advertisement


Confused (a little)

FISBEY

pfm Member
My quest to downsize didn't really work.

Tried an Audiolab 8000a (serviced) with Rotel RCD965 - with old Tannoy Mercury M20's Ok but not enough get up and go and a bit 'vague'.

Got an Arcam Alpha 5 cd modified by Kevin Green, still very laid back, more detail but not brilliant.

Replaced the M20's with some B & W DM302's - much more detail, but not much mid bass and somewhat bright at times.

Replaced the Audiolab with my old 82/250 with a hicap DR - more bass all round, but jeez very harsh at times.

Put the M20's back in, not so harsh in the treble but still found I had a headache after a while...

Put the 965 cd back in - Harshness gone, but a very lightweight sound.

Where now?

I suspect the speakers could be improved upon, but am unsure about the CD - I like the weight of the Arcam and hope it isn't contributing to the harshness but I suspect it might be?

I think I've decided I do quite like the Naim mid bass thing.
 
Maybe try a small sub eg a REL T Zero to give some extra warmth/weight ?
What sort of ££ are you looking at?
 
I auditioned the Audiolab 8000a back in the day when it was the "hot " highly recommended mid price amplifier of the day and found it cold and clinical. 1 eventually bought a Sugden A48B that served me well for many years eventually being replaced by a valve amp.
 
My RCD965 has a bright and breezy signature to it, to my ears. I use it successfully with a 282/250dr.

There is a system/musical taste dependency issue though. If you like your wind instruments, for example, fleshed out more, then a Naim cdp might be a better match.
 
The bottom of the range Cambridge audio amps are usually very good imo. Couple that with some old Mission 760i or 731, 731i or 731le and it should sound a lot better.
 
very often with downsizing you discover an absolute gem , many times on PFM you read folks saying " i replaced a whol rack of components with ***** and it was better or just as good
 
Keep the 82/Hicap DR/250. Assuming the sound quality is not far off from the 282/Hicap DR/250DR, it is not a surprise you found the other amps lacking. The harshness you experienced with the Naim might be due to the 82 but there is no denying the fact that the 282/82 based setup is colourful, robust and dynamic which may induce higher listening fatigue that had caused the headache.

I occasionally switch from the 282 to the 202 and the latter is proven to have a calmer and more soothing presentation with a sound that's softer, flatter and less lit. Dynamic leading edge transients don't leap out like the 282 does and as a result listening fatigue is lower with the 202.
 
If you want a big, powerful sound with smooth highs, a cheap Quad 306 and passive pre will do it (don't bother with a Quad preamp). Also make sure your cables don't have silver in them because they can sound bright.
 
What you describe sounds typical of the way that kit sounds. Or at least how it can sound. In any system careful matching and set up is needed to deliver the balance you want. It takes a bit of effort.

What I would say is that when kit is characteristically too harsh but has the detail and dynamics you want, like Naim or Rotel for example, there are things you can do about it. Careful system matching, cables plugs etc and set up stands a good chance of helping you get what you want.

If the kit is too laid back and dull, Audiolab and Arcam for example, there is nothing you can do about it.
 
Keep the 82/Hicap DR/250. Assuming the sound quality is not far off from the 282/Hicap DR/250DR, it is not a surprise you found the other amps lacking. The harshness you experienced with the Naim might be due to the 82 but there is no denying the fact that the 282/82 based setup is colourful, robust and dynamic which may induce higher listening fatigue that had caused the headache.

I occasionally switch from the 282 to the 202 and the latter is proven to have a calmer and more soothing presentation with a sound that's softer, flatter and less lit. Dynamic leading edge transients don't leap out like the 282 does and as a result listening fatigue is lower with the 202.

So... which of the above is right? Or are both wrong? Sorry, but if you have to change the amp in your system to avoid headaches.. something.. or possibly everything.. is seriously wrong.

I will say this again. The 'mood', whether it be calm or frenetic, should be.. and in fact IS in the music. If you need amps etc., to make you boogie, or to calm you down.. then you really aren't understanding the power of music.
 
The 'mood', whether it be calm or frenetic, should be.. and in fact IS in the music. If you need amps etc., to make you boogie, or to calm you down.. then you really aren't understanding the power of music.
I agree searching for components that 'fix' a specific fault is not a good long-term approach. Better to find the kit that enables each of us to better engage with the music, whether that's to boogie or whatever. Of course, the answer to this is not always the same set of products for everyone. Also, what engages us in a dealer dem room may not work so well at home so some trial and error may be necessary.
 
I agree searching for components that 'fix' a specific fault is not a good long-term approach.

That depends. It can be. If you have a component that is fundamentally wrong for your system or tastes then no amount of tweaking is going to fix it. You need to get the big bits at least in the ballpark then fine tune.
 
That depends. It can be. If you have a component that is fundamentally wrong for your system or tastes then no amount of tweaking is going to fix it. You need to get the big bits at least in the ballpark then fine tune.
I suppose if, for example, I had an amp that I was dead set on keeping but it had a specific weakness then I would be looking to compensate for that but, in general, I think its best avoided.
 
OK. There are certain pretty obvious and well known 'characteristics', which are generally ascribed to particular brands. I'm not attacking any brand here, just trying to reflect what is 'generally accepted'

Naim 'harsh/in yer face/rough/coarse/fatiguing'.
Arcam. 'soft/warm/laid back.'
Audiolab. as above.. or 'grey'.
Linn... well.. err.sounds like Linn

I wouldn't have thought of Rotel as sounding anything like Naim..as stated above but.. whatever.

I'd add that too much Rega in one system can sound 'bouncy' to me... though to be fair I haven't heard their latest stuff.

So.. I suppose, if you are the sort who listens to loud rock, dance or any of the countless sub genres of dance/drum and bass/hip hop/RnB/house or whatever.. all the time.. you might want to go for something a bit more 'upfront. Or is it more that the kit being 'upfront', in that context, wouldn't be seen as a 'fault'?

Conversely, if you are a pipe and slippers classical or easy listening fan, you might not be offended by Arcam/Audiolab or whatever. But again.. is that simply a case of the kit not offending within context?

But, the reality seems to me to be that most of us have broader taste than that and listen to a wide range of musical styles and genres. Now I for one really have neither the space nor the 'readies', to have a choice of amps etc., to be trotted out according to mood, or present choice of music.

It also makes sense to me, that neither 'natural' (i.e. non electronic) musical instruments.. nor kit, are aware of the musical genre that they are being employed to produce. It's all just soundwaves captured and reproduced by the wonders of technology.

It follows, that in an ideal world, any competent amplifier, which seems to be the main topic of this thread, would, in effect, be a 'straight piece of wire.. with gain..' (Attributed to someone from QUAD IIRC?) This amp would reproduce exactly what was fed into it, but at higher voltage/current or whatever. If said amp was then employed to drive a 'perfect' speaker.. the result would be the ultimate in true 'high fidelity'.

Now. Whether any individual 'punter' would like the sound of the 'ideal' set up.. is a moot point.. But.. I'd argue that such a set up would have the highest probability of making a decent fist of whatever music was thrown at it, and therefore of delivering well across an eclectic music collection.

ISTM that many of us lose sight of the objective, and the meaning, of the term 'high fidelity'.
 
I agree searching for components that 'fix' a specific fault is not a good long-term approach. Better to find the kit that enables each of us to better engage with the music, whether that's to boogie or whatever. Of course, the answer to this is not always the same set of products for everyone. Also, what engages us in a dealer dem room may not work so well at home so some trial and error may be necessary.

That last sentence is critical. I've described elsewhere how I was seduced by one out or two amps in a dem room, only to find the exact opposite in my own room/system. A home dem of any significant purchase is essential.

That depends. It can be. If you have a component that is fundamentally wrong for your system or tastes then no amount of tweaking is going to fix it. You need to get the big bits at least in the ballpark then fine tune.

Broadly agree. In my case I am to some extent 'stuck with' my 20+ year old speakers. They work brilliantly in my room both sonically, and in terms of space, positioning etc. So, I basically needed an amp which would drive my speakers, as well as delivering everthing from classical, to folk, to rock, etc., with equal 'fidelity' and ease. I chose an LFD amp and would recommend anyone seeking an amp that 'just works' without imposing it's own character, to audition LFD.. AT HOME!! :D

I suppose if, for example, I had an amp that I was dead set on keeping but it had a specific weakness then I would be looking to compensate for that but, in general, I think its best avoided.

I'm finding it difficult to imagine an amp that did almost everything well, but fell down in one area.
 
I've always thought of Rotel as baby Naim. I think the sonic signature is very similar.

Can't say I've ever come to that conclusion. But then the only Rotel I've heard long term is my RCD 965-BX.. which remains a very capable CDP and not remotely harsh, fatiguing etc. It's interesting though.. that the only NAIM components I ever considered giving 'house room' to, were NAIM CDPs, which often seemed to fly in the face of the wider NAIM philosophy/sound.. especially when used with other makes of amp etc.
 
I'm finding it difficult to imagine an amp that did almost everything well, but fell down in one area.
I can think of one example but it's not something I've done often. My red LED Nait is quite 'thin' sounding and lacks body but I love everything else about it. This is quite evident when partnering with stand mount speakers in my office. However, partnerring with an easy to drive floor stander (i.e. Linn Keilidh) somehow masks this lack of body by providing deeper (yet well controlled) bass. However, this is partly room dependant cos the Nait doesn't sound so 'thin' in the 4 x 4.5 room which has some bass issues. In that room, a small pair of standmount Katans sounds really good.
 


advertisement


Back
Top