I am sorry, its so hard to scroll thru all of this; has there been an assessment of any Lamm pieces? Just a curiosity, not more. Thanks!
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
kren0006, viber6 described your remarks, in his eyes, as vicious. Your response is that there was nothing vicious or insulting about your comments. I’m letting you know what I think about your comments, in hopes that future comments could be more civil. Ultimately, it’s needed because I’d like to see this thread continue. Had your comments been more civil towards viber6 to begin with, then we would not have had all the posts that followed. Dave |
thezaks ... a primer on how to post could definitely be helpful ...No "primer" is needed. Audiogon is very clear about its rules for using the forums. You might want to read the FAQ. Also, you might want to note this: ... all members are responsible for maintaining a professional and cordial demeanor on and off the site including our forums. We will not tolerate the use of hostile, offensive, profane or vulgar language. |
kren0006, It's ironic that you mention I am the one stirring up trouble. No worries, I'll leave that up to the moderators (an objective party) to decide. If it's ever me, I will definitely change my behavior. You and viber6 coexisting? Looking at some of his posts just from today - he's having to defend himself from your comments. Perhaps that's your idea of coexisting? Dave |
| Post removed |
jetter, Recent activity (post removal plus moderator intervention, plus complaints about how folks are treated) would show otherwise to what you mentioned, so a primer on how to post could definitely be helpful. Otherwise, the road towards closing this thread is actually shorter than you might think. Dave |
kren0006 - your approach tends to be a more "in your face" approach, and that leads to post removal, moderators dropping in, and folks getting offended (including me). viber6 is providing you good suggestions for making your point, without getting personal. I agree with carey1110's comments on viber6. I think viber6 has an intelligent, logical approach, and he's always asking WC for his thoughts on his speculation. And, WC responded, which was terrific and didn't offend viber6. Perhaps consider letting WC respond to viber6's speculation and/or just scroll on by. Dave |
WC, I agree that the preamp is matching with the amp. I'm also guessing that the AQ cabling and that new amp stand are breaking in and having a very positive affect. Seems to me that you are getting both slam and delicacy, as well as detail/resolution and liquidity - you're getting it all. I wish I could be there to take in the layering you must be getting. I think you already had the start of this before adding the preamp, and now it's getting even more refined. I can only imagine what it will sound like, once you add an upgraded power cord to the preamp. Dave |
Viber I consider a coloration as anything that alters or deviates from the original recording. However I think you mean anything that alters the original sound from live pre recording. Therefore there is no such thing as no coloration, the best we can do is minimize it. Recording engineers are also handicapped by the monitors they use. |
carey1110, goodsource, WC, All good points. But when carey says I prefer a "coloration" of brilliance and sweetness, that is true to some extent, but it depends how you define "coloration." My problem with audio systems is mainly the weakest link, the speaker, followed by the choices of the recording engineer and production team. How can a speaker made of boxes or other mechanical parts like different transducers re-create the liveness of real music? Real instruments are made of completely different materials--brass, wood, strings of catgut wound with other materials, fleshy vocal cords, etc. Real instruments are struck, banged, blowed, plucked, messaged, all of which create deliberate vibrations which make the sound. In contrast, the ideal speaker is supposed to be inert, and not move. Footers and stands try to do this. It is remarkable that artificial speakers sound anything at all like live music. I have to play games with electronics to get my system to capture the liveness of natural live music. Perhaps one day speakers will get better, so the transducers will more closely resemble live instruments, and then I won't have to do as much "coloring" of the electronics as I do. Choices of recording engineers that I don't like, require me to undo their work by using EQ. There are some recordings I like, from some engineers who have in mind the naturally real sound I go for. Then I don't find myself doing as much manipulation. To summarize, I would put it another way, and say I like the live music qualities of brilliance and sweetness. These are the "colors" of live music, not "colorations." The term, "coloration" applies to electronics, and speakers that have electronic crossovers in them, and I admit that I use the EQ as a "coloration" tool. I would rather not do it, and hope for the day when speakers will be much more true to life, and more recording engineers would try to recreate natural sound, rather than process it with all kinds of manipulations. It is harder to undo junk once it is in the source. It can be undone with EQ, but only partially. |
The reality here is that the MORE NEUTRAL a component is, THE LESS DESIRED it tends to be by the general audiences. A couple of examples: Boulder: it is extremely transparent stuff that has incredible construction and resolution. Gryphon Mephisto: Neutral. It punished me with Nordost odin and it told me exactly what a dac direct and a preamp do or don’t do. That said, how many people really chase boulder? How many chase the mephisto? NOT MANY. WHY? Well it’s not chump change. Also, these Components have a reputation of sounding "bad" or "too ruthless’ etc etc. So then WHAT THE HELL DO WE ALL WANT AS AUDIOPHILES? The REAL PRESENTATION? or a "cute" sounding presentation that let’s you sit there for hours and that doesn’t allow you to criticize bad recordings?? That is a question that only EACH AND EVERYONE OF YOU can answer. It is YOUR SYSTEM, YOUR FLAVOR, YOUR DOUGH. Lastly, I have noticed that many have strong opinions on components that they haven’t been in front of or at the very least heard at a show. There is a difference between having an "idea" and being "certain" how a component sounds based on reading 4-5 forums. Nobody can be certain of how a component sounds if all you have done is read what "others" have posted on forums. I read several forums and It never ceases to amaze me HOW MANY NARRATIVES exist by people who haven’t been exposed to any of the gear they comment on. I want to be clear by saying "exposed" rather than "owned" because the fact is that they haven’t even been to a show to hear the components they "supposedly" know so well. These are the things that lead to more confusion than anything else. When you read comments on ANY component, do your homework first and use comments as general preliminary feedback. Don't make buying decisions based on what people say on forums (yep you can also include me in that). |
there is no correlation between sweetness/warmth and detail at all. infact the sound of many instruments on the upper mids to high frequence is not sweet or warm at all. with so many variables from how the band of instruments or orchestra that performed to even determine the spacing and detail of instruments to what a recording engineer added or removed or compensated, its hard to draw a reference line. the best one can start with is that the components/electronics we use have to be transparent , uncolored and neutral and not warm or sweet in first place. second have an idea about how texture, timber and tonality of each instruments sound. for people who have no interest in going the above route, better to stick to their personal taste of what sounds best to their ears. |
Viber So therefore your preference Is a detailed sound with some brilliance and sweetness. Others may prefer a different violin because of its warmth, softness and wooden character neither of which is wrong. So when you hear a recording it’s not necessarily the truth of the recording you are looking for but perhaps to change it to a more brilliant sound with a bit of tonal sweetness. Even tho this may not be exactly how this recording sounds. Therefore maybe you prefer a “coloration” of brilliance and sweetness. Colorations aren’t just warmer or veiled they are any deviation from the original recording. Perhaps you as well enjoy some forms of coloration. |
Carey1110, Yes, WC's system is enjoyable to me, even from my mediocre computer audio. The most important question you posed is how do I know when the glass is clear? From my vast experience of hearing live instruments and voices of all types in many venues, I have a composite familiarity with the idea of "clear." I often walk past a house with an open window and the drummer is playing--I know it is live and not a recording, because of the freshness and general clarity that is hard to put into words. I walk past a playground where kids are playing handball, and hear the crispness of their hand slaps. Same for the basketball players and hearing the lower pitch of the bouncing basketball. When I walk daily, I listen to the natural sounds of spoken conversations, close and further away. All these sounds are crisp, so I really don't understand why anyone would deliberately not want crispness in their music, but they are free to like any sound they want. Recording engineers often play games with their artificial processing and manipulations. This is less applicable to naturally recorded classical and jazz. Even so, the concept of crispness still applies as a desirable goal--the processing is not so bad as to interfere with the perception of crispness underneath the layers of processing. A separate case applies to my use of EQ. I would like to find an EQ that has a clearer glass window than my Rane EQ. Some recordings have a distant perspective created by engineers who use mellow mikes and mix in distant omnidirectional mikes. I can take such recordings, use my EQ to boost HF judiciously to successfully make the perspective much closer, to my liking. The famous Mercury Living Presence recordings of the 1950's are widely respected for their upfront, live perspective, hence the name, "Living Presence." Even I didn't realize until as recently as 20 years ago, due to my experience in EQ, that these Mercury recordings were done with EQ. One day I'll get a more transparent EQ with better electronics than my Rane, but even today the Rane's very flexible EQ functions vastly outweigh its slight liabilities for transparency. But the issue of audio flavoring superimposing itself on the natural colors of live music is still important. I want maximum transparency without the coloring of electronics. EQ is a special case which corrects much of the defects of all speakers and the choices of the recording studio that I hear as nullifying much of the live excitement of natural music. Did you ever go to a store which has parallel mirrors on opposite walls, look into the mirror, see yourself in the first reflection, then look slightly off axis and see the multiple reflections? How about noisy analog recordings where several generation copies are vastly inferior to the original? A great thing about digital is that many generation copies still sound close to the original. These two analogies help explain my position on this subject. Quality violins are hideously expensive, and I would love to own a few. I had to settle for my present 1890 Theodor Paulus violin because it was affordable and it had the approximate type of sound I like best. That sound is detailed and brilliant with still enough tonal sweetness. But I do like a variety of tonal personalities in other violins. This gets me back to my overall view that I appreciate tonal variety and beauty of natural unamplified instruments and voices, but don't like electronics that cause additional coloring superimposed on the natural colors. |
Viber- I understand your preference but the problem is how do you know when the glass is clear unless you were standing in front of the violin when it was recorded. I guess the point is it’s never completely clear. Maybe the illusion of clear. What you hear every time you listen to a recording is the recording engineers preference. Maybe thats not your preference, Maybe you prefer the mic to be closer or back further etc. this is why there are so many different successful manufacturers of audio gear. However I believe this latest system of WC’s should be checking most of the box for you. Am I right? Viber I have one question for you, do you prefer a particular violin? If so why? |
This is a great discussion on the distinctions among various Gryphon amps. There is probably variability in the tonal character of the various Gryphon preamps as well as cables. This may be a good idea from the Gryphon management team of different engineers. Customers have slightly different preferences but all want the high quality of Gryphon products. They can go for various combinations depending on their tonal preferences. One engineer with a particular tonal preference himself may create a product for a particular customer, and another engineer who has a different personal tonal preference can design another product for another customer. There are many, many gradations of "dark." Over the last 100 years, electronics have evolved to the point that all have near zero distortion, and tonal characteristics are not that much different in top level electronics. Speakers are much more variable in their sound. My lifetime experience playing over 1000 violins has shown great variability in each violin's tone. The greatest violin maker, Antonio Stradivari, made 600 violins in his long lifetime. I played 13 of them, and they were all so different. It also makes a big difference in which player plays any particular violin. Some players have a quick bow stroke with more precision in their right hand bow attack and left hand finger technique. The result is that a particular violin may sound dark or bright depending on the violin player. I enjoy this variety of natural sounds from live unamplified instruments and voices--dark, bright, and everything in between. But I believe that electronics should not impose its own personality on the natural sound. Let the tonal colors of natural instruments speak for themselves. I want to look through a clear glass and see the natural colors. The alternate approach of audio system coloring to me is like looking through many different layers of colored glass--all very interesting, but ultimately not true to the character of the natural music. I mentioned the rose colored sunglasses which make the blue sky more beautiful, but rob the green grass and trees of their green beauty. |
@goodsource: The reports I’ve been getting about the antileon evo is aligning with your statement above. It is the "dark" gryphon while the coliseum is not. The mephisto completely departs from the tonality of their siblings by adding more layers, more organic feeling, more immediacy and impact and last but not least, more neutral than the coliseum and I can probably say more than the antileon as well. The mephisto has given me the feeling of " you’re there , I have arrived, I am here with you jay" and other amps didn’t quite echo that. I can’t think of an amplifier that I rather have than the mephisto. Will I still bring more amps? Sure I will. I just don’t know if something else will check as many boxes as the mephisto. The boulder 2160 has been on my radar as well as the baby gryphon essence. Outside of those amps, I can’t say there is anything else that makes me extremely curious but this doesn’t mean that there isn’t something else worth me trying. The last video I shot impressed me even when listening to it on my phone. The massive amounts of positive comments, texts, emails I have received in regards to the last video is unlike anything else. Of course, if you pay attention to my videos you’ll see there are always 1 or 2 people who do thumbs down and that needs no explanation as to who that might be. As of right now I have 59 thumbs up and 3 thumbs down lol. Hmmm how interesting right ? The great thing with YouTube is that you can control the negative comments plus you can see who is leaving negative comments and easily figure out who they are etc. That said, I don't know where to go from here when it comes to amps. |
@viber6 regarding CH M1.1 vs Mephisto. Mephisto was not in my shopping list as 200W pure class A amp is not my cup of tea or preference.i was looking for class AB amps. and you were spot on while describing what is dark. i talked to another mephisto owner and this was his description of dark --- Dark refers to the fact that the upper treble range has a tendency to be slightly recessed...extremely clear, all the details there, but not as forward. By contrast, when highs are emphasized slightly in the presentation, they become 'spot lit'...hope that makes sense. In the case of the Mephisto, it is exceedingly organic (which some might say is warm)...but is not nearly as 'dark' as its historic predecessors (Antileon).. --- |
@carey1110 fully agree with you on different hearing perceptions and arguments around the same. thats why i trust WC judgments and description as a base truth rather than deriving it by listening to the youtube video. i find jay to be very dispassionate and impartial with gear, and hence basing & deriving the further arguments based on what WC says reduces ambiguity and confusion for me. |
@kren0006 i do not think WC rebuked @viber6. i always find viber’s remarks or contrarian opinion or even criticism to be very constructive. viber is not like techno. he was trying get clarification and reconcile presentation comparison on christine/mephisto vs pandora/mephisto and WC clarified that with a reply.thats all. main thing we all have different perceptions of adjectives used in characterizing something. relaxed sound , sweet top end , organic, natural can mean different things to different people and needs to put in comparatively and relatively correct to make sense of it |
Viber, you can be upset with me, that’s fine. Also, I think you misunderstand my motives. I am not here to torment you, only to call out your misleading statements. The same way WC did and has done on dozens if not hundreds of occasions over this thread. After so many times I just have less patience than WC. But I mean you no ill will. |
kren0006, No, WC didn't call me wrong or correct me. He just elaborated on what he said about the Pandora, which is helpful info. Aside from that, WC never says anyone's views are wrong, but just that they have different preferences. The person who is wrong is YOU, not for your sonic preferences, but for your misreading of my remarks which were an intelligent discussion of audio parameters, and morally wrong because of your character assassination. You still rebuke me in your latest post to me, 10/10/20 at 5:38 PM. I won't tolerate your insults and will call you out on any future infractions of the basic moral code here. |
Kren0006. I agree I’m just trying to understand why every once in a while someone comes in out of left field with a 180 degree view that to me doesn’t seem to make since. Most people seem to agree except for some minor variations. Then you get that way out there opinion, I’m just trying to figure out what may cause it that’s all. |
Agree on all of that. Yet we (I least I) consistently hear big differences in the video presentations. When i don’t like something I hear I point it out (have done that many times with Mephisto). Since we can’t be there, it’s the best we got. Also, and this is important, by now anyone who has been following for any length can tell from WC’s comments about his own gear what he likes and can read between the lines (both before and since YT channel) about what he doesn’t. And based on that we can tell if our own preferences match or conflict with WC’s. Then, If our own listening impressions concur with WC’s, that is added confidence that what we hear on videos is likely to be our actual reaction if we were there. |
Here’s the thing with trying to make judgements of a system over you tube. You are listening to music that has been reproduced then played into a microphone re-recorded, played through a computer or another system completely different. I’m amazed we can hear the differences that we do hear. The best you can hope for is a very rough idea of the differences. This is flavored by everything in the chain including what system we play it back on. That’s why there is such a wide range of responses to the same video. Therefore it’s very important to get some input from the person who is there listening in person. Who owns and is familiar with the gear. I think it sounds great with my headphones, someone else may may think it’s awful with their system. So consider this possibility before we challenge each other so readily. |
| Post removed |
kren0006, I wasn't twisting WC's remarks in any way. This is YOU twisting my remarks--"That is you adding euphonic misrepresentation to his statements that Pandora was immensely better sounding than Christine." And, "Let WC describe it and stop trying to rewrite it the way you would like it to be." Further negativity from you, "There, b4 I could even finish posting WC also rebukes V’s misleading characterization." But unlike your vicious remarks, WC doesn't "rebuke" me or my characterization, but just takes the high road and clarifies further with his post, "It's not that the pandora is on the relaxed sound but rather that it evens out the tonality of the Mephisto. It takes the incoming signals and balances out all frequencies. Nothing is too tilted or too relaxed. Everything seems spot on. The bass is deep with zero overhang and nothing jumps at you." It is still early in WC's listening to the Pandora, and things could change. Everyone knows that. But words have subtleties that seem to escape you. On the video, he describes the Pandora as relaxed, and now says that "nothing is too relaxed." There is no contradiction on his part, because he is still feeling his way with the Pandora. So let's say the Pandora has some bit of relaxed feeling at present. This is close to my rephrasing of it with the synonym of "soft." Perhaps the Pandora is "softer" but better balanced than the Christine for what WC likes. Instead of denigrating remarks from you with knee-jerk verbal attacks, it would be best if you take time to think about subtleties and pose reasonable questions to help clarify things that are said. Oh, but you think clarity of thought as with sound is not so important. I accept people who don't have clarity of thought, but lack of respect from them is not to be tolerated. If you really disagree with my observations, simply say, "I don't agree" and leave it at that, without the insults. That would be OK. |
No interest in magico a5. I’m glad you love you them. Build around them and report back. At the end of the day what counts is YOU liking them. Makes zero difference what anyone else has to say. I have bested ALL of MY PREVIOUS systems and I am not seeking any validation from anyone. I’m not comparing my CURRENT entire system to anybody else’s other than my own. I love what I am hearing HERE and that is really what matters TO ME. I’m at the top of MY OWN MOUNTAIN. Stay safe! |
Looking at your previous posts suggests you are blown away by the baby magico a5 speaker? I can certainly say I’ve heard it and it isn’t in the same conversation with a wilson alexia 2. That said, it is about preferences and if you feel the magico a5 is that good, I’m quite happy you didn’t have to spend the dough I spent on my Alexia 2s. You got a "better" speaker FOR YOU and spent waaaaay less money than I did. You WON for your current situation and that is all that matters. :-) However, I will say, freely (just like you did here about my Alexia 2s), that the magico a5 sound like a 900 dollar speaker if the Alexia 2 sound to YOU like a 6k speaker. Preferences...nothing else..nothing more...that is what it comes down to. Lastly, don’t forget I’ve owned magico s5mk2 and briefly the magico m3 a as well which I hope you don’t categorize as inferior to the magico a5 that you love. Better said, you hate wilson (on video as you stated) and I don’t love magico but I don’t dislike it either. The cool thing about what I do is that I could bring a magico m2 at some point and build around it or vivid audio or focal again? Who knows. The sky is the limit. Thanks for the comment above and wish you make those magico a5 kick @ss ! |
