2. amps-preamps
  3. 1036097850

high-end vs. ultra high-end amplifiers

It is quite frustrating to know that some amplifiers (Boulder, FM Acoustics, Accuphase) are sounding better than even very expensive ones from the big boys (Mark Levinson, Krell, Bryston, Spectral). I wonder why there is such a difference. Madrigal, Krell, Bryston, Spectral, they all belong to the high-end sector of audio industry and they are claiming they are making the best amplifiers. But I know that this is not true: I've heard amplifiers from Boulder and FM Acoustics and they sound just better than the Madrigals, Krells and so on. Is it because Boulder and FM Acoustics have more know how about amplifier design (I suppose not) or do they use more expensive parts and better circuit topologies? Do they have brighter technicians and designers? There must be an explanation for this phenomenon. It isn't magic! Maybe someone from the audio industry can reply to this thread.
dazzdax

Showing 1 response by bob_bundus

bob_bundus
1,834 posts
 
Having been through this situation personally, I agree with Daz. The reason is: that everything is built to a price point, & typically you get what you pay for. Not always, but mostly. I have tried out any number of famous-names equipment & was never really satisfied until I got my Accuphase; that is when I finally stopped trading & actually began listening to real music.
Like Onhwy says, personal preference remains a large factor at this level as well as system synergy, but I think that Daz basically has the right idea. YMMV of course...
More to discover