Integrated Amps - Moving on up!

Not sure I agree with this. The big guys (Marantz, Yamaha, et al.) have history and r&d muscle that the upstarts can hardly compete with, especially in the entry level market.

 

Yes. I agree.

The point I raised was about popular brands take on the sound vs. the personal idea of what Hi-Fi should represent.

Regards

 

Yes, but what does that mean in the context of moving up? My idea of HIFI is the best possible accuracy. Musicality should come thought the recording itself. Marantz current sound (PM 8003,8005,Pearl KI) is musical but also inaccurate.

Regards

 

I'm with you on the goal of accuracy (I prefer to call it 'transparency'), but I don't think it's related to the size of the company. Small companies tweek the sound as much and as often as the big guys, and vice versa. However, I would also say that most companies, large or small, aim for accuracy. Some are just better at it than others. My bigger gripe with the larger companies is that even though they have superior engineering capabilities and scale efficiencies, they squander most of their inherent advantages on needless complexity and unneeded features. Sometimes having less money is an advantage, because you actually have to think, which leads to better (often simpler) signal paths, superior parts, and better assembly.

 

The Problem is that Accuphase gear cost half in Japan then in USA or Israel, for that matter. Its not the same for Naim or other British Brands that cost around the same in England and in other countries. its kind of put me down when Im thinking about Accuphase.

 

I have the opposite opinion.

I would call the Marantz sound, natural and the "accurate" gear, unnatural.

 

BOAZ Have you auditioned TEDDY PARDO 180A integrated amp Made in Israel v Naim Supernait 2

 

No I have not. Maybe I should... thank you.

 

Oh you would definitely hate Crimson. Richard I respect your opinion but I haven't yet found the need to be so dogmatic when it comes to tube vs. SS (along with analog vs. digital). I've owned or extensively listened to hybrid and SS Blue Circle (both Class AB and D), Audiomat, Tron, Audio Note, Accuphase, Crimson, and quite a few more. I enjoyed my time with all of them. While speaker synergy was obviously crutial, every design had something to offer.

Wasn't it Bob Carver that demonstrated he could make a SS amp sound just like a tube amp? In my experience SS amps can be designed to sound "tubey", but I haven't ever heard a tube amp that can quite do what SS does well. Let me just bring this back to the OP and say that you needn't be persuaded into tube amps. There's a place for both. They can both be terrible and they can both be great. It's primarily about good design and appropriate speaker matching.

 

Making a SS state amp to sound like tube amp is not HiFi. SS amp that sounds dry and cold is also not HiFi.

Regards

 

We also have another forum member here who claims that all amplifiers sound the same .

 

Bob Carver demonstrated that he could make a SS amp sound like what WAS at that time a stereotypical and BAD sounding tube amplifier. Basically a noise inducing buffer stage. The reason that that is such a chortle chortle laugh is that tube amps, unlike SS amps, sound very wildly different from each other and for that matter from the same manufacturer. Meanwhile very rarely does anyone in a Blind level matched listening session ever tell one SS amplifier from another. The reason I don't like SS amplifiers (one of them) is for this very reason. I can listen to a $1999 Rotel RB 1090 amplifier which can put out 2850 watts into 1 ohm and get a "very too similar sound" from a $55k Dan D'Agostino Momentum that does piss poor on Stereophile's test bench. It all sounds like SS and lacks ambient cues (the hall) of recordings where there is a hall.

I'm not actually against less expensive SS amps like the the Rotel because if you need bags of power and a robust built machine for reasonable money - it's pretty damn awesome - wish they still made it. It's when they start wanting $10k plus and they use torroid (lol) transformers.

With SET amps they sound rather wildly different from each other - now on the bad side that means they are all likely wavering from some ideal form of accuracy but at the same time they are always chosen as best when pitted against non SE designed tubes or SS amplifiers. See Martin Colloms blind tests where top SS makers were the ears and ALL of them chose a low feedback tube amps as sounding the best. Indeed, they chose the $100 second hand tube amp over their own $3,000 SS designs when listening blind!

And we go back to Carver - making his little test so he can make distortion sound like the old beat up ST70s (a piece of crap IME) doesn't say much today. An Audio Note Quest 300B for X dollars sounds a LOT different that the same price AN Empress using 2a3.

This isn't a Bryston where you can go listen to a 4BSST and it will sound pretty much exactly the same as every other SST amp - they claim the only difference is power and the sound should be identical. That's not the case with tube makers who make a variety of tube amps.

It is very possible to listen to one Audio Note amp and hate the thing and then listen to another and be in love. I am not, for instance, a fan of the 300B directly heated Triode. I prefer it run in Pentode, I prefer the 2a3, 45 and 211 or my own 845.

The great thing though about no one differentiating SS amplifiers is that it makes it cheap to own "as good as it gets" solid state technology - especially if you subscribe to Carver. You can buy basically a Bryston 3b and be done with SS. And then you can bring in a good tube and have people listen level matched and blind and see what all of them have to say.

I would like people to bring modern tube amplifiers home to hear for themselves what they offer - not have people dictate to them they shouldn't bother because they read a graph in a magazine or a publicity stunt to make someone (Carver) famous.

 

Never liked Accuphase gear, far too clinical for me, and way over priced.

 

Marantz gear is fairly good sounding for the price but I had continual break down problems.

 

Hi Richard, you always post interesting stuff. Particularly as I used to live in Hong Kong from 1975-2002 and used to frequent the Mong Kok hifi stores when i was a lad. I wonder if you've had a chance to hear any of the new Yamaha amps (AS1100, AS2100, or AS3000)? I ask as numerous reviews I've read say they sound quite different to other amps they've been compared against - eg "Bass sounds a whole octave lower", "closest to tube sound from SS I've ever heard", etc

I'm considering getting one of these new Yamaha models and would be really interest in you view of them.

MC

 

I wouldn't put the PM8003/8005 in the same league as the PM-KI-Pearl. The Reference line of Marantz is significantly superior.

 

Yes there CD players are the worst.

 

So would I. And they should also bring home modern SS to hear what they offer, if they're so inclined. I just don't think it should be dictated to anyone that tubes are the only way to great sound. I'm now demoing a $5000 Class D amp that I prefer to the $15,000 Tron SET amp I had. Maybe there's a $3000 tube amp out there that I'd prefer to the Class D, I'm open to such possibilities. There's a certain clarity and objectiveness to good SS that I don't hear with tubes. Maybe you like the euphonic nature of tubes. Maybe SS all sounds similar because it's fundamentally more accurate than tubes. Regardless it's all irrelevant. They BOTH have have their place, and they both can be great. That's the objective reality of it (as I see it ).

 

Whoa dude I really like my 8004 Cd player. It got great reviews from AbSound, most of which i agree with.The redbook playback is exceptional; where I would fault it is the SACD playback, which is nothing special for a $1000 player.

 

I could say the same about the Yamaha IA's I've had, but I don't. It was just MY experience as others I know haven't had any issues.

 

Yes I agree, they are a bit pricey. But I like them, have had both a CDP and an integrated for some years. The built quality is outstanding.

 

I own and enjoy a Vincent Audio sv236 mkii (around $2400 at Audio Advisor)
Tube preamp section mated with 150 watt amp
I love it, seems to be built like a tank
I very much enjoy tubes in my system

 

I liked the CD players too and was happy with sound but when you get three in a row with mechanical issues...
And I see i'm not the only one here.

 

Interesting I own the SA-8005 and also feel that Redbook sounds great while SACD playback does not seem like much of an improvement to my ears. I don't know if it's the player, my ears, or if the formats really sound that similar.

 

I'm not too sure either, but the SACD playback often seems to be missing something for me compared to the CD layer on the same disc. Often a little dull. Prime example, the MFSL Blood on the Tracks. It could be that I just don't like the SACD format, but my working theory right now is that the SA-8004 is an exceptional redbook player living in sin with an average SACD player.