I am new to the higher end of music listening, actually I haven’t started the listening part yet. I have just purchased an Emotiva XSP-1 pre and a pair of Magnepan 1.7i’s. My listening room is 14x14 but one wall is not closed off completely and there is an additional open space connected that is 8x9. My budget has been unexpectedly diminished more by having to buy new connectors and speakers cables. I just assumed I would be able to use my old RCA connectors and my 50’ spool of speaker wire I bought from Radio Shack 25 years ago. I will pause while you laugh....Anyway, the jist of it is is that I’ve got $2500 left for an amp. I need advice on what would be good for my setup? What would last the next 25 years, as I am a poor man with expensive tastes and will probably not be able to make any further upgrades. Would something used and older be out of date technically in 10-15 years? Could I consider something new that would be adequate for that price point? Should I go mono or two channel? Thank you for your consideration and reply.
Just a caution if what you are seeking is "uber resolution". Although you might "hear" everything, you may not find this kind of system musically or emotionally satisfying over the long haul. I've encountered systems like this that are very much on the "sterile" side and fatiguing to listen to over time. Listen for a sound that draws you into the music and provides the "goosebump" effect, even if it's not the most highly resolving system. Also, an FYI that the Maggies do tend to sound better with a bit of volume. Their sound doesn't really "bloom" at lower listening levels. You also have to be VERY careful with speaker placement. Inches can make a huge difference, and the listening position for them is quite narrow. My audio room has just one chair. Something that my wife has commented on more than once... ;-) However, it's a great chair to be in late at night, lights down, hoppy craft brew in hand, and a favorite artist hovering in space in front of me.
If you mean uber resolution and analytical sound at high volumes, then pro-audio / pro-audio leaning gear. PMC Active monitors, for example, driven by pro gear.
I envy you your love for, and expertise in, playing pool. Many years ago I often earned myself a few beers when playing in the local bars of my college town. :) However, I want to point out that your analogies are not exactly parallel. When playing pool, even though your technique and strategies might be varied, your goal is quite straightforward. You need to sink the balls you've called into their pockets. Quite objective. However, when assembling an audio system, your goal (as David pointed out) is very subjective. For example, I tend to listen to a lot of acoustic roots music (blues, folk, bluegrass) and I like a relatively "forward" and intimate sound while maintaining a nice amount of "air" around images. Many of my classical music loving audiophile friends like a much more "removed" sense, as though they're somewhat well back in a symphony hall with good acoustics. So, my perfect sound is quite a bit different than theirs. Find your own sound and move toward it.... As far as actually hearing a difference in sound between components, you will unless you have some kinda substantial physical hearing loss. Many a time an acquaintance of mine has sat in my listening room for the first time saying that they really don't have "good" ears and that they probably won't hear much difference from their car radio, etc. Within a few tunes, their eyes have widened and they are expressing the various aspects of sound that they've never heard before sitting at home or in their cars. It's not a particularly special skill. It's just something to enjoy!
So if that happens I don’t want to realize that I purchased the lesser quality product even though there was a better quality product for the same price point.
This is where it gets very tricky, because it is quite subjective. Depends on you.
@chrisoshea yeah that’s the idea, I just want the best sound quality for what I can spend. I’m posting on several sights and reading every reply to decide based on those who are more knowledgeable than me about audio. Now if you walk in to my second home, the local pool hall, and want to learn about the nuances of shooting pool I’m your guy. I’ve been shooting seriously for over 20 years. I can tell you the differences in quality and play of all things involved; tables, balls, sticks, cue shafts, cue stick tips, ferrules, chalk and cloth. That’s just the equipment. I’m a novice and may not even be able to discern the difference in a higher fidelity system. Just as you may not be able to tell the difference in the skill level of two pool players who to you may be both “great players and better than I will ever be.” I would be able to show why this player is more skillful than the other. But someday you may become better and then even good at pool and would be able to also critique and discuss players’ abilities just as I may be able to identify good audio equipment and discuss why it is so. So if that happens I don’t want to realize that I purchased the lesser quality product even though there was a better quality product for the same price point.
Somewhat off the topic of amplification, but related to getting the most out of your 1.7s.... Two things that significantly improved the sound of my Maggies were upgrading the tweeter jumpers and the fuses. I currently have Cardas jumpers and Synergistic Research Black fuses in mine and am very happy with the results. I know many folks will scoff at these suggestions, but hearing is believing. I’m a believer. Cheers and happy listening.
For economical and yet very good sound reproduction, why not audition a Crown XLS amp? The Crown XLS 1502 will give you 300 W into 8 ohms, but it also covers 4 ohms and 2 ohms with higher power with the ability to bridge them. They are Class D, very efficient with power and have come a long way in very good sound reproduction with great detail, good tonal reproduction, sound staging width and depth, and transparency. Have a listen. The Crown XLS 1502 can be found new at $399.99 . . . possibly lower on line.
That been said, one point that I feel is critical to this debate and perhaps the ultimate arbitrator, is humans’ hearing physiology and how the brain processes the sound.
Right. One point that has been trumpeted by @atmasphere is how humans perceive distortion, but most egregiously so at the higher odd order harmonics. Glad to understand he designs his products with that (presumed correct) fact in mind. Unfortunate though that manufacturers do not include this type of data in their specifications.
I actually enjoy reading views that oppose the mainstream and encourage the folks to continue presenting those views. No single view is always right. That been said, one point that I feel is critical to this debate and perhaps the ultimate arbitrator, is humans’ hearing physiology and how the brain processes the sound. Just like (almost) everything among us, our ears hear sounds differently. Like many others on this site I’m also an engineer, trained academically and have been practicing in the field for the past 36 years. So I believe in data just like our self claimed resident scientist. But I also believe our ear/brain process that data differently.
This debate is generally pointless since no agreement will ever be reached. Enough said.
I drive my XPA-2 pretty hard (especially when the wife is out of town) and I've never had an issue at all! Also remember the Emotiva five yer warranty that transfers to new owners.
I had Maggie 1.7 and just upgraded to 3.7i and can tell you the Parasound Halo 2.1 is a wonderful pairing. You have everything you need in this integrated. Usually demos or slightly used ones show up for around $1600. Had Emos previously even with the high watt rating they just didn't put out enough ampage and were always blowing.
I’ve had Maggies for many years and currently enjoy the 1.7s in my listening room. During the last several years I’ve found that Rogue amplification really makes these speakers sing. I’ve used the Cronus Magnum integrated that did a very nice job considering it’s a full tube amp. However, their very reasonably priced Sphinx integrated won my heart (even when compared to its big brother the Pharaoh). You could purchase that for well under your budget and sell your preamp, or you could check out Rogue’s very fine stereo power amps that are based on the same technology as the Sphinx. By the way, don’t let the Class D status scare you. These are very musical amps, probably due to the tube preamp sections and the linear power supplies. The Maggies love them. So do I. :)
If you like the Emotiva Pre/pro, then get a used (or new equivalent) Emotiva XPA-2 power amp. Maggies will love the 300w/8 ohm & 500w 4 Ohm power!! New about $1000.00. don't let others here convince you that you have to spend more.
"
50’ spool of speaker wire I bought from Radio Shack 25 years ago. I will pause while you laugh"
I ain't laughing. Until a few weeks ago I was using Auvio Square Parallel Premium 12 AWG Speaker cable I picked up at Radio Shack for $0.48/ft. It's really good stuff, 99.95 OFC and half the strands are silver coated. I finally gave in to curiosity and replaced them with some $1,500 cables that I got for less than $100. I am very happy I didn't spend more. But that's me.
IMO
the scientific audiophiles among us seemed to have missed an essential
point in relying on low distortion or measures of human hearing ...
It seems to me that most of the audiophiles here who claim to be scientists are nothing of the sort. They typically offer data only collected by others; they don't confirm the data or results in their own tests. At the same time, they demand data from anyone with whom they disagree, and label them "faith-based" audiophiles or believers in magic. Meanwhile, huge numbers of audiophiles testify to what they hear - such as differences between amplifiers - that the "scientists" can't explain other than to point to things such as the very confirmation bias to which the "scientists" are obviously vulnerable. If you apply Occam's razor, it's pretty easy to ascertain the truth here.
IMO the scientific audiophiles among us seemed to have missed an essential point in relying on low distortion or measures of human hearing. The goal, ultimately, is not accuracy. Accurate reproduction is impossible. Reproduction of what? The instruments? The engineers’ concept of the bands sound? The microphone manufacturers concept? it seems to me what many if not most of us are seeking is the maximum satisfaction with the sound of a system we’ve chosen and assembled with any and all of the elements we deem effective. This may or may not coincide with ‘accuracy’. Whether it does is irrelevant to anyone but the individual audiophile. In 40 years I have never heard two major components that sounded identical. To me. Btw. I’ve blind demo’d ic’s and speaker wire for many friends and not had a single one fail to hear some difference... which they preferred...now that’s something else entirely.
Always an interesting argument, paper graphs vs. ears. I have sold high end audio and had a company selling and installing high end systems. The brands I have sold or were the dealer for were JMLab/Focal, B&W, Maggies, SoundLab, Ayre, AudioResearch, Acurus, Aragon, YBL, Wadia, PS Audio, NAD, Rotel, PSB, Harbeth, HSU subs and quite a few others. I also have an Associates Degree in Electronics so I can understand a lot of how circuits work. And I can solder. A lot of theoretical Engineers can't. My point is, I have heard and compared a lot of different brands and models for a living, and I liked my job. I have made my own interconnects and since a lot of my systems were in-ceiling/in-wall stuff I even bought 15 different volume knobs and tested them. BTW, Knoll's resistor based knobs sounded the best, way better than pots.
So yes, Virginia, there is a difference in amplifiers. I sought different audio gear and interconnects because of their differences. Because people hear and gravitate towards a particular sound/flavor. That's why there's not one generic box that says AMP on it for everybody. I think all of the brands I sold were quality, but they did sound different. Probably because I played shred guitar for years I like the sound of tubes. On paper they may not spec well, but the most sound I've gotten out of paper was shaking it. There are a lot of fraudulent or misguided attempts to enhance sound quality but I've seen some weird tricks that work. One is big ass AC cords-12ga. high strand count cable with hospital (Watt-style) connectors. After running the electricity through miles of Romex why do they make a difference in the sound through speakers? Doesn't work on some systems but my AR LS-8 and Aragon 8008BB appreciated them. Personally I really liked the Aragon amps, especially the 8008 series. And yes, they sound great with a non-balanced pre. I like tube pres myself, but that's just me.
So my job was to listen and compare and then present my recommendations to the customer based on qualifying questions like their existing gear, room environment, tastes in music and so on. If you do something for 20 years you should get good at it. And for every customer I had to prove to them there was a difference, an improvement or no sale. Depending on reviews only sucks, I trust my ears to know what's good (for me, anyway).
To wrap up a long-winded conversation: if you can find a high end shop near you and if they're a 'good' shop they'll work with you. Sometimes audio repair shops will carry used and consignment gear. If not check out reviews from good audio mags like Stereophile (I hope they're still around) or the like. CNET ain't gonna cut it for good audio but I do like their TV reviews (I'm ISF trained). Manufacturers sites usually archive reviews on older models as well.
You are going to get a lot of recommendations. Opinions are like... bellybuttons... (polite version), everyone's got one. Since this is a long term purchase take your time. Join an audio-enthusiast club if there's one nearby or post a c-list ad in 'electronics' and start your own. I used to attend monthly meetings at members houses to hear their systems, listen to mostly good music and geek out about sound and motorcycles (lot of members also rode). Enjoy the hunt, most of the above recommendations are good ones.
Man... would look no further then classe. Great pricing used right now with them newly being purchased by Marantz. If your not comfortable there wouldn’t look past Bryston
Although I appreciate the scientific approach that some here have, I find it laughable that many claim, little, to no difference, in sound, between amplifiers / preamplifiers, not to mention cables, feet, and such.
If measurements are that all-knowing and supersede our hearing ability, then why is there even a market for supertweeters? Our ears remain the final arbiter.
First, buy a used amp. You'll get almost twice the value for your money. There's a highly modified McCormack DNA-0.5 available here now well below your $2500 budget that will last forever and you'll never feel the need to apologize or upgrade. Another good choice is Bryston -- I'd focus on the SST2 models as I think they're the sweet spot of sound and value (btw there's a 4BSST2 for sale here now near your price range) -- that is also bullet proof and offers a 20-year warranty. My choice would be the McCormack, but I'd defer to Maggie owners if it's got enough juice to get the most out of your speakers -- although you've got a relatively small room and the 0.5 is conservatively rated so I'd think it'd be fine.
Second, my opinion is that these amps outclass your preamp -- not that you don't have a decent preamp, it's just that these amps are really good. And, at least in my experience, the preamp can have an even bigger impact on what you hear than the amp. Bottom line, at some point you should probably consider upgrading your preamp (or at least audition other preamps in your system) as your speakers and amp will give you even more of what they're capable of.
Lastly, despite what some others have said here, interconnects, speaker, and power cables all make a big and meaningful difference once you reach a certain level. Whether you need to spend more or less is entirely listener- and/or system-dependent, but at the very least it's more than worth experimenting. I'd just say this -- buy used and you can usually swap wires in or out at little or no loss. In fact, I'll throw out an opening salvo. There's a pair of Acoustic Zen Hologram speaker cables (very good all-around cables) available here now for 500 bucks. If they don't make a big difference over lamp cord or whatever you're already using, good for you and just sell them. At least you'll know, for your specific situation, that you're in good shape (obviously you can do the same for interconnects, where I'd recommend AZ Silver Reference series 1 or 2 -- they're both very good). BTW, by coincidence while researching your question I happened to see this review of your speakers with a Bryston amp and some Acoustic Zen wires -- just FYI.
For a start, odd harmonic distortion present in some systems is more discernible while high levels of even order HD are less offensive. As far as losing information, let’s assume a straight wire with gain. Now, electronically, consider the hundreds of PN junctions in a digital system compared to a non-digital system. Then the actual ADC/DAC conversion processes? Digital amplifiers? The replication losses changing formats? SMPS power? If you take a direct to analogue recording and digitize it, you will lose information due to losses inherent in the process. Of course, remastering can add in subtle delays and effects to enhance the sound but it is not the same as the precious original. Again, in other words, once you subject the original signal to interference (pun intended), you lose data.
cleeds, you are so tiresome in your deliberate misrepresentation of what I say.
If you find my posts tiresome, don't read them. But when you make absurd claims - such as those with whom you disagree believe in magic - please expect to be challenged. It goes with the territory you've staked out as yours.
noromance, that then would be the distortion level that humans cannot hear. Indeed, there is enough research that we can tolerate or not even discern quite high levels of distortion. My question was, however, how resolution is lost if it is not by such distortion?
cleeds, you are so tiresome in your deliberate misrepresentation of what I say. 1 It was suggested that I think everything sounds the same. 2 My answer was that this may be true in the case of electronics if some conditions are met. But those conditions do matter, and I have repeatedly stated them here. I have also repeatedly backed them up with emperical evidence. If you have empirical evidence to the contrary, you are welcome to present it. 3 The other part of my answer was that speakers and room interaction produce far from perfect results. I do not think that is controversial.
Distortion and resolution are intimately related: with distortion you lose resolution. However, you are right there is a level at which distortion or non flat response become irrelevant, once they dive below the threshold of human hearing. That was exactly my point. But how do you define loss of data or detail?
Actually, yes you have ... you've just placed a few conditions on your claim.
I have argued that amplifiers may sound differently for a few
identifiable and avoidable reasons commonly ignored by audiophiles, and
not for the magic reasons
that they think.
If there's a practitioner of magic here, it would apply at least as much to you - and maybe more - as it does to your critics. "Magic" is an illusion, and relies on things such as misdirection, psychology and manipulating expectations.
@willemj Interesting points on total distortion comparison. My take is that if the measurable distortions (or not perfectly flat frequency response) do not detract from the general resolution of the system, then it is not a big deal. One can get hung up about small quantitative measurements while missing the bigger picture- the quality of the music reproduction. In other words, the goal is not to lose data at any cost, rather than minimum distortion at any cost. In fact DHT SETs with horns reproducing every minute nuance of emotion from a 60s mono LP may be more satisfying than an ultra low measured distortion rig which loses that detail at every step of the reproduction process. Remastering for example. Further, while vinyl has measureable and audible distortions, a great analogue recording will always sound better than one in which the data has been irretrievably lost.
Just read my posts more carefully. I am not saying that everything sounds the same. I have argued that amplifiers may sound differently for a few identifiable and avoidable reasons commonly ignored by audiophiles, and not for the magic reasons that they think. Amplifiers are clipping on input if there is a gain mismatch between the output of a source and the input of the amplifier, they may have a load dependent frequency response (largely a tube isssue) and they may be clipping on output because of insufficient power. Finally there is also an observational issue when sighted comparisons are made at different levels, and with too much time in between. The result has been too much agonizing over electronics and too much budget allocated to them. For the industry this is attractive because this is where the profit margins are (I will not even mention the cable folly). I have also argued that the links of the chain at the interface between the mechanical and the electrical are far more flawed than people seem to think, and deserve more attention and a bigger slice of the budget (my argument is not that good audio is cheap). This is easily demonstrated by even the most basic and uncontroversial measurements. The explanation is simple, and nothing more than mainstream physics: these components have mass, and mass vibrates, is slow, and behaves in a nonlinear way. So microphones are imperfect, even the best ones (but this is out of our hands), and so is the vinyl link of the chain, and at the final end of the chain so are the speakers and their interaction with the room. For this simple reason I have abandoned vinyl years ago, and for the same reason I have bought what I think of as the best speakers money can buy (Quad electrostats, i.e. dipoles with less room interaction, and yes I listened to them), and applied room equalization to deal with the room modes generated by my sub (and yes I can easily hear the improvement). In all its simplicity the argument is nothing more than that you do well to allocate your money to reduce the biggest errors in the reproduction chain. The strategy is a simple combination of science and engineering principles and economics: what is the marginal sonic utility of an extra $1000 spent on speakers compared to an extra $1000 spent on electronics? How does an improvement in electronics distortion from for example 0.002% to 0.001% compare to the sonic benefits of a reduction in speaker distortion from 2% to 1%? In the first case you go from 2.002% to 2.001%, in the latter from 2.002% to 1.002%. You can do a similar sum with frequency response, where good electronics can easily stay within 0.2 dB, but speakers have a very hard time staying with 2 dB. Their real world in-room response is even far worse. So I did start a discussion of room acoustics, but that has fizzled out for apparent lack of interest. So no, I will not claim that all gear sounds the same, or that no improvements are possible.
So you claim that your hearing is better than e.g. an Audio Precision Audio Analyzer? Do you have evidence for this?
Not necessarily. My claim is that my amplifiers sound differently depending on many factors. E.g. different coupling caps, tubes, feet, power cable. It is quite obvious. In fact, changing my platter mat changes the sound dramatically. Reproducible over a number of tests. Perhaps it is not the sensitivity of my hearing which is in question here, but of yours.
Thank you sir. This forum needs more posters like you. When I read the OP's first post in this thread I cringed at the idea that a person would spend money on wires before shopping for a critical component such as an amp. I am so happy that I was able to secure an education in electrical theory and a working knowledge of electronics repairing and maintaining radio equipment in F-4 and F-15 fighters before my foray into audio components. I have no doubt that with the stuff being marketed as audio enhancing technology these days that I have saved myself countless thousands of dollars that would have otherwise been wasted. Keep up the good work.
I second the statement that more power is better than less power and that power on the used market is much more affordable than buying new. Buy more power than you need is my advice.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
