Spectral DMC-90's as Mono Amps?

Thanks, Shubertmaniac, for describing your experience with bridged DMA-50's.

Based on what I've read in this thread and elsewhere on the Web, I've just made the decision to forgo purchasing a second DMA-90 with the intention of running both in bridged mode.

Instead, my intention now is to think carefully about whether I actually *need* the additional SPL's that more power would allow. If so, and if I ultimately decide to purchase the inefficient monitors I've targeted, I'll endeavor to purchase a newer, higher-power Spectral amp.

Thank you to all of you who responded here. You've been a great help!

Best Regards,

rx7audio

Sorry for not looking at the Audiogon forums for awhile.
I had a pair of the DMA-90 fore-runners: DMA-50s. I much preferred a single DMA-50 to run my Acoustat 2+2s. And it played loud enough for sure. Actually I liked it better than the DMA-200. Had the DMC-10 as the pre-amp with all MIT cables. This was my secondary, party it up rock and roll system.I have had alot of Spectral over the years and can say the amps are rock solid and if something goes wrong, Spectral will repair it.

I telephoned Spectral a couple days ago and was transferred to "Mark" in the service department for a brief but informative conversation. I learned from him: (1) In general, if a Spectral amp seems to be working fine, there is absolutely no need to send it in for evaluation/service. (2) Even a 20-year-old Spectral amp is still quite young; they are designed and built to mil spec standards. And (3) the DMA-90, in particular, is an extremely robust amp, quite bullet-proof!

So, it seems my concerns about maintaining a--another--nearly 20-year-old Spectral DMA-90 would seem to be unfounded, which is terrific news!

Tkmetz, thanks for describing your experience. Maybe it is at this increased noise level Razmika was hinting. Certainly, this is something to seriously consider. This and the fact that I would be purchasing (and needing to maintain) a nearly 20-year-old electronic component. However, truth is, one of the features that attracted me to the DMA-90 was its sleekness. "Portly" amps—even portly Spectral amps—are not nearly as beautiful (to me) as my svelte DMA-90, never mind whether I could even afford one of the newer Spectrals! (I know, I know: I'm so shallow!)

Hi RX,
I used bridged DMA90s for awhile and while they sounded good, I didn't think the improvement was worth the price of the second amp. And the noise level really increased in bridged mode. I tried a DMA150 which didn't play quite as loudly, but had a much smoother and musical upper mid and high frequency range. I ultimately ended up with a DMA180 II which was phenomenal.....it had plenty of power yet with wonderful finesse and musicality.....the best of both worlds. At the time, I was using a DMC20 pre and Avalon Arcus speakers. Going up the MIT cable line also produced significant improvements. The biggest changes were going from 350 spectral interconnects to 350ref single ended, and then the ultimate was going to 350 shotgun balanced cables. g

Razmika,

Can you elaborate? The amp has a specific switch on the back panel intended just for this purpose. You've actually listened to music played through such a system, and it sounds compromised?

Thanks, Tan. A long time ago I remember seeing a system which had Wilson speakers powered this same way. I don't remember whether I liked the sound or not, though.

I would not do that. You will compromise the sound of the amp.

I no longer have them but I was very happy with a pair of 90's bridged.
I also had a DMC-12 pre and all MIT cables.
I sold them and tried Class 'D' for a while.
Some time I wish I had kept the Spectral. I do believe you will see an improvement with two 90's bridged over a single.