Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
70.196.204.90
Hey guys,
Thanks all for the advice on the NAD for driving my new MMG's (just ordered them!)
So now I'm looking at ARCAM. Boy this stuff is pricey, but I've seen some used that I might be able to afford. However, the used stuff seems to be primarily refurbished stuff, or "factory refreshed" with limited warranties.
Any thoughts on the quality of ARCAM (sound and reliability) vs. the higher end NAD stuff? I've never heard ARCAM and can't even figure out how to buy one...any suggestions on where to buy one, and models that would be capable of driving the MMG's?
Thanks again for all the positive feedback.
Zdog
Follow Ups:
Seriously, look at the Emotiva site. They make several amps which would be good matches for your MMGs. I have a couple of their products and they make some seriously good stuff.
LineSource
Zdog, I meant to ask this earlier. What kind of source(s) will you be using? Do you already have the/a player?
Have you taken a look at Emotiva?
LineSource
Emotiva looks like a good starting point.
200 watts per channel on a closeout Emotiva amp for $299
https://emotiva.com/products/amplifiers/upa-200
I bought a couple of the last generation monoblocs (UPA-1) and made the MMG's sing. A quality product at a very good price. I am not a "fanboy" but I appreciate a good bargain.
Lets all talk the same units, it's a 125 watt amp (@8 ohms). However 125 watts can be more than enough and the Emotivas work well with Maggies.
Yeah, with the XPA-100 mono amps for 808.00 dollars you not only get good power for the MMGs at 400 watts into 4 ohms, but biamped power to boot. I would personally go this route rather than the XPA-2 because each XPA-100 has 60,000 uF of storage capacitance for a total of 120,000. That provides some serious current which these speakers need. The XPA-2 because of how the caps are wired only provides 45,000 uF which is shared between both channels. For a couple hundred bucks more the XPA-1Ls put out 500 watts into 4 ohms with 90,000 uF of storage capacitance and run on pure class A up to 35 watts, switching over to class A/B above that. And if you don't like their stuff you can send it back within thirty days for a full refund.
LineSource
At $149, I had to try one. Hooked up to my upstairs MMGs - it did great!Note this is a Class H Amplifier with tracking power supply rails at higher power levels.
"The hardest thing of all is to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if there is no cat" - Confucius
Edits: 08/26/14
Ha ha! Bigguy, one does get tweaking & project ideas when these little things show up out of the blue for such low prices.There's a malformed DNA string in me that's got me looking at these amps as a solution to a problem that I don't have at all, LOL!
Edits: 08/26/14
It may depend on which one you have in mind. By and large, Arcam makes very good audio. I have yet to hear anything of theirs disappoint me. However, I have never heard Maggies with them. You'd have to ask Arcam if their current lineup is rated for 4ohms. (BTW, MMGs are pretty stable at it, hardly ever go any lower).
A former neighbor had an Arcam Avr 360 receiver hooked up to 5 mid-sized Paradigm speakers and his apartment rocked in surround mode, even with the subwoofer off. So, even with Maggies being less efficient, something like this could work. Like Satie mentioned elsewhere, the subwoofer could help unload stress from the main amps.
This was over a year ago. Arcam must have new models out...perhaps a 360, or higher, is out there looking for a new owner?
Do look into Anthem. Although they were kind of "behind" on the HT part when I last looked at them, their audio is always solid. They may have caught up.
Which reminds me, Emotiva is coming in strong into the HT arena. Can't say that they have what you need but if you look...who knows!
Anyway, we can always go check on your specific candidates.
You are going to be hard pressed to find a relatively inexpensive AV receiver capable fo delivering the kind of power your MMG's deserve. I would try finding a used stereo amp that will give you 200wpc and then use your NAD as a preamp and amplifier for the other 3.1 channels. Does your NAD have a pre-out that allows you to connect an amplifier for the front channels?
On my integrated 312 (or 314?) the amp is much better than the pre-amp. So, if their amp is not good enough, then the pre-may not be worth using either. BTW I'm using that NAD on my MMGs as my rear speakers.
Arcam is, I believe, better than NAD, but you really would get much more bang for the buck if you were to buy used rather than new. For example, a Bryston 3b-ST would be much better I think, and still have 5 years left on the warranty--see attached link. I have no affiliation with the seller of the Bryston, and am just showing you that to give you an idea of what you can get used.
Thanks Slapshot! We wants the precious...
unfortunately, I need a 5.1 channel or greater as I'd like to run HT with a pair of MMG's up front.
I'll start searching for Bryston...always thought this stuff was way out of my price range.
thanks again,
Zdog
Never had MMGs, but my SMGs weren't so awesome with an NAD amp. When I powered them with an Adcom GFA-555II or a subsequent Parasound HCA 2200ii? They were pretty incredible.
Doh! I just sold and shipped today my adcom GFP-565. Sad to see it go, but I'm giving up the 2-channel for AV/HT.
I'm at a loss now...not much love for the NAD in this crowd. What to do what to do...ARCAM reviews and problems scare me a bit.
thanks again for the feedback. Nice folks here on this list. I will keep looking.
Zdog
Ironically, a few weeks ago I found a refurbished Denon AVR-4520CI for a friend for a bargain price of $800. Something like it would have been great for you because it has most of the current HT features PLUS a solid power supply for surround + Maggies.
The irony is that I then found him a AVR-5308CI (as another bargain but much more dough) and he let go of the 4520CI.
Anyway, let's keep looking.
We love NAD. I even run a NAD pre-amp on my MMG system. Its just that low power receivers are a bit disappointing. I can't even make a recommendation for a multiple channel receiver, there are maybe a handful of good ones and tons of average stuff. Any way we can talk you into 2 channel?
Edits: 08/26/14 08/26/14
No matter what anybody "rated" their preamps, I never found any of the Adcom GFP series very good sounding. Their amps? Simple, straightforward circuit that could sound incredible with the right loudspeakers.
LOL! David, I use HCA Parasound myself (2, on bi-amp).
Yet, it was my old NAD 2200PE power amp that first made my MMGs display untypical dynamics and slammy bass. The first time was playing David Sanborn's Tequila...those bass notes at the start show the beauty of a well-designed strong power supply.
The original NAD equipment was well designed & decently built for the times. It is a pity that all this has been rendered "unrefined" after 30+ years. I keep wishing to do surgery and rebuild the NAD...wishful thinking : - )) .
Yeah, the 2200 was a really great amp with a number of speakers I used it with, but oddly, it didn't have very good control of the bass with my Maggie SMGs.
Weird - maybe the MMG presents a greatly different load in the bass than the SMG did.
In my case, the preamp/linestage was either a NYAL Moscode Minuet or an ARC LS3. Using either, the NAD had poor bass control, and the Adcom rocked the house. I'll never knock the NAD 2200 - it was the best amp at ANY price I tried with my DALI 8s, but it faltered with my Maggie SMGs.
Goes to show you - DON'T judge ANY given component on its own.
David, your observation is right on the money as far as what would have been perceived. It would have appeared as if "out of control".
The interesting thing is that it was the dynamic punch of the 2200 which revealed a weakness in many Maggies, more so in earlier days. Their frames were a bit too weak. When put to such impressive dynamism as the NAD could send at low frequencies, the sound came out muddled. Strong bass was perceived as fuzzy and out of control.
At the time I hooked up the NAD to my MMGs (which are VERY old), I had already cured the weakeness. Bass from the NAD was tight, clean, and plentiful.
Yet, later on I had a taste of what your heard. One day I conducted some tests of "Razoring" (a tweak by inmate Dawnrazor [on sabbatical] : - )) ) which went on for several weeks. At some point I used the NAD while I had removed the "cure" mentioned earlier. HORRIBLE fuzz on bass-heavy and on full orchestral passages!
The "cure" is to add frame reinforcement. Or, like some do, to replace the factory frame. In any event, if someone had applied the same thing to the SMGs, I am sure that they would have improved also.
So, any of many Maggies would have shown some stress unless reinforced. Actually, the issue persists...
Others will have better suggestions for 5.1; I'm strictly a 2 channel person. :)
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: