 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.229.18.201
Unfortunately, my ears are screwed up and I have to face the reality that I need a balance control, which my Exposure amp doesn't provide.
The new Parasound is among the few amps that have one, in addition to the Creek 100A.
Curious if anyone has any feedback on these amps
Follow Ups:
Historically, the Creek/Music Hall integrated are very nice and a pleasing listen. If you need / require more power or high current- look elsewhere.
I was just informed by pm that the new Parasound integrated is NOT a JC design.
I wouldn't let that stand in the way, if this piece fit other requirements AND sounds as YOU think it should in YOUR system.
Tune in in maybe 5 years and check out resale Value and if any are actually available used.
Too much is never enough
That's too bad. Guess it makes sense - JC, as I understand, did not design the a23 and I suspect the amp section on the integrated derives from the a23.
I do know he designed the a21, which I owned briefly. From what I recall, it was a very nice amp.
Looking at photos of the 21 /23 the LAYOUT is the same. Both use bipolar or JFETS in certain applications and both have similar headroom specifications from the RMS rating. NEITHER actually DOUBLE from 8ohms to 4ohms. Board layout, at least that part I can see in commercially available photos is VERY similar, if not identical.
So, based on this and an exchange of notes with Richard Schram, my conclusion is that while the '23 was NOT a 'clean sheet' design, neither was it the product of JC. 'Cousin' or perhaps 'close relative' may be appropriate.
It is reasonably possible that the '23 is a scaled down '21? Some consessions might have been made in the interest of costs. I simply do NOT know.
The Integrated? Sort of between the '21 and '23 in power, it also uses the same topology and order of device use.
I rather suspect that you could NOT reliably tell the difference between these amps when run in level matched comparisons AND below clipping levels.
My PAIR of the '23s with ONE EACH per Magnepan as BIAMP is wonderful. And NO, I didn't even for an INSTANT consider any bridging situation.
The PREAMP section of the integrated would appear to be PURE P5.
Too much is never enough
I essentially designed both the A-21 and A-23. A good deal of the design detail was done in Taiwan, but the basic circuit is mine.
nnn
Good. Game / Set / Match for the NaySayers of 'who designed what'.
ME? I dont know that I'll ever need or WANT to replace my pair of A23s.
I'll be moving forward on my Line Level crossover and MAY replace the level potentiometer with a pair of FIXED film resistors. I don't use the variable level feature BUT may need some minor adjustment AFTER crossover. The Speaker in question, a magnepan has an inductor in the lo-pass crossover amounting to about 10% of the TOTAL DCR of that circuit. Removal of that piece may increase the output level of the low driver by some very small amount. Maybe as much as 1db or so? I'll calculate later, when it becomes important.
Again: Great amps and for those without massively deep pockets, a wonderful way to complete a system.
Too much is never enough
Great amps also for those WITH deep pockets.
:)
I think the JC-1 is for deeper pockets. But OTHER amps can reduce sub-5 digit costs to the ChumpChange level.
I saw some 54000$ Constellation amps at a demo. ONE of 'em didn't work. So much for spending a YEARS salary on a pair of amps.
My A23 retail for around a grand PER. Not cheap, but certainly NOT over the top, either, especially if you have a speaker of medium or higher sensitivity or a non-cave sized space.
I'll spend the difference on some kind of major vacation someplace unique and off the heavily beaten path.
Too much is never enough
This is the first time I've seen the Constellation name on this forum!
JC designed the Constellation Perseus phono pre. It got him a TAS award recently.
:)
Be that as it may, the large, industrial looking AMPS bearing that name are STILL unknown to me.
I had a chance, but ONE of the pair simply would not 'fire'. DOA at the Demo.
The Crack-Up here, IMO, is that a volunteer from the 'crowd', went home and returned with a PAIR of Emotiva Monoblocs which retail for about 1/80th the Constellation's 54,000$
Sounded fine to all listeners, BTW, of which there were 30 or 40.
WE really have to rethink the cost / benefit part of this hobby. Would 54 Large in amp have been nearly 80x better than what I DID hear? (had they BOTH worked?) Can some of these huge costs be justified in the long run? Could I SLEEP at night knowing I spent a years salary on a PAIR of amps?
No, I'll stay at the fairly Shallow end of the pool. I can touch bottom here. While I may DREAM of a pair of 20.7 or maybe even a pair of 3.6 (doable, maybe) I think I may actually be able to swing some DIY on my 1.6s in the form of reframe and a line level crossover. Maybe Santa will bring me a Hakko Soldering Station?
Too much is never enough
...I enjoy it every day.
See ya. Dave
The preamp is almost identical. The new integrated actually includes a better DAC than the DAC in the P-5. I'm not sure I would notice a difference in sound quality running my ALACs and FLACs, but the DAC in the integrated can run DSD, which is not something the P-5 can do.
I don't know enough to KNOW. Would that be a SOFTWARE change or require a change in hardware?
Too much is never enough
I don't know if it COULD be done with software, but in this case it's a different chip, so hardware. The integrated uses an ESS Sabre32 chip, the P-5 uses a Burr-Brown PCM1798. Not only can the Sabre do native DSD, but it is apparently a better regarded chip as well.
I use the DAC in my P5 for the TV ONLY. For that, nearly any DAC is FINE.
I have something else for more 'serious' duties.
Too much is never enough
Provided two amps of identical design, with the deceit that one was designed by a famous engineer - I suspect most, myself included, would say the "designer" amp sounded better.
I would not be surprised if the a21 and a23 sound very much the same, though I do tend to notice an ease with more muscular amps, so who knows. Paired a23s are a different story - sounds like an interesting setup.
Thanks for the info.
Such testing assumes 'blind' in some fashion to what is under 'test'
Now, let's just say I install a LINE LEVEL crossover so my amps are no longer required to process the full range signnal HALF of which is now 'out of band'. That in effect buys me as much as 3db additional power. WHAM. All of a sudden I have roughly the equivilent of 2x400 per panel, as much as 2x the power of an A21. Edge to biamp? A21 still sound 'better'?
I recently heard 700$ (not a misprint) worth of EMO Monobloc driving a pair of 7000$ speakers at a demo. The amps that came with the speakers? 54,000$ worth of amp, one of which failed to 'light' which is why a volunteer was sought from the attendees to run home real quick and fetch a replacement.
NO COMPLAINTS. Sounded FINE.
Lots of the home owners gear in the shot, too, but the speakers? I think they had ALL Seas Prestige drivers or equal.
Too much is never enough
Whether JC designed or not, my thinking is that Parasound's product line delivers more "bang for the buck" than most/any high end products.
I think they've got a good overall product philosophy: High quality sound, low glitz/glamour factor.
:)
I would further wager 'higher than industry average' resale value for 'used' pieces.
Too much is never enough
I have the next best thing:
Parasound P5 preamp which is part of the new integrated and a pair of A23s which are cousins of the amp IN the new integrated.
NICE: Not only does the balance work as advertised, but the sub has a front panel level control.
Tone Defeat switch? Good. And I set a slight boost to bass and treble to simulate what WAS old-school 'loudness' contour. Good for late nite listening without disturbing sleepers.
Too much is never enough
like the old Quads (I believe) used to have.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
Then Antony Michelson decided he wouldn't.
The conformity in hi-fi is suffocating.
A V-tilt, like the tilt control featured on old Quad preamps, twirled the frequency response around a central point of around 1 kHz, Tilt up for warmer, richer sound. Tilt down to lighten up the bass.
Easy and instinctive. There was more to the old Quad preamps. Very useful tone controls.
I was going to play a joke on Antony and review the V-tilt anyway, even though it didn't exist.
Thanks! for sharing- ST.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
