Replacement for ASL Hurricanes (Question to Mr. Robert Harley)
-- Tue, 04/28/2009 - 13:20
Hello!
I currently own a pair of Antique Sound Lab Hurricane monoblocks with Electro Harmonix tubes driving
B&W 800Ds. Luckily, I've not been having too many problems with blown tubes and fuses, and the heat is
not a major problem, but I'm not sure the bass is the ultimate in speed and control. Otherwise the sound is
pretty good.
I'm considering replacing the Hurricanes with Spectral amps, either the DMA-250 or the DMA-360.
My room is pretty small, 4.38m x 3.95m (14'4" x 12'11"). I listen almost entirely to classical music of all
types, symphonic, choral, chamber, piano, some organ, opera etc., at a pretty high volume.
Questions:
1. Will the Spectral be a good replacement as regards the following aspects:
a. Competitive or better overall sound than the Hurricanes
b. Better bass control/speed
c. High reliability, no malfunctions
d. Good match to the EMM Labs Switchman 3 preamp
2. I understand that the DMA-360 monoblocks sound better than the DMA-250, but does the difference justify almost doubling the price? Especially for such small a room?
3. Any other alternatives not too much above $10,000 :-), preferably less, that do well as regards the
aspects specified above?
Thank you very much,
Amir
Current system:
=============
Common:
- EMM Labs (Ed Meitner) CDSD-SE disc transport
- EMM Labs (Ed Meitner) DAC6e-SE 6-channel converter
- EMM Labs (Ed Meitner) Switchman 3 6-channel preamplifier
Front:
- Antique Sound Lab Hurricane monoblock power amp pair (200W each) with Electro Harmonix tubes
- B&W 800D speaker pair (diamond tweeters)
- Purist Audio Design Venustas interconnects
- Purist Audio Design Venustas speaker cables with parallel bi-wiring
Surround:
- Adcom GFA-5503 3-channel power amp (3 x 200W)
- Rear: B&W Nautulus 802 speaker pair
- Center: B&W HTM2D speaker (diamond tweeter)
- Subwoofer: Velodyne Digital Drive DD-12 (1250W RMS active subwoofer)
- Cardas interconnects and speaker cables
Also:
- 2 x Shunyata Hydra 4 power conditioner
- 3 x Solid-Tech Rack of Silence
- Components matched with Radio Shack Digital Sound Level Meter and Telarc SACD-60541 Surround
Speaker Setup disc
I have not heard the Hurricane in my own system (just at shows), but from what I know of it I can safely say that either of the Spectral amplifiers will be a significant upgrade. You should know that these two amplifiers are at opposite ends of the sonic spectrum; the Hurricane has a classic tube sound, while the Spectral is exceedingly neutral and transparent.
You asked specifically about bass reproduction; the Spectral has vastly better control in the bottom octaves, deeper extension, and more realistic reproduction of transient information.
In terms of reliability, I've never had any malfunction from any piece of Spectral equipment I've had in my system.
The DMA-250 is a great amplifier, but the DMA-360 is truly in another league. Nonetheless, I think the DMA-250 would be a significant improvement over the Hurricane.
The Spectral amplifiers should work with the Switchman, although I think it takes a full Spectral system to realize the amplifier's full potential. You should also be aware of the need to use terminated loudspeaker cables with the DMA-250 or the DMA-360.
Dear Mr. Harley,
Wow, many thanks for your prompt and helpful reply!!
I'm not sure I can have a full Spectral system :-(
Do Spectral have a multichannel SACD player and a multichannel preamp? If yes, at what prices?
I apologize for my ignorance, but what exactly do you mean by "TERMINATED loudspeaker cables"? Aren't almost all loudspeaker cables terminated, usually with spade terminals or banana plugs? Or maybe you mean the MIT cable termination? What happens without this?
Do you happen to know the damping factors of the DMA-250 and the DMA-360? I've been unable to find these specs anywhere.
Thanks again for your great help!
Amir
I listened ASL hurrican, it's sound is quit different from spectral.
I think you should at first detect your taste then try to upgrade.
spectral is good in it's sound class but it no means that upgrading to Spectral will give you better sound.
musicality is not upgrading to more expensive, more transparent, more neutral components, it depends to many other things.
regards
Amir
Dear Amir,
Of course you are absolutely right in what you say!
I do not think that paying more money means upgading, or that more transparent/neutral per-se means better or more musical.
In general, I do like the Hurricanes very much, but the three issues I mentioned do interfere with my pleasure - mostly bass control, but also occasional blown tubes/fuses and some heat, as well as the need to turn them off to preserve tube life, and having to wait until they warm up again for optimal operation.
So there is definitely taste involved, as well as practical issues. However, the Hurricanes do what they do very well, and at almost a quarter of the DMA-360's price, not mentioning having to replace interconnects (to XLRs) and maybe speaker cables (to "terminated" ones).
Thanks for your comment!
Amir
I used the Spectral amplifiers with other compnents and still heard their remarkable qualities. Spectral doesn't make multichannel equipment.
As for "terminated" loudspeaker cables, I mean those with a box on the cable containing a network. The Spectral amplifiers have a very wide bandwidth (they can produce their full rated output power at 3MHz) and need the low-pass filter in the cable to assure stability.
Dear Mr. Harley,
Thanks again for your helpful response! Appreciated!
Would you say that using TERMINATED speaker cables is a MUST with Spectral amps?
Are there any competitive alternatives you can recommend at the DMA-360 price level? From, say, Mark Levinson, Krell, Ayre, Boulder, Nelson, YOU name it?
What about competitors at the DMA-250 price level?
Thanks!!!
Amir
P.S., Do you happen to know the damping factor of the DMA-250/360?
You absolutely must use terminated loudspeaker cables with Spectral amplifiers. As for competitive alternatives, the DMA-360s are in a class by themselves. There are, however, other excellent amplifiers. Check out the Pass Labs line.
Mr. Harley,
It is beyond my understanding how you may, after so many years in audio, make 'expert' comments without even listening to the components in your system or an a/b comparison. You did this comparing ref 3a grand veena to sonus faber in another threat and now here again. It is also equally unbelievable that the products you disfavor without properly auditioning are ones that are crowned as best by Mr. Pearson. This at least should dictate more concious comments...
Dear Ozan,
This is a common disease among reviewers, they just push you to upgrade.
Armen
"Robert Harley -- Fri, 05/01/2009 - 11:08
I used the Spectral amplifiers with other compnents and still heard their remarkable qualities. Spectral doesn't make multichannel equipment.
As for "terminated" loudspeaker cables, I mean those with a box on the cable containing a network. The Spectral amplifiers have a very wide bandwidth (they can produce their full rated output power at 3MHz) and need the low-pass filter in the cable to assure stability."
Methinks you should talk to HP!
"Robert Harley -- Mon, 05/04/2009 - 09:48
You absolutely must use terminated loudspeaker cables with Spectral amplifiers. As for competitive alternatives, the DMA-360s are in a class by themselves. There are, however, other excellent amplifiers. Check out the Pass Labs line."
Again, not true! Just go to the Spectral website and read HP's review.
Using Spectral amplifiers with non-terminated cables runs the risk of destroying the amplifier. Such damage is not covered under warranty.
Sunday Niagra your points are bordering on personal and petty. How long have you been an audiophile. I guess not too long because if you were you'd be aware that that's one of the fundamental issues with spectral amplifiers (wide bavdwidth) without proper wiring you're playing with your investment. Who made HP God anyway? Do your resaearch my friend before you personalize your rhetoric against one of the most researched minds in audio.
I hope you used proper cabling with your spectral amp if you have one.
"
zead (not verified) -- Tue, 05/05/2009 - 15:11
Sunday Niagra your points are bordering on personal and petty. How long have you been an audiophile. I guess not too long because if you were you'd be aware that that's one of the fundamental issues with spectral amplifiers (wide bavdwidth) without proper wiring you're playing with your investment. Who made HP God anyway? Do your resaearch my friend before you personalize your rhetoric against one of the most researched minds in audio.
I hope you used proper cabling with your spectral amp if you have one."
Rick Fryer was po, but still published the review. Don'tcha wonder why?
"Robert Harley -- Tue, 05/05/2009 - 11:01
Using Spectral amplifiers with non-terminated cables runs the risk of destroying the amplifier. Such damage is not covered under warranty."
Who's words are these?
Hey Elliot:
How about chiming in on this one.
Mark
Normal
0
false
false
false
EN-US
X-NONE
HE
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
Dear Mr. Harley and dear colleagues, Ozan, SundayNiagara and Zead,
First, dear Mr. Harley, on the one hand I do appreciate your comments and your time and thank you for it. On the other hand, I was a bit surprised and somewhat dismayed at the absolute decisiveness with which you referred to the Hurricanes, without having given them a serious audition and/or comparison under more optimal circumstances than just shows. In any case, your comments, especially as regards the DMA-250 vs. the 360 and the clarifications about the cables have helped me, and I thank you for this.
Second, dear colleagues, let's please not attack each other too much about this. These are mainly matters of opinion and taste, not absolute truths. HP's glorious review of the Hurricanes was ONE of the reasons I bought them, but I had also heard what they can do before buying them. I do still love them a lot, and they've easily outclassed other amps I've heard in my system, including Krell FPB 600 and others, by Jeff Rowland and Bel canto. I'm well aware of their strengths, but they do have their small weaknesses. It might be intrinsic to tube designs, but their bass, while deeper, richer and more detailed than many other amps I've heard, might be less controlled/fast than what I *IMAGINE* possible in my system, even if the guru HP has not referred to this point (or wrote otherwise, I don't remember).
As to the necessity of using terminated cables, if you enter http://www.spectralaudio.com/, press "Spectral Audio System" and then "MH-750 Ultralinear Terminator", you'll see "Spectral amplifiers are not warranted for use with speaker cables other than MIT". I think that this just about settles the issue, even if this little fact is not mentioned in the DMA-250/360 description/specs.
Let's ENJOY music and equipment, not FIGHT over it… :-)
Amir
P.S., Suggestion: Never just copy/paste from Word without previewing, or else you get the following kind of stuff prefixing your messgae :-(
Normal
0
false
false
false
EN-US
X-NONE
HE
MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
they do have their small weaknesses. It might be intrinsic to tube designs, but their bass, while deeper, richer and more detailed than many other amps I've heard, might be less controlled/fast than what I *IMAGINE* possible in my system
I've had a pair for a few years - it's sitting in my basement at the moment. They're noisy, the bias needs very frequent adjusting, and they're not the last word in reliability - they blow tubes and take out the resistors in the process, which means repair is not just about sticking another tube in. The problems are not inherent in tube designs, as some tube amps are remarkably quiet (though admittedly not as trannies), stable and reliable.
Having said that, the Hurricanes are great sounding amps and excellent value for the money. I've not heard the Spectrals so can't comment on their sound, but I would guess RH views them as a reference amps and the Hurricanes, good as they are for the money, are far from being reference amps.
Dear Zeb,
Thank you for your comments.
It seems that we've had different experience with the Hurricanes. I assume this may depend on the preamp and speakers, as well as the tube make and supplier.
As regards "intrinsic to tube designs", I was explicitly referring only to bass handling, not to any other aspect.
The Hurricanes have been noisy each time after replacing the 6SN7 tubes, but soon became quite quiet :-). They have blown some KT88 tubes, more often than not without even blowing the fuse, and they never blew transistors so far (touch wood!!), though this did happen to a couple of my friends. However, both of these friends are unwilling to part with their beloved Hurricanes, due to their sound.
Replacing the transistors wasn't a big problem for the local technician here.
Before the Hurricanes I had a Krell KSA-250 transistor power amp, a long-time reference of many a reviewer. They blew transistors more than once, and each time they did, the technician had to work hour to disassemble the boards, I had to send them to Krell and back at my expense, and then again hours for reassembly. This took weeks without music each time, not to mention the huge expenses and overhead for proper packaging, transatlantic shipments (HEAVY stuff), customs, customs handling fees, etc.
I'm not sure what you call "reference amps" -- doesn't it depend on personal taste? At the local hi-fi store I heard the "in-house" system with the Hurricanes, and, at different times, with ASR and CAT amps, and preferred the Hurricanes. I also heard the Krell FPB-600 at home, and while they had their advantages, I still preferred the Hurricanes. The ASR/CAT/Krell may be considered "reference" by many gurus, so what?
When the Hurricanes cost $4,000, HP -- yet another guru -- said that the Hurricanes would be a steal with a price tag of $20,000. I'm sure he considered a couple of less than $20,000 to be reference level amps at the time, which implies he may have considered the Hurricanes to be "reference amps". So what?
A reference for one can well be unimpressive for another. Some simply don't like tube amps, so that they would never consider a tube amp as reference.
Me - I'd prefer transistor amps due to practical considerations, but good sound is even more important, so I bought the Hurricanes. For me, they are pretty great, regardless of cost, not just great value-for-money.
I may have to audition some transistor amps with great bass control (I heard the Krell FPB-600 with my B&W Nautilus 802, I now have B&W 800D as front speakers). Maybe I'm only IMAGINING lack of control at the bass.
By the way, does ANYONE know the damping factor of the Spectral DMA-250 and/or 360? This seems not to be specified anywhere, not even within the detailed specs at Spectral's site.
Best regards and enjoy your music!
Amir
P.S., The Hurricanes do not need re-biasing very often at all, maybe once a month or two, and the effect of inaccurate bias is hardly noticeable anyway, so even that seldom may not be required... :-)
Hmmmm....couldn't let THIS go by without commenting.
The Hurricanes are superb amplifiers. It has been noted -- not by HP-- that they are a bit "romantic" between 20-30hz, but that would not, for me, be a big issue: I have Nola Thunderbolts for the bottom octaves.
What I have yet to see mentioned is how "continuous" the soundfield of a Hurricane is, comparable ONLY to the Jadis Defy 7, which had a sense of air above all the instruments in a soundfield, so that there were no "holes" between instruments. The Hurricanes are exccedingly dynamic, in both macro and micro spectrums and convey mournfulness as well as volcanic eruptions. They are not as transparent as say, a Goldmund Mimesis 9 amp, which I owned, but they are not remotely smeared. they reproduce inter-transient silences quite well. They are also tonally excellent, nearly as good as Jadis, and that is saying a lot. Jadis are, tonally, superb at reproducing instrumental families, and within the families themselves, the tonal excellences of instruments.
Noisy??????? Are you joking?? I might agree that the bias drifts and I would certainly agree that reliability WAS a problem, but not now. I had a blown resistor out of the box -- the first time that ever happened to me with ANYTTHING, back when I bought them in 2003. Not a great start. But the moment I heard them from the listening chair, I got goosebumps, and I don't GET goosebumps. Not from my Versa, my WATTS, my Goldmund (turntable, amp, speakers). Only the Defy 7 came close, and Hurricanes do things Jadis never approached: dynamics from very soft to extremely loud. Noisy, my ass. Noise obscures soft notes. The Hurricanes allow, within their reach, the sound of pages turning to have the full spectrum of a page turning in real life: fundamentals along with the immediate sensation that it sounds like a page being turned by someone sitting 4 feet away from you. If they're noisy, the broke. Fix them first, THEN comment again. Even though there are amps with s/n ratios of 110 (Brystons), there is an enormous difference between sounding good and sounding real. The Hurricanes are not second class citizens in that respect. I wonder what they would sound like with Magicos.
What they don't have is great high frequency extension, but they have superior amounts of air and conntinuousness within the stage (which is not a function of the highest frequencies anyway! and Paul Seydour has never seemed to have understood the concept of continuousness, from his writings. For that matter, neither has most of the staff. Live music sounds continuous. Talking to your friend in the living room sounds continuous.Life in general sounds continuous: there are no vacuums in the street: sound is all of a joined body of existence.) And, returning to the virtues of the Hurricanes, they have considerable HEIGHT to the stage, something hard to get right. But most importantly, the ARE the sound of music. Like life to a fault.. I don't think calling someone petty for pointing out facts is exactly intelligent. I respect Mr. Harley's experience, but I'd bet my life he has not heard the Hurricanes in a controlled environment.
I haven't heard the newest Spectral amps, but Spectral, as perfect sounding as it is, did not, 3 years ago, sound "real" in the way that Hurricanes do. Not even close.
And a final note: the Hurricanes have been on HP's list of top amps from 2003 to 2008. Exactly when -- EVER-- has an amp been on HP's list for 5 years???? Let me spell it out for you: N-E-V-E-R. Get a grip.
Dear mcbrion,
Thank you for your illuminating comments, which may help clarify the issues here.
As to "I haven't heard the newest Spectral amps, but Spectral, as perfect sounding as it is, did not, 3 years ago, sound "real" in the way that Hurricanes do. Not even close" -- when you heard the not-newest Spectral, 3 years ago:
Many thanks and best regards,
Amir
Amir:
Not living in California any more, no, I did not hear the Spectral in a controlled environment. I DID hear them in a room I have heard them in several times before. I also did not check out the model, just saw that they were monoblocks and looked over the rest of the system, which was what Spectral had out at the time (I asked what vintage it was, and it was the latest vintage).
What I AM famliar with is the sound of Avalon speakers. And, saying this sincerely (meaning, not sarcastically), I hear enough live music to be able to determine what sounds more lifelike. I don't need equipment to tell me what a piano sounds like, or a flute or piccolo. I heard that for 4 years day in and out.
What I mean is that there are many components that produce superb sounds, but do not sound like life. The Hurricanes, with someone who sets them up with the best equipment, sound more likelike in the little cues of reproduction: the continuousness, that sense of the sound moving thru air with all the fluidity that real life does. Avalons can do that, perhaps other speakers do as well. When I hear Avalons (unless the line has changed), I know immediately if the partnering equipment can make them sound like life. I admired the purity of the sound that day, and the sense of reproduction, but I did not get the feeling of the sound being continuous. Many will disagree with my contention that without complete fluidity of sound, the reproduction will seem herky-jerky and they're entitled to disagree. I admire all that solid state does: my Goldmund Mimesis 9 was a marvel. I regret I ever sold it. But it did not sound "real" in the way that life does, nor the way a Jadis Defy 7 did, nor the Hurricanes. I have found it exceedingly hard to give up that feeling of "aliveness" in sound for a more complete recreation of the soundstage, or better highs. In fact, Jonathan Vallin's word, "action," is an apt description of how the Hurricanes move sound thru air, if action were combined with "continuousness." Frankly, very few speakers convey that, either. But, one pays ones money and takes ones chances.
I think the one thing that hasn't changed is that Mr. Harley has not yet stated if he's heard the Hurricanes in a controlled environment, either. That was the point of my post, an objection to poster Zead scolding poster Ozan who challenged Mr. Harley's (lack of ) knowledge about the Hurricanes -- and other products -- as though, simply based on his accomplishments, it would place Mr.Harley beyond criticism. It was a perfectly valid observation for Ozan to point out something that has been a bedrock of TAS's philosophy: commenting on something one has only heard under show conditions. NO ONE is "beyond reproach" if one has not heard a component in a controlled environment. A dealer's listening room is quite a bit more a controlled environment than a show, would you not agree?? I am assuming the dealer is competent, by the way. One could just as easily point out HP's recommendation of the Hurricanes -- and Grand Veen as - as nothing to sneezed at, and acknowledge HIS accomplishments, one being that, were it not for HP, Mr. Harley would not BE the editor at the magazine HP founded and made the most magical -- and legendary -- of the English language High End audio magazines. No offense intended, RH.
There are many different points of view at TAS these days. The biggest problem is, as I have said before, without the inter-commentary system (which would, undoubtedly, increase TAS's expenses shipping components to reviewers, it is nearly impossible to determine if the statements any given writer makes is worth anything more than a "gee-I-Love-this component" rave review. It's a bit disheartening to me, personally. There is no longer a diagram of the writers' room, their preferences (tastes), so there is no foundation on which to assess their statements, although it is clear enough when one says the highs are rolled off, or the mid-bass is too lean. Based on that, one would want a writer to have heard something long enough to state -- definitively -- how it compares to something else.
Dear mcbrion,
Thank you for your comments, to most of which I can easily relate and agree, especially as regards the Hurricanes' fortes. However, it seems that we don't live in a very simple, straightforward, one-truth-for-all world. I doubt if there are ANY truths involved, only various tastes, and, in some cases, consensus, which is far from THE TRUTH.
An all-too-common subject for disagreement is issue of "lifelike" sound. I've heard systems with horn speakers and 5 W tube amps whose owners claimed the sound was totally lifelike. These systems indeed had some magical, fascinating, attractive realer-than-life sound, with instruments floating in mid air with velvet background. Problem is, I've never had the luck to have heard such sounds in real life. This sounded much "better than life" than simply "like life". Similar phenomena occurred with some planar speakers, which also sounded "beautified" or "prettified". I didn't find these lifelike at all. I felt cheated, as if somebody was trying to sell me an "improved" illusion of things, not the real things. Some may love it, claiming, legitimately, that recorded music need not sound like in real life. Recorded music is different from real life, and, indeed they may differ in many aspects, and can even be more beautiful.
I also feel cheated by the Avalons. A friend of mine has Avalon (Opus?) speakers with EMM Labs CD/SACD player and ASL preamp+Hurricanes. There are discs where you can see the mike setup, with each mike a couple of feet from the instruments it "covers", but with the Avalons you get a sound picture/stage of sitting in row 15. I'm sure you know the difference in sound and impact between near-field instrument a couple of feet from you and the same instrument 30 or 50 feet away. Indeed, with the Avalons you get a somewhat laid-back, comfortable sound, with deep and remote soundstage, quite far off. This is quite different with the B&Ws I'm used to (801 Matrix 2, then 801/3, Nautilus 802 and now 800D), where "what you see is what you get", even if sometimes it's "in your face". I don't want the speakers (or the electronics, post-processing or anything else) to change what the mikes captured.
I assume that much of what you wrote was about showing to Zeb and others, including RH, that they may have missed something about the Hurricanes, writing them off too readily. I definitely and markedly agree with you. However, you have referred mainly to their fortes and lilelike-ness, and have not really referred to my ("real" or imagined) issue with them -- bass control. It may be less than an issue with the Avalons, I don't know.
As to your writing off the Spectrals all too easily, you may have placed yourself in a similar position to RH's. Maybe the required MIT cables have not been used. Maybe the Spectral do not interact that well with the Avalons as with other speakers, such as the Magicos. Maybe they didn't have a matching preamp, or interconnects, or whatever. Maybe what sometimes happens to me (and to many others) happened to you, that we're used to some equipment, so that totally different equipment sounds worse/unrealistic to us, or maybe it's the common phenomenon of self-defense and trying to protect ourselves against something that is a threat to what we own and love? I try to identify this in myself and openly admit it when I suspect it might happen. All of the above might even be the case with my taste regarding B&Ws vs. Avalons, but at least this has been consistent over many years.
Moreover, most of the main components in my system have been selected due to their usage in the major classical recording studios. The main exception being the Hurricanes (and the cables/interconnects). Many studios use Classe amps (e.g., Classe CA-M 400), but the local distributor charges almost $20,000/pair instead of the SRP of $12,000 in the U.S., so I think I can buy a better value-for-money (or just a better) amp. The Spectrals have occurred to me because their designer, "Prof." Keith O. Johnson of Reference Recordings, is the well-known recording engineer of many truly "reference recordings", and the well-known electronic engineer of many good sounding innovations, not least HDCD (in the pre-SBM era, before 24/96 recordings, SACDs etc). Mr. Johnson might also be of some authority regarding "lifelike" sound… :-)
Maybe when you moved away from the Goldmund to the Jadis and the Hurricanes you've actually became a tube-sound lover, preferring it to solid-state? Maybe RH is in the opposite direction, saying that "the Hurricane has a classic tube sound, while the Spectral is exceedingly neutral and transparent", so that he actually did not like the Hurricanes too much regardless of the environment?
If it only were a very simple, straightforward, one-truth-for-all world… :-)
Enjoy your music!
Amir
P.S., A-propos Magico, their developer, Alon Wolf, used the Spectral DMA-360 during development, not the Hurricanes. This does not detract one little bit from the Hurricanes, but does add to the Spectral's credentials. Please see http://www.avguide.com/forums/pass-lab-replacement-call-robert-harley-0
Fors some obscure reason, it seems I have inadvertenly touched a raw nerve here.
For what it's worth, I had a Defy-7 before the Hurricanes and now have the ARC 610Ts. I have used the Defy-7 for 7-8 years, the Hurricanes for 4-5 years and the ARC this past one. My experience with the Hurricanes is not unique. My brother owns a pair, a close friend owns two pairs, another friend has half the ASL range. SO I am very familiar with all these amps, and not only in the context of my house or my system.
The Hurricanes have been revised quite a few times, even just after HP's first rave - some revisions did not go in the right sense. I think the current version is a substantially revised model (Hurricane 2 ?) and I've only heard the older versions - all my friends have the same vintage Hurricanes. They would all agree with the comments I have made. I am glad they are now the last word in silence and reliability - they were not. They sounded excellent for the money but they are totally outclassed by the 610Ts, and so they should be, considering the 610s are about 6-7 times their price.
...reference level components.
What makes a product a reference? If a component has stunning dynamic contrasts, gradation, imaging, soundstaging, musicality, continuousness, transient accuray and is good up to the lower highs, and can reveal the components ahead of it, I'd say that would give it credibility as a reference. There are those who maintain that a Quad is a reference component, although the older models could arc (that unreliability you mentioned with Hurricane resistors, eh?!?!) and take out protective circuitry, had no real bass, rolled off highs, yet is considered a classic because it bring the music to life. I reviewed early Plinius amps, and found: fat bass, thickness from about 30-150 Hz, a forwardness that made ALL performances sound close up. Nice amps, but murky. Robert Greene loved them. What does that say?
I don't doubt that reviewers in general can determine what is reference quality: only that they are not ALONE in being able to determine what qualifies as reference level products. Perhaps your setup didn't show the Hurricanes at their full potential: my experience, after using them with Alon Viper Elite, Tetra Live 405, Genesis 6.1 (all of which I reviewed with these amps [I used an Accuphase amp on the Gensis, but the Hurricane certainly revealed more of its soul] and Manger speakers. And if ANY speaker is a reference , the Mangers are. This is not an arguable point, and TAS is remiss in not reviewing them. The last time they did was around issue 112, when Harry proclaimed them "jaw dropping" [above 80 Hz).
A reference product is one whose traits are so superior to others -- not just in its class -- but in its genre, that it cannot be ignored. The WATTS at one point were maligend and certainly not, despite their blinding lack of haziness, transient response, and musical capablilities, considered a reference. Would you argue they're NOT a reference now?
This whole "reference product" thing pivots on one premise: Do you allow a reviewer to determine what the references are, or are you musical astute enough to determine a reference with your own ears. My ears are as good (well, used to be) as Tom Miiller's and I would put them up against a few other reviewers as well. The Hurricaness reliability issues aside (like the Jadis JA-200, which I trust you remember?), the amp has a living presence that few others can even begin to manage. But if that's your take, it's yours alone. I found them dazzling and clearly a reference caliber product.
Oh, I think Scott Markwell's sidebar in the original review called it a "world class product." Crow, anyone?
Mr. Harley,
I believe there is enough smoke around what you disclosed, so maybe it is time you chime in and explain us humble audiophiles how you grade and rank so many equipment at a snap?
Thanks in advance for your illuminating reply (JV may also step in anytime, I bet)
Perhaps you would like to rephrase your question so that it doesn't seem rhetorical.
Amir:
The MIT cables were used. This dealer, Music Lovers, in Berkeley, CA is pretty knowledgeable about setup. I should have noted MIT cables were used, but I didn't. Again, they were.
And yes, I had plenty of reliability issues with my Hurricanes by the 3rd year, but fortunately no more.
And, as to the Spectral comment I made, I did not write them off. I simply said that, in terms of true-to-life reproduction, they were not close to the Hurricanes in that respect. that was not a write-off: no component is perfect, as I said. And Spectral is an excellent line of electronics. What has happened since then, I cannnot say, only that as superb as it was, my (less superior) system held more of a sense of "action" and continuousness as it happens in life. I think you might have misinterpreted what I wrote, which was no slam against Spectral (I could hardly even begin to design electronics!), but a comment on the sound, which I stand by.
Dear mcbrion,
After having posted my response to your comment, I thought it might have looked like a direct attack on you, posing many questions that might all too easily be misinterpreted as questioning the validity of your views, etc.
I sincerely apologize if (all too naturally) this was the impression you got. I didn't mean it THAT way at all. I apologize if I offended or embarrassed you in any way, form, shape or otherwise.
What I did mean was, talking to myself as well as to you, to question things some of us (myself DEFINITELY included) may take for granted and often miss out on when considering views and judgments about equipment and/or recordings and/or music.
I wouldn't challenge your views about Spectral amps, not least due to never having the luck of hearing them… :-)
I hope you accept my apology!
Best regards and enjoyment!
Amir
Amir:
It's many months later, and you may not even be looking at this thread. I certainly haven't, for some time.
I never took what you said as an attack. Chalk it up to my enthusiasm for the Hurricanes. I don't doubt other amps have better transients, low-level detail, etc. Just for a laugh, mine are back in the shop now -- for repair. They blew tubes, resistors and the nap off the rugs. I still love 'em. I'm not sure I would call them "classic tube sound" now that I've re-read all the posts, but I defer to the experience of others in that arena.
My point is simply that a component that reveals everything ahead of it is invisible ENOUGH (neutral is a tired word, it means nothing now: it's used as often as the word 'Love' which, given popular culture today, wouldn't barely pass for "well-enough liked" around 1945) to be used as a reference.
I've listened to several systems that sounded great, but had no "soul" to them. To me, the truly 'great' components reveal not just the sound, but the soul of music. No one, not even a reviewer, can claim that their ears know "soul" when they hear it. It is as indefinable as the measurements that tell everything about a component, yet reveal nothing. Having been a reviewer, I used to think I knew what was the "BEST" too -- until I grew older. Soul cannot be qualified thru measurable means, it is like kindness: those who ARE kind recognize it in others. Those who are not merely hypothesize what it must look like, feel like, be like. And they can be so utterly wrong that to even hear them describe it breaks one's heart. So it is with music reproduction. And that's what makes it hard to describe a reference. It was said of astrologer -- of which I am one -- that one could only be as good an astrologer as one's level of consicousness as a human being. The same can be said for any field that delves into the human spirit. Many astrologer are technically astounding, but lack the soulfulness to truly "see" someone past the rigid understandings of words. They are knowledgable, but not wise, not compassionate, not truly "knowing." As the line goes in Avatar "I see you." A beautiful thing to say to another human being. But back to music.
Many components -- and I know you comprehend where I'm going with this -- reveal sound without revealing the soul, or intent of music. My assertion is simply this: the Hurricanes reveal soul, intent, dimension. But not by traditional reviewing methods. So, I accept that there are better amps for revealing the sound. But not necessarily better for revealing the soul.
Post new comment