New Bel Canto Gear at RMAF

Hi Downunder, In the Bel Canto room I was impressed by the sound I heard more than anything else. Bel Canto may have concentrated resources on engineering internals rather than on exterior metal work. I suspect the Ref1000 still utilizes the ASP1000 modules. But given the great sonic variability of amps employing this module across the industry, I suspect Bel Canto may have performed excellent work around it. I do not know details yet, but here is what I extracted from the BC press release on the subject:

"• Fully-balanced input stage yields high common mode noise rejection and wide dynamic range. Optimizing internal impedances improves amplifier drive for even lower noise and distortion. Measurements reveal a full 6dB improvement in signal-to-noise ratio when driving the output amplifier section with low-impedance loads.

• The input stage uses the latest top-quality parts including Caddock resistors, Solid Electrolytic ultra-low ESR decoupling capacitors, and low-noise regulated power supplies, ensuring the input section is utterly transparent.

• The highest spec REF1000 MKII and the REF500 mono amplifiers are fitted with custom power supply rectification and filters that substantially increase the power supply’s energy storage. They’re manufactured with carefully selected high-speed, low-noise rectifiers, high-voltage film filter capacitors and high energy storage capacity. What this means for you is lower noise and reduced sensitivity to power line effects."

I'll post more detail if I learn any.

G.

Thanks G. I have heard the REF1000 and it sounded quite good. However, when you opened the amplifier it looked EXACTLY the same as the ASP1000 modules.
Brands like Rowland, Cary have encorporated toridal transformers etc to make the module sound different.
Points 2 & 3 seem to be additional to the ICE modeule - not sure about the first point thou.

Downunder, yes it would be interesting to learn how Bel Canto has achieved its sonic goals in the latest generation of amps while containing weight to under 20 pounds. We are starting to see a flurry of deceptively minimalistic devices which yield sophisticated sonic performances by applying unconventional technological solutions to traditional problems. . . and I suspect we may see more of these in the future. G.

Hi Guidocorona,

I have previously owned the BC Ref 1K before they were dethrone by the Nuforce alternative. Do you think the MKII version substancilly improved upon the original to warrant a reconsideration? My concern are as follows with the original Ref 1K:

1) Transparency-- wasn't there for both the high or low end though midrange is quite dense and solid
2) Speed was a factor as well and the BC was slow
3) Laid back, not exciting or live-sounding
4) Smooth--perhaps too much so that music sounded overly "rounded"
5) Resolution--lacking especially compared to Nuforce Ref 9SE V2 or MCH3SE
6) Soundstaging: narrow and not deep or expansive enough, lacking air big time.

Regards,

Kenobi

Kenobi, I listened to the entire system and it is difficult for me to isolate any particular observation to the BC Ref 500 amps unless I auditioned them in my own system. Furthermore, there were no other amps in the same room against which to compare the Ref 500s. I also have no experience with the original Ref 500/1000. Yet, here are my subjective impressions roughly mapped to your itemized issues:

1) Midrange was solid/textured, and transparency was in evidence.
2) Speed -- I call this transient response. . . yes BC seemed quite nimble/agile on macro/micro transients.
3) Laid back? -- System was not 'agressive', I thought it sounded 'realistic' and eminently listenable without ever sounding dull/boring.
4) Smooth -- System did not sound etched in most recordings, but I was very pleased by the amount of harmonic texture that was exposed.
5) Resolution -- Seemed to be one of the most resolving systems at the show. But could not perform a direct comparison with other amps.
6) Soundstaging: broad, deep, and expansive, good 'air' around instruments.

Unles I have the opportunity to listen to BC Ref500 or Ref1000 at some length in a very familiar system/environment, I can't make meaningful comparisons with closely competing devices. . . Yet, it was pretty evident to me after 2 lengthy visits in the suite, even sitting way to the side and at a 90 degree angle to the speakers, that the new BC reference lineup are worth a very careful listen/consideration. G.