Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Continuuation. (active continuum 3way)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • killa
    replied
    Originally posted by Pallas View Post


    If you must have an expensive "dumb" amp, probably ATI or Bryston. McIntosh if you want eye candy.
    Well my "dumb" outlaw audio I was using for my active setup is basically an ATI yet to me my crown sounds better.

    Leave a comment:


  • mattsk8
    replied
    Originally posted by Pallas View Post

    I'm saying that PS Audio is not high-fidelity equipment. If you like it, whatever. I said nothing about the Carver, but if the PS junk sounds different from it then that speaks well of the Carver...

    Craig's affinity for overpriced low-performance audiophool baubles is well established on this forum. That he defends the Sprout based on raves from pliable reviewers when we all know from its measured FR that its sonic signature is dominated by a huge and non-defeatable upper bass boost...just shows that subjective reviews of audio electronics are trash and people who swear by them are dumb.

    Gain blocks are totally unexciting to me. An Anthem AVR will ARC properly used will sound better than throwing money at a gain block. For a speaker like the one this thread's about, the miniDSP PWR-ICE amps are ideal. Sonically transparent, fairly priced, and easy to use. They even have a prefab backbox if you don't want it in the speaker.

    If you must have an expensive "dumb" amp, probably ATI or Bryston. McIntosh if you want eye candy.
    Regardless of what you want to think... amplifiers all have a "sonic signature" (some are brighter, some have more bass, some are more open and airy, some are dull, some are "thinner sounding"), and those differences aren't (always) based on "incompetence in engineering"; whether or not that signature is huge or small is in the eye of the beholder and based largely on the system you pair the amp with... and which amp is "best" isn't always black and white, it's system dependent. I actually agree with you that Anthem (generally) makes decent equipment, and absolutely agree that Bryston makes great amplifiers. I have no first hand experience with McIntosh.

    I also agree that the ICE amps are very nice... but if you're truly going "active" that's a whole other can of worms that IMO (unless you're doing a HT system) would negate a lot of our discussion because it would change a lot of the components (but truthfully, I haven't ventured into all the available "active" options, beyond my shop system).

    I completely disagree about an AVR vs a component system- aside from power isolation you gain in components, you have a LOT more options to achieve your desired "sonic signature" with a component system than you do with a AVR. Yes, if you're purchasing new equipment the component system will be substantially more money, but in the end (for me) a component system is more fun and a LOT more versatile.

    All that said... to each their own. I would never tell you or anyone else that what they use is "garbage", because that's their prerogative. If a AVR works for you, great. My biggest issues with using a AVR are... 1. If anything in the AVR fails the whole thing is garbage... 2. Less options for achieving your desired "sonic signature"... 3. Less headroom. But that's my personal opinion, and maybe Anthem makes the perfect AVR for you, and if so that's fine, that doesn't mean I'm right or you're right... it just means you found something that works for you. And FTR, I still disagree with you about PS Audio. Are they overpriced?... perhaps, but a lot of things are overpriced... but being overpriced has nothing to do with whether or not something works well.

    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post

    When I said that the Adcom and Aragon were on opposite ends of the sound spectrum, I meant they sound different, pretty obviously different. I must work on my grammar because I do not make it clear even when we agree ))). I posted to support your findings as spot on. Because what you write is the truth and despite all my efforts over the last 2 decades, people seem to accept that amplifiers sound different now. This is very new. I very agree.

    Pallas' PS Audio comment was a cheap shot but depending on how good your memory is, not completely undeserved. PS Audio has served up excellent to dismal products over the years but I make no judgement on their current products. I have little experience with them.

    My experience with active speakers, leaves me uninterested in passive speakers. Surround demands a technically superior speaker. Like the LP, a passive speaker offers something for stereo playback that an active speaker somehow does not. I leave it to the 2 channel guys to figure it out.
    I have fun with active- I have a DBX Driverack that I use for my shop speakers (not because it's "the best", I got it for super cheap ). But, for some reason I find more enjoyment in a passive system, and I don't think it's a sound quality thing that brings the enjoyment... I'm not sure if it's the challenge I enjoy or what it is about a passive system.

    I'd still love to hear your system someday. I know we've had our differences in the past, but I also know you do know what you're doing and that you definitely have real experience. I thoroughly enjoy both surround and 2 channel... I just prefer 2 channel for music. Probably related to the fact that I enjoy vinyl, but also doing a 5 channel active system could get really, really expensive.

    Leave a comment:


  • craigk
    replied
    [QUOTE=Pallas;n1322857]

    "I'm saying that PS Audio is not high-fidelity equipment. If you like it, whatever. I said nothing about the Carver, but if the PS junk sounds different from it then that speaks well of the Carver..."

    well Pallas there was a room full of people that got to hear my PS amp, and they all liked it better than the Carver. i have owned several Carver amps and there is no comparison. so there must be lots of people that like junk in diy too. by the way the latest PS audio amp has been called the new reference amp period, regardless of price.

    "Craig's affinity for overpriced low-performance audiophool baubles is well established on this forum. That he defends the Sprout based on raves from pliable reviewers when we all know from its measured FR that its sonic signature is dominated by a huge and non-defeatable upper bass boost...just shows that subjective reviews of audio electronics are trash and people who swear by them are dumb."

    you need to learn to read, no where does it say I like the Sprout. I just pointed out that 23 reviews that say it is a nice unit and you saying that it is not ... well going on your past record I will take the reviews over your opinion. people that usually think they are right and the rest of the world is wrong are called delusional.

    "Gain blocks are totally unexciting to me. An Anthem AVR will ARC properly used will sound better than throwing money at a gain block. For a speaker like the one this thread's about, the miniDSP PWR-ICE amps are ideal. Sonically transparent, fairly priced, and easy to use. They even have a prefab backbox if you don't want it in the speaker."

    "If you must have an expensive "dumb" amp, probably ATI or Bryston. McIntosh if you want eye candy."

    ATI, very mediocre, sound like any other average amp on the block. bass is a little above average, highs are irritating. Kessler has done better. plus they need to be played at high levels to even sound average. I guess if you are doing home theater they would be alright. Bryston has some good stuff, some of the Bryston amps are rather on the neutral boring side at times. the warranty makes them a good deal alone. there are a few good McIntosh amps, but you need to know what ones. McIntosh also produced a lots of over priced junk through the years. again a very dull and lifeless amp for the most part. the Bryston is the only one mentioned I would consider a hifi amp of the ones mentioned.

    Pallas you still did not tell us what you are using for your system. I know those 20 year old Kef speakers mounted on the wall really have to be high fidelity. please, share your system and let the rest of us "dumb" audiophools know what a real system consist of.

    I think you know the truth, you just enjoy trolling so much you cant help yourself.

    Leave a comment:


  • DE Focht
    replied
    Originally posted by dcibel View Post
    Your posts never cease to amuse me, De Focht. Please, tell me more.

    You also constantly amuse me! Very serendipitous we should chat here.

    I have fought with Pallas for over a decade in these matters. "Know thy enemy."

    There you have "more" as requested.

    Leave a comment:


  • DE Focht
    replied
    Originally posted by mattsk8 View Post

    Haha... El... oh... el... . Me thinks he needs to hit the books a little harder- based on the fact that he's completely wrong and doesn't know what he's talking about. And I'll have to disagree on "real world application" vs a forum warrior that sits in front of a PC, copying and pasting garbage they read on the internet (and still somehow fails to understand)... real world application usually (not always) wins out.

    Not sure what your point about the Adcom vs Aragon amps was at all- I never said they sounded the same. The Aragon is a more neutral sounding amp, and maybe a smidgen more dynamic, or maybe "airy" sounding than the Adcom. It also has a lot more headroom. I agree both are decent amps, I wouldn't own them if I didn't.

    And lastly (and I'm not being a jerk, just curious)... if you don't care about it, then why'd you bother posting??
    When I said that the Adcom and Aragon were on opposite ends of the sound spectrum, I meant they sound different, pretty obviously different. I must work on my grammar because I do not make it clear even when we agree ))). I posted to support your findings as spot on. Because what you write is the truth and despite all my efforts over the last 2 decades, people seem to accept that amplifiers sound different now. This is very new. I very agree.

    Pallas' PS Audio comment was a cheap shot but depending on how good your memory is, not completely undeserved. PS Audio has served up excellent to dismal products over the years but I make no judgement on their current products. I have little experience with them.

    My experience with active speakers, leaves me uninterested in passive speakers. Surround demands a technically superior speaker. Like the LP, a passive speaker offers something for stereo playback that an active speaker somehow does not. I leave it to the 2 channel guys to figure it out.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pallas
    replied
    Originally posted by mattsk8 View Post
    Except the PS Audio mopped the floor with my Carver. I'm not sure if you're just trying to be an a-hole and saying both my Carver TFM-55 and Craig's PS Audio are "incompetently designed" or what it is you're saying...
    I'm saying that PS Audio is not high-fidelity equipment. If you like it, whatever. I said nothing about the Carver, but if the PS junk sounds different from it then that speaks well of the Carver...

    Craig's affinity for overpriced low-performance audiophool baubles is well established on this forum. That he defends the Sprout based on raves from pliable reviewers when we all know from its measured FR that its sonic signature is dominated by a huge and non-defeatable upper bass boost...just shows that subjective reviews of audio electronics are trash and people who swear by them are dumb.

    Originally posted by mattsk8 View Post
    Since you're under the impression that you have this all figured out... which amp should we all be using? What is "the Pallas gold standard" in amplification??
    Gain blocks are totally unexciting to me. An Anthem AVR will ARC properly used will sound better than throwing money at a gain block. For a speaker like the one this thread's about, the miniDSP PWR-ICE amps are ideal. Sonically transparent, fairly priced, and easy to use. They even have a prefab backbox if you don't want it in the speaker.

    If you must have an expensive "dumb" amp, probably ATI or Bryston. McIntosh if you want eye candy.

    Leave a comment:


  • mattsk8
    replied
    Originally posted by DE Focht View Post


    No Pallas has taken his time to study research about what other's think/research about what you can and cannot hear. So most of his comments are based in the limitations of human hearing and the inability of people to perform differentiation of products under blind ABX type tests. Pallas was a Geddes disciple, hardly concerned with 1/4 dB of distortion..


    Although this is valuable information to know, it still does not make an Adcom 5500 sound like an Aragon 4004 MkII. Both well designed amplifiers that populate two different ends of the sound character scale.

    It's audio, I no longer care. I just know all about it.
    Haha... El... oh... el... . Me thinks he needs to hit the books a little harder- based on the fact that he's completely wrong and doesn't know what he's talking about. And I'll have to disagree on "real world application" vs a forum warrior that sits in front of a PC, copying and pasting garbage they read on the internet (and still somehow fails to understand)... real world application usually (not always) wins out.

    Not sure what your point about the Adcom vs Aragon amps was at all- I never said they sounded the same. The Aragon is a more neutral sounding amp, and maybe a smidgen more dynamic, or maybe "airy" sounding than the Adcom. It also has a lot more headroom. I agree both are decent amps, I wouldn't own them if I didn't.

    And lastly (and I'm not being a jerk, just curious)... if you don't care about it, then why'd you bother posting??

    Leave a comment:


  • dcibel
    replied
    Your posts never cease to amuse me, De Focht. Please, tell me more.

    Leave a comment:


  • DE Focht
    replied
    Originally posted by dcibel View Post
    Pallas just has a different view of reality than most. To him, 1/4dB of linear distortion in the top-octave is unacceptable garbage. Most may find it perfectly acceptable when considering the linear distortion of the system and the audibility of 0.25dB of change in the top octave.

    No Pallas has taken his time to study research about what other's think/research about what you can and cannot hear. So most of his comments are based in the limitations of human hearing and the inability of people to perform differentiation of products under blind ABX type tests. Pallas was a Geddes disciple, hardly concerned with 1/4 dB of distortion..


    Although this is valuable information to know, it still does not make an Adcom 5500 sound like an Aragon 4004 MkII. Both well designed amplifiers that populate two different ends of the sound character scale.

    It's audio, I no longer care. I just know all about it.



    Leave a comment:


  • craigk
    replied
    Originally posted by dcibel
    Pallas just has a different view of reality than most.
    The key to good communication is brevity.

    Leave a comment:


  • dcibel
    replied
    Pallas just has a different view of reality than most. To him, 1/4dB of linear distortion in the top-octave is unacceptable garbage. Most may find it perfectly acceptable when considering the linear distortion of the system and the audibility of 0.25dB of change in the top octave.

    Leave a comment:


  • craigk
    replied
    http://www.psaudio.com/products/sprout/#tab-reviews

    lets see, 23 independent reviews that all love the Sprout. nothing bad to say. the frequency response looks almost identical to the highly praised NAD 3020. Just one more of your ignorant rants, of which you have no clue as to what you are ranting about as usual. find me one bad review of a PS audio amp. by the way, the amp that I own is not the Sprout, so you know what happens when you assume things, you just made an *** of yourself, again. you should try getting out in the greater Atlanta area and actually listening to something. it is much better than reading about things on the internet. then you could have a real opinion on something and just not post graphs that you apparently do not understand. are you first generation college educated in your family ? it seems like you just try and impress people with your posting of information from reviews, and it is very clear that you really do not understand them. so white trash mentality. the last thing is that Paul McGowan is a good amp designer. Paul is also smart enough to know he is not great and hires great designer like Odell and King to work for him. I would really like to hear an amp that you design Pallas. since you have such a vast wealth of knowledge please design us the perfect amp. I am quit sure you can do it.

    Leave a comment:


  • mattsk8
    replied
    Originally posted by Pallas View Post

    PS Audio is not exactly known for quality engineering or build quality. One might go so far as to call them an embarrassment.

    ...snip...

    Nobody disputes that incompetently-designed amp or broken amps can sound different from well designed amplifiers of competent build.
    Except the PS Audio mopped the floor with my Carver. I'm not sure if you're just trying to be an a-hole and saying both my Carver TFM-55 and Craig's PS Audio are "incompetently designed" or what it is you're saying... but I also have an Adcom GFA-5500, and a Aragon 4004 amp, and my Carver was never embarrassed by either of those (actually the Carver sounded better than the Adcom, Aragon better than the Carver). So based on that... I'll have to say PS Audio must have some inclination as to what is going on. Also, Craig did modify/rebuild his PS Audio, so maybe he's a next level genius and his "Midas touch" is what really brought the acoustics out of the PS Audio.

    Also... I'm not the only one that heard this, a few other people here did at the get together in Grand Rapids this year.

    Since you're under the impression that you have this all figured out... which amp should we all be using? What is "the Pallas gold standard" in amplification??

    Leave a comment:


  • Pallas
    replied
    Originally posted by mattsk8 View Post
    My biggest eye opener for realizing that amps do sound different was when we compared Craig's PS Audio to my Carver TFM-55. My Carver should be (substantially) more powerful, but Craig's PS Audio easily walked away in terms of performance over my Carver...
    PS Audio is not exactly known for quality engineering or build quality. One might go so far as to call them an embarrassment.

    This is one example of a PS Audio amp that a careful listener will be able to distinguish from a real amp:


    Here's another one that's not as garbage...but still garbage.


    And of course the lowly Sprout's frequency response into multiple impedances. It is at least flat into the NHT load, showing it has competent parts (Anaview amp module) but the non-defeatable EQ consigns it to the ranks of garbage-fi.


    Nobody disputes that incompetently-designed amp or broken amps can sound different from well designed amplifiers of competent build.

    Leave a comment:


  • craigk
    replied
    Interesting post. Just some general thoughts. I have listened to enough active systems now to form some general opinions. I will start with mids and tweets. I prefer passive xovers. There is a openess to the top end that active can't duplicate, yet. I think it is just a matter of time though. Now for the bass, cause its all about the bass. I really like some of the active woofers I have listened to. Best way to describe it, no bloat. Just clean and natural. I have always said there is a difference in the sound of amps. My reference amps are spectral, jeff rowlands, and ps audio. I have a few other very nice amps I use also. There are definite differences in the sound of all of them. Very noticeable in some cases.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X