I would imagine, if a list of basic questions were presented, inquiring about what needs to be part of a conversation where people aim at understanding each other, most of the people here could answer the questions fairly well. After-all, this is a group who demonstrates keen interest in and and awareness of the linkages required for clear communication between sources and outputs of the reigning sound technology. Sure, the analogy has limits, but it also has application to the communication at hand...
It's actually very useful to reflect on the distortions that enter into communication, tendencies toward defensiveness, or an "ambushing" style that only looks for something to negate or disagree with. Keep in mind, we live in a culture with a sizable emphasis on disrespect and looking out for oneself, even when personal gains are marginal and the negative impact on others are palpable.
For many of us, a pattern of "pushing people away" or "fighting for pleasure," treating everything as a nail, is fairly standard, locked in decades ago, the utility of which is difficult to question when the tracks run so deep and long. Patterns feel necessary often because they are so deeply practiced; some of them go back into parents and grandparents, maybe earlier.
In all of my relationships, over the years, I've made huge gains by learning to notice (and diffuse) my divisive competitive style and how my tendency to go on the offensive is generally bound up in my tendency to act defensively. It's been a liberating study, lasting many years, but absolutely unequivocally worth it.
The aim of seeking to understand the other person is of huge significance to all. When a person brings up the idea of "truth," do you simply resort to tactics that allow you to continue resisting and opposing, or do you truly ponder what the other person is attempting to describe? Do you understand the person, or mostly follow a pattern of disapproval, or some variation? A useful conversation will have a very different taste and it will include and explore differences, but it will look and feel quite different, will be marked by a different kind of intelligence, than a zero-sum game of winner and loser.
I have frequently been on both sides of this experience, but in my ongoing growth I've recognized just how powerful it is to truly place my intelligence in the role of seeking to understand others. This does not mean I necessarily agree, only that I'm using my intellectual resources to truly get what the other person is saying, based on their intentions and focus and capacity in the moment. If you want a single word for how this communication works, the word is "receptivity." Are you able to bring receptivity to exchanges where there is disagreement, or is the pattern to go on the offense, which really is another angle of defensiveness.
I do think there are technical truths that "all" of us would agree upon. I mean, is it my 'opinion' that a component is not working owing to it's not having power, if in fact there is no electrical power running to the unit, and I know it was working right up to the point of it being unplugged? These conversations really need some kind of common ground to work. The shared language itself is one of those common grounds. The topic is a common ground, but it may not be obvious that the topic is shared, or being shared about in the same way.
It really changes things when we seek to understand others when we would rather oppose, when we would rather "win," when we feel an impulse to strike out, when our feelings have been hurt, but then I have wanted to see big changes in how I feel with people, particularly during moments of apparent disagreement.
It's of great use to examine your intentions around your communication, and to do so as a 'habitual' element of the process of communication.
Best regards,
|
Actually, I find they make a much finer impact visually than my past two sets, not just because the Moabs demand attention, owing to size, but because the tweeter array and stature of the speaker are so damn interesting to look upon. I went with white, which creates great contrast against the black driver array.
Ordering the Moabs prompted me to repaint the room and the adjacent stairwell, so the whole area just glows now, with new contrasting paint and the massive speakers.
I almost feel that its best not to brag about the sound, because it's exciting to see how people react to them without putting my finger on the scale... I will look forward to your impressions, MC.
|
I've just sat again with my Moabs, with woofers ranging a neat 7'10" from my left and right ears, and the drum work on a variety of my jazz pieces arrives, in a word, "whole," with no evidence of bass note separation in the woofers of each channel. The top woofers are about 2" further away. Very much alive sounding.
I did spend many hours cumulative over the first five weeks moving the speakers around, dialing in the bass. They now sit 40" out from the back wall, and about 2' from each side wall, in a 14.5' by 12' room. Standing the spiked speakers on two Ikea bought bamboo cutting boards brought considerable shape to the bass octaves, and the bass feature was a serious concern of mine given the modest size of the room. Did not like moving the 135lbs/each around the room and I could have made it easier with a little more planning. I sort-of wrestled the right one up on the cutting board and was fortunate not to make a mistake.
The point is that the effort/expense/choice has resulted in sound quality that leave me saying to impending owners that I don't want to say (much of) anything to influence initial impressions for anyone else...
In sum: I'm having more than a small amount of "good times" almost every evening... |
Have any of you tested the 1watt efficiency at 1m of your Moabs?
If I'm running two (Moabs) in a small room (12x14.5) and they truly operate at the stated 98db efficiency, does this not suggest that I could get by handsomely on a flea watt amp, of just a watt or two? I watch the SPL meter when listening to my music and peaks are around 85-87db in 99% of my listening... |
I appreciate the clarification, MC. You might have helped me a bit, here... I have spent some time with SPL calculators that take into consideration speaker distance from walls, speaker distance from listening location, etc. For instance, using http://myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.htmland inputting 95db efficiency, without placement considerations and 40 watts, I'm told I can achieve 106.3 db... the 40 watts is the 4ohm output rating of the Aegir. Even at 20 wpc (which is lower than the stereophile measurement at 8ohms), it calculates 103.3 db. Perhaps it makes sense if I calculate this as a peaks volume with the pre-amp at 100% volume. Maybe that's it... |
@mapman What I have heard, from one Moab owner, is that the Moabs can drop as low as 3.1 ohms, but this statistic may not correspond with the selection of drivers Eric has moved to. I understand he is no longer using scanspeak tweeters.
Also, the Aegir, in terms of heat, draws current for a class A bias to 10 watts and extends class A to a large extent to its rated output. I am repeating what I've read, so I'm open to learning anything you might have to offer here, but Schiit has made it clear that this is a hot running amp. The Nuforce, comparatively, runs much cooler and more easily achieves greater output. You might know that somehow they are squeezing 36db of gain from 80watts per channel. I wish I knew how that was possible, when the Aegir is putting out a claimed 40wpc; so it would seem it should rival the Nuforce in gain, but no.
@almarg I appreciate the breakdown. I am reading the 2.83 volt figure on the website, but it is not specified for 4 or 8 ohms. The Ulfberht claims 99db with 2.83 volts into 4 ohms. This being said, I'm still not finding 95 db without considerably drawing from the guts of these machanisms.
For Q 2: Your comment indicates a quarter turn lower setting from an active pre-amp. Can you state this another way? Are you saying your starting volume with an active pre is the same volume as a passive but with an extra quarter turn of potential gain? Does the active pre-amp confer 25% more voltage?
Q3: Thanks for the claims concerning max volume... I might check this out... Interestingly, volume varies widely with the recording, so the real impact of 22db is a bit of a mystery...
I appreciate the perspective that claims ascending value is indisputably tied to ascending dollar figures, but I dispute that claim. It's just too easy to debunk with a little careful consideration/reasoning. As we well know, costs do not all go into parts and technical finesse. In some cases, you are paying for the fancy rhetoric that obscures the realities of parts and technique. High dollars can go to many things that appeal to ideas and images we cherish, while evading capture by the sensitive ear. Let's not be too absolute about all of this, as there are beautiful pieces selling for $50K, as well as $799.00. I believe the Aegir is a beautiful piece; others agree, but I don't really need their support. I just want to understand the interaction between an amp and my pre-amp and my speakers, so I can feel my way through. This has been an outstanding approach for me... If you have a subtle refinement, please let me know... |
For all the Moab hunger out there, I have a set of questions that might reveal something interesting about claimed efficiency of the Moabs, as well as amplification considerations...
Context: I'm not one of the high-rollers on the website, but I'm quite sure there are a number of people out there who would die for a good deal on a hot system. I think the Moabs are special, and yes I do love the aesthetic.
My tendency is to look for the very best I can buy at the lowest possible dollar. I went for the Moabs after doing abundant research and knowing I could return them, take a hit of maybe $400, and have a killer adventure while doing it. I understand the need to hear things and not make a big mistake, but I actually think there are good mistakes to make, particularly if you know it's not going to crush you. In truth, you probably shouldn't even consider the Moabs if losing the shipping fee is going to become a nightmare scenario for you. They are a pain in the a*** to move, for sure.
So, I started my Moabs on the diet of an amp that really is an amazing find for the dollars: the Nuforce STA200 - 80wpc. It's not Raven level, I'm sure, although I don't really know what a Raven sounds like. Also, Raven is out of order on their low end integrateds, yet they claim they will be catching up soon.
In terms of the Nuforce, for all of $500, I imagine it would be nearly impossible to beat. It can easily run the Moabs with peaks into the low 90db range, without difficulty. I've hit brief peaks in brief listening bursts of 98db without much trouble, either. Still, I'm finding it very difficult to reconcile the claim that the Moabs, or other speakers, are producing 98db out of one watt. The knob is considerably up on the dial by the time you are hitting 98db (peaks), so it certainly looks like much more than 1 watt consumption. Either way, the Nuforce was and is wonderful, and the $500 is icing for the likes of a deal-seeking-guy like myself. Nevertheless, I did run into some (potentially significant) heat issues when pushing the amp, and I've written elsewhere about how hot the amp became when pumping Lorde's "Royals," which I understand is fairly unique in its outstanding bass demands.
Subsequently, I decided to go class D, with another well reviewed high value amp, the XTZ 300w channel into 4ohms amp. They run cool. They have big bass. They are clean, low noise floor, good sense of instrument definition. They also seem to torque, in degrees, some of the sound images. I learned something about how I process new products with the XTZ, because initially I was attracted to what came through as "differences" in the sound, yet I subsequently found out that those differences were not necessarily positive. For instance, hand claps stuck out initially, but then I found that they were less authentic, more plastic. Vocals came through as though in box, or a room that is too absorptive. I had some feeling that the box quality may have indicated the impacts of the recording space, so this seemed like a good thing at the first. However, with the Nuforce, voices were more full, free from the box, natural. I sent the XTZ back after a full month of play - they offer a 30-day trial. It was a good experiment.
I'm now three days into the Schiit Aegir, another value item. Lovely rich sound - has lifted microdynamics into the soundstage that I never really noticed before, voices have more shape, piano keys are much more fully formed. I'm only three days in and have yet to return to the Nuforce for comparison, but I'm loving what I'm hearing thus far. I'm not wild about the heat, but I'm running two small USB fans that do a decent job of dispelling more than half the heat load.
My main complaint is that I'm running the Saga+ pre-amp, a passive pre, to about 80% of its volume, while hitting peaks in the upper 80db range. I'm not really one to do a lot of blasting, so I won't be running with 85-90 continuous and expecting 95-100 db peaks very often, but there will be times when I want to do this... So, where am I, in terms of this goal... it's weird to make another purchase only to find out that you are already thinking about where to go next, but I am... concerned about the limits here... First, why can't I get my 98 db for 1 watt efficiency from these speakers? To be clear, my room is 14.5x12 and I'm 8' from the speakers, which themselves are about 8' apart. The room has plenty of furniture, so I'm sure there is some absorption. Ceilings are 11' high at the center peak.
So, my questions:
First, why is it so hard to achieve 98db on the Moabs without pushing my amps to their limits? Does this have implications for the various amp suggestions people are making for these speakers?
Second, what role, in terms of increasing db at a set volume, would an active pre play here? I'm curious as to how a Freya, or others, might interact with the amp and the speakers...
Third, what problems am I looking at, for both the speakers and the amp, by running the volume mostly at 75-85%, and up to 100% some of the time? By the way, I have not attempted a 100% expression of the amps power with the Moabs - should I?
I'm hoping this offers some useful reflection on the path of the Moabs, with perhaps the semi-value-oriented consumer in mind.
Best regards... |
I’ve had my Moabs since February, enjoying almost every minute of it. In my smallish room they have taken some patience, because these are speakers with generous bass that is diminished if the speakers are shifted too far into the corners.
My biggest challenge has been with amplification. I’m essentially on a tour of amplifier options. They run better than expected on my NuForce amp and I know many of you have heard me speak on this, so I’ll move to where I’ve been over the past several weeks.
First, I went class D, buying a well reviewed XTZ amp, boasting 300wpc into 4 ohms. The amp is stable down to 2.7. Bass was excellent. Vocals were boxed, perhaps truncated or pinched, as though coming from an over dampened room that did not integrate with the overall soundstage. At first I thought I was hearing the distinctive character of the recording chambers, but soon it became clear that the Nuforce produces fuller vocal characteristics and does everything else just as well... So, I returned the XTZ.
Now, I’m fourteen days into a Schiit Aegir. Lovely amp. Took me a solid week to relax into and fully appreciate the unique and high quality sound of this component. It Imparts enough spacial information, including bass density to make it clear that better amps are on the market, compared to both the NuForce and the XTZ. With respect to spacial information, using Patricia Barber’s "Modern Cool," songs 1) Touch of Trash and 7) Company, the soundstage emerged with the kind of layering that makes listening addicting. I sat in a state of constant fascination at the interactive call and response elements of the first track which the amp + speakers reveal in so much delicate playfulness. "Company" includes great drum-work and other features that are worth taking in, if you haven’t listened to this album carefully in recent times.. Compared to the NuForce, the added spacial information, captured by the Aegir, delivers a strong dose of positioning and distancing of instruments. The NuForce just doesn’t do that - maybe it offers occasional hints. This might, in both cases, also be subject to further room treatment, which is a relatively unexplored feature of my setup.
My next curiosity is tube amplification. I wonder what you all can tell me about Moabs and tubes. I’m seeing interesting options from Jolida, Decware and Dennis Had, even Prima Luna. I’m very tempted to keep the Aegir and I’m likely to do so, but I hear so many high flying claims about tube living that I feel I must scour your minds to see what I might be missing...
Again, I’m wondering particularly about the lower cost offerings as that is clearly where my focus resides. The Moabs will remain my most costly feature for the foreseeable future. This is to say, Decware at the top end of my possible future amp outlay - they have a 20wpc amp for about $2500.00. Jolida has tube content on offer in the $1-1.5K range. Dennis Had sells his 10wpc creations for about $1.7k, but this is really about the quality of the sonic upgrade, moving up from an Aegir.
Anyone speak to the plusses and minuses of a tube amp for this particular speaker? I’ll state one final consideration, that Ralph (Atmasphere) constantly reminds; I believe I’m paraphrasing him correctly in noting that 4ohm loads diminish the lowest bass octave with tube amps. I’m sure there are variables, and perhaps some of you have useful information to share...
Thank you, |
Any particular pieces of music you are expecting to lay on the Moabs with their/your/our maiden voyage? |
We are all waiting...!
And by the way, I picked up an eleven watt per channel, given KT88 tubes, Inspire Fire-Bottle tube amplifier, made by Dennis Had, formerly of Cary Audio. The Moabs are a'singing with the firebottle flame warming the cables! I haven't yet eaten up the volume dial and have been literally shaken by the quantity and quality of bass from so few watts.
Midrange is vivid, and soundstage yields three-dimensions on some recordings. After my wife hounded me to put the TV back between the speakers, the SQ dropped a full-step, soundstage broke up, my heart was half-broke (j/k). I've now treated the TV and had a full return of sweet sonics for my evening listening sessions.
I hear many claims about the value of big juice solid state, but I'm very much enjoying the class A, low wattage menu. You might recall my complaints about a hot-running Nuforce amp. I've since bought the aegir and the firebottle, and I'm about done with my amplification quest, both affording more than enough goodness for my ambitions.
I'll want a new DAC within the next six months, but otherwise, I'm now waiting to share the joy of others who are on this audiophile path...
Wishing you a colorful sonic picnic, tomorrow, MC! |
I think the issue of watts and output is one that can be very difficult to pin down. I ran an 80 wpm with high gain (36db) on my Moabs, and the available power was immediate. Even with the volume all of the way down, you could still hear the music bubbling through.
Then I bought a 20wpc channel with much lower db gain (22, I think) and I had to turn the volume up to about 1-2pm on the dial to achieve listening volume.
With my newest amp, an 11 wpc tube amp, I found myself pushing 2-3pm on the dial. But then, I pulled the pre-amp from the system and wove my DAC directly into the tube amp. The pre was a PASSIVE pre and it was utterly masking the power of the tube amp, and probably the preceding 20wpc amp. Now I’m running the tube amp with the Moabs at 9 o’clock on the dial.
The effect has been as if many veils have fallen, the sound emerges from the silent background and recreates a full hugely dynamic experience - this has been a new experience for me, sonically speaking. Dynamics, sparks of realism jump into the space.
I do have a small room of 12x14.5’ and I’m less than 8’ from the speakers, but make no mistake this kind of amplification conveys the instrumental weight of all the jazz and acoustic music I can take. If you want super loud output, I would consider something else, but I can offer the documentation that in my modest space, pushing beyond 10:30 on the dial has just been too loud... At 10:30 and under, I’m in the sweet zone volume-wise and it’s just gorgeous. Given my experience, I’m actually quite happy to suggest that you don’t have to spend 10-15K, or more, to finalize a super satisfying, even thrilling experience... |
@p05129 I would be very interested to see a clearly documented example of this superior setup you allude to, given a two-thousand dollar set of speakers, and equalling the Moabs. Also, and I hope I'm not pushing the issue too far, but it would be even better if you could provide a decent list of $2000 speakers that excel over the Moabs, as you I'm sure you would agree that one set of speakers is not going to suit everyone. Given this same standard, I will also agree that this one speaker at $4500, the Moab, is not for everybody.
Plenty of people want something different, and that's just fine. In this vein, you might list the standards of evaluation you are applying to the $2K set and the Moabs, because you certainly have your own standards of evaluation... My standards:
-not playing it (particularly) safe in my selection, after having owned Vandersteen 2ce's for twenty-five years
-novel (for me) design
-a cohesive 20to20K concept, so I wouldn't feel pressed to hold down the bottom end with subwoofing
-A look I found compelling and unique, a "conversation" piece
-high efficiency; giving greater options for amplification, in my book
-drawing favorable comparisons with horn style dynamics, which is another piece of my audio history; dad having owned Klipschorns and LaScalas.
-Vivid sound-staging and 3-D imaging possibilities
-Sound images approaching life-sized
I would really call everyone suggesting there are better things to make a clear case - document your point-of-view with evidence, then instead of things becoming some sort of head-to-head contest of wills, verbal force, or threat of humiliation, we can dive in deeper, understand more, etc... etc... |
@p05129 I think you would agree that people can say just about anything they want. There are some vague standards here for "decency" and "relevance" but that's about it.
You summarize other peoples' claims about the Moabs by pointing to comparisons made with $30K Wilson speakers. Many things have been said about the Moabs, so you are focusing in on one type of example. I do see limits in the particular thin conversational piece of pie you have critiqued, in that such equations linking and comparing Moabs to Wilsons are vague, for most of those here.
A useful comparison would include standards or criteria that could be applied to compared speakers. Maybe you would like to know more about the comparison between Moabs and Wilsons - I would find that interesting. This can take a little time to develop but it comes through with more potency, more thought, more potential for utility.
The aim for many of those congregating herein is to develop/identify useful information, so people can add to what they know, and then the experience in discussing Moabs, or other speakers, moves out of the state of making claims to making claims with documented evidence and associated reasoning. People also congregate herein to share time on a topic for which they feel strongly. It's ultimately about the music - I hope no one has forgotten that!
Would you agree, strictly in terms of product evaluation, if we are only making claims, but providing no solid evidence/reasoning, we are just filling the channel with empty assertions and other vagaries. Can you do this? Can others do this? Yes. Can we do better? If the interest is in cultivating deeper understanding of audio technology and products, we can certainly do better with the addition of solid claims backed by evidence and associated reasons...
|
It's also the case that you can just make your point and then move on. If the person refutes the point meaningfully, it's appropriate to address the counterpoint, meaningfully. I spent a few weeks following a class D thread where one contributor made the same point in virtually the same language almost daily, for many weeks. I hear he repeated the same arguments for months on related threads. What does this amount to in terms of eating one's own, as well as others', time? If you make a clear, thoughtful, solid point, you don't have to say more. If people misunderstand the first time, you might spend some time clarifying or illuminating the issue with vivid explanation or examples, but then you are about at the end of the rope. If you are mostly straining against the other person, you are wasting energy and have actually missed an opportunity to solidify your position. Often it is serious work to truly identify the actual issue(s) at stake. It's really very easy to say, "There are many speakers at the $10K level that are better than the Moabs, in my view. And here's a list of them: x, y & Z and here's why they are better: e, f & G." If you need to force your position onto the other person, you are now involved in personality based conflict and you can't go anywhere with that. One thing that does change things is an obvious effort to understand contrasting points of view. So, I think p05129 has a point when he claims that there are other fine speakers available, particularly when you allow a range of comparison that at least doubles the cost value of the speaker receiving apparently awesome accolades and claims. Is that enough for him? It's really not up to me to decide. Maybe he needs further validation... What's interesting is the level of angst, tension, bitterness and the like, which is actually the more palpable product in many of these so-called arguments. I wonder if those grinding away in endless cycles of repetition recognize that nothing is happening, except that stress hormones are kept at high levels for prolonged periods of time, which is unhealthy. Endless straining to be heard or to make the same point weakens the initial line of thought, while trending toward deterioration of mind. I learned this the hard way, lost a few relationships as part of my training. I think the problem is that people need to force the issue, need to hear a response that creates a sense of "winning" or achievement, or movement in their direction. That is a recipe for enslavement to one's own dependence on others' manners of expression. I think a fair point is made that the Moabs, which I own, do not compete well against all speakers at the $10K level, but there are probably some $10K speakers that the Moabs do compare well against. I found they beat out many things given my tastes, like the Klipsch Forte III. I also felt they were more subtle and interesting than the Cornwall IV, but I know this is a personal appraisal and others prefer the Klipsch pallet. The work here is really to notice that you are repeating yourself again, straining and straining to make the same point, which is inadvisable unless it is a point that is unusual or demanding of a whole new angle of intellectual recognition, growth, etc... You were heard. Let the readers and other contributors ponder your points of view and let them germinate in each person's mind in its own way. I still think it would be wonderful to hear a careful comparison of the so-called $2000/pair speaker that could defeat the Moab. A serious comparison would be a delight to read about. I claim this takes some real effort, to identify useful standards/criteria, and then to make a real case for how the lower cost pair is better. Given the fact that I know the Moabs and am "floored" by their quality, a serious argument for an even better speak for $2K would prompt me to instant research and consideration of this possible new gem. Bring it on, p05129 ! I would adore more honeyed sounds upon my ears' drums! https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/stress-management/in-depth/stress/art-20046037 |
I wanted to make a music recommendation to those who have been enjoying their Moabs lately, or anyone else on this thread who is very serious about the music experience itself. Peace. Frisell's Valentine, released days ago. https://open.qobuz.com/album/aqd9cg2yc852b |
I had been playing with my fire-bottle tube amp for about a month, enjoying each evening with it and the Moabs when suddenly I felt inspired to plug my Aegir back into the system. Mind you, it only has may be twenty hours on it, maybe thirty.
It was kind of strange because it was not expected, but the sound rising from the speakers combined with the Aegir, included quite a bit more subtle information than the tube amp in this setup, and I found myself immediately, powerfully more drawn into the music.
The fire-bottle is immediate, lively, and dynamic, just so much energy on tap in an immediate way, like all ten/eleven watts possessed by the amp want to burst out of the system, all at once, in its unique signature. But then, the Aegir has its own feast of dynamics, and detects the hidden alluring details that the fire-bottle seemed unable to sense, as though there is magic in the music and the Aegir can touch that, can hear that. You might find it interesting to know that the Norse god Aegir was fond of listening to the god of poetry. The tie-in is wonderful.
Into 4ohms, the Aegir develops over 40wpc, while the Fire-bottle is all afire to the tune of 11wpc.
...It turns out, both of these amps couple well with the Moabs. It also turns out that the Aegir, running with a single tube pre-amp (Schiit Saga+) added a dose of liquidity to my high res samplings for the evening that left me literally intoxicated by what I was hearing. The fire-bottle has yet to impart this liquid quality. It was startling to encounter this new liquid feature, which I had not heard in the previous month, while running the fire-bottle. Interestingly, this experience seems to stand in contrast to Wolf's evaluation of the same set of amps. He claimed the Aegir could not touch the fire-bottle with his Klipsch heresy setup. Perhaps the speakers are the difference here; perhaps something else...
So, I'm thinking about DAC's for the Moab setup. Said a few weeks ago that I would be buying one in the coming months... I'm a bargain searching kinda guy, stretched to my limit with the Moabs and my recent amp purchases. I'm wondering which DAC's you all are using with your Moabs, or which ones you all would suggest... What is the best bargain DAC out there, most certainly under $1000.00?
Remember: it's about the music! The listening!
|
The Dennis Had Fire-Bottle wattage varies, depending on the output tubes. This particular version is the KT-88 SEP. With the KT-88 it runs at eleven (11) watts per channel. I tend to play it around 9-10 on the volume knob, easily achieving SPL’s into the 82-85db range.
I mostly listen to jazz and acoustic music and I have no problems with bass at all. Bass is not the least bit thin.
The guy who sold it to me claimed it bested his Nelson Pass amp, his Cherry amp and another that I don’t recall. With the particular tubes I’ve used, I find it is not as good at controlling the woofer, so provides less bass texture than the Aegir. I’m wondering if the Aegir does better with the lower impedances of the Moab, but I have zero electrical engineering education, so I’m speculating.
I've looked up Mhdt products. I've never heard of them... I'm a bit of a Schiit guy, so how would the Mhdt "Orchid" compare to the Bifrost 2? Any other DAC suggestions? |
