B&K harsh sound


I recently auditioned in my system a used B&K 1430 amp, which is 3x200 into 8 ohms. I have monitor audio silver 5i speakers. My current amp is a rotel rb960bx, which is only 60 watts per channel. I almost couldn't listen to the B&K. It was so bright and a little ragged on the top end. Imaging was bad as well, both right to left and depth. Has anyone else had this experience with B&K amps? I wonder if it is just a bad match for the Monitor Audio speakers, or perhaps it is just this model. Should I give up on B&K for my system?
dsk
All B&K amps I've heard are laid back, sometimes too laid back.. What cables are you using? Post the info & you'll get input from experienced users here....
Sounds l;ike a speaker cable mismatch.I just had one with CJ MF2500A and Kimber Monocle XL cables.That sound hurt my ears and i thought the amp was broken.Then i tried a number of cables and stayed with Harm.tech.cables.
I've heard B & K with Monitor Audio speakers, nothing wrong with that match.
I'd suspect other things. A bright room, a malfunctioning amp, etc. You've gone from 60 to 200 amps and to my ears, B & K is a little warner sounding
than Rotel -- the extra power may be bringing something out that clashes with the room or with your ears. You may also be playing the music louder
than usual, which could cause problems in the room that you didn't encounter with the weaker amp.
I picked up a new B&K ST2140 2 years ago to mate w/ the B&K PT3 preamp driving some old Polk Monitor 10 speakers. The amp was awful out of the box. I burned it in 24/7 for a week. Still awful, harsh, glaring, distorted, constrained soundstage, you name it. I returned it.

My 20 year old Hafler sounded great. So it wasn't the pre, CDP or the speakers. I eventually got rid of the B&K preamp too. I'm not a fan.
Newer B&K amps sound quite a bit brighter, harder and more sterile than their older counterparts to me. Rotel gear is also somewhat bright, but may be slightly smoother overall.

Having said that, you should have any electronic component that you bring home for audition on for at least 3 days straight. If at all possible, music should be running through the system 24/7 before doing "serious listening". When running the system during this time, low volume is better than no volume and no volume with the power on is better than no power at all.

Not only are we trying to establish thermal stability, but we are trying to pass signal through all of the components that will normally see such operation. Granted, the compononents might not be getting the work-out that they would during normal use and at higher volumes, but something is better than nothing.

If you don't like the sound of what you hear after 72 hours of continuous playing, you probably never will. Things can change after that, but with electronics, you're about 90% of the way there after this period of time / operation. If that last 10% that settles in over time makes or breaks your decision, you're walking a very fine line.

Speakers will continue to alter operation for quite a period of time, especially if you listen at low levels. I have purchased used speakers that were over a dozen years old that still weren't broken in. Throttling the power to them on a sustained basis made a DRASTIC difference in low frequency output. This was because the suspension on the woofers was never stressed and was still "tight" due to never having to make long excursions. Pumping more power through them / playing music that had "basso profundo" made a huge difference after several days. Speakers that were recently re-foamed may also go through a similar "break-in" period all over again. It is not quite as severe or noticeable as with a brand new speaker, but it does occur. Sean
>