530 has landed!!

I suppose there's more tweaking to be done after all. I was thinking under my speakers but perhaps I'll also try them under my amps/pre. From what I've read, they don't tip the highs excessively like the Symposium blocks do which is why I've shied away from anything under my Pass gear (other than my SRA bases).

Mark: as pretty as the Constellation amp was, she's much better to look at :).

I agree !

Thanks Michael, I'm glad you appreciate it.
 
Great writeup, Michael, thanks for sharing! Seems like you got a winning combo in Pass/Magico! :audiophile:
 
Hi all, new member here! Have to chime in on this thread. I will preface this with the fact that I have never heard the xs amps or any pass gear for that matter. Luckily I have an exceptional dealer who let's me demo mega buck gear in my own home. I too own the s5's and over the past year have had the itch to swap some boxes. I had been a hardcore Boulder fan for the past few years and I guess I just wanted to try something different. The dealer (who also sold me the s5) graciously sent me the Constellation Centaur and Virgo with the newest DC filter. The Constellations sound great with the S5 and I could immediately hear why they are pairing them with magicos at shows and in showrooms. This is both a positive and a negative. The constellation softens the sound of the ultra resolving speakers making them more palatable to a larger audience and appealing more to "joe" audiophile. I could go on and on but ultimately I felt they lacked resolution and control when directly compared to my boulder separates. I will note that they sound fabulous at low volumes and this certainly is their strong point. However, they lacked extension at the extremes and the softened sound I remarked on above led me to feel they muffled(probably a poor description) the highs and lost quite a bit of bass control. Almost like they couldn't keep up with what the S5 wanted to deliver. I felt the lows weren't actually extending down but the focus was on the low low mid range frequencies. This created what I would call a "slow" sound from the Constellation pair. Upon replacing them with the Boulder setup it was immediately apparent they were lacking in attack and low frequency delineation. So, the dealer sent me the soulution 530.

For about the first 48 hrs on and running I was a bit underwhelmed and unsure that they could articulate much other than bass boom and highs. Where is the mid range and control Soulution is noted for I thought. Then came the transformation. Speed, lows, forgiving but extended highs and a midrange sound I never had with the Boulder combo. Unbelievably resolving and detailed without anything I would call harsh. A relaxing sound that exudes confidence and ease. I still cannot wrap my head around how it does this without any bloat or fatigue. So, I plugged the boulder setup back in. Again, great extension and detail but a bit of leading edge that detracts from the listening experience. After an hour or so it becomes annoying in comparison to the Soulution. I was sold along with a couple serious audiophile friends who had a similar opinion. The 530 is not not as extended in the low frequencies as the boulder but it has more drive and more control still. To me, the sound is more natural, less hifi than the Boulder. Detail without fatigue, speed without etch. I am still figuring it out but after a month of owning the 530 I think it is the way the midrange is presented. Not as focused on the upper mid but more of a lower mid warmth that takes the edge off. Or maybe an excentuated "mid-low" midrange that makes it pleasing. The 530 seems nearly limitless in its power as well.

So, The 530 replaced a Boulder 2010, 1060 and 1008. 4 boxes into one. Had a 1021 as well-gone.

I didn't get into the phono stage but a quick summary would be that it is not as quiet as the boulder stand alone but is more natural sounding, more analog and more enjoyable.

Anyway, I'm down to a turntable the 530 and now the 540 CD. Couldn't be happier.

As always, YMMV.

Current system: Magico S5, Soulution 530/540 and Spiral Groove SG 1.1 TT.
Spiral groove IC's and SC's with Pranawire PC's

Regards, Chris.
 
Chris,

Welcome to the forum and thank you for joining. Great write-up. Thanks for your description.
 
Chris:

Thanks for adding another perspective. I am glad to hear that the Solution is performing well in your room. I did not listen to the phono stage on the 530 but I've heard it's great! Welcome to AS!!
 
Hi all, new member here! Have to chime in on this thread. I will preface this with the fact that I have never heard the xs amps or any pass gear for that matter. Luckily I have an exceptional dealer who let's me demo mega buck gear in my own home. I too own the s5's and over the past year have had the itch to swap some boxes. I had been a hardcore Boulder fan for the past few years and I guess I just wanted to try something different. The dealer (who also sold me the s5) graciously sent me the Constellation Centaur and Virgo with the newest DC filter. The Constellations sound great with the S5 and I could immediately hear why they are pairing them with magicos at shows and in showrooms. This is both a positive and a negative. The constellation softens the sound of the ultra resolving speakers making them more palatable to a larger audience and appealing more to "joe" audiophile. I could go on and on but ultimately I felt they lacked resolution and control when directly compared to my boulder separates. I will note that they sound fabulous at low volumes and this certainly is their strong point. However, they lacked extension at the extremes and the softened sound I remarked on above led me to feel they muffled(probably a poor description) the highs and lost quite a bit of bass control. Almost like they couldn't keep up with what the S5 wanted to deliver. I felt the lows weren't actually extending down but the focus was on the low low mid range frequencies. This created what I would call a "slow" sound from the Constellation pair. Upon replacing them with the Boulder setup it was immediately apparent they were lacking in attack and low frequency delineation. So, the dealer sent me the soulution 530.

For about the first 48 hrs on and running I was a bit underwhelmed and unsure that they could articulate much other than bass boom and highs. Where is the mid range and control Soulution is noted for I thought. Then came the transformation. Speed, lows, forgiving but extended highs and a midrange sound I never had with the Boulder combo. Unbelievably resolving and detailed without anything I would call harsh. A relaxing sound that exudes confidence and ease. I still cannot wrap my head around how it does this without any bloat or fatigue. So, I plugged the boulder setup back in. Again, great extension and detail but a bit of leading edge that detracts from the listening experience. After an hour or so it becomes annoying in comparison to the Soulution. I was sold along with a couple serious audiophile friends who had a similar opinion. The 530 is not not as extended in the low frequencies as the boulder but it has more drive and more control still. To me, the sound is more natural, less hifi than the Boulder. Detail without fatigue, speed without etch. I am still figuring it out but after a month of owning the 530 I think it is the way the midrange is presented. Not as focused on the upper mid but more of a lower mid warmth that takes the edge off. Or maybe an excentuated "mid-low" midrange that makes it pleasing. The 530 seems nearly limitless in its power as well.

So, The 530 replaced a Boulder 2010, 1060 and 1008. 4 boxes into one. Had a 1021 as well-gone.

I didn't get into the phono stage but a quick summary would be that it is not as quiet as the boulder stand alone but is more natural sounding, more analog and more enjoyable.

Anyway, I'm down to a turntable the 530 and now the 540 CD. Couldn't be happier.

As always, YMMV.

Current system: Magico S5, Soulution 530/540 and Spiral Groove SG 1.1 TT.
Spiral groove IC's and SC's with Pranawire PC's

Regards, Chris.

Thank f8ck for another believer. Hey Chris, welcome to the shark! Soulution is system dependent, but it's serious good...............man,.... I've been really lucky with the gear I have lived with & all along the journey I haven't let go of the things that I know are gold, for me the "520" is one of them. By the way, where are you.... roughly's good......
 
Welcome Chris !

I'm really glad you found the amp for you, Solution is definitely top tier gear. That's the great thing about our hobby, we all like things a little different from each other. I will be hearing the Solution 711 soon, paired with the S5's at Design Audio Video here in Texas. It should be fun.
 
Hello everybody! This discussion about the Soulution 530 seems very engaging with a lot of interesting input so I decided to share some of my opinions on this matter . I have recently auditioned the 530 in my system and I agree with majority of Michael's comments , nevertheless it is important to look whether sonic objectives for an amp in this price range were met. The 530 offers a very transparent and natural sound with certain limitations in the bass response. It is not surprising the Pass Xs surpasses the 530 in terms of body and control as it is twice the price of the integrated (+ power cords, interconnects etc) . My polish friend recently wrote a review about 530 , stating that the former 710 surpasses it in bass extension and texture. If we believe Soulution, which claims that the 711 delivers a performance which is a level above the 710 , than the new seven series should certainly be a match for the Pass amps .Given they are both in the same price category makes it sensible to compare them. Concerning the instrument body of the Soulution amps, it all comes down to musical preferences with the current technology. I have yet to encounter a product that would offer a laser-sharp focus and imagining together with life-like instrument body and sound richness. The Soulution can offer focus, localization etc. but will always be a bit skeletal . The same is the case with the Technical Brain TBP-Zero amplifiers which deliver even more surgical precision that the Soulution 7 series but simply lack the visceral punch in the bass . The same logic can be applied to speaker cables. The Odin's are very precise and exceptional in treble ,while the crystal cable Absolute Dreams portray excellent body but sound diffused in direct comparison. All of this comes down to circuit topology or cable geometry. It is understandable that Michael noticed the 530 offers a cleaner treble that on his Pass amps because Soulution topology offers a more precise amplification process than the Pass Labs topology, which results in less distortion. I am not commenting on the bass extension or texture because that is a compromise of the integrated design not the topology itself . The ultimate question to ask is whether our CD's or SACD's actually contain a life-like instrument body or whether this is a result of additional distortion, that can be subjectively viewed as positive since it adds more weight to the recording, or whether it is signature of the amplifier. I personally feel that more often than not , the recordings lack proper instrumental dimensionality, but those that don't can be heard in their true scale through an amplifier that amplifies frequency dynamics in extremely linear way, thus preserving the body and weight. The fact that even the top amps sound rather differently points to the fact that the ideal topology has not been discovered and every amp 'modulates' the sound in its own unique way. So far it is still about compromise and sonic preferences or rather amplifier modulation preferences..
Take care
Martin

 
Very nice write-ups and observations folks. Keep em coming.
 
Regarding the "limitations" of an integrated design, below is what the engineer at Soulution described to me as I was at one point pondering the separates. I am hoping this doesn't get me into trouble but it doesn't divulge any insider info I guess. What you are hearing in the 530 is essentially the 501 Mono's and the 520 pre. If this is just not your cup of tea then so be it.

"The components in the 530 are the same as the for 501 & 520. The power rating and the peak current are exactly the same. Both amplifiers provide 45A peak current. There should not be too much difference between the two setups. And in fact the difference is pretty small. However, there are of course some pros and cons for the two solutions.

The interconnect cable between the preamp section and the power section in the 530 is very short (20 cm), it is soldered to the preamp an plugged to the amp board. This connection is by far better than any connection between 501 & 520. Apart from the longer cables, you will have as well the interfaces (XLR / RCA plugs) between the cable and the amplifiers. This point is clearly pro 530.
On the other hand there is more noise within the 530 due to the power section. This potentially does affect the preamp stage, especially the phono section. We can not measure a higher noise floor for the 530 or any wrong behaviour of the 530s phono stage, but there is eventually a bit more noise in the 530. Again the difference is pretty small.
The 501 & 520 needs three housings where the 530 needs only one. The price difference between the two options is agian pro 530. However, the 530 is quite big. There are clients who might prefer several components but smaller ones like 501&520. This is more a matter of taste.


From a technical perspective none of the two solutions is clearly superior to the other. It is more like two different interpretations of the same technology. If the form factor of the 530 does not bother the client I would suggest this option, it has the best value for money ratio. If it does he should go for 501 & 520.



If there are any further questions please let me know."



Kind regards,

Cyrill


soulution nature of sound



BTW: I am currently in Buffalo NY, soon to be Dallas TX. Thanks.
 
Regarding the "limitations" of an integrated design, below is what the engineer at Soulution described to me as I was at one point pondering the separates. I am hoping this doesn't get me into trouble but it doesn't divulge any insider info I guess. What you are hearing in the 530 is essentially the 501 Mono's and the 520 pre. If this is just not your cup of tea then so be it.

"The components in the 530 are the same as the for 501 & 520. The power rating and the peak current are exactly the same. Both amplifiers provide 45A peak current. There should not be too much difference between the two setups. And in fact the difference is pretty small. However, there are of course some pros and cons for the two solutions.

The interconnect cable between the preamp section and the power section in the 530 is very short (20 cm), it is soldered to the preamp an plugged to the amp board. This connection is by far better than any connection between 501 & 520. Apart from the longer cables, you will have as well the interfaces (XLR / RCA plugs) between the cable and the amplifiers. This point is clearly pro 530.
On the other hand there is more noise within the 530 due to the power section. This potentially does affect the preamp stage, especially the phono section. We can not measure a higher noise floor for the 530 or any wrong behaviour of the 530s phono stage, but there is eventually a bit more noise in the 530. Again the difference is pretty small.
The 501 & 520 needs three housings where the 530 needs only one. The price difference between the two options is agian pro 530. However, the 530 is quite big. There are clients who might prefer several components but smaller ones like 501&520. This is more a matter of taste.


From a technical perspective none of the two solutions is clearly superior to the other. It is more like two different interpretations of the same technology. If the form factor of the 530 does not bother the client I would suggest this option, it has the best value for money ratio. If it does he should go for 501 & 520.



If there are any further questions please let me know."



Kind regards,

Cyrill


soulution nature of sound



BTW: I am currently in Buffalo NY, soon to be Dallas TX. Thanks.

Good post. I was informed of the same. I was also told that the 530 output a bit more power than the 5 monos despite the shared components which surprised me.
 
Back
Top