Thread: Best Pure Musical Amplifiers (power not important)

burmester, spectral and gryphon

Originally Posted by Bones13

I took a chance on a set of Atma-Sphere Class D mono locks. They hit many of my current boxes. Light weight, run cool, and efficient, 50-100 watt, true balanced, and voiced well.

Designed and voiced by a long time Tube Amp Designer, sculpting the distortion spectra to be similar to his classic OTL amps. Very similar to the DIY class A amps I have built over the years, but with more grunt.

Really loving them with the Daedalus Muse Studio speakers 95db, 8 ohm.

A friend loaned me the Atmasphere Class D mono amps. I was pretty shocked it was hard to tell them apart from my Dartzeel NHB108 model 1 amp. They are very good SS style amps.

Originally Posted by Kingrex

A friend loaned me the Atmasphere Class D mono amps. I was pretty shocked it was hard to tell them apart from my Dartzeel NHB108 model 1 amp.

Turn in your audiophile card immediately, it's revoked. Sending Mr Wayne to get it.

Originally Posted by AJ Soundfield

Turn in your audiophile card immediately, it's revoked. Sending Mr Wayne to get it.

He can pick up mine as well. I purchased the Atma-Sphere Class D’s and they are outstanding. Replaced Class A and I’m not looking back.

Guess he's going to be busy in that van of his

I've listened to TAD M600s quite a few times. I believe it is ClassD, although there are many doubts out there, 90kg each mono amps!
They do sound amazing in control, but just that tidbit "cold" or "exageratedly precise" for me.

Originally Posted by pietpara

I've listened to TAD M600s quite a few times. I believe it is ClassD, although there are many doubts out there, 90kg each mono amps!
They do sound amazing in control, but just that tidbit "cold" or "exageratedly precise" for me.

That's not the Atmasphere.

the aavik class d is a very fine integrated

Originally Posted by Kingrex

That's not the Atmasphere.

Sorry, I didn't mean to say it's representative of Atmasphere.
Just a personal comparison with a high-end amp that has non-traditional (class AB, A or tubes) amplification.

I am also interested the the Atmasphere class D amps. Glad to hear others have had good experiences with them.

Originally Posted by AJ Soundfield

Turn in your audiophile card immediately, it's revoked. Sending Mr Wayne to get it.

Live and let live , I'm sure it beats Ralphs toob amps too.....

Originally Posted by pietpara

Sorry, I didn't mean to say it's representative of Atmasphere.
Just a personal comparison with a high-end amp that has non-traditional (class AB, A or tubes) amplification.

It's the bad timbre , apparently most arnt sensitive to it, so trod on to each their own ...........

Originally Posted by MPW

He can pick up mine as well. I purchased the Atma-Sphere Class D’s and they are outstanding. Replaced Class A and I’m not looking back.

USPS pickup arranged ....

Originally Posted by Bones13

I took a chance on a set of Atma-Sphere Class D mono locks. They hit many of my current boxes. Light weight, run cool, and efficient, 50-100 watt, true balanced, and voiced well.

Designed and voiced by a long time Tube Amp Designer, sculpting the distortion spectra to be similar to his classic OTL amps. Very similar to the DIY class A amps I have built over the years, but with more grunt.

Really loving them with the Daedalus Muse Studio speakers 95db, 8 ohm.

Saving for a new Streamer/Dac/Pre/headphone amp. I need to find time to fly down to Sarasota to compare Boulder 812 vs Esoteric N-05XD. I need one XLR analog input for Vinyl input from Technics 1200GR + Boulder 508, so many streamer/DACs don’t qualify.

Kinda leaning to the 812 for the size, weight, and headphone amp. The Esoteric DAC might be better, and nice Esoteric remote control, and Lumin software.

Sorry to put all that in this thread, but do love my new amps.

Doubt the distortion spectra is anything like Ralph's OTL amps , just saying .........

The sound of a well designed amp is determined mostly , by ( simply put) the load its driving and clipping characteristics ( lack thereof or recovery ) so not surprised when one beats another since most not really level matching when comparing..


Glad you are enjoying them




Regards ..

Originally Posted by a.wayne

Doubt the distortion spectra is anything like Ralph's OTL amps , just saying .........
...

Isn't Ralph a member here, to comment on this? I seem to recollect his posting somewhere (WBF?) that their distortion spectra are similar (by design)...

My kef r105/3 really did well with a krell kav 300 il
my salon 1's and hegel h360 were outstanding
my paradigm persona 7f mated to a pathos logos mk 2.. the little 60wpc Lumin integrated also did well with the persona (class d)
my Kef blades really sing with the Mc611's

To me, Triode Labs EVO45. 2 watts and so far this is one of my absolute musical amp ever. So Jeff Day picked it as his fav amp for his Tannoy.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by a.wayne

Doubt the distortion spectra is anything like Ralph's OTL amps , just saying .........

The sound of a well designed amp is determined mostly , by ( simply put) the load its driving and clipping characteristics ( lack thereof or recovery ) so not surprised when one beats another since most not really level matching when comparing..


Glad you are enjoying them




Regards ..

Don’t want to put words in Ralph’s mouth, but he has described the Class D’s as having nearly identical distortion spectra as his OTL’s.

Originally Posted by Randy Myers

...I am most interested in what you believe are the most musical amplifiers that you have heard... the ones that pull you in and make you loose track of everything else but the music...

...So just curious if other people have any amps that gave them that special something that helped them forget the world for a while; again, watts per channel is not a criteria here.

Since this thread has been resurrected I am giving in to my gadfly inclinations and will ask: how is this (the OP excerpted above) significantly different from just asking "what are your favorite amps"?

I also notice that Randy's signature does not include some of the amps he mentioned as liking, earlier in this thread. Any updates on that?

Originally Posted by MPW

Don’t want to put words in Ralph’s mouth, but he has described the Class D’s as having nearly identical distortion spectra as his OTL’s.

Would love to see some bench measurements on both ..!

It's puzzling to me to understand what "musical" actually means, (though I have my suspicions). It's a purely subjective term -- not that there's anything wrong with subjectivity except that it provides no basis for comparison amongst people's preferences.

My preference run to detail, "air", transparency, and crisp dynamics. (Hope that's a little more descriptive that simply "musical".) IMO, that invariably means that what I hear is maximum fidelity to the sound as recorded. The unfortunate downside is that poor recordings are starkly revealed as such.

My best amp in terms of my own criteria is my current VTV Purifi Stereo amp with VTV I/O buffers with Sparkos SS3602 op amps installed.

gi.mpl?u=20428&f=xsml-dscf1021.jpg

Originally Posted by Feanor

It's puzzling to me to understand what "musical" actually means, (though I have my suspicions). It's a purely subjective term -- not that there's anything wrong with subjectivity except that it provides no basis for comparison amongst people's preferences.

My preference run to detail, "air", transparency, and crisp dynamics. (Hope that's a little more descriptive that simply "musical".) IMO, that invariably means that what I hear is maximum fidelity to the sound as recorded. The unfortunate downside is that poor recordings are starkly revealed as such.

My best amp in terms of my own criteria is my current VTV Purifi Stereo amp with VTV I/O buffers with Sparkos SS3602 op amps installed.

gi.mpl?u=20428&f=xsml-dscf1021.jpg

Please define "crisp" dynamics. Is the opposite of crisp dynamics soggy dynamics?

Originally Posted by mep

Please define "crisp" dynamics. Is the opposite of crisp dynamics soggy dynamics?

Haha! Well yes actually, pretty much non-soggy dynamics -- not dull, not inarticulate, not just loud, not lacking in detail. Does that help?

I'm into the realm of what some have called "micro-dynamics", not the loud stuff, but the fine details of dynamics. I think this related to what the Brit used to call "PRaT", (pace, rhythm, and timing); though mind you, I've always considered the term to be silly: pace, rhythm, and timing are attributes of the music and performance, not playback.

Now back to "musical": what's your personal definition?

Originally Posted by Kingrex

I think its a different question to ask what is your favorite and what is musical. I have an 845 SET smp that has ground issues. If I listen to long to it or an 805 amp I have on loan, I get Enough of them and turn them off. I'm not fatigued, I have just had enough. I also have my Dartzeel that can just play and play and always sounds great.

If you played the 845 and Dartzeel back to back. There is no way you would not immediately notice the 845/805 is shocking more natural and true to the sound of a piano, stringed instrument, reed insteument. It's very apparent. In my book, musical had some basis in being true to the sound of a non amplified musical instrument. Its not all, but a big piece.

Hence, the big bottle tubes are musical, but not necessarily my favorite.

They would be if they were not clipping ......

Musical to me is not the most accurate. I've heard amps that I'd consider accurate but was not involving when listening. Maybe the opposite of "musical" is "sterile".

In the amps I've heard Conrad Johnson is my poster boy for musical. The presentation has a way of reaching me emotionally and I hear the PRAT, I like to say it breathes soul into the music. Why don't you have CJ? See above. I listen to Rock, Metal and fusion amongst other things, some call CJ "romantic", romance doesn't render the best Metal presentation. I had a similar experience with Pass. I like both CJ and Pass just not as my mainstay. The Levinson amp by comparison made my Pass amp sound polite and some sluggish. Not to get of topic but to be fair the Pass had attributes the Levinson was lacking, less texture, less density and the like. Come to preference.

For now Levinson is my sweet spot delivering both the speed and dynamics of what I look for and smooth with enough PRAT to be considered musical by me, it has a foot on both sides. The newer amp more so than my prior ML.

I used the above as example and my taste, anyone can take the same sentences and insert other names to fit their experience and likes.

I think most listen to music as some type of emotional experience, whether love of the music or something else. This should mean the system you use for playback should accentuate that experience.

It is still not clear to me why someone would want to listen to music using an amplifier that is not "musical"

Originally Posted by rbbert

It is still not clear to me why someone would want to listen to music using an amplifier that is not "musical"

It all depends on how people define the term and that's one of the problems with communication in this hobby.

Maybe they have yet to hear any amp that touched them in a way that inspired them to pursue anything that sounds better. People also listen at different depths, I was surprised on a thread here how many admit to doing something else while listening. I say that because I am between my speakers when listening, with full attention.

And, I agree, describing sound is a moving target. One of the magazines had a audiophile dictionary of a large group of words. Unfortunately it was in my favorites on a computer that I no longer have.

Originally Posted by rbbert

It is still not clear to me why someone would want to listen to music using an amplifier that is not "musical"

Originally Posted by Puma Cat

Harley Lovegrove posted a really interesting video the other day on the Purifi amplifier by VTV.

Part 1: The perfect power amplifier? - YouTube

I'm intrigued by this amp; has anyone any experience with these?

Oh, oh, I have

Lovegrove nails a number of key points:

• Yep, the Purifi 1ET400A is just about perfect on its own.
• The necessary I/O buffer will influence the sound.
• Perfection isn't what very many people actually want.

Or to say the same thing a different way, what a lot of people what is a bit of distortion added to the inherent sound of the recording. Ultimately it isn't mysterious: moderate 2nd and/or 3rd order distortion sounds pleasant. It may also mask other, nasty forms of distortion in the playback change, and even imperfections in the recording itself.

Certainly 2nd/3rd harmonics are the core issue, but just how much and how much of each, etc., are a matter of personal choice. In the case of the Purifi amp, Lovegrove suggests correctly enough that choice of buffer could be the way to tune the distortion products to one's taste.

Personally I think the way and place to "tune" distortion to taste is the preamp stage. And a way to look at that is that I don't believe in layering distorting components in the playback chain. Put 'em in one place: the preamp.

So in case of my own VTV Purifi amp, I chose VTV's own buffer without the tube and rolled a few op amps to find which I preferred. In my case it was the Sparkos SS3602 op amps. I won't get into the characteristics of each op amp I tried, but in the end I felt that that Sparkos was the cleanest and most neutral. Upstream I have my Sonic Frontiers Line 1 SE+ preamp which does add some "tube goodness", (i.e. friendly distortion). I rolled a few tubes there and settled on my preference.

BTW, Warren Coleman of VTV is a really stand-up guy when it comes to customer service.

System expectations and Load being driven will determine if Lovegrove got it right, aside and considering the very colored and high distortion speakers he is using in the video , to pair with the VTV, hard to say ....




Regards

Originally Posted by Mr Peabody

Maybe they have yet to hear any amp that touched them in a way that inspired them to pursue anything that sounds better. People also listen at different depths, I was surprised on a thread here how many admit to doing something else while listening. I say that because I am between my speakers when listening, with full attention.

And, I agree, describing sound is a moving target. One of the magazines had a audiophile dictionary of a large group of words. Unfortunately it was in my favorites on a computer that I no longer have.

I think that's a very good point about listening depth. Like you, I seem to listen with a good deal of attention and I can see that it might affect one's equipment preferences. Listening more attentively would seem to ask for more detail, more accurate instrument harmonics, and the like.

The other big factor, IMO, is one's taste in genre. Personally I listen to mostly Classical music including orchestral music and large-scale choral music. This sort of music demands the maximum in detail, transparency, and large- and small-scale dynamics.

Interesting , we found class D amps to be least effective on classical music, good on electronic music and Jazz ..

Originally Posted by a.wayne

Interesting , we found class D amps to be least effective on classical music, good on electronic music and Jazz ..

No doubt personal preference play a big role. What class D amps did you try? Which aspects of the class D sound made the good Electronic and Jazz, and not so great for Classical?

As I mentioned, for Classical, especially orchestral & choral, I like the detail, air, transparency, and micro-dynamics I'm getting from my Purifi amp. Bass too is the best I've heard in terms of depth and articulation.

I also agree that equipment preferences and describing quality of sound depends on your method of listening or experiencing music, including genres. I guess everyone, also audiophiles, do this differently due to all kinds of reasons, like education, experiences, the wiring of your brain etc. Even your emotional state makes a difference in your perception. Also, how trained your ears are to hear subtleties makes a difference; e.g. comparing to my son, wife or brother, whom I need to explain what to listen for before they start to have a "aha" experience.
Personally, I enjoy music most intensely and appreciate the high-end being of the equipment most strongly, when I listen for a while, not interrupted, able to get into a, I described it as, almost meditative state. That's when the engagement with the sound, the music the artist created, all details of the recording and its translation by the equipment are blissful. The auditory senses take lead over the others.

I would also like to add that it’s not only with the classical music genre that the maximum of dynamics, transparency and detail are demanded. There's plenty of electronic or rock music that you experience at a different level with such characteristics of your equipment.

Cheers

Originally Posted by pietpara

I also agree that equipment preferences and describing quality of sound depends on your method of listening or experiencing music, including genres. I guess everyone, also audiophiles, do this differently due to all kinds of reasons, like education, experiences, the wiring of your brain etc. Even your emotional state makes a difference in your perception. Also, how trained your ears are to hear subtleties makes a difference; e.g. comparing to my son, wife or brother, whom I need to explain what to listen for before they start to have a "aha" experience.
Personally, I enjoy music most intensely and appreciate the high-end being of the equipment most strongly, when I listen for a while, not interrupted, able to get into a, I described it as, almost meditative state. That's when the engagement with the sound, the music the artist created, all details of the recording and its translation by the equipment are blissful. The auditory senses take lead over the others.

I would also like to add that it’s not only with the classical music genre that the maximum of dynamics, transparency and detail are demanded. There's plenty of electronic or rock music that you experience at a different level with such characteristics of your equipment.

Cheers

Thank you, pietpara. I think we're on the same page in terms of the various factors that determine our equipment priorities.

Classical is my thing, but I don't doubt that at least some other genres benefit from "the maximum of dynamics, transparency and detail". But equally I believe that these qualities are less critical for others, at least depending on listening habits.

Originally Posted by a.wayne

System expectations and Load being driven will determine if Lovegrove got it right, aside and considering the very colored and high distortion speakers he is using in the video , to pair with the VTV, hard to say ....

Regards

I certainly agree about Lovegrove's speakers.

As load I assume you mean speaker impedances across the FR. In that respect the Purifi 1ET400A module is highly load tolerant which could not be said for all early class D designs. As I understand, the Purifi will handle down 2 ohms for moderate periods, overheating being the main constraint. Also the output impedance is ridiculously low: less than 65 micro-ohms @ 1 kHz according to specs. This means 'damping factor' is absurdly high, >100,000 (-- which won't be to everyone's preference though).

I saw a company called Spec out of Japan that makes some Class D amps, anyone familiar?

Originally Posted by atmasphere

I've maintained for years that the mark of a really good system is that its very hard to tell how loud its playing; the dynamics are coming from the recording rather than the electronics!

I really identify with that description!
Now, that doesn't mean your preamp can attenuate (volume knob) to any level or the power amp's reserves are not important.

But indeed, my personal experience and pleasant surprise is when an amplifier does not "tell" you at which volume it's set. The music recording dictates that and the amplifier can follow organically / naturally / realistically the octaves of dB it would represent as when you're really present at the recording.

Originally Posted by atmasphere

...I've maintained for years that the mark of a really good system is that its very hard to tell how loud its playing; the dynamics are coming from the recording rather than the electronics!

Completely agree.

Originally Posted by Feanor

No doubt personal preference play a big role. What class D amps did you try? Which aspects of the class D sound made the good Electronic and Jazz, and not so great for Classical?

As I mentioned, for Classical, especially orchestral & choral, I like the detail, air, transparency, and micro-dynamics I'm getting from my Purifi amp. Bass too is the best I've heard in terms of depth and articulation.

Hello ,

BelCanto stereo and monoblocs
Crown
Hypex
Rotel
Lyngdorf


Regards

Zanden 9600MKII

Originally Posted by atmasphere

To date no-one has found a way to favor a certain genre of music over another. What makes an electronic product like an amplifier good for classical is exactly the same thing that will make it good for rock or jazz.

Not exactly , classical requires more class A or lose the Timbre , body and nuance on instruments at low levels , very critical in catching the micro /macro details of a symphony, much different from low crest factor rock which really sounds more realistic and best on class B drive ..!

So whats really critical Is amp selected transition point from class A to class B , hence why its necessary to match Speaker sensitivity, db required and load to amplifier bias operation ..


Regards

The best looking, the best measuring, and the best sounding amps out there, and built in Australia (where WiFi was invented)....in my experience.

Screen Shot 2023-03-26 at 10.32.11.png