thezaks361 posts09-28-2020 6:36pm
kren0006,Excuse those of us who may think otherwise, but kren0006 is the one getting it.
That is exactly the point. I’m paying attention, but you’re not getting it.
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
jetter, I'd sure appreciate hearing your perspective on this, since you agree with kren0006. To me, viber6 has been fair in showing not only his absolute preference for clarity and for his opinion that DAC direct has more clarity than a preamp, but he's also acknowledged that others who have different preferences will appreciate a preamp. Dave |
Here we go again rating the person not the gear. Come on. If you just state your opinion about what you like Or dislike About the sound and Not about the person. Make any claim Or statement you want about the sound leave out the person. I could care less about what any of you think about each other but I do want to know you opinion on the gear and the sound. That’s where the value of this thread is. |
Ok so the time has come to sell one of the 2 speakers. I can’t keep all 3 pairs and the Wilson Alexia 2 aren’t going anywhere for now. This will be the first time that I will be asking YOU, my followers, which speaker I should sell: 20.7 13a I need to keep the best speaker out of the two in order to build a cheaper system around it. Here are things to consider when making your recommendation: Is it the speaker with the largest fan base? Will people lose interest in my channel by me selling this one over the other? Will it be easier to work with this speaker? How did you arrive at your recommendation? I’d appreciate your input in order for me to form an educated decision. Please note: at the end I will be the one making the final decision. I just want you guys’ input to help me think. |
Trying to consider the questions (I definitely understand the importance of them), but I don't really know which one would have a larger fan base or garner more interest. Regarding one being easier than the other to work with, I would think the 20.7 to be easier. I also prefer the sound of the 20.7. Overall though, for my interest, I would not keep either one. I think there's many other lower price speakers for consideration. I could be in the minority on this though. Dave |
Jay, I think I’d sell the MLs. For even better performance at an even lower price point, look at the Tekton Ulfers. Many are gravitating to the Moabs for cost and a good percentage of the performance of the Ulfers. I believe the Tekton’s would even give the Wilson’s a bit of competition. ( not sayi g they’d win, but I bet they would in some categories) |
Well I just listened to the video with the preamp. For me......It was much more engaging that with out a preamp. Sound seemed more life like and organic. I just liked it better. As far as which speaker to keep. That depends on what you are trying to do. I do prefer the sound of the Maggie’s however if you are going for two systems one ultra high end and one lower high end and for what you are doing I’d keep the Martin Logan. Mainly because you will be able to help more people get that speaker right since there are probably more ML owners than Maggie’s. The reason I say that is Matin Logan is a larger company and they are prettier to look at. Even tho I prefer the Magnepan sound i believe fewer people will own it especially the 20.7 due to is size and room problems. |
kren0006, You have reasonable challenges to my "pronouncements." A few points can be discussed to see whether your challenges have merit. First, the role of theory and principles. Second, and more mundane, do expensive preamps change the findings that DAC direct reveals more music than adding a preamp? The second is easier. I didn't yet listen to the latest video with the Christine preamp, but I compared the recent videos with and without the Christine. It certainly is a great preamp, by my definition of "great" because it is very transparent and alters the signal little. But it was still slightly inferior in clarity to going direct. I would expect my cheap Rane without its EQ engaged to be inferior in clarity to the Christine. So my point is that regardless of expense, a preamp will alter the sound to a greater or lesser degree, so going direct will be best for purity and clarity in nearly all cases. The only way I would be incorrect on this, would be if there is a quirky impedance mismatch by going direct, and a better impedance match by using a preamp as an intermediary. This is like making a ramp for an elderly person who can't get up stairs. For the fit young people, the ramp slows them down, but for handicapped persons, the stairs are a non-starter and the ramp is the only way to get around. On to the tougher question about the role of theory and principles. A scientist uses inductive reasoning to first make observations, in this case, intelligent listening to a variety of live and recorded music, speakers, electronics, cables. I have done all of this. Then the scientist realizes that all his listening generates common conclusions, and he forms a theory. The theory can be used to predict observations about equipment he has never heard and compared in his familiar reference system. Nobody can hear everything, so the theory is useful to narrow down the fruitful possibilities of equipment to audition properly. After the theory has been confirmed with even more listening, it is ready to be promoted to the level of principle. Coming down to earth, I found it interesting to compare the 13A and the 20.7. One of my theories is that electrostatic transducers are more accurate than planar magnetic ribbon transducers, because of the construction and tighter control of the diaphragm by the electrostatic field. Another of my theories is that convex curved electrostatic panels are inferior to straight panels. Then how could I predict whether the 20.7 would be better than the 13A, or the opposite? One theory predicted that the 20.7 is better, but the other theory predicted that the 13A is better. To find out the truth, WE DO THE LISTENING. We both agree that the 20.7 is our preference over the 13A, and we both agree that listening is the final arbiter. I just find it helpful to formulate theories based on listening experience, to help understand the observed differences. In case you still object to this whole post by saying that I emphasize clarity to the exclusion of everything else, I wrote this AM that clarity encompasses most of the things that WC values, with the exception of macrodynamics and bass slam. So I still say that if macrodynamics and bass slam are very important to someone, they would lean towards having an additional preamp circuit in the chain. If the preamp were super transparent so that the extra gain comes in handy, then even I might want to have that super preamp around for very dynamic music, mainly if the power amp had very low gain. But for most music I listen to, I would take out that preamp in order to gain the greatest amount of clarity. |
WC, I'll tell you about my experiences with headache patients in relation to EMF and assorted electrical exposures when I have time. Although you no longer have the 3.7i, you know that I preferred an earlier model 3 to the early 20.1 for its lighter tonal balance with more HF but less bass. If a client on a very limited budget has my tastes, you could advise them to build a great system around the 3.7i. |
Keep the 13A's Maggie's are the Radiohead of the speaker world. Absurdly overrated by people who want to believe they have found something "unique" that not everyone else "gets". 13a's might compress at high volumes, but at least they do a few things very well and much differently than a "woofer tweeter" speaker, and still have the ability to give you some bass response that is relatively well integrated. Maggie's at best are background music speakers. |
HMM .....Interesting
|
Viber 6. You present a very interesting and compelling argument. For more purity removing the EQ will also give more purity don’t you think. Isn’t the EQ adding Or shaping the sound to make your music more like you want it as apposed to ultimate purity and clarity. While I may agree with what you are saying in the literal sense my preference is still the preamp over the “extreme purity” more engaging To me. It draws me in more. Some prefer the sound of the violin, some the horn, and some the sax. They can all play the same song but some people will prefer one over the other. Stereos can be like that, they can play the same music, some people prefer the warmth of tubes, or Some solid state, some with panels some with cone speakers, some with a preamp and some without one. Even tho we have different preferences we still like the music. That is what brings us to this thread. Hearing the difference perspectives helps us understand and maybe even change our own a bit. Nice well thought out post, lot of good points. I find WC’s videos very interesting in that I can hear a lot of different equipment and draw my own conclusions while still hearing what others think as well. I always find it amazing how the same video can have some many different interpretations. Great stuff. |
Viber, I believe your logic is flawed. Every piece of equipment, including your eq, even when engaged, adds its own signature to the total sound. Try different eqs, and you will find they each perform differently, therefore showing they do each add their own sonic signature. Some products add more of a signature, some add less and are considered “ transparent”. If all these transparent products are out there, why do they sound different? Because they’re not as transparent as we’d like to believe. The most transparent don’t always sound the best. And maybe listening to what comes direct from the source dosnt always give the best sound. It just may be what the equipment adds to the sound is what makes it enjoyable. To me every piece of equipment is an eq of sorts, but one with a set eq and sound, since it’s not adjustable, mostly. It never made sense to me that you had to take it or leave it as far as the particular sound signature a product produces, in the hobby. Personally I am not sure why there is such resistance to eqs, as some like more bass, some less, some are more affected by a too bright and harsh top end, that others might like for the detail. Yet we are supposed to buy different equipment with a different signature to solve that. It might be very difficult to find one with a sound that is prefect for you, while having some ability to adjust that might make a mostly good for you product turn into one the hits all your preferences. Some of us may have hearing deficits that an eq could help us with. Since nothing we listen to is exactly “pure” ,why not tailor the whole experience to our individual preferences. In the guitar world there are products that emulate amps, and effects. There are products that even professional musicians cannot tell emulation from the real thing. Wouldn’t it be great to have a product that allows us to have the sound signature of a Mephisto , any preamp you desire, and a DCS Vivaldi, all for 5k? It’s definitely possible. I’ve owned those products, though for me the interfaces are overly complicated, and could use some good interface engineering to improve that. You could experiment with any combination of equipment that had been “modeled” as they call it. Though that might put jay out of business with his channel. Sure would save him a ton of money though. There are plenty of you tube Videos and preset combinations that people share, to get a certain sound, say Aerosmith on Walk this way from the Toys in the attic album, so how the channel would be presented would be different. If emulators room over, would development of improved equipment, or sounds in the case, cease? Emulators have not taken over the guitar world en masse, as there will likely always be people who just wouldn’t believe in them even if a blind test could prove how well they worked, but they do seem to be gradually gaining steam. I doubt the audio world would go in that direction, but it’s sure something to think about |
speedbump6, I actually agree with everything you just said. I would love to compare different EQ products, because their electronics would yield different sounds. But the choice of high quality products is limited. I'd love to see someone like Merrill come up with a purist line stage with limited gain, a SOTA volume control, and top grade EQ parts. I am not claiming my Rane ME60 is the best such product--I merely tried it because I was desperate to add EQ when the conductor of my orchestra complained that my recordings in the lousy hall sounded dull and bass heavy. I agreed with him and was unhappy. That was back in 1995, and I came to enjoy the EQ for audiophile listening purposes. I lean away from the tubed EQ units of Manley, but I would welcome other units you may have heard that have the transparency I seek. There are actually 2 subjects here. One--purity with lack of coloration, and transparency. Two--the role of EQ to bring out HF which brings out more details of higher freq harmonic overtones. On the 1st subject, it is remarkable that the cheap Rane especially with mrdecibel's tweaks is decently transparent as just a line stage without its EQ, although no doubt the Merrill Christine and other SOTA line stages are better for purity/transparency. On the 2nd subject, the EQ with HF judiciously boosted enables more snap and sparkle so that speakers come much closer to those qualities of live music. I have some cherished musical performances on recordings where the mikes are relatively distant and electronics are sweet and tubey sounding, so I get the midrange a little drier and more neutral by slightly reducing the range of 200-800 Hz. Also, don't forget that mikes are transducers with their own electronics embedded, so they are in effect EQ's. That's a big reason why mikes have different sounds which may vary as much as speakers. So as I explained in a recent post, the slight handicap of the Rane for purity is vastly outweighed by its EQ ability to make recordings and speakers much more lively so that the overall sound is much closer to the gestalt of live unamplified music. Sounds contradictory, and few audiophiles believe this, but my listening experience has taught me all these things. Slightly another topic, but I wonder whether the single tweeter array of the cheaper Tektons has more HF emphasis than the double array used in more expensive Tektons. In the single array, there are 6 tweeters that cover the midrange, and 1 tweeter that covers above 3 kHz. In the double array, there is the 1 tweeter for above 3 kHz, and 14 tweeters that cover the midrange, so perhaps there is more relative midrange output from the double array. Eric Alexander would know, but I don't want to bother him since I am not ready to buy Tektons at this time. |
grey9hound, Yes, recently I posted about the meaning of "Mephisto." One meaning is the "demon" which relates to what WC has experienced with it. He called it a wild animal. It is most revealing, but sometimes in a negative way, which has forced WC to try many cables and preamps to get the sound he wants. |
So let’s hear from the dac direct adherents explaining why the 13A video without the preamp sounded better than the one with the preamp. Please don’t try to distract by getting into curve panel nonsense. That was a constant across experiments, and thus not relevant here to this question. I’ll help. Yes, it was clearly better with the preamp across the board IMO. Given the choice of listening to either I’ll choose the preamp vid 100 out of 100 times. WC obviously agrees. But dac direct folks: let’s hear from you on why WC is wrong. |
WC, I think your ophthalmologist is right about the blue filters in the prescription glasses, and the fact that the elevated eye pressure may be a factor. I could mention other causes of headaches, dizziness, nausea, but the most important thing to do is to get a thorough medical checkup from an internist. Also, see a neurologist (headache specialist) and get an MRI of the brain, just to rule out serious things. In the 1940ish movie, DARK VICTORY, Bette Davis plays a commanding socialite who develops headaches. One of her admirers who falls in love with her, is a neurosurgeon. He observes her seemingly casually, but notes that she misses lighting her cigarette. With this evidence of spatial disorientation, he diagnoses her with a brain tumor on the spot, operates on her the next day, and is proven correct. A few years ago, one of my patients told me he was bumping into things on his right side. I found that he indeed had right visual field defects, and I diagnosed him with a brain tumor on his left side, confirmed with the MRI. He survived with conventional treatment for 6 years, but he refused my advice to go on a keto (very low carb) diet, which research has shown to extend survival in brain cancer patients. Doctors used to be trained to make diagnoses of nearly everything by taking a history and doing a physical exam, before any tests are done. That was when CT scans and MRI exams were unavailable. Nowadays, this art of diagnosis has been largely lost, and more reliance has been placed on doing tests. Still, my neurologist colleague and I order MRI tests of the brain on nearly all headache patients, because the traditional art of diagnosis doesn't pick up everything. Please insist on getting an MRI, and don't let the MD shrug you off by prescribing pain drugs for your headaches. You probably don't have any serious condition like this, so I'll get into some interesting causes of headaches I have seen in patients. LED lights are an example of electro-sensitivity which is a problem for a % of the population. It can cause insomnia (my case) or other brain symptoms. I bought products and fabrics to make shielding for 4G and maybe 5G, from lessEMF.com. Your wife could help you with the sewing. I have some products from Airestech which partially neutralize the effects of environmental EMF on the body. I carry the Defender Pro in my shirt pocket all day, and in my underwear when sleeping. I bought the esi24 meter from lessEMF, which measures RF, magnetic and electrical fields. I have had modest improvements with these strategies, but the 45 year old wife of the super in my building had more dramatic results. She had severe insomnia. I measured all the rooms in her apartment. The RF levels at the head of her bed were off the roof, but they were lower at the foot of the bed in the middle of the room. The 1st step was putting her head where her feet were. This alone gave an improvement. Then when she went into the other room where RF levels were much lower, she then began to sleep like a baby. I'm not kidding. I use orange goggles that fit over my glasses in the evening to filter out 98% of the blue light which suppresses melatonin, the sleep hormone. Get the Uvex S 0360 X Ultraspec 2000 model from Amazon. This model still transmits 50% of the total light, so you can do your activities. Melatonin declines with aging, but young people who use bright screens from phones and computers at night can have melatonin suppression. Melatonin suppression also occurs with stress, so it is important to manage that, so I hate to say it, but try to avoid doing audio research at night. If you must do it, use the orange goggles, which you can also use for listening with also the lights turned down. All this will help restore your melatonin levels. Even if you sleep like a baby for 8 hours, the odds are that your sleep quality is not as good as you think. Many people like me are actually handicapped in sleep quality and quantity, but rationalize that they are OK by getting involved in pleasurable activities like audio or anything else, to take their mind away from the true realities. Melatonin deficiency can increase the risk of many conditions, so your blue filter glasses and my orange goggles are a good strategy. If the neurologist diagnoses migraines as a cause of headaches, they generally prescribe specific migraine drugs and avoidance of trigger factors like stress and foods. I go further, and start by recommending a gluten and dairy free diet. These are the most common foods that cause food sensitivity. If you have abdominal symptoms after eating moderate sized meals, that often indicates food sensitivities, which cause what is commonly known as IBS, irritable bowel syndrome. The IBS leads to "leaky gut" which opens up the Pandora's box of overall body inflammation, such as migraine headaches as an example. (There we go again, Mephisto and Pandora, lol.) Even if you don't have any abdominal symptoms, it is worth a month trial of avoidance of gluten and dairy, which has helped many of my patients with neurological symptoms of headache, dizziness, etc. I hope you and some other people find this info helpful. |
Thank you for the above viber. I will look into your recommendations. Luckily, i refuse to take meds of any kind unless i am dying of excruciating pain. I am thankful that i don't get hooked on any sort of addictive drug or anything like that. The only time i have to take some sort of pain killer is when my back isn't playing nice with me. |
A couple of updates for this week: -Critical Mass stand for Mephisto arrives this Thursday -Pandora Preamp is supposed to ship to me today -New speaker cables arrive today -Second preamp will hopefully be delivered this week -Audioquest Dragon source powercord for the dac comes next week I have high expectations for the Mephisto once everything arrives. I am not sure if i am going to be spending anymore money on it after buying what i just outined above if it does not exceed my expectations. My brain says "yes it will deliver and blow away my expectations" but my gut says "i am nervous because if it doesn’t slam the door shut then where do we go from here ?" Quite frankly, and again, to be honest with you guys in order to show TRANSPARENCY that does not benefit me by being very vocal with what i am about to say: The Mephisto is indeed the devil and it does require effort on your part. This is like an Arabian horse (google it) which is the most expensive horse in the world and i am sure those who own it do not feed it garbage food or water. I am sure that kind of animal has top veterinary care, top caregivers, top food, etc. This is what i feel the Mephisto is. No skimping anywhere on your rig. I welcome the challenge, but those of you who do not have patience or resources will fall flat on your faces. In addition to the above, i also believe the Alexia 2 is another animal that is showing me the character of everything upstream. Mephisto & Alexia 2 are no joke when it comes to revealing and distinguishing between a good, bad, and outstanding component. They tell you the truth, but that pisses you off because maybe you were not looking to change something else on your rig. I actually wanted to also share something else which was my personal comparison of the Sony 295es and JVC NX7 4k projectors which i have here. In case you dont know, the similar situation is happening with those. The sony 295es is Sony’s most affordable 4k projector ($5k msrp) and the JVC nx7 is 9k msrp. They are 2 different tier groups and the JVC has better parts, glass lens, better black colors etc, BUT when you watch streaming content such as the APPLE TV even in 4k, the jvc is good, but the cheaper sony seems better to me, more pleasant and it hides the imperfections of the streaming content much better, but as soon as you put a real 4k bluray disc, the jvc easily hands the sony a knockout punch. In short, remember what i have been saying, the more you go up the ladder, the more demand is placed on the rest of your set up. I am 200% sure of this. Keep that in mind when making your next purchase. |
| Post removed |
Looking at the before and after room measurements of the ML 13a I see that the auto EQ attenuates AND boosts the peaks and dips. After speaking with several audio (EQ) specialists and also personal experience I have found that using EQ sparingly along with room treatments work best and sound more natural to me. I only EQ bass @ 200hz and below and only attenuate and never boost. Boosting a frequency always sounds unnatural and I hear an added pressure sensation at that frequency. As far as transparent EQ systems, I have found Roon's digital EQ extremely transparent. I only attenuate at 40hz by 7 db with a Q setting of 2. Switching back and forth (engaged and disengaged) reveals no loss of transparency and no ill effects to the upper registers. As far as which speaker to keep....I think the Maggies sound better but are limited, so I would keep the ML's. To have a full range affordable speaker sounds like a better choice for future evaluations. |
I think EQs have merit and in some system will show amazing results. Just like tone controls on the D’Agostino gear. I have a friend who has one and is scrutinized by his audiophile friends. However when they are over listening to his system and he compares with it in and with it out they all prefer it with EQ engaged. Myth # 11- EQs are bad and degrade the sound. |
viber6 Thank you for the insight into your sleep patterns and day to day concerns about EMF, it explains a lot. Please post a link to where we can buy the orange goggles you wear on top of your glasses before going to bed. An example of a transparent analog EQ was made by Levinson the man, for his now defunct company Cello, it is called Palette and is highly regarded in über high-end circles, absolut top parts, but maybe a little more expensive than a Rane. |
I would sell the Martin Logan 13A (and keep the Maggies ). Their bass is sloppy slow and can’t keep up with their midrange which is diffuse and overblown imho. It’s highs are rolled off also, compared to any well made dedicated tweeter. I would also depart with the Gryphon vip cable line asap, which will loose a lot of resale value with time as it is not a well known cable brand with serious research and development to back it up. I would replace the Alexia 2 with Focal Maestro Evo, imho a much better engineered speaker than any Wilson. You also get a tasteful design with Focal. Wilson, imho, is a stacked of boxes made of « heavy gloss car paint fiberglass. » |
Techno, jay did a shootout a while back of the focal vs the Shasha daws. The daws won that one, and I know I felt it was the better in that contest. So we have recently been there and done that, if you look back a few months, you will find it in his videos. See what you think about the comparison. The Alexia’s would only make the disparity even greater I believe. |
I love the Wilson speakers. This is what one reviewer said: "The Alexia Series 2 conveys a feeling of ‘togetherness’, and I don’t mean just a more cohesive and integrated sound than the original due to better temporal accuracy. It draws you into the performance conjured up by the musicians, making you feel you are part of it. I reveled in the wonder of a soundstage of Biblical dimensions glittering with pin-sharp detail set in a sea of ambience cues. Macro and microdynamics were perfectly balanced, improving the sense of pace and rhythm, bass went deeper – though don’t expect a free ride to the center of the Earth – while midrange transparency saw all veils from vocals removed. I was enthralled. And this was from a seating position four meters away from the speakers" It draws you into the performance conjured up by the musicians, making you feel you are part of it. I reveled in the wonder of a soundstage of Biblical dimensions glittering with pin-sharp detail set in a sea of ambiance cues. |
Techno your comment makes me think you’ve never heard them. Very unusual response to Wilson. A long standing speaker manufacturer sitting in more high end system than any other speaker out there. I doubt that is the result of building lousy speakers. I think there is more to it than you describe. IMHO |
speedbump6, I listened to a bit of the video where WC is deciding between the Wilson and Focal. He mentioned he had comments favoring both of them. I think it came down to what WC preferred most at that time. And, now I also understand, based on what WC recently mentioned, that it can also have to do with what product will be of the most interest to those watching/listening videos and this thread. The Focal's were the Scalas, and techno__dude mentioned the Maestro's. That would be interesting to have Maestro's vs Alexia 2's. Might end up with the same result, or, maybe different. I think the Nordost cabling was too much with the Focal's, so it would be interesting to compare Maestro's vs Alexia 2's, now that WC is stepping a little bit away from the Nordost. Dave |
In comparing the DAWs to the Alexia’s I felt the Alexia 2 is much better. The highs are crisp but not etched. Much more organic, natural and live. I found that the Alexia 2 is more revealing than the DAW in that it gives you the entire picture top to bottom not just fine detail in the upper register. The wood of instruments Are More apparent and the strings of a wood instrument 🎻 more amazingly life like. Very subtle changes in the music are more evident . However it can still bite where the music calls for it. The bell of horns very obvious and can be in your face if recorded that way. I listen at lower volume than most and want to hear all the details Without having to crank it. The Alexia 2 does this for me. I find the this speaker will reveal the electronics no matter what. If you put a warm Tube Mac on them they will sound warm and rolled off. I have been experimenting with different preamps and feel this speaker to be very neutral and without prejudice. I also feel it was more coherent over all than the DAW due to the dissimilar woofers. My room is 17’ x 20’+ And behind me opens into the rest of the house. I have a cathedral ceiling with 18-20’ sloping ceiling. My speakers are placed very similar to the DAWs I had. The DAW was a bit lean and maybe on the bright side in my room so the Alexia works perfect. Remember even though the upper drivers are the same the crossover is different. If my room was smaller I think I’d still go with the Alexia 2. Hope this helps in giving another perspective on the Wilson Alexia 2 |
The Focal Maestro are a different beast. And remember WC’s friend who came to compare the Scalas against the Daws... The Focal won big time, it was a revelation compared to the Daws. Carey, WC insist on not trusting online magazine reviews, yet you quote them repeatedly. You seem to be obviously biased toward Wilson. What are your motivations regarding that brand sudden panic defense ?... |
Here is a quote lifted from Audiophile Style regarding DAC direct vs adding a line stage/preamp;
Not every DAC goes direct into every amplifier perfectly. After experimenting a lot with both approaches, with a lot of DIY efforts where I could change the output stage to suit the amp, I have found that current headroom of the DAC's output stage seems critical to get a robust DAC direct sound. Some IC opamps used in output stages only have around 30 mA current capability, where others can have 75 mA, or even over 100 mA. Of course the stoutness of the power supply powering those IC opamps also matters. If the IC opamps in the DAC output stage are operating anywhere near their limits, they tend to sound a bit weak in terms of dynamic expression.
I think this echos Jay's thoughts on this question, not all DACs have the juice to be as dynamic and controlling as needed and a preamp can bring back the dynamic excitement and control letting the amp and system reach their upper limits of performance. |
Techno I’m Not saying they are absolutely the best speaker in the world I’m just saying they never seemed a bad as you made them sound with Your earlier remark. Just saying that having owned them I can really appreciate what they do. Are they better that the Focal? Well I don’t know because I haven’t heard the Focal. I appreciate your opinion it just compels me to respond thats all. Not personal. |
Just an opinion here, but I doubt that there'a preamp section of any DAC (regardless of expense) that's as good as a separate well-engineered preamp. The advantage of a DAC used as a preamp is basically a shorter signal path with less external components in the path. However, that can often get outweighed/outperformed by a better built external preamp. Of course, there's much more items to add and tailor the sound of an external preamp - power cords, interconnects, additional shelves, cable lifters, vibration control, fuses, another power conditioning outlet, tubes in some cases, etc. Lots of $$$ and time involvement. I'm sure some folks would rather spend all of that money on better speakers/amps/dacs than on an external preamp setup and tweaking. I'm betting that WC, with his vast experience thus far, probably has an opinion on whether it would be better to put money into a preamp and all the fixings or upgrading speakers/amps/dacs. Dave |
And the Sasha daws were compared to the Scalas, and a Otto ally different setup as far as the supporting hardware. Possibly the outcome could be different, but I have found each brand to have an underlying tonal signature, which is why the Focals did not do as well in that shootout. But you never know until you try. I have the Fical Ultima line of speakers in my car system, and own both their Utopia and Stella headphones, so I’m a fan of Focal. I don’t believe that the maestros would win in a contest with the Alexia’s, but different people prefer different sound, so I’m sure for some the Focal would be a better choice. All you have to do now is convince Jay to bring in a set of them to find out. Good luck with that, sounds like it’s not happening at this point in time from the previous comments about what he’s doing. Hell, I’d even ship my tekton ulfers to him to do a shootout with those if he wanted to spend the time and energy on them. Just can’t do everything that everyone would like to see and hear. There’s only so much time and money. |
