Audioholics, Panny, impedance swings, Ascends

[Eddie]

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/...tchingAmplifie rIssues.php

To be honest, most of the technospeak in that article goes over my head until the last page.

I was rather surprised to hear the Panny being associated with "old SET type tube amps" which if I am not mistaken are usually said to be very "warm"---an adjective I have never seen attached to this controversial little thing.

I did notice that the main author of the article happens to own a small audiophile (analog) amplifier company and spends the last 1/3 of the article specifically bashing the Panny based entirely on measurements and ending on this self-revealing note:

"While writing this article I am reminded of the classic truism of analog design: Out of band rejection and noise reduction go hand in hand.
The designers say it doesn't apply here, but I have my reservations."



Funny enough, recently I heard from a fellow Panny owner who auditioned both the Classic and the new SE Ascend speakers and found that he much preferred the Classics. He reported that the new SE speakers had less bass and sounded much brighter than the Classics---jaw dropping, since the slightly lower-sensitivity SEs were specifically designed to provide more bass and to seem "warmer." Unfortunately he did not have a chance to compare the two versions on a normal analog receiver. He added that he spoke to Dave F. about his experience (he sent back the SEs) who he said went and bought an xr55 to investigate...if so, I'm dying to hear his results!



btw, I have not spent a lot of time browsing the Audioholics website but is it my imagination or do they seem to be very measurements-oriented?

[BradJudy]

It's probably worth noting that, from what I recall, the XR50 uses different amp modules than the XR55. If I'm remembering correctly, one of the differences was the frequency at which the switching amps operated. I think the XR70 uses the same amps as the XR50 though.

Yes, Audioholics is very measurement focused.

It's nice that he got some comments from class-D amp designers in the article, but his links to AudioCircle are very misleading. Most of the feedback on Class-D amps there has been very positive, particularly those using Bruno's Hypex modules (Channel Islands D-100/200, Exodus amps, etc). The threads he has linked to discuss some of the more controversial amps on that forum (NuForce discussion has certainly gone through the extremes on AC).

[Grayson73]

I have the SA-XR50 and am wondering whether Ascends 340s and 200s would work well with this receiver. I'm also wondering whether classics or SEs will sound better with this.

[curtis]

FWIW, I am using NuForce Ref 8 amps to drive my left/right channels. As posted elsewhere in the forum, a couple of us compared them for an hour or so with my ATI 1502, and a couple of pro amps. We also used some different speakers and listened at higher levels. In my home, I am using classics 340's, but in the comparison we used 340SE's.

In that short time period, the two of us concluded that the NuForce seemed to have tighter/punchier bass and that anything else was not readily different.

I have been using the NuForce amps now since January. I could swear the sound is more transparent, but I also don't doubt it is psychological.

[Lee Bailey]

I think you have just filled in a hole that is usually missed. That is, integrating a speaker with a receiver/amp properly. Seeing as how there is a direct relationship with how an amplifier works with different impedances, capacitance, and inductance, once you get closer to matching the characteristics of the source and load, the better your system should sound. Consider that the amplifier "see's" the load changing constantly depending on the frequencies it is pushing to the speaker. Unfortunately, it seems to be a crap shoot to find that match.

Yes, I also agree that Audioholics focuses on a lot of measurements. Of course, what you hear and like are what really count in the end, no matter what the measurements might indicate.