2. amps-preamps
  3. 126624-10101

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


128x128jays_audio_lab
20,890 responses 
kren0006
1,859 posts
 
That Teaser #1 video sounds fantastic 
carey1110's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
carey1110
566 posts
 
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. 
kren0006
1,859 posts
 
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.
carey1110's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
carey1110
566 posts
 
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.
viber6
2,444 posts
 
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
1,859 posts
 
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.
kps25sc
149 posts
 
kren0006
You will never change the behavior of some posters, everybody including Jay has tried for years now. Simply scroll down past the posts and save yourself some aggravation, Jay should do the same.
kren0006
1,859 posts
 
Yes, you are right
ron17
607 posts
 
Yep
goodsource
114 posts
 
@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
goodsource
114 posts
 
@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.
goodsource
114 posts
 
@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).. 
---
jays_audio_lab's avatar
jays_audio_lab OP
5,381 posts
 
@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
2,444 posts
 
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.
kps25sc
149 posts
 
Scroll,scroll,scroll !
carey1110's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
carey1110
566 posts
 
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?
viber6
2,444 posts
 
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.


carey1110's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
carey1110
566 posts
 
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. 
goodsource
114 posts
 
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.

jays_audio_lab's avatar
jays_audio_lab OP
5,381 posts
 
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). 
viber6
2,444 posts
 
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.


bvdiman
491 posts
 
@viber6
Perhaps FM Acoustics 268C is your solution..
But no chump change either like WC puts it, that ‘little thing’ will cost you a set of Mephisto Solo+Pandora plus money left for some decent power cords, iCs and sc.
carey1110's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
carey1110
566 posts
 
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. 
thezaks
712 posts
 
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 
thezaks
712 posts
 
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
jetter
3,032 posts
 
+krenooo6

thezaks, I know it may be difficult to believe, but we actually have been getting along on this site for years and years (almost 20 here) without a primer on how to post.
thezaks
712 posts
 
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
Post removed 
thezaks
712 posts
 
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
kren0006
1,859 posts
 
Have a good day, Dave.  If you feel my posts are out of bounds, I'm sure you won't hesitate to report them.  It's an audio forum.  Lighten up.  Viber can handle it.
thezaks
712 posts
 
kren0006,
You are absolutely correct on that point - regarding your posts. Yes, it’s an audio forum - a forum that has rules.
Dave
kren0006
1,859 posts
 
The reason I say you are stirring up trouble is because everybody had moved on, but then you come in just now accusing me.  That's okay, I'll respond respectfully as I did, but why is it needed?
Ag insider logo xs@2x
cleeds
5,928 posts
 
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.
thezaks
712 posts
 
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
techno__dude
511 posts
 
Maybe Simaudio 850P preamplifier can outperform the Gryphon Pandora and it’s dark house sound ?
thezaks
712 posts
 
cleeds,
Thanks so much for your post.   Yes, reminding of the rules and FAQs could very well be what is needed.  I also like what you quoted.   That very much supports the point that is trying to be made here.


Dave
carey1110's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
carey1110
566 posts
 
👍
speedbump6
760 posts
 
It’s obvious that some folks rub others the wrong way. I might suggest just stop reading their posts when you see their name. Unless their being truly insulting, there’s no need to get involved in a dialogue with them if it’s that grating to do so. 
thezaks
712 posts
 
speedbump6,
"Unless their being truly insulting" - exactly, and agreed.  That's the point.  If it was just disagreement on audio speculation and/or gear, then no problem. 

Dave
rpeluso
1,041 posts
 
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!
viber6
2,444 posts
 
carey1110,
These are difficult, mysterious questions we are trying to answer, regarding what are colorations, and are we able to eliminate or even minimize them?  Despite my vast live music experience as a performer and concertgoer, and lesser experience doing live recording, I still don't know what any given recording sounded like to the engineers and production staff.  I don't know precisely how commercial recording pros operate.  Some of them sit distantly away in a control room, and hear the live mike feed played back on questionable monitor speakers.  But when I did my recordings, I sat in the 1st row, near my mikes.  I would take my headphones on and off as I compared the live sound to the mike feed heard through my headphones.   In effect, I was transplanting my head onto the mike stand, which was the closest anyone could get to being in the chosen position of the mikes.  I used only 2 Neumann KM184 cardioid mikes whose diaphragms were separated a little wider than my head, but I used no supplemental ambience mikes and did no mixing or processing.

So even though I tried to hear the live mike feed, I was handicapped by the huge colorations of my headphones as well as the lesser colorations of the best mike preamp and mikes that I had.  I never knew what my recordings really sounded like, but what I did know was the live sound I heard from my close 1st row center seat.  

I accept your definition of coloration as a deviation from the original recording.  However, since the original recording sound is unknowable, the coloration is also unknowable.  You're right about my other definition of coloration, which is a deviation from live sound.  I believe my definition is more practical than yours. Then there are the huge colorations of various speakers.  One SOTA speaker has a vastly different sound from another SOTA speaker.  To overcome my uncertainties about all this, I take a practical approach of learning about a wide variety of live sounds in halls and outside in nature.  What I try to do with my audio system is to recreate the approximate tonal characteristics and snap of real instruments and voices that I know from live experience.  I know what a violin sounds like in various rooms, halls, and under my ear.  I have learned what the common features of the violin are, despite having differences in the various environments.  The same goes for other instruments, and combinations in various ensembles.  I am interested in the direct instrument sounds heard close, where the main mikes are, not heard from a distance, which are a mess of reverberation, hall effects, and severely rolled off HF.  I'll take the sound of my car radio appropriately EQ'd, rather than the live audience sound of 100 feet away.  I've done that comparison, driving to a concert hearing a recording in the car, and being disappointed at how muddy the sound of similar music was in the hall from my distant seat.
dguitarnut
136 posts
 
Best way to keep up with this thread is just scan and read only WC’s posts which is what I do.  Usually it’s only 1 or 2 per page.
tjassoc
258 posts
 
Jay - first, I agree and learned long ago not to comment on pieces I haven’t heard. The first revelation was my first listen to Apogee speakers (in The Listening Room, in Scarsdale, NY - owner Ron Mitz). I was amazed at the time - and the experience was exasperated because most everything I read about them lead me to have a very different expectation of how they would sound.
Second - I’ve posted this on your thread before, I prefer neutral components that recreate the illusion of the live performance as best as possible.
While I haven’t heard the Boulder amplifier, I explained my impression after listening to Momentum mono’s (in a system and with music I was very familiar with) to another respected audiophile, and how they were very clean, precise and articulate (and had slightly better bass then the amplifiers I used) but that they didn’t have all the natural harmonics that accompanied a live performance and he stated that Boulder started that "sterile" type of sound movement. Now - please don’t criticize me - that’s not what I stated. And this is being VERY critical (but at this level of equipment, I believe we all have the right to be VERY critical).
What I’m trying to convey is there’s much more to reproducing the illusion of a live performance then neutrality, though neutrality is certainly a necessary part. A system has to be engaging and be able to convey the emotion of the music - and for me, that’s what keeps me listening for hours (literally!). And, at the same time, my system ruthlessly exposes poor recordings. I prefer this because with well recorded music - the experience is unmatched.
This is just my preference with my own system - and my system isn’t at the level your system is (Meridian 861v8, 800 Transport, Pass XA-200.5’s, Sasha I’s, Sound Application TT-7).
Another aspect (for me) regarding a system’s performance is imagining. After the "preliminary" system performance aspects are met (frequency response, dynamics, speed, transparency, etc.) imaging is super critical for me. If a system doesn’t provide that reach out and touch it 3D lifelike image (with lifelike proportions, width and depth), then it’s not convincing (to me).
I found cabling makes a DRASTIC difference in system performance and I hope one day to visit and get to listen to your system and switch in the cables that I prefer and get your feedback. What I’d like to find out is: 1 - do we value the same performance characteristics (as you just previously stated - that we all have our own preferences) and 2 - how well do the cables I found to be the best performing ever compare to the cables you found to be the best performing ever.
Like the Gryphon electronics, the cables I use are RUTHLESSLY revealing - and I think that’s a positive trait but it exposes recordings for just what they are - both good and bad.
And - so everyone knows, I became a dealer for the cables I use. I first purchased them and liked them so much I became a dealer for them. But, after attempting to educate and offer these cables to fellow audiophiles, I no longer promote them, because it seams everyone values something different and so few of use apparently use live music as a reference and strive to create the illusion of a live performance.
I certainly don’t mean to offend anyone - I’m just trying to share my own experiences and gain insights from other’s experiences (so we don’t have to do all the trials ourselves).
Keep up the good work Jay - while I haven’t been able to follow your forum daily, I do my best to keep current and catch up whenever possible. Your forum is unmatched - and it’s length and duration is a testament to that! We’ve all gained so much from it ! ! ! !
zprr
306 posts
 
great post @tjassoc 
@techno good suggestion!

wish i could spend the evening listening to the mephisto and pandora combo

take good care everyone 
thezaks
712 posts
 

Nice post and well said tjassoc!   Hope you get the chance to visit WC some day and try your cables and to hear his cables.


Dave

viber6
2,444 posts
 
tjassoc,
What are the revealing cables you sell? Can I read anything on them before trying? It is nice that we have the same goal of neutrality and using live sound as the reference for building audio systems. BTW, with The Listening Room in Scarsdale, I go way back with them in the late 70’s when it was owned by Marcel Whitman, and later Stuart Clayman.

My last few posts have made a distinction between colorations of systems and the natural colors of real live music. I suspect you would agree with me that audio coloration means deviation from the live sound. This relates to a discussion about whether "sterile" electronics are subtracting harmonic information. My position is that people who describe certain electronics as sterile, are desiring warmth and less detail. There is no doubt that some live instruments have a certain amount of warmth in certain freq ranges, esp in midrange tonality and bass fullness in certain halls and rooms. However, this live warmth does not subtract detail. Rather, it provides full harmonic information which is made possible by all the detail.

But the kind of warmth in some audio systems is different. HF info is rolled off to an extent, and some detail is lacking. As a consequence, the relative warmth of middle and lower freq is emphasized. This warmth has a psychoacoustic effect of fooling the listener into thinking he is hearing more harmonic information, but in reality the relative lack of detail is obscuring true harmonic info. I call it "veiling." The "sterile" perception of more detailed electronics is actually due to something else, often the many layers of processing in recordings which is better revealed by the "sterile" components and smoothed over by "warm" electronics. This correlates with WC’s and many other people’s experiences of preferring "warmer" components with mediocre recordings. But with more natural recordings, the more accurate and detailed component will often be preferred.

If you get the opportunity, go to a concert in Boston Symphony Hall and compare to Carnegie Hall (of course after covid peters out). Sit close in both. The sound of Carnegie is warmer than Boston, due to the plush seats and carpeting in Carnegie which absorb more of the sound, than the bare seats and lack of carpeting in Boston. Some might describe Boston as sterile compared to Carnegie. I know what they mean, but the greater neutrality of Boston lets you hear more variety in the tone of all the instruments. Carnegie is more like rose colored sunglasses, which warms up everything and actually distorts the true and greater harmonic information heard in Boston. Boston is crisper than Carnegie, with a fuller spectrum of harmonics in Boston vs some roll off of HF harmonics and an emphasis of lower freq harmonics in Carnegie. That’s what I heard.
Post removed 
Post removed 
techno__dude
511 posts
 
WC should bring in the new Benchmark LA4 preamplifier so we could compare it with the big buck Gryphon Pandora. Then we could know what a lot more money buys you.

Its measurements are off the charts. But is it musical, so that it would satisfy WC ?

If WC & friends is so sure about the ultra high end gear obvious superiority, then please enlighten us on yt video...

I’m sure there could be nervous people around that kind of matchup...
Post removed 
This discussion is closed
More to discover
80x80
Conrad Johnson ART Series 3 - Anniversary Reference Triode Preamplifier
80x80
Audio Research Reference 80S
80x80
Ayon Audio Ayon Triton EVO Mono Amps Pure Class A