Thread: What's with the trend in amp design?

Originally Posted by mep

Beats me Mike. I don’t have enough information to hazard a guess. Is the amp being used with a preamp from the same company? What speakers were used? What sources were used? How did you determine this a new trend and it only affects amplifiers?

Everything remains the same. Amps, SOME preamps (based on a friend who upgraded his PREAMP from a v1 to a v2 from a well known DAC manufacturer for example). He eventually gave up.

Originally Posted by Mike

Maybe. So what's driving this change?

Money, the only reason to bring out a new version of anything is for improvements and those changes include a new cost. Be it a new camera, new car, electronics as these new versions never stay at the same price. Got to make money some how, and if changing the sonic signature of a product means its a new version. Well there ya go. After all the following version will most likely put it back with the "new and improved" version. Its to simple of a why, but a business has to stay in business.

For me, all speakers, better on some, worse on others.

Originally Posted by a.wayne

On all speakers or on particular speakers ..??

Originally Posted by joeinid

For me, all speakers, better on some, worse on others.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by joeinid

They had the Ref 6 in their own system and ultimately came to the same conclusion. I never prompted them in any way.

Just to be clear Joe, Did those 4 or 5 friends own the Ref 6 or were they listening to a Ref 6 that belonged to someone else?

Originally Posted by joeinid

Under certain conditions, the previous gear had some great qualities. Sure I was a little over the top and that was certainly my fault but at the time those posts were written, that’s how I felt. I guess I get excited and and wanted to post about it. It won’t happen again. I’ll be more reserved until the dust settles. Can you forgive me? It’s just my opinion of snapshots in time. I’m not a professional like you. I should know better.

Sorry you feel the need to turn this around on me. You make the purchases and you write the words, not me.

They owned their own Ref 6 preamps.

Originally Posted by joeinid

They owned their own Ref 6 preamps.

Thanks. I find that very interesting.

Originally Posted by joeinid

They had the Ref 6 in their own system and ultimately came to the same conclusion. I never prompted them in any way.

Under certain conditions, the previous gear had some great qualities. Sure I was a little over the top and that was certainly my fault but at the time those posts were written, that’s how I felt. I guess I get excited and and wanted to post about it. It won’t happen again. I’ll be more reserved until the dust settles. Can you forgive me? It’s just my opinion of snapshots in time. I’m not a professional like you. I should know better.

Joe, I hope that its does happen again. I find your the candor of your views when you hear something new to be refreshing.

Thanks for all of your efforts here at AS on moderating and your posts. I look forward to what you have to say.

Thank you Le Roy. I think we are on the same page. I appreciate your kind words.

Originally Posted by mep

Joe-Didn't you rave about the TAD CR-1s up to the point where you sold them? Weren't your latest pair of McIntosh amps you kept for 34 days "destination amps" and you said good things about them until they headed down the road to their new owner? So now we have you and four or five of your friends who think the Ref 6 was bright. Were these people who own the Ref 6 or people who stopped by your place and heard it in your system?

Hi Mark,

I had a fully broken in Reference 6 in my system for two weeks that my dealer loaned me. There’s no question that it’s a very fine preamp. In fact, I preferred it to a VAC Master preamp that I brought in for a demo, largely due to its neutrality and broader soundstage.

However, I subsequently purchased a Reference 10 preamp for my system. I observed the Ref 10 preamp to be much smoother and more refined in the treble than the Ref 6. In addition, I found the Ref 10’s overall presentation to be more balanced and have more ease than the Ref 6. So, in my opinion, compared to the Ref 10, the Ref 6 is edgier in the treble, more forward in the soundstage and overall has a more aggressive presentation. YMMV.

Ken

Originally Posted by kevinkwann

There’s a good chance that if your system were more revealing, you’d be able to hear it too.

Thanks. I appreciate your kind words. I don't remember you ever coming to my house and hearing my system. Please tell us about your system.

Originally Posted by Alpinist

Hi Mark,

I had a fully broken in Reference 6 in my system for two weeks that my dealer loaned me. There’s no question that it’s a very fine preamp. In fact, I preferred it to a VAC Master preamp that I brought in for a demo, largely due to its neutrality and broader soundstage.

However, I subsequently purchased a Reference 10 preamp for my system. I observed the Ref 10 preamp to be much smoother and more refined in the treble than the Ref 6. In addition, I found the Ref 10’s overall presentation to be more balanced and have more ease than the Ref 6. So, in my opinion, compared to the Ref 10, the Ref 6 is edgier in the treble, more forward in the soundstage and overall has a more aggressive presentation. YMMV.

Ken

Hey Ken. You are comparing a $14k pre to a $30k pre. The Ref 10 should sound better than the Ref 6. The Ref 10 has truly dual mono power supplies that share a single outboard case vice the shared power supply built into the Ref 6. Maybe if I owned a Ref 10 I would come to the same conclusions as you, but it wouldn't take away from the fact that the Ref 6 is a damn fine preamp that many people would consider themselves lucky to own. You have a very nice system by the way.

Originally Posted by kevinkwann

Zero interest.

Well, you were quite interested to trash my system, but you have never heard my system or stepped a foot in my room. So, it's interesting that you can draw conclusions with no facts and cast aspersions on a system you have never heard.

Originally Posted by mep

Hey Ken. You are comparing a $14k pre to a $30k pre. The Ref 10 should sound better than the Ref 6. The Ref 10 has truly dual mono power supplies that share a single outboard case vice the shared power supply built into the Ref 6. Maybe if I owned a Ref 10 I would come to the same conclusions as you, but it wouldn't take away from the fact that the Ref 6 is a damn fine preamp that many people would consider themselves lucky to own. You have a very nice system by the way.

Mark,

Thanks for the compliment on my system. Did you read my first paragraph? I think I did write that the Ref 6 is a darn fine preamp. What I was also trying to point out is that the Ref 6 does, in my opinion, have some of the tendencies that Joe mentioned. The degree of these tendencies is certainly debatable. That’s why I wrote, YMMV.

Ken

Originally Posted by Alpinist

Mark,

Thanks for the compliment on my system. Did you read my first paragraph? I think I did write that the Ref 6 is a darn fine preamp. What I was also trying to point out is that the Ref 6 does, in my opinion, have some of the tendencies that Joe mentioned. The degree of these tendencies is certainly debatable. That’s why I wrote, YMMV.

Ken

Ken-Yes, I read everything you wrote. Did you notice the issues you are describing before the Ref 10 landed in your system or after?

Originally Posted by kevinkwann

Some people may find your defensive, passive-aggressive posts interesting and worthwhile. I'm not one of them.

You found it interesting enough to comment on this thread about the quality of my system which you have never heard. Meanwhile back at the ranch, you are just one more in a crowd of audiophiles who won't publish details of their system and yet take pot shots at other people's systems. Everyone can draw their own conclusions about people who do this.

Originally Posted by mep

Ken-Yes, I read everything you wrote. Did you notice the issues you are describing before the Ref 10 landed in your system or after?

Mark,

I did notice some edginess in the treble when I added the Reference 6. It was more pronounced when I played my Esoteric K-01X than the ARC Reference CD9 that I was also borrowing. But I did hear some treble edge with both sources.

This got me interested in hearing the Reference 10. So I took a trip to JS Audio in Maryland and did a direct comparison of the Ref 6 and Ref 10. After hearing the smoothness and refinement of the Ref 10’s treble, there was no going back. To be fair, I did not really notice the forwardness of soundstage or more aggressive overall presentation of the Ref 6 until I did the direct comparison.

Ken

Originally Posted by joeinid

Under certain conditions, the previous gear had some great qualities. Sure I was a little over the top and that was certainly my fault but at the time those posts were written, that’s how I felt. I guess I get excited and and wanted to post about it. It won’t happen again. I’ll be more reserved until the dust settles. Can you forgive me? It’s just my opinion of snapshots in time. I’m not a professional like you. I should know better.

What nonsense! Joe please ... you don't have to change a thing.
You don't have to apologize for your opinions.

As you say it over there - Just own it!


Regards.

I can't say I heard brightness out of the Ref 6, even on a unit with only 100 hours, in a several hour home demo. I believe ARC recommends 400 hours for break-in, which may describe some reaction to it.

Originally Posted by joeinid

Took you long enough I think several were mentioned already.

I’ll add another and you will certainly disagree but I couldn’t stand the ARC Ref 6. I will say the ARC GSPre is wonderful and I would take that in a heartbeat over the Ref 6.

For the record, Joe never said the Ref 6 was bright. He just said that he didn’t like it. Perhaps he will elaborate on exactly what he didn’t like about its sound. For me there was a stridency in the treble that called attention to itself. It was not brightness.

Ken

Yes, not bright but a little aggressive and not smooth essentially. I’m not sure how to exactly describe it. I’d personally take a BHK signature over the Ref 6 and save money.

I will say that I’ve extensively heard the GSPre from ARC and absolutely love it. I could easily live with that over the Ref 6.


I’m generally not a fan of the 6H30 tube preamps.

At 835 hours, I don’t find the REF6 anything but sweet. During break in, it went through some serious adjustments in Sonic Signature but now has really stabilized and sounds anything but strident to me. In the all Shunyata system, the REF6 is one of my favorite preamps - ever. Joe and I have talked about this one a lot. We have agreed to disagree. ❤️

My concern has been more on SS amps than any preamp.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Mike

At 835 hours, I don’t find the REF6 anything but sweet. During break in, it went through some serious adjustments in Sonic Signature but now has really stabilized and sounds anything but strident to me. In the all Shunyata system, the REF6 is one of my favorite preamps - ever. Joe and I have talked about this one a lot. We have agreed to disagree. ❤️

My concern has been more on SS amps than any preamp.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Of course I agree with your assessment Mike-no surprise there. I wonder how many of the people that claim the Ref 6 is strident, bright, or aggressive strictly listen to digital and the Ref 6 is just shining a light on the upstream components? How many are matching the Ref 6 to a SS amp? Are you running it balanced or unbalanced? How is your room treated? Does your room tend to sound bright? Do your speakers tend to sound bright? The list goes on and on.

Originally Posted by Al M.

Which has been precisely my point too. It is all system/room context, as I argued on thread pages 3 and 4.

True, but my point was swapping in the V2 in the same place as the V1 amps and total shock.

I just don't get this trend. High frequencies attenuate vs distance much faster than lower frequencies, so having an aggressive amp just doesn't mimic what we hear naturally.

Originally Posted by shadowlight

Pure speculation on my part. It could be that the folks who have the money to purchase some of the newer expensive equipment are getting old and their hearing is starting to go. To compensate for the speculated hearing loss manufactures are cranking the brightness up, which leads to folks with normal hearing finding the sound bright.

Personally, if I hear bright sound I end up with earache followed by a splitting headache after hr or so of listening to bright sound.

Could be the exact opposite too. Lots of younger kids have damaged their hearing through ear buds and headphones played at unsafe levels for prolonged periods of time. The music industry didn't start the loudness wars to impress older people who knew better. Maybe some companies have decided to make their gear bright for the same generation that loves them some loud music with no dynamic range.

I personally wouldn't mind if there were some more forward sounding amps on the market. Before I bought my current amp I tried a Ayre integrated amp. It was horrible dull and boring, rolled of highs and no dynamics. I have the same experience with older McIntosh (SS) gear and older design tube amps.

If I were to buy a new amp in the future I'd prefer a more dynamic and better highs then my current integrated amp.

Originally Posted by Priaptor

Well given that I have Concert Grands and was driving them with REF10 and REF75+KT150's till I went to a Select II direct to a GS150 (and now a CH M1) I know the sound signature of your system pretty well and KNOW you are producing amazing sound. The KOs are one of the best speakers in their class and unfortunately few have heard them and given them a chance. While I haven't heard the REF6 I once owned the REF5. I'm not sure how one can describe ARC gear as "bright" BUT there is no doubt they are moving more towards a bridging of trying to compete in the solid state world as well. So I do get those looking for that "tube sound" which is not necessarily the most accurate or desirable may be a little disappointed with the direction, IMHO, that ARC is moving.

Congrats on your system. I'm a fan.

Thanks. I appreciate the kind words.

Originally Posted by Al M.

Which has been precisely my point too. It is all system/room context, as I argued on thread pages 3 and 4.

Couldn't agree more. It's all about the system. Not bragging as I don't own them ("yet" maybe never due to cost) but I am currently listening to Gobel's new Epoque Aeon (replacing the Fine) using my MSB Select II direct into my CH Precision M1 using all Gobel's cables. If there is a more transparent and neutral speaker out there, I haven't heard it. I bring this up because in combination with the MSB direct into the CH, really bad recordings sound bad and really amazing recordings sound more amazing than I ever heard. The other thing I have really come to appreciate is just how good some of the original redbook recordings are. These have been dismissed as mediocre and the quest to improve with remastering, high res, etc may be the fault of our previous playback mechanism. I have been awed by the Select II in this regard.

In terms of "voicing" equipment, I am not sure we are hearing a voicing towards more sibilance than we are hearing more accuracy. I have never been a "detail freak" as in the past that has usually come with what I like to call an increase in the exhaustion index. I think many go though this phase until they obtain a sound that pleases them over the long run and allows them to sit for hours rather than minutes.

I have moved from solid state, to tubes, tried solid state again 5 years ago with a combination of Q1 and Constellation and really didn't like it. I understand why many did at the time but to me I felt there was a lack of involvement at the higher octaves. I tried the Constellation on my Nolas and tried the REF250s on the Q1s. I kept going back to the REF250 + NOLA and gave up on my Magico/Constellation quest.

Recently, in an effort to help Elliot who is distributing the Gobels I was fortunate enough to try many solid state amps as the "guinea pig" for what he was going to choose for the Gobels once they arrived. Without going into detail and all the amps we tried I will say solid state, IMHO, has come a long way since my last foray into solid state 5 years ago with the Constellation. I am very impressed. If anything, I feel today's solid state is getting it much more right than in the past, not the reverse. In fact I enjoy it so much I made the decision with my wallet and sold my REF10/GS150 for the CH Precision M1 driven direct by the Select II.

Any of you fortunate enough to the have "The Alternate Blues" album, I recommend you listen to it. I played this for people after the Gobel Aeon broke in and people were absolutely stunned. The difference in styles between Dizzy Gillespie and Clark Terry is so well illustrated in this album as are their amazing talents that we were just all in awe. Never heard anything like it. As I said, the system, the combination of all things, is how it should be interpreted. I have been doing this stuff since the late 70s and can say, the new breed of equipment is stunning.

Thank you Priaptor.