Pathos goodness

[admin_exported]

Thanks for the reviewing the Pathos Ethos. I have been waiting for this review for quite some time.

Couple of questions for the review team or anyone who feel like contributing :

1, how does the Ethos compared to the similar priced Logos sonic-wise? Some online reviews seem to suggest Logos actually sound slightly better, but Ethos is better value for money as it comes with DAC and USB input. Do you agree with their findings? I would imagine, they have very similar sonic character as well?

2, And how does Ethos compared to yet-again similar priced a pair of bridged Pathos Classic One mk3? From my little research, there have been reports suggesting that the lack of bass is improved by adding a second Classic One. I know this is abit of an unusual setup, but would be interested if it produces similar result.

Many thanks.

 

[CnoEvil]

Great questions with which to make an entrance.....I will be interested in the answer you get.

BTW. Welcome to the forum

Cno

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

Thanks for the reviewing the Pathos Ethos. I have been waiting for this review for quite some time.

Couple of questions for the review team or anyone who feel like contributing :

1, how does the Ethos compared to the similar priced Logos sonic-wise? Some online reviews seem to suggest Logos actually sound slightly better, but Ethos is better value for money as it comes with DAC and USB input. Do you agree with their findings? I would imagine, they have very similar sonic character as well?

2, And how does Ethos compared to yet-again similar priced a pair of bridged Pathos Classic One mk3? From my little research, there have been reports suggesting that the lack of bass is improved by adding a second Classic One. I know this is abit of an unusual setup, but would be interested if it produces similar result.

Many thanks.

I don't think Classic One (at least its mk III incarnation which I'm familiar with) lacks bass.

as for SQ; there's a scan of review of Classic One mk III and Logos in Stereophile. Sam is telling (pun intended ) that he prefers the Classic One over Logos. that's not to say the Logos is trashed.

I think that whichever Pathos you choose you won't be disappointed. why not try the true Pathoses; the TT and Inpol2?

 

[tino]

Me likey very much ... Had it not been for this thread I would have missed the review ... Possibly only the second in a UK hifi mag to date ...

If I had to put all my amplification eggs in one basket ... then this amp would probably be it ... It looks stunning and by all accounts has the sonic performance to match. I think the performance of the DAC section has also been improved to 192k from the original launch spec. of 96k ..

 

[Anonymous]

I don't think Classic One (at least its mk III incarnation which I'm familiar with) lacks bass.

as for SQ; there's a scan of review of Classic One mk III and Logos in Stereophile. Sam is telling (pun intended ) that he prefers the Classic One over Logos. that's not to say the Logos is trashed.

I think that whichever Pathos you choose you won't be disappointed. why not try the true Pathoses; the TT and Inpol2?

Yes, I'm aware of that review. I dont think I put it quite right. I dont mean lack of bass, but the control of bass.

sadly, im using KEF 201/2 which does need some power behind them before they start waking up.

Another option i'm considering is getting a Cinema X and run it in stereo mode. I believe the Cinema X is almost like 3 Classic One bolted together, however i believe it is based on the mk2 instead of mk3 since no update has been made since it was launched.

Me likey very much ... Had it not been for this thread I would have missed the review ... Possibly only the second in a UK hifi mag to date ...

If I had to put all my amplification eggs in one basket ... then this amp would probably be it ... It looks stunning and by all accounts has the sonic performance to match. I think the performance of the DAC section has also been improved to 192k from the original launch spec. of 96k ..

Thanks for the info on DAC. I was not previously aware of this. This made it increasingly more tempting.... :bounce:

 

[Anonymous]

Great questions with which to make an entrance.....I will be interested in the answer you get.

BTW. Welcome to the forum

Cno

Hi there.

 

[CnoEvil]

....im using KEF 201/2 which does need some power behind them before they start waking up.

Great speakers which do need good power/current and sound sublime with a good Class A type amp. I have the 205/2s driven by the Musical Fidelity AMS35i, which sounds very nice indeed.

I like your choices.

Cno

 

[oldric_naubhoff]

I dont think I put it quite right. I dont mean lack of bass, but the control of bass.

sadly, im using KEF 201/2 which does need some power behind them before they start waking up.

sadly I have no means to compare but for me Classic One sounds very much rhythmic and fast (when it has to). I've been using Dynaudio Focus 110 and now Magnepan MG12 and I didn't feel any of these was slow bass (although Magnepan is much quicker and has better resolution in mid bass but this is a completely different story). it's really down to how loud you want to go with your speakers and how much you're willing to spend. if you can afford more expensive models go for them! I can't upgrade now but I wish I could try out Pathos TT. however, I'm not feeling short changed a bit using Classic One on a daily basis.

Another option i'm considering is getting a Cinema X and run it in stereo mode. I believe the Cinema X is almost like 3 Classic One bolted together, however i believe it is based on the mk2 instead of mk3 since no update has been made since it was launched.

do you really need all that 5 channel power? CinemaX is a great choice if you're thinking of an outstanding HT set up. just add a decent universal player connected by analogue outs and you're all set. however, at that price point I'd be interested to check out Inpol amps if I were you (TT and Inpol2).