|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.217.203.201
I am trying to decide on these locally, the Edge amp is somewhat more expensive.
I know in comparison the P-800 has 400 watts rating vs 225 watt rating of the Edge, but I'm not so much after power, I want the best sound.. I know I won't be sure until I try in my system, but what is your opinion on this?
The P-800 is also 10 years older than the Edge.Thanks,
Follow Ups:
The P-800 is one of the very best amplifiers ever made, but it must be used with a reference-class Accuphase preamp.
Dear George
From my research into the reviews and comments on amps, I get the feeling that Accuphase amps are not getting the exposure they deserve in these forums and others.However I notice a fanatical following for them among a few audiophiles.Is there a problem with the PR of the company? Or is it because it doesnt advertise enough? I wouldnt say they are too expensive.They are in my opinion fantastic looking.Do you think they need to have a more aggressive ad campaign or it doesnt matter?
Regards
Bill
In the 70's, their distributors advertise their products, and lightly advertised in the 80's as well.Accuphase is a rather conservative company that believes that products should speak for themself. Their products certainly have.
When the original products were released in 1973/74, they represented a major breakthru in solid-state sound reproduction, with superior linearity being the key component.
These products took the world by storm. The C-200, P-300 and T-100 were instantly recognized as the new reference in audio across the board.
They were built like farberge egg's, had the best circuit design and layout, and were clearly the most accurate, linear, transparent, refined and true-to-life components ever seen in audio.
The problem with their recognition today is simple. They have not changed the focus of their audio quest.
But, the goal in audio reproduction for most HAS changed alot since then. With all the emphesis on imaging, soundstaging, prat, slam, ect, few care to listen to what things actually sound like.
.
The problem of leisure, what to do for pleasure. Ideal love a new purchase, a market of the senses. Dream of the perfect life.
I don't think this guy is anything but a shill for ikkyfaze, every post is "ikkyfaze is the Best ever"! I think he stands alone.
nt.
.
The problem of leisure, what to do for pleasure. Ideal love a new purchase, a market of the senses. Dream of the perfect life.
I have a new Audible Illusions Modulus 3a tubed pre-amp.. one of the best pre-amps.. why won't it work?
It may suffice, but the C-280 will be the best match. Please see my email.
Without checking the sensitivities of both products your preamp should work.Many of todays design and manufacture marks design the pre and the power together for the ultimate synergy within that product line. That's not to say there are components that can preform more to the satisfaction of the buyer who would consider those other components "better". The basic design as well as its most recent upgrade of the M3A is dated although still very capable. Newer designs can offer more staging, dynamics, silence, etc. the differences can be quit startling.
Every time I've upgraded my preamp I'm amazed at just how important the roll of the preamp is in the chain.
Vic, thanks for responding.
I am curious, can you give me an example of a new pre-amp that is better than the one I have, and for roughly the same $$ that would have more dynamics, quieter, (why would you want more stages?)?
After my time with my M3A my dream preamp fell into my lap and I haven't looked back. I think George Mann's advise can be trusted. I haven't any experience with other tubed pre's in your range, sorry. Audio Horizons, ModWright, and of course I'm a huge Ayre fan but those are simply guesses on my part.
My C-240 betters every other makers top-class preamp that I have pitted it against. Yours, the CAT Ultimate, ect.The C-280 betters the C-240 in every regard, and was concidered to be the absolute reference in preamps until the C-2800 came along, just as the C-200/240 was before it.
The difference between Accuphase and others is in how accurate, linear and true to the original event/record their components are.
In these categories, Accuphase remains unchallenged, but one must use both their amp and preamp to achieve it.
In my email, I told you that I had compaired the CAT Ultimate to my C-200 using my P-300. I also had a Bedini 25/25 and Krell KSA-50 that I used in the comparison as well.
Although these 2 preamps are roughly in the same class sonically, the C-200 was clearly superior in the categories listed above, as heard thru all 3 amp's, and a much better match for the P-300.
Using the C-200/P-300 combo, I was in the studio/venue. Using the CAT with the P-300, I was in a hi-fi salon.;O)
Where do you put the Accuphase C-2400 in this hierachy?
The C-2400 is a more linear C-240 (former flagship). Both of these preamps deserve a best buy rating, offering a perfect balance of accuracy and linearity + musicality and refinement.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: