|
|
Post by jandl100 on Nov 13, 2014 9:47:34 GMT
Well, one channel of my lovely Marantz receiver (used as a headphone amp) has developed "the rustles".  I'll probably have it checked out one day, but I only really bought it as an ornament anyway and was surprised and pleased how well it performed as a 'phones amp and as a phonostage. So, after a quick peek at ebay this beastie has arrived ....  Sexy and kool, as long as you like black and lots of knobs and switches.  It's been recapped so should be fine. Very pleased with it so far and have even hooked it up to my MBL speakers where it did not disgrace itself at all, a little on the forward side, ballsy and with really good bass. And it sounds genuinely good as a headphone amp. I seem to be turning a bit vintage these days, in more ways than one.  |
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Nov 13, 2014 13:56:12 GMT
Nice. That type of stuff is so often overlooked. Keep it up Jerry!
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Nov 25, 2014 11:00:53 GMT
Boxswap update.  I do like Pioneer DVD players as CD transports. For a while now I've been using a Pioneer DV-636D, bought for a few tens of £ on ebay with very fine results. But a Pioneer DV-737 appeared on the Wam classifieds last week - and as the ad said, 'battleship build', so I thought I'd give it a go having in the past had excellent results from a DV-717. And here it is, top left, all nice and shiny and champagny ...  That's my current line up of electronics .... Pioneer DV-737 via Cable Talk 3 Digital co-ax cable into Wyred4Sound DAC1 via Epiphany Atratus 3 cables into NAD S300 integrated amp. Bottom left is my Arcam DV29 DVD player, this actually used for DVDs! And under the Arcam my AG1500 mains regenerator which powers the whole setup, all fed with Nordost Magus / Blue Heaven power cables. Sonic differences between the 636D and the 737? - simply more vivid, more presence and higher rez. The 636D is no slouch and imho beats most CD-only players/transports and the 737 simply takes this further. Very pleased. Definitely the best my system has ever sounded.  |
|
|
|
Post by brian2957 on Nov 25, 2014 11:06:16 GMT
Nice Jerry . I've always fancied one of these . BTW did you ever get your mitts on a glass optical cable ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2014 15:35:41 GMT
Recommended (Glass?) optical cable - Profigold. Both Jerry and myself found this an outstanding performer and I suspect it is as good as some stupidly expensive product. Can be purchased for as low as £5 for a metre from Amazon sellers.
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Nov 25, 2014 15:38:24 GMT
Glass optical cables ... yes! thanks to a kindly Wammer, I was loaned one of these www.lifatec.com/toslink2.htmland on the suggestion of Classicrock I bought one of these www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B002KDQDBK?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00 although he has now found a cheaper variant using the same cable (?), see his post above. My hopes that all glass TOSLINKs sound the same crashed and burned! - I definitely preferred the latter, and cheaper, Profi Gold. But both were way ahead of standard plastic TOSLINK and conveyed audio of a very good standard. However, a certain co-ax cable (that will remain anonymous as I am on the lookout for another  ) has sent all the optical cables scurrying for cover - night & day better! But then that is far and away better than almost all digital cables of the many I have tried - even slightly better than the $700 battery powered AQ Eagle Eye! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2014 16:29:44 GMT
Does that mean it is not widely available and more importantly is it expensive?
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Nov 26, 2014 14:03:49 GMT
No, mine cost me a few £ on ebay - but no longer commercially available and very rare - at least, I'd not even heard of it before I came across the ebay listing and took a punt. Well known & established company, though, just I didn't know they did a digital cable.
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jan 11, 2015 9:03:14 GMT
Latest amplifier arrival at Jerry Mansions ....  Accompanied and ably fed by my lovely Restek Consens pre-amp it's a Crown 300wpc class D semi-pro power amp jobbie. I was recommended it by a hifi visitor who rated it above his own Audio Research Reference 110 amp! A month or 2 later a DJ-dealer had them on sale at a much reduced price (not that they are expensive anyway!) and I couldn't resist trying one. Irritating flashing power LEDs neatly (?) covered by some blu-tac. I've had it a day and a bit and haven't yet even tried approaching its outer dynamic envelope to see if my windows warp at high SPLs. I suspect they will - 300wpc should do a lot of shoving. But at low to moderate volume it is very very fine sounding amp indeed. I could live with this in the longer term, I have no doubt about that. Better than my beloved NAD S300 integrated amp?  - there's a smidgeon more high freq 'zing' to the NAD that makes things sound a touch more sprightly, there is a touch of class D smoothness to the Crown. And the Crown perhaps lacks just a bit in the spatial magic of the NAD/MBL pairing - the NAD is by far the best match to my speakers that I've yet heard. So do not waste your time watching the classifieds for the NAD. With the pots wide open there is some noise through the speakers (curiously, I found the same with Behringer A500 amps) so they are at half setting, it's fine then. Early days yet, but I suspect the Crown may be a medium term keeper as it sounds mighty fine indeed and it is just so nice using my Restek pre again - I do love that pre madly/deeply/irrationally! Lessee how it gets on when the music steps up a pace or 3 dynamically. {pause for more listening ....} Much more listening has ensued over the last few days, and (a bit to my surprise) I have not yet been tempted to re-install my lovely NAD 300 amp! The Crown is a fine and enjoyable amp to listen to. Power delivery is not a problem with the Crown. It sounds simply immense on big music. 300wpc would seem to be adequate. It's also remarkably rhythmic - especially for a class D amp; a lot fall down a little on this aspect of the music ime. My toes were a-tapping with the rhythmic beat so ably supplied by The Buggles "Age of Plastic" album. Bass is seriously deep, fast, powerful and well controlled - I don't think I've heard James Blake's 'Limit to your love' sound more awesome - you can count the Hertz! Great fun. Overall just a tad smooth in its delivery of rez, there is also a hint of sting in the highest frequencies. A lot of class D amps do this, ime. I can't quite figure this out, but on some music rhythmic swagger is presented in huge swathes as mentioned, but on some tracks the magic is a bit reduced - I'm thinking particularly here of Dream Theater's "Pull me under" where the raunchy left/right bass guitar riffs simply didn't sound as raucously driving laugh-out-loud fun as they do with my NAD amp.  Imaging is good, but my initial feeling that a bit of the NAD Magic is missing remains - I've never heard a better imaging amp than the NAD S300; it is 3D in spades, a step ahead of any other amp I have heard when paired with my MBLs, which are imaging champs in their own right. More listening to do, but I'm enjoying the Crown a lot. ... it's stupidly good for the money, as well. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Jan 11, 2015 9:12:07 GMT
A pro amp and listening to Dream Theater in the same post Jerry!
Any further news on the digital cables you mentioned. A pity they seem to be so rare
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Jan 11, 2015 9:17:33 GMT
Interesting. At just over a £/watt, that's pretty cheap, even compared to one of the little Mini-T jobs!
I suspect that it wouldn't pass the hifi cred test for many people though. I wonder how well it works into tricky loads Jerry?
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jan 11, 2015 9:22:05 GMT
According to the spec, power delivery holds up quite well into lower impedances ...
Stereo, 8 ohms (per ch.): 300 watts
Stereo, 4 ohms (per ch.): 525 watts
Stereo, 2 ohms (per ch.): 775 watts
So I'd imagine it is OK into difficult loads.
But as you say, audiophile street cred = 0
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Jan 11, 2015 9:33:58 GMT
That's quite impressive, considering the price, if those figures are correct.
Zero cred is good, though. It means it will remain cheap!
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jan 11, 2015 13:08:42 GMT
Never mind the street cred, I love the left-field application of a pro amp. If you remember some time ago I reviewed my son's pro amp just for the fun of it and found it to be surprisingly capable.
I'd love to try the Crown sometime, just to see if it could approach (or even topple) the Chord.
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jan 12, 2015 7:38:46 GMT
No, I don't think there will be any Chord toppling.
I took the Crown along to friend's place yesterday - he has new re-built from the ground up and much enhanced Apogee Duetta full range ribbon speakers (very nice!).
(Do a Google / Google Image search for Apogee Duetta Interstella )
On a previous occasion I had taken my Parasound A21 power amp along to power the old (standard) incarnation of those speakers - that had been a real "Wow" moment - I just loved the way the big Para took hold of those speakers. The best I had ever heard them.
I was kinda hoping that the Crown would have a similar epiphany with his new speakers, same sort of power rating even more than the Para in fact, but no it was not to be. The Crown sounded good, very good in fact, but it failed to Wow us. It doesn't have the sense of magisterial control of the A21, it sounds merely like a very good amp ---- which is of course a bit astounding at the price.
It definitely falls within the top 20% of the amps I have heard.
But it isn't a Parasound A21 or NAD S300 beater, nor a Chord beater.
Aforementioned Apogee owner is quite keen to buy or borrow my Crown amp for the summer months when his huge valve monoblocks turn his Man Cave into a sauna - so he was quite impressed, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jan 12, 2015 8:45:44 GMT
I just looked and that is one impressive restoration job! The Apogees have a reputation for being amp killers and it's good to know that the Parasound was up to the job. Do you know if he's tried a big Krell? I would have thought that to be the perfect marriage.
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jan 12, 2015 8:58:56 GMT
No, I'm pretty sure he has never tried a big Krell - he's much more into his big 211 valve monoblocks. I don't see him ever changing them, they are his babies!
Here's a pic of when he brought them round to my place ....
haha - I see I was going through a t-amp phase at the time!  |
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jan 12, 2015 9:03:55 GMT
Colour me old fashioned, but how on earth are 211s able to drive Apogees to any sensible level and quality?
|
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Jan 12, 2015 10:00:26 GMT
Hmm -- actually they do surprisingly well.
Level and quality are both very good - and he likes to listen seriously LOUD!
I suspect there is a bit of clipping with some material - but the effect is of a forward brashness which he actually quite likes.
They match better with his Apogees than they did with my MBLs in terms of sq, neither of us was very taken with the latter match. Not bad, but not great either.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jan 12, 2015 14:01:13 GMT
Hi-Fi is full of those amazing synergies (or lack of)!
|
|
I'll probably have it checked out one day, but I only really bought it as an ornament anyway and was surprised and pleased how well it performed as a 'phones amp and as a phonostage.
) has sent all the optical cables scurrying for cover - night & day better! But then that is far and away better than almost all digital cables of the many I have tried - even slightly better than the $700 battery powered AQ Eagle Eye!
- there's a smidgeon more high freq 'zing' to the NAD that makes things sound a touch more sprightly, there is a touch of class D smoothness to the Crown. And the Crown perhaps lacks just a bit in the spatial magic of the NAD/MBL pairing - the NAD is by far the best match to my speakers that I've yet heard. So do not waste your time watching the classifieds for the NAD. 
