My Long List of Amplifiers and My Personal Review of Each!
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!
Wow - now that was something special! I have to admit, I was never one for the analogies. They just didn't compare well (for me). But kren0006 just brought the house down! Still true that point for point the analogy doesn't directly mesh directly with performance - but man do you get the vibe and character of what's being communicated / conveyed! I re-read it twice because it was so good and I'm still impressed! Well done kren0006 - well done! |
@kren: i love the analogies thrown in there. Nothing wrong with how you feel about Wilson - IT IS A GREAT SPEAKER. Every speaker i have had over the last 4 weeks (i think) really boils down to PREFERENCE. Nobody can argue anyone as to why their speaker is superior to the other because some might have different boxes that need to be checked off first. In your case, you like the dynamics and muscle which i also like. I will be giving my personal view based on ownership and of course this is my opinion - nothing else. |
Went back and listened to a bunch of the videos of Alexia2, Stella, Magico and 20.7, across the different songs (not necessarily straight-up comparisons across common songs, but rather an amalgam). I like ron17's analysis - can't really argue with any of that. But for me I'm not so focused on the things he was. I went into it not even knowing what I wanted to focus on. I just let the presentations guide me and tried to ID the biggest differences I heard - probably at the end of the day this points me to those things that are most important to me. Plus I'm kinda hungry right now and wondering what I'll have for dinner tonight, but I digress. What really stood out across the presentations was the difference in dynamics and what I'll call muscularity or slam. That kick you in the chest slam that just grabs you by the throat and says, listen up mf'er, this is how the music is supposed to sound. Anything else, just take that weak sh++t and move along. If a speaker doesn't have it, and I mean really have it, it cannot rise to the top for me. All of the other stuff (tonal balance, clarity, coherency, soundstage, imaging, midrange, treble, bass, balance, ....) is important too, even necessary, but dynamics and muscularity is a deal breaker for me if it is missing. For others, it won't be as important. I think though, for WC it is just as important to him as it is to me, and I think his speaker choices and length of ownership bear that out. So, let's describe it in terms of a restaurant analogy. Wait wuh? 20.7: This is the little known restaurant you book with your wife, not having high expectations, but you get there and it is all a lot better than you expected it to be. The food was good, as you expected it to be, but the ambience and fun factor was much better than you expected. The service was top notch for what you are spending - good experience. You leave having had a great time and you will be back. Magico: This is the highly regarded Mexican restaurant that you've been hearing so much about, and you have high expectations. But you get there with your wife and the menu that is handed to you has all Indian dishes. You're like, WTF?? But you order anyway and the Indian food isn't bad, not great. But the weird thing is the entertainment is some hula dancing team. None of any of it makes any sense. You leave going, what just happened here?? Stella: This is the black tie steakhouse, all formal, little stuffy. You and wife enjoy a fantastic meal, and the entertainment in the corner is a violin player, who is very good (technically really, really good), but, you know, it's a violin player. You look around, and everyone is sitting properly at attention, some watching, some looking at their phones. The music isn't very loud, and it seems overly polite. You leave thinking, well, that was really expensive, and the food was great, the entertainment level was I guess okay, and I think my wife liked it a lot, but ...... just not really my style. Alexia 2: This is the top BBQ joint in St. Louis or Austin, with the best rated ribs and brisket in the country, and the entertainment for the night is a kickass blues band. You and your wife enjoy an amazing BBQ spread, you eat and drink way too much because it is just so good, and then the band starts and everyone in the place starts dancing, the drinks are flowing, the music is loud, and by the end of the night everyone is fist-bumping each other. Somehow your wife ends up on stage and is belting out an Allman Brothers Band classic, and as the night goes on the playlist gets heavier. You leave thinking that is the best damn time I've had in a very long time. Give me Wilson all day, every day. It's the only one of the four that put a huge smile on my face. |
@viber6 Posting "Guido and almarg (sadly deceased)" was perfectly clear to me. I had heard almarg had passed and even posted it myself on this thread. But to hear that Guido had also passed was quite disturbing. Being a doctor I sure hope you have more clarity when writing medical prescriptions....just sayin. |
Thank you my friends... Indeed I've not been culled or even attacked by that virus which incidentally bears my last name, nor by any other random pox... I am in fact quite fine and chipper. Rather, Enjoying recorded music through the Rowland Daemon integrated... And practicing live music on the Wessex EP104 euphonium. Saluti e buone cose, Guido |
Hi Guido. Just for you, I searched my post. I said "Guido and almarg (sadly deceased)...." I should have written, "Guido and almarg (the latter sadly deceased)" to indicate that only almarg was deceased. I thought I was clear at the time, but I wasn't clear enough. I apologize if this insufficient clarity led to confusion and hurt. More generally, this is one example of why clarity is paramount in all realms of life, and in particular, for music expression and its reproduction. |
Hello all, just a minor administrative point.... A post on 0928-2020 by friend Viber has been misinterpreted by an old friend of mine as I being "deceased".... As in * Having popped; * Passed on; * Crossed the Great Divide; * Be pushing daiseies; * Croaked; * Died. I am happy to announce that his news is premature. Last time I checked, I was still alive and kicking. Best regards, Guido |
@viber6 That is not how it works. Once the breakup frqs are excited, the entire tweeter goes into a convulsion. That is why you want the breakup frq to be as high as possible. Like many metal domes, the Focal tweeter is coarse sounding due to too low of a breakup point, and as I said, even though some don’t hear it, it does not mean it does not exist. |
sciencecop, I am "only" 67 years old. I mention this to illustrate that my exposure to music was from a very early age. I said my first words at the age of 3, so music was my first understood language, and English second. It is true that I have some age-related HF hearing loss. Too bad lots of young rock musicians have severe hearing loss. Not me, I was never a full time orchestra player. I have demonstrated to people that when I play loud chords on my violin, as forcefully as possible, I can generate 120 dB peaks at a distance of 1 foot, but I am careful when I practice not to do this much at all. Trumpet players tell me they practice with their mouthpieces instead of blasting away indoors. In any case, I have found that what people think of as HF harshness is really upper midrange anomalies around 5K or so. The maximum sensitivity of the human ear is at 3-4K, which explains this. So if the Focal tweeter has anomalies at 25K, this is totally irrelevant to human perception of harshness. It is audibly smooth in the important 5K region, although measurements may not reveal this or correlate with what we hear. Many people just don't like brilliance of sound, seek tube electronics and warm sounding speakers, etc. They like to sit 50 or more feet away in the concert hall where HF are greatly attenuated. But those of us who want to hear everything and also know that most recordings are made with close mikes, value components that reveal as much as possible. The Stella is both a revealing and natural sounding speaker, very lifelike. |
Post removed |
Let me be clear, I’m not dissing the m3. It is one hell of a speaker by all means. I am just saying that I have heard both here, in my room with the same gear which I hope you have done with the stella and m3. If you haven’t actually done that with BOTH speakers then I think I am a little closer to understanding both speakers? You are right, i haven’t lived with the m3 long, but i have heard both speakers here so one could argue i have more "exposure" to both with the same electronics than someone who has only had the m3 and heard the stella at dealer? IF this was indeed a stella because I know that MOST dealers DO NOT display the stella EVO so i am probably going to go out on a limb and say you heard a maestro or Scala Evo and NOT a stella EVO and to be clear here, i owned the Scala Evo and stella evo and the tweeters are NOT the same internally nor do they sound the same. Not even close. The Stella and Grande utopia are miles ahead of their baby brothers (maestro and Scala) With that said, if what you are comparing from the focal line is the maestro or Scala then what you are saying could very well be the truth. |
Having lived with both here, the stella tweeter is WAAAAAAY smoother than the m3. Not once did I get bite at all from the Stella regardless of how loud i played music and i blasted it hard. The music just got bigger and bigger with the stella. One last thing, the stella tweeter IS NOT the same tweeter internally as the Scala or maestro. I hope you are not referring to the focal tweeter in the stella or grande Utopia. |
Good to verify, it can save you some disappointments! I am just reporting what I hear. To me, the Focal tweeter is a bit crude (I have listened to focal many times). It’s not just the level, it’s the quality. If you look at Focal tweeter measurements, you will see that the breakup is rather low (~25KHz), and that is probably what I am hearing, a slight but constant coarseness. It’s fatiguing. The M2 tweeter breakup point is much higher (~50KHz), it is much smoother but perhaps less exciting to some. I had the M3 for almost 3 years, trust me on that, without proper set up, you are not beginning to hear what this speaker can do. |
@sciencecop I try to stay away from measurements because I feel they put a thought in our heads. It's like if i told you, becareful with your new employee. He worked for me before and he's lazy. What will you do? You will now keep an eye on him to see if it's that is true instead of just judging the person for who they are with you. |
Post removed |
@sciencecop There is partial truth to what you said about me not putting them on mpods but i also didn't use spikes on wilson or focal so i guess you have to take that into account. All speakers could have benefited from spikes or mpods. Additionally, the stella were the speaker with no break-in time. Alexia 2 and m3 were one year old so they did have the proper break in period. If anything, the stella IS/ WAS with the biggest disadvantage out of the 3. As far as brightness, if you can refer back to the videos with the stellas you can easily hear that they were never bright for me. Actually, the m3 was a tad brighter at times, but not often. The Alexia 2 got a little bright or shouty when pushed hard. |
So you are 70 plus years old, and playing music, perhaps in an orchestra, which will expose you to +100db of sound pressure on a regular basis for 60 years?? That is a lot of wear and tear on the ears, maybe you like your highs boost 😉 I am only in my 50’s, right behind you buddy (if I am lucky), will probably like the Focal more soon, LOL. |
All true, but Atkinson is a basshead. He starts all his reviews talking about bass, and usually gives discussion about HF as a brief footnote. He just retired as editor of the magazine, and as such is a political/business creature. On the reasonably natural acoustic guitar and voice recordings of Nils Lofgren, there is no doubt that the Focal Stella is laughably superior to Jay's other speakers in every important way. I don't care what the measurements indicate. My musically educated ear takes precedence. 60 years of musical experience as a violinist, 50 years as an audiophile. |
FWIW...because of my room problems I'm a sealed cabinet guy. My YG's interfere less with my room than any ported speaker I've owned. I can see myself (in a couple of years) with the M2's. I was excited when Jay bought (for the 2nd time) a pair of M3's. I believe the M3's are a speaker that needs very careful attention when pairing them with components and cables and of course isolation...same as the Mephisto did. Given time I think Jay could have the M3's performing close to the Stella's...surpassing them in some ways and falling just short in others. Also, I always wondered how close the YouTube videos really sounded to Jay's actual system live so as a reference point I recorded (with my iphone Xs) several tracks on my system that I'm familiar with. I then played them back on my Mac computer. Aside from the 3D front to back soundstage and of course deep bass I was surprised at how close the videos of my system sounded like my system live. |
@viber6 Also, FWIW, John Atkinson reviewed a Vimberg speaker for $31K and hinted that they have more HF air than the Magico M2 he reviewed a few months before that. Perhaps, but you forgot to mention that it is the M2, not the Vimberg, who got his vote for loudspeakers of the year, and by a wide margin (https://www.stereophile.com/content/stereophiles-products-2020-loudspeaker-year). There is a lot more to good sound than a splashy top end, which the Focals are notorious for. Not all ears are tuned to that (you can look at measurements, if you don’t hear it). In fact, some will argue that they gave Beryllium the bad rap it has. The magic of Magico is their balance. If set up properly (which our gracious host did not bother to do ☹), nothing stands out, for better or worse, yet it is all there. Some can find it boring, but for longevity, mostly if you listen to ’mildly’ engineered music like Classical and Jazz, they are in a league of their own.(https://www.stereophile.com/content/stereophiles-products-2020-editors-choice) |
Also, FWIW, John Atkinson reviewed a Vimberg speaker for $31K and hinted that they have more HF air than the Magico M2 he reviewed a few months before that. Putting the M3 on the dedicated pods will improve the sound, but when the 20.7 for 15% the price beats the M3 as is, I'd say forget it, Magico. |
Excellent analysis by ron17. I also listen on my stereo iMac desktop computer. The built in speakers have decent HF response. They are good enough that I appreciate the general superior sound Jay has in his room. Whatever deficiencies in bass from the iMac speakers are not relevant to the song, "Man in the Moon." I don't like even great headphones, which are deficient in HF, compared to the free air openness of good speakers. If I use headphones, I hold them away from my ears by up to 1". This allows open space, although the bass is cut. Headphones on the head are like speakers too close to walls. |
Using my stereo Mac computer I queued up Man In The Moon on the Focal's, Magico's, Wilson's and Maggie's. I listened at least 6 times with each speaker. I concentrated mainly on clarity, definition and pinpoint imaging of Nils vocal presentation. Each speaker was very different the way it presented the vocals and the accompanying guitar. The Focal's were by far the best. Nils voice was pinpoint dead center, highly focused and natural sounding. His guitar was just below the vocal image with by far the most natural acoustic sound. The natural warmth of the guitar was clearly evident. The Wilson's I felt were next best. The vocals were dead center and focused but didn't quite have the natural sound of the Focal's. The guitar sounded good but was more diffused and more spread out over the soundstage vs the Focal's which was just below Nils voice and highly focused. Next I placed the Magico's. Very disappointed here. I found the vocals diffused. The soundstage was vast but nothing was clearly defined. The guitar seemed to be spread out between the speakers, also the tonal balance sounded thin in upper bass and didn't have the richness of the Focal's. I'm guessing the Mpods would alleviate these problems...hopefully. The Maggie's vocal presentation I thought was good but it was spread out and not quite as focused as the others. The guitar sounded like it was coming out in equal parts from both speakers and not centered below Nils voice. The tonal balance was not up to the other speakers, but for the $ I was very impressed with this speaker. Being that none of the speakers were properly anchored to the floor I'm sure had a lot to do with precise imaging...had they have been I'm guessing the Magico's and Wilson's would have fared better. As far as the Focal's...wow, the sky is the limit on those speakers! BTW I have a BA in music from NTSU with my instrument being the guitar. I'm very sensitive to recorded acoustic guitar. The Focal's sounded very close to live natural acoustic guitar to me....well, as close as can be expected played from a YouTube video through a stereo computer....my 2 cents, YMMV |
Post removed |