best amp for sierra-1nrt

[beadyz]

I found a good 2-channel preamp upgrade to make more difference in my system than when I upgraded my amplifier.

Maybe do some research on a nice preamp in your price range and worry about the amp later. Perhaps a Musical Fidelity preamp, or a Rogue Audio tube preamp. I'd recommend used, as you get much more bang for your buck. I've had great luck on Audiogon buying great gear and prices I was happy with.

I started with a Carver receiver running the Sierra-1's in stereo. Then I used the Carver as a preamp and then picked up an Adcom GFA-545 mk1, which you can find for ~$100-150 and it really sounded nice. A noticeable improvement over the internal amp in the Carver. I was going to build a DIY amplifier and bought an amp to use for its chassis, power supply, and heat sinks, but ended up just using that amp and liked it more (not drastically, but incrementally better everywhere) than the GFA-545. It was a SMART TA-242 stereo movie theatre amp, and it is an upgraded clone (torroidal transformer, etc) of the Hafler amps like the DH-220 and XL-280. The SMART amps are on the bay all the time for ~$200 or less and the Haflers in that range also I think.

After a year or so I stepped up to a sweet 2-channel BAT tubed pre-amp. WOW!!! Talk about an increase in SQ. More improvement than going from some Bowers and Wilkens bookshelves to the Sierra's, or from the Carver to an outboard amp.

Another year later and I upgraded to a BAT tube amp. Another big increase, but I think the preamp was the bigger step up in SQ.

Just depends what you want your system to do. My system is 2.1 only, and I use it for TV/DVD and music. I have a Velodyne SMS-1 for subwoofer control. If you don't absolutely have to have 5.1, you could put the money you'd spend on speakers and wiring into a preamp and/or amp. I'm not worried about having 5.1 at all, and am extremely happy with my setup. So happy that I don't see changing my preamp/amp combo for many, many years to come.

Mike

[markie]

Very interesting, that a step up in a preamp could better a step up in speakers. To my shame I haven't even heard of BAT tube preamps or amps. But I have heard that a good preamp will make a bigger difference than a good amp, given speakers that are reasonable to drive. And I've heard that if tubes have to go in any one place, the preamp is a great place for them.

I wonder if Dave is now tempted to give those BAT tube preamps a try, given the glowing (pun intended) review by an Sierra owner...

Mark

[curtis]

He said it made more of a difference than the amplifier, not the speakers.

[markie]

Hmmm, yes he said the change in preamp made more of a difference than a change in amplifier, but he also said it made more of a difference than a change in speaker, at least in this particular case:

More improvement than going from some Bowers and Wilkens bookshelves to the Sierra's

This is exactly the kind of information that is fascinating, and useful imo.

At the Toronto Audio Video Entertainment Show which I attended exactly a week ago today, I got to hear dozens of speakers, and one of them was the Legacy Aeris, a very highly acclaimed speaker. But I thought the sound in the room was - meh - and I've since heard a couple of reviewers say the same thing. They attributed the let down to the associated equipment setup that the vendor was using.

So, I think it is important for Ascenders to know what combinations of equipment have been known to work well with their Sierras. Mike's account was very helpful for sure.

Mark

[curtis]

Sorry...I was responding to his first sentence.

I found a good 2-channel preamp upgrade to make more difference in my system than when I upgraded my amplifier.

Hmmm, yes he said the change in preamp made more of a difference than a change in amplifier, but he also said it made more of a difference than a change in speaker, at least in this particular case:

[beadyz]

The B&W's were 601 S1's as I recall. The Sierra's had much more controlled bottom end and were less boomy in the bass while going lower. That was the biggest difference I recall. I seem to recall the mids were cleaner and sounded more realistic also.

When I went to the BAT preamp there were lots of changes. I think the improvement I noticed most was the attack on the leading edges of sounds, particularly precession instruments. That's the best way I can describe it. I thought everything sounded wonderful until I "heard something new" with the preamp. Sounds were just sharper and more realistic without being overdone or artificial.

And not just the leading edge thing. Details were finer, and sounds seemed to "hang" in the air more. Most pronounced with say a piano played delicately or a female blues/Jaxx voice. It was even noticeable from another room, the ambient sounds were just more real sounding.

The last thing I noticed was the improvement in bass. Not big, slamming bass, although that is there in spades, but what I've read people describe as "texture" to bass is the best analogy I can come up with. Instead of just a one-note-bass type of sound you can hear variations in the bass (and particularly sub-bass) frequencies.

The tube amp upped everything I just described another notch, but not as much as the initial increase I got with the preamp.

I can't say if it's because it is a tube preamp, or if it's because it is dual mono all the way from the power supply or what, but I was very happy with the result, particularly as I bought it without ever haveing heard any tube gear at all. Guess it was a leap of faith.

I will point out that the tube gear puts of a lot of heat. The preamp probably abut 200-250 watts of heat. The amp I think is north of 500 watts. That's a small to medium space heater. I didn't listen to the tube gear most of the summer as it just got the rorm too warm. Now that it's cooling down it's great though.

Mike

[petmotel]

Hmmm, yes he said the change in preamp made more of a difference than a change in amplifier, but he also said it made more of a difference than a change in speaker, at least in this particular case:



This is exactly the kind of information that is fascinating, and useful imo.

At the Toronto Audio Video Entertainment Show which I attended exactly a week ago today, I got to hear dozens of speakers, and one of them was the Legacy Aeris, a very highly acclaimed speaker. But I thought the sound in the room was - meh - and I've since heard a couple of reviewers say the same thing. They attributed the let down to the associated equipment setup that the vendor was using.

So, I think it is important for Ascenders to know what combinations of equipment have been known to work well with their Sierras. Mike's account was very helpful for sure.

Mark

The problem with "letting Ascenders know what combinations work well" is that this is all just subjective opinion which will not be universally accepted by all. Just because there is a difference in the sound between a tube pre-amp and a solid state piece does not mean that the sound quality is better. It just means there is a difference. Some people might like that difference, others may not.

I'm relatively certain that modern, well built solid state equipment will measure better than the tube equipment, the very notion that changing to different tubes will alter the sound signature of tube equipment suggests that it is coloring the signal. Personally I prefer the signal to be as uncolored, and close to the original as possible.

If you hear a presentation of gear at a show, and come away less than impressed, there are a great many variables at work here, from the room acoustics, to the quality of the recorded material that can affect what is ultimately heard. Assuming it's a bad combination of gear is only supposition, and one not likely supported with honest, bias controlled testing.

Jay

[Rock]

Today listened integrated is Atoll in 80 helpers and AM200, and before the PR300
The components were better than the dynamics, play more realistic.
Basically, the sound is very pleasant to read, not aggressive. It is well Very plays jazz and classical music. Hard rock is normal. Female vocals
very clean.
Tomorrow I want to listen to Yamaha A S700, NAD C356BEE, Rotel RA-12,
but more and more I go to the Emotiva
Rock

[beadyz]

I'm relatively certain that modern, well built solid state equipment will measure better than the tube equipment, the very notion that changing to different tubes will alter the sound signature of tube equipment suggests that it is coloring the signal. Personally I prefer the signal to be as uncolored, and close to the original as possible.

I'm sure even most low-end SS gear will show better distortion numbers than the best tube gear. Add enough negative feedback and you I think you can get almost any amplifier circuit to show vanishingly low distortion numbers. I'm a mechanical engineer, and that side of my brain couldn't wrap itself around the fact that tube gear with (much) higher distortion could sound better than SS gear with such low distortion. I'd been curious about tube gear since back in the late 90's, but never took the gamble until about 2 years ago. The soundstage on my tube gear seems more open and extends deeper behind the plane of the speakers than my SS gear.

As I said, I don't see myself changing anything about my amp/preamp for a very long time, perhaps not until I can't get replacement parts for this equipment or it becomes unfeasible to repair it.

Tube vs. SS is almost like politics or religion, ppl seem very rooted in one camp or another. All I can say is that for me, I like the tube sound better in my system than SS. I will add a couple caveats, however. I have never listened to any SS equipment of the level that my tube gear is, and the 6H30 tubes used in the BAT SE models is said to be too linear and SS sounding by some hardcore tube guys.

Since this forum is focused on Ascend gear, I will say that the Sierra-1's were definitely more transparent than the B&W's. Meaning once I switched to the Sierra's it was much more difficult to locate the speakers in front of me with my eyes closed than with the B&W's. They were much more hollow sounding then the Sierra's, so perhaps I was hearing vibrations from the encloses, making it easier to "see" where the speakers were in front of me with my ears.

Back to amps, there really isn't a whole lot of difference between 50 wpc and 100 wpc, or even 200 wpc. You'll have a bit more headroom, but it's not a huge difference, IMHO. I have an old Kenwood integrated SS amp from the early 70's that was my dad's, and it is rated at 50 wpc, and it got plenty loud also. I'd go for SQ over power.

I would like to upgrade my Sierra-1's with Dave's Sierra-2 upgrade, but that's not to say I find the original Sierra's lacking. I really want to see how a ribbon tweeter sounds with tubes (supposed to be sublime), and I want to support Dave for working so hard and song long on a project like this. You don't find too many companies like Ascend anymore, and I want to do my part to keep Dave in business.

[markie]

Hi Jay,

Yes very much is subjective in audio, whether one likes a warmer sound, or so forth. But there are other attributes of music that, although subjectively discerned, just about *everyone* would agree is better. A perfect example are the details in the improved sound quality Mike describes with his BAT preamp.

Double blind studies comparing one amp or the other, I dare say, involve unfamiliar source materials, unfamiliar components, in unfamiliar rooms. In other words, the acoustic memory we have which is so important in evaluation and which takes much time develop, is removed from the equation. That is a shame, and that is why such studies should not be taken at face value.

For sure I would believe Mike's well considered analysis over a dozen such fundamentally flawed 'controlled' studies any day.

The question, as Mike has raised, it what exactly is causing such an improvement in sound quality. It may not be tubes per se (as he pointed out), it could be something else in the way the preamp operates.

I just took at peek and see that BAT has a new solid state version of the preamp. I would guess it's as good as the BAT tube preamp that Mike has, without being a space heater:

http://www.musicdirect.com/p-350-bat...te-preamp.aspx

And hey, it's only $8000

Mark