Jump to content

Best Integrated amps for original Fortes


kadini

Recommended Posts

I have a 32 year old pair of original Fortes. Even though they seem to work fine I took them to a shop to have them checked over. The guy found some minor things wrong and I expect to get them back in pristine condition soon for way less than new speakers would cost. At the shop's recommendation I am not doing any of the tweeter diaphragm or cross over "upgrades" that are floating around out there.

 

Meanwhile my Carver HR-895 receiver is making static out of the right channel and rather then fix it I thought I'd buy some new stuff. Going to replace my Carver CD player too.

 

So, golly, it's a brave new world out there. Lots of new things available and very confusing.

 

I have decided to go with a 2 channel integrated amp. Thinking I'll hook one up to the new Marantz ND8006 CD and network player since it does everything. Then don't have to worry about CDs, DACs, Bluetooth or wifi, it's all covered. (And which simplifies the amp search.) I can live without a tuner given all the other options there are now.

 

So looking at 3 int amps each is around $1000 those being the

Rega Elex R

Naim 5si

Marantz PM8006

 

None the less very interested in knowing if those 3 amps are a good match for the Fortes. Also welcome any information about personal experiences, good and bad.

 

And, open to suggestions on other solutions. Willing to spend up to $2000 or thereabouts. I have pretty much eliminated NAD and Cambridge Audio for various reasons.

 

Whatever help you can offer is greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kadinim

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

7 hours ago, kadini said:

Thinking I'll hook one up to the new Marantz ND8006 CD and network player since it does everything. Then don't have to worry about CDs, DACs, Bluetooth or wifi, it's all covered. (And which simplifies the amp search.)

 

If you look at my gear list below, you will see I like things to match, both visually and audibly.  With that said, my first choice would be the the Marantz.

 

7 hours ago, kadini said:

And, open to suggestions on other solutions. Willing to spend up to $2000 or thereabouts.

Maybe look at the Yamaha A-S2000 or A-S1100.

 

7 hours ago, kadini said:

I have pretty much eliminated NAD and Cambridge Audio for various reasons.

 

I am sure you have your reasons but my experience with these brands has been wonderful.

 

Bill

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I adamantly believe that modern day amplifiers which are operating w/in their design limits that are indistinguishable from one another in terms of sound quality.  To read more on this proposition, see this fairly exhaustive discussion If you're persuaded by this then you'll find any integrated or AVR would suffice provided it can drive your speakers loudly enough without distorting (an easy feat w/ Klipsch's b/c of their efficiency).  So, while I wouldn't worry too much about which amp has better "voicing" (a nonsensical term that makes me cringe), I'd look for a sensible set of features.  To that end, I'd recommend two features that can make music so much more enjoyable - bass/treble controls (tone) AND a Mono switch.  

 

I recommend tone controls because very few recordings are perfect.  In fact, there are some wonderful songs which were rendered nearly unlistenable by poor micing, bad venue acoustics, or bad mixing, etc..   In such cases, a simple adjustment of the treble control can make this song enjoyable.  Some will say such tampering basically undermines what the artist wanted you to hear but I say BS:  if the song goes from "unlistenable" to "enjoyable", I'm quite sure the artist would strongly approve.

 

I suggest that a Mono switch is equally indispensable.  Do you listen to any music from the 40's - 60's??  During the early days of Stereo some songs had some very strange mixing.  Instead of using stereo to replicate a soundstage where each instrument and voice is placed somewhere b/w two mics some treated it like a special effects opportunity.  For example, some early Beatles songs had Vocals coming completely out of one channel and the music out of the other.  When would this ever happen on a real stage??!  To me, these otherwise fantastic songs are almost too goofy to listen to and problem is exacerbated if your sitting closer to one of the speakers.  There are a great many Sinatra, Sarah Vaughn, Ella Fitzgerald, etc... recordings that suffer from this.  After hitting the mono switch, all is brought into the middle and sanity is restored.  In short, good Stereo is best, but Mono is wayyyy better than bad Stereo.

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, ODS123 said:

I recommend tone controls because very few recordings are perfect.  In fact, there are some wonderful songs which were rendered nearly unlistenable by poor micing, bad venue acoustics, or bad mixing, etc..   In such cases, a simple adjustment of the treble control can make this song enjoyable.  Some will say such tampering basically undermines what the artist wanted you to hear but I say BS:  if the song goes from "unlistenable" to "enjoyable", I'm quite sure the artist would strongly approve.

 

I have to agree with this having just experienced my Oppo pre which does not have tone controls and now have added a Sunfire Pre into the mix using the Oppo as a source. In a perfect world tone controls should not be needed and I strive for keeping them flat most of the time but I listen to a wide variety of music from the '60's to current all of differing quality so they are nice to have time to time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW

pick up a used totl yamaha avr for not much money, AB amp, and run it in direct mode using the onboard DAC est 120db sn ratio.

 

A great unit can probably be had for $200-300

The units have built in adjustable EQs if you want to turn them on.

 

Run the unit as a 2 ch integrated, specs and sound are hard to beat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you using a sub with your Fortes?

 

If you don't need a remote there are excellent sounding vintage receivers / integrated amps out there. That Marantz ND8006 has variable RCA outs so volume can be controlled there while using a vintage piece.

 

18 hours ago, kadini said:

At the shop's recommendation I am not doing any of the tweeter diaphragm or cross over "upgrades" that are floating around out there.

I'm very happy with my stock Chorus IIs.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apologies for not introducing myself as a newbie. But I guess the forum software took care of that...

 

Quote

If you look at my gear list below, you will see I like things to match, both visually and audibly.  With that said, my first choice would be the the Marantz.

Matched components has it's appeal. A quick comment about the Marantz ND8006. I kept getting confused with streaming devices, wifi, Bluetooth, DACs, and some of them are pre amps to boot. So the ND8006 simplified the decision tree plus eliminates the need for a separate CD player. (But, sigh, do I really even need a CD player? It's all so confusing.) Marantz has always been on my wish list too.

 

Quote

I am sure you have your reasons but my experience with these brands has been wonderful.

I was, am, really attracted to the NAD C 338. Plus it has the DAC, wifi and Bluetooth. All I would need is a CD player then. But my speaker guy said it wasn't a good match for the Fortes, and his comments seemed to jive with reviews I read about it. (I haven't bought anything yet). I really like the Canbridge Audio offerings too, but they seem to have reliability issues. If that's wrong I'd sure love to hear about it.

 

Thanks for your comments Willland.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

I adamantly believe that modern day amplifiers which are operating w/in their design limits that are indistinguishable from one another in terms of sound quality.

I went and read the Richard Clark Amp Challenge. Wow, if I wasn't confused enough. That is a lot to digest. Regardless, it's still safe to assume more powerful amps will generally sound better than less powerful ones? I understand the Fortes don't take a lot of power but my living room is fairly large and open to the rest of the house away from the stereo end. The Marantz PM8006 would be better than than the PM5005 or PM6006?

 

9 hours ago, ODS123 said:

I recommend tone controls because very few recordings are perfect.

I think all my choices have tone controls without looking.

 

Quote

I suggest that a Mono switch is equally indispensable.

Most of my listening is 60s-70s rock and Classical. At least that's my CD collection. I lost my records when the house burned down in 1986 (insurance money made buying the Fortes doable). But over the years I have acquired a large collection of vinyl. Not sure how. But someday I'll hook up my turntable and listen to some of them. Don't think I actually have an monaural recordings though.

 

Thank you for your inputs ODS123.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ODS123 said:

I adamantly believe that modern day amplifiers which are operating w/in their design limits that are indistinguishable from one another in terms of sound quality.  To read more on this proposition, see this fairly exhaustive discussion If you're persuaded by this then you'll find any integrated or AVR would suffice provided it can drive your speakers loudly enough without distorting (an easy feat w/ Klipsch's b/c of their efficiency).  So, while I wouldn't worry too much about which amp has better "voicing" (a nonsensical term that makes me cringe), I'd look for a sensible set of features.  To that end, I'd recommend two features that can make music so much more enjoyable - bass/treble controls (tone) AND a Mono switch.  

 

I recommend tone controls because very few recordings are perfect.  In fact, there are some wonderful songs which were rendered nearly unlistenable by poor micing, bad venue acoustics, or bad mixing, etc..   In such cases, a simple adjustment of the treble control can make this song enjoyable.  Some will say such tampering basically undermines what the artist wanted you to hear but I say BS:  if the song goes from "unlistenable" to "enjoyable", I'm quite sure the artist would strongly approve.

 

I suggest that a Mono switch is equally indispensable.  Do you listen to any music from the 40's - 60's??  During the early days of Stereo some songs had some very strange mixing.  Instead of using stereo to replicate a soundstage where each instrument and voice is placed somewhere b/w two mics some treated it like a special effects opportunity.  For example, some early Beatles songs had Vocals coming completely out of one channel and the music out of the other.  When would this ever happen on a real stage??!  To me, these otherwise fantastic songs are almost too goofy to listen to and problem is exacerbated if your sitting closer to one of the speakers.  There are a great many Sinatra, Sarah Vaughn, Ella Fitzgerald, etc... recordings that suffer from this.  After hitting the mono switch, all is brought into the middle and sanity is restored.  In short, good Stereo is best, but Mono is wayyyy better than bad Stereo.

 

 

 

Wow.    So my first generation EMO amp with overinflated inputs and a God awful noise floor thats hooked up in my garage setup  is going to sound the same as my McIntosh hooked up to my K's in my house?

 

Dude

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, kadini said:

Apologies for not introducing myself as a newbie. But I guess the forum software took care of that...

Oops, forgot to say....Welcome to this great forum!

'newbie' can be changed to whatever you want. In your profile, hit  'edit profile', then change 'member title' to your liking. Go way to the bottom and save.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rivernuggets said:

Are you using a sub with your Fortes?

 

If you don't need a remote there are excellent sounding vintage receivers / integrated amps out there. That Marantz ND8006 has variable RCA outs so volume can be controlled there while using a vintage piece.

 

I'm very happy with my stock Chorus IIs.

 

 

RN I was happy as well but ecstatic with new capacitors in the networks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kadini said:

I was, am, really attracted to the NAD C 338. Plus it has the DAC, wifi and Bluetooth. All I would need is a CD player then. But my speaker guy said it wasn't a good match for the Fortes, and his comments seemed to jive with reviews I read about it. (I haven't bought anything yet).

Maybe to him but not to me.  We all have different ears so I get it.  I have driven Fortes, Heresys, Quartets, RF-63's, RB-5's, RB-35's, all with NAD and loved the combinations.

 

2 hours ago, kadini said:

I really like the Canbridge Audio offerings too, but they seem to have reliability issues. If that's wrong I'd sure love to hear about it.

Not going to say wrong but my experience with CA has been pretty good reliability.  My 9 year old 640A v2 integrated did have an issue with it's protection circuitry a couple of years ago but it has been smooth sailing ever since.

 

2 hours ago, kadini said:

Thanks for your comments Willland.

You are welcome.

 

Bill

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Audio Flynn said:

Are you using a sub with your Fortes?

No sub. Just want 2 channel stereo. I have never used more than 2 channels on my Carver AV receiver and bass has never been an issue. In fact, if the Fortes have a true strength it is for sure in that area.

 

10 hours ago, Bubo said:

pick up a used totl yamaha avr for not much money, AB amp, and run it in direct mode using the onboard DAC est 120db sn ratio.

 

3 hours ago, Audio Flynn said:

If you don't need a remote there are excellent sounding vintage receivers / integrated amps out there. That Marantz ND8006 has variable RCA outs so volume can be controlled there while using a vintage piece.

I have been happy with my Carver HR-895 AV but in truth I liked the plain old Carver 900 receiver that proceeded it better. It was simple, just 2 channels and all I needed. If I had it to do over I would have just kept the 900. That said I don't want another receiver. I have had my speakers, CD player and turntable for 32 years. I'm 66. Do the math, I may never ever buy another component. The speaker guy recommended an Onkyo receiver. But I want something that looks cool, is only 2 channels, and has more snob appeal. I want something new with a warranty also. I know there's some really awesome used stuff out there but you never know what you're getting. Probably others know better than I. I really can't audition what I buy before I bring it home so I am reading as much as I can and seeking advice where I can find it.

 

Oh, as an aside, the stereo is mine, but I am getting my wife a good FM/AM music player so he can listen to the radio without being intimidated by all the bells and whistles. Yamaha TSX-B72 looks pretty good. Any suggestions? Want a single unit, not a receiver with separate speakers.

 

Thank you very much for your comments.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, kadini said:

I am getting my wife a good FM/AM music player so he SHE can listen to the radio without being intimidated

Whoops. Not that I would care about or judge others.

 

2 hours ago, willland said:

Maybe to him but not to me.  We all have different ears so I get it.  I have driven Fortes, Heresys, Quartets, RF-63's, RB-5's, RB-35's, all with NAD and loved the combinations.

My speaker guy said there was nothing wrong with NAD. But he felt the current offerings wouldn't drive the Fortes as well as say Marantz, Yamaha or Onkyo. And, again, I read a couple of reviews that seemed to corroborate what he was saying.

 

Again, I really like the C 338. It looks really cool and is really affordable. Has anybody hooked that particular NAD up to Fortes, Heresys, whatever?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, kadini said:

But I want something that looks cool, is only 2 channels, and has more snob appeal. I want something new with a warranty also.

Cool man, you know what you want. :emotion-21:

That Yamaha TSX-B72 looks good.

 

This Parasound Halo Integrated has more bells and whistles than you want but the styling is excellent, IMO. Haven't personally heard this but drooled over it plenty. 160 watts x 2 will leave you with plenty of headroom on those Fortes.

 

22 minutes ago, kadini said:

I have had my speakers, CD player and turntable for 32 years.

I think that's awesome. I wish I could do the same. Hard for me to sit still with the same components when there is so much to hear and combine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Rivernuggets said:

This Parasound Halo Integrated has more bells and whistles than you want but the styling is excellent

It looks pretty good actually. Don't think it has too many bells and whistles. Little bit out of my price range. It's not that i couldn't afford it, but I have to balance cost versus use. Even though I will retire soon I doubt I'll sit around all day listening to and agonizing about my stereo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...