Why monoblocks?

Audiofiel's association of mono amps with mono records strikes me as dubious, though I will tell you that you would never see a stereo amp on the Springfield Monorail and with good reason.

I use MBL monoblocks as doorstops. Let me tell you one thing - those doors are staying f'in open when I want 'em to.

Foster_9, Just do it. You will be glad you did. Bigger soundstage and images, better dynamics and better overall sound.

Most audiophiles buy stereo amplifiers because it is cheaper than buying monos.

In all seriousness, monoblocks do not guarantee a bigger soundstage and images, better dynamics and better overall sound.

Any recommendation to that effect would be the voice of inexperience speaking.

A well engineered and implemented stereo amp will smoke its' poorly designed counterpart. Given the choice of 300B products would you choose a pair of Ming Da monoblocks over a VAC Renaissance stereo amp? I think not.

I have no financial interest in either line.

Undertow, since when did dual mono become monobloc? All I'm saying is if monobloc designs were the end of and be all, then why aren't there a substantial number of monobloc preamps and converters?

It may be that, at least historically, that monobloc amplifier designs came about not for any sonic reasons, but instead due to engineering/construction practicalities. In a high powered design, especially one using output tubes, a single chassis would have to be so large as to become impractical. It's probably cheaper to manufacturer two smaller cases than one humongous case of equal rigidity.

Onhwy61
"But if mono designs are really that much better then why aren't all ultra high end electronics monobloc designs? Where are the monobloc phono preamps, D/A converters or preamps?"

This is your quote exactly. And exactly why I said DUAL mono is all over the place, yes they are identical in design to MONO block, but sharing one chassis. So to your point, its in fact the way "Ultra high end" does work.

Now if we are going to debate over A) mono topology, or B) whether the 2 channels can be placed across the room from each other and not in one spot are two different points.

Honestly it does not make much of a difference as I clearly stated as long as they have their own discrete power supplies etc... Per channel.

Only Real advantages are physical beyond that, not topology, as stated different cable configurations, and possibly heat retention for specifically class A components, which most pure class A designs in large monos do in fact for the most part use 2 chassis.

But further there is no reason to do always more than one chassis for a preamp or dac, they don't get that hot, and they don't take up nearly as much room for circuits or transformers as an Amplifier, however they are still mono designs so to speak, but not mono "Blocks" which I guess is the word your hung up on. But again as you stated why would ULTRA high end not do it, almost guaranteed they do at their top levels.

Which by the way I am not defending "Mono Blocks" are the end all be all... It will completely be based on the systems needs, well speakers for the most part, of course a 50,000 dollar stereo amp, yep they exist can in fact be perfectly fine on most everything, accept possibly that real crazy load speaker and somebody needs bigger and heavier which in one chassis is not as marketable.

Again it was mainly based on your first post which was not clear you were looking at the topology MONO and not realizing that does not mean it has to be in two units, so I just clarified it. You said nothing about Dual mono either, I just pointed it out. Which it looks like in your system you have a Rowland amp that acutally is a dual mono, but a step further in 2 chassis separating just the power supplies? Thats even a rarer approach!