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!


128x128jays_audio_lab

viber6,

So, if you want to state that definitions are not subjective, then the dictionary definition of "musical" does not agree your definition of "musical".  Since nobody else is commenting on this here, perhaps it's better if we take this to PM.

 

Dave

Thanks for your post...

You post make perfect sense to me...

But all is not so simple than we think...

I had the same goal than you...

But in designing my room acoustic, with my own devices homemade passive treatment and my own designed mechanical room tuner, i encountered the problem of TUNING the speakers/room relation with my ears and for them...

Then this mythical and idealized " transparency" was a goal yes, but a relatively attainable one ...It cannot be an absolute succeess in absolute term...

Some think that their audio system patiently assembled give that to them free of further  work , but the room acoustic also play a part, a very important one...

Then i am in absolute approval of each of the words i extracted from your post...

However transparency in playback system cannot be absolute experience, it is always relative.... And any gear "colored" the sound always, and anyway we always listen the recording room of the live event TRANSLATED, never perfectly reproduced, in our own specific room and with our own specific system, for our own specific ears ONLY...

Then transparency is the goal you are right...But when this is said....

And when this is explained clearly like you just did, this concept and what is musicality dont transform your own taste, and experience, and system and room is the EXEMPLARY ONE...

Perhaps there exist perfectly transparent system in perfectly controlled room, but it is exceptions around the world ....

This is the reason audiophiles speak about the prefered "color" of their system...Some call their taste 2clarity" some others called it "warm"... No ears has the same design and history or skills...

Teh even if you are right about their entertained confusion between the original living sound of music and their experience with their gear in their room ...in spite of that they are right also, not only because they are conditioned to do so by the engineering marketing of the gear, but because no gear is perfect , and no room is perfect most of the times... Almost no ears are percfect too..

Then you are right and i think the same like you just wrote, but others who claim differently are right in their own perspective...

Audio life is not a one way road for one person....No one own the meter of musicality or transparency...Not even Karajan or Gould...The truth is we dont even know what sound is or what music is...

For sure "sound" must serve music, by sound i mean the gear and the acoustic, but the "sound/noise" cannot dispear from any playback system and from the room acoustic specificities magically and give us only absolute transparency just because we say so... We must work the gear and the acoustic with our imperfect ears....Even Karajan would do for his playback personal system for a result at the end debatable by an other maestro for his own reason...

Am i wrong ? feel free to correct me....

 

This gets into the different meanings of "musical." Ultimately, it is related to whether one thinks of the audio system as the music, or whether the audio system should be an accurate conduit of the real music in the recording. My goal is the latter, so I think it is absurd to talk about the "musicality" of the system. Most people here design their system to color the music the way they like, which they call "musical." In effect, this is making the (real) music more "musical" for the audio system, kind of absurd to me. I want the system to do as little as possible, and just transparently transmit the music on the recording. I strive for no audio "musicality," just transparency. Let the real music define what "musical" means.

 

 

I forgot to say the "timbre tonal micro structure" perception is an acoustic phenomenon that cannot be qualified by the main frequency spectrum only but by acoustic and psycho-acoustic conditions of the room/ears...The relation between the relative size of the sound source and the listener envelopment cannot be described by "clarity" "warmness" "coldness" or transparency concepts...

 

Then speaking about "transparency" in an absolute way, speaking about playback system, is  something that come from the marketing engineering conditioning of the customers.... Which is  always oblivious of the importance of the acoustic control of the room...

 

Tomorrow, at noon Eastern time, you will find out which component leaves Jay's Audio Lab... 

mahgister,

Your writings are sophisticated and true. I agree that we cannot describe live sound in any environment in superficial terms like frequency balance, warm, colored, etc.  It is also impossible to get mechanical speaker drivers to have the exact same tonal characteristics of natural instruments made of metal, wood, etc.  Even the same natural instruments sound vastly different in various halls, rooms, etc, due to size and acoustical materials.  Even though I have written about the unique superior sound of live unamplified acoustic music, there is a lot to complain about even in the best seat.  Applying the same critical standards we all have about our audio systems, I have come to be disappointed about certain aspects of live sound.  The strings in the front row of the stage sound wonderful, but the instruments in the back of the stage often sound really bad, with much confusion from the excessive reverberation.

So to be practical, my goals are to gain an understanding of music either heard live or on the audio system.  Clarity and high fidelity don't mean perfect reproduction of the live sound.  "Fidelity" means a faithful likeness, or "wow, it sounds real."  High fidelity is not an exact copy.  Do you know how to read printed music, also known as the "score" ?  This contains all the notes written by the composer, with some suggestions for dynamic contrasts, although the artist will interpret these suggestions in presenting the music.  If you look at the score of even a simple string quartet, it is amazing how much is written that you don't hear in most audio systems.  Live performances reveal these details better, but only if you get one of the few good seats.  If you design your audio system with the goal of revealing as much as possible of this written music, you will achieve high clarity.  I won't pretend to know much about the technical differences between audio systems and the live sound, but I am happy to understand more of the music, aided by pursuing neutrality, clarity so that the audio system has as much fidelity to the live sound I can get.  

I am not in this audio hobby as a scientific project, but rather as a means of getting the maximum information and understanding of the music I love.