Spectral Amps + MIT Cables: A Marketing Coup? A Question to Mr. Robert Harley
default -- Sat, 05/09/2009 - 11:53
Dear Mr. Harley,
I've been thinking about the fact that Spectral amps REQUIRE the use of MIT cables with their network box, and it suddenly dawned on me that the (passive) electronics in the MIT box could have been made part of the amp. This could have made the amp independent of specific cables, and the electronics could have been improved, possibly by using active components and/or changing the amp itself, to minimize phase shifts, delays and whatever other distortions introduced by an additional passive network in the critical path.
Then I thought of possible reasons why NOT to do it.
The amps currently have a feature that seems VERY impressive -- frequency response up to 150 KHz within 0.1 dB and to 1 MHz within 1 dB. However, this impressive feature is plainly unacceptable to speakers, so that the network is REQUIRED. However, how can we retain this special, unique, impressive, marketing-differentiator feature and still have the network? Simple: Separate the network from the amp, but REQUIRE that the network be used! Brilliant, isn't it? Especially when people have to buy our own cables and will be willing to pay extra for our network!
This way the amp can be as purist as can be, have the best measurement and so on, only that what you measure and what you hear may not be directly related…!!!
Maybe that's why Spectral avoid specifying anything about the output of the amps except power, as any output impedance and damping factor specs might be an obvious lie.
All this does NOT imply whether the sound of Spectral amps is great or not. I know you consider the DMA-360 a class of its own, and the above does NOT refute that.
Can you help me untangle these thoughts, in case I got anything wrong?
Thanks and best regards,
Amir
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Dear niner,
Thank you for your comments and OF COURSE you are MORE than right!!!
I'd advise the same to whoever has the option!
It's only that I have a small problem following your (and my own) advice regarding this: I live in a small country where there are few hi-end shops and fewer that keep top-of-line models in display/stock. I can rarely audition equipment in my country at all, not to say at home in my own system.
As I wrote to Elliot above, with the current economy, I find it hard to audition hi-end equipment even abroad. I could not audition the B&W 800Ds even in Japan, only the 802Ds, and I had to practically GAMBLE about almost 100% addition in price as to whether to buy the 802Ds or jump to the 800Ds.
You're lucky to have/give that option!
Good luck to you and enjoy your music!
Amir
RH said - " Spectral makes a version of their amplifiers that has restricted bandwidth and thus doesn't require the use of their or MIT cables. These amplifiers are intended for use in recording studios. "
no, no, no, NO, NO, NO. The UNIVERSAL AMPS STILL REQUIRE MIT SPEAKER CABLES, they just don't require a Spectral preamp to drive them AND the MIT interconnects - all non-universal amps require BOTH MIT cables in and out AND a Spectral preamp! Read the manuals please, and run such semi-official statements from a magazine's editor through Spectral first. Please stop the misinformation.
You CANNOT require people to use MIT cables in the US. It is AGAINST THE LAW!
The words 'storm in a teacup' come to mind ...
I've read the thread. Wrong AGAIN. The quote from cornell is half the picture. Although what's stated in that law is not disputed (and obviously the basis of your claim), the Magnuson-Moss act, which suplpements the law, does open the door for a manufacturer to actually require the use of AUTHORIZED PARTS with their equipment. For example, a car manufacturer CAN require the use of petroleum-based motor oil in the engine (although not a specific brand), and the warranty can be voided if the user chooses to use olive oil and burn it.
In Spectral's case, they require the use of these authorized parts - and none other - with their product, and the argument ends here. Every manufacturer has the right to explicitly list in the terms from the warranty all *authorized* parts with which their product must be used based on description and other things, but exclusive of brand names. Which brings me to the next point: Notice that Spectral does not require the use of *MIT* cables per se, as this would break the tie-in part of the law, but THEY REQUIRE THE USE OF *SPECRAL/MIT* CABLES which carries no tie-in issue, because they co-designed them and the cables carry their name on this authorized part. We routinely refer to them as MIT cables, but, no, they are *Spectral/MIT* cables, and listed so in their warranty.
Get it?
It''s pure BS! Go to the Spectral site and read HP's review, which directly contradicts Spectral's point of view. Remember, Spectral was not forced to print that review on their site.
SundayNiagara said: "It''s pure BS! Go to the Spectral site and read HP's review, which directly contradicts Spectral's point of view. Remember, Spectral was not forced to print that review on their site."
So now that you have run out of incompetent legal arguments you are looking for support for your incompetent technical views, based on HP's own incompetent technical opinion (in this matter) - proven so, along with sheer lack of business acumen, over the last two decades - in order to continue arguing a stupid point you can not really make.
Well, for your and HP's information, Spectral do not want to put the output inductor that comes after the output stage in every solid state design in the amplifier, preferring to do so in the networked cable that carries their name and logo on the network box, in order to account for the electrical characteristics of the particular cable and the length that one buys. This way, they optimize even that least part of the entire systemic equation. The rolloff the cables provide are above 800kHz, thus they do not compromise the wide bandwidth, as others surpmise in this thread, and the overall bandwidth goes well above the measured 102kHz overtones of certain musical instruments (e.g. cymbals) - see if you can find that online article. If you happen to be reading Stereophile and take a look at other amplifier measurements, they routinely show rolloffs around 20-30kHz, and the good ones around 100-200kHz - and NONE at 800kHz! No one else, to my knowledge, has been able to provide stable circuits at such high frequencies, far higher than those top overtones to have any effect and compromise sound. Get it?
So Spectral probably exhibits a bit more technical savvy than you and others do. I thought HP was wrong back in 2000 when I read that review and I continue to think so now. But unlike HP, who has proven to have golden ears and has provided immesureable insight into thousands of components - and for which we respect him tremendously and are thus willing to turn our heads when he gets something so wrong, you have nothing to offer but sheer ignorance.
If you don't like what Spectral does and why, take a hike and don't buy them. In the end, Spectral do and can legally require the use of authorized cables ONLY, and their decision has pute technical merit.
Get it?
Nope! The use of specific cables is BS. Btw, I have tremendous respect for Rick Freyer's designs, but just don't believe/trust the cable BS. And, BS is exactly what it is.
Dear Robert, You might want to check on that since the input impedance on those amps is 10k and they will not work with all preamps and processors to the best of my knowledge.
The reply by "niner" is excellent; in my books I recommend that readers "Shop for a dealer, not for equipment." That isn't practical in your situation, thus your research on the Forum.
I would go with the DMA-360 (there's a new Mk.II version) if you can find one. They are hard to come by, with long waiting lists. If that's not the route for you, there are a number of excellent amplifiers out there. I'm using the similarly priced Pass XA100.5 after the DMA-360s went back to Spectral.
Dear Mr. Harley,
Thank you very much for your response! I'll definitely consider it seriously!
Be blessed!
Amir
My waiting time for a DMA-360 v2 and DMC30SS ran ~3.5 months.
Curiously as painful as that wait was, it has already disappeared from recollection...
Credit to Spectral they produce a particularly compelling system.
At the price you pay for the Spectral amplifiers don't you think they could at least be professional enough to put an email address on their website for contacting them? If you have to go through all this stuff just to consider giving your money over for them I would choose the #5 option earlier given to purchase something else.
The entire MIT cable having to be used with the Spectral amplifiers is again, just another sign of not being professional.
Are you seeing the trend: "professional"
"At the price you pay for the Spectral amplifiers don't you think they could at least be professional enough to put an email address on their website for contacting them? If you have to go through all this stuff just to consider giving your money over for them I would choose the #5 option earlier given to purchase something else.
The entire MIT cable having to be used with the Spectral amplifiers is again, just another sign of not being professional.
Are you seeing the trend: "professional"'
Post of the day!
Hi Robert Harley,
MIT and Transparent cables use filters ( probably all pass together with low pass filters ) in their cable designs.
The stated need for Spectral to operate without going into "potential" oscillations
only with "networked" cables implies that their amplifiers need their bandwidths to be reduced by these "lossy"
cables. Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of using wide bandwidth circuit design only to have it
throttled back by bandwidth limiting MIT cables? In other words, the end user will not enjoy
this so called wide bandwidth property because the bandwidth must be reduced by lossy MIT cables to prevent outright amplifier oscillation.
This is deceptive marketing, plain and simple. If this were reviewed by John Atkinson in Stereophile, his technical measurement
will have been very helpful to any potential buyers.
I was therefore horrified to read the real life oscillation problem experienced by hikejohn as posted below.
Spectral has the right to force customers to use MIT cabling in order not to void the warranty,
but that is simply a bad circuit design with insufficient gain or phase margins in the amplifier.
Absolute Sound should clearly warn their readers of this risk in the future.
I am a Krell amplifier user and Krell recommends the use of the Cast interconnect cable system
for best sound quality. However, the full warranty will still apply to conventional RCA or XLR terminated
cables, as it should be for a properly designed well thought out product, especially considering
the high price points of Spectral components in relation to performance.
Spectral amplifiers do sound quite respectable and may indeed be the best sounding HiFi on earth, according to Robert Harley,
but this instability defect cannot be tolerated, IMHO.
Petre
hikejohn -- Sun, 05/24/2009 - 16:45
A couple of comments...as someone who has owned an entire Spectral system...with MIT cables:
It is truly in the top league of anything out there...excellent sound, performance
I don't think you can buy Spectral from a dealer who isn't well versed in the NEED for MIT cables...not to mention the sound quality. As to building in the network in the amp...to me there would be several concerns:
It would be a real pain to ship back an amp just to update the speaker cable portion of the amp....notice how much more frequently MIT updates/modifies/improves their cables than Spectral does the amps.
As I recall MIT cables are made to a given length...(aside from the tails)...and again it would be a burden to return the amp to spectral simply to permit me to change speaker placement...perhaps exceeding the length of cables....to match the network to the new distance.
After I sold my DMC 30 and DMA 150 the guy used some other speaker cables....a problem occured (no idea if it was related to speaker wires or not...or an act of God)...he returned the amp for service and they told him that amp was damaged due to high frequency oscillation....so there were able to correlate some type of amp problems to cables
I have not found Transparent cables to offer superior performance....particular over the equivalent MIT model (presently I don't use either MIT or Transparent...but I am curious about MIT's newest models
Just my thoughts
John
Hi Robert Harley,
MIT and Transparent cables use filters ( probably all pass together with low pass filters ) in their cable designs.
The stated need for Spectral to operate without going into "potential" oscillations
only with "networked" cables implies that their amplifiers need their bandwidths to be reduced by these "lossy"
cables. Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of using wide bandwidth circuit design only to have it
throttled back by bandwidth limiting MIT cables? In other words, the end user will not enjoy
this so called wide bandwidth property because the bandwidth must be reduced by lossy MIT cables to prevent outright amplifier oscillation.
This is deceptive marketing, plain and simple. If this were reviewed by John Atkinson in Stereophile, his technical measurement
will have been very helpful to any potential buyers.
I was therefore horrified to read the real life oscillation problem experienced by hikejohn as posted below.
Spectral has the right to force customers to use MIT cabling in order not to void the warranty,
but that is simply a bad circuit design with insufficient gain or phase margins in the amplifier.
Absolute Sound should clearly warn their readers of this risk in the future.
I am a Krell amplifier user and Krell recommends the use of the Cast interconnect cable system
for best sound quality. However, the full warranty will still apply to conventional RCA or XLR terminated
cables, as it should be for a properly designed well thought out product, especially considering
the high price points of Spectral components in relation to performance.
Spectral amplifiers do sound quite respectable and may indeed be the best sounding HiFi on earth, according to Robert Harley,
but this instability defect cannot be tolerated, IMHO.
Petre
hikejohn -- Sun, 05/24/2009 - 16:45
A couple of comments...as someone who has owned an entire Spectral system...with MIT cables:
It is truly in the top league of anything out there...excellent sound, performance
I don't think you can buy Spectral from a dealer who isn't well versed in the NEED for MIT cables...not to mention the sound quality. As to building in the network in the amp...to me there would be several concerns:
It would be a real pain to ship back an amp just to update the speaker cable portion of the amp....notice how much more frequently MIT updates/modifies/improves their cables than Spectral does the amps.
As I recall MIT cables are made to a given length...(aside from the tails)...and again it would be a burden to return the amp to spectral simply to permit me to change speaker placement...perhaps exceeding the length of cables....to match the network to the new distance.
After I sold my DMC 30 and DMA 150 the guy used some other speaker cables....a problem occured (no idea if it was related to speaker wires or not...or an act of God)...he returned the amp for service and they told him that amp was damaged due to high frequency oscillation....so there were able to correlate some type of amp problems to cables
I have not found Transparent cables to offer superior performance....particular over the equivalent MIT model (presently I don't use either MIT or Transparent...but I am curious about MIT's newest models
Just my thoughts
John
Easy solution for your intolerance...don't buy them.
I'll return to enjoying my Spectrals...
Dear Eclipse,
Thank you for your illuminating the MIT issues. However, there are a couple of issues I failed to understand. Please note -- I'm not challenging you, I just wish to understand:
First, if you go to http://www.spectralaudio.com/, press "Spectral Audio System", scroll down to Cables and press, say, the "MH-770 Ultralinear CVTerminator" link, you'll see "Spectral amplifiers are not warranted for use with speaker cables other than MIT". Note: "MIT", not "Spectral/MIT", as oppoesed to what you wrote in your previous post.
Second, do you also mean than MIT cables that are not SPECTRAL/MIT, such as, say, "AVt MA Bi-Wire", won't work so well with Spectral amps?
Third, where can I read about Spectral's requirements, such as requiring a Spectral preamp to drive Spectral amps? For example, can the Spectral manuals be downloaded from anywhere?
Fourth, I'm considering buying a pair of Spectral DMA-360 Mk. II to drive B&W 800Ds, using EMM Labs Switchman 3 6-channel preamp. I assume the EMM Labs preamp might be less optimal than a Spectral preamp, but won't that work very well? (As far as I know, Spectral do not make multichannel equipment)
Thanks!!!
Amir
Amir,
All of your questions revolve around that lack of a local dealer...which leads to lots of problems. My thoughts and comments are these:
From having owned Spectral gear in the past I know their preference is to talk to the person directly....on the phone (by the way many other high end companies prefer phone/or talk to local dealer)...they want to give complete and full answers after fully understanding your needs....hard to do that on email.
While the 360 is a great amp...if I were to return to Spectral gear it would only be as an AMP and PREAMP combo....over the years I am yet to hear one of their components mate as well to anything but Spectral....and it is excellent...as Mr. Harley suggests there is great syngism is using an all Spectral system...following their advice...for their gear, and likely other top designs, mixing and matching may provide entertainment....and various elements of performance may be attractive buys folks like Spectral...Ayre...and a few others try and optimize as much as they can....and for me its hard to second guess what the designer does
As MIT cables for Spectral gear....they mention the "UltraLinear Series" on their web site....but that isn't the ultimate choice for Spectral...I suspect that it is "a reasonable cost choice"....assuming that the word reasonable belongs in this conversation. If one goes to the MIT website they talk about various versions of their cables....at various price levels that are more or less appropriate with a given amp...be it Spectral...Krell...Ayre or ARC....I recall that MIT will communicate via email....perhaps try them....or if you prefer Joe Abrams (former MIT person....who presently markets lots of MIT cables at reduced prices) has many listings...he is a stright shooter and can make recommendations to you....search MIT on Audiogon and I am sure you can find him...
There are also some excellent Spectral/MIT dealers...two that come to mind are Overture in Delaware and Goodwins in Boston...I am sure you can find their web sites....I suspect they can give you excellent advice, may have some good used units...both Spectral and MIT.
Personally I haven't had good experience with Transparent's performance with Spectral (or with some other stuff)
Lastly, if it were my system....and I loved/wanted to keep the B&W speakers....if I choose the Spectral route I would used the DMC30 and DMA 360 with an appropriate level of MIT cables....if you weren't going to use a full system....if it were I, I would love elsewhere.
regards,
John
Dear John,
Thank you for your serious, informative and helpful response!!!
Not ALL issues may be related to not having a local Spectral dealer :-) There is also the issue of Spectral not making multichannel equipment, and I do like multichannel for my (mainly classical) music. Having one setup for stereo only and another setup for multichannel is not practical.
The question is, GIVEN that I'll have to stick to my EMM Labs Switchman 3 (not a VERY bad preamp :-)), what should I do?
Maybe the Spectral DMA-360 (especiall Mk. II) is so good that even when used with non-Spectral preamp, giving less than its best, it might still sound better than any other amp I can use.
Or maybe, without a Spectral preamp, the DMA-360 is not THAT great and another power amp would outperform it. In this case, which?
As to the MIT issue, I was thinking about MIT AVt MA Bi-Wire, but then Eclipse said above that Spectral optimize the cables' network to the amp and specific cable length. In that case, I may lose this optimization, unless MIT do this too.
What equipment did you move to from Spectral?
Many thanks!!
Amir
Amir said: "First, if you go to http://www.spectralaudio.com/, press "Spectral Audio System", scroll down to Cables and press, say, the "MH-770 Ultralinear CVTerminator" link, you'll see "Spectral amplifiers are not warranted for use with speaker cables other than MIT". Note: "MIT", not "Spectral/MIT", as oppoesed to what you wrote in your previous post.
Second, do you also mean than MIT cables that are not SPECTRAL/MIT, such as, say, "AVt MA Bi-Wire", won't work so well with Spectral amps?
Third, where can I read about Spectral's requirements, such as requiring a Spectral preamp to drive Spectral amps? For example, can the Spectral manuals be downloaded from anywhere?
Fourth, I'm considering buying a pair of Spectral DMA-360 Mk. II to drive B&W 800Ds, using EMM Labs Switchman 3 6-channel preamp. I assume the EMM Labs preamp might be less optimal than a Spectral preamp, but won't that work very well? (As far as I know, Spectral do not make multichannel equipment)"
Amir -
web design isn't exactly Spectral's forte and/or interest. There are quite a number of inaccuracies in the pages that have resulted in reviewers like RH to report incorrectly based on the web site's contents. For example, it's stated that the DMC-30SS (and 30 SL before it) preamp was the first one to feature a remote control... wrong, this was copied from the original DMC-30 (web page no longer exists). Second, it is claimed that the DMC-30 SS (and SL before it) was the first to feature optical protection - wrong again, this was copied from the original DMC-20 text. And so on. For whatever the reason, they have the tendency to copy the contents of previous products into new ones AS IS, misleading people. YES, I said MISLEADING, because there is no other way to put it.
Then there is the question of why they don't have an email address on the web site. All of this says one thing only, which was articulated by another user: THEY WANT YOU TO TALK TO A DEALER. Email clearly cannot relate the information correctly and to the depth required, nor will you be getting the personal attention a dealer will afford you. Finally, they are a small shop and want to remain as such, with limited production runs for those who care about their products.
Where do we see the exact language about Spectral/MIT cables and preamp requirements? ONLY IN THE MANUALS and warranty card. Why, I don't know. They probably also routinely refer to them as MIT cables. But if you talk to a dealer, they will articulate the preamp requirement clearly, and discuss the "universal" versions with you if you don't want to buy their preamp.
Will any other preamp work with a Spectral amp? It depends - my understanding is that Spectral is concerned about a preamp sending the amp into oscillation, just like any other speaker cable but MIT probably may, and then there is the whole issue of impedance matching (their amps have very low input impedance). So in order to protect their interests, they require the use of Spectral preamps in the NON-UNIVERSAL models. Realistically, will some other preamp work? If the impedance is right AND it can deliver the minimum output current that the amp requires AND be stable at very high frequencies (i.e. below the input interconnects' rolloff frequency - and I don't know what that is, but I suspect it's also very high), then yes it will work - but how are you going to find that preamp? I have no experience with the EMM products. I haven't tried another preamp with my Spectral amp, not because of their requirement, but because they sound so damn incredible that I just have no interest.
Will any other MIT speaker cable work with a Spectral amp? Yes, Spectral have blessed other MIT speaker cables, but they do not require them, and a dealer will let you know which ones. I know for a fact that the MIT Oracle speaker cables have been blessed, and RH reviewed with them, and these cables offer more than just an output inductor, as you can see from the pictures he included in a subsequent issue. I assume these cables offer the same level of protection to the amp along with the very wide bandwidth they want, plus phase properties they want, etc.
Hope this helps
Dear Eclipse,
No only does your response greatly help to clarify the issues at hand, it is also a model response!!!
It answers all my questions directly and straightforwardly, in general where required and specifically when required. When you don't know or don't have the experience with something, you simply say so, without becoming vague or reverting to generalities.
Kudos to you, as well as hearty thanks!!!
Amir
"Fourth, I'm considering buying a pair of Spectral DMA-360 Mk. II to drive B&W 800Ds, using EMM Labs Switchman 3 6-channel preamp. I assume the EMM Labs preamp might be less optimal than a Spectral preamp, but won't that work very well? (As far as I know, Spectral do not make multichannel equipment)"
Be sure there isn't an impedance between preamp & amps.
The idea behind the wide bandwidth of Spectral amplifiers is not to amplify 3MHz at full power to the loudspeakers, but to produce an amplifier that has extremely fast settling time in the audioband. The fact that the amplifier has a 3MHz bandwidth has implications for how the transient properties of audioband signals are amplified. The low-pass filter in the cable is required to make the amplifier stable. Spectral could have incorporated this filter in the amplifier, but chose to put it outside the amplifer in the cable.
For surround sound at the highest level my opinion is that you need a stereo preamp/use its processor loop for your surround preamp/processor device...in my case a Meridian 861 v4. No processor that I know of performs in the same league as Spectral, ARC, Ayre...etc. And by the way if you do a combo stereo/HT-surround set up I would suggest strongly that ideally your three front amps and speakers be the same. Currently I use Ayre MX-R monoblocks....one each for L/R/Center...in my experience the ear is very sensitive to speaker/amp differences....accross the front. For me I listen to music with two speakers and I am happy. I should also point out that all the front cabling is the same....I am not a fan of the salad bowl approach...trying to balance the system by playing with different wires/interconnects....just my opinion.
Hi, John!
Thank you for your response!
It seems you may not be familiar with EMM Labs, the company of Ed Meitner, the guy who has designed (or modified/upgraded) the A/D and D/A convertors used in the best recording studios. I haven't tested other preamps, but the Switchman 3 is not a "processor", and I'm sure it can compete with the best preamps out there.
I'm sorry I cannot afford a third B&W 800D and another Spectral-level power amp for the center channel. I have to settle for B&W HTM2D for center and B&W Nautilus 802 for rear, with a 3x200W Adcom power amp for all three. While definitely less than optimal, I'm not complaining very loudly...
Do you find the Ayre amps outperform the Spectrals? Did you have DMA-360s?
Thanks!
Amir
I am familiar with Meitner....have listened to their stuff over the years...not my cup of tea but in the larger world he makes a nice CD player. Personally I don't think Meitner preamp is in the same league as Ayre, Spectral, ARC, VTL and a few others....
As to speakers...a B&W center is fine....I was simply referring to the front three amps and wiring to be the same...with stereo amp for the rears.
But we come from different perspectives....I spent years and lots of money trying to get top sound from multi channel equipment....after all that I am convinced that a properly setup analog/stereo system is the best way, at least for me, to enjoy music...which for me is classical, jazz, blues and some rock. If you want to use multi channel with music the closest might be Theta with a "six shooter"...as I recall ARC and CJ had some type of multi channel preamp....with no processing...but those items pale in comparison to ARC's and/or CJ's top analog preamp. I think, as we American's might say, barking up the wrong tree....at least in my opinion.
When I had Spectral DMC 30SL...I think that is two versions back...and a DMA 150....at the time I didn't appreciate the benefit of monoblocks...thus went stereo...in my current system I am taking advantage of monoblocks...next to my Rockports....one of my major decisions was to use MIT again but they demand a minimum length of 8'...versus short wires between the Rockports and Ayre's....thus selling my MIT cables...I also tried a bunch of other cables....Nordost, Transparent....but landed on the Ayre Signiture speaker wires...a version of Cardas....and as a system they work very well.
John
Amir,
I may not have the same gear as Hike but I agree with his advise. You are going to make a serious mistake because you keep asking the question wanting a different answer
Speactral is a system product PERIOD. That has nothing to do with sound quality only on how it works. If you are not prepared to use the amps with their preamp move on to something else. I think that it is a shame that more companies don't design to a system approach ot would make things much easier for consumers to get the kind of results they are looking for and remove a lot of expensive errors. Many time the sound suffers from not bad equipment as much as bad system matching. Components are not all universal and again like Hike said a buffet dejour of cables and gear does not produce a gourmet treat. Cables are all filters!!!!! they all do something to sound. Here at least the company is telling you how they designed their gear and what it
will work with. THis is a novel idea guys, if you can't afford it or don't like the concept then do not buy it. Imagine buying your car like this.
Spectral amps have very low i,put impedance much lower than Krell, ARC, CJ, MLAS etc. and so they don't work up to snuff with every preamp.
Check it out if you don't believe me.
I also think that no matter what you buy the other amp you have needs to go. YOu really should have at least the front three amps match if not all of them. To use a SOTA amp on left and right and a far from that as a center channel will be bad on film and on music really terrible. You should rethink your plans
1). You have no support and/or dealer near you for Spectral.
2) you are going to use it incorrectly
3) you can't hear it
So as the audiophile says ITS PERFECT for me!
Wise words from Elliott. If you don't have a dealer nearby and can't hear it, preferably at home in your own system if it's an expensive piece of gear, then you're looking to be disappointed.
Dear Elliot,
You said that I "keep asking the question wanting a different answer". Problem is, I'm not getting the answer to my specific question, only generalizations… :-(
Maybe it's easier to assume that I don't get what I'm repeatedly told, ignoring the fact that I said long ago that I've understood and accepted those points, and once was enough… :-)
I fully accept your statement "Spectral is a system product PERIOD". I understand it and I accept it. OK? Do you now believe me that I do? :-)
What I do have a problem with is the paradigm/assumption/preconception/prejudice that follows: "If you are not prepared to use the amps with their preamp move on to something else".
It stands to reason that if designer XXX knows how to design a superlative piece of equipment, he knows best on earth how to design other components so that each produces the best from the others and the combination sounds its best when used together. Especially so if the components have been designed as a standalone system, without giving ANY consideration to interfacing with components by other designers.
Though unlikely, it might happen, even so, that when a component by designer XXX is used with component(s) by other manufacturer(s), the result might be even better than the entirely-XXX system.
Even when accepting that a component designed as part of a system sounds less than its best with component(s) by other manufacturer(s), a component by XXX may still sound great, possibly better than a similar component by designer YYY, including an all YYY system.
Please note that we already have two known examples of exceptions to the above paradigm, specifically with Spectral:
* Though the Spectral system was designed with MIT, at least HP said that the DMA-360 sounded better with other cables
* ScottB said he is thrilled with Spectral DMA-360 V2 amps, though he uses them with a non-Spectral preamp (Berkeley Audio Design AlphaDAC), obviously violating the Spectral system concept.
There are probably many other examples, such as Krell's components, designed to work best with CAST, but performing pretty well with components by others.
Therefore, the paradigm/assumption/preconception/prejudice above might not be THE TRUTH, the whole truth and/or nothing but THE TRUTH :-)
So what I wrote, after having understood your points and incorporated this understanding, was:
I haven't received an answer to THOSE questions from anyone yet, at most repetitions and variations of the above paradigm.
Maybe without having heard a system with SWM3 and Spectral DMA-360 one cannot really answer the question, which is perfectly OK.
The appreciation of the result is only a matter of taste anyway. Such appreciation might even be affected by one's paradigms -- if one is CERTAIN that Spectral can sound good ONLY in a Spectral-only system, he might be reluctant to let himself be confused by the "facts" of what one is actually hearing … :-)
Thanks anyway for trying to help!
Amir
Amir said: "What I do have a problem with is the paradigm/assumption/preconception/prejudice that follows: "If you are not prepared to use the amps with their preamp move on to something else".
It stands to reason that if designer XXX knows how to design a superlative piece of equipment, he knows best on earth how to design other components so that each produces the best from the others and the combination sounds its best when used together. Especially so if the components have been designed as a standalone system, without giving ANY consideration to interfacing with components by other designers."
Amir - the word on the street is that Spectral design the products that they'd rather own... Draw your own conclusions.
Amir said: "Please note that we already have two known examples of exceptions to the above paradigm, specifically with Spectral:
* Though the Spectral system was designed with MIT, at least HP said that the DMA-360 sounded better with other cables
* ScottB said he is thrilled with Spectral DMA-360 V2 amps, though he uses them with a non-Spectral preamp (Berkeley Audio Design AlphaDAC), obviously violating the Spectral system concept."
When I tried different speaker cables, the amp was running considerable HOTTER at the same volume, which means the amp was probably oscillating. I don't recall RH saying the amp sounded better with other cables. Can you point us to this claim?
Dear Eclipse,
It was probably HP who wrote it, not RH, thought the quoted article is unsigned. Please see http://www.spectralaudio.com/ ==> "Spectral Audio Reviews" ==> "# Review: Spectral DMA-360 Monoblock Power Amplifier reprinted from The Absolute Sound Magazine, February 1999", where he writes:
*** "And I, for one, thought the Spectral amplifiers with the MIT cables sounded bright and electronic".
*** "Using the Nordost SPM speaker cables and daring Fate by leaving the amplifiers cooking throughout the nights that followed - and I live in the New York metropolitan region, which means mucho trasho in the V-and UHF- spectra. Not a whisper of a problem. Complete stability. And wonderful sound. With no audible artifacts of an electronic nature"
Regards,
Amir
Amir said: " It was probably HP who wrote it, not RH, thought the quoted article is unsigned."
Yes it was HP who said that and I recall that review very well - it's OK to report how other cables may have sounded, but it's not OK (with me at least) to go off on a tangent and outright dismiss Spectral's requirements, even if these required cables sounded worse to him than the Nordost. And it's no secret, as the article says, that Spectral did not loan him the pair of amps - HP borrowed them from a friend of his, who probably put in a word or two into HP's ear, not to mention that I just don't believe HP *EVER* tried MIT cables with that amp, unless his friend would have a pair, and why would he.
Hi, Eclipse!
I'm not sure your post of Thu, 06/11/2009 - 12:10 above was a model post... :-(
I felt rather threatened when you wrote earlier "Can you point us to this claim?". Now it's your turn :-)
It seems to me to be a point of HP's favor that he borrowed the amp from a friend rather than from Spectral -- this way he could probably be less obligated to Spectral (and still HIGHLY recommend their amp!!!)
What is your basis for your allegations that:
*** HP's friend "probably put in a word or two into HP's ear" and that HP preferred that word to his own personal judgment and personal integrity?
*** HP's friend did not have a pair of MIT cables?
*** HP *NEVER* tried MIT cables with that amp?
These are indeed pretty serious allegations, presenting HP as a liar (saying he tried MIT cables when he allegedly had not), easily influenced by others and lacking professional ability and/or the integrity to stick by it.
On the one hand, I'm not sure to what extent to "outright dismiss Spectral's requirements" is so very wrong, especially only as regards sound, after having elaborated about the potential risks and the sharp disagreements about them, and explicitly mentioning Spectral's view of this. All this to the extent that Spectral saw fit to publish this review in its entirety, without adding an extra warning of their own.
On the other hand, such serious allegations without ROCK-SOLID PROOF is, in my opinion, definitely wrong, verging on libel.
Actually, this makes me wonder whether you're not a Spectral official/unofficial representative, attempting to unconditionally justify Spectral whenever possible, in accordance to what I already felt about your post in http://www.avguide.com/forums/the-best-kept-secret-spectral-dma-250360-d....
I don't know if HP reads these posts, but, unless you really have some VERY solid evidence supporting your allegations, I think you owe HP a BIG apology.
Regards,
Amir
P.S., Just to be clear, when I wrote "Now it's your turn", I meant "your turn to bring evidence", not "to be threatened" :-)
Don't forget that speakers are basically filters also....
Amir should recognize facts....if he wants multi channel...front amps/cable and speaker type must all be the same
for the amount of $$$ he is considering to spend he needs to hop on plane and hear this stuff...cheap flight to confirm or deny his vision by first hand listening
by the way I would be way suspicious of local guy who can get Spectral for same as US...to sell to Amir at such a price...might be great deal but my personal antenna would be in over drive....Spectral is special stuff...needs special knowledge...and we didn't focus on proper cables...a suitable set of MIT cables may drift well north of $10K US....so Amir you looking for a $40K plus ride....is that what you want....at that level the best deserves the best....great stuff....hope you keep your day job....or perhaps its the night job.....
You should always keep price/value in line with your personal goals....as I mentioned before I think you are on the wrong path...but that is just my view...unless you have a trust fund..
John
I call this post a reality check!
Dear John!
Considering the prices my dealer can usually obtain (and has often obtained, similar to U.S. prices), and trade in for my Hurricanes and cables, I'd expect the total cost to be more around $20+K, not $40K… Also, he's VERY reliable and knowledgeable, but requested that I do not quote him or tell his name, as he's known internationally.
As to the Meitner preamp, it's, as usual, probably an issue of taste. For me, it's a great preamp. It definitely and easily outperforms the Bel Canto PRe6 and the Sonic Frontiers Line 3 I had before it, both often used as reference preamps, and the Krell I had before them.
A friend of mine has a (stereo only) Meitner CD/SACD player (I have a separate Meitner transport and converter), an Audio Research preamp, ASL Hurricanes (similar to mine) and different speakers (Wilson Watt/Puppy, not B&W), and, given the similarity, I prefer the EMM pre to the Audio Research. Another friend has the same stereo player, the same Hurricanes and Avalon speakers, with an ASL preamp, which is cheaper than the Switchman 3, and I prefer the latter too.
As I wrote to Elliot, maybe without having heard a system with SWM3 and Spectral DMA-360 one cannot really answer my questions, which is perfectly OK. It's all a matter of taste in any case.
My dealer has already suggested the idea of "hop on plane and hear this stuff" :-)
Thanks and best regards,
Amir
hikejohn your comments are bordering on disrespect....please stick to audio
I have stuck to audio....but clearly I should cease to pay attention to this thread
Stick around, we need a few more like you.
Right! Thanks for the positive contribution!
Amir
Strictly from my perspective as a new Spectral DMA-360 V2 customer, I am thrilled with these amps. I'm using them with a Berkeley Audio Design AlphaDAC as the source/preamp, feeding the Spectrals directly through balanced MIT Magnum MA interconnect. Through Magico V3 speakers, this combination produces a sense of music originating in 3D space that I've simply not experienced before, combined with a dynamic ease and sense of authority that enhances every piece of music. My previous amps, McIntosh MC501s, were no slouches, but the Spectrals have a sense of rightness and transparency to the music that is just addictive.
I am obviously violating the Spectral system concept in principle. In practice, the Spectral and Berkeley engineering teams are very closely connected, and the Spectral 360s were the reference amp for development of the AlphaDAC, so I'm not particularly worried about the reliability of my expensive new amps. I personally would not use any other preamp/source besides the Spectral or Berkeley.
To the original point of this thread, interactions between amplifier and cable can be significant, and designing amp and cable to work together absolutely makes sense from a system design perspective. For example, note the effects on amplifier spectral response due to different cables in this test:
http://www.audiodesignline.com/howto/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201807390
You might or might not like the limitation on cable choice imposed by Spectral's design philosophy, but there is legitimate science behind it.
As an aside, as a former chief techology officer of a large technology company, I can say that the requirement for a particular piece of associated equipment to guarantee safe operation is in no way illegal in and of itself. For instance, car manufacturers often refuse to warrant safety or reliability if critical maintenance items (oil, tires, filters, etc) are not "approved", and they regularly source these components from one manufacturer only. The requirement for specific associated equipment violates antitrust laws only if the effect, and in practice, the intent, is to restrict competition - i.e. if the companies in question are conspiring to gain competitive advantage by excluding competitive products. There is simply no evidence to that effect in this case - in fact there is clear evidence that Spectral amplifiers are not safe with most other cabling products, and that the cable restriction is part of the basic competitive design advantage of Spectral products. And from a practical standpoint, two relatively tiny companies in a niche market like high-end audio will never attract attention from the relevant authorities in any case.
Dear ScottB!
Thank you for your helpful and empowering comment!
Please see my reference to it in my response to Elliot.
Be blessed and enjoy!
Amir
ScottB said: "I am obviously violating the Spectral system concept in principle. In practice, the Spectral and Berkeley engineering teams are very closely connected, and the Spectral 360s were the reference amp for development of the AlphaDAC, so I'm not particularly worried about the reliability of my expensive new amps. I personally would not use any other preamp/source besides the Spectral or Berkeley."
Well put - neither would I. You are not the only one driving the amp directly from the Berkeleym from what I have heard, and I have to admit I haven't done it myself YET. However, my amp is now close to getting out of warranty anyway, so I will try it soon. You are correct that they alpha was designed around the 360 S2... BTW, Spectral had also approved for me (long ago) the use of an external crossover between the amp and preamp from the old Entec company, because that crossover was designed by Damian Martin, the chief engineer at Spectral before Keith Johnson.
Amir,
Noone is going to t tell you that your own taste is going to influence how you spend your money however I said that you need to know if thechnically they work together. I am not sure they do. I also said that a hodgepodge of amps is not a great idea for a multichannel system especially when the center channel is different from the fronts.
Like three pirrelli tires and a goodyear
Dear Elliot,
I'm not sure either whether they work well together, technically and/or musically. I'll definitely have to check both.
The analogy to tyres may not be so good, as in that case, the symmetry is broken, which does not happen with a center channel.
In any case, of course you're right that it's not a good idea to have different amps/speakers (and interconnects/cables) for the front and center channels.
If I only had the money... :-) For any given amount of money I spend, I prefer to invest more in the front channels and save on the others.
Thanks!
Amir
I've used different amplifiers and cables on center speakers with no problems. The tonal balance of a center speaker is so different from that of the left and right as to render moot differences between high-quality amplifiers.
Hi, Eclipse!
I'm not sure your post of Thu, 06/11/2009 - 12:10 above was a model post... :-(
I felt rather threatened when you wrote earlier "Can you point us to this claim?". Now it's your turn :-)
It seems to me to be a point of HP's favor that he borrowed the amp from a friend rather than from Spectral -- this way he could probably be less obligated to Spectral (and still HIGHLY recommend their amp!!!)
What is your basis for your allegations that:
*** HP's friend "probably put in a word or two into HP's ear" and that HP preferred that word to his own personal judgment and personal integrity?
*** HP's friend did not have a pair of MIT cables?
*** HP *NEVER* tried MIT cables with that amp?
These are indeed pretty serious allegations, presenting HP as a liar (saying he tried MIT cables when he allegedly had not), easily influenced by others and lacking professional ability and/or the integrity to stick by it.
On the one hand, I'm not sure to what extent to "outright dismiss Spectral's requirements" is so very wrong, especially only as regards sound, after having elaborated about the potential risks and the sharp disagreements about them, and explicitly mentioning Spectral's view of this. All this to the extent that Spectral saw fit to publish this review in its entirety, without adding an extra warning of their own.
On the other hand, such serious allegations without ROCK-SOLID PROOF is, in my opinion, definitely wrong, verging on libel.
Actually, this makes me wonder whether you're not a Spectral official/unofficial representative, attempting to unconditionally justify Spectral whenever possible, in accordance to what I already felt about your post in http://www.avguide.com/forums/the-best-kept-secret-spectral-dma-250360-d...
I don't know if HP reads these posts, but, unless you really have some VERY solid evidence supporting your allegations, I think you owe HP a BIG apology.
Regards,
Amir
P.S., Just to be clear, when I wrote "Now it's your turn", I meant "your turn to bring evidence", not "to be threatened" :-)