Modjeski like Carver a genius…
Yes, they both are! Good points Tomic
Peeking inside a Carver Crimson 275 Tube Amplifier
Well, it doesn't take an engineer to throw out all of ASR's testing and your conclusions because the amps in question are not shown to be actual amps built by Wyred4Sound for the Carver Corporation. The logic above and at ASR is dime store at best. But, hey, if it turns out Carver puts a 15w OPT from Edcor in its amps and they cannot actually come close to spec, then yes that's a problem. It's clear folks are assuming what they seek to prove. I'm not an engineer--I'm a lawyer. Such conclusions would never make it into the record from a law perspective (which is a way lower threshold than scientific method). Think about that. Hey, this vacuum cleaner is defective Judge and killed my wife. My expert says its wiring was faulty. Judge: But you cannot say the vacuum actually came of the manufacturer's line. You can't cite to a bona fide serial number on the vacuum. I will say, however, Frank Malik should step up and explain this away (if he can) as folks are coming with pitchforks for his brand. |
Yes, let's see how it plays out. I may even open mine up to take a look. It's tough to get into the transformer covers as you have to remove the circuit boards completely, which is a PIA! The amp does sound great. I had it side by side with a Primaluna HP Integrated and it sounded better to me. I was quite familiar with the Primaluna too. Before all this controversy, I posted (above) about how some of the parts quality was great and other parts were cheap stuff that I wouldn't put into anything. @mulveling you are correct in that some moderate to low power amps sound awesome and that's what matters. I also agree that if the Carver Corporation made material misrepresentations about the amplfier's capabilities that would not be acceptable. Frank Malik (owner of Carver Corp) said he will provide responses to some of the questions raised in the forums about the amp. And so we wait.... |
@jbhiller Do you have any evidence to support this claim? I’ve been in the industry for about 47 years. @mulveling has an excellent point, one which I’ve also found troubling. I’m a big fan of the Harmon Kardon Citation 2 which is a stereo 60W/channel amplifier. It weighs about 3 times more. But its made of the same materials. We make a 60 watt monoblock amp that lacks the weight of an output transformer and it weighs about 25 pounds while employing an aluminum chassis. IMO something doesn’t add up. Put plainly, prior to the Carver amp, no stereo or monoblock tube amps capable of 75 watts that weighed so little were ever made! Since this spec comes from the Carver website: https://www.bobcarvercorp.com/copy-of-crimson-raven-features-spec I’m inclined to think one of two things. (Using Occam’s Razor...); one explanation is that the weight is a typo. The other explanation, the weight is correct, requires too many other things (some quite wild) such that the answer is for too complex to be correct. The problem here is that a 19 pound amp would also very coincidentally be about the same weight as a tube amp capable of about 17 watts per channel. I don’t like it when coincidences like that pop up- it makes me think something is fishy. You are in a position to shed some light on this, and apparently possess the required skills to do what needs to be done, as evidenced by the work you talked about prior on this thread. I’ve become quite curious and am holding all explanations in abeyance. Could you weigh your amplifier and relay to us that value? Could you remove the output transformer cover and show us what the output transformer looks like? If the ASR review is not of the same amp they are doing a disservice IMO. |