2. amps-preamps
  3. 1036097850

high-end vs. ultra high-end amplifiers

It is quite frustrating to know that some amplifiers (Boulder, FM Acoustics, Accuphase) are sounding better than even very expensive ones from the big boys (Mark Levinson, Krell, Bryston, Spectral). I wonder why there is such a difference. Madrigal, Krell, Bryston, Spectral, they all belong to the high-end sector of audio industry and they are claiming they are making the best amplifiers. But I know that this is not true: I've heard amplifiers from Boulder and FM Acoustics and they sound just better than the Madrigals, Krells and so on. Is it because Boulder and FM Acoustics have more know how about amplifier design (I suppose not) or do they use more expensive parts and better circuit topologies? Do they have brighter technicians and designers? There must be an explanation for this phenomenon. It isn't magic! Maybe someone from the audio industry can reply to this thread.
dazzdax
twl
3,251 posts
 
What I wanna know is, can you really hear the differences in these amps or is it all in your head? :^) If you really want to get to the bottom of things, you'll have to blindfold yourself, and everyone within 3 blocks and put earmuffs on, and twirl around 3 times while chanting, "I do believe in science, I do believe in science......". :^)

Now, really, what makes you think that the "big boys" you mention actually ever made anything close to the best amps, ever? Perhaps now you are just finding out what you didn't realize before.

My guess is that the smaller and newer manufacturers must make a product that is head-and-shoulders better than the mass market high-end that dominates the magazines, to even get noticed.
lugnut
1,190 posts
 
There really isn't enough information given to respond acurately. What speakers were being driven and what were the other components? Were the differences noted in the same system with just the amps replaced? Was this noticed in the same room? I'm not trying to defend the big boys of the industry but with a blanket comdemnation of such revered names I am suspicious that you may be fishing for controversy. Don't take me wrong, just tell us more and we'll respond. Some of the lesser names in audio do a great job.
brianmgrarcom
1,317 posts
 
I agree with Lugnut. Also, what you may chose as "sounding better", may be the opposite to someone else. (That is not to say that one amp can not be clearly better than the other.)

Also, one manufacturer may incorporate things into the amp that doesn't necessarily add to it's sonic performance, yet is costly to add, such as extensive protection. Consider the support you get with a product also, these things add up.

I am not sure of the prices of all these, but are the prices really that far apart? I never thought of Accuphase amps as being "inexpensive".
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,276 posts
 
Interesting observation, but I think you've drawn the wrong conclusion. It's my opinion that once you get into truly high end amplifiers (say $5,000+), then personal preferences begin to dominate what people consider better or best. As such, it's highly unlikely that any group of audiophile will ever agree on what is the best amplifier. As an example, I have the original Quad ESL, you have the $80,000 Wilsons. The amp that works best for me won't work all that well for you.
bob_bundus
1,834 posts
 
Having been through this situation personally, I agree with Daz. The reason is: that everything is built to a price point, & typically you get what you pay for. Not always, but mostly. I have tried out any number of famous-names equipment & was never really satisfied until I got my Accuphase; that is when I finally stopped trading & actually began listening to real music.
Like Onhwy says, personal preference remains a large factor at this level as well as system synergy, but I think that Daz basically has the right idea. YMMV of course...
More to discover