Simaudio i3RS to ATC SIA-2-150 upgrade

[admin_exported]

has anyone compared these amps?

I like the bottom end tightness of the Simaudio but looking for more bass grip/extension as well as midrange resolving ability, and a soft top end.

I have read favourable things about the ATC MkII. Has anyone compared it to the Simaudio?

Speakers are PSB Synchrony Twos (upgrading to Ones which have a more open and detailed midrange).

Synchrony bass is regarded as rich and harmonic as opposed to crisp and detailed so I'd need something with tight bass.

Thanks

 

[Craig M.]

i've just done that exact change.

the atc will give what you are after, it has way more punch and much stronger dynamics, more detail throughout the frequency range, sounds superbly natural and emotive. i really liked my i3rs but the atc is a vastly superior amp and is great value for money. i can't see me ever changing it.

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks Craig, I was hoping you'd reply!!! We exchanged forum messages about the i3rs and ATC speakers quite some time ago.

I wonder if the SIA can handle speakers that dip below 3ohms in the bass like mine (the I3RS can handle it).

Also Simaudio is renowned for a fast top end and fast bass - how did the ATC's handle this? I have read that the SIA does not have the bass grip of say a Plinius 9200, that it is more bloomy and warm. What's your take on this?

Reason is I have speakers (PSB Synchrony 2) with a similar characteristic, so I don't want to overcook the bass.

I have been doing a lot of research into integrateds, and the SIA seems like the best value out there in that price range- by a long way!

Actually I wonder how good those SCM40's are....can get very good prices in Australia on ATC gear!!! Does the SCM19 have the better midrange to the 40?

What music do you use the ATC amp for? Also when you say more punch do you mean heavy bloomy bass, or tight hard bass?

Thanks!

 

[Craig M.]

hi, i have no idea how the atc handles difficult speaker loads, i've only used it with my speakers. i've seen a member of another forum however, who states the thing he likes most about his sia2-150 is the way it controls a tricky speaker.

i find the bass of the atc to be vastly superior to the i3rs, faster and more detailed. i can't compare the atc to the plinius as i haven't heard it, but i find the atc has great bass control.

the top end is more realistic and natural then the i3rs and a little more prominent, without being forward or bright in any way. overall it is more realistic sounding and neutral in tone then the moon amp which is definitely on the warm side, and leaves it for dead in terms of dynamics.

the scm40s have a more explicit mid then the 19s, however, i've seen the 19s described as more musical. what is definite, is that atc amp and speakers are a really great pairing.

i listen to most music except classical, mainly rock, pop and electronic music though.

by punch i mean rock hard, tight and solid bass.

can you tell i like it?

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks Craig!

My only question would be is that is the ATC only better because you're using them on low efficiency speakers that need lots of watts like the SCM19's, or do you think it would be better than the Simaudio on higher effeciency speaker too...my speakers are 89db, but the load is tricky.

When you say the top end is more prominent, do you mean more weight towards the top (some say that is bright), or just cleaner and sweeter making it more noticable?

I actually thought the Moon is quite neutral sounding, well according to reviews i have read...perhaps I was wrong. What in your view made it warm? too much bass weight or rolled off high frequencies?

Regards

Andrew

 

[Craig M.]

hi, the treble comment relates more to the neutrality of tone, i found the i3rs was definitely a bit warmer throughout the frequency range and a bit smooth sounding, also, the mid is clearer on the atc which maybe makes the treble a touch more noticeable. it's not bright or forward in any way, rather it seems more balanced (to me).

the atc also has a higher damping factor then the i3rs, which translates to better control of the speaker, i especially noticed this at lower volumes resulting in a punchier sound.

the atc is also more detailed.

i can't answer your question regarding the impedance drop of your speakers, my atcs are inefficient but are an easy load. maybe a chat with an atc dealer or e-mail atc, they've responded promptly to me in the past.

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks - although I thought the I3RS had a very high damping factor...>200 according to the manual

will check with ATC direct about difficult loads

when you say the i3rs was smooth, do you mean it could artificially sound more refined?

 

[Craig M.]

the atc has a damping factor of 400.

by smooth, i probably mean slightly rolled off treble, it tamed my kandy cdp which through a primare i30 could shred your ears with the wrong material. the atc has more air at the top end.

 

[Anonymous]

ok thanks...although I have to be careful with my speakers which are titanium tweeter...the AVGUIDE review suggests the ATC amp's treble is also not as open as it could be, but I suppose its better than the Moon's as you say.

Thanks for your help, its virtually impossible for me to get a demo where I live!

 

[Anonymous]

Craig

Which one had more body in the midrange vocals - i3RS or ATC? Also would you say the Moon was more liquid and organic sounding?

Thanks

Andrew

 

[Craig M.]

haha, still umming and ahhhhing.

now you're testing my memory, i think the i3rs had a bit more body to vocals, maybe. or maybe it's some of that warmth creeping in. when i first got the moon, i was blown away by how realistic voices and acoustic instruments sounded, i have to say though that for me, the atc just about matches it. i read a review of the atc the other day, which went along the lines of the atc being a very powerful amp, but the power wasn't what characterised it's sound, rather it allows it to convincingly portray music due to it's dynamic reserves and headroom.

i guess what i'm trying to say, is that the moon amp is a fluid and organic sounding amp, and i expected the atc to lose out to it in this regard, but i don't think it does, but the moon amp can't get close to the atc in terms of dynamic headroom and punch, nor can it match the speed and control of the bass.

over here, the moon amp costs about the same as the atc. if the moon is a 5 star amp at it's price, then the atc should have about 7! i can't think of an area where i think the moon beats it, but the atc beats the moon amp in lots of areas.

i don't know your speakers, which is all that is stopping me from saying just buy it, it's the only hifi item i would be happy advising someone to buy without hearing first, and not have some concern that they may not like it, or think it's not great value. but all being equal the atc is head and shoulders better.

if you go for it, let me know how you get on.

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks again!

Actually ATC I recommend getting the CA2/P1 separates as they're a 4 ohm load...but the integrated should still work fine they said. Subtle sound differences I think