I spent some time today switching between my Purifi amps (using Neurochrome input buffer), Neurochrome Mod-286 amps, and Parasound JC5.
First, I should say that my ears aren't as discriminating as they used to be. I've suffered with Tinitus for many years, and my high-frequency hearing is not what it used to be. So take these observations with that in mind.
I used the same interconnects for all three amps, but I had to use longer speaker cables with the JC-5 since it's a stereo amp. The cables were exactly the same construction, just 2.5 meters instead of 1 meter. Also, I used a different (although similar) power cord with the JC-5 since I needed a longer one.
I set the levels using a pink noise -10db recording with a sound pressure meter with C weighting measuring 64db. For most of the recordings I listened to, this would be about my average listening level. A couple of the recordings were a bit lower volume than I'd normally listen.
The songs I listened to were Sophie Zelmani - Why, Jennifer Warnes - Way Down Deep, Shirley Horn - Beautiful Love, Dominique Fils-Aime - Birds, Ray LaMontagne - This Love Is Over.
I turned off my subwoofers for these comparisons since they have their own amps and I didn't want their contribution to influence my impressions. My main speakers (GR Research NX-Oticas) don't play very low without the subs, so I can't really assess the deep bass performance of the amps.
All three amps have a fairly similar presentation, although the JC-5 was slightly more laid back than the other two. The overall differences between the amps were not real obvious.
The JC-5 is slightly warmer sounding with excellent dynamics and smooth midrange. The highs (to the extent I can still hear them) sound clean and natural. Compared to the other amps, the biggest short-coming is a somewhat narrower sound stage. I suspect this is because the other amps are monoblocks.
The Modulus-286 amps were the weakest of the three. They still sounded quite good, but had a bit of honkiness (if that's the correct term) to the upper bass and some unpleasant sibilance on female vocals. At higher volume levels, I've noticed these amps get a bit more congested sounding, probably due to their more limited power, but at the volume that I was playing today, they sounded fine.
The Purifi amps were just a tiny bit rougher sounding in the upper midrange compared to the JC-5, but overall cleaner than the Modulus-286. They also had a touch more energy in the bass compared to the other two amps, most obvious on the Jennifer Warnes song.
At this point, I'd be perfectly happy with either the JC-5 or the Purifi monoblocks, but I'm hoping I can take the Purifi amps to the next level with the new input buffers I just got. I'm waiting on a couple of connectors before I can install them (hopefully next weekend). The Purifi amps are also a lot more efficient which is particularly nice during warmer months.
First, I should say that my ears aren't as discriminating as they used to be. I've suffered with Tinitus for many years, and my high-frequency hearing is not what it used to be. So take these observations with that in mind.
I used the same interconnects for all three amps, but I had to use longer speaker cables with the JC-5 since it's a stereo amp. The cables were exactly the same construction, just 2.5 meters instead of 1 meter. Also, I used a different (although similar) power cord with the JC-5 since I needed a longer one.
I set the levels using a pink noise -10db recording with a sound pressure meter with C weighting measuring 64db. For most of the recordings I listened to, this would be about my average listening level. A couple of the recordings were a bit lower volume than I'd normally listen.
The songs I listened to were Sophie Zelmani - Why, Jennifer Warnes - Way Down Deep, Shirley Horn - Beautiful Love, Dominique Fils-Aime - Birds, Ray LaMontagne - This Love Is Over.
I turned off my subwoofers for these comparisons since they have their own amps and I didn't want their contribution to influence my impressions. My main speakers (GR Research NX-Oticas) don't play very low without the subs, so I can't really assess the deep bass performance of the amps.
All three amps have a fairly similar presentation, although the JC-5 was slightly more laid back than the other two. The overall differences between the amps were not real obvious.
The JC-5 is slightly warmer sounding with excellent dynamics and smooth midrange. The highs (to the extent I can still hear them) sound clean and natural. Compared to the other amps, the biggest short-coming is a somewhat narrower sound stage. I suspect this is because the other amps are monoblocks.
The Modulus-286 amps were the weakest of the three. They still sounded quite good, but had a bit of honkiness (if that's the correct term) to the upper bass and some unpleasant sibilance on female vocals. At higher volume levels, I've noticed these amps get a bit more congested sounding, probably due to their more limited power, but at the volume that I was playing today, they sounded fine.
The Purifi amps were just a tiny bit rougher sounding in the upper midrange compared to the JC-5, but overall cleaner than the Modulus-286. They also had a touch more energy in the bass compared to the other two amps, most obvious on the Jennifer Warnes song.
At this point, I'd be perfectly happy with either the JC-5 or the Purifi monoblocks, but I'm hoping I can take the Purifi amps to the next level with the new input buffers I just got. I'm waiting on a couple of connectors before I can install them (hopefully next weekend). The Purifi amps are also a lot more efficient which is particularly nice during warmer months.