Next step up of Power Amp

[Jud]

Look here at what many think is the best Ncore value: Hypex Amps, Abrahamsen Audio, IPL Acoustic Speakers

Look here for what users, some with great systems, think: Nord One Up Ncore NC500 amps, Class D ready for prime time ..... - Page 83

 

I'm absolutely loving mine with my new electrostatics, stomped my VTL tubes.

 

The Nord amps seem to be the cheapest new Hypex nCore and UcD ones now apart from Hypex kits.

 

I'm not sure of that, unless the pound's drop has made those even less money than these:

 

Hypex NCore NC400 Build Service: Stereo, Mono, Bridged Mono – James Romeyn

[Sal1950]

Class D amps have become a revolution.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Computer Audiophile mobile app

 

Class D is definitely a revolution in amplifier design efficiency. Their SQ is still being debated and of course will vary from one to the other.

 

Then in a few years when the "new" wears off the reviewers will be all be raving,

"dang the efficiency, these latest Nelson Pass pure Class A's make all else gaslight"

or

you just have to revisit the latest SET amps, their detail and delicacy will remind you of what was left behind.

LOL

Nothing will ever remain static for the audio hobbyists. The reviewing media will always need something new (old) to fawn over. Manufacturers need new products to replace your old obsolete one, etc, etc.

I've watched this circle go round and round over the last 50+ years and the,

Wheel In The Sky Keeps On Turning - Journey 1977

[rah50]

I'm not sure of that, unless the pound's drop has made those even less money than these:

 

Hypex NCore NC400 Build Service: Stereo, Mono, Bridged Mono – James Romeyn

 

The Romeyn stereo is the same price as Nord stereo. The basic Nord mono pair is much less than the Romeyn. The upgraded Nord is about the same as the Romeyn mono pair but this is really what you want. The upgraded Nord uses the new/better Ncore 500 module and an upgraded input buffer that uses a discrete voltage regulator and discrete opamps of your choice. This is what makes it better than many of the other Ncore implementations.

 

Jud: When are you moving out here?

[Sam Lord]

I'm not sure of that, unless the pound's drop has made those even less money than these:

Hypex NCore NC400 Build Service: Stereo, Mono, Bridged Mono – James Romeyn

 

Hi Jud,

 

I'm glad you brought up James Romeyn. I approached him about oh 1.5-2 years ago about changing the layout of his Ncore400 amps. He was using Siliconray enclosures, which company is now sadly gone. I didn't like the way the certain things were done in order to shoehorn the SMPS and amp modules into the little monoblock boxes: it was not a complaint of quality, just arrangement to minimize wire lengths. The last matter is relevant in such low-impedance designs as nCore. And the new chassis from Hypex have the same problems! Each of them uses a harness to connect the input to the module: it's totally unnecessary and a (very weak) invitation to induced noise and oscillation. Anyway, James is great to work with, a true gentleman and perfectionist with a passion for music. I would send anyone his way.

 

But my life got twisted around and I had to drop the project, I still have 4 nCore400 channels (with 4 SMPS600) lying about idly. But I've found another enclosure builder (Ghent Audio) who is willing to make all the changes I desire for 10 monoblock chassis minimum and I intend to get them and build more amps. Okay very briefly the changes are: 1) rotate the SMPS 90deg clockwise; 2) rotate the nCore modules about 70deg clockwise (this is already an option); 3) switch the front pushbutton to switch Nampon instead of power; 4) use Furutech IEC inlets without a power switch in back; 5) lengthen the enclosure a little (probably unneeded but he wants to go to 315mm) and retain all the top+bottom venting holes; 6) incorporate an XLR *outlet* in the back for multi-amping; 7) use different binding posts, TBD but probably one of the Cardas varieties.

 

These changes will lessen AC input radiation, lower Zout for the SMPS, lower radiated noise reaching the modules, and lower noise reaching the input wires. Wires will barely exist in this version. The current Ghent modules do have a couple of improved features such as the aforementioned, optional, correct rotation of the modules and the upside-down arrangement of the 15A IEC inlet for better retention. Hopefully James and DIYers can use this new layout too, as he agrees that it's better.

 

Class D is definitely a revolution in amplifier design efficiency. Their SQ is still being debated and of course will vary from one to the other.

 

Then in a few years when the "new" wears off the reviewers will be all be raving,

"dang the efficiency, these latest Nelson Pass pure Class A's make all else gaslight"

or

you just have to revisit the latest SET amps, their detail and delicacy will remind you of what was left behind.

LOL

Nothing will ever remain static for the audio hobbyists. The reviewing media will always need something new (old) to fawn over. Manufacturers need new products to replace your old obsolete one, etc, etc.

I've watched this circle go round and round over the last 50+ years and the,

Wheel In The Sky Keeps On Turning - Journey 1977

 

Sal, you make a very good point on fads. But the Class D has long stopped being a fad--lots of people liked the Spectron umpteen years ago. It had lots of performance anomalies, and my Bel Canto Icepowers (2xS300) have certain traits of weak measured behavior. They're still really good amps, and more dynamic than Class AB amps costing a *lot* more. I expect the new class AB Benchmark AB-1 is a killer too given its measurements and its price is very competitve. I'll bet he uses oodles of feedback like Hypex.

 

The measurements matter...amps with stupid-low output Z, IMD, and high-order harmonics are going to sound fabulously transparent and dynamic. Their timbre and soundstaging will be correct too. When you get used to that combo, you don't want to go back. SET designs on big horns are really nice, but you *always* know you're hearing a low-powered amp with gobs of distortion, however sweet. Now, lots of people including great MEs prefer Pass Labs Class A designs (for example) to some of Bruno's Class D labors, and I wouldn't challenge their choice. Of course Class A designs measure wonderfully too. But I don't want to spend that much or emit that much carbon for my hobby anymore.

 

The Romeyn stereo is the same price as Nord stereo. The basic Nord mono pair is much less than the Romeyn. The upgraded Nord is about the same as the Romeyn mono pair but this is really what you want. The upgraded Nord uses the new/better Ncore 500 module and an upgraded input buffer that uses a discrete voltage regulator and discrete opamps of your choice. This is what makes it better than many of the other Ncore implementations.

 

I've read that, and like what I see of Nord's priorities.

[Sal1950]

Sal, you make a very good point on fads. But the Class D has long stopped being a fad--lots of people liked the Spectron umpteen years ago. It had lots of performance anomalies, and my Bel Canto Icepowers (2xS300) have certain traits of weak measured behavior. They're still really good amps, and more dynamic than Class AB amps costing a *lot* more. I expect the new class AB Benchmark AB-1 is a killer too given its measurements and its price is very competitve. I'll bet he uses oodles of feedback like Hypex.

 

The measurements matter...amps with stupid-low output Z, IMD, and high-order harmonics are going to sound fabulously transparent and dynamic. Their timbre and soundstaging will be correct too. When you get used to that combo, you don't want to go back. SET designs on big horns are really nice, but you *always* know you're hearing a low-powered amp with gobs of distortion, however sweet. Now, lots of people including great MEs prefer Pass Labs Class A designs (for example) to some of Bruno's Class D labors, and I wouldn't challenge their choice. Of course Class A designs measure wonderfully too. But I don't want to spend that much or emit that much carbon for my hobby anymore.

 

Sam, Just to be clear I was neither praising nor damning any of the above designs. Simply pointing out that the audiophile media reviewers will always need something new to get excited about + encourage consumers to purchase new products. The $advertisers like that you know.

Yep, absolutely the measurements matter and can guide consumers away from making poor choices when picking a amp for driving Speaker X or system matching in general. As to pure sound quality, differences in well designed and mated amplifiers have been astonishingly small for the last 20+ years. The best A & AB designs of the 1990s hold up very well today.

As such maybe continuing to use an older amp like the OP B&K can even better serve not to "spend that much or emit that much carbon for my hobby"?

Speaking of Class D hype, did you see John Atkinson's measurements of the Spec RPA-W7EX? Not all is roses in the Class D world.

"KM very much liked the sound of the Spec RPA-W7EX. I, however, was disappointed by its measured performance—modern class-D amplifiers, especially those using one of the Hypex modules, measure very much better than this. And with its low input impedance, its dislike of load impedances below 4 ohms, and its high levels of radiated noise, this not an amplifier that can be universally recommended, I feel.—John Atkinson"

Read more at Spec RPA-W7EX Real-Sound power amplifier Measurements | Stereophile.com

[Jud]

 

Jud: When are you moving out here?

 

The goal is late spring or early summer of next year.

 

We'll be in the area next week.

[Jud]

The Romeyn stereo is the same price as Nord stereo. The basic Nord mono pair is much less than the Romeyn. The upgraded Nord is about the same as the Romeyn mono pair but this is really what you want. The upgraded Nord uses the new/better Ncore 500 module and an upgraded input buffer that uses a discrete voltage regulator and discrete opamps of your choice. This is what makes it better than many of the other Ncore implementations.

 

 

I wonder about the sort of tailoring the sound to taste that Nord is advertising, my own very possibly naive goal being an amp without a sound of its own.

 

Any designers in the audience (Sam? ) want to weigh in on whether I'm indeed being naive, or if an "unflavored" nCore amp is a reasonable goal in this price range?

[Sam Lord]

Sam, Just to be clear I was neither praising nor damning any of the above designs. Simply pointing out that the audiophile media reviewers will always need something new to get excited about + encourage consumers to purchase new products. The $advertisers like that you know.

Yep, absolutely the measurements matter and can guide consumers away from making poor choices when picking a amp for driving Speaker X or system matching in general. As to pure sound quality, differences in well designed and mated amplifiers have been astonishingly small for the last 20+ years. The best A & AB designs of the 1990s hold up very well today.

As such maybe continuing to use an older amp like the OP B&K can even better serve not to "spend that much or emit that much carbon for my hobby"?

Speaking of Class D hype, did you see John Atkinson's measurements of the Spec RPA-W7EX? Not all is roses in the Class D world.

"KM very much liked the sound of the Spec RPA-W7EX. I, however, was disappointed by its measured performance—modern class-D amplifiers, especially those using one of the Hypex modules, measure very much better than this...

 

Sal, we're in strong agreement on measurements. I was trying to point out the general correlation between SQ problems and certain types of distortion. The Spectron had some very good damping and zero crossover notch distortion, but had other artifacts that bothered people because they *really* affected sonics; I won't try to look them up now. B&O's Icepower and SMPS did much better but still have certain performance weaknesses that bother listeners. I tried briefly and unsuccessfully to look up the main red flag, but IIRC I think it was/is steeply-rising THD and IMD with frequency, many 10s of dB at 20kHz vs. 1kHz.

 

When we built our Class AB amps, we weren't original designers but used AB circuits designed by the brilliant sonar amp designer Jeff Polan. His overall circuits looked much like Douglas Self's "Blameless" designs. But Jeff was/is especially gifted in tailoring feedback circuits and using great components wisely. He was one of the first to use the still-outstanding MAT02 BJT single-die matched pair in the differential input, giving huge performance gains up front. The quietest versions of those cost almost $20 apiece but were worth every penny. He created excellent discreet regulators and bias circuits. The types and placement of bypass caps was another departure from Self's designs and was quite superior.

 

My best work, in close collaboration with my boss/partner Dale Pitcher, was the overhaul of the layout of those circuits with some enhancements to regulation. We shortened the physical wiring to the absolute minimum, being first at what I christened "component-to component" wiring, meaning no jumpers *or* circuit traces, and vastly improved the thermal coupling of driver and output devices to heatsinks. We used the best resistors money could buy at the time, the oil-filled Vishay H-series in critical spots. Those cost around $12 apiece. This was before the naked Z-series was available.

 

We isolated vibrations from the transformer with great care. We used ultra-low-ESR filter caps, sometimes bypassed with Black Gates. We used a lot of quartz in the chassis, which acted as a piezoelectric sink for RFI. We matched the gains of our drivers and output devices with extreme care--work which I often performed myself with a first-rate curve tracer. Anyway, the result was extremely quiet, dynamic amplifiers with very low crossover notch distortion and very low high-order harmonics. These amps were at least the sonic equal of the best competitors which were the insanely-overbuilt Halcro and the innovative, laser-biased Edge.

 

But the point of this litany is even with all that effort and parts expense, we would be unable to equal the measured performance of Hypex nCore amps. People need to understand that the efficiency of the best-of-Class-D designs is *strongly* related to their essentially-perfect performance. When Bruno created the nCore from the Hypex UcD foundation, he didn't need to increase efficiency from IIRC around 94% to over 96%. But that was a *expected, logical result* of creating an ultra-reactive, ultra-high-Q circuit that is stable. The use of tiny SMD components, careful matching, and 5 poles of feedback (vs. IIRC 3 poles in the UcD circuits) is the key to the ideal nCore design. A big class A design can match some of the nCore numbers but not all--especially noise and damping.

 

Note that these things require perfect layout. Bruno has stated that if some circuit traces in nCore were even 1/16" off, the device would be unstable. The best-performing equipment *has* to be barely stable, it's simple math. The best analogy is fighter jets. The roll rate of an F-16 is impossible without a fast electronic feedback circuit: the pilot attempting to fly it without such circuits will make it fall from the sky.

 

And the result is inexpensive amps that destroy older designs. I can *promise* you that even the older UcD circuit WILL stomp on the class AB B&K. And an autoformer-based McIntosh will sound like fat old Cadillac in comparison: cushy, comfy, and slow.

 

I wonder about the sort of tailoring the sound to taste that Nord is advertising, my own very possibly naive goal being an amp without a sound of its own.

 

Any designers in the audience (Sam? ) want to weigh in on whether I'm indeed being naive, or if an "unflavored" nCore amp is a reasonable goal in this price range?

 

Even with all the work mentioned above I don't consider myself a complete amplifier designer, but rather a tweaker. Anyway, my understanding is that the point of offering choices in those input circuits isn't to greatly alter the sound of those amps, but just tweak a little. The measurements of the IC opamp vs. discrete components aren't much different, but then our hearing is so acute. This part of the circuit is quite independent of the rest, you could even put a filter there.

 

From the little I've read, there is essentially no downside to the fancier discrete design; I'd buy that one. It will have better overload performance, probably with lower nasties, though it might not equal the insanely accurate IC's distortion figures in nominal conditions. Maybe the discrete opamp will sound a hair sweeter. Bruno uses a discrete opamp at the front of the Mola Mola, FWIW.

[rah50]

The goal is late spring or early summer of next year.

 

We'll be in the area next week.

 

Excellent on the move!

 

You are just missing the opera though, this is closing week, and I'm exhausted. We'll get you up next year.

 

Call me if you come up this way next week and you can the hear the Nords.

[rah50]

 

Anyway, my understanding is that the point of offering choices in those input circuits isn't to greatly alter the sound of those amps, but just tweak a little. The measurements of the IC opamp vs. discrete components aren't much different, but then our hearing is so acute. This part of the circuit is quite independent of the rest, you could even put a filter there.

 

From the little I've read, there is essentially no downside to the fancier discrete design; I'd buy that one. It will have better overload performance, probably with lower nasties, though it might not equal the insanely accurate IC's distortion figures in nominal conditions. Maybe the discrete opamp will sound a hair sweeter. Bruno uses a discrete opamp at the front of the Mola Mola, FWIW.

 

Exactly what people are reporting, making the Nords the best value in the Ncore market and possibly making them one of the best sounding as well.

[rah50]

One last Nord comment, iirc, one of the biggest sonic improvements was the switch to the Sparkos discrete voltage regulator.

[17629v2]

That's just silly. Any difference the Hypex amp might make would be extremely subtle and probably hard to detect in a bias controled blind listening test. Using descriptions as kill and stomp as best left only to speaker of room EQ changes.

 

You can't know that. The change can be anywhere from subtle to huge. Without actually listening to the amps, side by side, its just pure speculation.

[Sal1950]

You can't know that. The change can be anywhere from subtle to huge. Without actually listening to the amps, side by side, its just pure speculation.

I stand corrected, your right.

Amps are just like different speakers. They will all sound radically different.

BLAH

[firedog]

I'm not sure of that, unless the pound's drop has made those even less money than these:

 

Hypex NCore NC400 Build Service: Stereo, Mono, Bridged Mono – James Romeyn

 

Jud, not your usual attention to detail: best value isn't necessarily cheapest. The Nord amps come in UcD, NC400 and NC500 configurations. NC500 model has upgraded PS and the linked model above has an upgraded input section over stock NCore. That's the point of the NC500. So cheapest? Possibly yes (if you look at the Nord UcD model); best value? Possibly yes (NC500 model with upgraded PS and input module).

[17629v2]

I stand corrected, your right.

Amps are just like different speakers. They will all sound radically different.

BLAH

 

I wouldn't go that far and say all amps sound radically different. If I remember correctly, I'm pretty sure I said this.

 

"The change can be anywhere from subtle to huge."

 

Also, I don't remember saying amps are just like different speakers. But since you bring it up, they can be. Sometimes an amp upgrade will make a bigger difference than speakers. Happens all the time.

[Sal1950]

I wouldn't go that far and say all amps sound radically different. If I remember correctly, I'm pretty sure I said this.

 

"The change can be anywhere from subtle to huge."

 

Also, I don't remember saying amps are just like different speakers. But since you bring it up, they can be. Sometimes an amp upgrade will make a bigger difference than speakers. Happens all the time.

 

Not unless you had a poorly designed amp mated to a radically difficult to drive speaker.. Or one of the components was just plain defective.

You can make these hyperbole claims all you like but they just ain't so.

Just derived as side products of manufacturers and the advertiser controlled review media's attempt to continually obsolete the old and sell the new.

[Jud]

Not unless you had a poorly designed amp mated to a radically difficult to drive speaker.. Or one of the components was just plain defective.

You can make these hyperbole claims all you like but they just ain't so.

Just derived as side products of manufacturers and the advertiser controlled review media's attempt to continually obsolete the old and sell the new.

 

There really is very little way to generalize; it depends not only on the system, but on the listener and what he or she wants from the system's sound.

 

Changing from a PSE Studio IV amp to a Spectral DMA 150 made more difference to me personally than changing from Vandersteen 2Ce to Vandersteen 3A Signature. I'm guessing if you did measurements, objectively there would a greater difference with the latter change, but for me subjectively there was more of a change in the impression the system made on me with the switch in amps. The amp change made everything sound to me as if there were less noise and greater clarity, while the speaker change was subjectively more of a quantitative than a qualitative difference, a step up within the same Vandersteen "sound."

[17629v2]

Not unless you had a poorly designed amp mated to a radically difficult to drive speaker.. Or one of the components was just plain defective.

You can make these hyperbole claims all you like but they just ain't so.

Just derived as side products of manufacturers and the advertiser controlled review media's attempt to continually obsolete the old and sell the new.

 

Sorry, but it doesn't work like that. First, you can't have an opinion on how something sounds without listening to it. I know you think you can, but you can't. As far as side products, advertiser controlled media, obsolete, and whatever buzz words you want to use to support your position, are irrelevant because you don't have a position to support. At the very least, you would need to know what the amps in question are. They can all be current production units with similar price and similar advertising. If anyone wants to stop by my house in NY, I can back up everything I'm claiming with amps that I have laying around. Its not even a challenge.

 

The real issue here, is the so called "objectives" take on things. Although, I think super subjective is a much more accurate term. A growing trend that I see clearly evolving on daily basis, is that people lacking knowledge and experience, are desperately trying to level the playing field so they can be on equal footing with those of us that are far more competent. There's always a simple answer for everything that's backed by irrefutable science. So, for example, if everything you need to know is on a spec sheet, you no longer need experience to back up your position. Now your take on an amp you've never heard is just a valid as mine. Nice and convenient. Other people may we willing to buy crap, but not me. I see it for what it is.

 

Now, before you come back at me with the typical reading comprehension, expectation bias, random quotes taken from others, or whatever your go to simple and scientific excuse is, show me just 1 part of your last post that's not complete speculation on your part. I'll even make it easy for you.

 

"Just derived as side products of manufacturers and the advertiser controlled review media's attempt to continually obsolete the old and sell the new."

 

Give me just one, actual real world example of this. Just one. Show me the ads, reviews, star constellations, tarot cards, etc. Whatever you need to prove your point. I wouldn't have brought up the last two, but you do pull the "magic" card on almost a daily basis, so I figured it was fair to include them.

[Sal1950]

There really is very little way to generalize; it depends not only on the system, but on the listener and what he or she wants from the system's sound.

 

Changing from a PSE Studio IV amp to a Spectral DMA 150 made more difference to me personally than changing from Vandersteen 2Ce to Vandersteen 3A Signature. I'm guessing if you did measurements, objectively there would a greater difference with the latter change, but for me subjectively there was more of a change in the impression the system made on me with the switch in amps. The amp change made everything sound to me as if there were less noise and greater clarity, while the speaker change was subjectively more of a quantitative than a qualitative difference, a step up within the same Vandersteen "sound."

Ah, the heart of the matter.

And possibly you were hearing exactly what you wanted/expected to hear? With some deducive evidence you have no idea what or why your hearing.

But in the end if your happy that's all that counts to you.

Others may deserve a more exacting approach.

[Sal1950]

Sorry, but it doesn't work like that. First, you can't have an opinion on how something sounds without listening to it. I know you think you can, but you can't. As far as side products, advertiser controlled media, obsolete, and whatever buzz words you want to use to support your position, are irrelevant because you don't have a position to support. At the very least, you would need to know what the amps in question are. They can all be current production units with similar price and similar advertising. If anyone wants to stop by my house in NY, I can back up everything I'm claiming with amps that I have laying around. Its not even a challenge.

 

The real issue here, is the so called "objectives" take on things. Although, I think super subjective is a much more accurate term. A growing trend that I see clearly evolving on daily basis, is that people lacking knowledge and experience, are desperately trying to level the playing field so they can be on equal footing with those of us that are far more competent. There's always a simple answer for everything that's backed by irrefutable science. So, for example, if everything you need to know is on a spec sheet, you no longer need experience to back up your position. Now your take on an amp you've never heard is just a valid as mine. Nice and convenient. Other people may we willing to buy crap, but not me. I see it for what it is.

 

Now, before you come back at me with the typical reading comprehension, expectation bias, random quotes taken from others, or whatever your go to simple and scientific excuse is, show me just 1 part of your last post that's not complete speculation on your part. I'll even make it easy for you.

 

"Just derived as side products of manufacturers and the advertiser controlled review media's attempt to continually obsolete the old and sell the new."

 

Give me just one, actual real world example of this. Just one. Show me the ads, reviews, star constellations, tarot cards, etc. Whatever you need to prove your point. I wouldn't have brought up the last two, but you do pull the "magic" card on almost a daily basis, so I figured it was fair to include them.

 

A typical misleading reply. Manufacturers rarely supply measurements that can tell you much about a components true nature. But that doesn't mean that more comprehensive measurements and investigations aren't of great value in choosing a component or in explaining it's sound in real world use. (Yep, without ever hearing it) Believe I linked this review earlier but I'll highlight a couple points.

 

"Both inputs preserved absolute polarity (ie, were non-inverting). The unbalanced input impedance was on the low side, at approximately 7500 ohms at audio frequencies. The balanced input impedance with pin 1 floating was 7650 ohms. Capacitor-coupled source components that have an output impedance that rises at low frequencies will sound a little lean with the RPA-W7EX."

"The output impedance at low and middle frequencies was usefully low, at <0.1 ohm (including 10' of speaker cable), though it rose to greater than 1 ohm at 20kHz. As a result, the modulation of the amplifier's frequency response with our standard simulated test load was ±0.3dB below 10kHz (fig.1, gray trace), but with the top octave boosted by up to 1.5dB."

 

"KM very much liked the sound of the Spec RPA-W7EX. I, however, was disappointed by its measured performance—modern class-D amplifiers, especially those using one of the Hypex modules, measure very much better than this. And with its low input impedance, its dislike of load impedances below 4 ohms, and its high levels of radiated noise, this not an amplifier that can be universally recommended, I feel.—John Atkinson

Read more at Spec RPA-W7EX Real-Sound power amplifier Measurements | Stereophile.com

So here you have a amp of dubious design that complete measurements show can make audible differences that will vary greatly with the complexity of the loads it sees. There are also some other possible audible problems if your care to read closely. JA very delicately warns of possible issues but then feels compeled to get PC and has to remind readers that KM liked the sound. LOL

Then IMHO, as a further nod/wink to the manufacturer and the subjective audiophile community at large, Stereophlie did a follow-up in April. Art Dudley gave this poorly designed tone control of a amp a rave subjective follow-up review. Can't have JA's poor published measurements rocking any bodie$ boat.

Finally in the same April issue Stererophile hands this $6,000 poor representation of modern amplifier design a Class B recommendation, and in such vaguely alludes that it's only Class B cause JA gave it a "not recommended" test bench report.

 

There Mr 17629v2, I hope that satisfies your request and more as I see it.

Beyond that each months product reviews in Stereophile, TAS, etc; will provide you with the evidence you requested.

A large number will allude to how today's soup du jour has surpassed that which was a prior reference component.

In amps, if your strung together all the HUGE improvement hyperbole claims of subjective progress over the last 25 years, Jamesroy's B&K would sound like the a original Edison recording. obviously that is not the case. :)

[YashN]

I have a Referenc200.2 S2 B&K Power amp 225w rms. What would be the next step up from that. I have just purchased a few months back a Partasound 2100 Classic Pre amp. I hope this is the correct forum to ask this. I have the old B&K Reference 200.2 preamp for sale on Craigs list. I guess I should have tried this forum for that. I don't have deep pockets.

 

Try something different: a Single-Ended Triode Tube Amp with highly efficient speakers and then listen to high-rate DSD through it.

 

It will be low wattage, but you may be surprised.

 

You could also bi-amp with your existing SS amp doing amplifier duties for the lower-end frequencies.

[17629v2]

"There Mr 17629v2, I hope that satisfies your request and more as I see it."

 

I'm not satisfied, but for a different reason. I knew you wouldn't respond to any of the points I brought up in my last post. Like always, you just talk about different things in an attempt steer the conversation in another direction so you can get out of answering? You can't even keep whatever position you have consistent. Lets have a look.

 

First you say: "Just derived as side products of manufacturers and the advertiser controlled review media's attempt to continually obsolete the old and sell the new."

 

OK, so we can't trust the audiophile media. If that's case, then why this comment?

 

"A typical misleading reply. Manufacturers rarely supply measurements that can tell you much about a components true nature. But that doesn't mean that more comprehensive measurements and investigations aren't of great value in choosing a component or in explaining it's sound in real world use. (Yep, without ever hearing it) Believe I linked this review earlier but I'll highlight a couple points."

 

So now you reference a review to support your case? You're doing exactly what I said you would do in my other post. The "objective/super subjective" community is trying to convince everyone that you don't need knowledge and first hand experience to operate on the same level as those of us that have it. In your mind, doing this allows you to know more about the audio components in my house, than I do. Same thing with Jud's system.

 

"Ah, the heart of the matter.

And possibly you were hearing exactly what you wanted/expected to hear? With some deducive evidence you have no idea what or why your hearing. But in the end if your happy that's all that counts to you. Others may deserve a more exacting approach."

 

And you can do better without listening to his system, sitting behind your computer? I know you're a nice person Sal, but you're delusional. Sorry if this comes across as being arrogant, but I forgot more about audio than you'll ever know. I say this not as an insult, but just as a statement of fact.

 

Now for the insults.

[Jud]

Ah, the heart of the matter.

And possibly you were hearing exactly what you wanted/expected to hear? With some deducive evidence you have no idea what or why your hearing.

 

I was hearing what I expected to hear. I was familiar with the sound of Spectral amps for about 23 years, and that amp in particular for about 16, before I bought it.

 

But in the end if your happy that's all that counts to you.

Others may deserve a more exacting approach.

 

If we want a more exacting approach, there is the following:

 

At RMAF 2015, I attended a seminar on various types of distortion (what they sound like, what levels may matter) given by the Audio Precision folks. One of the points the presenter made was that different people have different sensitivities to distortion, and respond differently to different types. Toward the end of the seminar, slew rate distortion was demonstrated, which the presenter said most people felt was fairly benign.

 

I couldn't believe how abrasive the sound of that distortion was. I worked on an archaeological dig when I was a kid, and they used to clean old crockery with an ultrasonic cleaning machine. It put out a heck of a lot of upper audible-range frequencies/harmonics, and since its whole purpose was to shake loose centuries-old dirt, those noises were mighty unpleasant. This "benign" distortion reminded me of that machine. It became audible to me before anyone else (each demo increased the level of a form of distortion over a half minute or so while people in the audience raised their hands as it became audible to them), and everyone else appeared to tolerate it better than I did.

 

I bought the Studio IV in 1989 or so on my dealer's and Richard Vandersteen's recommendation. At that time, slew rate wasn't a commonly published spec for amps, and I don't know what the Studio IV's slew rate is. Spectral has always concentrated on building extremely fast amps, and their slew rates reflect that. So it's possible my liking for the Spectral amp reflects the fact it puts out less of a type of distortion that is particularly bothersome to me.

 

Or it could all be expectation bias. I've never claimed to have golden ears, or to be immune to bias. But potential technical support for my preference does exist.

[sockpit]

So back to Nord. Which model and options are the best to check out if one prefers a sound that's on the warm side?

[Sal1950]

I was hearing what I expected to hear. I was familiar with the sound of Spectral amps for about 23 years, and that amp in particular for about 16, before I bought it.

 

 

 

If we want a more exacting approach, there is the following:

 

At RMAF 2015, I attended a seminar on various types of distortion (what they sound like, what levels may matter) given by the Audio Precision folks. One of the points the presenter made was that different people have different sensitivities to distortion, and respond differently to different types. Toward the end of the seminar, slew rate distortion was demonstrated, which the presenter said most people felt was fairly benign.

 

I couldn't believe how abrasive the sound of that distortion was. I worked on an archaeological dig when I was a kid, and they used to clean old crockery with an ultrasonic cleaning machine. It put out a heck of a lot of upper audible-range frequencies/harmonics, and since its whole purpose was to shake loose centuries-old dirt, those noises were mighty unpleasant. This "benign" distortion reminded me of that machine. It became audible to me before anyone else (each demo increased the level of a form of distortion over a half minute or so while people in the audience raised their hands as it became audible to them), and everyone else appeared to tolerate it better than I did.

 

I bought the Studio IV in 1989 or so on my dealer's and Richard Vandersteen's recommendation. At that time, slew rate wasn't a commonly published spec for amps, and I don't know what the Studio IV's slew rate is. Spectral has always concentrated on building extremely fast amps, and their slew rates reflect that. So it's possible my liking for the Spectral amp reflects the fact it puts out less of a type of distortion that is particularly bothersome to me.

 

Or it could all be expectation bias. I've never claimed to have golden ears, or to be immune to bias. But potential technical support for my preference does exist.

 

Thats great and it all sounds extremely reasonable.

 

Except for the part where you reveal that amps age/heritage.

To listen to some here that design had it's wheel reinvented quite a few times around already and should have long ago been retired. LOL .