NewMount
-
Posts
9 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by NewMount
-
-
Can you also let us know how your new Accuphase compares with your old Luxman, overall, as well as in the treble, midrange, and bass? I've heard great things about Accuphase, but I'll never lose affection for the Luxmans and Macs that are past.I've had McIntosh tube amps, Dyna tube amps, Marantz SS, Luxman SS, Yamaha SS and NAD SS ..... In the midrange and treble, the best sounding were the McIntosh and Dyna tubes... Overall, taking the bass into account, the best sounding was the Luxman. The only one that sounded bad with Khorns was the Marantz SS, 80 wpc, c 1973 ... It was a bit hard and harsh, compared to all the others. I don't know why. If I wanted to baby tubes along, and if I wasn't a bit OCD, I'd go for the warmth of tubes in a minute ... but the reliability of SS helps me relax (pitiful, I know). The NAD 272 is fine, and almost as warm as the Luxman L 580, which self-destructed a few years ago and is beyond repair, according to someone who took $40 to tell me that.I have now had the Accuphase A-45 for a couple of months. A comparison between my old Luxman M-03 from 1992 and my new Accuphase A-45 Class A power amplifier would not be fair, since the M-03 probably retailed for around $2000 and the A-45 costs $7000, but here you go: The A-45 is much more transparent and detailed, but never sounds harsh. The A-45 has a warm, sweet sounding treble, whereas the M-03 was a bit grainy in comparison (although the overall sound of the M-03 is warm as well). The class A operation of the A-45 should mean low distortion. As for the midrange, they both sound good, but voices are incredible with the A-45. You can hear every breath, every layer of vocals. The bass of the M-03 was powerful but lacked the control of the A-45. Some say the Accuphase is bass shy, it is not, it is bass correct. When there is slam and punch on the recording, the Accuphase delivers just that. I listen mostly to rock music and I have high demands on dynamics and punch. With the A-45, I can play really loud with crystal clear sound. Obviously, this is mainly thanks to the efficient Khorns, but the low distortion of the A-45 should have something to do with it. Unless I play really loud, the A-45 just delivers milliwatts to the speakers (but great sounding milliwatts). Not every SS amp sounds good before the first watt. A truly great feature of the A-45 is the gain control. You can set it at -3, -6 and -12 dB. I have set it at -12 dB. It is not a potentiometer, instead it switches between different gain stages (three variants of the first amp stage with different gain). This reduces residual noise of the power amp (very quiet at -12 dB), as well as residual noise of the preamp. It also allows you to use more of the range of the volume control of the preamp (and thereby more of the dynamic range of the preamp). Perfect for the 104 dB Khorns. The M-03 has input potentiometers, with which you can reduce gain and residual noise of the preamp. However, they cannot reduce residual noise of the power amp. The noise of the M-03 was clearly audible, although it was not higher than for any normal amp. At the moment, I'm very happy with the A-45. It's hard to imagine how it could sound any better. Perhaps an Accuphase preamp (C-2810?) would improve the sound further, but my current system sounds great so why upgrade...Overall verdict of the A-45: crystal clear, sweet and punchy.Overall verdict of the M-03: warm and powerful.Generic statement #1: efficient speaker + inefficient amp = audio nirvana. It takes about 200 watts to produce a few milliwatts of incredible sound.Generic statement #2: Klipschorn + Accuphase = Happiness.A few years I ago sold my old homebuilt horns, thinking that I would get a "real" HiFi sysem (as you know, horns are not considered HiFi), and got a pair of Infinity bass reflex boxes and a Rotel monster amp. Sure, it was a good system and may have sounded more HiFi than my old horn system, but it lacked life, it had no soul, it didn't fill my body with music. Those were gloomy years, but now I'm happy again.
-
I'm more than happy with my Accuphase A-45 Class A power amplifier. I use a Linn Kolektor preamp and a Sony CDP-XB740 CD player with it. I would describe the sound as an iron fist in a velvet glove (to use a cliché). It gives you all the details (the transparency is breathtaking) without ever sounding harsh and has all the punch you need. Some say it sounds "sweet".
-
As everyone has already pointed out: The less noise, the better (obviously), both in the preamp and in the poweramp. Generally speaking, surround receivers are horrible when it comes to noise, so you might consider stepping up to a better unit or a dedicated high-quality surround preamp. However, even with a low-noise preamp and a low-noise power amp, the noise can still be audible since the gain of normal pre-power combos is tuned for much less efficient speakers than Klipsch. The solution is, as several people have already mentioned, to reduce gain in the power amp thus forcing the preamp to output a higher signal (using more of the dynamic range). For some strange reason, very few power amplifiers have a gain switch or potentiometer. In the old days (80's to mid 90's), most power amps had a gain potentiometer: Denon, Sony, Luxman, Accuphase, McIntosh, etc. The only power amp brands I can think of today that have a gain switch are Accuphase (I have one, it works great at -12 dB) and GamuT (selectable gain using jumpers on the inside of the amp). Do you know of any other brands? Could it be that the vast majority of power amp buyers have inefficient speakers (sensitivity around 90 dB) and that the audio electronics firms concentrate on them?
By the way, has anybody tried the Rothwell in-line attenuators? You can find information about them here:
http://www.rothwellaudioproducts.co.uk/html/attenuators.html
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0803/rothwell.htm
I'm a bit sceptical towards attenuators since they can affect the sound, though. Does anybody have any experience from introducing attenuators in the signal path? I think they must be of high quality in order not to degrade the sound.
-
I once used an Adcom GFA-585 for my K-horns with great results. However, the relatively high idle noise bugged me so much that I eventually replaced it with a Luxman M-03. The M-03 also had gain controls which allowed me to reduce the noise from the preamp as well. My current amp, Accuphase A-45, also has audible idle noise when the gain switch is set at maximum, but no noise can be heard when it is set to -12db (it's not a potentiometer, it actually changes the first amp stage to one with less gain, hence reducing residual noise), which is suitable for the high efficiency K-horns. The GFA-585 has incredible bass punch and dynamics as well as a warm sound. I never got listener fatigue from it, but then again the treble was somewhat subdued. I don't know how much the GFA-545 resembles the GFA-585.
-
I went for a brand new Accuphase A-45 Class A power amplifier instead. I only got it a couple of days ago and the first impressions are good. I'll be back with more impressions when I get to know it better.
-
An answer to a very old post. I have run an ADCOM GFA-585 2X250W powerhouse (paired with a Linn Kolektor preamp) on my Klipschorns and it sounded great. Killer bass (the kind you don't get from tubes), soundstage, dynamics, beautiful midrange, never harsh treble (all the cliché adjectives!), you could go as loud as you wanted without any signs of distortion or fatigue (not surprising with the 104 dB Khorns). Grainy? No way! The GFA-585 really made the Khorns sing. The general opinion seems to be that the older bipolar ADCOM gear is less harsh than the later MOSFET gear. There was really only one drawback: the noisefloor of the ADCOM was not low enough. The idle noise was simply too annoying for me on the Khorns. When you listened to music, no problem, but it was irritating between tracks. I don't think this is a problem for speakers with lower sensitivity (< 95 dB), though. It's a great amp, make no mistake. My father is now happily using it with his Totem Mani 2 speakers. He compared it to a rather expensive Linn power amp and it blew the Linn out of the water. Just my $0.02.
I would like to add that I believe the GFA-585 operates in class A at the levels used with the Khorns (usually < 1W), but I'm not sure...
-
Thanks for all your comments. I think I'll go the Accuphase way.
-
I have the opportunity to buy either an Accuphase P-500L (2X270W, early 90's model) or a McIntosh MC300 (2X300W, late 90's) power amplifier for my 1992 Khorns. Currently I have a Luxman M-03 (2X200W, 1992) power amplifier that has performed quite well, but I feel that something is lacking in the bass department (too soft, not as defined as I'd like). I know a lot of people prefer tubes for the Khorns, but I quite like ss gear. I have had an integrated Accuphase E-203 (2X70W, ca 1980) with a pair of homebuilt horns in the past with great results, so I lean towards Accuphase. I don't really need all the power of these monster amps, since I rarely use more than half a watt, but I like having a lot of headroom and I imagine that bigger amps have better bass control (not the case for the M-03, though...). My preamp is a wonderful little microprocessor controlled Linn Kolektor that has no potentiometers or switches that could start making noise. The noise floor of the Kolektor is a bit higher than that of an Accuphase or McIntosh preamp, though, but that is easily fixed by lowering the gain of the poweramp (possible on the M-03, the P-500L and the MC300) thus forcing the Kolektor to produce a higher output signal and thereby increasing the signal-to-noise ratio. I don't hear any noise from my Khorns apart from the idling noise from the power amp.
Do any of you have experience from high power Accuphase or McIntosh amps with Khorns?
Khorns vs La Scalas
in Technical/Restorations
Posted
I have the same disease. One could call it "cornerspotting". I wonder of it's common among Khorn owners....