2. amps-preamps
  3. 1216693488

New Rowland Criterion 2-chassis battery pre

Jeff Rowland Design has just created a page for its upcoming statement-level, twin chassis, battery powered full function preamplifier. Detail is still scant, but a little bit of info is already available, in addition to front and rear view pics. Here’s the page:
http://jeffrowland.com/Criterion.htm
And here’s the front view:
http://jeffrowland.com/Criterion-front.htm
And here’s the rear view:
http://jeffrowland.com/Criterion-back.htm

You will find a few specs already on the site. JRDG should be publishing more info in the next few weeks. I will post here as I receive it. in addition to the published specs that you can read on the page above, here are a very few additional tidbits that I have learned this far:

. Uses Burr Brown TI OPA1632 high speed fully differentially balanced modules.
. Includes phono stage.
. Uses standard NiMH D-cell batteries available in most electronics stores, loaded in 2 rear-inserted tubes of power supply chassis.
. Capable of AC/DC operation . . . will recharge batteries on independent circuit during AC operation.
. Full remote control
. Target price $18K (not sure yet)
. Availability: probably early Fall 2008.
. Will be featured at RMAF in Soundings Hifi suite Marriott 503 or 505 from Oct 10th to 12th in Denver.

And sorry folks, I have not heard this device yet. Nor I have any good third party reports on its sound. Any speculations on Sonics from my part would be just. . . pure speculations. I’ll keep everyone posted as I learn more.

Guido
guidocorona
guidocorona OP
4,298 posts
 
Mike, a direct in-system Dartzeel/Criterion comparison for both battery and AC ops would be quite fascinating, particularly if vinyl media could be included in the proceedings. Guido
kawika
57 posts
 
Hi Mike. Glad to have you in on this. I'm fairly confident the Criterion will exceed the "Zeel" in most areas (yes I heard it in both modes, But having a bigger influence on the Zeel than the Rowland). As far as the 312, I do think it is a superb amp, but lacks overal slam and bass extention in comparison to other amps at this pre amp level. It's greatest attributes are the transparancy, image placement and honest neutral timbres. I just miss the sort of full bodied sound I had when I ran a Gryphon Antellion Sig (196 lb Class A Solid State) Would I trade the ultimate transparency of the Rowland for the Gryphon...? Not at first thought, but when considering the heat (I live in Houston, TX) I must live with the Rowland. BTW: I'm an electric Bass player. The Rowland's bass is more accurate in the details, but leaves a void in comparison to the Gryphon. I hear he has an upgrade in the works that deals directly with my (and a few others!)complaint. Aloha, David.
mikelavigne
2,199 posts
 
David, glad to be here.

my use of the word 'zeel' refers to the 50 ohm BNC 'zeel' cable interface which darTZeel and Playback Designs use in place of conventional cables. this offers a few 'system' and 'synergy' performance advantages. they are cheap relative to typical cables used in systems at this level. they sound the same whether .5m or .5 kilometer. they outperform conventional cables due mostly to 'near-perfect' impedence matching.

side note; in the November (maybe Septemeber?) 2001 issue of Stereophile Herve Delatraz (Mr. darTZeel before there was an actual company or products) wrote a very interesting article about how all conventional interconnects were inherently flawed due to impedence miss matching. it's worth reading.

my question was whether 'zeel' cables were used in the Criterion--Dart NHB-18NS comparison.

the dart preamp is excellent when used conventionally in any system; but it's at it's best when used with the dart amp, Playback Designs and 'zeel' cables.
guidocorona OP
4,298 posts
 
One interesting point is that at Soundings Hifi in Denver, in the opinions of several, the Rowland 312 amp was preferred to the Boulder 2060 stereo in the areas of authority, macrodynamics and general fullness of sound, in addition to micro dynamics/microdetail, harmonic exposure, and involving musicality. As already mentioned, the rest of the system consisted of Boulder CDp, Boulder 2010 pre, and Vienna Die Muzick speakers.

Needless to say, we did not have the opportunity of contrasting with MBL.

Please note that, at this level of performance, I am more inclined to utilize the term 'preferred' rather than 'exceeded', because live observations between such top flight devices -- even in the most controlled of situations -- are very much relative to personal taste. G.
guidocorona OP
4,298 posts
 
Mike, at this point, Criterion does not support BNC connections. Inputs and outputs are XLR balanced and RCA unbalanced. All I/O is transformer coupled to resolve source impedance mismatches and apparently yields >90dB common mode rejection on balanced inputs. Input offset adjustment is available on all inputs with a 0.5dB resolution, while output offset adjustment is available on unbalanced output 2 with same resolution.

The import of all of the above of course is exquisitely theoretical. Only significant in system a/b listening has a chance of revealing actual musical/sonic differences and address compatibility with personal prefs.

a comparison of the following:

1. PD + Dartzeal BNC + Dartzeel pre,
2. PD + fav XLR IC + Criterion,
3. PD + same fav XLR IC + Dartzeel,

Would be very interesting indeed.

One complication of course is. . . what is the 'best' (cringes about crass absolute term) XLR to use for this exercise? I have had extremely satisfying results with the Furutech Evolution II ICs between Criterion and my Esoteric X-01 Limited, yet I shan't claim that I have reached the pinnacle of my IC quest without a lot of further explorations.

G.
More to discover