Phil and NIck thanks for your response. I pulled my jumpers out to compare.
They had been in place since last winter when I was running them with the Cambridge Audio amp. Was really suprised at how much different the Jungson sounded with the jumpers out.
With jumpers the difference in bass was most obvious. There was a slight loss in depth (this would probably be alot more noticable on the 888's) but what really struck me was the loss of fullness and impact. Somthing that seems to be a signature of FA.
I figured it was speaker related. But its obvious that its amp dependent as well.
Looking at the strengths and weaknesses of the CA amp I think (or at least have a theory) why. According to a TNT review (which I agree with) the amp has a recessesed midrange, really dosen't try to do low bass but instead concentrated its bass energy in the 50hz and above range and puts the brakes on on dynamic passages. In otherwords a boom and sizzle amp.
I'm thinking the better integration I was hearing was a slight loss of bass energy and a relaxed high that helped the midrange not sound so recessed. The concentration of energy in the midbass region may have helped mask some of the loss of fullness in this region.
Bottom line it worked very well with the CA but not with the Jungson.
Live and learn.
They had been in place since last winter when I was running them with the Cambridge Audio amp. Was really suprised at how much different the Jungson sounded with the jumpers out.
With jumpers the difference in bass was most obvious. There was a slight loss in depth (this would probably be alot more noticable on the 888's) but what really struck me was the loss of fullness and impact. Somthing that seems to be a signature of FA.
I figured it was speaker related. But its obvious that its amp dependent as well.
Looking at the strengths and weaknesses of the CA amp I think (or at least have a theory) why. According to a TNT review (which I agree with) the amp has a recessesed midrange, really dosen't try to do low bass but instead concentrated its bass energy in the 50hz and above range and puts the brakes on on dynamic passages. In otherwords a boom and sizzle amp.
I'm thinking the better integration I was hearing was a slight loss of bass energy and a relaxed high that helped the midrange not sound so recessed. The concentration of energy in the midbass region may have helped mask some of the loss of fullness in this region.
Bottom line it worked very well with the CA but not with the Jungson.
Live and learn.