2. amps-preamps
  3. 1149434690

Are ICEpower amps really that good?

Hi folks, it's getting a bit boring now, but I would like to hear your opinions about the following issue. I have the eAR ICEpower based amps (with the ASP1000 modules with built in SMPS). Some audiophiles and amp manufacturers believe they are just trash. In my opinion they are no slouch compared with the almost 8 times more expensive Accuphase A-50V stereo amp. In fact, I prefer the ICEpower amps above the Accuphase. Now I'm a bit in doubt (audiophiles are such weird creatures): are this sub $2k ICEpower amps really that good that they can compete with the $$$ Accuphase amp, or is it due to my own shortcoming (I might have some form of insidious and progressive hearing impairment) or is it just imagination? If the ICEpower amps are really that good, what's the point of buying $$$ amps? Btw, I have Dunlavy SC-V loudspeakers.

Chris
dazzdax
dazzdax OP
599 posts
 
Hi Tvad, if you are right that the ICEpower amps are hyperdetailed, transparent and dead neutral, then we are talking about the best (most honest) amps in the world? Or am I wrong? If some audiophiles don't like the sound, that would mean they don't want a dead neutral sound, with other words, they want a colored sound. You see, it is not very clear to me whether the sound, or better: the non-sound of ICEpower amps is in fact due to lack of distortion or is it due to insufficient rendering of harmonic overtones (fucked up harmonic structure).

Chris
slaw3
139 posts
 
I bought the Nuforce 9s after extensive auditioning of several mega buck tube and SS amps in my system. While the 9s and Bel Cantos do not have the midrange tube bloom of good SE amps, it's the only thing they DON'T have.
For me, clear answer is YES- THEY ARE THAT GOOD! I'm done!
arni
313 posts
 
Tvad,
I have read an Nuforce owner argue (Audiogon thread) that it was more musical and warmer than the Conrad-Johnson SE60 it replaced. Have you ever listened to an ICE power based amp in direct comparison to the type of amps you believe are "better?"
I haven't, but I am definitively interested in exploring this evolving new amplification.
Post removed 
tgrisham
1,291 posts
 
Mind if I ramble a bit?? Your question is interesting in part because it brings up the old conflict of descriptors such as "detailed", "warm", "veiled", etc. It comes down to preference. In thinking about your question it occurred to me that we all have so much time and money invested in our equipment that it becomes very personal. There are those of us who like a certain sound quality when we listen, and some who just want to perfectly recreate a studio or concert hall recording, warts and all. Maybe the SET and tube officiadoes prefer Van Gogh or Rembrandt, and the Icepower lovers prefer the pointalists or photographic art. Not that we don't appreciate one or the other, but what do we like the most, and spend our money on? What do you listen for in recordings?
More to discover