hi!
I’ll second the note on sheer popularity. Its like why are there so many Toyotas for sale?
I’m getting the impression from this post that you want to change the presentation somehow. Other’s seem to perceive that as well.
Exactly what sort of presentation are you trying to obtain? Looking to tame something? Increase something? Improve things overall? What?
As for preamps…. Houses make preamps for their own associated amps. That should be plain enough. Will or can these preamps be mixed with other amps? Well, that’s why we are here and the interesting aspect of the past tie. Isn’t it?
A former Krell KAV 250 I owned was incredibly dynamic, very extended, but until It was paired with its partner preamp, it was just too too too much thru much of the bandwidth, especially up top.
With bAT it was a bit different. Stay in your house, and there is gonna be built in synergy. Roam beyond and its almost anyone’s guess what will occur. UNLESS, one of the amps uses tubes. Then you can better adjust the sonic parameters to your preffs… or merely towards performance.
I’ve owned several models of BW. I’ve not yet met a BW speaker that doesn’t like power. Nor, have I met one that hasn’t needed tubes in the chain somewhere. Usually at the source or preferably, the preamp. Their top ends are an area one must ‘respect’ or address, for these guys to be stellar performers.
Some yers ago, BW usually were in the salon as either Krell or Levinson. Why? Both have excellent bottom end production. BW are OK in the lower areas but exell with those two amp brands even more.
Keeping at or above 300wpc should improve things noticeably. Albeit, IMO that ain’t the end of the line.
I’ve heard the Big Macs and as decent a power amp as they sound each one has something a bit different to offer. The 500 monos were IMO the more transparent. The 601 2 ch amp seemed the best fit for a BW 802 IMO. The 600wpc monos might be the best fit, if, again, a preamp with tubes in it were in the mix.
If memory serves, a MAC 602 or 601 2 ch amp weighs about 140lbs. ouch.
The note on BC 600s and keep the change is a good pick. Easy sound. Good power. Balanced thruput.
A Levinson with good power would be decent fit too.
Not heard it, but on paper the PSA hybrid monos seem pretty interesting and there seems a few available fairly often within the budget. Rolling that tube in each amp, and trying different Power Cords might lead to Audio pleasure city. You’d get tubes, poer, flexibility, not a pair of space heaters or back breakers to lug about compared to the Macs.
Lastly, room acoustics and their treatments may be in order. For me they wuld if I owned anything in the BW 800 series despite the iteration. But then, I don’t have your ears.
Good luck.
I’ll second the note on sheer popularity. Its like why are there so many Toyotas for sale?
I’m getting the impression from this post that you want to change the presentation somehow. Other’s seem to perceive that as well.
Exactly what sort of presentation are you trying to obtain? Looking to tame something? Increase something? Improve things overall? What?
As for preamps…. Houses make preamps for their own associated amps. That should be plain enough. Will or can these preamps be mixed with other amps? Well, that’s why we are here and the interesting aspect of the past tie. Isn’t it?
A former Krell KAV 250 I owned was incredibly dynamic, very extended, but until It was paired with its partner preamp, it was just too too too much thru much of the bandwidth, especially up top.
With bAT it was a bit different. Stay in your house, and there is gonna be built in synergy. Roam beyond and its almost anyone’s guess what will occur. UNLESS, one of the amps uses tubes. Then you can better adjust the sonic parameters to your preffs… or merely towards performance.
I’ve owned several models of BW. I’ve not yet met a BW speaker that doesn’t like power. Nor, have I met one that hasn’t needed tubes in the chain somewhere. Usually at the source or preferably, the preamp. Their top ends are an area one must ‘respect’ or address, for these guys to be stellar performers.
Some yers ago, BW usually were in the salon as either Krell or Levinson. Why? Both have excellent bottom end production. BW are OK in the lower areas but exell with those two amp brands even more.
Keeping at or above 300wpc should improve things noticeably. Albeit, IMO that ain’t the end of the line.
I’ve heard the Big Macs and as decent a power amp as they sound each one has something a bit different to offer. The 500 monos were IMO the more transparent. The 601 2 ch amp seemed the best fit for a BW 802 IMO. The 600wpc monos might be the best fit, if, again, a preamp with tubes in it were in the mix.
If memory serves, a MAC 602 or 601 2 ch amp weighs about 140lbs. ouch.
The note on BC 600s and keep the change is a good pick. Easy sound. Good power. Balanced thruput.
A Levinson with good power would be decent fit too.
Not heard it, but on paper the PSA hybrid monos seem pretty interesting and there seems a few available fairly often within the budget. Rolling that tube in each amp, and trying different Power Cords might lead to Audio pleasure city. You’d get tubes, poer, flexibility, not a pair of space heaters or back breakers to lug about compared to the Macs.
Lastly, room acoustics and their treatments may be in order. For me they wuld if I owned anything in the BW 800 series despite the iteration. But then, I don’t have your ears.
Good luck.