Just my opinion here. Every thing I say may be obvious to some. But it seems as though some take this thread as an absolute ranking of amps. Any comparison of amps is highly subjective dependent the reviewer’s taste and preferences of sound and music, speaker and source being mates to the amps, system setup, room acoustics, etc. What sounds best to WC may be the worst sounding to some. Not trying to rain on WC parade. I’m convinced WCs is being entirely honest about what he hears. I am in agreement with some of his assessments but not others. I have never heard one modern Mac amp I liked irrespective of system, and all Rowland’s I’ve heard has a very specific house sound which could be a blessing or a curse. The Luxman intrigues me. Well worth an audition based on WCs experience. This is a very entertaining thread.
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
dracule1--WC does tell us what he likes, but he also describes objectively what the sound characteristic is--laidback, forward, too much highs, bright, lots of bass, sweet or neutral midrange, imaging and space, etc. All with reference to different types of his music. Subjective opinions are less useful than objective analysis and the ability to be an unbiased reporter without corrupting ads and magazine politics. That is why WC's views are most informative. Many years ago, I heard a big Rowland with its gold casework and cylindrical handles. A gold temple. In the store, compared to some other SS amps, that Rowland was overly sweet and rolled off. But Guidocorona has informed us that the new Rowlands have a neutral, highly resolving quality. |
WC, Just got the latest Stereophile today. A review of the ARC 160 monos. Reading between the lines, the reviewer seems to be in love with its beauty of sound relative to the more detailed Progressions. Now you can use the money for the Progressions, or possibly more interesting, try the ARC against the 2301 as suggested by RIAA. Then later go for the tubes with the best specs in a real shootout between the ARC and 2301. |
viber6, "he also describes objectively what the sound characteristic is--laidback, forward, too much highs, bright, lots of bass, sweet or neutral midrange, imaging and space, etc." Sorry based on the definition of objectively( in a way that is not influenced by personal feelings or opinions), I don’t agree. The key words are, "not influenced by personal opinions" and all of us are just providing our opinions based on our experiences and preferences. Laid back, forward, bright, are all opinions. The other factor that can greatly affect our perception of sound is the room. In your room the exact same equipment may sound different. |
geoffkait11,378 posts09-11-2018 12:39pmJust
a quick note to say Aerospace is not just the Government and not just
weapon systems. There is also commercial aviation, which is huge. You,
know, Boeing, Lear, etc. and all the light aircraft. It’s also NASA,
Space X, satellites, etc. My son is currently getting his Master's Degree in Aerospace Engineering (focus on Space Systems). You'd probably be surprised to learn that there is a big demand in other areas such as automotive (including race cars), construction, and sporting equipment. |
No Pass XA200.8. Me thinks the ´´ PassLabs lobby’´ was afraid of their amps being spanked by the 2301s. Or that WC would objectively find them not really better than the 601s, and subpar to the famous Lux 900u. And please don’t tell me that there is no such think as a PassLabs lobby. I call it the snowflake hi-fi brand...As soon as someone says something bad about Pass, it seems everybody looses their mind... |
Viber6, I respectfully disagree. Unless you have measurements to back up your assessment, it’s all subjective. But I don’t want to go into measurements and how they correlate with our perception of sound, which is a highly contentious subject among audiophiles. I recently evaluated Audio Research Ref 6 preamp, which has garnered enthusiastic reviews by professional reviewers and by WC. However, my assessment was essentialy opposite of what the reviewers had said. Just goes to show you how different we are when it comes to reproduction of music. The assumption that WC has no vested interest in his reviews is valid and reassuring. I have long given up on relying on professional reviews based on what I know of what goes behind the scenes from industry insider friends. |
Ricred1 and Dracule1, Agree with your distinction of subjective versus true objectivity. Subjectivity is unavoidable if someone listens to an audio product and then describes what they hear. This is pure opinion (listening impressions) and subjective by default. Test bench measurements and specifications are objective and useful but won't tell you how something will sound. You must rely on listening (subjective) to determine that. WC's reporting in this thread is pure subjectivity and that's just fine. He is not measuring any of the amplifiers or equipment he's using and nor does he need to in order to make his point. Charles |
as I mentioned earlier, I don’t get paid from anyone to review gear. Some dealers are actually afraid of selling things to me because of what I may say about the product to you guys. IF I WAS A IRRELEVANT then no dealer would be scared to sell to me. As a matter of fact I was told yesterday by a dealer that he was “prohibited” from selling to me lol. Who am I ? The Mexican cartel? Am I running an illegal operation by buying with my own money? Yes guys, some people are afraid to sell to me... man I didn’t know how big I was ? |
dracule1, ricred1, This is an interesting discussion about how we use words to describe what we hear, and how we define "subjective", "objective", "opinion", "perception". Medically speaking, the shape of our ears, frequency response, hearing thresholds, etc. are all different from each other. Nobody really knows the electrical inputs from the acoustic nerves to the part of our brain that does the perceiving, so in that sense there is more objectivity from laboratory measurements of any part of our system or in its totality. However, we have each lived with our own ear-brain mechanism and know it like any part of our body, so different environmental sounds can be compared fairly objectively. In visual perception, an obvious example is perception of the blue sky on a perfect sunny day without clouds. Even accepting various degrees of color blindness, everyone can describe the sky as blue through a long life of experience, unless you are completely color blind. This is a decent level of objectivity because nobody will say "it is my opinion that the sky is blue." It is literally honest and correct to say, "I perceive the sky as blue," and then to say quite objectively that "the sky IS blue" because my perception is accurate and we all know what the word "blue" means. If a person with normal perception later describes the color of the sky as yellow, he is either wearing orange glasses with blue filters (I use these glasses at night to suppress the blue light that interferes with sleep) or he develops a medical visual perceptual disorder. In audio, a component that generates lots of bass or lots of highs relative to the rest of the freq spectrum can be objectively described by anybody regardless of whether he likes ("opinion") that sound ("subjectively"). The ability to hear things carefully and then to intelligently describe what you hear is a learning process founded on experience with music and the sounds of nature. Even when playing in the orchestra, the oboe gives an A 440Hz and we all listen carefully for a few seconds to make sure we perceive the A accurately before we tune our instruments to match the A. And the word "laid-back" is not an OPINION, it is a fairly objective observation and even definition that describes rolled off highs. Whether you LIKE that sound is your opinion or preference, another matter. The intelligent audiophile must further develop listening abilities so that communication is more meaningful and precise, rather than just saying it is all a matter of opinion or this or that component is better ("I just like this and you don't, so get lost"). Through a process of developing a vocabulary and developing better listening skills, our subjectivity and perceptions will move closer to objectivity. In life, more objectivity is sought, as with good evidence in legal cases, or a speeding ticket with the visual proof from 2 timed camera shots that you are guilty and there should be no dispute. |
WC, what do you mean dealers are afraid to sell items to you? how would they even know who you are? Walk in, talk, negotiated a good price, arrange delivery and evaluate. Maybe it's time for some "get smart" disguises. I read earlier dracule 1 didn't care for the REF 6 pre-amp. However, I would be interested to know what equipment he evaluated it with. This is the first time I have heard someone state they didn't like the REF 6. I find it pretty amazing. However, other's may not. hmmm. I just know that when WC "feels" he found a better pre-amp than the REF 10 and gets rid of it, I'll try to be first in line for it. Then, WC will figure out he made a mistake and want it back. Ha. One thing I have read hear and other places are subjective reviewing terms like "bass thump" or the bass hit me in the chest, etc. I just want to be clear, that they may be fun and nice to hear, but it is probably not accurate reproduction. If that thump or bass response wasn't intended in the original recording, then the equipment (speaker, amp, etc.) manufacturer placed circuitry in the device to give this impression. However, it may not be and probably isn't accurate. This is another example of the audio industry (some) doing things for effect and not accuracy. I've fallen for that effect in the past also, then asked myself and others whether that effect was actually intended by the recording engineer as opposed to being an artificial device placed there by the equipment manufacturer. I've definitely experienced this effect with certain speakers. Wayyyyy too much bass effect. may sound good initially, but it gets old and after spending thousands, one realizes it is not accurate. anyway, my take. interested in WC's next review. Where are the Neoliths? enjoy |
@viber6 I understand what you explained about objectivity, and in general, it makes some sense. A blue sky is hard to argue. However, I still believe that, in audio, it's subjective and not objective. Two reasons: 1) Different folks hear differently. A flat frequency response may not appeal to a lot of folks. If something is perceived as bass heavy to one guy, another guy might think it's perfect and any less bass would be bass shy. Same with upper frequencies - what is laid back to some folks is perfect to others. Or screeching highs to one person might be perfectly detailed and not harsh to another. 2) You might agree with this. Subjectivity not only comes from opinion and personal taste, but also it can be caused by other factors such as environment, cabling, and other components. Dave |
I find it silly that an audio dealer would be afraid of selling WC a product due to the possibility of negative comments from him. Come on, WC is one listener posting his listening impressions, one person's opinion. I enjoy reading this thread for fun. Are there people literally taking his evaluations as gospel? I'd find that surprising if that's the case.. Charles |
Thezaks, Agree. The very nature of this interesting thread is rooted in subjective reporting. This is the foundation. One listener rotates amplifiers and speakers into his home audio system and renders a listening impression based solely on what he heard. Interesting for sure but by no means absolute. Nor does WC claim to be absolute. Charles |
@charles1dad I totally agree about dealers being afraid to sell their product to WC - it’s definitely silly. I had an experience like that one time - a guy named Jerry from 10audio-dot-com has interconnects that he makes himself and sells on A’gon and his website. The interconnects are around $100-$150/pair and claimed to beat out a top end Audioquest interconnect that costs much more. I sent him a question about the cables, and I guess he felt that I might have my doubts about the cable. So, he banned me from his ad on Audiogon. I wanted to try them out, but he would not let me. Of course, that’s new products. They really can’t do anything to keep WC (or the rest of us) from buying used products from non-Dealers :-) Dave |
thezaks, Ah, we're coming to a common understanding about objectivity and subjectivity, great. A few minor differences, though. We both agree that people hear differently. This is OBJECTIVELY true, demonstrable by basic hearing tests. See how agreement is easy when you have objective facts and measurements to back you up? However, at age 65, I have hearing deficiencies above about 10 Khz, so I don't claim to be as objective and revealing as a good microphone. Even in 20 year olds, I have measured hearing deficiency at 18-20Khz compared to 9 year olds. I try to be as objective as possible within my limitations, and acknowledge that there is quite a lot of subjectivity/uncertainty in my perceptions. So audio is not about total subjectivity vs total objectivity, it really is some combination of both. And charles1dad, pure subjectivity is completely unreliable, since the reviewer doesn't understand what he is listening to and doesn't have the basic vocabulary to describe it intelligently. On the other hand, pure objectivity in reference to lab measurements only may not tell you completely about how a system sounds. We are trying to do more measurements to get more info, and the challenge is to combine the measurements in some way to correlate better with everything we hear. John Atkinson in Stereophile often does a good job of correlating his measurements with the sound the reviewer describes. WC doesn't have test equipment, but he nicely describes objective and subjective characteristics, since I believe he has a great ear and is articulate about his findings. So let's try to get more value from our comparative listening and reporting by doing both objective and subjective analysis. Individual preferences is another subject. Someone might LIKE that bass bump, but should be honest and objectively admit that there is that bass bump and he just likes it. As minorl said above, the bass bump is probably unnatural--I agree with his objective observation that the bass bump is there in some systems I have heard, even though it is a certainty that he and I hear differently in some ways, and my opinion matches his that it is unnatural. On one level, this opinion is subjective, since we weren't at the recording session and don't know objectively what the engineer really did. But you can play numerous recordings through such a system and objectively say that in most cases, it is an objective fact that the system has a bass bump. The more knowledgeable you are about natural, live music and the more informed is your listening, your subjective statement becomes more authoritatively objective, although not completely so. |
You have to admit, what WC has started is some very good and much needed conversations/discussions about equipment, rooms, perception, etc. I am actually enjoying this and really admire WC (and his wife for allowing him to do this). The ultimate resulting side discussions are not only needed but mandatory. I was in San Diego recently and went to a "high end" dealer. Stereo Unlimited I believe. Since Stereo Design closed their doors a while ago, my fun has been limited. However, Stereo Unlimited has pretty good salespeople and consultants with a good inventory of equipment. They sell used and new albums also. I grabbed a 4 disc copy of Dire Straits Brother in Arms album and played in on one system with golden ear speakers, Rogers (I believe integrated) and I forgot the turntable. Brother in Arms is a song that really demonstrates much about systems. That song was great, however, the bass kind of threw me off. It was thumping and good, but hmmm. I then took the album in the other room to hear it on the system with Vandersteen 7s, VTL amps and pre-amp and again (forgot the turntable). I asked the owner to remove the existing speakers and put the Vandersteen 7s in the system. They were in the same room. He (with help) managed to do that for me without complaint. Well, I found a new favorite store, other than Randall's in Santa Monica. Wow!!!! the Vandersteen and VTL setup really sang. love those speakers. What I really noticed was that the golden ear speakers exaggerated the bass. Most people that don't compare with A/B comparisons at the same time wouldn't really notice until much later (after purchase). But, to me, the Golden ear speakers in that system exaggerated the bass. Granted the Vandersteens and VTL setup was much, much more expensive, but one could tell that the bass wasn't right. enjoy |
Subjectively or not, we get a fairly detailed view of how the big guns compared with each other in WC’s system. I understand why some dealers or makers can be afraid of this thread conclusions, they well know some more expensive products performs no better than some less expensive ones... When that happens, they bring in the ´´everything is always relative ´´ card big time...Yeah yeah... |
I have talked to WC several times and respect his opinions. To say, " hey well know some more expensive products performs no better than some less expensive ones", is just silly. What we will know is WC’s opinion about the component in his system/room. I submit Charles has already said it the best, "
Interesting for sure but by no means absolute. Nor does WC claim to be absolute." |
@ricred1 - I agree. @viber6 - no disrespect here - I see where you are trying to go with this objective/subjective thing, but I think your latest post regarding subjective/objective is in itself subjective. When you mention things like - they should be honest, or, it's unnatural, or, the more informed you are about natural music, etc, you are basing this upon what "you" (and perhaps many others) perceive to be objective. Still though, others might have a different take on what is objective to them. For some, it's unamplified music, for others it's amplified music, still for others it's a colored sound, only to them it's not colored, for others it's perhaps a completely flat response. Some might say if it does jazz right, others classical, some hip hop or electronic dance. All of these other views of claimed objectivity will also include different required (in order to be objective to them) levels of bass, brightness, etc. I just don't think we can get there - a blue sky for all to see and recognize and agree upon - because when it comes to audio, there's too many factors, and as humans we just can't help being subjective and different. Dave |
Well again I realize the discussion has strayed from the original topic and this will upset some participants/readers of this thread. I do however find the contributions from Minori, Dracule1, Ricred1 and Thezaks in response to Viber6’s objectivity comments insightful and meaningful. It seems so clear to me that the very essence/act of listening to audio equipment reproduce recorded music is one of the purest examples of subjectivity in action. Charles |
I trust WC ears, thread and ranking so far. 1_ Rowland 925 monos. 2_ Luxman 900u monos. 3_ Mcintosh 2301 monos. 4_ Simaudio 760A stereo. 5. PS AUdio BHK300 monos 6_ McIntosh MC601 monos Call it what you want...subjective, objective, bobthespongective... I 'm here to know and acknowledge this ranking. Or else, I would not bet here and audiogon forums would serve nothing... |
thezaks, you have entered into a whole new generalized conversation about recognizing the distinction between subjectivity and objectivity. I was a devout male chauvinist before I discovered the utter brilliance of a woman named Ayn Rand, whose Objectivism philosophy has had much influence in world affairs. Many people have difficulty accepting that there are facts and good principles that are objectively demonstrably true and logical, even if certain naysayers deny their validity through claiming that EVERYTHING is subjective and a matter of opinion. "You and perhaps many others perceive what is objective", "other views of claimed objectivity will also include different required elements in order to be objective to them"--my approximate quotations show the confusion. Particularly, "objective to them". First there is the objective reality of the real sound, either live or recorded. Then you have to perceive it, so the statement "objective to them" is illogical. Rather, it is correct to say "subjective to them" because "to them" means personal perception. Some people have a lot of experience and have developed a high level of interpretive understanding of what they hear, and accurately describe their perceptions whose accuracy reflects this understanding. In the case of the blue sky, this is a relatively elementary example where a high level of objectivity is recognized. The challenge is to develop more sophisticated levels of objectivity in audio that more people can recognize as objective, although I don't expect anyone to be able to do an accurate spectrum analysis of a sound by ear to compete with test instruments. But I think it is realistic to expect people to agree on something like, "speaker A in this room has more bass output than speaker B when both are played at the same subjective and measured wideband volume levels." This is an objective statement of tonal balance that is easy for 2 people with acceptable hearing to communicate, and they can easily agree because of the objectivity. If the two people disagree on whether speaker A is better than B, that is a subjective evaluation. The more things that can be objectified, the higher the chance of agreement and the lower the chance of bitter fighting to prove whose ego is bigger, who is a liar and dishonest, etc. The most fruitful outcome may come when 2 people who are trying to be objective, agree on some things, but one person hears things the other person doesn't, they have a discussion, and then they thank each other for the increased knowledge that they obtain when they put their heads together. In time, further discussions and learning will increase the level of objectivity. It is not productive if they just say that one product sucks and the other is good without that objective discussion. But it is better if one person says, "look, we both agree that this one objectively sounds more upfront with more detail in the music than the other, but since I know that you prefer laid back sound, I understand your preference for the laid back less detailed one." That is a consistency between objectivity and subjectivity that both people can respect. The combined approach of objectivity and subjectivity is more fruitful than either one to the exclusion of the other. |
| Post removed |
Agreed jetter! I think that discussion has gone further than it should have. I will do my part by refraining from responding in this thread. Should viber6 choose to create a separate thread for that discussion, I will be happy to respond to the last post about objectivity/subjectivity. I'm here for WC's journey :-) Speaking of that, I'd like to hear from WC on the rank list that techno_dude provided. Is that actually your list WC? I would think Pass Labs amps (X, XA, or XS) would be somewhere in that list. Dave |
Jetter; I don't know about that, but I am still waiting for WC to get his hands on some Neoliths. I feel that as long as the "side" discussions are taken from subjects brought forth in the OP's posts or even introduced and continued by some, I don't see a problem. Also, WC is busy making deals trying to get his hands on the next. So, while there is a lull so to speak, I think this is good. By-the-way, can someone please tell me if the Rowland amp is Class D? enjoy |
| Post removed |
Viber6 Just for the Record "Laid back sound" is not less detailed .It is less Forward or less "In Your Face" It is less "shouting at you".The detail is still all there , just not in your face or "forward ". A laid back sounding system can be turned up loud and sound like LIVE music without Ear Fatigue. Please stop the ramblings. You are ruining the thread ....for sure. |
I agree .......lots of the conversations do not belong in this thread. Some folks need to geta life.....or at the very least a thread for their boring verbose diatribes. No one gives a ..... if your son has a masters in aerospace engineering or your qualifications to give an opinion. I myself am the chief engineer at Tesla in charge of aerospace and HiFi engineering but I don’t like to flaunt my double PhD. Lol |
| Post removed |
@dguitarnut, you mean to get a life like you waiting anxiously for an
anonymous person on the interweb to post his opinion on an amp that he’s
listened to for an hour and then will sell off even though it’s like
lifting a veil in his system? Got it, thanks. Good luck at Tesla and don’t forget to turn off the lights as the last one out the door! :) Oh, and it doesn’t take calling McIntosh "mid-fi" on a forum to get on their .... list. Just trying to get an RMA to get something fixed under warranty will pretty much do it. |
For the record, minorl and grey9hound had the only intelligent and worthwhile responses to my last admittedly long post. The rest are tongue tied and impatient. Sure, I am eager to hear WC's developments, but lately he is very happy with his 2301's and is relatively quiet because he is enjoying his music and other life. Yes, I could start my own thread, but I have no particular topic to address. I find it more useful to comment on any topic that is raised here, with ramifications outside audiophilia that several people have found interesting. Grey9hound, your comment is interesting about whether laid back sound is less detailed. I have experiences in the concert hall that lead me to this conclusion. One time I could only get a ticket in the 15th row. I was unhappy because I couldn't hear that much detail of the music. All I did was look at the empty seats much closer. When there was a break, I moved up to the 5th row. Better, more detail, but then I moved up to the first row--voila!, an exciting, detailed experience. Of course, the first row was louder, but the tonal balance showed more highs although everything was enhanced. Keep in mind that the microphone placement for most recordings is close, so the objective truth of what is on these recordings is closest to the sound heard from the first row. And, as mayoradamwest, the professional trumpet player on this thread said, the very close sound heard from within the orchestra on stage is MUCH more detailed than the sound heard by anyone in the audience, confirming my thoughts. Another way to look at this is to remember a lot of comments in the audio press, where a component that has a tonal balance more to the highs will have more detail, although the reviewer may not like it because he finds that sound to have less fullness and body, qualities which he values. That's a fair, honest statement. Still another observation is that I have tried more laid back amps at home to compare with my reference. Of course, the sound impression I got was different and interesting, and some details I knew from my reference were still audible, but others were missing, particularly in the highs. But do the reverse, and start with a laid back amp, get to know the music and the amp. Then switch to a more upfront amp, and you will be shocked to hear many more details revealed. The differences from going from laid back to upfront are usually greater than the differences from going from upfront to laid back. This is because the upfront amp reveals the detail, which you may still hear in the laid back one, since you ALREADY know what to listen for. Of course, the upfront sound may need getting used to, and don't listen at unnaturally loud volumes, where even too loud live sound is unpleasant, shouty, etc. More generally, I know some here have learned from my extensive life musical experiences. For people who disagree with me on some things, this stimulates me to organize my thoughts and better explain my ideas, and sometimes modify them based on some of the valid points made. I have certainly learned from many people here. Don't be rude and say, "get outta here" because that shuts everyone down to a certain extent. We all have much to learn from each other, as long as we are courteous and respectful. We can ignore who we don't like, but it is more fruitful to voice disagreement and explain why, in a courteous way. |
It is interesting that every speaker WC has had, I would not trade to from my modified Klipsch Lascalas. I am also driving them with a close out special amp from AA that cost me $499. I enjoy reading this thread, and, I enjoy all of the comments, but after 50 years of being in this industry, both as a professional and a hobbyist, I have determined that the level of information I am hearing from my recordings is stellar, and my days of spending big bucks has come and gone. I was a singer, and was on stage much of my early life. But, I do not want to be up on the stage, I want to be in the audience, and yes, near the 1st row. However, many different concert halls I have had the pleasure of visiting ( as a patron ), the music was more enjoyable when I was not in the front row. Objectivity, subjectivity, participant, experience and whatever else, has made me the listener I am today, and has given me a grasp on what I want in my listening space. I can easily go into my 401 and purchase more expensive gear, but have been there and have done that. I suppose I am fortunate. I gain nothing really from WCs findings, for myself, but enjoy reading " his journey ". There are many here that are so called know it all’s, and this is fine with me. But there is not ONE single one of you that can tell me what sounds good to me. I use my own ears for that. Keep the ball rolling everyone, and....... Enjoy ! MrD. |
WC, read the glowing review of the Constellation Centaur 2 in the latest Stereophile. However, there is a telling line from the sales rep, Irv Gross, where he says that the main difference between the Centaur and the Inspiration is the power. For comparable sound quality, why pay 5 times as much, even if the Centaur permits you to blast your ears off. Watch out for hearing damage. The Inspiration Stereo is still pretty powerful. I am saving for the Merrill Element 118, which is more powerful than almost anything and may have the purest sound quality. As Guido said, the ultimate shootout will be the Rowland 925 vs the Element 118. The Element is "only" 36K retail. I am willing to be patient for another year until reviews and more experience with all the Elements is discussed. Meanwhile, I don't want to waste big bucks on obsolete dinosaur technology, until I see what develops with the Elements. |
mrdecibel, thanks for relating your experience. Because of that, your views have clout and command respect, notably your integration of "objectivity, subjectivity, participant, experience." I agree that often the first row has disadvantages, mainly because it is lower than the stage and the piano can sound funny, as respected_ent said a while ago. You have to look up, which is a bit uncomfortable. Instruments radiate upwards, so the first row listener may lose some information, even though proximity will be important to preserve high freq, which are severely lost through distance due to air absorption. I loved the Klipsch LaScalas when I last heard them in the early 1970's, at the time driven by an average receiver. They reminded me of my father's custom made Altec Voice of the Theaters from 1965, which gave me the audio bug. Even though I love my electrostatics, I don't think there is anything like horns for voice authority and naturalness. My favorite tenor, Jussi Bjoerling was so commanding and gorgeous on those horns. |
Hi whitecamarross I have been following your thread on the pass labs amplifiers and associated speakers you have been using. I will disclose then I am a pass labs dealer located in Long Island, New York the name of our store is Sound Insight and I have been on this high-end journey as an audiophile and dealer for almost 30 years. I will have to say that you must seriously audition any pass labs amplifier with a speaker that does not possess a crossover and that does not produce Omni directional sound waves that seriously interact with you our rooms acoustics. I have sold and heard some of the worlds greatest loudspeaker systems ever introduced at a retail level. I welcome you to audtion a speaker that does not contain a crossover on the main panel -does not interact with the rooms acoustics as it operates in an open dipole horizontally disbursed manner. The speakers are from GT audio works and I welcome you to go to their website or our stores facebook page just Google Sound Insight high-end audio There you will see many videos of us in action and have won many audio shows winning best sound of show. Additionally you must realize that it is been my experience that the sound of any loudspeaker is compromised when you have any type of low-frequency transducer [woofer] in the same cabinet or enclosure as the mid range drivers There is an audible smearing and lack of transparency that occurs when you do this. Therefore the GT speakers are mated to open baffle servodriven sub Woofers crossed at 65hz that do not compete with the main speakers. The technology in the speakers is remarkable From the pure copper traces on the membrane, the only planar magnetic or electrostatic speaker known to possess a membrane that is not just mylar or kapton but possesses a double membrane to break up any resonances that occur or that plasticky sound. Special frame within frame construction to reduce any mechanical resonances or vibrations that you get in any box or open dipole speaker. We have a pair of pass labs XA 60.8 mono blocks running the speakers as they are 93DB1 W efficient. |
WC, I know faxer. I heard his GT audio near-full range ribbons and can vouch for their naturalness, neutrality and clarity. Even without the separate large woofer stack, the ribbons go down low to about 40 Hz. Only for music with very low bass were the woofers audible. As ribbons, they are better than any Maggie in the ways you know I value. They are efficient and dynamic, although I don't know if they rock the way dynamic speakers do. Don't interpret this as an biased endorsement of my friend's work, I am just recommending the speakers as a great value for the quality of sound from them. They compete favorably with the top Martin Logans at a much cheaper price. |