How do you know which speakers your amp is best suited to?

[robg1976]

This is hard to answer, As you dont get to view the power supply or get the performance figures.... But if you stick to the brands who are known quality and sound... For example at any budget or price point You got the NAD .Rotel Marantz products . I believe no one can disagree they always perform well at their respected price points... BUT PLEASE audition if you can. Only you can decide on the sound that suits you....

Then you move in to ARCAM.......NAIM and the better gear.

Please always try and find a dealer to listen to products....................

Finaly The point i was trying to make rather than pick a product you should buy is THE FIGURES QUOTED ARE NOT ALWAYS WHAT THEY SEEM OR DO THEY HAVE ANY INDICATION ON SOUND QUALITY .. yOU HAVE TO CONSIDER OTHER FACTORS LIKE SPEAKERS AND EVEN THE ROOM YOU SYSTEM WILL BE PLACED

 

[davedotco]

This is hard to answer, As you dont get to view the power supply or get the performance figures.... But if you stick to the brands who are known quality and sound... For example at any budget or price point You got the NAD .Rotel Marantz products . I believe no one can disagree they always perform well at their respected price points... BUT PLEASE audition if you can. Only you can decide on the sound that suits you....

Then you move in to ARCAM.......NAIM and the better gear.

Please always try and find a dealer to listen to products....................

Finaly The point i was trying to make rather than pick a product you should buy is THE FIGURES QUOTED ARE NOT ALWAYS WHAT THEY SEEM OR DO THEY HAVE ANY INDICATION ON SOUND QUALITY .. yOU HAVE TO CONSIDER OTHER FACTORS LIKE SPEAKERS AND EVEN THE ROOM YOU SYSTEM WILL BE PLACED

Back in the days before digital amplifiers and power supplies it was (almost) possible to buy amplifiers by the kilo. Quite simply the bigger and heavier they weighed, the more potent an amplifier they were. It was at least as reliable a method of choosing an amplifier as reading the spec sheet.

I have another theory too, a lot of modern budget systems seem to lack control in the amplifier/speaker interface. It takes little to upset such systems, a bit of room resonance perhaps, and the speakers start to sound a bit boomy and the amplifiers can not stop them moving.

The result is the overblown, boomy bass that is so common in this area of the market and is often blamed on the room though in my experience better systems do not suffer this problem and often catch out novice enthusiasts who often think that they have no bass.

 

[peterpiper]

what does the damping factor specification tell us about an amp?

 

[matthewpiano]

The little Exposure works very well and my first hand experience is that it is a much superior amp to most sub-£500 devices. When I say 'superior' I mean in its ability to provide clean sounding power and control as well as providing a balanced sound at low volumes as well as higher ones (within the cpabailities of a 50wpc amp). It does this as it has a good power supply and a good volume control, the latter maintaining channel balance in its lower region where quite a few do not. According to a review (HFW I think it was), the 1010 virtually doubles its output into 4 ohms (95w). It sounds surprisingly capable with quite exposing speakers - I loved the sound it made with Audio Note's AX-2s, for example - and it exposes the differences in source very well. When I auditioned it I could quite clearly hear the difference between the matching Exposure CD player and a Consonance CD-120 Linear. I also heard it powering Rega RS-3 floorstanders very comfortably though I found the speakers themselves less enticing sounding than the AX-2s or, indeed, my Dynaudios.

In combination with my Dyns and Roksan it describes instrumental timbre very convincingly and creates a stable and satisfying soundstage which hangs nicely outside and in between the speakers. Dynamic transients in orchestral works are handled admirably for a combination of this price, and there is plenty of sure-footed rhythm when you want to rock out. It is not a sound that sounds muddy or lack in agility.

To provide a bit more context I have heard the Dynaudios driven by a variety of affordable amplifiers and most fail pretty miserably with them. They represent a fairly stable 4 ohm load but they need an amp that can control them with a decent amount of grip, as well as driving them. With a Marantz PM6004 they sound soft and diffuse, which is not a characteristic of these speakers at all but a symptom of not being sufficiently gripped by the amplifier. The Arcam A18 was just as bad - something I also experienced using that amp to drive B&W 686s - and with the Dyns sounded very leaden in the bass and unfocused through the midrange and treble. With the Exposure behind them they sound tight, rhythmic, and stable with a lovely open treble which has a 'liquid' quality and extends well without becoming uncomfortable. Says an awful lot about the little 1010.

Practical considerations. It is as basic as amps come. No headphone output, one set of speaker outputs, no tone controls, no loudness or filters, no digital inputs and no phono stage. All the focus is on the basic job of powering and controlling speakers which, at this end of the market, is no bad thing IMO, and there are plenty of outboard phono stages and headphone amps which can be used in conjunction with it. The remote is similarly basic as there isn't much to control, but it does provide nice, precise control of volume with none of the hard-to-control jumps that you get with, say, a NAD.

The potentially unpopular and/or contentious bit? It is sensitive to cable choices and it does benefit from a high quality speaker cable and (with my tin hat at the ready) a decent quality screened power cable (after lots of A/B-ing I am confident it cleans the sound up that last %, but this is in a property where the hi-fi is on the same mains ring as the fridge freezer, broadband modem and computers). I use Chord Rumour 2 speaker cable and a Merlin Tarantula Mk6. After lots of experimentation I feel these get the very best out of the amp and speaker combination - the icing on the cake so to speak.

Limitations? If you want to drive a big room at ear-bursting volume levels, look elsewhere (and preferably spend a lot more money). The 1010 is all about giving the best possible performance on a relatively tight budget, driving real-world speakers in real-world rooms at real-world domestic volume levels. Of course, the more expensive 2010s2 and 3010s2 will give more of everything as would a Creek Destiny 2, but I think you would struggle to find anything else at the price of the 1010 that would compete with it. The Brio-R is probably the other one, though after hearing both amplifiers many times I feel the Exposure is the better all-rounder of the two.

Hope this is helpful. Any questions please do not hesitate to ask.

 

[peterpiper]

that sounds like a superbly balanced system and you haven't comprised by putting budget bookshelves with it such as the wharfendale 9'1 or tannoy v1

not that they are bad speakers for the money,

do you feel there are any lower octaves missing for organ music or reggie etc do get the urge to add a powered sub for example

 

[Thropplenoggin]

Dear Matthew Piano

Many thanks for taking the time to right such a thorough response. A fascinating read and convincing argument in favour of the Exposure 1010. I have now found a dealer near to me where I can demo it.

As you may know by now, my listening is mostly classical (from Bach to Wagner). I'm planning on partnering the amp with the Q Acoustic 2050is. The only part missing in the equation now is the CD-Player. I'm debating whether to buy a Sony Blu-Ray/DVD player for £80 and use the coaxial into a Musical Fidelity VDAC-90 or pick up a budget CD player (Marantz CD5004, say)...or a s/h player (tho' I have worries about the risk involved in s/h gear).

The VDAC could be useful for other audio sources, too, such as my Fiio X3 and laptop.

Any thoughts?

Much obliged,

Throppers

 

[the record spot]

Hi Throppers, the only thing I'd caution against with the Sony consideration is that while the picture and sound quality is really very good (I used a BDP-S370 via a Firestone Audio Spitfire II DAC) the Sony's transport mechanism was a tad on the noisy side. Enough to be a bit of a distraction, but generally okay for the most part in play. I had a couple of other CD players at the time, so tended not to use the Sony as a main player. However, it did prove to be a very capable player, that issue aside.

 

[Thropplenoggin]

Hello TRS

Thanks for the advice. The BD/DVD player is the cheap WHFSV winner BDP-S4100. I may still acquire one anyway, as our DVD player is ancient!

Given what you and others have said, I'm leaning towards a budget CDP like the Marantz CD5004, even if it means going slightly over budget.

Throppers

 

[SpursGator]

what does the damping factor specification tell us about an amp?

A non-scientific answer, but it's one of the measures of how good an amp is at stopping when the input signal stops. Amps with high damping factors are often described as being rhythmic or having 'good PRAT.' Amps with low damping factors are often described as being open or having a wide soundstage.

 

[davedotco]

what does the damping factor specification tell us about an amp?

A non-scientific answer, but it's one of the measures of how good an amp is at stopping when the input signal stops. Amps with high damping factors are often described as being rhythmic or having 'good PRAT.' Amps with low damping factors are often described as being open or having a wide soundstage.

To be slightly more accurate it is a measure 'of how good an amp is at stopping a speaker driver when input signal stops'.

I'm sure that is what you meant, though it wasn't quite what you said.

Interestingly older Naim amplifiers, reknowned for their PRaT used resistive coupling in the output stage that in theory at least reduced damping factor considerably.

There are other factors at work here, how the damping of the speaker helps the amplifier, how the 'back emf' reacts within the output stage of the amplifier and other factors even more obscure.

If you doubt how important damping factor is in the performance of a playback system, there is a simple experiment you can do. Take any single wired speaker and completely disconnect it from your system. Very gently, try pushing the bass driver cone with your finger tips, you will find that it moves in and out quite freely. Now short out the speaker terminals with a short length of wire, an offcut of speaker or mains wire is fine. Try pushing the cone again, you will find that it moves much less freely, it will in fact be pretty stiff.

Thats damping factor.

 

[hoopsontoast]

Dampening factor tells you mainly about the ouput impedance of the amplifier. So amplifiers with high output impedance tend to be SET valve amps for example, that can and will change the frequency response of the speaker as they can have an output impedance of 1Ohms or more.

My Decware Zen SET has an output impedance of around 0.8 Ohms which into an 6 Ohms speaker gives a DF of around 7.5 (not taking into account the speaker cable)

A dampening factor of anything over around 25 is probably no better than that:

http://www.butleraudio.com/damping1.php

http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/amplifiers/75-amp-tests/149-damping-factor.html

Most Solid State amps will have an output impedance of less than 0.1 Ohm so 'Dampening Factor' will always be high enough to not make much difference.

 

[davedotco]

Dampening factor tells you mainly about the ouput impedance of the amplifier. So amplifiers with high output impedance tend to be SET valve amps for example, that can and will change the frequency response of the speaker as they can have an output impedance of 1Ohms or more.

My Decware Zen SET has an output impedance of around 0.8 Ohms which into an 6 Ohms speaker gives a DF of around 7.5 (not taking into account the speaker cable)

A dampening factor of anything over around 25 is probably no better than that:

http://www.butleraudio.com/damping1.php

http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/amplifiers/75-amp-tests/149-damping-factor.html

Most Solid State amps will have an output impedance of less than 0.1 Ohm so 'Dampening Factor' will always be high enough to not make much difference.

Which is of course why SET amplifiers are extremely system dependent.

With amplifiers of this type another factor comes into play. The poor transfer function that is the result of high output impedence means that frequency response (of the amplifier) will not be linear and will, in effect be the inverse of the speaker inpedence curve, ie the amplifiers output will drop if the speakers impedence rises and vice versa.

I have always thought that SET/speaker pairings should be concieved as a single unit, rather than 'matched' after the event, strange that.

 

[hoopsontoast]

Exacltly, I have always found 'matching' amplifiers and speakers is mainly trial and error, and checking impedance curves (and phase angles) of the speaker can tell you more than just if an amplifier will 'drive' it based on output power and the senstivity of the speaker.

For example, I have my SCM10s (and Keesonic Kolts) here which are a relatively easy load for an amplifier, they stay mostly above 6Ohms throughout the frequency range so most amps will have no trouble with them. Even a SET amp like the Decware 'works' but the only issue is a lack of raw output power that lets it down. Much the same with various T-Amps and valve amps, they have all been fine.

 

[davedotco]

Exacltly, I have always found 'matching' amplifiers and speakers is mainly trial and error, and checking impedance curves (and phase angles) of the speaker can tell you more than just if an amplifier will 'drive' it based on output power and the senstivity of the speaker.

For example, I have my SCM10s (and Keesonic Kolts) here which are a relatively easy load for an amplifier, they stay mostly above 6Ohms throughout the frequency range so most amps will have no trouble with them. Even a SET amp like the Decware 'works' but the only issue is a lack of raw output power that lets it down. Much the same with various T-Amps and valve amps, they have all been fine.

There are slightly separate things going on here, mainstream product should match fine, that it often does not is usually down to poor system building caused by the current trend to spend too much (relatively speaking) on loudpeakers. I would include T-amps and most valve amplifiers (push-pull ones anyway), though they require more care than most.

Matching SETs though is a whole different ballgame, they are influenced to a huge degree by the impedence curve of the speaker and I would have thought it would be benevicial to adjust such an amplifier to the specific speaker.

That it is rarely, if ever done suggest that it may be more difficult than I am making out, on the other hand it might be simple reluctance by the amplifier manufacturers to build an amplifier that only really works correctly with one specific speaker.

 

[robg1976]

What is damping factor?

Damping factor (DF) refers to the ratio of internal impedance of the amplifier to the speaker system. Simply stated the DF is the ability of the amplifier to allow the speaker cone to return to its mean static state as soon as possible, from the momentum generated from a singular pulse. So, if the amplifiers damping factor was very low, the speaker cone would oscillate about its mean static position before it came to a standstill. This then adds coloration to the sound field, which is undesirable. On the other hand, if the amplifier's internal impedance is high, the speaker cone would encounter resistance on rebound and then continue to bounce about its static mean position until it finally comes to rest. The amplifier then acts like a trampoline for the speaker cone... perhaps desirable for those who like boomy bass, but less desirable for those who want precision. An amplifier with a high damping factor (greater than 20 DF), is able to absorb the energy generated by the cone rebound, and thereby allows the speaker to return to its mean static position as quickly as the speaker design will allow.

 

[matthewpiano]

that sounds like a superbly balanced system and you haven't comprised by putting budget bookshelves with it such as the wharfendale 9'1 or tannoy v1

not that they are bad speakers for the money,

do you feel there are any lower octaves missing for organ music or reggie etc do get the urge to add a powered sub for example

No small speaker is going to be able to reproduce organ music convincingly. In fact the only time I've heard a hi-fi system get close to being convincing with organ music was a pair of KEF Blades driven by Electrocompaniet monos, pre, and CD.

I don't get the urge to add a sub. I'm not a bass head. The system as I have it set-up has a surprisingly deep and tuneful bass considering the size of the speakers but it doesn't boom and it wouldn't suit a real bass freak. I like a realistic bass - one where you can hear what is going on clearly but which doesn't fall apart in an uncontrollable mess of overhang.

Hope this helps to answer your question.

 

[matthewpiano]

Dear Matthew Piano

Many thanks for taking the time to right such a thorough response. A fascinating read and convincing argument in favour of the Exposure 1010. I have now found a dealer near to me where I can demo it.

As you may know by now, my listening is mostly classical (from Bach to Wagner). I'm planning on partnering the amp with the Q Acoustic 2050is. The only part missing in the equation now is the CD-Player. I'm debating whether to buy a Sony Blu-Ray/DVD player for £80 and use the coaxial into a Musical Fidelity VDAC-90 or pick up a budget CD player (Marantz CD5004, say)...or a s/h player (tho' I have worries about the risk involved in s/h gear).

The VDAC could be useful for other audio sources, too, such as my Fiio X3 and laptop.

Any thoughts?

Much obliged,

Throppers

I hope it does the job for you! Do report back when you have heard it.

I'd ask the dealer for advice on the source if I were you. Contrary to popular belief CD players do sound different and ideally the 1010 deserves better than the CD5004. If you can get a CD6005, that should do a decent enough job or perhaps the Cambridge Audio 651C. I'm not familiar with the V90 DAC but I have had the original V-DAC before and it was a very strong performer for the money. If you can brave 2nd hand you won't go far wrong with the Rotel RCD965BX. The Arcam CD73T is another good player.

 

[peterpiper]

What is damping factor?

Damping factor (DF) refers to the ratio of internal impedance of the amplifier to the speaker system. Simply stated the DF is the ability of the amplifier to allow the speaker cone to return to its mean static state as soon as possible, from the momentum generated from a singular pulse. So, if the amplifiers damping factor was very low, the speaker cone would oscillate about its mean static position before it came to a standstill. This then adds coloration to the sound field, which is undesirable. On the other hand, if the amplifier's internal impedance is high, the speaker cone would encounter resistance on rebound and then continue to bounce about its static mean position until it finally comes to rest. The amplifier then acts like a trampoline for the speaker cone... perhaps desirable for those who like boomy bass, but less desirable for those who want precision. An amplifier with a high damping factor (greater than 20 DF), is able to absorb the energy generated by the cone rebound, and thereby allows the speaker to return to its mean static position as quickly as the speaker design will allow.

so it seems the differences between amps with damping factors higher than 20 are negligable, for example the figure quoted for my AS500 is 240, and yes while it gives tight bass paired with my 6ohm AE109, t there are more expensive amps with a much lower figure, surely these will give an even tighter bass, or will they ??? so there must be more , and it cant be just the power of the tranformer, the AS500 employs a 240 watter,which is quite substantial for a budget amp or any mid priced amp, are we being taken for a ride with specifications sometimes

 

[unsleepable]

Most sub £1000 amplifiers are too loose in the bass for my tastes, soft at best, boomy at worst.

I am really not that familiar with modern Creek product, other than the 50a. Historically Creek's entry level products have always been the best value, maybe that is still the case?

Ok, so I have finally been able to audition a Creek, the Evolution 2. And I agree it is a great amplifier that in my opinion lives up to the fame of the brand. I have liked it much better than other amplifiers that I have auditioned.

The sound presentation is actually not so different in broad terms to that of the Arcam A19, the most apparent difference being that the higher frequencies seem to be pushed forward. I think this may explain the reviews to which I referred in my previous post, insinuating that the amplifier verged the bright. Of course there are other sound differences but that are not so obvious, and one really has to look for them to notice. Both soundstage and bass, which in my opinion are strong points of the A19, I find equally good in the Evolution 2—but just being a tad tighter and reaching a bit lower in the A19; but again, nothing that jumps on your face and only audible in certain tracks.

While I preferred the sound presentation of the A19—even after getting used to the sound of the Creek for a few days—, I think I may have very well preferred the Evo 2 having owned other, warmer sounding speakers. But I have again found the A19 an excellent match for the Kef R100. On the other hand, I also found I preferred the Creek with specific, older, leaners tracks; it made them more lively.

At very low volume, I also preferred the A19 as I found the overall tonality more neutral, while with the Evo 2 bass was almost inaudible unless I raised the volume more.

The stuff I didn't like so much of the Evolution 2 was more functional than related to its sound. For example, the volume at 20 in the Creek was more or less equivalent to 34 in the A19, which is pretty much my day-time listening level. Even though the Evo 2 has 75w, this does not entirely account for the difference in the volume control. This is something I have learned to love of Arcam. Also, the Creek remote control is quite big and regrettably has a whole bunch of buttons that do nothing on the amplifier, but that I suspect are only useful in case you buy other separates from the brand. And I think you'll need to buy quite a few separates to make sense of so many buttons.

All in all I have enjoyed the Creek very much, and no doubt will take into account next time I upgrade. On the other hand, since the reviews indicate that the Creek 50A has quite less bass than the Evo 2, I don't think it will do it for me with my speakers, so I'll pass for now.

 

[csq2]

When buying an amp, don't believe the rated power wattage- it's inaccurate. A 50W/ch amp can sound more powerful and punchy than a 75W/ch. Generally, look at for speakers with high sensitivity 89db or higher, so you don't have spend lots of money on an amp to drive them properly. Also, make sure you're using thicker cabling with the Marantz or Rotel.

 

[davedotco]

Most sub £1000 amplifiers are too loose in the bass for my tastes, soft at best, boomy at worst.

I am really not that familiar with modern Creek product, other than the 50a. Historically Creek's entry level products have always been the best value, maybe that is still the case?

Ok, so I have finally been able to audition a Creek, the Evolution 2. And I agree it is a great amplifier that in my opinion lives up to the fame of the brand. I have liked it much better than other amplifiers that I have auditioned.

The sound presentation is actually not so different in broad terms to that of the Arcam A19, the most apparent difference being that the higher frequencies seem to be pushed forward. I think this may explain the reviews to which I referred in my previous post, insinuating that the amplifier verged the bright. Of course there are other sound differences but that are not so obvious, and one really has to look for them to notice. Both soundstage and bass, which in my opinion are strong points of the A19, I find equally good in the Evolution 2—but just being a tad tighter and reaching a bit lower in the A19; but again, nothing that jumps on your face and only audible in certain tracks.

While I preferred the sound presentation of the A19—even after getting used to the sound of the Creek for a few days—, I think I may have very well preferred the Evo 2 having owned other, warmer sounding speakers. But I have again found the A19 an excellent match for the Kef R100. On the other hand, I also found I preferred the Creek with specific, older, leaners tracks; it made them more lively.

At very low volume, I also preferred the A19 as I found the overall tonality more neutral, while with the Evo 2 bass was almost inaudible unless I raised the volume more.

The stuff I didn't like so much of the Evolution 2 was more functional than related to its sound. For example, the volume at 20 in the Creek was more or less equivalent to 34 in the A19, which is pretty much my day-time listening level. Even though the Evo 2 has 75w, this does not entirely account for the difference in the volume control. This is something I have learned to love of Arcam. Also, the Creek remote control is quite big and regrettably has a whole bunch of buttons that do nothing on the amplifier, but that I suspect are only useful in case you buy other separates from the brand. And I think you'll need to buy quite a few separates to make sense of so many buttons.

All in all I have enjoyed the Creek very much, and no doubt will take into account next time I upgrade. On the other hand, since the reviews indicate that the Creek 50A has quite less bass than the Evo 2, I don't think it will do it for me with my speakers, so I'll pass for now.

It is good that you got a chance to try the amplifier, I am unfamilier with the Evo so can not comment specifically.

One thing that often concerns me about comments of this type is that they seem to focus on presentational details, more/less bass, bright/not bright etc, etc.

These observations will vary from recording to recording as you pointed out but also from speaker to speaker, room to room etc. I find that I get greater insight by ignoring, as much as I can, the 'sound' of the system and listen to the music. Does the voice appeal or not, is the playing together or not and a fair number of other factors that determin how a piece is being played.

I find that listening in this way makes it much easier to hear how good the system is as it takes a few variables out of the equation and seems to give a better indication of long term satisfaction.

 

[Vladimir]

Love the thread guys, keep it up. :clap:

Thought I'd share few experiences and thoughts of my own.

I am not of the school of thought that amplifiers should be picked by tonality first, then worry about how competent they are latter. I always look in the electrical capabilities and build quality first, then when I get my tech kinks satisfied I may audition an amp but most often I buy them without auditioning. Crazy, init?

I think amplifiers don't "sound", they "amplify" and their tonality is overated and misleading. I believe transducers sound, amplifiers amplify, cables conduct, shelves and stands hold. YMMV.

When I buy an amp without auditioning it first, I do my homework what my choice of speakers need electrically and for my subjective sonic taste. Any variation in sonic characters between amps it takes me 2 days to forget it ever existed. But I will not forget when my amps voltage rails sag in congested passages on Mahler and speaker cones want to fly away out of their baskets.

I also believe in the policy of you get what you paid for, and although there are exceptions the rule applies.

So here is what I look in an amp from hardware POV and these are still just my preferences.

- "POWER" Jeremy Clarkson.

Doubling down power from 8 ohms to 4 ohms and a wet dream doubling down to 2 ohms. Or at least separate windings on the transformer for different loads.

- High current design, simple topology.

- Dual mono construction with separate PSU or sharing transformer with separate windings for each channel.

- MOSFET first, bipolar second, more tranzistor per channel the better. Tubes acceptable only in low power application (preamp).

- Oversized Power Supply Unit (PSU). Especially oversized transformer exceding 500VA (if pushed to its limit, gauss field gets denser and transformer hums. I hate that). Preferably Talema or Noratel.

- Regulated PSU, multiple voltage rails.

- Lower output impedance, wide bandwith, fast slew rate and 3 digit dumping factor,

- Larger heat sninks.

- Quality caps with higher temp spec, voltage, ripple current, lower impedance and ESR.

- ALPS conductive plastic volume pot. No tone controls, selectable loudness etc. I use my DSP in JRiver if need be.

- Elna Silmic II in signal path. I love them. I don't mind WIMA film caps as well.

- Quality opamps (preferably none), diodes, metalized type resistors and relays.

- No wires flying arround holding on zip ties. All components well situated on PCB is better. Otherwise I will hear the fridgerator in my Paco de Lucia.

- Driver tranzistors and/or preamp running in class A, power amp high biased AB is what I prefer over full blown Class A amps. They are hard and pricey to live with. Don't mind a full class AB at all, if its well done.

Well it is a big-ish list but its boxes I tick when I'm shopping arround. Its never a perfect 100% to my satisfaction mainly because the more boxes I tick, turns out more money I have to cough out. So every next amp I get I tend to cover as many of these preferences as possible for my budget.

I too like most here roam in the commercial sub 1000 GBP, this is why i got my Roksan. Previosly I had Harman/Kardon HK6900, a real beast but getting old and with some issues. Prior to that I owned a Marantz PM-80 MkII, Kenwood KA-9X, Pioneer A400 (just for fun) and few more.

I don't expect people outside of this hobby or just begining to have such a list or understand the basic terms used, but for someone who is in the deep end, I find it odd to "use the ears" and not much between them. What seems pleasant in the hifi showroom or even in your room, in your system, it may be just a brief honeymoon and the relationship can turn sour very quick and divorcing from your new gear gets really costly.

From that perspective I would trust a knowledgable dealer and build that relationship, so I don't have to learn, make lists and pay for costly learning mistakes. More time and money to enjoy the music and not this OCD of a hobby. Easier said than done, though.

Sorry I waffle on a bit. :wave: