(could I tell them apart "blind" - probably not - but there are still observations of how I felt about the sound after a couple of months of one or the other.
where the Class D crowns focused more on clarity and dynamics. some years back I recall thinking the Quads sounded "sweet", with more microdetail in the mix. The Crown XLS2500 that I have in the system now, handles the speakers better as they are a bit of a difficult load - this is totally subjective - but it feels as though it has better dynamics (perhaps a response more to the spec sheet than the sound?) - I probably should redo my long term comparison with the Quads now that I have Dirac EQ in the system. Your characterisation of the AHB2, is similar to my own long term feelings about the Quad 606 & 707 current dumping ampsīoth the AHB2 and the Quads share the base design of current dumping / Feed Forward, I wonder whether the sonic similarity is due to that. I've highlighted one particular part, though there are some who will argue that class A/AB and D must all sound the same if they measure the same.
It's a bargain, too, by the standards of high end amplifiers, and with its sophisticated protection circuitry, quite bulletproof! So the Benchmark isn't a perfect amplifier, but anyone who has never heard a really good amplifier or thinks that all amps sound the same is going to be blown away by the sound. What this means in practice is that the AHB2 will sound great on clean recordings, but will pass the harshness through on more distorted ones, while some more colored amplifiers with lower order harmonics will tend to mask that harshness. And higher order distortion is unfortunately quite common on poorly made recordings and badly-designed equipment. This is because of the mechanism by which we detect the timbre of sounds. Lower order harmonic distortion is known to render higher order harmonic distortion euphonic. The highs in particular are to die for, like gossamer.Īnother issue is, paradoxically, lack of distortion masking. There are those who say that the Benchmark robs music of excitement, and after several years of listening experience, I tend to agree. My Parasound A21, for example, is a less refined amplifier than the Benchmark, but it happens to be one of the best amps I've heard in this particular regard. But listen to a piano on the Benchmark and another good amp and you'll hear what I mean: it rounds off the attack.Īmplifiers actually differ surprisingly in the degree to which they do that. Again, this isn't a question of steady state measurements or amplifier power - I'm not clipping it. It excels in steady state measurements, but it isn't as dynamic sounding as other good amplifiers with which I've compared it.
It's a save-the-planet kind of amplifier, without the sonic compromises of Class D.īut perfect amplifier? No. (If you've ever heard crossover notch distortion you know why Class A amps sound better than A/B ones, it's incredibly audible and annoying in small amounts.) And the low weight, tiny form factor, and efficiency of the AHB are really welcome. Or like Class A without the absurd size, weight, and heat. I was listening to it last night and I can only describe the sound as ravishing. I've owned an AHB2 for several years now, and it's the cleanest amplifier I've ever heard.
Hopefully, some additional Gan400 owner read this and share their experience.That said, anyone who thinks that the Benchmark is a *perfect* amp because of its steady state measurements will learn that that doesn't yet exist. My conclusion: horses for courses.some gear just doesn't work so well together in some rooms.and yet sounds fantastic elsewhere. Then a couple weeks ago, I hear another A21 fronted by a Lyngdord 2170 as a preamp and playing through Magnepan 3.7i's and the system sounded fantastic. At the time I was listening through Salk Veracity ST's.so the 2Cherry stayed and the Halo went. Over time I came to believe that the 2Cherry low end tone and definition was so good that I no longer heard what I called the one note boom but instead heard the much more nuanced detail. My immediate impression was less "boom" on the bottom but much better top end and soundstage. When you stumble upon the few negative comments about the LA4, they seem to reference that preamp being so "clear" that maybe it does sound a little thin.which I equate to tone density.and if I remember correctly, the Denafrips doesn't have a volume control so bypassing the LA4 isn't an option.Ī few years ago, I moved from a Halo to a Digital Amplifier 2Cherry (class d). I wonder a little bit about the synergy aspect.
0 kommentar(er)
