Boulder is most definitely NOT out of business. I get it serviced a great my dealer. I cannot really explain the difference between the 1060 and 2060. What I remember of the 1060 is that it was outstanding but I could get listening fatigue. I remember an extended in home test with an all Boulder set up and it was detailed but I was able to get fatigued. I do not have that issue with the 2060. It’s smooth and something I can listen to for an extended period. Perhaps some of that has to do with the Vitus Dac/preamp adding a touch of warmth to signal. If I inserted the 2110 or 1010 perhaps it may be different. Does that address your concern? The 1060 is excellent and had a good deal not come my way I’d probably have the 1060 or 1160. But the 2000 series really is a different amplifier.
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
@dan6054 I had the Plinius Odeon amp - Ultimate Upgrade edition. I did not like it at all. I then had the McIntosh MC8207 - nice sounding, not harsh, and fairly dynamic. I wanted to try the Krell Chorus 7200, because a reviewer had mentioned to me that it was better than the ATI signature and the ATI class D amps. I was then told that the newer Krell Theater 7 had much better sonics than the Chorus 7200. I was concerned about the lower wattage ratings of the Theater 7, however, I was assured that the Theater 7 would provide about the same amount of current as the Chorus 7200. I now have the Theater 7, and it is the best amp I have had in a very long time. Definitely a keeper - I can now just concentrate on cabling. By the way, I really like the Audioquest Hurricane 20 amp power cord with the Theater 7. I've also tried the WW Silver Electra (with and without the upgraded silver plugs), the Krell Vector HC, and the Cardas Clear Beyond, but the Hurricane is the best in my system. Dave |
Boulder warning...another way of saying our amps are made so colorlessly neutral that most recordings will sound like crap... WC, again your input is very appreciated. I thought so about electrostatics imaging and separating the best. Would you say your Magicos are the best cone speakers at imaging and putting air between the instruments? Or you eard better separation elsewhere , maybe Focal or Wilson are better at this. I’ve read Sonus Faber and Focal are very good at imaging. |
In response to viber6 questioning Boulder’s status, not sure where you might have heard that they're out of business but don’t believe that to be true. They've recently introduced a new phono stage and have been participating in audio shows as documented on their News & Events page. |
Quoted from Michael Fremer, on the Boulder 2150 monoblocks : The remaining variable is probably the biggest: the sound quality of the recordings played. With the right associated gear, the best recordings will be allowed to express themselves as well as or better than you’ve ever heard them. The worst ones won’t be able to hide in the shadows, because these amps cast none. Owners of 2150s must also be willing to accept the fact that some, or even many, of their favorite recordings don’t sound so great............................ ... There is a level of equipment ( designs ), that are so neutral and revealing, that since we are listening to recordings ( some better than others ), seem not to be pleasant to listen to. I have heard Boulder amplifiers ( not these 2150s ), and thought they were excellent ( and this was with B&W 801 series 3, not my favorite ). Enjoy ! MrD. |
jlaz, Thanks for your observations on Boulder. If the 2060 is warmer than the 1060, is the 1060 even more detailed and revealing, even though many might describe it as sterile? Maybe like the clearest possible black and white picture, which I would prefer to a blurry color picture? Isn't Boulder out of business? Where do you get them serviced? Would a competent local tech be able to service them? |
I just want to give my support of the Boulder 2060. I have a Boulder 2060 and I think it is an amazing amplifier. To my ears it is neutral, revealing, and I get tons of signal. What is not, is forgiving. I think it may have to do with the rest of my system, Analysis Plus cables, Vitus Dac/Preamp, Wilson speakers, and a class A stereo amplifier (the 2060). To my ears the Boulder is the quietest amplifier I have ever used, while it is solid state, I find that it is warmer and more musical than the 1060, and has allowed me to hear deeply into the music, and with well recorded music, transports me to the music hall. Depending on the music, my system renders a sound that is extremely lifelike, from drums that sound real, to a sense of space that is three dimensional and authentic. I have had other amplifiers before the 2060, including Boulder. I had an 865 for a long time and it actually sounded pretty good. The 1060 was quieter and in some ways better and in other ways I preferred the 800 series. The 2060 is another story. I found it to be the perfect amplifier for my needs, properly combining the best of solid state, with the benefits of class A. The bass is tight, the sound of the instruments could fool me into thinking the band was in my room, and it just sounded right. In my second system I had a Viva Solista which was nice, but in the end I decided to sell it to focus on my main set up. Prior to Boulder I had a Naim system. In some ways that system was excellent, but my wife hated the number of black boxes and when I heard the 865 sound better than the Naim my wife was sold. I liked the Naim and it offered a lot of fun sounds, it had PRaT and energy that few other amplifier designs could match. but when I moved on, it was the right time. Before that I had my first proper hi-fi system, a tube system that Andy Singer sold me. I loved it. My now wife hated it. And when we moved from NYC to Chicago I moved to Naim. I will never forget the musicality of this system. When I had a chance to hear those components again, they were not as good as I remembered, but I chose to remember the system fondly because it got me into this hobby-- a way to share in my dad and brother's god given musicality-- and appreciate great artists. |
I said it a million times, the Plinius Odeon is the best multi channel amp there is. Period. Krell tas is good but runs too hot. It was a good unit back in the day but there are far better options today. No need to get a tas and having to send it in to get recapped etc. Too much money and no real benefit when you have good amps today. Try those class d amps. They do a great job in home theater. However, don’t expect the 2 channel experience to be out of this planet. There’s a reason why they are affordable amps with plenty of power. |
whitecamaross for Multi Channel amps, how did you like the Krell TAS amp compared to the Plinius Odeon and Classe Amp you had? |
wym2, All speakers have trade-offs, none does everything well. I heard the YUGE Sound Lab Ultimate in my friend's average sized room, and it was awful--bloated, etc. This speaker is only suitable for very large rooms. The much smaller but still fairly large Sound Lab A3 sounded great in another friend's similar average sized room. To get big bass out of an electrostatic, they need lots of panel area. Then the midrange gets bloated, except in a YUGE room. For WC's average size room, I believe the best approach would be the Martin Logan CLX for midrange/HF purity and focus, and a dynamic woofer for bass. The ML Neolith is an attempt to have it all, but I have already discussed why I believe the CLX is a better approach, as well as being much cheaper. |
stringreen, Did you hear the Merrill Veritas at home, or in what system? What amp did you compare it to? Thanks for your observations. My Mytek Brooklyn amp, an inexpensive class D at $2k, is neutral with slight warmth, detailed with no SS artifacts. It is competitive with amps costing many times more. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
WCSS, " I feel like if a full range speaker lacks bottom end then that’s just how the speaker is. I refuse to buy huge speakers and still have to buy two subs to get more bass unless we are talking about home theater. " It's your choice.... but (other than space considerations) why would you not want to listen to full range music? Some of the bigger speakers that I see out there for ridulous money, are actually too big for many rooms. Compromise is what is needed in many rooms. I have a very strict opinion myself.... I hate ported speakers. Those expensive Magicos are just begging for some help. Seems like all I do is rant about 2 subs (REL) right next to the speakers. Last night I had a party night again with EDM (electronic dance music). With just my ML Montis... eeew. With the REL S3s added, the dance club came to my livingroom. Just love the synergy. I would love to hear about the SimAudio 870A in your system. Keep on rockin'. So cool your travels are. I ran out my retirement money buying just too many cars and stereo equipment. Nice to see the craziness thru your eyes. |
I’ve owned the 803d3. They are good speakers and pretty. I was actually offered a great deal on a pair of 800d3 last night. I almost took the deal but right now if I went to another speaker it would be electrostatics. Other than the bass, I don’t have any complaints about the Magico. It’s just that they are expensive :) I am also not a believer in using subs with full range speakers. I feel like if a full range speaker lacks bottom end then that’s just how the speaker is. I refuse to buy huge speakers and still have to buy two subs to get more bass unless we are talking about home theater. For example, the 800d3. If I bought them and I still needed more bass, then to me that’s a failure of a speaker. There’s no excuse for a ported speaker to not have enough bass. I’ve seen people buying large ported speakers and still using subs. That’s just not me. |
thezaks, OK, you're right--I didn't understand the hdmi/processing functions. Therefore, the preamp/processor is essential for HT, but an active preamp is NOT essential in a regular stereo. Assuming the stereo speakers are reasonably efficient and the power amp has enough gain, an active preamp can be replaced with an excellent passive preamp such as the Luminous (thanks to mrdecibel for mentioning this) or the Music First. One of the Music First models has a +6 dB switch if more gain is needed. But I didn't hear any loss of transparency with the +6 dB switch in a bypass test. Either the Luminous or Music First will be more transparent than any active preamp. If coloration is sought, an active preamp will be preferred. You know my view on that. I believe everyone, including WC should try the Rane for the many benefits. For getting more bass, the Rane has some benefit, but for the goal of getting very deep AND tighter bass with more power, the Rane won't replace a better power amp that will deliver these qualities. For most room correction purposes which usually involve reducing bass resonances at certain room mode frequencies, the Rane would be very useful at a far lower cost than room correction software. I don't know the software products, but using your ears with the Rane is really the best way to go. You should be adjusting your system based on your perceptions, not blinding relying on objective measurements. Measurements can give a useful starting point, but they should not be used to override perceptions. Your system should please yourself according to your perceptions. For best results in everything, get the best power amp AND the Rane or another quality EQ, for stereo. |
@viber6 Two thoughts I came away with from your post: 1) You don’t seem to agree with me that WC should try the Rane - there’s . 2) For my application, I’m not sure how I would substitute the Rane for my Theta Casablanca IV? The Rane does not have hdmi inputs, nor does it have the processing of the CBIV. Perhaps I’m not understanding what you are trying to convey? Dave |
WC, I gather from your descriptions that "wow" means more dynamic and more bass. That's what Wilsons and plenty of other dynamic speakers are about. But the Magico and ML electrostats are about accuracy and honest naturalness. This is true when using any amplifier to drive these or similar types of speaker. Accuracy/naturalness are not immediately obvious to the casual visitor, so there is less "wow." I recall that it took you some time to appreciate the Magico, as you were transitioning away from the "wow" type of speaker. The more advanced driver and cabinet R&D of the Magico compared to these other dynamic speakers is consistent with the sonic results. |
thezaks, Yes, the Rane can be used to tailor bass, but also everything else with much more flexibility than trying different amps. That said, it is mainly used to alter tonal balance to your liking. EQ can yield more quantity of bass, but it won't tighten it. My electrostatics have a bass boost in the interface transformer which I don't like, because the bass is loose. I cut the deep bass, which has an approximate effect of tightening it, but it is really a reduction in the bass bloat, which is not the same or as truthful as getting more accurate, taut bass, the true goal. To get true deep and accurate bass, there is nothing like power and control from big transformers, caps and power supplies, but the Rane helps a little for this. Dave, I encourage you to try a few Ranes in your HT. As you say, little risk. The quality of its electronics may not equal mrdecibel's Luminous, but it is probably very competitive with that of your active preamp (it killed my Spectral DMC10 gamma of 35 years ago). Just by substituting the Ranes for your HT preamp in the flat setting (no EQ), you may come out ahead in accuracy. Then using the EQ to tailor your system according to program material and your taste should provide tremendous benefit. |
Magico: needs premium fuel to shine. You won’t get away with 87 octane here. Race gas is even better for these speakers. If you can’t afford 93 octane, then don’t even try. Lots of engine knock and hesitation. Wilson: easy to drive with 87 octane. They do sound better with premium fuel. This speaker will drive just fine with 87 octane and will sound better than Magico with this type of gas. More wow factor than Magico aesthetically speaking. Every guest who came to my home was always drawn to my Sasha 2s. They always took pictures of these speakers. With the Magico s5, not so much. They look like any other speaker. |
@viber6 My last post regarding the Rane ME 60 for $89.99 on Guitar Center's site was not for my benefit, but as a suggestion for something that WC could try - really no risk involved with this purchase - no reason not to try it. Plus, considering WC's recent post about bass, he just might be able to tailor the bass more with this unit than with trying different amplifiers. Dave |
WC, I have not heard all the Wilsons or Magicos or Martin Logans, but I have heard examples of each. There is little doubt that for dynamic speakers, your Magico is hard to beat. Sure, its bass may be quantitatively less than other speakers like the Focal Sopra or several Wilsons, but its quality/accuracy is probably closer to the natural truth, according to your descriptions. Just appreciate its virtues and tolerate its deficiencies, although if I heard it I would probably say the accurate bass is one of its assets. I would be careful in trying to get more bass from amps that emphasize that, because there will likely be losses in midrange/HF accuracy and information retrieval from those amps. And more bass may be accompanied by looser, not tighter, bass. The Martin Logan 15a or the CLX may give you more midrange accuracy and naturalness, although they will probably have flaws in other areas in which the Magico excels. |
I was about to sell my Magico speakers and pick up alexias or another pair of Martin Logan 15a until I turned on my music today after not listening for a few days and I said “nah I can’t do it. Not ready for it “ could I use more bass? Sure but THAT is WHY I’m going to be trying more amplification with these. My take is that if all of a sudden my bass got deeper and tighter with a new set of amps, this means the amp is great at controlling the woofers of the Magico S5 mk2. It will be easy to hear these changes with these speakers. You’ll hear bass that they never gave you before and that’s going to be easy to perceive. As far as boulder, incredible looks and construction but the sound is just weird to me. It’s like watching a 4K movie with your colors all the way down and with no wow factor either. I can promise that if we had a shoot out of a boulder 2060 vs a pair of Luxman 900u, 9 out of 10 would choose the Luxman. By the way, the ref6 and Luxman 900u are both awesome but the Luxman always sounded best with its own amps. The ref6 will sound better with more systems than the 900u preamp. |
thezaks, Great find on the used Rane. Yes, I agree with the audiophile thinking is that less electronics is best, which is why I value the elimination of the preamp in my system. The EQ is a separate issue which I think is most useful. I look forward to hearing how it works out in your HT--you can eliminate the preamp. |
WC, I think I've got a better food analogy that I hope you find useful. People do comparative wine tasting, but if this is done after adding sugar to each wine, they all taste like sugar, or the ability to discriminate is lessened. Another analogy would be the chef who is creating many types of flavorings from sweet to sour/bitter. I don't know much about culinary arts, but I would think he would start with a neutral sauce and then modify the flavor according to the concept of the dish. He doesn't start with a sweet sauce, because then the ability to modify it is limited. Back to music--we like a variety of tonalities, ranging from the sweet sound of a soft female singer to the trumpet which can sound soft and mellow but nasty and strident when blasted. It is best to start with a neutral sauce or system, and then see how much variety of tone colors you can get from different music. Guido may be right that the Boulder is a poor example of accuracy and neutrality. I have never heard it and certainly am not advocating it, but the goal should be to start with accurate, neutral, well balanced electronics. You already have such a speaker, the Magico. You have your best chances of long term success if all the components are that way, because then the variety of tonal qualities will be most appreciated. |
mrdecibel, We agree on most points. I would say that your Luminous or any other high quality passive preamp such as Music First is a better conduit than the electronics of our Rane. I just want to emphasize the importance of EQ for music reproduction optimization. Done right, using your ears, EQ enhances the musical tightness of a group, etc. Studio engineers often do a great job, but any audiophile who disagrees with their choices can do the EQ for a particular recording, electronics or speaker that they could improve. Personally, I think speakers show the most deviations from natural instruments, so EQ is most important for that. EQ can be used for room correction, but the full flexible use of EQ goes way beyond room correction. I also don't like the peculiar inputs of the later Rane which require adapters. The sound of the later Rane electronics is more colored than the original I bought, so it is in my closet. Our little discussion of this topic is certainly directly relevant to this thread, because many people have spent big money changing amps, etc., when simple and judicious EQ would enable many more preferences than the differences between amps. It is about the net/total end result of all the components, not just individual things like amps, etc. |
gtaphile, " the importance of selecting/auditioning new components that have synergy with the rest of your system as well that the audition include a selection of corresponding high quality cables." It took me a long time to get to that point and understand "we" put too much emphasis on individual components. Ultimately the sound is a combination of all of the components in the system; therefore a "preamp", "speaker", or any other component can be preferred in one system and not another. |
I'll chime in to provide some additional perspective on (WC's) statements throughout this thread on the importance of selecting/auditioning new components that have synergy with the rest of your system as well that the audition include a selection of corresponding high quality cables. I auditioned the Luxman C900 pre. to try to take my system forward competing with an ARC 5SE. I did not change any cables and the 5SE clearly bested the C900 where WC reported that the C900 bested the Ref 6 in his findings. I made another pass with three HQ cables and two other amps and the differences were clear when items were changed, however, the 5SE still was the clear winner in my set-up. If you dont have the right combo of components it is likely you won't get the results you are seeking. |
viber6, my Rane ME60, as I used it years ago, was for room acoustics ( single ended only ). The newer version did away with single ended, making the need for using xlr / rca adapters. I do not like the sound of adapters. I use them, sadly, with all my pro amps ( male 1/4 inch to female rca. I never though of using the eq instead of a preamp, until I read about it through your posts. I tried it, as a preamp, and found it to be just ok, and this was with all of the controls centered. I no longer have the high end ss preamp I had, so cannot compare to it ( a few system changes ). The Luminous unit is awesome. I will do my resonance control mods to the the Rane ( I do them to most of my equipment ), but never did it with the eq. I will try it, after my mods, as a preamp, but I am sure it will still not be clean enough for me. Because of that, it is not likely I will connect it after the passive, with yet another inter connect. I am quite happy with my system, and, feel the recording and mastering quality of my recordings have been well done. Listening to Jethro Tull recently, I know eq could have helped, but what I listen for is " the musicianship ", more than anything else; ie. the tightness of the band. I know, you know what I am talking about. It amazes me the work, and ears, of all the studio engineers getting this right. I do feel bad posting this on WCs's thread, but I believe it is all related. Anyway, that is it, for now. WC, continue on your journey. My hope, is you find the system that stops you from looking at other pieces of gear, and allows you to listen, happily. Always, and Enjoy ! MrD. |
I just googled it, and Guitar Center has a used Rane ME 60 for $89.99. Honestly, I think it would be cool for WC to pick that up and give it a shot. I know the Audiophile thinking is often that less electronics in the signal path is better, but for that price, WC could experiment while waiting for the next leg of the journey. All up to WC, of course, but there's really not any risk here. Dave |
WC, I understand and respect your preference for flavoring your music the way you want. I do the same with my EQ, but I want an amp that is colorless and reveals the most info. The Boulder is an example of that, which I have never heard but take your word for it. I am also open to discovering another EQ whose electronics are as revealing as possible. That is not boring but instead is exciting if you love your music revealed in all its glory. I'm not sure your analogy of the plain boiled chicken is apt. If the music has the naturally delicious colors and mild or pungent spices, the accurate amp will reveal it all, so it won't be an unflavored chicken. What you might be doing is flavoring the music on top of what has been already flavored by the chef. Taste the chef's dish first, then add your own flavor if you think you can do better. In most cases, a great chef knows best. Experience the music the way the artist/engineers intended it, first. |
thezaks, Dave, I am glad you had positive experiences with your Rane EQ. In my view, it is essential for any type or quality of music or music system. It gives you the utmost in tailoring the sound to your tastes, as I have said. In my case it has eliminated the need for a preamp, with big benefits in eliminating the electronic veiling of preamps as well as the cost. When I want another source, I just unplug. Whatever slight distortions of the Rane ME 60 electronics are vastly outweighed by the utility of the EQ capability. I like the original model of the ME 60 better for its transparency, even though the EQ curves in the later model are more advanced. So what, because you can use the 30 band 1/3 octave adjustments to your taste anyway. For 5 channel HT, you could get 3 stereo Rane units, or get 1-2 units for the front L+R or L+center+R, respectively, and not bother with the 2 rear channels. Any way will give you so much benefit. I paid $600 retail for my unit 22 years ago. Reverb.com is a source for used pro equipment. Enjoy! |