I have moved to a fully computer based set up as a source. No transport and none of those shiny disks any more.
The system has an open, huge soundstage, with very clean, tight bass that dives deep into two figure Hz.
The sound is very powerful and dynamic. Extremely detailed, but still warm, musical and believable and easy to listen to. With the right recording a reach out and touch holographic image and soundstage is possible.
I have been through quite a lot of equipment. I am and was a huge Audio Research fan for years, and I used their tube monos/preamps with great happiness.
I have pretty much always had planar speakers until recently. So I needed powerful amps to drive Magnepan2.6R/3.6R and Apogee Diva/Duetta sig etc.
I have moved to high sensitivity speakers in the form of the Avantgarde Trios now. This has enabled a move to very low powered SET amplifiers which has been great fun.
I have been searching for equipment that keeps the music free of colour and true to the recording. I believe you choose your source for its sound. The rest of the equipment should let the source do its magic as much as possible and get out of the way of the music.
This unit is modified with Mundorf silver/gold in oil caps, Mundorf tube cap, and Duelund VSF Cu caps. I use Emission Labs mesh plates 45 power tubes. A very refined and beautifully natural sounding amp. Very transparent.
DCS Scarlatti clock
Finest player in the world
Avantgarde Trio
19 ohm 109db/watt with 225 subs
DCS Scarlatti
State of the art number crunching.
PS audio Premier Power Plant
Power regenerator.
Analysis plus Golden oval XLR
Beautiful cable. Amazing detail and still warm and life like
Audio Magic Stealth XXX oyaide
Specially made with Oyaide XXX sockets and furutech input. Much more detailed than the Hydra it replaced
Apogee Duetta signature2 Heavily modified
These have the latest Graz ribbons both tweeter/mid and bass panels. I have external cross overs with mundorf silver/gold in oil caps and Alphacore foil inductors. Caddock resistors and all solid core silver wired. All suspended and vibration free. These apogees take much more power and go way louder and have much better dynamics than the original. Not only that but much improved sound quality. Simply stunning! I have had many planars magnepan etc but these really are the best in every way now. Long live Apogee and Thank goodness for Grazs search for perfection!
Virtual dynamics Revelation 2
This must be one of the only cables I have heard that when compared to cables that seem to "do nothing" or just pass signal untouched this cable does lots but in a good way! A staggering solid detailed sound, but a nightmare to plug in due to its size, weight and stiffness.
Virtual dynamics Master LE
Very nicely focused cable with very low noise floor. The best bass I have heard and startling dynamic speed
Oyaide SWO XXX/SWO GX
Its own spur and conditioned with various filters along the way before reaching the Stealth
Acoustic Revive RR-77
Sends out a very low frequency into the room which disrupts RFI EMI and makes you feel relaxed! Very odd but works well Seems to focus the mid range
Sonic studio Amarra
Bolt on for itunes
Auralex Lenrd Bass traps
I have 8 of these traps placed subtly in the corners of the listening room. They have done a very good job in a room that had quite tight bass anyway.
Weiss Medea plus
Latest super DAC. Volume control on Firewire input. Variable output voltage to match amps. stunning DAC
Curious about if you have had any noise issues with such sensitive speakers, especially from amp to amp, including the Bel Cantos? If so, was tube part of the issue or no?
I might test the set waters in a separate system some day so I am very interested in how things go with others that are trying to push the edge.
My audio system strategy is to always use reference systems that push the edge as a starting point, then figure out what have to do to approach that on my budget.
Hmm, I think what he was indicating is that the Trios are not designed to work optimally with tube amps, including his, due to the impedance variation at various frequencies. The result would be less than ideal tonal balance top to bottom.
Use of a sub would likely help compensate.
Still, I'm wondering if you have tried and good lower power Class A SS amps with those? I'm thinking that you might find SS to be the best inherent match and not have to deal with any tubes in the power amp.
Ralph Karsten (Atmasphere) pointed out on the big horn thread going that Trios are designed to work best with SS amps in that the crossover implementation results in significant impedance variations from driver to driver:
"(FWIW, the Trio is only horn speaker I know of where the designer intended it to be used with transistors. This is reflected in the crossover design, or lack of it, which consists of capacitors to roll off low frequencies for each driver. This results in an impedance curve that is nearly 19 ohms in the bass horn, but only about 4 ohms at the tweeter frequencies, even though the individual drivers are all nearly the same impedance. No low power tube amp is going to drive this right as the speaker is what I call a Voltage Paradigm technology, whereas most low power tube amps and other horns are Power Paradigm technology. see http://www.atma-sphere.com/papers/paradigm_paper2.html for more info.)"
I'm wondering are you hearing this with the various tube amps versus say your original BC ref 1000?
I would suspect that highly efficient speakers like yours would result in different amps sounding more different than they might sound otherwise. That's because I expect high sensitivity to act almost like a magnifying glass, increasing differences that otherwise might be subtle.
Settling on a single amp in such a case might take a while. It would be like gong to the candy store and having to decide upon a single sweet treat to live with when there are so many different kinds available.
I've come more and more to realize that there is no "best" anything in audio. Different pieces work best in different scenarios. An amp that sounds best with hard to drive Apogees cannot perform similarly with a high efficiency design like Avantgarde. It may work and even sound very good, but the equations are different meaning the results are as well. Plus toss in personal preferences which can change as well over time. Many ways to skin a cat, plus so many breeds and the cat generally will not even stand still.
It doesn't surprise me that watts, current and damping factor are not the key ingredients to make the best soup with the Avantgardes. I found it encouraging thought that the Bel Cantos lasted as long as they did though. Their not being exposed on your system with those speakers was a plus in my book and helped convince me to take the plunge with the ref1000 mkiis, which are just what the doctor ordered with my OHMs. I don't see myself going anywhere ampwise for a long time unless something unexpected comes up.
I like the halcro design from what I have read. It seems to have a unique approach to isolation of components which is something I can imagine squeezing extra performance out of an otherwise good amp design to start with.
Disk files are just better source for digital audio systems I believe. And I agree optical drives/transports designed exclusive for audio are a dying breed. I hardley ever use mine anymore. I rip to music server disk first and play from there.
Once ripped to hard disk storage, any connection, firewire, network or other with sufficient bandwidth to get the bits to the audio components involved in the d to A conversion (clock, DAC)will suffice in that it is just data being delivered. Conversion to sound occurs afterwards.
BTW, I just bought a 1.5 Tb USB disk drive at Best Buy for $140 US. My entire CD collection and more will fit on that. That is incredible!
computers and audio are match made in heaven or hell, dEpending on perspective.
i'm blogging from an opera browser on dell pda, the same gadget i use wirelessly to select music of my server to play via roku soundbridge on my system. very cool. sounds fantastic.
on the flip side, i dropped the laptop i was using as music server the other week. i did not keep a backup of the files i lost. that was not cool. i learned a lesson there. now i added a nas device i use for backup.
Going lower power with the right amp would probably result $$ per $$ in better amplification for sensitive horns like those where it matters. The power available has to be somewhat superfluous for these.
The horns are opposite end of the load and power consumption spectrum from the Apogees. There has to be a better amp available for those speaks for the same cost, so my gut feel is that you have some upside there for perhaps little or no additional cost.
"Texture" is often enhanced or limited by speaker interaction with room acoustics. I've found that speakers often need room to "breathe" in order for this aspect to play out well.
That could be tricky with the much larger Trios compared to smaller designs in tight quarters with little room to "breathe".
If you can turn it up without realizing how loud it really is, that is generally a very good sign!
Some adhere to the theory that for a particular amp design that works well, it is disadvantageous to go with a model that provides way more power than you will ever use because higher power amps are not as clean and pure at a lower volume as lower power ones. I do not know if I necessarily subscribe to that theory.
I do think that per watt, a high current design like a good Class D does handle complex loads better at lower volumes often in terms of a more satisfying low end. If that is what you are getting currently but with only a tad of background hiss, you are probably in very good shape. I suspect that the sound produced from horn designs with complex loads (not sure if that fits the Avantgardes or not) will be even more sensitive to these types of load imbalances when they exist than less sensitive designs, but that is just my speculation. I am far from an expert on these horn designs.
My gut feel is that a high power class D amp may not be the best match to those high sensitivity horns, but do not know for certain and I am very interested to hear how it works out.
If the Bel Cantos work well with both Apogees and Avantgarde horns, then I would venture to say they will work well with virtually any speaker out there.
How about the smaller Avantgardes (Ones, Unos)? Are they nearly as good? Maybe those could fit?
Apogees and horns are two ends the spectrum in terms of ease of load and efficiency, no? THEy are both detailed I believe. I believe it is the dynamics and microdynamics that have caught your ear. I would not compare my Ohms to the Avantgardes, but dynamics at higher volumes is what lured me to the Ohms from Maggies.
Also, I've heard that Avantgardes are not a good solution if you listen mostly at lower volumes. Maggies are and I suspect Apogees as well.
I wonder what other horn designs out there that might approach what the trios do in a smaller package? Maybe a topic for a new thread.
"Most folks do not have the requisite space for the mighty Avantarges. They are simply not convenient to say the least. "
That is a fact. Even dealers that carry a wide array of high end stuff do not carry them for this reason. They are too big and obtrusive for most.
If not for the size issue, I might well own a pair of good full range horns by now. They may be the only design out there that might pry me away from my Ohms.
So how much better are these really than say a pair of well anointed Klipschorns?
They might be considered hazardous to your health in event of accident.
They are surely capable of reproducing the dynamics of a cannon or howitzer or blast and random blasts of noise, as well as those of a symphony orchestra with ease.
It would be interesting to do a study comparing the hearing capacity of owners of large efficient horn designs versus other breeds of speakers.
I guess most great things in life carry some risk....
I've never seen Cabasse in the US. I see only 1 US dealer in Washington State listed on their web site.
Ashame really in that I would really love to experience the line.
I have had a pair of French made Triangle Titus 202 monitors for about 10 years or so now and still love them.
THE French made Jadis equipment looks luscious as well. Cabasse and Jadis Eurythmie speakers are high on my list of speakers I've never heard but would really like to experience.
Doesn't Cabasse also have some more affordable (though perhaps somewhat full range-challenged) similar designs out there already starting in the $1000 dollar range or so? I think I read about these in a magazine about a year back. Something like that paired with a more traditional sub-woofer might be a very interesting combination for good sound at reasonable cost as well, even if not quite as sexy as these flagship models.
I've never heard the Cabasse but love the looks and design approach.
Not so crazy about the price though.
Wide dispersion or omni speakers that approximate a point source typically sound tremendous in regards to sound stage and imaging accuracy and detail, particularly on recordings made with a simple two channel stereo miking scheme.
Add in full range sound with lots of power and meat on the bones and you really have something special.
If money was no object, I would strongly consider a DCS solution. But the cost of admission for the unique DCS technology also requires a very open wallet as well that I doubt I can justify at this time.
That won't stop me from considering it as a reference standard though when considering my options.
I have done a lot of technical product development work over the years on digital image processing, cartography and related mapping applications. I have implemented some of the same signal processing algorithms that might be applied to digital audio, but have never worked in the audio industry other than as a part time sales guy in a HiFi store years ago.
Digital mapping is fun techno-geek stuff but not very cool or awe inspiring to the masses. Hence my alter ego "mapman".
Oh well, back to the drawing board on that as well!
Well, its always different strokes for different folks.
I agree though regarding live and smooth. I am often ambivalent in regards to smooth. I do not want artificial rough edges introduced, but want to hear the good bad and ugly of what went into the performance as captured on the recording.
Regarding the DCS Puccini, I was particularly impressed with the delivery of passages involving massed strings. There was something about the timbre and imaging that was very lifelike indeed.
Maybe "clean" would be a better term to describe it than smooth.
THis was with very high end tube amplification, Nordost cables, and the smaller Magico monitor speakers.
I cannot say how much each piece contributed to the end result, but the end result was very detailed and favorable with just a slight dash of tube warmth with minimal or no artificial bloom tossed in. It was a most subtle yet effective mix of the commonbiggest strengths of both SS/digital and tube amplification I thought in regards to detail and microdynamics.
In that the Magicos were still somewhat smaller monitors, the weight and dynamic range that go with a live performance were still not all there, but I found I did not care as much as I normally might otherwise.
The end result was a highly refined sound that I think would appeal to many. It should for what that system cost.
I've read about the DCS technology. IT is very unique to the best of my knowledge. Audio is a different application, but I can see where sophistication in military signal processing applications could be applied to audio in uniquely distinctive ways that produce very desirable results.
Other than noise removal however, digital signal processing does transform the source signal into something other than what it started as. I believe the DCS processing to be quite unique, hence its inherent value for those who take to what it does. However accomplished exactly with the unique technology applied, when I heard the Puccini on a very good demo system, it sounded like a very good, very analogue-like combination of smooth, natural and detailed.
"It has been reported that power conditioners devour current"
My large Ohms like current too. I still use a basic Monster power condition strip that was in place due to improved results with Dynaudio monitor speaks I had prior (which also despite being small like current as well).
If a conditioner is in fact devouring current, wouldn't that be indicated by them running pretty hot?
Intuitively, what you're saying makes sense to me. It may not matter though to those that like a "smoother" more "tube-like" sound though. Still, it is an interesting premise upon which to experiment and hear for oneself.
I've been researching DACs and though I understand the ramifications, I am not sure which approach would work more to my liking, oversampling or no. I tend to like a smooth but detailed sound like that produced by better tube systems, and understand the benefits of oversampling, but with my current setup, I have not out ruled that I might be better off with a good dac that foregoes the oversampling and just does a good job of delivering the content that is actually there.
Also, doesn't Class D/ICE with its ability to deliver lots of power cost effectively and handle difficult loads make products like Apogees viable for more people?
My understanding is that the prime downside to Apogee's design was that there were few amps around at the time that could drive them properly.
Same true of the Ohm Walsh design as well, the older models from the 70's, the As and Fs, in particular.
Class D amps have arrived from what I read. There are as many authoritative positive reviews for Class D products these days as any other viable technology. personal tastes and biases will always come into play, but that's a normal thing.
Were I to take the plunge for a "bigger" amp, the BC REf 1000 and , if I might afford it, the new Rowland Class D gear would have to be considered at the top of the list from what I have read. I'm sure class D would sound great and my power bills would like it as well. My only concern might be potential for RF interference if not addressed adequately, but my understanding is that many of the better newer class D designs have a handle on this.
The Roku Soundbridge on my system might be able to do it. It can play over a network connection from a music server (haven't tried this yet, I use it solely for Internet radio to-date), but not sure about that format.
I'll find a way to play it one way or another though.
"I could even bring some high bandwidth orchestral recordings straight from the studio 192 Khz @ 24 bit completely untouched and straight from the mixing desk. "
please bring these if you ever come my way as well!
I've had bad sound experiences with wood floor boards in the past also. THey can really wreck havoc with the sound, I've found. I'm lucky now in that I have two rooms with solid concrete floors covered by thin but dense carpet that provide a rock solid foundation without ringing for my larger Ohms, and it really helps.
Sounds like your room is a real challenge but you have things well in hand after much experimentation, which is the only way to really get things "tuned in".
I suspect you have no need whatsoever, but as I'm sure you know, its easy to integrate a good sub to most any good system and make it more full range and add weight and authority to approach the bigger speaker designs out there that essentially integrate sub components out of the can, if desired. Its a very practical solution and one of the reasons many audiophiles do not feel compelled to turn to monster sized speaks.
In audio, components and careful integration is always where its at, even just within speaker systems.
I think its a reasonable trade off for many from what I can see giving up some imaging accuracy for bigger soundstage and fuller bottom end. Not an uncommon compromise scenario for many speaks, not just eletrostats or planars. Plus, practically, with limited space to start with, it may be more practical and keep the speaks out of the way.
I'm not sure I'd call it "wrong" though. Probably also not "ideal". It has advantages and disadvantages as do most things.
I had to get rid of a pair of Magnepans that I adored when I moved to my current house because I could ever get them set up as well as in my old house/room without being obtrusive, especially with kids running around with risk of collision. The low end and sound stage size was OK but imaging accuracy and depth suffered too close to the walls. I also determined that when set up best for imaging accuracy and depth of sound field, the low end suffered mainly.
Haven't heard any Apogees in quite a while but liked them when I did. I understand they are a bear, reputably one of the toughest loads ever, to drive properly though.
A good class D amp that doubles power into 4 and then 2 ohms seems like a good choice on paper. I would go a similar way with my Ohms if I had need.
A system sourced from the DCS combo is starting off with one of the best digital sources I've heard a tremendous cornerstone to build around for sure.
Some people prefer monitors and some prefer full range. It ain't a crime to stop short of full range, especially in tight quarters where neighbors might be disturbed otherwise.
Speaker placement in the pics may not be optimal and the room sounds a bit tight on space, but this system must sound incredible nonetheless.
Florianw, if you want to toss stones, you should really post your system as well and share, especially given the assumption that it is quite unique and rare in its configuration.
Heard the DCS Puccini recently in a limited audition and was very impressed. I'm thinking of that unit as my current reference standard for comparison.
Wondering your impression of the DCS players versus the competition in general and what you may have used prior? Does DCS make players at lower cost points that incorporate any of the key design elements of the Puccini?
Have you ever heard the Musical Fidelity line of CD players for comparison?
