Not sure what to think


This weekend I spent A/B testing a new preamp. My system: OPPO 105 (I only  have CDs), Bryston 9B-SST amplifier, B&W 801 loudspeakers (circa 1980) no special cables, non-sound treated room. My current preamp is a Krell-KAV 250p recently serviced. I have always wanted to test a McIntosh preamp. My dad had McI equipment when I was growing up and recently visiting local stores with McI in their listening rooms blew me away (as would be expected in a vendor-setup room). I borrowed a McI C-49 to try out.

I spent 3 days putting different CDs in and out. Rock, jazz, classical, house. In rock, 80s rock, prog rock, anything I knew super well. I tried a few SACDs, too. I had to keep switching the cables so there was always about a minute or so going between the equipment. 

I wanted BADLY to hear a difference. I really did. Between the childhood nostalgia, the looks of the McI (yes, I know music is for listening, not watching what it comes out of), and the vendor visits, I was ready. I had to believe my "vintage" Krell would not stand up to a modern, much more expensive McI. I spent hours going back and forth and back and forth. I kept telling myself I would hear something different on the McI and I just did not. So many discs, keying in on different types of passages, focusing on the bass or the vocals or the mids. You name it, I was ready for that one tiny moment to say "drop the money on a McI and don't look back."

Alas, as much as I still have a passion for the McI for the non-auditory reasons above, for the moment I will be sticking with my Krell. I am not here to knock McI - I still love the thought of it, or any type of equipment that might upgrade my listening experience. I guess I should feel good that the Krell is still working and maybe something else will come along in my future. My sound producer friend suggested I spend the dollars on room treatments. :-)

olfac87

Showing 3 responses by terry9

I too have some Bryston gear, including a 9B SST in the HT. That’s a very nice amp for digital. I agree about improving your digital front end - that’s where I would start.

Cables last - like after your first 100K. IMO.

@roadcykler @hilde45 

Could you explain the physics behind that contention?

Sure. All surfaces reflect to some extent. This causes wave interference, constructive and destructive, which is perceived as amplitude peaks and dips at different places and at different frequencies. This can be mitigated.

Also, all surfaces deflect to some extent. This causes the walls to bulge outwards on the compression cycle and cave in on the rarefaction cycle. Each flection is frequency and amplitude dependent, and of course adds and subtracts energy to or from the sound wave. This is perceived as a muddy and poorly defined bass response, and can also be mitigated. Note that this is why very few loudspeakers are made of drywall.

As if that weren’t enough, even a solid concrete bunker has a characteristic sound determined by the ratios of length to width to height. According to simulations done by the famous Cox, MOST ratios are just plain bad. A quarter are OK, and a few percent are good. It is instructive to compare Cox’s science with the recommendations of some who should know better.

The results are more complex if the room is irregular.

That’s why a good room will allow most good systems to sound better than most poor systems. So look to your room.