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
kren0006
1,859 posts
 
Whoa I could barely get thru all of that but in the interests of brevity and coexistence, and it being late in the evening, I will decline to raise any new objections at this time.  : )
speedbump6
760 posts
 
Viber, I believe your logic is flawed. Every piece of equipment, including your eq, even when engaged, adds its own signature to the total sound. Try different eqs, and you will find they each perform differently, therefore showing they do each add their own sonic signature. Some products add more of a signature, some add less and are considered “ transparent”. If all these transparent products are out there, why do they sound different? Because they’re not as transparent as we’d like to believe. The most transparent don’t always sound the best. And maybe listening to what comes direct from the source dosnt always give the best sound. It just may be what the equipment adds to the sound is what makes it enjoyable. To me every piece of equipment is an eq of sorts, but one with a set eq and sound, since it’s not adjustable, mostly. It never made sense to me that you had to take it or leave it as far as the particular sound signature a product produces, in the hobby. Personally I am not sure why there is such resistance to eqs, as some like more bass, some less, some are more affected by a too bright and harsh top end, that others might like for the detail. Yet we are supposed to buy different equipment with a different signature to solve that. It might be very difficult to find one with a sound that is prefect for you, while having some ability to adjust that might make a mostly good for you product turn into one the hits all your preferences. Some of us may have hearing deficits that an eq could help us with. Since nothing we listen to is exactly “pure” ,why not tailor the whole experience to our individual preferences. In the guitar world there are products that emulate amps, and effects. There are products that even professional musicians cannot tell emulation from the real thing. Wouldn’t it be great to have a product that allows us to have the sound signature of a Mephisto , any preamp you desire, and a DCS Vivaldi, all for 5k? It’s definitely possible. I’ve owned those products, though for me the interfaces are overly complicated, and could use some good interface engineering to improve that. You could experiment with any combination of equipment that had been “modeled” as they call it. Though that might put jay out of business with his channel. Sure would save him a ton of money though. There are plenty of you tube Videos and preset combinations that people share, to get a certain sound, say Aerosmith on Walk this way from the Toys in the attic album, so how the channel would be presented would be different. If emulators room over, would development of improved equipment, or sounds in the case, cease? Emulators have not taken over the guitar world en masse, as there will likely always be people who just wouldn’t believe in them even if a blind test could prove how well they worked, but they do seem to be gradually gaining steam. I doubt the audio world would go in that direction, but it’s sure something to think about
viber6
2,454 posts
 
speedbump6,
I actually agree with everything you just said.  I would love to compare different EQ products, because their electronics would yield different sounds.  But the choice of high quality products is limited.  I'd love to see someone like Merrill come up with a purist line stage with limited gain, a SOTA volume control, and top grade EQ parts.  I am not claiming my Rane ME60 is the best such product--I merely tried it because I was desperate to add EQ when the conductor of my orchestra complained that my recordings in the lousy hall sounded dull and bass heavy.  I agreed with him and was unhappy.  That was back in 1995, and I came to enjoy the EQ for audiophile listening purposes.  I lean away from the tubed EQ units of Manley, but I would welcome other units you may have heard that have the transparency I seek.

There are actually 2 subjects here.  One--purity with lack of coloration, and transparency.  Two--the role of EQ to bring out HF which brings out more details of higher freq harmonic overtones.  On the 1st subject, it is remarkable that the cheap Rane especially with mrdecibel's tweaks is decently transparent as just a line stage without its EQ, although no doubt the Merrill Christine and other SOTA line stages are better for purity/transparency.  On the 2nd subject, the EQ with HF judiciously boosted enables more snap and sparkle so that speakers come much closer to those qualities of live music.  I have some cherished musical performances on recordings where the mikes are relatively distant and electronics are sweet and tubey sounding, so I get the midrange a little drier and more neutral by slightly reducing the range of 200-800 Hz.  Also, don't forget that mikes are transducers with their own electronics embedded, so they are in effect EQ's.  That's a big reason why mikes have different sounds which may vary as much as speakers.  

So as I explained in a recent post, the slight handicap of the Rane for purity is vastly outweighed by its EQ ability to make recordings and speakers much more lively so that the overall sound is much closer to the gestalt of live unamplified music.  Sounds contradictory, and few audiophiles believe this, but my listening experience has taught me all these things.

Slightly another topic, but I wonder whether the single tweeter array of the cheaper Tektons has more HF emphasis than the double array used in more expensive Tektons.  In the single array, there are 6 tweeters that cover the midrange, and 1 tweeter that covers above 3 kHz.  In the double array, there is the 1 tweeter for above 3 kHz, and 14 tweeters that cover the midrange, so perhaps there is more relative midrange output from the double array.  Eric Alexander would know, but I don't want to bother him since I am not ready to buy Tektons at this time.
viber6
2,454 posts
 
grey9hound,
Yes, recently I posted about the meaning of "Mephisto."  One meaning is the "demon" which relates to what WC has experienced with it.  He called it a wild animal.  It is most revealing, but sometimes in a negative way, which has forced WC to try many cables and preamps to get the sound he wants.
kren0006
1,859 posts
 
So let’s hear from the dac direct adherents explaining why the 13A video without the preamp sounded better than the one with the preamp. 

Please don’t try to distract by getting into curve panel nonsense. That was a constant across experiments, and thus not relevant here to this question. 

I’ll help. Yes, it was clearly better with the preamp across the board IMO. Given the choice of listening to either I’ll choose the preamp vid 100 out of 100 times. 

WC obviously agrees.
But dac direct folks: let’s hear from you on why WC is wrong.
More to discover