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!
wesc, I am curious about the sound characteristics of your Rega 8/Apheta 2. Probably the apheta cartridge makes the most difference, more than the difference between the RP8 and RP10 tables. What other TT/cartridges did you compare with the Rega? I read that the Rega TT/cartridge combo has brilliant clarity, but I am interested in your opinion.
Viber6 and other posters on this blog need to contact Sound Insight to hear then new GT Audio Works planar speakers with the open baffle servo subs -as they have been redesigned and are vatly improved Over past models. They were exhibited at Capital audio fest 2018 and received rave reviews from Avs showrooms on their reviewers view video At the 7 minute 20 second Mark of the video. Other great reviews were from Part Time Audiophile, Myles Astor from Audionirvana and Todd Anderson from AV Nirvana.
@WCSS, I'm interested in your take on the SA-103! I just received my upgraded SA-102 and it's pretty much the same hopped up SA-103. SO far with about 40hrs on it, it's really starting to open and glow with warmth and layers of imaging. Everything just got better with the upgrade. I had a matching second SA-102 and sold it and now I'm trying to buy it back so that I can upgrade it and go back to 400w Class A mono's. Now that is some serious current. I feed my Plinius with a Cary SLP-05 and it matches up pretty darn good. Tube rolling matters with the SLP for sure. Now I'm on the hunt for some matching cables.......I've really been wanting to try the Luxman M900 or M700 with my SLP and B&W 801N's to see how that sounds
Did you happen to pick up that black SA-103 that just sold on Agon?
I used to have an SLP-05 as well. Have you seen that Cary is doing an upgrade to the SLP-05's? Apparently, it makes a big difference. If I still have my SLP-05, I'd definitely think about doing the upgrade.
The Plinius SA 103 is rated @ 125 watts per channel in both class A and class AB mode. I know pure class A is a different animal but I thought you were looking for more power not less. The Plinius SB 301 mk2 that I bought from you a while back would have been nice to try with the Neoliths. Is your plan to try and pick up a 2nd SA 103 and run them in mono?
I believe everything is about system matching, but the best amplifier I've ever heard by far is the Absolare 845 mono-amps. They have a very detailed, rich, and natural sound quality unlike anything I've ever heard. At 52W I just don't think they have enough current for your speakers. My wife and I listened to the Absolare again today compared to an Esoteric amp and my wife just can't stop talking about how great the Absolare sounds.
@ricred1 - Haven't heard the Absolare myself but have only read good things about it. Did you hear it driving your speakers? From what I know about your MAs I don't think the Absolare would have sufficient power for them either. Since your wife likes them so much there would be an easy solution, also upgrade your speakers to be a better match! ;~)
bill, The Absolare was driving Raidho speakers. In the past week I've listened to Martin Logan CLXs, Raidhos, and Dynaudio speakers and several amps. I have no interest in changing anything I have. I'll continue to listen to different components as a means to educate myself on how some components sound.
WC, It is interesting that the Lux C900 preamp plus the M900 amp is a directly competitive package to the Dag integrated, although at a much cheaper price. First, the preamp has tone controls, like the Dag. Second, the power of 150 watts into 8 ohms keeps doubling to 1200 into 1, similar to Dag. Both packages would be excellent for the Neos in the HF, although the dynamics of your music tend to be more in the lower freq where you would probably want more power. For now, it would be informative to first get the Lux preamp only, since your finances are tight. I just don't want to have to see you sell the Dag just to be able to afford more trials. The Dag may ultimately be a keeper. So you could use the Lux preamp into the Dag, to see how the tonality and other characteristics compare. First, keep the tone controls flat, to see the inherent characters of each preamp section. Then try the Lux treble at the maximum 5:00 position to compare to the Dag's max treble. The design of the tone controls and the range will probably be the biggest factor in the difference between the Dag and Lux. For example, you might prefer the Lux for its more extended HF at 3:00 compared to the Dag with just a slight +1 or +2. Then you might prefer the Dag at +4 compared to the Lux at 1:00. This will be a real dog fight since both units reportedly have similar tonal character. But the Lux preamp will give you an opportunity to try more powerful amps. Right now, there is no flat (without tone controls) preamp plus power amp that will give the needed HF boost to the Neos. Transparency is not as important as tonal balance, so I feel that some EQ is needed. You have also observed this with the Neo, although every speaker benefits from EQ.
Of course, the total Lux package in a compelling value, but only if the sound is preferable to the Dag. That can only be determined by hearing both excellent packages side by side. This will be a real dog fight. If your finances don't permit this, you will get a good idea of the differences by just getting the Lux preamp. In general, power amps have the same character as preamps from the same designer. I have a hunch that the Dag is more neutral. It would be informative to get RIAA's opinion on Dag versus ARC, so don't get rid of the Dag because it really may the best thing out there for you. Also, I feel there is no absolute requirement to get the preamp and amp from the same company. As long as the input impedance of the power amp is greater than 10X the output impedance of the preamp, you can mix and match for great results. So you may prefer the Lux preamp with the power amp of your choice, and that might be the ultimate way to go.
Wcss- pass labs question for you. Did you ever get a chance to own the 350.8? you talked about it in your initial post but I wondered if one ever made it into our system. i ask bc renohifi has a used one and a pair of 260.8’s used for about the same price of 9k.
Hope everyone enjoyed their TG. viber6, a few things......the Rane is a 30 band eq, not 32 band, has never been a 32 band eq. Damping and reducing the resonance of the Rane ( which you and dguitarnut are having fun with ), has substantially improved the sq characteristics ( you are definitely blind to it ). Still, far from my Luminous. Not close. As far as my " not requiring eq " ( although hard for you to believe ), I am fine with all of my recordings as they are ( which is why I wanted the Luminous, to hear more of what was on the recordings ). My speaker / room / listening seat situation, are all beyond satisfactory to me. No tone control or eq needed, or wanted. BTW, The ME60 had 3 production runs ( mine is the 2nd ), and then the ME60S, which is now also discontinued ( refer to Rane ME60 - Ken Rockwell ). So, I would like to be removed from the Rane as a topic, as I do not feel it belongs in the company of the equipment being used by wc ( I feel my Luminous unit does ). Lastly, I know you feel WC has caught up, and surpassed, many of us in experience. I have to disagree. Yes, I never owned 80 K speakers, never owned 60 k monoblocks, never owned 3 k power cords, but am familiar with much of it. And as I have stated recently, more power to him and his journey. But I am a happy and content listener, and he has yet to be. So as I see it, he has not reached that level of experience. Thank you all, and enjoy ! MrD.
I rather take the Hegel H30 over the pass 350.8. Sorry to do this to Nelson but he dropped the ball with the 350.8. I rather own the 350.5. More musicality and sweetness. The Hegel H30 beats both and it does it quite easily. Whatever pass labs is going to do next to replace the .8 series they need to truly think hard and long because I feel that the .8 series was a failure. I’m pretty much mentally retired from the .8 series from pass. Ain’t a d@mn thing I like about it. Luxman 900u mops and sweeps the floor with the 350.8. Actually, the Luxman 900u demolishes the 350.8 in every single area.
Thx wcss! I’ll give the jc1’s a demo. They are local and dealer can’t take my judgement 7m’s in trade which given their age size and weight would be helpful.
There really isn't much difference between a reviewer and anyone else. Both are just providing their opinions. One could argue that they trust the opinions of the "average" person over reviewers.
Man, I fat fingered my last post. i meant to say that I will demo the jc1’s as my local dealer has a demo pair for sale at a social price and he can take my jrdg 7m’s in trade.
So I spent the last 3-4 hours setting the neoltihs. I’m going to say I now have the speaker I thought I had in my hands all along. Huge improvement is an understatement. Speakers are now sounding massive with THE BEST IMAGING I’ve ever heard here. This is the first time I can hear things happening in songs I had heard about 3,000 times. Instruments actually walk across the stage from speaker to speaker. Things move left to right in songs that I thought this same instrument was being played by both speakers before and it turns out that this isn’t the case. Speakers are 59.5 inches from the front wall (measuring from the center of the panel) and they are about 46 inches away from the sidewalls (measuring from center of the panel). I essentially brought them in almost a foot inward so they are now about 5.5-6ft apart (measuring from the inside of cabinet). I actually did not want to do this when I first put them in the room because I thought they needed to be as far as possible from each other in order to not hurt the imaging. Well, I learned something new today; these monsters work just fine in a mid size room and although I could have made my life easier by buying renaissance, I wouldn’t have the massive slam, dynamics and midbass from these Neolith. What do you get by buying neoltihs that you don’t get with the clx or 15a? DYNAMICS, MID BASS and FAR BETTER woofer and panel integration.
I have question about the power demands of the Neolith? At one point WCSS says they can dip .5 ohms. Is that something that happens when playing at the very highest volume? I was reading about the GamuT M250i mono amplifiers. The absolute sound review. In the intro I came across this quote.
GamuT says the M250i is safe with loads ranging all the way down to 1.5 Ohms, which is the point at which GamuT, in its own words, draws “a line between what is a loudspeaker load, and what is a short circuit”
I don’t understand the speaker - amplifier - volume control relationships. It sounds like .5 ohm is an impossible load.
Yet WCSS is achieving amazing sound... the Neolith’s have amplification for the bass correct? So the amp is driving the panel only?
WCSS please address this as you please, and as you bring in the higher power amps.
@wesc the Neoliths are all passive. No built in amps inside of any kind so the amplifier needs to drive the entire speaker. Yes if you go to their site you’ll see the Neolith drops to .5 ohm at 20khz. This is needed regardless of the volume level. The amplifier receives the load throughout the entire frequency range. The only way the speaker won’t drop to .5ohm is if you play music that does not have any frequencies at 20khz.
mrdecibel, Sorry if you thought I was criticizing you. Actually the opposite. I appreciate hearing about your Rane and your other valuable observations. I am still interested in purchasing your unit, if you could just send me a picture or 2, and your terms. Most importantly, you have had an open mind about using it in your system, but you prefer not employing it. I respect people with open minds who then decide my ideas are not for them, but people with audiophile religion who refuse to try something because it goes against their beliefs, are missing out.. For WC, both he and I recognize the value of tone controls to boost the HF of his Neo, whether a preamp with tone controls, Rane, or digital EQ. And for his age, he has had remarkable experience.
WC, Oops, I think I made some mistakes in my previous post about the Dag integrated. It seems that any input goes through the entire electronics, which is the tone control circuit, preamp stage, power amp stage. If you used your Ref 10 into the Dag, you got a 4th stage of amplification and circuitry, but at least you got the benefits of the tone control circuit. Not having a manual or any conversation with a Dag dealer, it appears to me that you cannot bypass any stage of the Dag--you just take the integrated as a complete integrated package. As such, if you don't want any more power, it does everything else you want superlatively. Since tone controls are important for the Neo, an alternative is the Lux preamp with its tone controls. I don't know of any other SOTA preamp with tone controls. You could still use your Ref 10 to evaluate SOTA powerful amps, but to see if you can improve on the Dag integrated, you need a preamp like the Lux with tone controls. The other way would be to get a separate EQ like the Rane or digital EQ which other people here are knowledgeable about. That opens up a larger selection of SOTA preamps to consider, or even still use your Ref 10. But if you don't want to bother with a stand alone EQ, the Lux with its tone controls would be a great way to go. The complete Lux package of preamp and amp would challenge the Dag integrated. If you want more power, you could double up on the M900u monos. However, using bridged amps means that allowable speaker loads double, so although bridged amps have more power into 8 ohms, they are more uncomfortable into 1 ohm. Also, although bridged amps give more power into reasonable loads, the extra circuitry reduces the detail and transparency at moderate volumes. At least a single M900u is relatively cheap, to give you an idea of the tonal qualities of the complete Lux package versus the Dag package.
Hello wesc, so happy that the Masterset speaker setup process is bringing your system to new hights... Not at all surprised!
Meantime, for anyone interested... I am preparing a writeup of the new Rowland M535 bridgeable amps... I have bridged a pair delivering 700W per chassis into my relatively wilding Vienna Acoustics Die Muzik. Stunning for the musical resolution and the sheer proportions and transparency of the stage... At just below $12K for the pair they are delivering music in a way that I would have only expected from amps several times their price... Much more to come in the scribblings that I will post on Agon... But so much of M535 remind me of the M925 monos... They definitely are creations of the same mind.
Might still be a couple weeks to complete my project... I have one more week of real work to do (Sighs!) before 25 days of Christmas vacations... Will complete the scribblings during my vacations.
Guido, I look forward to your review. I also want you to address some concerns I have about bridgeable amps. First, there is double the amount of circuitry in the chain for each channel, which would decrease the transparency, detail, resolution at moderate levels. Of course, you can get 4X the power into 8 ohms, which is an advantage for some people. But subtle resolution occurs at power levels of a fraction of 1 watt for speakers of average efficiency, so I would think that for this criterion, the bridged version is at a disadvantage. Second, bridgeable amps don’t like very low impedance lows, such as from electrostatics at HF. Most companies advise not to use bridged amps into impedances of less than 4. For your Vienna dynamic speakers, this is likely not a consideration, although I read that ARC tube amps exhibit tighter sound from the 8 ohm taps than the 4 ohm taps, when driving Wilsons whose nominal impedance is 4. The ARC tube amp may not be relevant to your evaluation of the Rowland SS amp, however. So I request that you include your evaluation of the Rowland M535 in the area of resolution at moderate levels, comparing standard setup to bridged. Also, how does a single M535 compare to a 525? [ You might have seen Merrill’s August announcement that the stereo Element 114 has similar speed/resolution as the 118/116, at a projected retail price of $9-12K. He claims that the 118/116 have somewhat better spatial qualities than the 114, but the differences are small. See his post as the first entry after searching A-gon under Merrill Element. Read his statements several replies down. Of course, the 114 will have less power--we don’t know yet how much. But the 114 looks to be an outstanding value for a SOTA contender. My guess is 150 watts into 8 ohms, which might keep doubling as impedance load is halved. This should satisfy most people who care more about quality than quantity, at an attractive price.
Hello Viber, as I might have mentioned a few months ago, the only exposure I have had to the Merrill Oganessom series has been a 1188 engineering prototype for a few days during last Spring... As I did not have the time to conduct a proper break-in, I am not in a position to comment about performance of the final product. Even more so, I will not venture conjectures about Element 116 and Element 114... I try to limit comments on devices of which I have no direct experience.
Concerning Rowland M535 in bridged versus stereo mode.... I have given priority to breaking in the devices in bridged mode so to ensure that both chassis would reach optimum conditions at the same time. Once I have concluded my observations in bridged mode, I will connect one of the chassis in stereo mode. The good news is that M535 seems to be evolving and maturing quite a bit faster than most amps I have had in my system.
In the mean time, The degree of transparent resolution, harmonic exposure, and essential lack of artifacts makes me not be terribly concerned about theoretical shortcomings of bridged operations... Yet, the proof shall be in the proverbial pudding... That is when I eventually connect a unit in stereo mode I'll have an idea of any performance difference.
Worth pointing out though that Jeff Rowland is extremely conservative... He told me that he has implemented M535 as easy bridged-ready amps because he had verified that their high prformance level in bridged mode warrants such implementation.... I am conjecturing that this might have to do with he having designed for M535 distortion minimization circuitry evolved from what he first developed for the M625 S2 stereo amp. Connection into bridge mode is as simple as connecting the mono line level source to the XLR input instead of the two stereo XLR inputs... Connecting a speaker cable to the mono output terminal instead of the two stereo terminals... And flipping a single toggle switch in the back of the amp to bridged operations.
By the way, M535 has been design in such a way that gain structure in bridged mode is identical to stereo mode... According to the designer, you can leave preamp volume at identical levels for stereo and bridged operations.
@sqitis I no longer have a dedicated preamp. I'm back to just a home theater processor - currently, the Theta Casablanca IV with Xtreme 3 DACs. Come back here and let us know if you do the upgrade for the SLP-05. Dave
Nice to see you have the placement of the Neolith improved. Very similar spacing to my Montis ESLs. Once you get it right, OMG. I can only imagine how some serious current is going to make things even more real. Cheers.
WC, do you feel you need a high frequency boost ?, as viber suggested, especially after your last " positioning ". All of the MLs I have heard ( many models, many times ) never seemed to be lacking in the HF area ( after proper set up, system match and optimum seated position ( distance and centered ). I find it odd that an 80K set would not be able to provide it ( given the proper amplification and everything else preceding them ). Maybe the better amps will make the difference. Enjoy ! MrD.
Breaking news... someone who reads my thread daily has just joined the Neolith club :) Neolith is a special speaker but I feel like it needs to be understood and really given the opportunity to let you see what it can do. It’s just NOT the speaker you can just do “plug and play” and that’s it. It’s just too honest of a speaker that will tell you how “sh1tty” your front end is. I am actually beginning to think that after amplifiers I will begin to hunt down dcs for a source. Tomorrow the Plinius sa103 arrives and it will be strapped to the ref10 so it will be one interesting experiment. Hell, I might buy another Plinius and see how much better it will be in mono with 400 watts class a per channel.
Viber, you have stated that you use the eq with very subtle adjustments, maybe a db or 2 here and there. What if you were to try a unit such as the Luminous ( which I find cleaner and more detailed than transformer based passives ), or a LightSpeedAttenuator ( single in, single out ), a reason I chose the Luminous ( there is also Tortuga ). Just like you are surprised by me not wanting or needing eq, I am as surprised with you. You are missing details and information, and I do mean significant. Your thoughts ? Enjoy ! MrD.
mrdecibel, Several lines of evidence point to the Neo HF being rolled off compared to other speakers WC has tried. 1-2 years ago, when he had the ML Montis, 13A, 15A and CLX, he found them to be satisfactory in HF when they were 1-2 feet away from the front wall. But the Neo at that position was rolled off in HF. The Neo certainly improved with the greater 5 foot distance. We can only imagine that the HF of the smaller ML would have more HF output with 5 foot distance, so the HF of the smaller ML would still have the same relative increase compred to the Neo. With my own electrostatics, Hf are more evident with greater distance in the back of them. Also, his experience with the tone controls on the Dag showed that the HF were good with +4 for the Neo, and he speculated -1 for the Magico. WC's listening experience correlates with mine over the years in comparing large panels to smaller ones. Large panels are great for bass especially, then the midrange, but NOT for the HF, which get smeared due to multipath and dispersion considerations. It is an integral calculus problem. The tonal balance of large panels is weighted towards lower freq compared to that of small panels. And with curved panels, the situation is magnified. The CLX has a skinny curved panel for the mids/HF, so it is the best design from ML if you want more HF, coherency and speed from 360 Hz on up. The Neo is for people like WC who want more dynamics as a top priority.
mrdecibel, Yes, I believe what you say about the superior resolution of the passive Luminous. But only 1 of my violin recordings is brilliant enough to not require any EQ, so I listen to that recording with the EQ at flat. No doubt I could enjoy it more with the Luminous rather than the flat Rane. But other typical recordings are as dull as dishwater by comparison, unless I boost the HF. You may not appreciate my perspective of hearing the brilliant sound under my chin, which is much brighter than anyone else hears. I am glad tjassoc will meet me and hear what I am talking about. I wish I could meet you and play for you--where do you live?
whitecamaross...in your last post did you suggest that you might upgrade your source? i.e component?
Hopefully it will be a state of the art CD player...esoteric, meridian, dcs puccini etc.
(Sadly,I know you are not getting involved with TT's)
Without a top shelf CD player you will never appreciate everything downstream.
Garbage in Garbage out.
When it comes to CRITICAL LISTENING ,I am of the belief that time and effort and resources are wasted with streamers , dacs , transports, hi res downloads, jriver, tablets, usb ,optical , swapping interconnects , swapping speaker wires, swapping power cords and ,yes, equalizers.
These things have their place for sure.
But not as a tool for critical listening. IMHO
With the proper source component in place it is much easier to weed out an underachieving piece, but more importantly it will allow you to relax and slow down the shell game with your equipment.......and be amazed how great it all sounds.
Guido, I agree with your caution until you listen. I like your methodology. But in your experience with other amps, do you agree with my theoretical discussion that bridged amps may be less transparent than the unbridged setting in the same amp at moderate listening levels?
mikepaul, I agree with all your comparisons, except for EQ. I know it goes against audiophile religion, but you should try an excellent EQ like the Rane, plugged into your power amp. The Rane has additional 6 dB of gain with balanced connections, so it can take the place of a line stage, and as I and mrdecibel say, it is better than most line stages for transparency, etc. Remember that WC had reservations about the inadequate HF of the Neo until he boosted the treble using the Dag. Your ML 15A probably has a tonal balance more towards the HF compared to the Neo, so you might not feel EQ is necessary for you, but I promise you will be shocked if you try it. For $200, you will have fun, and will probably change your thinking about EQ. I became a convert to EQ in 1995, when my first recordings of an orchestra in a dull hall were DEAD. Then I started recording with the EQ in the chain, and then I had the greatest recordings. BIG DIFFERENCE, second only to my discovery of electrostatic speakers 15 years earlier.
WC, other than easier on amplifiers ( both impedance and sensitivity ), and easier to place in my room, I feel the level of transparency I am experiencing is incredible. I easily hear changes when I swap out a fuse in a component ( a big controversy here on other threads ) Some systems I listen to that is not so easy. I hear plenty of detail from my system. Enjoy ! MrD.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
