2. amps-preamps
  3. 131179-2797

which is better? Stereo Amp or Monoblocks?

Which do you like better ?  Stereo Amp or Monoblock amps ? Thanks for your Input!
128x128rsa
exron
111 posts
 
Well,  just like ( dlcockrum ) said, that ( stringreen ) above nailed it, and I agree.  stringreen, that was a very good answer, and now I'm going to put something in and see if I can nail it as good as stringreen.

This is something that I have kept in my notes for many years and I thought I share it with everybody since it's perfect for this discussion.

From the old "Audio magazine" ( February 1991 issue, page 74, The late and great speaker designer Jim Thiel of Thiel speakers wrote
"speakers will sound better with one very good amp than with two lesser amps". He also went on to say that your speakers should always be used with the best stereo amp that can be afforded rather than splitting the available money between two amps.

I think this is one of the very best pieces of advice a stereo manufacturer can give a customer and I agree. A really good $10,000 dollar retail price amp should always be able to beat a pair of mono blocks that retail at $5000 dollars each, basically. This is just my opinion as well.

By the way, I never owned Thiel speakers, but I always liked them.
unsound
7,329 posts
 
^Pretty sure Jim Thiel's above mentioned comments were in regard to bi-amping speaker channels.
rascerman
12 posts
 

Mono is the answer, if I can remember the question. I have a pair of Accuphase A-70's. These are true 60W Stereo full Class A , doubling all the to 1 ohm amps. 480W at 1 ohm stereo, 960W at 2 ohm bridged.

I almost bought the A-200 (100W mono) instead. I decided I would rather have the ability to HORZ./VERT. bi-amp and bridge. In the end my preference was BRIDGED.

Side note on how Accuphase does things. In their design, like the A-70 for example each cannel is basically is 2 amps in parallel. I said parallel not series ( bridging 60W becomes 240W, series ), buy running 2 amps this way main design gains are increased current, lower over all stress on amps per given output. Cost is the down side. These amps are a lot cooler to the touch than any other Pure Class A amps that I have come across.

This product may well be as close to the amp " erik_squires "  says you can not find. Well, for under lets say $100K, just saying.

Any how, I would say this if you go stereo, get something bridgeable to keep your options open. If you have the funds down the road, yes in my opinion there are gains to be had in power and presentation, etc.

As for Thiel on the whole I would agree but once you have reached the Top of the Line, you can still take it further. This is the nature of upgrading, there is always another step. Perfection is unattainable, nothing is the best. Is trying to reach perfection a waste of money, well that is a question of ones values is it not.     

Post removed 
bjg's avatar
bjg
29 posts
 
Mono blocks proved best for me 

I had a chance to buy two spectron  fully speced out amps to drive a pair of ML  CLX that required a lot of voltage at higher frequencies -  I bought the first one to evaluate the performance and ran it on stereo for a few months  - the previous owner said he would hold the second one for 60 days in case I wanted it ( these were an experimental build by the manufacturer with additional components and consecutive serial numbers - so if I wanted to add a 2nd one a year later - it would not be a match)

 When I added the 2nd one in bridged mono configuration - it was one of the biggest improvements in the performance of my system I've ever experienced -  no regrets    

So with a direct comparison of the exact same amp - in stereo - vs - bridged mono - there is a huge improvement in noise floor and separation -  and even though I listen at very moderate levels - the additional power available minimizes any distortion with loud transitions -  and mounting the amps right beside each speaker has likely contributed ( at least on the coat of speaker cables ) 

bart
 
More to discover