ML & digital amps.

[Joey_V]

Thanks for the inputs joey - any idea with the volume being less with the BC? kinda strange.

Neil,

Could it be that the Bel Canto is rated with less power (watts) compared to the PS AUdio? It could be the reason why the Bel Canto is quieter despite the same Onkyo (preamp) volume level on the potentiometer.

That's my first guess.

Joey

 

[TheBobGoat]

I think the BC is 150/300 and the PS was 100/200 --

Just as a reference compared to just plain receiver - the BC is 4-5 quiter, and the PS is 1-2 louder.

who the heck knows. I am going to listen to both until Friday and make my decision.

anyone live in Oklahoma? because that is where I am going for a while

 

[roberto]

Neil,

Could it be that the Bel Canto is rated with less power (watts) compared to the PS AUdio? It could be the reason why the Bel Canto is quieter despite the same Onkyo (preamp) volume level on the potentiometer.

That's my first guess.

Joey

Hola Joey...that could be due to the sensitivity of the power amp, and nothing to do with the rated power....just my thought. Happy listening,
Roberto.

 

[Joey_V]

Hola Joey...that could be due to the sensitivity of the power amp, and nothing to do with the rated power....just my though. Happy listening,
Roberto.

Beats me Roberto.... you could be right. I'm going to bring this up next time I call Krell CS.

 

[ralflar]

HsvToolFool,

Regarding the commonalities between welders and Class D amps, as funny as your reflections are, you must have been referring to the switch mode power supplies found in those welders and many Class D amplifiers, right?

There are other Class D designs which do utilize large linear power supplies. As in: really big transformers and really large caps. The actual amplifiers are chip amps indeed; I am having trouble imagining these chips in a welder.

 

[HsvToolFool]

Correct. My understanding is that one technological
advance made digital amps feasible. About 5 to 10 years
ago, switching power supply MOSFETS (also used in PC
power supplies and low-cost MIG welders) increased in
speed from around 10KHz to somewhere above 250 KHz.
Being 10 times faster than the highest audio frequencies,
these chips were finally fast enough to accurately recreate
audio signals at high power.

Like all silicon, these chips will just keep getting faster and
more efficient. As they do, digital amps will get better and
eventually equal the best analog technology. Then inefficient
analog transistor amps will be relegated to obscurity like
our beloved tube amps. Eventually even Mark Levison and
Krell will produce high-end digital amps, but only when
they're good enough.

I wish I could recall the name of that digital amp I auditioned
several years ago. The amp impressed me enough that I
visited their web site. The founder/designer had an
excellent whitepaper on the (then new) technology.

I want to say that one of the founders of the company was
one of the founders of Genesis or perhaps Infiniti (but not
Arnie Nudell). But I just can't remember. Getting old sucks.

 

[lugano]

I wish I could recall the name of that digital amp I auditioned
several years ago. The amp impressed me enough that I
visited their web site. The founder/designer had an
excellent whitepaper on the (then new) technology.

I want to say that one of the founders of the company was
one of the founders of Genesis or perhaps Infiniti (but not
Arnie Nudell). But I just can't remember. Getting old sucks.

ToolFool, I think you might be talking about Spectron.

See this link: http://www.positive-feedback.com/pfbackissues/0604/pappas.spectron.6n4.html

Their home page is here: http://www.spectronav.com/

 

[welshdra]

Hi Folks

I just joined your ML forum, as I am seriously contemplating the purchase of a set of MLs. I recently auditioned a pair of Vistas at Tweeter and was very impressed. I had never listened to MLs before. After they piqued my curiosity, I read several reviews of the Summit and the Vantage, which I understand are the big brothers to the Vista.

I currently Have a HT system comprised of a pair of Sonus Faber Concertos (front) Concertinas(back) and Piccolo (center) augmented by a REL storm III. I am using a B&K 307AV receiver (rated at 150w X7).

I recently substituted my old Polk SDA-1s and my KEF 101(for rear) with the piccolo still in center spot. The reason I put them back into service was because I planned to sell them, and wanted to be sure that they still worked. To my amazement, the Polks opened up an entirely new soundstage that I had forgotten about after buying the Sonus Fabers. When I purchased the Sonus, I was making the transition to HT, and was awed by the HT experience. That coupled with the small footprint apparently made me forget about the imaging of the polks. The imaging of ML was nothing less than stunning to me, even compared to the polks.

I was wondering what you folks thought about the B&K receiver being used if I decide to purchase a pair of MLs.

Thanks for any comment.
John

 

[Joey_V]

I just joined your ML forum, as I am seriously contemplating the purchase of a set of MLs. I recently auditioned a pair of Vistas at Tweeter and was very impressed. I had never listened to MLs before. After they piqued my curiosity, I read several reviews of the Summit and the Vantage, which I understand are the big brothers to the Vista.

I currently Have a HT system comprised of a pair of Sonus Faber Concertos (front) Concertinas(back) and Piccolo (center) augmented by a REL storm III. I am using a B&K 307AV receiver (rated at 150w X7).

I recently substituted my old Polk SDA-1s and my KEF 101(for rear) with the piccolo still in center spot. The reason I put them back into service was because I planned to sell them, and wanted to be sure that they still worked. To my amazement, the Polks opened up an entirely new soundstage that I had forgotten about after buying the Sonus Fabers. When I purchased the Sonus, I was making the transition to HT, and was awed by the HT experience. That coupled with the small footprint apparently made me forget about the imaging of the polks. The imaging of ML was nothing less than stunning to me, even compared to the polks.

I was wondering what you folks thought about the B&K receiver being used if I decide to purchase a pair of MLs.

Thanks for any comment.
John

I will agree that the Sonus Fabers have nothing on the cleanliness and overall coherence of the Martin Logan Vista and above.... atleast the SF COncerto and Concertino (since I had those two exact speakers before). I will say that the Polk SDA does imaging with a certain gimmick... certainly good for some music but not universal and totally not true to source.

The BK receiver, being an upscale receiver with good current throughput should be ok, but as always, once you go ML, you will quickly find that it is truly a transparent portal to your upstreams.

And like me, you'll be playing catchup the rest of the way through.... it's a bad road.

Joey

BTW, :welcome:!!

 

[welshdra]

Thanks Joey for the welcome. Your conclusion on the B&K is about what I expected lol.

 

[Zero]

The vintage Stereo Dimensional Array's from Polk do not take a back-seat to Martin Logan when it comes to imaging. Dare I say; they may actually be a bit ahead in a few respects. The most salient attribute of the SDA series is that, when properly set-up, their speakers (particularly the 2B studio) can create a spacious sound that can fill a room quite convincingly from nearly all corners. These things will have both seasoned and un-trained listeners alike turning their heads (often resulting in open jaws)... Of course, everyone here knows that Logan is quite the opposite; presenting a more narrow sweet spot at the benefit of a very focused and composed sound.

As Joey mentions; the cancellation of odd phasing is not inherently 'true to the source'. However, it does offer a very unique and fun experience that gets you very close to the music, all for pennies on the dollar.

In the end, the two speakers couldnt be more different. I'd give the nodd to the SDA's over even the Prodigy in a number of areas, and vica versa.

 

[welshdra]

Thanks zero, I have really enjoyed the polks through the years. Before surround sound, these speakers gave me the illusion that the music was coming from the side of me in some instances. A nice balanced sound too. I bought the SFs initially, because I didn't have the space for the polks anymore at the time. I suppose I was in a compromising frame of mind at the time and was taken by the effect of Dolby Digital.

 

[HsvToolFool]

ToolFool, I think you might be talking about Spectron.

See this link: http://www.positive-feedback.com/pfbackissues/0604/pappas.spectron.6n4.html

Their home page is here: http://www.spectronav.com/

Eureka! Thank you, Lugano! That was going to bug me until
I remembered the name. The instant I read "Spectron" and
"John Ulrik" those unused neurons fired again and I
remembered. I think I auditioned the "Digital 1" model.

The product and web site designs have changed quite a
bit since I last visited. Also, that tech article I recall
wasn't there, but they had another which was almost as
good.

I had no idea Ulrick started building digital amps back in
the late 1970s. It's kind of like when I learned that
electrostatic speakers were invented back in 1929 at Bell
Labs.

 

[TheBobGoat]

SO - I sent them both back. None of them sounded bad, but neither does my receiver.

I had to try something out to see how the sound would be different, and in the end, I am happy with what I have.

Some guys mentioned changing both the preamp and amp - which, I will try to do that at somepoint, but auditioning equipment from where I live is not really a good option. Maybe on my next move. Thanks for the input guys, but I am going to stick with my setup as is for now (unless I can get a deal on some summits!)

 

[Joey_V]

Thanks for the input guys, but I am going to stick with my setup as is for now (unless I can get a deal on some summits!)

Should've pounced on my Summits back when I was shopping for them... tsk tsk tsk...

Joey

 

[TheBobGoat]

ya, i remember - oh well, something will come along some day. till then, im going to listen to what I have!