Walking that fine line: What would you do ?


I recently installed an amp on loan from a friend in one of my systems. We swapped amps just to "compare notes". I had an amp that he wanted to hear and vice-versa. The fact that we are a couple of States apart makes it hard to do first hand comparisons with each other, so we have to be selective, especially with amps. Between the shipping costs and the potential damage, this is the first time that we've done this. If we were both happy with the results, we were simply going to swap amps and compensate the differences in cash.

As it turns out, i like the amp quite a bit. It seems to be a good match for the preamp and speakers that i'm using it with. There is only one "problem". Whereas the system has always sounded very musical with good accuracy ( hard to achieve ), i've now moved up a notch on the "accuracy" scale. I'm now hearing a little deeper into the discs. While most would call this a step in the right direction in terms of being "revealing", i'm beginning to think that it is "annoying" and "distracting". Don't get me wrong, the amp / system sound quite good, maybe the best it ever has. It is not "etched" or "analytical" by any means. I could use all of the superlative's to describe what i'm hearing, but i've now got one nagging problem.

I can now hear just how much the engineers are "twistin' knobs" on several recordings that previously sounded "warm and sweet" i.e. very enjoyable with no distractions. One in particular is Diana Krall's Love Scenes. On some songs, you can easily hear the faders come up as she begins to sing and drop down as she stops. This is evident as the noise floor increases and you hear more hiss. When the mics are open, you have less of a "black background" between musical notes from the instruments. On some of the other songs, they simply leave the mic open most of the time and you hear hiss throughout most of it. On a few others, the leave the mic open, then fade it in a few spots, open it back up, etc... Some of this was obvious before, but not anywhere near the extent that it is now.

While most of us would not consider this a big deal, it kind of gets annoying after a while. To me, it's kind of like looking for a smaller hidden picture within a much larger picture. Once you find it, it is all that you can concentrate on. How you could've missed it for all that time is beyond you. So it is with this system now. In other words, these "small details" now distract me from the "big performance" taking place.

Has anybody else run into a similar situation and what did you do ? I'm open to suggestions as i'm kind of twisting and turning on this one. I like the amp a lot, BUT.... Sean
>
sean

Showing 5 responses by sean

Reference quality ? This is the system in my computer room !!!

Honestly though, i use this system a LOT and have spent a lot of time with various trial and error combo's. If i told you guys what i'm currently running and what i paid for it, it would blow that "high resolution takes big cash & big names" theory to shame. Between the CD source ( transport & dac ), preamp, power amp, PLC, speakers, cables, etc... i have about $2500 invested in it. It was all bought used and "well researched" before buying. In other words, i'm a cheapskate that prefers to do homework and break out the elbow grease instead of throw money at a "brand name" system. I do have a new transport and DAC that will be going into it soon, which i know are measurably more revealing AND musical than what is currently in there. This will bring the total up to about $3250 after deducting the cost of the current transport / dac.

So what did you do while you had a system of this type ? I'm liking what i hear, but almost want to go back to the slightly "masked" and "romantic" sound of NOT hearing all of the things that should NOT end up in a recording. Sean
>
Greg, it still sounds quite musical but is not quite as "warm" of "full bodied". It is cleaner, quicker, better bass definition, more accurate, etc.. whereas the other amp that i was running was a little more "colourful" and "sensual" sounding on female vocals ( which i liked ).

I'm glad that we have similar points of view on gear being "different". While some stuff IS noticeably better than others, a lot of it is just being delivered from a different perspective. Your suggestion to try some various types of music is a point well taken. I've been listening to a few discs quite a bit and i probably need to widen my horizons in order to grasp the full potential / differences in these amps. Both are fast / wide bandwidth designs, as i really don't like bandwidth limited stuff for "serious listening". It's okay for relaxing, background music though i.e. the bedroom, etc... Sean
>
After doing some thinking, i have noticed the "recording artifacts" that i mentioned many times before. As it turns out, the factor that brought this back to my attention is that my girlfriend has been home from work. Since i typically listen to this specific system late at night when she's trying to sleep, i have to keep the volume down to a lower level. Since she's been staying up later, i've been playing the music louder. With more volume, I can now hear things that would otherwise be drowned out by ambient noise in the room at lower listening levels, etc... So, in effect, all of the "hoopla" that this thread raised was primarily for naught. None the less, i think that we have covered some ground in terms of various things to look for in recordings AND may better understand where some are coming from in terms of system resolution. Sean
>
I've been at this stage before, but never to the point of having SO much of both aspects of sound reproduction ( musicality and accuracy ) at he same time. It usually either leaned one way ( musical ) or the other ( analytical ) to some degree.

I did have this system to a point where every recording that i put on it sounded VERY good and extremely "pacey". You could not help but want to at least tap your fingers and toes or more literally shake, dance and shout when listening. I could go from swooning over Diana Krall to stomping with Monster Magnet with ease. The system literally seemed to have "life" in it. Like the "tinkering idiot" that i am though, i kept substituting / trying out things with the hopes of making it "even better". I monkeyed with it so much that i forgot what components / cables i had where. As such, i'll probably never be able to get back to that specific combo.

That system probably did not have the resolution that it does now, but it was SO musical that i wouldn't have cared. Personally, i would rather be swept away by the music and sacrifice some of the very tiny details than vice-versa. If i can get this system back to where it was or somewhere very close, i HAVE learned my lesson. LEAVE WELL ENOUGH ALONE and KEEP A LOG BOOK !!!!! Until then, i'm going to keep trying. I've got more discs to listen to before i pass final judgment on this amp. Sean
>

PS... Sugarbrie, i agree about the reverb / hollowed out effect. I've noticed it before on some specific components with some being more pronounced than others. I always backed away from combo's that made this aspect of the recording so prominent. How many otherwise excellent performances were ruined by inept production and engineering ?!?!?!

Abstract: I hear ya. That is one reason why i have several very different systems set up within the house. Not always convenient to have to run between them to listen to different discs, but at least i have that option.

The amp that i lent out ( Sunfire rated at 300 @ 8 / 600 @ 4 ) was not what i ultimately favored in this system. That honor goes to any of the Forte' 3's or Forte' 6's that i own ( i have 2 of each ). All of the Forte's are relatively rich Class A/B amps and run quite hot. These two models, one earlier (3) and one later (6) are rated at 200 @ 8 / 350 @ 4 wpc. Since the speakers are appr 2 ohms at low frequencies and never go above 4 ohms, i need all of the "oomph" i can get. The trouble is doing that while retaining good sonics and keeping the price reasonable.

I have used the "baby" Sunfire in this system with good results though. While it did quite well overall, it is not as "sweet" or "airy" as the Forte's. It was pretty similar to the amp i have on loan, which happens to be a slightly modified Robertson 6010 ( 200 @ 8 / 400 @ 4 ). Looking at the internals of the Robertson, there are definitely things that i can do to improve its' performance right off the bat. I'm not doing anything to it though until i figure out if i want it for sure or not.

As it stands right now, the Robertson is somewhat of a blend in performance between the Sunfire and Forte' amps. The Robertson is a little more solid sounding than the Sunfire while having a glimpse of "sweetness" and "air" that the Forte's offer. Both the Sunfire and Robertson are better performers in terms of raw "oomph" and bass impact / definition as compared to the Forte' amps. Since i like the Forte' and Sunfire for various reasons, you could see why i would have a good amount of enthusiasm towards finding a reasonable blend of the two in the Robertson.

I had been running a set of Kinergetics KBA-202A Platinum Monoblocks ( 250 @ 8 / 500 @ 4 / 800 @ 2) into these speakers, but i've got them torn apart in terms of doing some very time consuming modifications to them. While they were pretty decent performers before, i hope that they will really shine when i'm done with them. I see no reason that they won't, as i've simply shortened the signal path, re-routed / seperated audio & power supply wires, improved the ground plane of the circiut board, added bypass caps to the power supply filters, etc... Since they already had Cardas wiring throughout the entire audio path, i did not change that.

With all of that in mind, any amp that i use in this system will HOPEFULLY be temporary until the mono-blocks are done. Then again, if i can get one of these amps dialed into this system well enough... : ) Sean
>