Husk, as promised, I have checked with the factory.... JRDG has no immediate plans to offer either M625 or the future M925 in black livery.... These devices will be finished in Silver only at this time. G. |
It looks like Kawika will have an M625 in his system very shortly... He will be in a position of commenting on the sound before long. G. |
Hi Husk01, I do not know if black will be available on M625 and M925.... I will contact the factory and will post back here. G. |
It is my understanding that M625 has just started to ship after RMAF. I have heard the device at RMAF side-by-side to the older M301 monoblocks.... M625 easily outperformed M301 for all audible parameters but one.... Only residual advantage of M301 over M625 was size of stage marginally larger.... After all, M301 yields at least 800W over 8 Ohms, versus the 300W of M625. G. |
Dtanclim, at the last RMAF a number of people, including myself, preferred M625 with very little break-in over a pair of well broken-in M301 monoblocks. Our own Kawika should receive his new M625 very soon. He might be able to share some impressions before long. Kawika is replacing an M312.
G. |
Kawika, I have heard rumors that the bias of M625 changes as the device warms up, and moves more towards class A.... Keep us posted. G. |
Husk01, I do not know if M925 will run at CES. I have also no information on how hot M925 will feel to the touch: simply extrapolating from the M625 heat dissipation would be in itself a dicy affair.
Which brings me to a question to Kawika: How hot does M625 run after 30 hours of operation.... and how does heat generation/dissipation change with changes in sustained loudness? G. |
Arnie, Kawika promised me that, if I behave on Audiogon for the next little while, he will visit me in a few weeks and will bring his M625 along so we can listen to it in my own system.... Want to join us? It will be loads of fun! G. |
Hi husk01, my M925 is on order. As soon as the amps are ready I'll be placed somewhere in the cue.
Arnie, David and I will definitely keep you posted.
G. |
Husk, the delivery schedule will be set only after the product is released. I have no hard information about release schedule. If anyone attends CES, they may ask Jeff or Brandon directly at the JRDG suite. Any info from them has a lot more value than any of my own speculations.
G. |
Dtanclim, I noticed the spheres when I was at the last RMAF.... I asked Jeff Rowland about them. He told me that the spheres are made from Delrin, and he prefers their sonic effect to that of the traditional Sorbothane pads. I do not know if the audible improvement is real or not. I rather suspect that using the spheres as footers is mostly happenstance: they are derived from their use as chassis separators in multi-chassis devices like Criterion and the upcoming M925 monoblocks. |
Keith, as far as I know there is little or no commonality between 150W 10-year old M10 and 300W M625, except that both operate in class A/B, and use some forms of SMPS.
I have no real information whether Rowland has "abandoned" class D or not. Fact is that at this time tech detail is a little scant.... All I know beyond the product page on the Jeffrowland.com site is that M625 and M925 operate in class A/B with some form of "variable self adjusting bias" (my term not JRDG's) and no "global feedback" (their term).
Technical commonality with M201 is even less, M201 being an entry level device and M625 far from it. As for M925, it will cost approx 10X M201... I sure hope there is some difference beyond chassis and price tag, or I'm going to be one unhappy camper when I finally get my own units (grins!)
As for the sound, I have not heard M625 and M201 in the same system, but purely from fickle memory, they do not seem to sound the same at all at all at all.
G. |
I just called the factory. To start with, at CES, JRDG appears to have 2 suites, probably in the Venetian:
35-204
30-231
The current price of M625 is $13,500; current price of Corus is $12,200.
Yes I heard Corus, but not in my system. I have not determined yet audible differences from the Criterion that I own.
There is no ICE nor other Class D technology in M625. Apparently the device is packed full of A/B circuitry. Device weighs 54Lbs or so. Finally some specs have been posted. You will find them in the M625 section of the JRDG knowledge base at:
http://jeffrowland.com/websitepublisher/amplifiers-model-625.html |
I see the cause of your surprise.... M625 does not use heavy toroidal transformers in power supply. Power supply is high speed switch mode, preceeded by a power factor correction-based rectifier, hence the contained weight. |
Dtanclim, as you know I do not have direct experience with M625 in my own system.... My amp is still the Rowland M312. Furutech and Shunyata CX series worked for me remarkably well on M312 in a manner that I personally deem to be synergistic with JRDG sound. G. |
Fair question Husk01... We won't know anything about M925 heat generation/dissipation until the amp is released. G. |
Clavil, by coincidence I did try the on/off procedure on M625 for those very same reasons..... I could not hear anything what so ever from the speakers when I switch M625 to operation and then back to standby. Conversely, I always hear a very faint click from the right speaker when I turn on M312. Kawika is more qualified than I am to report on M625 powerup/down noises.... as he has an M625 at home.
Corus is much closer technologically to Criterion than it is to Capri. Did you see the used Criterion from Europe currently offered on Audiogon? Excellent price!
G. |
That is exciting Isvaldo, DartZeal makes extremely fine sounding devices. if you ever have the opportunity of comparing Criterion and the DartZeal pre side-by-side, please let us all know your impressions. G. |
Claude, there was a typo in DCStep's post. Rowland suite initially featured M301 monos, not M302 stereo amp. His findings match my own. G. |
Dtanclim, the price of $9800 for the Aeris DAC is correct. It was used in a few systems at CES, including the Rowland suite. I have not heard the device, so I can't comment about its sound or other performance parameters directly, but third party reports have been favorable. |
Thank you Isvaldo for encouraging people to use their own ears. Unfortunately I have never heard M312 and M625 in the same system. Therefore, at this time, I do not know what I prefer between the two, nor I have any real idea if they sound the same, or different. |
Husk, nothing new on M925. On the other hand.....
For the last 2.5 weeks, I have been breaking in an M625 in my system with surprising results.... The device has now approximately 300 hours of operations.
For the first couple of hours right out of the box, M625 was very pleasing, if somewhat 'skinny' sounding, with not too much resolution, and the stage it created was no more than 60% in width and height of M312.
After that it entered a funk of about 100 hours, where it sounded closed in and not terribly resolving, with transients tending to sound harsh.... I confess that I was temporarily underwhelmed.
Between 100 and 150 hours it oscillated between darkness and peakiness. During this time, the stage proceeded to broaden and rise in hight, to about 80% of what M312 does.... Stage started to become deeper, and resolution started to creep in.
Things really get interesting after about 150 hours.... performance oscillations start to abate rather rapidly, and what I think to be the character of the device begins to emerge....
Width and height of the stage end up comparable if not larger than on 312, but stage is MUCH deeper and layered. This goes with a much more precise virtual location of various instruments/performers. As a result what I perceive now is a significantly greater sense of 'reality' of the virtual stage than on M312.... even more of the sense of the stage being recreated rather than 'depicted'. This also means that depending on the recording or the radio broadcast, I get much more a sense of the instrument being relatively close, or far from me, and surrounded by 'real' space, including audience and walls. This also means that while the performance have considerable 'presence', the sound is never forward, and the frontmost instruments hardly ever seem to emerge from positions more than a foot forward from the front of the speakers. A sideeffect of the positional accuracy is however that recordings where the engineered has fiddled with montages of sorts (like on some SACD remasters) become much more prone than usual to reveal solo orchestral instruments being suddenly shifted to the front of the stage.... (I still do not think that orchestral players are in fact encouraged or even allowed to zip about the stage on chairs with casters (grins!)).
I always thought that M312 was a champion at reproducing bass accurately and musically, but I discovered that M625 runs circles around it..... Bass is significantly more present than on M312, but in a more pitched, accurate, and harmonically rich way. This gives an impression of bass being paradoxically stronger, earthier, and lighter at the same time.
Midrange is textured and harmonically complex in the Rowland tradition, but even more so than on 312..... and the treble is extremely open, detailed, and 'feathery', without a seeming trace of brickwalling the upper harmonic series. Interestingly, M625 reabsorbs certain small treble intermodulations that were still detectable with m312 on complex passages of sostenuto multivoice treble.... rather than the typical coalescing 'jarries', what I hear is distinct instruments that play distinct melodic lines in slightly different positions in space.
The result in orchestral pieces is an unexpected sense of expansive grandness combined with a chamber-like pinpoint location accuracy. Anyone concerned about M625 transient authority? Well... dont be concerned.... I am probably getting greater authority and transient from M625 than from M312.... I suspect that this may be because, as distortions are lower on m625, much more of the correct musical signal is getting to my ears, and as a consequence higher SPL levels are possible without ill effect.
2 more issues are worth mentioning:
Heat dissipation.... Machine right out of the box operates relatively cooly for a couple of days, then gradually warms up to a hefty toastiness, just shy of feeling uncomfortable to the touch. It seems though that past the 250 hours mark, the operating temperature may have dropped a couple of degrees, to what I would consider 'pleasantly toasty'.... No problem at all keeping my hands/fingers on the unit.... and temperature appears to be the same no matter where I touch the amp.
Last but not least, the only thing I hear when I turn on the amp is a soft delayed click from internal relay switches with no audible pop from the speakers... but when I turn the amp off, a very moderate pop is produced on each speaker.
If anyone were still wondering if I thought M625 were at least 'as good' as M312, or it were shy of it, my current impression is that the new device constitutes a very significant step forward in musicality, resolution, staging, imaging, and.... yes, authority. I can only wonder at what is expecting us with M925.... whenever it shows up, that is (sighs).
I am not at all sure if M625 has completed breakin yet.... and I suspect it has not. I'll post more impressions in the next few weeks.
G. |
Hi Husk, I usually turn M625 off once per day for a while to facilitate breakin.... This is per Rowland recommendation. . Lately I have been turning it off overnight. I have great hopes for M925, but until I hear it in my system.... it's pure guesswork. G. |
Optimus, the comparison of M312 with M625 is for me an interesting one. Until M625, M312 has been my preferred amp of record. I have commented abundantly ("ad nauseam" many would say) about my preference of M312 over most other amps -- SS, tubed, and switch mode -- without price restrictions. For my application--90% classical music, 7% jazz, and 3% other types, M312 has yielded more 'soul' and listenable musicality than other amps I have had the fortune of listening to.... I had never perceived any idiosyncratic ICEpowerness in M312. So much so that I considered it superior in all respects, except for sheer grunt-power, to my old Rowland M7 monoblocks.... after all peak current of 175A for M7 vs approximately 40A on M312 does count for something.
Having said that, M625 in my opinion has significantly more 'soul' than M312... I think it is a combination of many things.... the much sweeter treble, the better pitched and much more controlled bass, the clarity of harmonics, the sense of graceful realism that I get from enhanced instrument layering, positioning, imaging.... ambient cues that are present but also delicate and never muddy.... and a rendering of extremely low level detail such as vibrato which is where the emotional, the poetic and the 'soul' come in I suppose. I used to be extremely pleased by M312's rendering of large orchestras, but M625 lets individual instruments emerge much more than on M312..... but never in an 'etched' or strident way.... always in a manner that makes me sink into the musical event, even in sharp transients and fortissimo passages.
Guido |
Isvaldo, you bring up 2 very excellent points....
1. Until the M625 has gone over the initial 150 hours of breakin grundge, M312 does easily sound better than M625. After that, my impression is gradually reversed.
2. Hypnotic is perhaps a term that fits well to describe the effect of Criterion + M625 + my Vienna speakers.... Thank you for the suggestion.
Guido |
Claude, M625 has the same 2 sets of Cardas binding posts, just like M312. The only difference is that on M625 set "A", that is the outer set, is rotated 90 degrees, to facilitate binding from the side. Unless there is something that I am missing, If a speaker wire can be used on M312, there should be no reason why the wire should be incompatible with M625 |
Isvaldo, I am glad you are enjoying Electrocompaniet AW250R. Unfortunately, as I have never auditioned AW250R, I have absolutely no idea if I would enjoy it more than JRDG M625. Over the years, I have realized that my guesswork has often been disappointingly off the mark, and has been at odds with, well .... live listening results.
If you ever have the opportunity of auditioning AW250R and M625 in the same system, please let us know your live impressions.
G. |
Hi Isvaldo, I do love GamuT products, and have in fact already have reviewed their CD3 for PFO ... I am sure I will review more GamuT products in the future.
You have just stirred my interest in ElectroCompaniet. I'll try to audition ElectroCompaniet amps at RMAF this coming October. If I like what I hear, after I receive and fully break in and evaluate the upcoming JRDG M925, I might try listening to ElectroCompaniet amps in my own system, and would contrast it with the sound of several SS amps, including M312, M625, and M925. I have simply no idea about the possible outcome.
Concerning M625, it is in my system right now, but I have not completed its evaluation. At this point M625 appears to be exceeding M312 comfortably in:
* Frequency extension;
* harmonic development;
* Mid bass linearity;
Micro detail;
* Three-dimensionality / solidity of stage and imaging.
M312 conversely still yields an overall larger image, which is quite understandable, given M312's higher power rating.
One thing extremely surprising about M625 is that bass controll is improved over M312, even though M625 damping factor is only 200, versus M312's 1,000.
Hope this helps.
G.
|
Claude, you are absolutely correct.... For example, using my standard test track of the Old Castle piece by Dvorak played by Inna Poroscina, M312 induces a piano image wider/taller than M625 ... However, M625's staging/imaging is more coherent .... staging is deeper, and the piano has more 'solidity' than on M312, for lack of a better word.
G. |
Isvaldo, M625 yields 550W at 4 Ohms, 300W at 8 Ohms. Idle power consumption is 100W. Standby power consumption appears to be 1W.
G. |
Krell888, the info from your singapore dealer is very close to the mark. JRDG is preparing to release a bridgeable amplifier seemingly housed in the same chassis as M625. Being bridgeable, one would be able to run the device as stereo, or as a pair of monoblock chassis. As far as I know, in stereo the power rating is similar to M625. Not sure what the rating is in mono operations. Please note that this is not at all the M925. M925 remains in development and will apparently be a 4 chassis mono product. I know very little about the new bridgeable amp, except for what I mentioned already. As soon as I receive some official info, I will post it.
I have no idea whether this new JRDG bridgeable amp would be preferable for anyone to any/all of the excellent GamuT amplifiers mentioned by Isvaldo.
To anyone interested, the information page for GamuT D200I just adopted by Isvaldo is at:
http://www.gamutaudio.com/en-GB/Products/Electronics/Amplifiers/D200i-Stereo-Power-Amplifier.aspx
G. |
BabyBear, Harold Camping has just announced a 5 months reprieve on the end of the world. You and I have another full 5 months to repent from our sins of audiophilic lust ... October 21st ... more/less at the end of RMAF 2011 I suspect. By that time I might even have M925in the system . Will I enjoy it more than M312 and M625? I have no idea ... Ask me in the fall.
Denon, I am much more familiar with JRDG Criterion than with Corus, although it is generally believed that Corus and Criterion are sonically very close. Corus and Criterion are significantly more refined than Capri ... They better be, at 4 and 6 times the price of Capri respectively.
On the other hand, as Capri's output impedance in balanced mode is only 80 Ohms, there will be no problem interfacing Capri with M625, which has an input impedance of 10,000 Ohms. If you enjoy the Rowland sonic signature as I do, the consideration of selecting Capri or Corus/Criterion becomes simply one of budget.
Guido |
