advertisement


Mains conditioners: audioquest niagara vs puritan audio experience

W

winiar550

pfm Member
I thought it would be a good idea to make a thread like this as can't find much about it.
I am most curious about people experience with niagara 1200 vs puritan audio psm 156.

The reason behind this is I am considering of either upgrading niagara 1200 to wall power cord from audioquests nrg-z3 to something significantly better (thunder,tornado or ideally hurricane) OR going onto another direction of puritan audio mains conditioning .



And would not want people not tested either to leave silly comments please.

Thanks for all the input in advance.
 
I’ve owned the Niagara 1200 and had the Puritan 136 and 156 on home demos. If I remember correctly, I had the 136 directly compared to the 1200, and then had the 156 later. I preferred the Puritans by quite a margin. Curiously, I thought I liked the 136 more than the 156.
 
EPear said:
I’ve owned the Niagara 1200 and had the Puritan 136 and 156 on home demos. If I remember correctly, I had the 136 directly compared to the 1200, and then had the 156 later. I preferred the Puritans by quite a margin. Curiously, I thought I liked the 136 more than the 156.
Click to expand...
Would you mind to expand it and leave your impressions about your comparison? Also what make you to think 136 better than higher 156 model?
 
winiar550 said:
Would you mind to expand it and leave your impressions about your comparison? Also what make you to think 136 better than higher 156 model?
Click to expand...

Sure, at the time I was using monoblocks and bought the 1200 without audition as it has 2 higher current sockets. It did provide a quiter background but I definitely felt dynamics suffer and everything went too dull to my ears.
I then decided to audition the Puritan 136 which, although with audible filtration, had more of a balance and some more liveliness preserved. This made me curious about the 156 - and it does sound deeper/darker and quieter as a background, further than both, but also more “back in the studio” sterile and so in the end I felt that it was too much filtration going on for me in all of these. If I was to pick one though, it would be the 136 - slightly lighter on the bass may be but also less polite and more engaging overall.
Puritan also makes unfiltered blocks and I think they are worth considering..
 
EPear said:
Sure, at the time I was using monoblocks and bought the 1200 without audition as it has 2 higher current sockets. It did provide a quiter background but I definitely felt dynamics suffer and everything went too dull to my ears.
I then decided to audition the Puritan 136 which, although with audible filtration, had more of a balance and some more liveliness preserved. This made me curious about the 156 - and it does sound deeper/darker and quieter as a background, further than both, but also more “back in the studio” sterile and so in the end I felt that it was too much filtration going on for me in all of these. If I was to pick one though, it would be the 136 - slightly lighter on the bass may be but also less polite and more engaging overall.
Puritan also makes unfiltered blocks and I think they are worth considering..
Click to expand...
Thanks.
To be honest in my case no filtration is always worse case scenario.
 
Saw a niagara on special offer so looked into reviews especially on audio science but they did not convince me .

Have used conditioners though for many years from isotek, ps audio, supra and lately mcru
 
I had the Niagara 1200 and whilst it looks nice was very disappointed with the performance as filtering appeared to be poor, swapped it out for the Puritan 156 and huge improvement, in my setup there's no comparison really wish I hadn't wasted my money on the Niagara
 
NDL said:
I had the Niagara 1200 and whilst it looks nice was very disappointed with the performance as filtering appeared to be poor, swapped it out for the Puritan 156 and huge improvement, in my setup there's no comparison really wish I hadn't wasted my money on the Niagara
Click to expand...
Hi.
This is rather interesting.
Would you mind to expand it further???
 
I had the Niagara in situ when I upgraded my amp to the Hegel H590 and then had transformer hum. I swapped out to the Puritan and the hum disappeared and it also sounded more open and dynamic so I do also think the Niagara was throttling it back slightly so to speak , I also had some issues with mains switching clicks that the Niagara didn't filter out but the Puritan did. I've since resolved the problem at source but it made me realise in my situation the Puritan was far more effective. If I had the ability to trade the Niagara in against another Puritan I would but seems overkill for the kitchen hi-fi where it currently resides so the 1200 will remain for now
 
NDL said:
I had the Niagara in situ when I upgraded my amp to the Hegel H590 and then had transformer hum. I swapped out to the Puritan and the hum disappeared and it also sounded more open and dynamic so I do also think the Niagara was throttling it back slightly so to speak , I also had some issues with mains switching clicks that the Niagara didn't filter out but the Puritan did. I've since resolved the problem at source but it made me realise in my situation the Puritan was far more effective. If I had the ability to trade the Niagara in against another Puritan I would but seems overkill for the kitchen hi-fi where it currently resides so the 1200 will remain for now
Click to expand...
Thanks for clarification.
 
Update
Not posted for a while.
Already sold niagara 1200 ,but done a quick comparison of both and all in all think puritan psm156 is the better (overal) quality conditioner.
But note if you prefer a (warmer) kind of sound signature then puritan might not be the right direction.
I have tried both with either audioquest monsoon xtrm and puritan ultimate and found same result ,puritan being more neutral and accurate, but audioquest niagara 1200 more pleasant and lush sound overall.
 
daytona600 said:
Found most conditioners suck the life out of music & squash dynamics due to small size & power delivery
Used a Pro unit for years Furman P6900 bit of a beast 30amp


resources.nortekcontrol.com/products/ELITE-16-PF-E-I/pdf_ELITE-16-PF-E-I_datasheet.pdf

resources.nortekcontrol.com/products/P-6900-AR-E/pdf_P-6900-AR-E_datasheet.pdf
Click to expand...
I hope nobody objects to my 'tag-on' but I currently have a 'dead' Furman Elite 16PF Ei for which I have been unable to get an 'official' inspection or repair. In fact, after contacting the 'agents/importers' it appeared that my only option was to purchase a 'new' one, which given the apparent lack of support I'm not prepared to do.
Does anybody have any experience with this particular unit or in getting one 'repaired'?
My current plan, as it doesn't work well as a 'door stop', is to get it 'modified' to serve as a 'mains distribution' unit, given that the built in LED lamps were useful for illuminating the CD storage drawers which are incorporated in my equipment 'rack'.
Regards
Mike K.
 
hifinutt said:
Saw a niagara on special offer so looked into reviews especially on audio science but they did not convince me .

Have used conditioners though for many years from isotek, ps audio, supra and lately mcru
Click to expand...
since this post i have indeed bought a niagara 1200 which certainly immediately made a difference in realism .
 
winiar550 said:
Update
Not posted for a while.
Already sold niagara 1200 ,but done a quick comparison of both and all in all think puritan psm156 is the better (overal) quality conditioner.
But note if you prefer a (warmer) kind of sound signature then puritan might not be the right direction.
I have tried both with either audioquest monsoon xtrm and puritan ultimate and found same result ,puritan being more neutral and accurate, but audioquest niagara 1200 more pleasant and lush sound overall.
Click to expand...
i think both conditioners will be worth a try . from videos i have watched seems the 156 made big difference to dacs . never compared the 2 though .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top