Good Amp for Martin Logan Monolith II


What is a good amp for the Monolith II that doesn't cost a fortune. Before I had an Aragon 2004 for each speaker and it still seemed like it wasn't powerful enough. They would get very hot and seemed like they were struggling to power the Monoliths.
dirtrider180
If you want good sound from your Monoliths get tubes.
Everything shows up for sale eventually. You have to decide on what you want and be patient.
When buying used equipment there is no other choice. I don't like buying substitutes with anything whether it is stereo equipment or a dish for my cat. I would rather do without.
I agree with Rrog and go with tubes,but if you want to stay with solid state maybe check out Mccormack,Belles and
Classe;although the Sanders/Innersound amps are tough to beat as well.
Find a used Mark Levinson 23 or 23.5 or 27.5 and you are there. I have an Audio Research REF 3 pre-amp that goes to two AR VTM 120 Monoblocks for the upper panels of my Monolith IIIs and a Mark Levinson ML3 for the bass drivers.
I also use an ultra modified Bedini 250/250 MK II (that I modified) and it is also wonderful on the upper panels. Do not, I repeat, do not let tube bias steer you away from excellent and cost effective sound.

The ML 23.5 is still one of the best amps out there and for the money, you can't touch it tube or solid state.

enjoy
Minor1, You are using late model tube monos and preamp on your panels and recommending an older solid state stereo amp. Does this mean you're not there?
I have had the original Mark Levinson amplifiers like your ML3 work extremely well with electrostatic speakers.
Rrog; Oh I'm there all right. I don't have a tube vs. solid state bias. I have listened to many amps over the years and built up my system. I am not in the amp of the month club and don't change because some "new and better" amp came around. Because most times, the new stuff really isn't "better". Don't get me wrong. There is some great equipment out there. But, I will not change equipment just because something reportedly new and better came along. Most times manufacturers will cancel a piece of equipment and come out with something new, not because it really is better, but because equipment reviewers and magazines won't review older equipment, even if they are still being produced. And for some audiophiles, if the equipment isn't reviewed recently, they won't buy it. However, for tube amps and pre-amps, I recommend cleaning the connectors, changing the tubes with new tubes and rebiasing and then listening again before considering changing components. for example. I wanted to investigate a new pre-amp that was remote controlled (getting lazy) that was at or better than my Audio Research SP11. The SP11 is probably one of the better pre-amps around, even now. So, what I did was purchase new tubes and burned them in and listened. Wow! was it great. Then I went to my favorite stereo store and borrowed an AR SP 17 and SP 16 to listen to, along with a Krell pre-amp. They weren't close to the SP 11 in sound quality, and if I sold my SP11 it would basically pay for any one of them. So, finally, I listened to a demo model REF 3 pre-amp. Took it home for two weeks (yes, they let me). and it was better, not much better, but better than my SP11. I didn't think that the cost of the REF3 was low enough to justify purchasing it over the sound of my SP11, but I weighed it for days and finally negotiated a very good price for it, sold my SP11 for a very competitive price and I am good. I don't do that often. I know what music is suppose to sound like. I played classical violin, oboe, bassoon, etc. I know what live music sounds like also. So, my system is very close. Such that to upgrade is not cost justified for the incremental increase in sound quality. So, Yes, I'm there. It can always get better, no question. But I don't feel that anything is really missing or lacking in the music reproduction.

enjoy