2. amps-preamps
  3. 126624-10101

My Long List of Amplifiers and My Personal Review of Each!

So I have been in a long journey looking to find the best amplifiers for my martin logan montis. As you know, the match between an amplifier and speakers has to be a good "marriage" and needs to be blend exquisitely. Right now, I think I might have found the best sounding amplifier for martin logan. I have gone through approximately 34-36 amplifiers in the past 12 months. Some of these are:

Bryston ST, SST, SST2 series
NAD M25
PARASOUND HALO
PARASOUND CLASSIC
KRELL TAS
KRELL KAV 500
KRELL CHORUS
ROTEL RMB 1095
CLASSE CT 5300
CLASSE CA 2200
CLASSE CA 5200
MCINTOSH MC 205
CARY AUDIO CINEMA 7
OUTLAW AUDIO 755
LEXICON RX7
PASS LABS XA 30.8
BUTLER AUDIO 5150
ATI SIGNATURE SERIES 6005

With all that said, the amplifiers I mentioned above are the ones that in my opinion are worth mentioning. To make a long story short, there is NO 5 CHANNEL POWER AMP that sounds as good as a 3ch and 2ch amplifier combination. i have done both experiments and the truth is that YOU DO lose details and more channel separation,etc when you select a 5 channel power amplifier of any manufacturer.
My recollection of what each amp sounded like is as follows:

ATI SIGNATURE SERIES 6005 (great power and amazing soundstage. Very low noise floor, BUT this amplifiers NEEDS TO BE cranked up in order to fully enjoy it. If you like listening at low volume levels or somewhat moderate, you are wasting your time here. This amp won’t sound any different than many other brands out there at this volume. The bass is great, good highs although they are a bit bright for my taste)

NAD M25 (very smooth, powerful, but somewhat thin sounding as far as bass goes)
Bryston sst2(detailed, good soundstage, good power, but can be a little forward with certain speakers which could make them ear fatiguing at loud volumes)

Krell (fast sounding, nice bass attack, nice highs, but some detail does get lost with certain speakers)

rotel (good amp for the money, but too bright in my opinion)

cary audio (good sound overall, very musical, but it didn’t have enough oomph)

parasound halo (good detail, great bass, but it still holds back some background detail that i can hear in others)

lexicon (very laid back and smooth. huge power, but if you like more detail or crisper highs, this amp will disappoint you)

McIntosh mc205 (probably the worst multichannel amp given its price point. it was too thin sounding, had detail but lacked bass.

butler audio (good amplifier. very warm and smooth sweet sounding. i think for the money, this is a better amp than the parasound a51)

pass labs (very VERY musical with excellent bass control. You can listen to this for hours and hours without getting ear fatigue. however, it DOES NOT do well in home theater applications if all you have is a 2 channel set up for movies. The midrange gets somewhat "muddy" or very weak sounding that you find yourself trying to turn it up.

classe audio (best amplifier for multi channel applications. i simply COULDNT FIND a better multi channel amplifier PERIOD. IT has amazing smoothness, amazing power and good bass control although i would say krell has much better bass control)

Update: The reviews above were done in January 2015. Below is my newest update as of October 2016:



PS AUDIO BHK 300 MONOBLOCKS: Amazing amps. Tons of detail and really amazing midrange. the bass is amazing too, but the one thing i will say is that those of you with speakers efficiency of 87db and below you will not have all the "loudness" that you may want from time to time. These amps go into protection mode when using a speaker such as the Salon, but only at very loud levels. Maybe 97db and above. If you don’t listen to extreme crazy levels, these amps will please you in every way.

Plinius Odeon 7 channel amp: This is THE BEST multichannel amp i have ever owned. Far , but FAR SUPERIOR to any other multichannel amp i have owned. In my opinion it destroyed all of the multichannel amps i mentioned above and below. The Odeon is an amp that is in a different tier group and it is in a league of its own. Amazing bass, treble and it made my center channel sound more articulate than ever before. The voices where never scrambled with the action scenes. It just separated everything very nicely.

Theta Dreadnaught D: Good detailed amp. Looks very elegant, has a pleasant sound, but i found it a tad too bright for my taste. I thought it was also somewhat "thin" sounding lacking body to the music. could be that it is because it is class d?

Krell Duo 300: Good amp. Nice and detailed with enough power to handle most speakers out there. I found that it does have a very nice "3d" sound through my electrostatics. Nothing to fault here on this amp.
Mark Levinson 532H: Great 2 channel amp. Lots of detail, amazing midrange which is what Mark Levinson is known for. It sounds very holographic and will please those of you looking for more detail and a better midrange. As far as bass, it is there, but it is not going to give you the slam of a pass labs 350.5 or JC1s for example. It is great for those that appreciate classical music, instrumental, etc, but not those of you who love tons of deep bass.

 It is articulate sounding too
Krell 7200: Plenty of detail and enough power for most people. i found that my rear speakers contained more information after installed this amp. One thing that i hated is that you must use xlr cables with this amp or else you lose most of its sound performance when using RCA’s.

Krell 402e: Great amp. Very powerful and will handle any speaker you wish. Power is incredible and with great detail. That said, i didn’t get all the bass that most reviewers mentioned. I thought it was "ok" in regards to bass. It was there, but it didn’t slam me to my listening chair.

Bryston 4B3: Good amp with a complete sound. I think this amp is more laid back than the SST2 version. I think those of you who found the SST2 version of this amp a little too forward with your speakers will definitely benefit from this amp’s warmth. Bryston has gone towards the "warm" side in my opinion with their new SST3 series. As always, they are built like tanks. I wouldn’t call this amp tube-like, but rather closer to what the classe audio delta 2 series sound like which is on the warm side of things.

Parasound JC1s: Good powerful amps. Amazing low end punch (far superior bass than the 402e). This amp is the amp that i consider complete from top to bottom in regards to sound. Nothing is lacking other than perhaps a nicer chassis. Parasound needs to rework their external appearance when they introduce new amps. This amp would sell much more if it had a revised external appearance because the sound is a great bang for the money. It made my 800 Nautilus scream and slam. Again, amazing low end punch.

Simaudio W7: Good detailed amp. This amp reminds me a lot of the Mark Levinson 532h. Great detail and very articulate. I think this amp will go well with bookshelves that are ported in order to compensate for what it lacks when it comes to the bass. That doesn’t mean it has no bass, but when it is no Parasound JC1 either.
Pass labs 350.5: Wow, where do i begin? maybe my first time around with the xa30.8 wasn’t as special as it was with this monster 350.5. It is just SPECTACULAR sounding with my electrostatics. The bass was THE BEST BASS i have ever heard from ANY amp period. The only amp that comes close would be the jC1s. It made me check my settings to make sure the bass was not boosted and kept making my jaw drop each time i heard it. It totally destroyed the krell 402e in every regard. The krell sounded too "flat" when compared to this amp. This amp had amazing mirange with great detail up top. In my opinion, this amp is the best bang for the money. i loved this amp so much that i ended up buying the amp that follows below.

Pass labs 250.8: What can i say here. This is THE BEST STEREO AMP i have ever heard. This amp destroys all the amps i have listed above today to include the pass labs 350.5. It is a refined 350.5 amp. It has more 3d sound which is something the 350.5 lacked. It has a level of detail that i really have never experienced before and the bass was amazing as well. I really thought it was the most complete power amplifier i have ever heard HANDS DOWN. To me, this is a benchmark of an amplifier. This is the amp that others should be judged by. NOTHING is lacking and right now it is the #1 amplifier that i have ever owned.

My current amps are Mcintosh MC601s: i decided to give these 601s a try and they don’t disappoint. They have great detail, HUGE soundstage, MASSIVE power and great midrange/highs. The bass is great, but it is no pass labs 250.8 or 350.5. As far as looks, these are the best looking amps i have ever owned. No contest there. i gotta be honest with you all, i never bought mcintosh monos before because i wasn’t really "wowed" by the mc452, but it could have been also because at that time i was using a processor as a preamp which i no longer do. Today, i own the Mcintosh C1100 2 chassis tube preamp which sounds unbelievable. All the amps i just described above have been amps that i auditioned with the C1100 as a preamp. The MC601s sound great without a doubt, but i will say that if you are looking for THE BEST sound for the money, these would not be it. However, Mcintosh remains UNMATCHED when it comes to looks and also resale value. Every other amp above depreciates much faster than Mcintosh.

That said, my future purchase (when i can find a steal of a deal) will be the Pass labs 350.8. I am tempted to make a preliminary statement which is that i feel this amp could be THE BEST stereo amp under 30k dollars. Again, i will be able to say more and confirm once i own it. I hope this update can help you all in your buying decisions!


jays_audio_lab
viber6
2,454 posts
 
carey1110,
Agree totally.  Just a few years ago at a NY show, I heard Robyatt's Quad 57's.  These Quads still have THE best midrange purity and lack of coloration of anything I have heard.  The HF are rolled off compared to the Maggie ribbon tweeter, or my Audiostatic 240.  I have thought about getting a used pair of restored Quads from Wayne Picquet's Quads Unlimited.  I could use my Enigmacoustics Sopranino tweeter on top.  The main problem is that these Quads are not protected from excessive power, so they are readily damaged.

Subsequent Quads like the 63, 788, 789 and later models are far inferior to the original 57.  They are very veiled, although they are smooth.  Big deal--who cares about smooth veils?  Many conventional box speakers are superior to these Quads for clarity.

I have a concept for the ideal electrostatic design.  Instead of convex curvature toward the listener, make it concave in both vertical and horizontal dimensions.  (I like the vertical concave time aligned design of the Wilson Chronosonic for this reason.)  If you want to sit 8 feet away, imagine a sphere with a radius of 8 feet.  Cut a frame from this sphere, like a round melon slice, maybe 2 feet wide and 6 feet tall.  In this way, all parts of the panel radiate equidistantly directly to the listener with perfect time alignment--no toe in required!  There are 2 problems with my concept.  First, the listener's head is really stuck in a vise with no tolerance for error if you want the best possible sound.  Second, if you want to sit 10 feet away, or some other distance, there would need to be a multiple hinge system that would decrease the curvature for a 10 foot radius compared to 8, etc.  Take the Sound Lab small cells and curve them concave in a hinge that is adjustable.  My Audiostatics have some features of this design.  The 2 identical panels are hinged, so you can aim each straight panel to your head.  I tried this, and was able to get more bass and output, but there was a sacrifice in precise imaging and purity, so I listen to only 1 panel which is full range but rolled off in bass.  I opt for midrange/HF purity at the expense of bass, which suits most music I like.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
klh007,
Yes, I have followed the work of Roger Sanders.  Initially, he designed curved stat panels, but then realized that flat panels are better, so his designs have been flat for many years.  He has an informative white paper on this subject.  I heard a model 10 years ago in a home.  I was impressed, but it wasn't quite as good as my Audiostatic 240.  Certainly he has done a great job with the dynamic woofer and its own amp.  Further back, I thought his Innersound flat panels were relatively mediocre.  More recently, at a NY show, a model was in a tiny room and it was mediocre, possibly because of the room.  I was disappointed.  
viber6
2,454 posts
 
thezaks,
Technically you are right.  I could say, "I suggest,,,,"  At the other extreme, I didn't say, "You should... or "You must..."  So I left it in the middle,  "Move the speaker, etc."  In manuals, the instructions are neutrally written, like "connect..." or "rotate..."  It is understood that they are not commandments.  Sometimes they say, "Please.." but they don't start every sentence with "please," because it would get cumbersome.
kren0006
1,859 posts
 
It comes across as you think you know more than WC about gear.  Nobody on this thread except you believes you know more about gear than WC, regardless of how many times you have fiddled in the restroom.
jays_audio_lab's avatar
jays_audio_lab OP
5,381 posts
 
@klh007
thank you for the feedback above. I will try to go and listen to them next time shows become available.

It has been quite an interesting comparison i must say between the logans and the Magnepan. They are both so different in many ways, but the reality is that it comes down to a few things:

  1. how big is your room?
  2. do you listen to music alone or with a other people?
  3. is the WAF important to you?
  4. how much money do you want to spend on amplification?
  5. how loud do you go?
  6. what music selection is your preference?
i believe answering those questions will easily identify the speaker you should go for between the Magnepan & Martin Logan.
Saying that one is garbage over the other is really a personal opinion from some of you. If the logan is "rolled off" as some claim it to be, well then guess what? this allows you to play far more music (good and bad) than the other speaker. I will try to articulate my thoughts above a bit more during a future video. For now, saying that "purity" is really all that matters (which i have heard from some of you here) is in my opinion incorrect. how so? well, tubes are not "pure sounding" so does that make tube gear garbage because they are rolled off or not pure enough? I personally do not think so. I have ZERO issues with tubes and i really enjoy the flavor they inject into the music.
Some days i hate my solid state gear and wish i had tubes in the mix, but then i realize it is just the mood that i am in. Our mood weighs HEAVILY on how we listen and i believe i have spoken to some of you about the "mental game" associated with keeping equipment for far too long. What would this be? well, in a nutshell it has to do with our brain and ears getting used to the same type of sound over the long haul and then we end up enjoying things less and less. It is a fact that this occurs to us all. How can i prove this? very easily, stop listening to your system for 1-2 weeks and then go back to listening and watch how impressed you will be.
Audio is no different when it comes to the feeling that you slowly begin to "get used" to the sound. I know some of you own 2 pairs of speakers for this reason. You never get bored because you can change the sound anytime  you want. 
Do you have any idea how many people have told me they want to change their amp or preamp or speakers etc and i have asked "why?" and their answer was " i want to try something different". That is a perfect example of just boredom and the long term effects of owning the same components for too long. HOWEVER, this varies by individual so i will not say EVERYONE behaves this way, but most people do. 

More to discover