ML & digital amps.

[Thai]

Don't really care...thanks for adding to the fun!

Geez, you're kinda sensitive and rude all at the same time!

 

[Kruppy]

I revived a thread and killed a relationship all in one post. anyway, thanks for the info so far guys. I just ordered both and will let you know what I think! (in a few days...the Trio will be here tomorrow, the Bel Canto on Monday)

I've been following the Trio also. Please post your thoughts when you can.

 

[jjqiv]

my GCC-250 has a damping factor that exceeds 1000. Over here in Switzerland, it retails for about $6000, almost 3 times what it costs in the US. But I got one nevertheless. And yes, I love it clean, transparent and dynamic, that's what I most appreciate about ML's, and I won't brake them with Rotels or tubes. Nuff said.

How are tubes going to break your ML's?

 

[Charliemike]

How are tubes going to break your ML's?

I took "brake" to actually mean restrict and not damage.

 

[lugano]

I took "brake" to actually mean restrict and not damage.

Correct, that's what I meant.

Taken from http://www.guidetohometheater.com/amplifiers/78/

"EveAnna Manley's lighthearted and well-written instruction manual recommends allowing the Snappers to warm up for about 45 minutes before commencing serious listening, and even offers suggestions for appropriate music choices during the warmup period."

45 minutes of doing something else, instead of listening to music, in a best-case 2-hour listening time-window is a brake, in my book. Not a break. And when EveAnna speaks, I listen.

 

[TheBobGoat]

Initial thoughs about PS Trio A-100 vs Onkyo TXNR801 (receiver)

I switched back and forth between the two over and over and over again.

Played rock music like dave matthews and elton john with some ray charles and norah jones in there.

It took about 1 min for me to switch back and forth moving plugs around

I am not using any special interconnects, and the onkyo is acting as the preamp for the music, but it is in pure audio mode so it should not be processing the music at all.

Review:
It sounds like the Trio brings out the music a little more (brighter sound) Base seems a little tighter, but not as deep as with the Onkyo.

I was listening at the same volume setting for both, but I almost feel that if I turned the volume up two notches when just the Onkyo is powering, it sounded the very similar to the Trio

Overall, the Trio makes the music sounds just a little different. Any thoughts when you changed/auditioned equipment ?

(Oh, and I have very astute hearing =)

 

[Zero]

Goat,

Ice-modules take at least, and I do mean *at least* 100 hours or so to 'cook'. .. give it time...

 

[Thai]

This is what i was kinda afraid of...granted, a break-in period is needed. However, how do we really know if the amps in the modern well-respected brand receivers are all that bad?? I keep on reading reviews of Denon receivers and there is nothing negative that is said about them sonically by the reviewers. The bench testings are impressive too (at least for upper end Denon receivers). What gives?! I am on the sidelines about whether to spend an extra $2500 or so for a Sunfire amps or just keep what i have.

 

[TheBobGoat]

Dont worry, it is getting heavy use and will continue to do so all weekend (super bowl party anyone?)

on Monday, I am going to A/B it with the Bel Canto and see what happens.

We have tested the Trio now with Jay Z, John Legend, and yes even Hillary Duff followed by some Henry Mancini. Also played Gladiator in 6.1 ES to check that out.

I think overall it may sound a little better from the standard onkyo - but not positive on that. My wife and I are going to do some more blind tests later on to see what we think.

If it does show promise of improvement, you have to ask yourself (as she just asked me..) "Is it $1,000 better?"

BG

 

[Robonaut]

This is what i was kinda afraid of...granted, a break-in period is needed. However, how do we really know if the amps in the modern well-respected brand receivers are all that bad?? I keep on reading reviews of Denon receivers and there is nothing negative that is said about them sonically by the reviewers. The bench testings are impressive too (at least for upper end Denon receivers). What gives?! I am on the sidelines about whether to spend an extra $2500 or so for a Sunfire amps or just keep what i have.

I think the problem is that the magazines are listening to the mass-market receivers using your typical 8 ohm speakers. Or, if they are using lower-impedance speakers, they're using ones with a fairly constant load.

Based on my (limited) understanding of the MartinLogans, not only are they a low ohm load, but they don't run at a constant ohm rating, either. I believe that this is why MartinLogan advises owners to buy an amp which can double its power every time the ohm load drops

Now, that being said, I've heard MartinLogans powered at my dealer using nothing more than a Sony ES receiver and they still sounded fantastic. I can't say, though, whether or not powering them with an amp with a sturdier power supply would make them sound even more fantastic.

My advice to you would be to keep your current gear if you're already happy with the sound--the money you save can be used to buy a lot more music, and isn't that what the hobby is all about, anyway?

 

[jjqiv]

Correct, that's what I meant.

Taken from http://www.guidetohometheater.com/amplifiers/78/

"EveAnna Manley's lighthearted and well-written instruction manual recommends allowing the Snappers to warm up for about 45 minutes before commencing serious listening, and even offers suggestions for appropriate music choices during the warmup period."

45 minutes of doing something else, instead of listening to music, in a best-case 2-hour listening time-window is a brake, in my book. Not a break. And when EveAnna speaks, I listen.

In my book, never getting what happens after 45 minutes is a bigger problem. And, no, they don't sound bad in the first 45 minutes. If you turn off solid state equipment the warm-up is much, much, longer and you never arrive at the same destination.

 

[ralflar]

Neil,

If you were using the Onkyo as a pre-amp for the Trio, then your observation that the Trio sounds just a little better than the Onkyo probably means that you really hear the limitations of the Onkyo pre-amp.

The same thing happened when I first listened to my new monos using a Yamaha 1600 receiver as a pre-amp. The monos were clearly better that the receiver amps but basically just more of the same.

The pre-amp impresses its sonics. It was only after I replaced the Yammy pre that the monos showed their potential. Can you borrow a dedicated pre-amp somewhere? I suspect that you will not be able to extract what Trio or Bel Canto are capable of with a HT receiver's pre-amp.

 

[ralflar]

Robonaut is right, the impedance of Logans is far from constant. Not only can it drop to 1 Ohm or below at 20 kHz, it can also increase to 32 Ohm in the presence region. These are rather large impedance swings which lesser amps can not control well.

There are two current basic Class D designs that I know of, ICE and UcD. With ICE and a switching power supply very impressive power ratings are achieved. One inherent disadvantage of the ICE design is that its frequency response is dependant upon speaker impedance. Designwise this is not good. On the other hand it might explain why some reviewers like ICEpower 1000ASP based amps so much. UcD amps mostly use linear power supplies. Their implementation is different and allows them to produce a flat spectrum independant of impedance swings. Theoretically speaking they should be a better match for electrostats. Practically speaking many listeners like ICE's non-linearities because they consider them "tubey".

 

[TheBobGoat]

Received the Bel Canto S300 today. Trying it out right now. First impression out of the box -- not as bright as the PS Audio.

I am listening to some nelly furtado w/timbaland now, and some coldplay. going to start A/Bing it soon with some other music too. Just giving it a chance to warm up a little from outside and play through some music.


Will let you know soon!

EDIT - has anyone hooked the left speaker to one amp and the right speaker to another -- then just played with the balance? just curious

 

[TheBobGoat]

Well, listening to the BC, I have to turn up the volume about 5-6 steps to get the same volume out. It is definately softer. Does anyone know why this is?

I compared:

A: Just receiver (control group)
B: receiver + PS Audio (brighter, with cleaner bass)
C: receiver + Bel Canto (softer - after turning up volume to get same level sounded similar to PS, but still not as bright sounding)

thoughts ?

 

[Joey_V]

Way to wait until after I buy a Rotel to mention this

You're SO FIRED!

I will tell you this, Rotel may not be the top but it sure as heck aint the bottom. No one in this forum owns the best amp money can buy, so be glad that you own Rotel and you're one of us schmoes.

As for the Class D Rotel, I did not like it when I auditioned it. Too dry and way too lacking in the palpability. Overly bright and just plain off in one way or another. For $2.5K, better look elsewhere is my advice. BUT, that's just me. I remember, I compared head on against the Rotel RB-1090, and the 1090 was just far better.... not even a contest. 1090 > 1092 any day with BW and MLs.

 

[Joey_V]

Well, listening to the BC, I have to turn up the volume about 5-6 steps to get the same volume out. It is definately softer. Does anyone know why this is?

I compared:

A: Just receiver (control group)
B: receiver + PS Audio (brighter, with cleaner bass)
C: receiver + Bel Canto (softer - after turning up volume to get same level sounded similar to PS, but still not as bright sounding)

thoughts ?

My thoughts bro?

I seriously think that the Bel Canto is better... but that's just me.

Also, I seriously think you need to get a better preamp instead of the receiver, you're only amplifying the receiver.

JOey

 

[Joey_V]

Don't really care...thanks for adding to the fun!

Come on guys... be nice.

 

[TheBobGoat]

Thanks for the inputs joey - any idea with the volume being less with the BC? kinda strange.

 

[HsvToolFool]

Robonaut is right, the impedance of Logans is far from constant.

"Howard Johnson is right about Gabby Johnson being right!"

Regarding difficult speaker loads (varying impedance)...

We all know by now that digital amps are MUCH more
efficient than traditional tube and transistor amps. That
means that besides running cooler, they also convert the
wall-juice directly into speaker-juice with relatively tiny
power supplies (which has always been the bane of
cheap amps). I've been shopping for low-cost 110V MIG
and TIG welders recently, and I believe these gadets use
similar chips as used in these digital amps!

This is why I'm excited about the technology. A small,
light, digital amp can instantly draw enough current from
the wall to handle wild impedances just like a big, hot
Krell, but it doesn't need massive transformers and
storage caps.

But as I said earlier, it will be a while before digital amps
approach the capabilities of ML speakers. I don't want to
arc-weld my speakers, I want to create a fragile illusion of
reality. If you want the most refined sound, stick to
top-shelf tubes and transistors.

And keep an ear out for these class-d amps!