angelaudio
-
Posts
75 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by angelaudio
-
-
I'm curious to hear others impressions as well on the EL34 vs 120's.
-
The Evo400 has a big soundstage presence to it. The only thing is it does sound a bit too brittle and bright on its own. Tried it in two different rooms with three different sets of Klipsch speakers with the same results. Maybe a tube change would be needed to roll the Evo off a bit.
-
1
-
-
On 10/1/2020 at 12:34 PM, CECAA850 said:
I'm pretty sure the OP is looking at $500 max for an amp. What did this one run?
These are $599 I believe.
-
This is a wonderful amplifier and I heard it on my friend's Heresy IV and loved it. I also played it with my Magnepan .7's and was impressed at how well it drove them. The only odd thing was pairing it with my Heresy II, which my friend Mirko and I agreed, seemed to produce a more harsh, brittle sound which was quite perplexing. I'm sure it's a wonderful amp with the right match or synergy as audiophiles like to call it. Interestingly, when we paired the Evo 400 with my vintage Dynaco PAS II, it produced a more beautiful, warm, lush sound with my Heresy II.
-
1
-
-
I think marketing has a lot to do with newer gear, but I haven't heard any sound advantages to it. For most of my experiences, just the opposite.
-
This has turned out to be the best regardless of price for my Heresy and Magnepan .7's. I've compared all sorts of amps from tube to solid state and this really impressed me the most.
-
1
-
-
Correct, and the Yamaha S501 was a better match with my Heresy II than with his B&W. I sold him the S501 in this video and told him about the more muffled sound which he prefers. When I heard it on his B&W it sounded okay. IMO, it wasn't as good a match or as you guys would call synergy. So, I encouraged him on the S1200 because I believed it would have more detail and it did compared the the S501. I decided to bring my Dynakit over to his place to compare it to the S1200 and I could tell right away, from a relative perspective, it had more detail than the S501 but still had that same 2D presentation but just with more detail than the S501. It was like the tweeters finally started working on his speakers. Yes, it's a different room, but it's clearly obvious of that the modern Yamaha's have a more 2D sound. I would love to hear a vintage Yamaha equivalent instead. In fairness to others here though, my comments with regard to the OP tend to also be more of a SS vs tube discussion but for me, I'm happy that older vintage gear can sound so amazing.
-
1
-
-
BTW, I love the sound of my friends system with the S1200 compared to what it was with the S501. The S50 just sounds too muffled like the sound can't breath.
-
At my friends house. He actually likes that sound very muffled and closed, dark sound. Like a towel thrown over a speaker and has all these reasons for it that are more over my head. It just doesn't sound realistic. I remember hearing these Elac Debut people rave about, testing them here at home which he likes as well, but I thought they were absolute crap. Muffled sounding. I can't stand that sound.
-
With regard to the newer Yamaha A-S1200, it's a big improvement over the S501 but it's dry and lacks spatial separation. It sounds two dimensional IMO.
-
1
-
-
In my opinion, companies continuously strive to find cheaper ways to manufacture products and will cut corners where they can. Certainly that's a pretty general statement but it applies to almost everything made today. My recently acquired Dynakit Stereo 120 NG solid state amp is my favorite. It has provided the most impressive spatial separation I've ever heard in any solid state device and even competes with all my tube gear and these are all generally old designs. My guess is that it's probably because the Stereo 120 SS doesn't have all that noise reduction electronics in it. I don't care about a bit of noise as long as the music sounds good but you get these weird OCD people who spend more time listening to noise with their ears pressed up next to the tweeters than they do listening to music. I don't think those kind of people can enjoy themselves.
Here's my video on them
-
For me personally, I'm more interested in the sound rather than fancy features and quite frankly, the less gadgets, the better. I've been comparing a lot of components and I think direct listening is the best experience.
-
I don't think new gear sounds better than vintage gear, granted some new features are available, but as far as sound is concerned, I don't hear any advantages to newer gear.
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Shakeydeal said:
According to most reports, if happier customers were all they were concerned about, they would have skipped the CW III completely and gone straight to the IV. But obviously they couldn't make the IV at the retail price of the III. Every time you improve something, end user cost goes up, generally speaking. And as far as I know, returning a Heritage speaker to the dealer because you don't like it isn't an option. At least that's what I've been lead to believe.
I agree, let the reader decide for him/herself. If you can't hear a difference after some time, then no big shakes to me. I can't convince those people that all amps aren't the same and cables and power cords make an audible difference. To each his/her own.
Shakey
Shakey,
IMO, this probably has more to do with what components you are mating with these speakers. Many describe tubes as being warm. Quite frankly, I find solid state often to be warm and more rolled off. Mirko who posts here and I have been comparing a lot of different preamps, amps and components and I'm shocked at how the sound signatures and sound stages can differ greatly compared to these topics of break-in which I think are subtle at best. It may have more to do with the components you are using with these particular speakers.
-
I finally just had a chance to compare the Yamaha a1200 to my Bob Latino Dynaco ST70 using KT88 tubes and my restored PAS2. The 1200 is a very noticeable improvement over the s501. The bass is excellent and it sounds pretty balanced but it still lacks that beautiful, airy separation and clarity that I get from the Dynakit. Bummer because I was really hoping it would sound like what was described in the Stereo Police youtube channel. The a1200 is still an excellent integrated amp but it just lacks that open sound. Just a bit to too flat for my tastes. It has good detail but it still has that sort of muffled sound like quality to it compared to the tubes. It's difficult to put into words.
-
Not trying to cause waves here but I spent and entire evening with my friend comparing a McIntosh MHA100 headphone amp to a Primaluna Evo400 on a pair of Heresy IV. See my video below. The MHA100 is just 50 watts a channel and is not even a dedicated speaker amp and even so, was really challenging comparing the two so I'm having a hard time taking in the idea that the differences between an MA252 and Primaluna Evo400 are night and day apart considering that the MA252 is even more suited for floor standing speakers like our Heresy IV's in this video. A lot of this audio stuff gets pretty blown out of proportion IMO. MA252 has twice the power than this little headphone amp, a tube preamp! and tone controls. What am I missing here?
-
I forgot to mention to give a serious look at Decware. I have their little Zen and it's amazing. The Torri Jr is a nice push pull integrated amp. Check this guy out. He's never steered me wrong. http://www.glowinthedarkaudio.com/amps.html
-
We've been comparing a pretty good number of amps, preamps and integrated amps with the Heresy II and Heresy IV. I have four other friends and we borrow each-others amps to compare them and we compare our 2 channel systems. I'm amazed at the difference these components can really make. One of my friends just ordered the Yamaha S1200 and it's expected this Friday or possibly Monday as it has already shipped, so I will be happy to report back on its sound quality compared to others we plan to shoot it out with. I love Yamaha but there's one thing I'm still not sure about. When I started out, I purchased a Yamaha integrated S501 from Crutchfield about 3 years ago which is more entry level integrated but something I learned is that it has a very warm, rolled off sound. At first I really liked this integrated amp but never had anything else to compare it to, so I didn't really know. Later I had read a ton about tubes and was very curious, so I decided to contact tubes4hifi and decided to purchase an Dynaco VTA ST-70 with KT88 tubes by Bob Latino and they commissioned a technician to build it for me. I also pulled the trigger on an Erhard Audio Aretha tube preamp to run it. When I compared this new tube setup to the S501 I dropped my jaw in disbelief. The tubes were shockingly superior in every regard, I mean it wasn't even remotely close. It was if a towel had been removed from the front of the Heresy. It was more open, airy, holographic, whatever you want to call it. One day I found this video to best describes the difference in sound. If you skip to about 2 minutes into this video and listen to the drum symbols you will hear how even harmonics sound more muffled while the odd sound more open IMO. I'm just using this video as a frame of reference to give an idea what I heard. The yamaha S501 sounds like a towel is placed over the speaker. It doesn't sound alive or real like the tubes do. My friend then decided to bring over a Parrasound A23 Halo solid state amp to compare to the VTA ST-70 tube amp which we plugged into the Aretha to compare to the VTA. As my friends and I listened, we all could easily, immediately tell within just 5 seconds of listening that the Parrasound A23 Halo also had a similar muffled sound. I then began to wonder...do all solid state amps sound this way? muffled? It's like the music doesn't breath. Even the bass was more impactful in the VTA, go figure.
So, my friend loaned me his MacIntosh MHA150 solid state headphone amp of all things. It costs about 5 grand and has 50 watts a channel which is plenty for the Heresy. For the first time, I heard a solid state amp that did not have a muffled sound. I listen mainly to jazz and all the musical instruments sounded clear and separated unlike the other two solid state amps. But, once again, compared to the Dynaco, the MHA150 sounded to clean in the sense that it just didn't have a real soundlike quality to it. It didn't have that lively, realistic punch like the VTA. I don't know what it is about solid state, it just doesn't connect me emotionally to jazz in the same way as the tubes sound. I just can't go back to it. We have since compared a number of things but I will be very curious if the Yamaha S1200 has that muffled sound signature. I'll know very quickly. I also may pick up a Primaluna Evo100 this Friday from upscale audio. My friend may get one too. These integrated amps have a tremendous following, but I have not yet heard one, so maybe this Friday we will see and compare more.
-
1
-
-
On 6/14/2020 at 11:45 AM, SteveAudioFan said:
The Heresy IV is so far above the II and III for me, with my room and gear that it's not even up for any debate. The room makes the most difference, followed by how you set up the speakers for said room. Then your listening spot has to be dialed in along with the setup. The AMP, DAC, PRE AMP, and yes, even cables make changes to the sound. Then we have our ears, which are all different as well. I have spoken with many who have Klipsch and most of them never think about the quality of their amplification or upstream gear. Most feel it is "all the same", with it is 100% not. For example, my $3000 Naim Atom sounds better wit my Heresy IV than a $26,000 Integrated amp does. It's synergy but the Iv's have a much wider soundstage, much better imaging and they disappear easily. Bass is slightly better than the III but just enough to make it more cohesive. The II's for me sounded muffled yet hard and had no real qualities I enjoyed.
The III's are darker sounding and lack that big midrange presence that the IV has.
So these will sound different for everyone, in every space and some amps, gear, etc will NOT get along with them well. What I get from the Heresy IV when powered with an amp that loves them is a huge wall of sound that is detailed yet leans slightly warm. The midrange is preheated out and voices are huge, full and 3 dimensional. The soundstage for me expands to the walls, and the voices float a good 2-3 feet above the speakers right in between them. They disappear completely and only lack in that "oomph" lower bass region where they do nicely but will not blow you out of the water with bass.
I prefer the HIV qualities more than the CWIV but the CWIV paints a much bigger musical picture and has more of that "oomph" some of us like. I review gear but also always mention that the room and setup matter most of all followed by quality amplification, DAC, etc. For example, I placed some $6500 speaker cables on my HIV's and they turned nasty bright and harsh. Slapped on some $25 copper cables and they sounded amazing. Synergy matters.
Thank you for the feedback, I enjoy your reviews. I agree with you regarding the room but nobody seems to address the idea that the IV appears to sound unquestionably less efficient. I highly doubt they are 99db efficient as claimed and that is still being ignored. They sound more like 96db. As such, my little 2.6 watt a channel Decware integrated amp, which works sensational with my Klipsch II has to work harder with the IV and it was audible. You can also hear the relative differences in volume In the comparison video. The volume is set the same with both speakers, yet, one video is noticeably louder than the other. The other thing is the room acoustics are certainly important as you stated, but I'm talking about the "relative" differences. Another thing you mentioned which is not what I experienced is that the II's sound muffled compared to the IV's, yet I get slightly the opposite. Isn't that interesting how you indicate the sound is more muffled in the II compared to the IV? I ask myself, why is that? I feel almost compelled to wonder if maybe the issue in the II might have been an old crossover or a tweeter? Not sure, I'm not experienced compared to you guys. I can only go based on what I heard while comparing the two speakers in the exact same position. The II's just seemed so airy and effortless. I honestly think the II sounds a little nicer. I don't care for muffled speakers either but that's not how my II's sound. Reminds me why I sold my Yamaha S501 integrated amp and went to tubes. It was like a whole new emotion to the music opened up. To me, if anything was muffled, that S501 integrated amp was from a "relative" point of view. I checked out that Naim Atom, but for that kind of money and all that digital stuff, it will be worthless in several years, where-is good tube amps will remain timeless investments, yes?
-
8 hours ago, porsche987 said:
I just purchased a mint pair of Forte 1's. They are walnut and the cabinets are pristine other than feeling a bit dry and very little sheen. I am an experienced wood worker and can certainly treat these in whatever way is best but before I do I would like to ask others opinions. Mu inclination is to just use an oil treatment like Watco natural. Any thoughts out there?
I also do woodwork as a profession. You'll be fine with that choice of oil. The Forte 1 is my favorite Forte but impossible to find in walnut in mint condition. I struggled for a year looking for a pair but could never find one that didn't have some sort of dings or damage. I hate the way people abuse these absolutely beautiful speakers. Some day I hope to find a pair. My Heresy II are absolutely mint! no dings and they are extremely rare because it's nearly impossible find in sapele or ribbon mahogany as they are. Oh well, maybe someday I'll locate a pair of mint walnut forte 1's too.
-
1
-
-
On 6/7/2020 at 5:13 PM, Endo said:
For what its worth, PWK made shorthorns for a while (pics below). I don't know if they meet your criteria, but I'm curious to know more. It might be good to know these are 'out there'; you never know what's around-the-CORNER (!)
This is amazing! This is exactly what I was talking about. Never even knew there was such a thing as a Klipsch "shorthorn" speaker. Awesome. Sure would kill to find a pair just for their history alone. Can't even believe the prices they were selling for being so low! Thanks for sharing.
-
Interesting! Is there a picture of it or a way to see the article? Thanks guys.
-
I Googled everywhere without success. Did anyone ever build a scaled down Klipschorn like a 1/2 scale or 1/3 scale?
-
Thanks for the feedback guys. Yes, I will discuss it in further depth with them. Those Paul W Klipsch essays are amazing sources. The man was quite a genius.
-
1
-
New to Tubes
in Talkin' Tubes
Posted
I have a Schiit SYS. It's only $49, but IMO it sounds very sterile like and lifeless. The gain or volume is quite low when coupled to the ST70 I have and I mainly use it sometimes as an attenuator. I get the idea of the placebo effect it has on one's conscience because it's a simple unit. I think the internals are even made in Japan of all places too, but a dedicated preamp like the Erhard will absolutely blow it away. It's no contest when I compare the two and my Aretha has tone control. Obviously the Erhard is many times the price of a Schiit SYS but you'll definitely hear your money's worth with the Erhard. For me, Holger has been great to work with and answers many of my questions and his products are top notch. The phono stage in my Aretha is fantastic too. Great clarity and punch. There's some pics of my Aretha here.