it in 3 weeks or less?  Let's hear the great amps in shootouts against each other, like the Merrill 118, Gryphon, secret amp.  I know the Merrill 114 well, which is close to the 118.  The recording you used to play the 118 was processed like canned spam, so use a brilliant recording to A/B/C the top amps.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
The ML 13a demo sounds great even on my lousy iMac speakers.  Even though the music on the Avantgarde horns is different, I think I can still tell that the ML system has the best clarity.  Your Block amp is probably just as good as the Constellation, so it is very likely that the 13a has greater clarity than the Neo, with proper spatiality that isn't artificially inflated like the Neo.  Let's see how the Rowland 535 sounds.

viber6
2,454 posts
 
Did anyone hear the Volti horns that mrdecibel admires?  Why should any of these newer horns sound better than his Klipsch LaScala?  Did anyone go to the Klipsch rooms?  Maybe these other horns are made of materials that don't resonate as much as Klipsch.  
viber6
2,454 posts
 
faxer,
Thanks for your info.  As dasign notes, a high pass filter is used for the tweeter.  It is likely that a low pass filter cuts HF from the planar driver, otherwise the planar is quite capable of putting out significant HF.  Any way you put it, there are filters aka crossovers in the design.  Also, Wisdom Audio uses ribbons down to about 300 Hz in many models.  With Alsyvox, the midrange ribbon is wider than the super tweeter ribbon, at 15 mm and 5 mm, respectively.  Of course, you need quality powerful magnets to control the motion of the ribbons.  Using the same reasoning of Greg, the GT planar driver is being asked to go down to about 40 Hz.  The question is, does the 10 inch wide GT driver feel as much stress going down to 40 Hz with the huge excursions in the lower freq, versus the Alsyvox 15 mm (0.6 in) going down to only 850 Hz with the much smaller excursions at that freq?  My physics and math may not be correct, but to get the same energy at 40 Hz compared to 850 Hz requires 20 times the excursion.  Note how the 10 inch wide GT planar driver is about 20 times the width of the Alsyvox midrange ribbon.  So I think that the stresses on the Alsyvox ribbon are comparable to that on the GT planar driver.  At moderate/low SPL, the range of 850 to 6000 Hz is possibly more accurate and faster from the Alsyvox ribbon vs the GT more massive planar magnetic.  Also, since the ear is much more sensitive at 850 to 6000 Hz compared to below 100 Hz, bass that sounds loud will have MUCH MUCH greater excursions required, which puts more stress on the GT planar driver at low freq.

alexbpm and gwalt,
Your listening observations have inspired me.  You probably are enjoying wonderful clarity and dynamics from your Alsyvox.  What do you think of this discussion?
viber6
2,454 posts
 
jetter--you are missing the even bigger goal, which is to maximize learning and shared experiences from anyone here.  Why don't you just contribute useful info, rather than wasting verbiage on whose thread this is.  I'm sure WC and others learn a lot from me, as I do from them.  I stimulate discussion which does help to keep this thread alive which has more posts than any other thread, as long as you are interested in numbers.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
faxer,
Thanks.  For the R&D that Greg put in, the GT is a fair price.  I wonder if the same can be said about Alsyvox.  Much of the retail price of any speaker or even any finished product reflects the long process of R&D.  Maybe the cost of materials in the Alsyvox is greater than that of GT, but regardless of the relative sound qualities of the Alsyvox and GT, I still feel that the Alsyvox is overpriced and must come down.  Even if the Alsyvox smaller models (still pretty large) smoke the 1/4 million dollar funeral caskets for sound quality, the present prices cannot be justified.  The marketer who spoke to closenplay hinted that the prices would come down, hopefully.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
It was valuable for you to hear the excellent ML 13a/Constellation system to see that top performance can be had for a reasonable amount of money.  Now come the Rowland 535's for value.  Also, tell us the relative sonic personalities of the Rowland vs Plinius, another great value.  "It ain't necessarily so" that big bucks are needed to improve on what you already have.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
Live classical music concerts at a close seat have satisfying loudness with general volume levels averaging 20-90 dB almost all the time.  At rare moments for only certain pieces of music, you get 100 dB peaks.  Extremely rare are 110 dB peaks.  When there is clarity with natural tonality, these are satisfying levels.  90 dB is plenty loud.  Sustained volumes above 90 dB cause hearing damage.  Look at OSHA standards for hearing protection.  I have seen a few men in their 20's with hearing damage from playing in rock bands as a teenager.  
viber6
2,454 posts
 
ricred1, gwalt, WC--thanks to all of you for your thoughtful messages.  I just replied to them.  
viber6
2,454 posts
 
Also, the lady had the most dramatic improvement when she turned off the wifi overnight.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
grey9hound,
Yes, recently I posted about the meaning of "Mephisto."  One meaning is the "demon" which relates to what WC has experienced with it.  He called it a wild animal.  It is most revealing, but sometimes in a negative way, which has forced WC to try many cables and preamps to get the sound he wants.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
I have been away on a Euro cruise, listening to big church bells, the jingle of street cars, assorted street musicians, unamplified.  Big church bells have a lot of low freq info, but they are not full and boomy like funeral coffin box speakers costing 1/4 of a million bucks. Clarity is still the name of the game.  Reading the last week of exciting amp talk, I am confused about your statements about the Rowland 535 and Constellation preamp/amps.  First, you say that the 535 is merely good for the money, and it can't compete against the $80K Blocks or almost as expensive 925.  Guido has said that the 535 very nearly equals the 925, and may have even better HF extension although not quite the spaciousness of the 925.  I believe you said that the clarity/detail of the 535 and HF extension exceed that of the Block.  As Guido says, give the 535 more time.  Also, you like the Constellations, but said that they are a little missing in the sparkle, which does enable you to listen loud without fatigue.  So what does it mean to say that Constellation = Luxman on steroids?  A body builder on steroids may have a lack of flexibility and delicacy.  Even though you don't follow phono cartridges, the most expensive and detailed cartridges are handmade by delicate women with supreme coordination.  No steroids there.  Perhaps the Constellations are known for very good detail but not the ultimate in levels of clarity, which is still the most important criterion for most any type of music or real world reproduction of the sounds of nature.  Don't fall in love with expensive things--glad you were able to sell the Blocks.  And are you getting the clarity out of your Neos with the expensive Constellations, or do you find that the clarity of the Axpona ML 13a system with the much cheaper Con Inspiration electronics and cables still exceeds your Neo system?  Within their power range, a Con tech years ago told me that the circuit is the same as the higher models, which use the same 125 Watt modules.  
viber6
2,454 posts
 
Oh, too bad you didn't A/B the Block with the 535 or Constellation using the same preamp, whether the ref 10 or Con preamp.  Aging tubes and the expense of their replacement with top notch tubes makes excellent preamps like the Con a better proposition.  Even with all the tubes under the sun, an ARC preamp may have inferior clarity to any Con preamp.

I agree that if you don't like the 535 after about 5 months of use, then it is not in the running.

You still can't say that expensive amps or other components will usually beat cheaper ones.  Circuit design is more important than parts expense, as good thinking costs no more than mediocre thinking.  If clarity is top priority, then the balls brute force of an expensive Dag won't compete against some cheaper amps such as Plinius, Rowland 535, maybe MF Titan.  Car analogies are not really that useful, since the experience of clear sound is different from the thrill of a ride.  You also noted that the Oppo was very close to the far more expensive Lampi.  Now with the new tubes, the balanced Lampi may be more tubey sounding than the Oppo, so it is possible that the clarity of the Oppo may be in the league of the Lampi, although you may like the Lampi better.  Personal taste, nothing to do with money.   

viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
Thanks for your followup about Oppo and Lampi.  It looks like the Con Virgo preamp is a keeper since it revealed the differences which had previously been submerged by the ref 10.  As ihasaguy just said, it would be instructive to compare the Con Inspiration setup to your Con Performance setup.  The Inspiration preamp won't save you as much money as going for the Inspiration stereo amp.  Since the Axpona setup was impressive, I have a hunch that the Inspiration stereo amp used has more clarity than the Rowland 535.  I heard a big Rowland power amp 30 years ago, which was very euphonic and rolled off compared to another SS amp which I don't remember.  Constellation may have a more neutral and revealing sound than even today's Rowland.  The question is whether the Centaur 2 is much better than the Inspiration amp within its power range to justify the huge difference in price.  Guido has said that there isn't much difference between the 535 and 925, based on his careful A/B tests and long experience with both, so we will eagerly await whether you find this also true about Inspiration vs Centaur amps.  I believe a few years ago when you thought the 925 was SOTA and the Lux 900u very close, you liked their slightly euphonic sounds more than now, when you are coming closer to seeking neutrality, detail and sparkle.  In addition, for clarity, the Inspiration preamp/amp probably beats the much more costly Dag Momentum Integrated, so that is a good example of how cheaper is sometimes better than expensive.  The quest for sound is really mostly about the designer's thinking, although the same designer will likely produce a better product with more money put into better parts, etc.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
klh007 and mrdecibel, all true.  WC has to manage his money so he can continue to get new things, so it is not possible to be fully scientific, controlling all the variables, etc.  Still, my points remain valid overall.  Gotta go back to work, although still in vacation mentality.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
gtaphile,
Thanks for your appreciation.  I don't want to appear contentious, but just relate more experiences.  Concert halls are boring--just get outdoors and experience clarity, neutrality.  Without walls, things are the most spacious and also the most focused.  I'm not a golfer, but recently I was amazed at the snappy crack of the ball being hit.  On TV, it is so dull.  Same goes for baseball.  The live sound of punches in the boxing ring is fearsome even at 60-70 dB.  Clarity makes power--no need to blast at over 100 dB to get excitement.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
mrdecibel,
It is not pretentious to relate experiences, as I have said and done.  If some people have not had certain experiences, they should not think that talking about them is pretentious just because they may disagree.  New experiences merely provide food for thought for everyone, and especially for myself when I can confirm or modify my opinions. 

Well, I will admit that "concert halls are boring" was somewhat exaggerated.  The trouble with concert halls is that almost all listeners in the audience are far away from the action.  On stage, sitting with a fellow violinist using the same stand (not really the bulk of the hall), my stand partner was far more impressive at close range than hearing him/her from any distance.  In like manner, outdoor sound at reasonably close range has a clarity and purity that is more exciting than the relatively murky sound which comes from hall boundaries and a hornet's nest of reflections and absorption from various materials in the hall.

jetter,
Wow, 4:27 AM.  I hope you get enough sleep.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
jetter,
I wish you well--sleep, music and all.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
geoffkait,
Right.  Either way, not contentious nor pretentious, I hope some people continue to appreciate my input, warts and all.

mrdecibel,
So true about a gf--can't live with them or without them.  Is the same true about our present audio systems and our dream system and gf?
viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
Thanks for your latest list of amps, which is far more informative than most published reviews.  I value your objective descriptions, but then it is up to each person to select one of those amps based on their own criteria.  For example, if maximum clarity is sought, Hegel ranks higher than #3 for under $20K, because you said "it is just a neutral amp that will give you what you put in it."  Same goes for Rowland 535, which is an "extremely clear sounding amp that might sound even clearer than my top picks here."  Your greater preferences for Centaur, Lux are based on "musicality" and smoothness, which is another way of saying a "little sugar helps the medicine go down."  You had said earlier that the Centaur lacks a little sparkle, and at present that "it is just easy on the ears" which is saying the same thing.  And the Block may be the absolute best of anything you have tried because of its top race car speed and overall enjoyment.  For me, I have found that "easy on the ears" gets boring after a while, and then clarity takes top priority.  Also for you, the ref 10 did not reveal the big differences between the Oppo and Lampi, compared to using the Con Virgo preamp.  So the "easy on the ears" ref 10 ultimately was replaced by the higher clarity Virgo, a great move on your part.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
mrdecibel,  good idea.  russlaud (at) gmail (dot) com.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
mrdecibel,
Wading through your long post, you come to the same conclusions and values that I have--"yes, like you, I want to be upclose and personal, but once music is recorded, it is such a mess, compared to live, unamplified music, that we all try to reassemble it, to give us that musical nirvana."  PRECISELY, very elegantly stated, thank you.  So while you are correct in saying that most people are just listening to the recordings as they are, and don't have our upfront experience, my preference is to "reassemble" it, which includes EQ as an important element, to convert the messy recording into a sound that more resembles the upclose excitement.  There are some commercial upclose recordings that I love, such as the Turnabout Rachmaninoff Symphonic Dances, made in 1967 that was an audiophile demo LP in the 70's and 80's.  Mercury Living Presence recordings made even earlier are boosted in HF by the engineers and they have this upfront excitement, hence the name, Living Presence.  Another popular demo recording, Jazz at the Pawnshop from 1976, was recorded at Stampen, a small club in old Stockholm, Sweden.  It has an upfront perspective, which I confirmed by peaking in the window to see the small stage, close tables and intimate atmosphere.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
4425,
Thanks for your feedback.  It would be interesting for you to try a $6K stereo Rowland 535, comparing to your Lux M900u.  WC implies that the 535 has close to the best clarity.  
viber6
2,454 posts
 
mrD, just sent you a message.  Fun, off thread.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
It has been a long time since you heard the Lux.  Not only a long time, but many systems ago.  Although I think you have great ears and methodology, ultimately only a side by side A/B will tell.  Let's see what Guido thinks.  He told me privately that even the stock stereo 535 is close to the 925 monos, and you have said that the Lux is close to the 925, so the odds are that the 535 is very close to the Lux.  For clarity and sparkle, there might be slight shortcomings of the Centaur compared to the 535, so it would be interesting to try the Lux again.  But you are so happy with your present system that I recommend being patient until the Merrill Elements are evaluated.  I could get the Element 116 at $22K now, which is the sweet spot of his new line, but I am holding out for the $12K Element 114 model which Merrill says is very close to the 116.  Frankly, for absolute clarity and value, I think the very top choices are the 535 and Element 114.  I will definitely be reporting on the 114 when I get it.  My guess is that the Elements will have good resale value, since Merrill is keeping us on edge with anticipation.  But, as alexbpm and gwalt have said about the Alsyvox being endgame speakers, the Merrill Elements may very well be endgame amps at reasonable prices.  
viber6
2,454 posts
 
ricred1,
If you read carefully, you will realize that I have new things to say, mainly in response to WC, although they are variations on the same theme which is clarity, clarity, clarity.  Many people say similar things again and again, but with some variations on their themes.  They are all welcome.

henrycai,
YOU say the same thing all the time, which is nothing but personal attacks, and nothing of audio substance.  Please stop.

ron17,
You thanked me yesterday for a good summary and interpretation of WC's findings.  No need for you to join the unappreciative crowd here.

technodude,
You are always welcome.  Miss you.

Anyone who doesn't find my posts informative can just ignore them.  But I won't waste more time here if the spoilers here dominate.  THEY are the source of the negativity which detracts from the spirit of shared information.  That will be a loss for the people who appreciate my input.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
gtaphile,
Your insights about concert hall sound are very relevant here to anyone trying to use concert hall recordings as a reference for their audio system.  Audiophile pursuits are not random combinations of components like ketchup in green tea, but about trying to achieve a likeness to real sound, which is the most exciting thing of all.  We could communicate privately, but I think your knowledge would benefit many people here.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
Sim 860V2 seems like a competitor to the Gryphon and Merrill 118, all in the clarity camp.  Please do a listening shootout among all 3.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
ihasaguy,
Good points.  Years ago, I attended enjoyable concerts in Heinz Hall.  I can also understand your rock concert experience.  However, WC once said that he took his wife to a club, and they both agreed that his system sounded better than live.  I agree with that, because live rock concerts use inferior amps and speakers, so that's why Harry Pearson of the Absolute Sound said that the best reference is live unamplified music.  I would modify that slightly, because you can design your system to have an upfront perspective and get more detail and appreciation of the music than sitting far back in the hall.  But a close seat for unamplified music will give you more of everything with more life and naturalness than any hifi.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
mrdecibel,
I just sent you a PM, not email.  This is fun, and I won't be taking up space on this thread with private conversations.  I hear the thunderous applause from this thread.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
Folkfreak makes good points.  The trouble is that there is no guarantee that all the "correct" acoustical design will give you sound that pleases you.  Many famous concert halls wound up with bad, unpredictable sound after all the investment.  An expensive risk.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
Also, a studio mastering engineer recently told me that most audiophiles like certain distortions.  I realized he is right.  So, the technically "correct" measurements of the acoustician may not give you the sound you like.  This is analogous to our debate about subjectivity vs objective measurements relating to the sound of electronics.

gtaphile,
What do you think?
viber6
2,454 posts
 
techno_dude,

Two mono amps usually produce the same character of sound on the continuum of sweet vs neutral/accurate, just give more power than the single amp version.  There is even the risk that the signal which has to go thru double the circuitry will be more veiled.  Most music except for relatively infrequent peaks needs only a few watts, so for clarity it may be a step backward to use 2 mono amps, unless you want abusive high SPL's and don't care about clarity.  So the 2 mono Luxman M900u at $30K retail will still yield sweet sound, vs the more accurate/neutral Sim 860V2 at $18K.  I would prefer the Sim to the Luxman, either single for $15K or double for $30K. 

WC,
The Merrill 116 for $22K is very nearly the equal of the 118 for $36K, according to Merrill himself.  Let's hear the 3 way A/B/C of Sim/Merrill/Gryphon.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
That really is the point--we can't make up our minds, mainly due to humility about the unpredictable effects of "objective" acoustical measurements.  Nobody is an absolute authority on this, although I want to hear from gtaphile, a professional in this area.  Haven't you been to many dealers who spent a lot of money in a well-meaning attempt to have the customer best hear the products in an ideal home environment?  You and I have not liked the system in many such setups.  Nobody has an ideal setup.  At least if you make a mistake in buying a certain component, you can sell it and move on.  It is harder to undo a big installation.  (And don't go to a doctor who says, "OK I'll remove your gallbladder.  If this doesn't give you relief, I'll put it back").  LOL.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
Also, for your Neos or other large speakers, you could use a much bigger room than 16x22 to get full natural space and openness.  More like 25x 35-40, with a high ceiling, preferably a cathedral type with up sloping from 10 feet opening up to 15 or more.  Steve's room for his GT speakers has a very high ceiling with a room about 17x35.  But your very wide and tall Neos require more space than that.  I wouldn't make a big investment in the relatively small 16x22 space.  Some not too expensive homes have main living rooms that are like what I have described, so you could move to your dream home.  In that much larger space, the investment in acoustical design could pay off with much larger benefits.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
bigddesign3,
I hear you.  SOTA headphones can provide a lot of enjoyment, especially for those without the money and ideal room.  My AKG 1000 headphones are unique for their open (literally) quality where the ear speakers are some distance from your head.  This gives you an open, spacious feeling which is unlike the cramped feeling from most headphones.  The tonal character is revealing and very smooth.  You can angle the ear speakers away from your head to adjust the tonal balance to your liking.  They are not in current production, but you can probably get them used at a nice price.  
viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
I hear you.  In NJ, my gf lives in a nice community not far from NYC and close to Princeton.  Her house is worth about $600K, and it has a room with a nice high cathedral ceiling and another family room with standard ceiling but a large dimension of 18x35.  The little compact stereo sounds much better in that room than the same compact stereo in her bedroom. Her neighbor's house is a little larger with a fantastic larger room with very high ceiling.  It is a shame that they are not interested in music and have the room stuffed with furniture and decorative items.  Perhaps one day, you will build a home with 1 large room dedicated to your system, and skimp on the rest of the rooms to save money.  One of my deceased musical friends did just that.  We used to play music there, and there was enough space for a large piano, so the sound was great for everyone.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
ron17,

Continuing your line of thinking--to me, sweetness and neutrality/clarity are opposing characteristics.  Sweetness is usually obtained by rolling off HF, as with classic tube amps which show sweetness at the sacrifice of neutrality/clarity.  The high fidelity ideal is smoothness/coherence + clarity, which are features of live, unamplified music.  So if an amp has sweetness, I give it negative points towards the total score, but if it has smoothness/coherence I give it positive points which increase the total score.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
ricred1,
I posted a message to you on April 19, asked you some questions, but didn't get your response.  We can keep this private.  Thanks.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
WC,
Theoretically you are right, but the postings about guitar players are of interest to many people here, so it is hard to keep discussions private, just addressed to 1 person.  When possible, and the topic is of limited interest, you're right that private is the way to go.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
Technically, RIAA is right about starting other threads about other topics.  But I think this thread is so popular because of the community that WC has built.  Many people are catching his bug for enthusiasm, so it is natural that we can go off on tangents, off topic.  But, if people are happy and enthusiastic, they are more likely to have good contributions ON TOPIC as well.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
grey9hound,
Interesting about the 24 inch sub.  Back in the 70's, the Mark Levinson HQD system was SOTA by a mile.  Hartley 24 inch woofers built into the floor with the basement below serving as the enclosure!  Stacked double Quad 57's, Decca ribbon tweeter in the middle between the Quads.  I heard the system--it had everything.
More to discover