New Impression 11A's

[twich54]

I would not spend big bucks for a high powered amp unless you really want to damage your hearing listening to concert level music/rock.

buying of a 'high quality' amp goes well beyond doing so to damage your hearing. A quality/capable amp need not cost 'big bucks' I agree.

Buy a very good amp/receiver that sounds good to you and doubles at 4 0hms and you will be all set. but that is my humble opinion. Your mileage may vary!

and there in lies the rub, few(if any) 'very good' receivers are capable of doubling down.

 

[Chops]

Some quality integrated amplifiers would be a good choice as well, as a lot of the new ones are pretty stout and are capable of doubling power into a 4 ohm load. Some are safe to 2 ohm transients and offer fair amounts of current delivery.

 

[spkrdctr]

Chops you mentioned weak power supplies and mediocre amplifier supplies. Both of these are Power/amplifier issues. I'm saying that the base requirement that needs to be met first is that you have 100 watts at 8 ohms that doubles into 200 watts at 4 ohms. This means that it automatically has a robust amplifier section and will easily run all Martin Logan speakers. Once that requirement is met you then can look at whatever receiver or amp you like that meets that basic must have requirement. That is also the spec I last read for THX certification of amplifiers. They have to robust enough to double the 8 ohm watts at 4 ohms or you can't get it certified. Heck, I will look up the THX cert requirements again and post them. This does NOT mean you need THX certification it just means that certified THX amps/receivers will meet the basic requirement.

 

[twich54]

Chops you mentioned weak power supplies and mediocre amplifier supplies. Both of these are Power/amplifier issues. I'm saying that the base requirement that needs to be met first is that you have 100 watts at 8 ohms that doubles into 200 watts at 4 ohms. This means that it automatically has a robust amplifier section and will easily run all Martin Logan speakers. Once that requirement is met you then can look at whatever receiver or amp you like that meets that basic must have requirement. That is also the spec I last read for THX certification of amplifiers. They have to robust enough to double the 8 ohm watts at 4 ohms or you can't get it certified. Heck, I will look up the THX cert requirements again and post them. This does NOT mean you need THX certification it just means that certified THX amps/receivers will meet the basic requirement.

give me three examples of 'very good' receivers capable of doubling down........

 

[spkrdctr]

Chop and twitch, doing my quick research on THX and Receivers, I have to say two things. First the THX certification seems to be dying out. They have dropped the doubling down specs as it is too tough for the newer 7 and 9 channel receivers. So forget anything I said about THX meeting the requirements as they do not meet them anymore. Second as I looked for receivers meeting the requirement, I could not find any in my quick search. Again, everything has gone to 7 channels or more and I can't find any receivers that meet the requirement with the quick search I did. So time has passed me by. In the current market, you will be looking at separates. Even then you must verify from the spec sheet that they double down as mentioned. Sadly the expansion of the number of channels has killed the ability of the receiver manufacturers to want to sell them with enough of a power supply to matter.

There are still plenty of receivers that will power the ML speakers but they will not double down. Also you would be talking about the $2000 to $3000 range of receivers. I'm impressed that the power available has gone backwards in the last 5 or more years. Oh well, live and learn!

 

[Chops]

It's not a matter of how many watts a receiver or amp provides as much as it is its ability to provide the current demands that electrostats require.

Think of Martin Logan's with their massive impedance swings and low efficiency as a loaded down trailer with 20,000 lbs of cargo on it.

Option 1) A V12 Ferrari 458 with 562 Hp and 398 ft lbs torque
Option 2) An inline 6 Dodge Cummings with 360 Hp and 800 ft lbs torque

Which one do you think is going to pull that 20k lbs without breaking a sweat?

Sure, you can power your ML's with a receiver, but you're never going to get the best performance out of them, ever...

 

[Hear Here]

give me three examples of 'very good' receivers capable of doubling down........

Why are we even discussing "receivers" or "tuner-amplifiers" as they are known as this side of the Pond? They have long since been an extinct breed.

If you mean integrated amplifiers, there are now many that meet the "doubling" requirement you believe is necessary with ML speakers.. There are probably as many qualifying integrateds as there are power amps now, because so many audiophiles have realised that more boxes and cables don't actually add to sound quality - in fact the reverse is often the case - the cable that adds sound quality has not yet been invented (never will) so ridding your system of cables in itself is a laudable goal. Peter

PS still rather hoping for a response from you about my 13A experience - see my post dated 19 June in this thread.

 

[twich54]

Why are we even discussing "receivers" or "tuner-amplifiers" as they are known as this side of the Pond? They have long since been an extinct breed.

If you mean integrated amplifiers, there are now many that meet the "doubling" requirement you believe is necessary with ML speakers.. There are probably as many qualifying integrateds as there are power amps now, because so many audiophiles have realised that more boxes and cables don't actually add to sound quality - in fact the reverse is often the case - the cable that adds sound quality has not yet been invented (never will) so ridding your system of cables in itself is a laudable goal. Peter

PS still rather hoping for a response from you about my 13A experience - see my post dated 19 June in this thread.

Receivers are are by no means 'extinct', they in fact do wonders in many an HT setup.

For the record there are many good amplifiers(both integrated and separate) that do not 'dbl down' that are more than capable of producing sonic bliss when mated up to Logans.

 

[zigman]

give me three examples of 'very good' receivers capable of doubling down........

On the higher end (in no particular order): Gryphon Diablo 300, Vitus RI-101, Luxman 509X.

I was driving my old Source speakers with a higher end Denon receiver and it sounded fine. When I plugged in the 11A’s it sounded horrible, flat and thin. Even though they can be driven by receivers it will not sound nearly as good as a high current integrated or separates. I haven’t tried Class D with a a decent power supply though.

 

[spkrdctr]

I looked at the Luxman 509X and I have to say if anyone can afford that amazing beast then they really are in the high end gear. The specs are top notch and I looked at the interior of the amp under magnification and I have to say that is a seriously nice amp. In my circles I would call that nearly a cost is no object unit. I can't imagine the cost of setting up a surround system with amps like these. Heck even if I could get amps for $3000 if I needed three for the surround system, I would think I was in rarified air for sound.
I have to say that when I talk about equipment, I'm NEVER talking about that level of gear. The only guys I know that can afford that stuff are in the drug business. Geez, I'm just a regular guy and a $1500 to $2000 Receiver would be a BIG buy for me. I tip my hat to you guys that can afford this stuff. My College education was WASTED on a liberal arts degree.

 

[zigman]

I looked at the Luxman 509X and I have to say if anyone can afford that amazing beast then they really are in the high end gear. The specs are top notch and I looked at the interior of the amp under magnification and I have to say that is a seriously nice amp. In my circles I would call that nearly a cost is no object unit. I can't imagine the cost of setting up a surround system with amps like these. Heck even if I could get amps for $3000 if I needed three for the surround system, I would think I was in rarified air for sound.
I have to say that when I talk about equipment, I'm NEVER talking about that level of gear. The only guys I know that can afford that stuff are in the drug business. Geez, I'm just a regular guy and a $1500 to $2000 Receiver would be a BIG buy for me. I tip my hat to you guys that can afford this stuff. My College education was WASTED on a liberal arts degree.

I can’t disagree, sadly the Luxman falls into the “cheaper” category in high end audio. I was in the same boat, I fell into the cost spiral of trying to find the best amp to drive the 11As. These type of integrated/amps are meant for 2ch listening. They can be integrated into a HT but there are far more affordable multi-chanel solutions.

There are definitely cheaper options out there, but unfortunately a receiver doesn’t have the power to drive the 11As to full effect. The older Theos maybe, though they sounded decent when I tried them out with my Denon receiver. Even with the 11A’s powered woofers the speakers need good current to get the full effect.

I always look at ratio for component costs. You want to spend most on speakers, then amp, then cables etc. If you spend $10K (retail) on a pair of speakers, you are doing may be doing it a disservice by pairing $1K-2K amp (retail). I am not saying the higher the cost the better, I mean for budget allocation. On the used market you could get something in that range that would work.

 

[Hear Here]

On the higher end (in no particular order): Gryphon Diablo 300, Vitus RI-101, Luxman 509X.

I was driving my old Source speakers with a higher end Denon receiver and it sounded fine. When I plugged in the 11A’s it sounded horrible, flat and thin. Even though they can be driven by receivers it will not sound nearly as good as a high current integrated or separates. I haven’t tried Class D with a a decent power supply though.

With respect, none of the items you quote is in fact "receivers". They are simply integrated amplifiers. My point to an earlier poster who mentioned "receivers" that this is a long-extent breed of devices is true. A "receiver" is a "tuner amplifier" ie an amplifier with built-in tuner -usually an FM tuner - there's a hint within the name!

OK, if we're talking about integrated amps, this is a totally different story. This are an ever-increasing breed and often now include a DAC and even a streamer. This is the way things are going - quite rightly - and could be considered as modern-day receivers in as much as they can "receive" music from within themselves. With old receivers this was FM radio via an aerial, but with modern devices it's streamed music via an Ethernet cable connected to the internet. However we should surely not confuse the two and should never call an integrated amp (with or without DAC or streamer) a receiver. I don't know of any manufacturer that describes any of its current range a "receiver". More likely and more accurately a "streaming amplifier" or similar. Peter

 

[DC-Audiophile]

I've been running my Spire's using an Arcam AVR600. When in stereo direct mode (no processing of any kind) it's rated at 150w per channel for the stereo channels. This is AMPLE power for really good stereo listening! I've had ML and non-ML speaker owners marvel at the wonderful sound from my setup. The design of this AVR provides an extremely musical and pleasant listening experience. My music comes via JRMC through USB to a Schiit Gungnir multibit DAC. Previously, I used a different external DAC too, for stereo only. For movies, I use the AVR's onboard processing and decoding and also get superb results. Makes me notice that even some TV ads actually have some very nice music which the speakers resolve quite nicely! Is this an ideal setup? Of course not. However, it's the most PRACTICAL setup and it has worked very well for me for the last 10 years. Yes, a separate, dedicated amp would work better. But I would not pair it with the outputs of the AVR given that "cleaner" sources exist. It would make more sense to have a streaming DAC directly interfacing with the amp (an option that's increasingly being made available). My current area of research, for any possible future upgrades, is to use something like the ultra quiet Okto Research DAC 8 Stereo directly interfacing with the ultra quiet low distortion Benchmark AHB2. The DAC 8 Stereo allows for an optional Rpi which allows streaming from a networked device, like a NAS. This setup would cut out a lot of components and create a more direct, low distortion, balanced signal path. However, I then need to figure out how to continue using my Spire's as part of the home theater experience. Therein lies the conundrum.

 

[Nuri58]

When I upgraded from the, btw 8ohm only, Arcam AVR 600 rated at 110w to the Arcam AVR 850 rated 120w8ohm/200w in 4 ohm the sound from the onboard DAC is quite adequate even compared to my Stax running on the Stax SRD-M50 headset amplifier, meaning I prefer the Arcam. Just for those unfamiliar with Stax these are pure ELS.

 

[DC-Audiophile]

From the Arcam website:
The AVR600 in detail

• 120WPC continuous power output into 4 or 8 ohms loads (all 7 channels driven at 1kHz)
• Stereo output power over 150WPC into 4 or 8 ohms, 20Hz to 20kHz

So when only using it for 2-channel stereo, you get the higher rating.

 

[Nuri58]

From the Arcam website:
The AVR600 in detail

• 120WPC continuous power output into 4 or 8 ohms loads (all 7 channels driven at 1kHz)
• Stereo output power over 150WPC into 4 or 8 ohms, 20Hz to 20kHz

So when only using it for 2-channel stereo, you get the higher rating.

You are right but note this is at 0.05% THD. The figures I mentioned are at 0.02% THD. I must admit that I cannot find where I got the 110 WPC at 0.02% THD and that seems to be to big a difference - and frankly speaking I don't think many would be able to tell the difference - the loudspeakers would add much more than that. I still wonder why it is the same output for both 4 and 8 ohms.

 

[zigman]

With respect, none of the items you quote is in fact "receivers". They are simply integrated amplifiers. My point to an earlier poster who mentioned "receivers" that this is a long-extent breed of devices is true. A "receiver" is a "tuner amplifier" ie an amplifier with built-in tuner -usually an FM tuner - there's a hint within the name!

OK, if we're talking about integrated amps, this is a totally different story. This are an ever-increasing breed and often now include a DAC and even a streamer. This is the way things are going - quite rightly - and could be considered as modern-day receivers in as much as they can "receive" music from within themselves. With old receivers this was FM radio via an aerial, but with modern devices it's streamed music via an Ethernet cable connected to the internet. However we should surely not confuse the two and should never call an integrated amp (with or without DAC or streamer) a receiver. I don't know of any manufacturer that describes any of its current range a "receiver". More likely and more accurately a "streaming amplifier" or similar. Peter

Totally agree, sorry for the confusion. I have not come across many receivers that would be able to drive the 11As to their fullest. Maybe NAD, they have focused on clean power and support for sub 4 ohm dips in the past. Most receivers, even high end, will go into protection mode if driven hard with the 11As.

My integrated amp has a built in DAC streamer and it’s great. Would highly recommend if someone is looking for simplicity. Saves a lot of time and money on matching components as well.

 

[Stefan_DR3]

Lexicon RV-8 was the baddest receiver. Predates HDMI though.

 

[Hear Here]

Totally agree, sorry for the confusion. I have not come across many receivers that would be able to drive the 11As to their fullest. Maybe NAD, they have focused on clean power and support for sub 4 ohm dips in the past. Most receivers, even high end, will go into protection mode if driven hard with the 11As.

My integrated amp has a built in DAC streamer and it’s great. Would highly recommend if someone is looking for simplicity. Saves a lot of time and money on matching components as well.

Which integrated with DAC and streamer do you have? I have NAD M32 with M33 as my planned upgrade route. I used the M32 successfully with my ML 13As, but I had a couple of power amps that were marginally better in my view. These were the GamuT D200 Mk III and the Sanders Magtech. My room doesn't favour ML speakers, so I kept my old Avantgarde Unos. Virtually unused 13As currently for sale in UK. Peter

 

[Sunkenpirate]

I bought a pair of 11a's this spring. I have been using a Mark Levinson 8505 and I could not be happier. Built in MQA DAC and at 4 ohms your getting around 250w. I have had no clipping at higher volumes and have not set off any protection.

Expensive unit, however, you can find some open box units with full warranty at sites like music direct.