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!
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!
20,890 responses
Hi The issue is the majority of my followers don’t really care for classical. Can I do it ? Sure. It’s easy for me but as an FYI most people that message me or do consulting with me don’t listen to classical. I personally don’t listen to classical but that’s just me. Anytime I hear classical music, I can't quite evaluate anything because I don't know the music. |
A modest request. In one of your videos, could you play some full orchestra symphonic music, with massed violins playing double forte. That would really give the system a work-out and enable us to hear how it handled particularly challenging sound reproduction. My recommendation would be this recent recording of Tchaikovsky's 6th, which is particularly exciting. You can get a flavor of it here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH0P6JS16Fc |
Jay, You and I are basically in agreement about the ideal of going for neutrality and transparency. We only differ in our discomfort thresholds for "bright" sound with things like Nordost Odin cables. I won't deny that you feel discomfort with Odin with Mephisto, just like I won't deny that my patient feels pain himself even if it is not apparent to me. Over the years, your tastes have changed--you used to love euphonic things like Constellation, Dag, Luxman, Rowland, Pass, ARC and Mac tube amps, but now you prefer Mephisto to even the fairly neutral Coliseum, let alone those other euphonic amps. It is possible that you eventually might appreciate the highest clarity of the Odin + Mephisto and not consider it unpleasantly bright. Of course, initially the Odin/Mephisto was a shock because it opened up new worlds you couldn't yet enter. Outside of music, often revolutionary new ideas are rejected at first, then slowly accepted, and finally embraced. You are even reconsidering the neutral Boulder, despite your negative experience with it years ago. Everyone agrees that more detailed, clear components often also exhibit brightness. Some would prefer the Coliseum or even Pass-type stuff to the Mephisto, because they are highly sensitive to brightness. In my case, I hear the brightness, but it is real sounding to me, because I listen to natural, relatively unprocessed recordings at reasonable SPL's, and my perceptions of the real world of live, unamplified music and random sounds of nature show me that there is indeed a certain amount of brightness out there in some instruments and voices. Goodsource has confirmed my observations. |
@chayro thank you for your observations above. You bring very interesting points which are reasonable. That said, did you see what i did? yes, i was BRUTALLY honest about the Mephisto knowing it can impact my future when it is time for me to sell it. Yet, i did not care and i was as real as i possibly could. I have been brutally bashed and criticized HERE for being X and Y when it comes to selling equipment, but i just demonstrated once again with that video that i DO NOT CARE to tell the truth even about my own gear. So now that i have gotten that out of the way, I consider the Mephisto the G.O.A.T. from all the power amps i have owned. That said, you are buying a V12 engine with twin turbos so now what are you going to do? are you going to put it inside your Oldsmobile Cutlass and expect the stock transmission, tires and suspension to hold up? no right? That is essentially what you have done by buying something like the Mephisto. I believe that i can still improve it (slowly) even though right now it is sounding incredible (as you heard on the first teaser video i did) so i have already found synergy. It was not hard to achieve it and it was just common sense: Buy the matching preamp and try their cables. The truth is when you get to a certain point with this hobby, it is often times better to stick to matching amp/preamp FIRST. I will try more preamps with the Mephisto and other things to evaluate the performance of the component. I go back to Nordost Odin 1: It is a tested and an excellent cable with a long track record for being one of the best cables out there, BUT the Mephisto brought a magnifying glass with it and it exposed the strength and weaknesses of the Odin 1 cables (brightness being a weakness at times). It is no surprise that Nordost Odin cables can be bright especially when not configured correctly and with the right supporting cast. However, the resolution is insane as well as the clarity so people who own Nordost can validate when i am saying here. Yes it gives you beautiful clarity, liquidity, speed, resolution, BUT nobody will lie to you and tell you it does not get bright (unless of course you listen at low volumes then it is hard to make something sound bright). I actually had someone PM ME asking me what i thought of Audioquest Dragon because he was getting "bite" from his Nordost set up. Anyhow, the point i am trying to make is that with the Mephisto these things are more "enhanced" and under the microscope to the point that they are unbearable. It is by no means the Mephisto’s fault because all it is doing is giving you "hearing aids" so you can pick up everything in more of an accentuated fashion. The best attribute of this amp is that it makes it EASY to tell you what happened to the sound when you add or remove something. i don’t need to spend weeks to figure out the difference between one cable or the other. Stay tuned for Teaser #2 today. You will get to hear more of it and the best part is that you WILL hear subpar performances sound subpar even though in some systems they might sound better which i can also achieve by bringing the constellations, the luxmans of the world back into the room, but i have already done that so i am not really exploring those options going forward. Once again, thank you for your observations above. Jay |
| Post removed |
techno, Take note of yyzsantabarbara's post above. Audio pursuits should be about the sound or lack thereof, regardless of price. Based on WC's comments in the latest video about the absolute neutrality and transparency of the Mephisto, and that it is his GOAT (greatest of all of them), it may very well be better for these qualities than the Benchmark AHB2 or my amps. The issue is moot for you and me. Just buy the Benchmark preamp and/or the amp, and you will have either the best electronics or second best right behind the Mephisto. Then when you declare Benchmark to be the best ever in your listening, comparable to the experiences of yyz and me, you won't care to send it to WC. You don't need to bother him to confirm what you know from your own listening. I respect WC's strongly held belief that a person doesn't know anything unless he buys something and lives with it for a while. I modify that, because I have been able to make decisions with 30 or 60 day trials without losing any money, except for return shipping. Before the days of online shopping, I used to do this over a weekend, picking up something when the store closed Sat afternoon, and returning it Mon AM. If you decide to pursue detail and neutrality, Benchmark is the clear choice and one of few options for a reasonable amount of money. But if you continue to go for euphonic things like Mac and Luxman, there are so many amps to listen to, and all you will be doing is trading 1 flavor of the month for another, an endless and unsatisfying pursuit at all price levels. The Mephisto is one of the few gems at high prices, and the Benchmark is the same at low prices. And the word, "benchmark" means reference standard. Re-read and re-read yyz's 3rd and 4th paragraphs above, for the most important words of wisdom on this subject. |
Pretty hilarious that the LA4 is getting some notice on this thread now. When I brought it up 2 or 3 years ago in a post here someone (I think a Canadian dude, like me) trashed my comment and said we are talking hi-end products on here not Benchmark level products. When I went searching for a preamp for my office system I heard a lot of gear including the incredible Luxman c900u preamp and others in the $20K level. I thought about what I really wanted a preamp to do. Then I narrowed it down to the Mola Mola Makua (near $20K with DAC) and the Benchmark HPA4/LA4. Given the price difference with the Makua and the almost perfect resale value of the HPA4 I bought the HPA4 first for under $2.8K new. It has exceeded my expectations of what I wanted a preamp to do. That is do nothing to the sound other than providing inputs and volume. It is the finest preamp I have heard and will also be the center piece of the second system I will build in the living room. The HPA4/LA4 is for people that want to hear exactly what is in the source. NOT EVERYONE WANTS THAT. For me, I do, and every time I play something very familiar, for example, just now I played Van Halen I and Stevie Wonder Talking Book. I think wow, I never heard it this good before. I usually want to play it a second time. Anyways, Benchmark has a 30 day free trial offer so if you are inclined you can see for yourself if I am full of it. |
Let’s get something clear, I have never given nor am giving any order to WC to buying a piece of gear. I just simply thought that, given the opportunity WC has of trying and comparing dream products, he could show us what are the differences between a 2.5k$ preamplifier and a 40k$ one. I want to know what I’m missing and what 40k buys me. He can show us all...2.5k is just a fraction of the price of only one of his fancy powercords... He could close that debate once and for all. Why doesn’t he do it ? What’s to fear ? If he ´s playing at this obvious higher level, shouldn’t it just also be obvious to enlighten us with the differences... Why only compare ultra high end gear with other ultra high end gear ?... WC said it himself... most of his readers and yt viewers don’t play at this level... So it would be more than interesting to know what a 40k $ preamp could buy most of his viewers... |
mr_gray, You're right that great appearance adds to our overall positive feelings. Sometimes physical beauty can carry over into liking the sound more. I have to admit that my overwhelming pleasure in the Vienna hall was increased by the sheer beauty of the tall slender gold statues lining the sides, and the gorgeous ceiling with chandeliers. It is possible that it affected my tonal perceptions. If you want to see this beautiful hall, you can see the hall every New Years Day when the traditional New Years concert from the Musikverein in Vienna is broadcast. Similarly, the whitish lighting in the Boston hall may have contributed to my perception of a cooler tonality. Boston has a utilitarian look compared to Vienna. Still, when I tried amps, if I didn't like the sound, I didn't care that it was beautiful in appearance. Conversely, the amps I bought because I loved the sound, had utilitarian appearance which didn't bother me. In fact, I came to appreciate the utilitarian appearance because I knew that the money was spent on the electronics, not the cosmetics. The Mephisto has the best sound with a utilitarian appearance, in contrast to the overpriced Dag stuff where more emphasis is placed on the cosmetics. |
WC. i love big amps and i like having a stack of them (i bi-wire speakers). when i’ve run class D i have simultaneously enjoyed the low heat and ease but also felt "let down" by the lack of mass and heft. a favourite amp of mine (looks wise as well as sound wise) was one you have owned, the plinius SA-100 mk2. i currently have 2 bryston 4b sst and i love their utilitarian appearance. if music / art is partially about how we feel, is it not valid to want the components appearance as well as performance to add to how we feel, positively? what is it about expensive big amp ownership that rocks so hard do you think? |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
carey1110, I agree with everything you just said. As a slight aside, The Absolute Sound had an entertaining early 80's review of the world's most famous concert halls. I ate it up, and soon after, I went to the number 1 rated hall, the Musikverein in Vienna, while there for chamber music fun. (Our tour guide arranged for us to play string quartets in one of the Esterhazy palace's ballrooms, just like 200 years before. Very cool experience, but the reverberant sound listening to my friends play was AWFUL.) The reviewer said that every seat in this hall was great. Naive that I was at the time, I went 3 times, each in different seats. The 3rd row seat was indeed wonderful. Row 12 was moderately muddy, and row 25 was grossly awful--messy reverberant, and the solo cello sounded like it was amplified on a crappy PA system. So much for trusting reviews!!! In that good 3rd row seat, the sound was the best concert hall experience I ever had. The sound was slightly sweeter than Boston Symphony Hall I went to many years later. The Absolute Sound review said that the Boston Hall design was modeled on the great Musikverein. Both Boston and Vienna halls were more live and crisp than the warm Carnegie. But especially in live halls, you must sit very close to avoid the smearing from reverberation sitting further away. I loved both the slightly cooler Boston and the slightly sweeter Vienna halls. FWIW, Vienna was ranked #1, Carnegie #2, Boston #3. Who cares what ranking the reviewer made. You would enjoy listening for yourself in many locations in any hall, and wherever you travel, go to different halls. At home, you can save money by hearing student concerts in your nearby halls. Get your own experience, and draw your own conclusions. While traveling, listen to people playing on the street and all kinds of places. |
I just realized something about the Pandora. Once it was added I did not notice any change at all in the way the Mephisto sounded as far as difference in tone, etc. the only thing I noticed is that the system sounded even more effortless and controlled than before, not by leaps and bounds, but enough that it was there. The whole idea behind a preamp is supposed to be to add nothing to the sound, the definition of transparency. Obviously that a first listen, with a product with very little time on it yet, but so far seems like it’s doing exactly what you want a preamp to do. Unless you’re wanting some coloration maybe to offset some weakness in the amp or speakers. |
I'm going to kindly disagree with you techno__dude. My guess is that WC would not mind at all doing a comparison of expensive preamps vs inexpensive preamps. If someone sent him a preamp, he could do the comparison and reveal the results to everyone. It would also build on his experience that could be used for his consulting and could possibly expand his clientele - that is, if that's what he wants to do. HOWEVER, regarding preamps that he looks to buy and try in his system, that is quite another thing than someone offering a preamp for him to try. I'm totally on WC's side that it's his choice. If he decided to buy the LA4, just to satisfy you, then many more folks would start demanding that WC try their brand of component, cable, etc. Look, this is his money and his choice. If someone becomes so demanding and telling WC try this product or that, then I think the onus is on them to provide that product, not WC - plain and simple. Demanding that WC purchase it is absolutely unreasonable. Dave |
techno, Really, I support your alternative viewpoints to those of WC. I agree with WC in some areas and disagree in others. So do many readers here, who may be silent. The reality is that we both are not in the market for uber-expensive items like Mephisto or Pandora, even if I believe that I probably would enjoy hearing them. I just like to learn what they sound like, watch the videos, and make my own judgments based on what I hear. But we both like products with great performance that are not too expensive. So I recommend that you purchase the Benchmark LA 4 preamp which you can try for 60 days from Music Direct, or 30 days from Benchmark. Although I have not heard your Mac preamp or the Luxman preamp you may have heard, I would bet good money that the LA 4 is more detailed and neutral than any preamp you have owned or heard. I have not heard the LA 4 either, but I almost bought the AHB2 power amp for its detail and neutrality, which unfortunately didn't work out because it shut down with my crazy impedance electrostatic speakers and electrostatic tweeters in parallel. If the LA 4 has the same characteristics as the AHB2, I would win this bet. I would also place a bet on the fact that the AHB2 is preferable to your Luxman M900u, for what I value in sound. I have placed much more risky bets buying blue chip stocks. Unless you absolutely love euphonic electronics, you would do extremely well to get the combo of the LA 4 preamp, and the AHB2 amp. Merely $6K MSRP for the combo. You and I don't play in WC's sandbox, but you can then proudly boast about how the Benchmark combo kills most electronics at multiples of the price. Many reviewers and customers who seek neutrality/clarity would agree with this. |
Lol. Right. He’s worried that it will destroy or equal the Pandora. From everything I’ve read the Benchmark is a fantastic product- at its price point, and I’m sure is able to beat many products that cost more than it does. I think everyone would love it if what you claim were true, no need to spend huge sums of money to get the performance level. So far I’ve yet to see anyone touting that it can beat the best of the best. Except for one distinctly unqualified and suspect biased opinion. Jay, not anyone has or feels the need to prove anything to you tecno. I’m sure most everyone else here has no doubts about that comparison. If you’re so sure, then put your money where your mouth is, don’t ask others to do so. You seem to be the one that needs to be convinced, no one else here has mentioned any interest. It’s not the Jay compares what tecno wants show, ( though I’m sure for the right financial incentive it could be) it’s the Jay buys what he wants( it’s his money after all) and is good enough to spend the time sharing all this with us show. Is the Pandora 15 times as good as the Benchmark? No. Nothing is. It’s called the law of diminishing returns. It’s the best of the best category. Benchmark can likely make claim to the best in its price point category. If you want value, buy the Benchmark. Probably wouldn’t get anyone to disagree that’s it’s a great choice at that point. It’s like trying to compare a corvette, likely the best at its price point, to a Bugatti. Let us know when you get your channel up and running so you can prove these things for us. |
He doesn’t have one. He just loves to create fiction and recently started to flood with comments on my YouTube channel under a new username. Guys, it is EASY to figure it out on youtube who writes the stupid nonsense...it is EASY TO SEE...and I get to remove the comments all day long... Every day..... Hate is a real thing...misery always wants company... |
We all know the Benchmark LA4 would not be destroyed by the Pandora. And this is exactly what WC & friends don’t want to demonstrate... He could enlighten us all, and plainly show us that putting 40k on a preamp has huge results on the final performance compared to putting 2.5k. Ask yourself why he won’t do it... |
Lol...that’s exactly my point Ron17. I also don’t need to prove anything to anyone especially the dude that gives thumbs down on all my videos. I will continue to do my thing and work on beating my own system and nothing else. I’m not going to compare my system to anybody else’s and that’s why I will say it here once again: If you found a speaker, amp, or preamp or dac or whatever it is AND you paid a fraction of what I have invested in my own system then MORE POWER TO YOU. Be happy you didn’t spend what I had to spend and that you did something better than I did. Don’t forget to tell your story here as to how you did it. WE WOULD ALL LOVE TO KNOW IT so we can duplicate it. Oh and while you're at it, build a youtube channel and show us too. Why not ? It is all fun... |
I completely agree with you speedbump6. Except for the fact that WC now uses youtube to ask for our opinions on what we hear and prefer. So we could be the judge and WC could proove me wrong with this kind of matchup. A small price to pay to have me shut up once and for all, don’t you think ? If all this time he has been right, the Pandora should clearly spank the Benchmark out of the ballpark. It should be obvious on youtube. Didn’t he bring a McIntosh MA252 in just for fun lately ?... |
Tecno, even if he did that, you wouldn’t be happy with the results, so why bother. You’d have some conspiracy theory why he came up with the results he did, as you have many other times. He’s paid or compensated by the dealers or manufacturers seems to be a favorite excuse that’s been used. What you could do is buy the Benchmark, send it to him, add some funds for his time and effort, and then he might, maybe consider testing an amp that’s less than ten percent the cost in a heads up. That way you would be hiring him to be a paid consultant for you, to test out your ideas. What a great idea! Then you don’t have to spend as much nor take the time to create your own channel to test new theories. Glad I could help to get you guys on the same wavelength and creat some thing that would be mutually beneficial. |
Viber- I will have to yield to your knowledge and expertise when it come to knowIng what a live instrument sounds like up close. However some people prefer Carnegie Hall to the Boston Symphony hall because of the sound of the hall and music combo. So if the recording is done in Carnegie I’m not going to try to make it sound like the Boston symphony hall. I too like a very transparent neutral sound if the recording is good. I can appreciate both camps. Also I can appreciate where you are coming from wanting every little detail up close. I also believe that comparing to a live instrument is great if you know it’s sound where it was recorded, what space, was it a studio etc. Therefore we just have to choose the sound we like and enjoy. Something that draws you in and makes you want to sit and enjoy. Just like you prefer one hall over another, you will prefer one system over another, one speaker, or one amp. I like getting your perspective because I know you know live sound well. Thankyou for sharing you knowledge of live music and how certain equipment compares. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
WC should bring in the new Benchmark LA4 preamplifier so we could compare it with the big buck Gryphon Pandora. Then we could know what a lot more money buys you. Its measurements are off the charts. But is it musical, so that it would satisfy WC ? If WC & friends is so sure about the ultra high end gear obvious superiority, then please enlighten us on yt video... I’m sure there could be nervous people around that kind of matchup... |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
tjassoc, What are the revealing cables you sell? Can I read anything on them before trying? It is nice that we have the same goal of neutrality and using live sound as the reference for building audio systems. BTW, with The Listening Room in Scarsdale, I go way back with them in the late 70’s when it was owned by Marcel Whitman, and later Stuart Clayman. My last few posts have made a distinction between colorations of systems and the natural colors of real live music. I suspect you would agree with me that audio coloration means deviation from the live sound. This relates to a discussion about whether "sterile" electronics are subtracting harmonic information. My position is that people who describe certain electronics as sterile, are desiring warmth and less detail. There is no doubt that some live instruments have a certain amount of warmth in certain freq ranges, esp in midrange tonality and bass fullness in certain halls and rooms. However, this live warmth does not subtract detail. Rather, it provides full harmonic information which is made possible by all the detail. But the kind of warmth in some audio systems is different. HF info is rolled off to an extent, and some detail is lacking. As a consequence, the relative warmth of middle and lower freq is emphasized. This warmth has a psychoacoustic effect of fooling the listener into thinking he is hearing more harmonic information, but in reality the relative lack of detail is obscuring true harmonic info. I call it "veiling." The "sterile" perception of more detailed electronics is actually due to something else, often the many layers of processing in recordings which is better revealed by the "sterile" components and smoothed over by "warm" electronics. This correlates with WC’s and many other people’s experiences of preferring "warmer" components with mediocre recordings. But with more natural recordings, the more accurate and detailed component will often be preferred. If you get the opportunity, go to a concert in Boston Symphony Hall and compare to Carnegie Hall (of course after covid peters out). Sit close in both. The sound of Carnegie is warmer than Boston, due to the plush seats and carpeting in Carnegie which absorb more of the sound, than the bare seats and lack of carpeting in Boston. Some might describe Boston as sterile compared to Carnegie. I know what they mean, but the greater neutrality of Boston lets you hear more variety in the tone of all the instruments. Carnegie is more like rose colored sunglasses, which warms up everything and actually distorts the true and greater harmonic information heard in Boston. Boston is crisper than Carnegie, with a fuller spectrum of harmonics in Boston vs some roll off of HF harmonics and an emphasis of lower freq harmonics in Carnegie. That’s what I heard. |
Jay - first, I agree and learned long ago not to comment on pieces I haven’t heard. The first revelation was my first listen to Apogee speakers (in The Listening Room, in Scarsdale, NY - owner Ron Mitz). I was amazed at the time - and the experience was exasperated because most everything I read about them lead me to have a very different expectation of how they would sound. Second - I’ve posted this on your thread before, I prefer neutral components that recreate the illusion of the live performance as best as possible. While I haven’t heard the Boulder amplifier, I explained my impression after listening to Momentum mono’s (in a system and with music I was very familiar with) to another respected audiophile, and how they were very clean, precise and articulate (and had slightly better bass then the amplifiers I used) but that they didn’t have all the natural harmonics that accompanied a live performance and he stated that Boulder started that "sterile" type of sound movement. Now - please don’t criticize me - that’s not what I stated. And this is being VERY critical (but at this level of equipment, I believe we all have the right to be VERY critical). What I’m trying to convey is there’s much more to reproducing the illusion of a live performance then neutrality, though neutrality is certainly a necessary part. A system has to be engaging and be able to convey the emotion of the music - and for me, that’s what keeps me listening for hours (literally!). And, at the same time, my system ruthlessly exposes poor recordings. I prefer this because with well recorded music - the experience is unmatched. This is just my preference with my own system - and my system isn’t at the level your system is (Meridian 861v8, 800 Transport, Pass XA-200.5’s, Sasha I’s, Sound Application TT-7). Another aspect (for me) regarding a system’s performance is imagining. After the "preliminary" system performance aspects are met (frequency response, dynamics, speed, transparency, etc.) imaging is super critical for me. If a system doesn’t provide that reach out and touch it 3D lifelike image (with lifelike proportions, width and depth), then it’s not convincing (to me). I found cabling makes a DRASTIC difference in system performance and I hope one day to visit and get to listen to your system and switch in the cables that I prefer and get your feedback. What I’d like to find out is: 1 - do we value the same performance characteristics (as you just previously stated - that we all have our own preferences) and 2 - how well do the cables I found to be the best performing ever compare to the cables you found to be the best performing ever. Like the Gryphon electronics, the cables I use are RUTHLESSLY revealing - and I think that’s a positive trait but it exposes recordings for just what they are - both good and bad. And - so everyone knows, I became a dealer for the cables I use. I first purchased them and liked them so much I became a dealer for them. But, after attempting to educate and offer these cables to fellow audiophiles, I no longer promote them, because it seams everyone values something different and so few of use apparently use live music as a reference and strive to create the illusion of a live performance. I certainly don’t mean to offend anyone - I’m just trying to share my own experiences and gain insights from other’s experiences (so we don’t have to do all the trials ourselves). Keep up the good work Jay - while I haven’t been able to follow your forum daily, I do my best to keep current and catch up whenever possible. Your forum is unmatched - and it’s length and duration is a testament to that! We’ve all gained so much from it ! ! ! ! |
carey1110, These are difficult, mysterious questions we are trying to answer, regarding what are colorations, and are we able to eliminate or even minimize them? Despite my vast live music experience as a performer and concertgoer, and lesser experience doing live recording, I still don't know what any given recording sounded like to the engineers and production staff. I don't know precisely how commercial recording pros operate. Some of them sit distantly away in a control room, and hear the live mike feed played back on questionable monitor speakers. But when I did my recordings, I sat in the 1st row, near my mikes. I would take my headphones on and off as I compared the live sound to the mike feed heard through my headphones. In effect, I was transplanting my head onto the mike stand, which was the closest anyone could get to being in the chosen position of the mikes. I used only 2 Neumann KM184 cardioid mikes whose diaphragms were separated a little wider than my head, but I used no supplemental ambience mikes and did no mixing or processing. So even though I tried to hear the live mike feed, I was handicapped by the huge colorations of my headphones as well as the lesser colorations of the best mike preamp and mikes that I had. I never knew what my recordings really sounded like, but what I did know was the live sound I heard from my close 1st row center seat. I accept your definition of coloration as a deviation from the original recording. However, since the original recording sound is unknowable, the coloration is also unknowable. You're right about my other definition of coloration, which is a deviation from live sound. I believe my definition is more practical than yours. Then there are the huge colorations of various speakers. One SOTA speaker has a vastly different sound from another SOTA speaker. To overcome my uncertainties about all this, I take a practical approach of learning about a wide variety of live sounds in halls and outside in nature. What I try to do with my audio system is to recreate the approximate tonal characteristics and snap of real instruments and voices that I know from live experience. I know what a violin sounds like in various rooms, halls, and under my ear. I have learned what the common features of the violin are, despite having differences in the various environments. The same goes for other instruments, and combinations in various ensembles. I am interested in the direct instrument sounds heard close, where the main mikes are, not heard from a distance, which are a mess of reverberation, hall effects, and severely rolled off HF. I'll take the sound of my car radio appropriately EQ'd, rather than the live audience sound of 100 feet away. I've done that comparison, driving to a concert hearing a recording in the car, and being disappointed at how muddy the sound of similar music was in the hall from my distant seat. |
