I have Dynaudio Confidence C4 Platinum powered by T+A V10 V2 ( Tube AMP). I really liked the sound. Upper and Mid was really good. I wanted to try a solid state for Dynaudio. I was considering Pass Labs 250.8 and Bel Canto e600M. After reading amazing reviews regarding Bel Canto, I went ahead and bought the Bel Canto Mono block through audiogon. So far I like what I hear on Bel Canto. I also felt Vinyl sounds better with T+A and CD/Streaming sources sound better with Bel Canto.I'll be doing more listening this week. I heard amazing things about Pass Labs and I definitely want to listen to that as well. T+A is powering my Martin Logan's now and they sound amazing.
This is for Georgehifi especially but others can chime in.
I am buying Dynaudio C-1 Platinums and would like an ideal amp. Which would you choose? I prefer solid state. Separates or integrated. If you could recommend a few optimum choices that would be great. Based on my short couple years on here you strike me as very knowledgable on the subject. My dealer wants me on Pass Labs. Incidentally right now I have the Devialet 400 and I’m pretty sure you are not a fan of this type of amp. Any of your wisdom is appreciated. Thanks, Mike
191 responses Add your response
Karurravi, A tube amplifier even an excellent one may not be the best match with the Dynaudio and it is possible the extra power and bass control of the Bel Cantos is doing it for you compared to what the tube amplifier was doing. T+A's older products were always very good, with that being said their newer solid state products are the ones that people are freaking out about and rasing the company's reputation as making some of the world's best gear. Why don't you go to your dealer if you have one that sells T+A you should give the latest solid state products a demo. The new HV series sounds like smooth tuby sound with great bass and dynamics and with excellent information retrival. Just a thought. Dave and Troy Audio Doctor NJ |
| Post removed |
@audiotroy - you and I had a rather lengthy conversation about gear last year. It was clear you were and still are a HUGE proponent of T+A gear. Given your level of confidence that it will outperform virtually 90% of the brands discussed on this forum, why would you not make the investment of having a in-house demo program for those who cannot travel to your store? Based on your statements on this and many other threads on this forum, it would appear as if an in-house demo program would be a very low risk, high reward proposition for you if the gear is truly as good as you say it is. I am sure there would be many on this forum who would be happy to pay for shipping charges (worse case scenario) in exchange for the ability to audition the gear in their home environment. Quite frankly, I don't see a downside to this and in fact, your T+A sales would increase exponentially assuming the gear is as good as you claim it to be. |
wolf_garcia A dealer can generate business simply by invading a free forum with self promotion … I consider that to be an unethical and somewhat slimy commercial activity designed to promote a business. Period. Others may disagree…and I don't need to "report it to the moderators" as I can state my case just fineOf course you're entitled to you opinion, but the rules of the forum allow dealer participation, so I don't consider them being here "slimy" at all. I think what is much more troublesome are some of the posters here who do not appear to be dealers, but who consistently promote their own agenda, such as their frequent claims of "snake oil," demands for data and belief that everything sounds the same. Those are the posters who are not transparent. |
Greginnh, actually that is a great idea. So far no one has asked for an in home demo believe it or not. We have the separates on display later this year we will get an HV and R series integrated on display. We did have the 2500r in for a week and it was amazing. As per T plus A being better than 90 percent of the stuff out there never said that. It is so special because it hits all the bases musicality with resoloution. Super build quality with great features these ars things we value. It is in that same level of gear as Soloution, Burmester, CH and others. If we are heading to your area we would be delighted to bring some over to you. As per Plinius good stuff sold it for years we had an SA 103 it is not in the same class as a T plus A which is like the Devialet in terms of speed & clarity but with much greater midrange and superior musicality. If the OP has a Devialet D400 an $18k 400 watt mono which we also sold, he kind of needs to move into a similar level of product. Dave and Troy Audio Doctor NJ |
| Post removed |
Mr Jmcgrogan, Over the years we have had Chord, Electrocompaniet, Plinius, Hegel, Luxman, Devialet, in both our reference room and our next step down room. We tested out the Thrax gear which was fantastic, and have run demos vs Boulder and big Krells plus a couple of other demos. So far the only thing that beat the T+A gear we were comparing was a $90k set of big boulder amplifers which were three times the cost. So yeah we would say the T+A gear is pretty special. |
Opinions aren't necessarily an "agenda," and, again, regardless of the forum rules I don't see anybody from Goodwin's, Stereo Exchange, or other reputable dealers self-promoting like this guy. Note that Atmasphere will rarely even mention that he designs and markets well regarded products, and often offers valuable information based on his experience. I'm simply one who feels that crass advertisements invade far too much of our online space, and simply hope that business-centric commercial intrusion could stay out of forums that should simply be an exchange of ideas and opinions not tainted by desperate salesmen. |
| Post removed |
wolf_garcia Opinions aren’t necessarily an "agenda," ...I agree completely. But, for example, when the same poster repeats the same few claims again and again, and insists that those who disagree provide data, and accuses those who disagree with believing in "magic," it’s pretty clear there’s an agenda beneath it all. And it isn't the passionate and objective pursuit of science. |
Cleeds…you mistake "agenda" with "point of view." I consistently argue my point with those who might tout an audio "magic" panacea without any explanation other than something like, "I don't know how it works but it does" especially when I've tested (in the case of fuses) some myself and find the claims of astonishing sonic benefits to be nonsense. If something works (good cables, premium power outlets, Vibrapods, a tube) I might mention it, but to rely on hyperbole seems silly. For example, the word "quantum" in any product description generally gets my attention. Your "agenda" might be to discredit my point of view somehow but I suggest you actually read my opinions before attempting that. Good luck. |
wolf_garcia Cleeds…you mistake "agenda" with "point of view." I consistently argue my point ...I have made no such mistake, but I agree that you consistently argue the same few points. As Thoreau said, sometimes circumstantial evidence is very strong, such as when you find a trout in the milk. That is the case here. |
bubba12 Excellent choice Bubba, with the XA-60.8 monoblocks, they will have high biased into Class-A for a very nice sweet transparent sound. And they bat well above their specs. Team them up with a $699 Schiit Freya preamp, which has three different sound flavoured outputs, passive ,tube or solid state you can choose on the fly and it’s remote with balanced or se output and inputs. http://www.schiit.com/products/freya Stereophile: The XA60.8 considerably exceeded that power, delivering: 150W into 8 ohms 240W into 4 ohms 380W into 2 ohms Cheers George |
Pass Labs XP 12 preampGood choice also, even though it’s $5,800.00 nearly 10 x the price, but then if you’ve got it, spend it. It would be interesting to A/B the two! As the volume control in the Freya is better, being 128 positions relay controlled, instead of the Pass having just a good quality potentiometer. Cheers George |
| Post removed |
What makes you say that these to preamp’s are comparable?Didn’t say they were comparable, but what I did say is the Freya has the better volume control system of the two. And if you know me that’s what I’m heavily into with my product (passive preamps). As most sources have enough output these days to make any poweramp run to full output (clipping). without a need of an active preamp with even more gain and noise that’s not needed. A quote from Nelson Pass himself: "We’ve got lots of gain in our electronics. More gain than some of us need or want. At least 10 db more. Think of it this way: If you are running your volume control down around 9 o’clock, you are actually throwing away signal level so that a subsequent gain stage can make it back up. Routinely DIYers opt to make themselves a “passive preamp” - just an input selector and a volume control. What could be better? Hardly any noise or distortion added by these simple passive parts. No feedback, no worrying about what type of capacitors – just musical perfection. And yet there are guys out there who don’t care for the result. “It sucks the life out of the music”, is a commonly heard refrain (really - I’m being serious here!). Maybe they are reacting psychologically to the need to turn the volume control up compared to an active preamp." Cheers George |
| Post removed |
I could not agree more with George hifi about the virtues of passive pre'amps' that are not even amps of course. In the old days, with sources of highly varying but often pretty low output level (plus phono that needed riaa equalization as well) you needed a pre amplifier to get all those different sources at the same level. On top, the preamp gave a switching facility and tone and balance control. These days, if you are only using digital sources such as disc players or a DAC, you usually have all signals at the same 2.0V of the Red Book standard, which happens to be the input sensitivity of many power amplifiers. If you are using a computer as a source, and a DAC with variable output, you can do the tone and balance control on the computer (and more precisely than on a traditional pre amp). So depending on the sources that you use, you can save a lot of money, and get marginally better results. I am very pleased with my very simple desktop system: computer, ODAC, Emotiva Control Freak volume control, some inline attenuators because my Quad 40-5- amplifier has an unusual 0.5 Volt input sensitivity. Cost of the electronics: $125+$50+20+$200 (second hand, but refurbished) = $395. Speakers are Harbeth P3ESR, and hence by far the most expensive component. |
@cleeds I agree completely. But, for example, when the same poster repeats the same few claims again and again, and insists that those who disagree provide data, and accuses those who disagree with believing in "magic," it’s pretty clear there’s an agenda beneath it all. And it isn't the passionate and objective pursuit of science. Actually that would exactly be the passionate and objective pursuit of science.... |
| Post removed |
Maybe you should call it cleaner. It is certainly more accurate because if the preamp does change the signal, by definition that is degradation.The problem (as has been discussed a lot elsewhere) is that a passive control is highly susceptible to cable issues while an active system is far less so. In addition, the control often acts to reduce the efficacy of the output coupling capacitor of the source (if it has one). This can result in reduction of bass impact as you turn the control down. An active system can be completely immune to the effects of the interconnect cable, allowing the result to be more neutral. That depends a lot on the construction of the line stage of course. Being aware of this fact, we designed our balanced line stages to be quite impervious to the interconnect cable(s) they drive; for this reason we often advise the customer that an expensive cable is not always needed. Audition is important! |
Parasound JC-1s and felt it was a little leaner than with a preamp. Would this be the same thing?Any active preamp will impart it’s own colouration on the source, and they all sound so different, that’s why so many chop and change these looking for the right colouration that suits them. I say let the source be heard for what it is, without any added colourations with a transparent passive preamp, and if you then don’t like it change the source, as the source is where it all starts, and not to add another colouration with an active preamp trying to fix it. Remember a very good 70’s saying from Ivor Tiefenbrun (Linn Sondek fame) "First get the source right and your 1/3 of the way there, if you don’t it’s a never ending battle to get the truth" Cheers George |
If I repeatedly question what I consider to be ridiculous and/or overstated claims of sonic benefits derived from any mysterious source, that’s simply a consistently aware point of view. An agenda implies that I’m on some sort of campaign against tweaks and I’m not…if covering your gear with axel grease or making cables from uranium is your thing, well good for you. If you claim in 10 paragraphs it makes your hifi rig superior in every way to what it was before you boiled it or froze it, I might venture to ask why that is. If you take everything anybody says about the wonders of "special" fuses or graphene on everything, and not at least wonder why a designer decided this was a "thing," you may lack the ability called "critical thinking" in which case your intellectual diet is being spoon fed into your mellon. |
georgehifi ... let the source be heard for what it is, without any added colourations with a transparent passive preamp ...As noted by @atmasphere above, passive preamps commonly suffer from their own problems that can easily affect the sound, and in a negative way. It is simply mistaken to believe that an ostensibly simple passive preamp is less colored than a more complex active preamplifier. |
I guess ‘the absolute sound’ is not my only goal. I want the music to sound good to my ears. If ‘coloration’ does that then so be it. These ‘auditions’ you speak of don’t exist. At these audio stores they follow you around like you’re going to steal something. After five minutes if you don’tsay that you’re going to buy the speakers they get frustrated with you. I have met a dealer that works out of his home that is much cooler about it though. |
passive preamps commonly suffer from their own problems that can easily affect the sound, Rarely, not commonly, around 10% of the time there can be mismatched impedance's when the source has tube output stage which is too high in output impedance, or it's output coupling cap is too small, which will give a very high output impedance at low frequencies. These types of sources direct, would be also mismatch into many Class-D amps as well, as many are 10-20kohms input impedance, just like a passive. Cheers George |
bubba 12 I have the Pass XP12 running through a pair of AVM 3.2 Mono's (which are D class) I tried the Pass XA 25 with my Dyn C1 Plat. They just like more power... I also use a comet dac with this set up I am not pushing D class but it does work well with the system I am sure there are a number of power amps that will do a nice job good luck with your search Dennis |
| Post removed |
All passives basically suck.Your First Watt amps have very little or no gain, I can see this maybe your reason behind this statement. But that’s your opinion, and you are entitled to it. It is a totally incorrect statement if there is no impedance mismatch or gain problems as First Watt amps will have, there is only transparency, dynamics, and distortion advantages over any active/buffered preamp with or without gain. As quoted by Nelson Pass: " What could be better? Hardly any noise or distortion added by these simple passive parts. No feedback, no worrying about what type of capacitors – just musical perfection." Cheers George |
| Post removed |
My F5 has about 15.5dB of gain.Say yes!!! about half normal power amps. Which is very low for a poweramp, and why your experience with passives is understandable, and why you need the gain of an active pre. As Nelson said: " "We’ve got lots of gain in our electronics. More gain than some of us need or want. At least 10 db more." And there’s no need for active buffers, on passives if there’s no impedance mismatch. Cheers George |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
You state "All passives basically suck". You have a problem sunshine that you need to address before you can make such a statement. You you say your power amp gain is only 15db, this is half of what most amps are and is not passive friendly. Who said 25kohm passive??? You should not have tried 25kohm passive, should have been 10kohm, as this is a match for any poweramp with industry standard of 47kohm input impedance or higher, and your source hopefully is low output impedance, not high impedance tube. So basically you suck it up and don't even go passive and complain about them or you fix your problems and maybe just maybe you may see the light. That passives can be more transparent more dynamic and less coloured than any active pre with or without gain. Cheers George |
