Hi Guido,
I lovedyour response ;-)
sic"What is even more interesting, is that rather than given you a sense that you are 'seeing deeper into the soundstage', it is more like Criterion plops a solid and vast 3-dymensional soundstage into the listening area"
I made one time this experience: with the pream Viola Cadenza ... just amazing
It would be great to compare the criterion to this one and also to FM acoustics preamps |
Clavil and Brazcole, all of these seem to be worthy comparison projects. . . Let us know your impressions if you have the opportunity of conducting some of them. G. |
Hi Guido,
I met yesterday my friend who has had the Esoteric Combo 03, he told me it was not new and had be runing for a while.
Regards |
Claude, it's quite possible that the Esoteric sound may simply be not what you are after. DCS seems to me sweeter sounding than Esoteric. G. |
Thanks, Clavil / Claude,
I already bought the Puccini & Clock.
Man, no words...No words do decribe. Uau!!
I don't need Scarlatti, Pagannini... or... anything else.
I'll run the test with Krell 222 next Friday.
Keep all post |
All, time for some updated impressions.
I have now been running Criterion almost 24/7 since mid July. . . it has either being playing from CDs on XLR input 1, or from my old tuner from XLR input 2. During night time, I usually mistune between FM stations and feed Criterion a diet of pure unadulterated quasi-inter-station white noise hash. I estimate that Criterion must have by now passed 2,000 hours of activity on the combined inputs.
Today I loaded a very old CD. . . Jackie Dupre on the Dvorak Cello concerto with her husband Daniel Barenboim at the baton. I always considered this recording more documentary in nature than anything else. While the performance is truly remarkable, the recording is of dubious quality also for vintage standards, with somewhat hazy sound, flat staging and hashi fortissimos. It was always a bit difficult to enjoy this recording. . . Dupre tended to be buried in the lumpy background
I honestly did not know that this CD even knew
what 'soundstage' and 'imaging' even meant. . . my opinion was always that the recording engineer should have been taken to the Lublianka for interrogation as a possible anti-musical plant. . . .
Well. . . today my jaw dropped. . . the words mesmeric, awesome, eerie, and stunningly emotionally involving come to mind.
The soundstage was there. . . and what a stage. . . with Dupre at the front center, more or less lined up with the front of the speakers. The orchestra sorrounds her at a realistic distance, consistent with true placement of instruments in the orchestra. Dupree is passionate beyond belief. . . her Stradivari cello is passionate and rippling with harmonics. . . in double stops I can follow the interplay of the twin melodies with incredible ease. . . there are things that I hear that Dupre intended me to hear, like those amazing harmonics, riveting macro dynamics, microdynamics that have an incredible intimacy. . . there are things that perhaps she did not want me to hear. . . like the swish of her sleeves and the creeking of her stool. and an occasional intake of breath.
The Orchestra sounds majestic, intense, and passionate. . . the emotional rapport and kinship between Dupre and Barenboim is pretty evident in the incredible dynamic synergy between the cello and the orchestra. I was specifically looking for the virtual placement of the triangle. . . would it be highlighted towards the front, or would it have a realistic placement. . . when it arrived it was clear as a bell, but from a distance, from the right and towards the back of the hall, in the spot it would be in a live concert. . . who said that JRDG gear can't image worth a darn (grins!). The fff ends of movements 1 and 3 had a special surprise. . . not only I could hear the great hall through the decaying sound, but the shells of the kettle-drums and perhaps some unused large cymbals were clearly ringing from somewhere close to the triangle player.
It is interesting that with Criterion, 'silent background' does not mean lack of sound. . . Rather, it means complete abscence of that glare and random hash that hides the lowest level of information from recording venues that are by their nature always filled with those tiny mechanical vibrations, that let us perceive their palpable existance, size, and often shape with our eyes closed. Thus, somewhat paradoxically, I suggest that Criterion's profound 'black background' silence actually illuminates musical reality.
During fff/tutti, there is obviously a little distortion (the sound engineer should still be punished, or at least be imparted musical reeducation in a gulag for a duration commensurable with his grievous crime against the Muses), but distortion is much less than I was used to, and the stage never collapses under macro-dynamic stress, which is totally unexpected in this recording.
Bottom line, this creature is amazing. . . and if you think you already love criterion after you used it for a couple hundred hours. . . I can assure you that you have not heard anything yet. I have now reasons to believe that Criterion may continue to mature and blossom well beyond the 1,500 hours mark.
I usually try to be dispassionate about my sonic findings, but what I heard today simply took my breath away. I was supposed to work on some web content creation today instead of wasting time listening to Dupre. . . well I obviously couldn't. . . so I didn't. . . and no apologies either! . .
Saluti,
G. |
During listening sessions, is the AC unplugged from the preamp? |
During yesterday's session Criterion was on batteries, but was not unplugged from AC. I have not yet run Criterion unplugged from AC. G. |
It should make a difference if you do. Unplugging the power cord from the unit (as opposed to from the electrical outlet) should reduce the amount of RF in the system (though there will still be leakage from your cd player). |
I agree. . . my only concern is also severing the Criterion's shortest path to ground when removing the PC. G. |
I just finish the test with the Krell 222 and the 202 as well. I could say the Criterion's sound stage is UNBEATABLE.
Now I have total confidance in this wonderfull device.
The best preamplifier I have heard. |
After I test the Krell 222 and the Krell 202, I decide to test my old GamuT D200. The COMBINATION with the CRITERION was huge, so I put my Model 312 to sell.
My set up with Criterion and GamuT D200 is perfect.
Thank you all for everything. Good bye. |
Guido,
I've enjoyed following this thread. Thanks for your
insights and thoughtful review. I've been enjoying my
ARC Ref 3 preamp for a few years. My dealer has offered to
make arrangements for a home audition of the new ARC Ref 5. I would also love to listen to the Criterion. Does the Criterion have a home theater by-pass feature? Any thoughts as to the synergy with Levinson 33H monoblocks?
Thanks.
Vito |
Thank you Vito, Criterion's home theater bypass is very flexible. Any/some/all of the Criterion's balanced or unbalanced inputs can be configured/assigned to home theater bypass. This means that you could have up to 6 inputs configured as theatre bypass if you really wanted.
Note that by default, as all inputs are transformer coupled, all inputs RCA/XLR have identical gain structure. If you want to adjust input gain for any/some/all of the inputs, you can assign a gain offset +/- 10dB in 0.5dB increments to any of the inputs.
All main outputs (2XLR, 2RCA) are also transformer coupled. . . This mean that by default they would present an identical volume gain to a pair of amplifiers that you may be using in a biamped configuration. . . But for greater flexibility in biamped configurations, RCA output 2 can also be configured with an output gain offset (+/- 10dB with 0.5dB granularity).
What's even more interesting, is that the record outs are controlled by a completely separate preamplification circuit. . . this means that you could even assign a Criterion input to drive an amp(s) in a separate room, which would enjoy a completely different musical program with a completely different volume.
On your specific question of compatibility with ML amp. . . Criterion's output impedance is only 60Ohms in both balanced and unbalanced mode. This means that Criterion is compatible with all but the most peculiar amps on the market. Unless your amp has an input impedance of less than 1200 Ohms, you will have no problems.
Saluti,
Guido |
Brazcole,
could you tell us was is better with your Gamut D200 than with the 312?
muito brigado |
Speaking of Gamut, they had one of the very best rooms at RMAF. We couldn't compare the Gamut pre and the JRDG in the same system, but they were both clearly at the top of the heap.
Dave |
I must echo Dave's assessment of the GamuT room, using their big monoblock amps. Performance of the Bach Toccata Adagio and Fugue in C minor on the organ was stunning and very emotionally involving. Yet it seemed to me that a system consisting of Boulder CDp, Boulder 2010 pre, Rowland 312 amp, and Vienna Die Muzick speakers that we listened to at Soundings Hifi just across from the Marriott hotel may have exceeded the Gamut system in harmonic resolution and low level detail. The 2 systems were definitely comparable in staging, imaging, extension, and superior abscence of any disturbing artifacts. . . the kind of systems that you just would like never to walk away from.
Dave and I were able to listen/contrast the Rowland 312 and the Boulder 2060 stereo amps on the same system at Soundings. . . Boulder CDp, Boulder 2010 pre, Vienna Die Muzick speakers. Both excellent amps. everyone present in the room appeared to favor 312 over Boulder 2060 for authority, staging, harmonic exposure, low level detail.
Unfortunately we were not able to compare directly Boulder 2010 and Criterion in the same system, hence I won't guess about my pref between these 2 devices. |
I will say, I agree with Guido with preferring the VA/Rowland/Boulder set up, BUT the GamuT was in a HUGE room and we were sitting much further away from it than the set ups at Soundings. Perhaps that distance impacted our ability to hear the inner detail of the large GamuT tower speakers.
I'm very comfortable in saying that Rowland, GamuT and Boulder are amongst the top performers in this rather serious price range. Which makes me think of the FM Acoustic, another amplifier that I liked a lot, but the six-figure price was offputting and it was not clearly superior to the trio that I mentioned before.
Sorry to take the thread away from the Criterion, but comparsions, even when VERY informal can be useful.
Dave |
I was at Soundings with Guido and Dave and agree that the 312 was a much better match for the VA Die Muzick than the Boulder 2060 was. I also listened to the Criterion on the smaller VA Mahlers with the 312. I was impressed with this set up. It was transparent and musical. It also had good tonal balance. The presentation was a bit smaller than the Die Muzick though. It was a shame we could not swap the Rowland and Boulder preamps to compare them.
Sean |
Sean,
I was pleased that Soundings was agreeable to switching around the amps and even putting the Continuum 500 in place of the Boulder 2060 and the 312. I'm glad we went on Thursday before the crowds came so that our request was reasonable.
I'll get back over there soon and compare the Continuum 500 to the Criterion/312 combo. That will be interesting.
BTW, it was nice meeting you and sharing a great Indian dinner with you and other friends, new and old.
Dave |
Hi Dave,
I had a great time and was glad I met you guys.
The guys at Soundings were very gracious hosts. In fact I have never been treated better at any other stereo store. I did not mean to imply that they would not have let us try that combo. It would have been a big pain to switch them out and that is why I did not ask them to do it. Especially when they were getting ready for the after show party the next day. I think I spent about 5 hours there that day. That is the longest I have ever spent in a store auditioning a stereo. Of course if Guido had not been there to talk to I probably would have got bored and left much sooner. ;-)
Thanks for the company and I hope we can do it again next year.
Cheers,
Sean |
Which makes me think of the FM Acoustic, another amplifier that I liked a lot, but the six-figure price was offputting and it was not clearly superior to the trio that I mentioned before. could you tell which FM amp & preamp you have heard and how it was? thanks |
If I recall correctly, FM Acoustics was showcasings its big monoblock amps costing $128,000. Guido |
Guido, I think that the FM was a huge stereo amp. |
Guido and Dcstep,
the big stereo amp from FM Acoustics is the 1811 it costs 133'500 swiss francs
the monos are the 115, a pair costs 85'000 swiss francs
all FM Acoustics products are sold in swiss francs
the big preamp is the 268 which costs 110'000 sf
prices are stratospheric ... how is the sound?
Best regards |
Clavil my friend, the sound of the amp was very, very good, IMHO. This was early in the show and the speakers were YG and the player was a rediculously over priced Weiss ($30,000 and using a $20 Phillips transport), but, even with this marginal set up, I think that the FM is top echelon and shown through.
We were told a price in US$. I can't imagine paying that much for an amp, so, after I learned the price, I lost interest. Despite that, I heard enough to say that anyone wanting to spend that kind of money on an amp should consider it, along with the Rowland 312 and Boulder 2060. It was clearly handling the big YGs easily. The harmonic richness was hard to judge because of the usual show issues, like speakers, front end and room, but I could hear good things shining through.
For that kind of money you'd expect a in-system audition at your house, after they check your bank account. ;-)
Dave |
Guido, I am trying to choose between the Criterion, the Dartzeel and the MBL 6010D. Any thoughts on that? |
And of course let us add those exceedingly fine GamuT monoblocks to Boulder 2060, Rowland 312, and FM Acoustics. Unfortunately I do not remember the model of the GamuTs, but I seem to remember they were priced at approximately $26K, which is 1 fifth the price of the FM Acoustics . G. |
Guido, I think Husk01 is speaking of Pre Amps.....Sounds like the MBL could be a very serious contender to the Criterion. The Dartzeel is colored in comparison to the Rowland. |
Apologies Husk. I inadvertently missed your post. Unfortunately I have no experience with MBL and DartZeel. I am sure they are fine devices in their own right. If you would like me to elaborate on the behavior of Criterion in some particular sonic/musical area, or you would like some particular tech info, I'll be happy to do so. . . but I can't compare it with devices I am not terribly familiar with. Guido |
I like the Dartzeel very much! What's not to like? My only reservation is that if you go beyond the resolutuion of CD the Dartzeel will have a very very slight masking effect and a tad bit of warmth to the perspective in comparison to the Criterion. The Criterion is probably the most neutral and honest piece of audio gear I have EVER listened to in my entire life's experience. This is not necessarilly a good thing, but it is a stated opinion and you must understand its implications if you think you want it in your system. If you are CD only on a poorly sourced system, you will not be happy. It realy isn't "ruthlessly revealing", but just honest in all regards. It is as I've said before... A reviewer's dream machine! I have heard both (Dartzeel)now extensively and can make that comment without hesitation or doubt. The question I'm starting to think about is how it compares to the MBL mentioned in a recent prior post? Aloha, David. |
David, I haven't heard the DarTZeel, but have heard the Criterion for quiet a few hours. By implication in listing the shortcomings of the DarTZeel (slight masking and warming coloration) you're describing the strength of the Criterion that I've heard. The Critereon offers an incredibly quiet background and ruthlessly accurate harmonic presentation, full of rich detail.
Much to my surprise, many people spending this much money still want warmth and take comfort in it. I understand this and that's why there's more than one solution available. However, at this level, if your front end isn't equally transparent, quiet and accurate, then I think you'll be wasting a ton of money if you buy any of the pre-amps being discussed here.
Bad CD playback will not be sweetened up by any of these devices. A touch of warmth might be a good idea with bad CD, but getting a better player first, like the Playback Designs, Esoteric or others is a better idea. I'd rather have a stunning CD/SACD player with a Rowland Capri than any of these expensive pieces. Of course that's my prejudice and priority suggestion and many may not chose to follow it.
Dave |
I am using a Sooloos HD system going thru a Berkely Audio Designs Alpha Dac. Are any of the above pres a food choice? |
Husk01, I can give you only a semi useful answer by indirection as follows:
A friend of mine tried Berkeley DAC by itself as well as Berkeley into a JRDG Capri: he much preferred Berkeley into Capri; never the less he sold capri because of cost recovery considerations only and kept Berkely DAC.
I personally much prefer Criterion over Capri.
By extension, I suspect that I might prefer Berkeley DAC into Criterion than Berkeley by itself.
As I said. . . mine is a valid but indirect hypothesis. |
I like the Dartzeel very much! What's not to like? My only reservation is that if you go beyond the resolutuion of CD the Dartzeel will have a very very slight masking effect and a tad bit of warmth to the perspective in comparison to the Criterion. beyond CD....to hi-rez PCM or real hirez such as vinyl or RTR? (please excuse my sarcasm....i could not resist). i wonder the context of this comparison? system? using 'zeel' interconnects and dart amp? any analog sources? or just digital....which digital? was the dart in battery mode? i do look forward to someday hearing the Criterion with the Rowland 312 amp. |
Hi Mike. Glad to have you in on this. I'm fairly confident the Criterion will exceed the "Zeel" in most areas (yes I heard it in both modes, But having a bigger influence on the Zeel than the Rowland). As far as the 312, I do think it is a superb amp, but lacks overal slam and bass extention in comparison to other amps at this pre amp level. It's greatest attributes are the transparancy, image placement and honest neutral timbres. I just miss the sort of full bodied sound I had when I ran a Gryphon Antellion Sig (196 lb Class A Solid State) Would I trade the ultimate transparency of the Rowland for the Gryphon...? Not at first thought, but when considering the heat (I live in Houston, TX) I must live with the Rowland. BTW: I'm an electric Bass player. The Rowland's bass is more accurate in the details, but leaves a void in comparison to the Gryphon. I hear he has an upgrade in the works that deals directly with my (and a few others!)complaint. Aloha, David. |
Mike, a direct in-system Dartzeel/Criterion comparison for both battery and AC ops would be quite fascinating, particularly if vinyl media could be included in the proceedings. Guido |
Isn't this glorious. We actually have an incredibly wide ranging list of contenders for top pre-amp and top amp honors. Unfortunately we seldom get to hear them switched in and out of the same system. Due to a stroke of luck, I got to hear the Rowland amp vs. the Boulder amp and I'll get some time together before year end to compare the Criterion with Boulder's top offering and Rowland's own Capri.
Is there a DarTZeel owner in the Denver area? It'd be fun to insert it into the same comparison.
Dave |
David, glad to be here.
my use of the word 'zeel' refers to the 50 ohm BNC 'zeel' cable interface which darTZeel and Playback Designs use in place of conventional cables. this offers a few 'system' and 'synergy' performance advantages. they are cheap relative to typical cables used in systems at this level. they sound the same whether .5m or .5 kilometer. they outperform conventional cables due mostly to 'near-perfect' impedence matching.
side note; in the November (maybe Septemeber?) 2001 issue of Stereophile Herve Delatraz (Mr. darTZeel before there was an actual company or products) wrote a very interesting article about how all conventional interconnects were inherently flawed due to impedence miss matching. it's worth reading.
my question was whether 'zeel' cables were used in the Criterion--Dart NHB-18NS comparison.
the dart preamp is excellent when used conventionally in any system; but it's at it's best when used with the dart amp, Playback Designs and 'zeel' cables. |
One interesting point is that at Soundings Hifi in Denver, in the opinions of several, the Rowland 312 amp was preferred to the Boulder 2060 stereo in the areas of authority, macrodynamics and general fullness of sound, in addition to micro dynamics/microdetail, harmonic exposure, and involving musicality. As already mentioned, the rest of the system consisted of Boulder CDp, Boulder 2010 pre, and Vienna Die Muzick speakers.
Needless to say, we did not have the opportunity of contrasting with MBL.
Please note that, at this level of performance, I am more inclined to utilize the term 'preferred' rather than 'exceeded', because live observations between such top flight devices -- even in the most controlled of situations -- are very much relative to personal taste. G. |
Mike, at this point, Criterion does not support BNC connections. Inputs and outputs are XLR balanced and RCA unbalanced. All I/O is transformer coupled to resolve source impedance mismatches and apparently yields >90dB common mode rejection on balanced inputs. Input offset adjustment is available on all inputs with a 0.5dB resolution, while output offset adjustment is available on unbalanced output 2 with same resolution.
The import of all of the above of course is exquisitely theoretical. Only significant in system a/b listening has a chance of revealing actual musical/sonic differences and address compatibility with personal prefs.
a comparison of the following:
1. PD + Dartzeal BNC + Dartzeel pre,
2. PD + fav XLR IC + Criterion,
3. PD + same fav XLR IC + Dartzeel,
Would be very interesting indeed.
One complication of course is. . . what is the 'best' (cringes about crass absolute term) XLR to use for this exercise? I have had extremely satisfying results with the Furutech Evolution II ICs between Criterion and my Esoteric X-01 Limited, yet I shan't claim that I have reached the pinnacle of my IC quest without a lot of further explorations.
G.
|
Splendid idea Dave. It may be worth while you creating a separate thread to locate a Dartzeel user in the Denver general area who would be interested in contributing his unit to perform the Criterion/Dartzeel listening session.
Problem is that not all Dartzeel owners may be following this Criterion thread. G. |
Guido, the whole 'zeel' interface involves not only the cables but an engineered 50 ohm interface input and output. so simply having BNC plugs would not be sufficient.
i have no idea how much effort it might require to design and build that 50 ohm interface; it may be real simple. regarding Playback Design when they were putting the final piece together i recommended that they include the 50 ohm interface, and thankfully they did.
i saved enough money on interconnects in my system to pay for a good amount of the cost of the dart preamp (8 meter set of Nordost Valhalla XLR's just between pre and amp).
btw; when i was listing the attributes of the 'zeel' BNC interface i neglected to mention that BNC plugs have a better and more reliable mechanical connection than other interconnect plug types. obviously the TV broadcast industry uses BNC for video. |
Mike, yes I read the DarTzeal site and saw the 50Ohm impedance characteristics of the DarTzeel BNC interface. I have no idea if it can be added to Criterion post FSC, or what engineering work its addition may involve. G. |
Dave, when do you think you might be able to get to Soundings for the Pre amp comparissons? Should be VERY interesting as Jeff R. has designed that thing to be as close to standard impedances everywhere in and out so as to have minimal effect of other components up and downstream. I'd love to hear it on a big tube amp(s):}) |
Sorry Kawika, but it'll be late November most likely. I was out of town until yesterday and I've got tons of catching up to do at work, with a few "events" coming up in the next few weeks.
Dave |
You need to do a lot of things to get experience. I think all the guys that are in this path for a long time did many changes.
So I put the 312 again in my set up "just in case", as I didn't sell it for my luck because the price is somethinh hight. After few seconds I start to jump in my room (my wife was in the kitchen) like a kid. Beautiful sound, with strong and deep sound stage. Wonderfull device.
Tomorrow I'll put the GamuT to sell. |
Huh? What big ears you have said the wolf! |
I just try the JRDG powers cords. One first and then the another one. I had before the Valhalla, but I change it for the Harmonix Combak 350, but I keep in mind that the Valhalla is a thin power cord, so the power cord don't need to be thick.
Last week I try the Puccini's stock power cord instead of the Combak. The stock power cord was so better that I leave it in the CD player and I change in the Clock as well.
Today with the Criterion and the Model 312 the same happenned, the stock power cords are better.
I think the factory, when the devices has a very high price , they send together with the device a excellent power cord. Yes, why not? If you pay more or less 20k for something, why not a much better power cord?
Anyway, I have a Caspian Roksan, the price is about 2K, tuner in my system, and when I try the stock power cord it's sounded very worse, the difference is huge, that I leave the Combak in the tuner.
Now, I'm listenning a female heavy metal band called Meldrum. Those girls are amazing. I never imagine that I could listen to a heavy metal band with so much pleasure. |
I have the impression that Criterion may be quite insensitive to power cords during AC operation. This has probably to do with the high degree of regulation of the power supply and the final passive power factor correction rectifier built into the power supply itself. G. |
