Just took delivery of the Red Wine Audio 30.2 and-


...and this thing is quite miraculous really. Have recently had the Lavardin IS Reference and Shindo Aurieges/Montille combo in house played over Living Voice IBXR2's via Auditorium 23 speaker cables with a Lector CDP 0.6T mk. 2 player-- and let me tell you, this little Red Wine punches like Mike Tyson and sings like Callas.
Specifics? Yah-- I got yer specifics right here... tight DEEP bass (I mean it-- frightening!), black backgrounds, wiiiide soundstage (the sidewalls are alive with the sound of music yada yada)Defined/refined treble (supposed to get better with age-- 100 hrs or so). Shall I continue? Thank you.
A breezy user interface, sharp looks, a crisp feel to the volume control/solid build in general and no need for a Fatboy Electraglide mk. 8 SE power cord etc. This amp is thus far dynamic, detailed and refined.
Criticisms? So far a few minor ones. It could be-- and I mean could maybe be... a hair brighter balanced. The treble's all there in spades, though it's certainly a shade darker than the Shindo gear for example (which for my taste-- may be a hair too tipped up tonally-- so what 'the tonal truth' is here... only Harry Pearson knows).
The RWA is punchier and more alive than the Lavardin (as promised by the Vinnster), with perhaps a broader soundstage and a bit more dynamics-- yah--not quite as sleepy-- which was perhaps my only niggle with that otherwise splendid amplifier.
Finally, in the way of niggling, I myself might like even finer gradations on the volume control for those times with a string quartet when you'd like juuuuuust a WEEE bit more volume to make it sound live-- but not a whole lot. Incidentally, the remote is super small and cutie and functions like a charm-- perfect.
Now the kicker--- I have a Manley Stingray enroute to my home as I type this and that comparison should be REAL interesting.
I shall rid myself of the loser, and that means yes-- as phenomenal as this RWA 30.2 is so far-- if tubes give it a sound trouncing-- back to Vinnie it shall go within the alloted trial period (and dont let the door hit you in the ass on the way out etc).
I am very interested to hear the tonal differences, as I thought the Shindo stuff would be richer etc. and perhaps the opposite is true. Incidentally- both the Shindo stuff and the RWA are quite pacey and involving-- high on my priority list. Havent listened to many great piano recordings with the RWA as yet-- and this is one of my true tests in terms of tone/density and all that jazz. Perhaps tonight.. I'm praying for density and not just leading edge flash n' tinkle.
But even still-- the sheer convenience of the thing--the elegance/simplicity of the design and the direct and uneventful way in which it goes about the business of DOING its business... is something rare-- certainly at this price point.
It isnt often I like the sonic signature of components a certain Head Moonie recommends (IMHO often a touch on the squeaky clean and bright side or possessed of, to me anyhoo, idiosyncratic tonal signatures-- at least in the past)-- but on this one I wholeheartedly agree. If I were to review the RWA amp in two words or less after only a single day of hearing thing, I would write: NO JOKE.
The RWA 30.2 is thus far cutting a good deal of mustard. One day of ownership though doesnt quite cut the ketchup in terms of the credibility of this opinion and so we shall see what tomorrow holds; the Stingray, the power, pride and prejudice of Evanna Manley and Bob Neill, my own sonic pleasure, and the very existence (in my home anyway) of the RWA amp hang in the balance...

(too much? Dramatic though-- you gotta admit- I was on my lunch hour. Well.. better than just saying Vinnie's a friggin' genius and the RWA is really err.... good so far:)
abramsmatch

Showing 2 responses by musicus53

Well Jwarmbrand, I'm a bit stumped. I've been running a Signature 30 with my Quad ESL 57s for six months now and have never been completely satisfied with the upper treble (especially massed violins) - I definitely prefer my Heathkit UA-1 push-pull amps in this area. At Vinny's suggestion I experimented with several brands of speaker cable, but the slight upper treble aggressiveness has persisted. The Sig 30 also did not fare well in my friends system with Gallo Signature 3.1s and was literally blown away by his reference 845-based SETs.

Don't get me wrong, other than the treble issue, the amp performs extremely well with my Quads. Perhaps it's just a matter of taste since I'm trying very hard to be completely satisfied. Have you had a chance to compare your new 30.2 to the older model - if so, is the difference that pronounced? I understand that others have been very impressed with the Sig 30.2/Quad combo, but I'm a little reluctnt to make the $500 minimum upgrade investment. Does your friend listen to classical?

Don
Hmmm, that makes my upgrade decision a bit more difficult since it appears the improvements to the Sig 30 address my main area of concern. One thing I did not mention is that I run my source components (CD/SACD player and phono pre) directly from the amp using the now discontinued Sig 3S source select switch and have not yet experimented with a tube line preamp in the mix. I've read that this adds more "bloom", etc. to the treble in some systems. However, I still notice the same treble characteristics whether I'm listening to vinyl or digital, despite the fact that my phono pre (Audion Trode Silver Night) utilizes tubes.

Don