Audio Research LS3 or Classe CP47.5

[Afman]

I have been searching to purchase a preamp amd amp. I am driving a pair of Celestion SL600 and am going to use a Classe CA-101 amp and trying to decide between the LS3 or the CP-47.5

I am looking for advice on which has a better sound. Also would getting another CA-101 and bridge enhance the sound.


Thanks in advance for your opinions and help.

[Justlisten2]

It all depends on your musical tastes and what you are looking for. I've heard both of these preamps and they are very nice. If you are looking for a warmer, more musical sound, you would want the Classe. If you're looking for more detail or definition, you'd be better served with the Audio Research. There is no one singular better for every one. That is why there are so many different flavors.

Good Luck,
John

[dennis]

Afman....IF you like your Celestion speakers and like their "musical" sound you are probably more into "musical than "detail"......Classe pre-amps are warm with an expansive soundstage....VERY NICE.......DETAIL can sometimes relate to edge and we don't like "edge"....I think you'll find the Classe easier to listen to over an extended listening session...."detail is great if your listening for 15-30 minutes....from 30 min. to 30 hrs. "musical" is nicer..

[Afman]

Thanks for the input.

[Mr Peabody]

The good news is you are in a win win situation. Both of these preamps would be very palatable. I disagree that detail equates to edgy. I could certainly listen to Audio Research for hours without any problem. However, you already have Classe amps and I am a firm believer in synergy which would cause me to lean toward the Classe in your situation. If possible though, I'd recommend auditioning each in your home to see which you like best.

[DMK]

[QUOTE=Mr Peabody] I disagree that detail equates to edgy.


Absolutely right. Detail leads to "more" musical. Over-brightness leads to edginess, not detail. if that were the case, we'd prefer veiled sounding components to gloss over the detail. Not the case, at least for you and I.

[dennis]

Mr. Peabody And Dmk......i Said Detail "sometimes" Means Edgy And If You Don't Agree With That Statement You Don't Belong In This Post. You're Audiophile Sound System Would Be A 'top Notch' Boom Box With Plenty Of Sizzle...........detail Does Relate Directly To Edge...whether You Like It Or Not.........in Some Instances!

[DMK]

Mr. Peabody And Dmk......i Said Detail "sometimes" Means Edgy And If You Don't Agree With That Statement You Don't Belong In This Post. You're Audiophile Sound System Would Be A 'top Notch' Boom Box With Plenty Of Sizzle...........detail Does Relate Directly To Edge...whether You Like It Or Not.........in Some Instances!

Sorry, I disagree. It isn't the detail that caused edginess, it's a frequency response imbalance i.e brightness (usually). Sometimes repositioning speakers cures the problem. But in all cases, the more detailed piece of gear should sound the best because it's passing the most musical information. It's only when that information is out of balance that the sound becomes edgy. If you want a "musical" amp, that's often a euphemism for something that smooths out the detail. If that's your preference, go for it, but you're missing out on the detail. The kicker is to keep all the detail and smooth out the FR problems, thereby giving us both a musical and a detailed presentation.

Oh, and as for belonging on this or any other post, I see that you're a newbie here according to the number of times you've posted and I don't recall seeing you here back in the old days before the forum changed formats. So I'll just say that this forum is public and anyone and everyone is welcome whether we agree with their opinions or not so long as they aren't verbally abusive. I disagree with your opinion but please continue posting! As I always say, if we agree on everything, one of us isn't necessary! The other can get all our points acrosss. Quite honestly, the disagreements are usually more interesting than the agreements!

[Mr Peabody]

At first I didn't even want to justify your remarks, but I don't want to leave anyone the impression that I agree with you even a little bit. If you don't want detail you might as well, have a boombox. Detail has nothing to do with edgyness. Maybe we should make sure we are talking apples and apples. Edgyness to me is harsh, or distorted around the edges. Detail is just what it implies, more audio information. If detail is bad why did they keep improving on DAC's to pull info off a CD? Why have better equipment at all? It's all, about detail. To substantiate your claim, you said, "in some instances", give me an instance.

I have been fortunate enough to have listened to Audio Research gear and can say from experience it is good stuff and I never heard any edgyness. I have also heard Classe. Either one would be a fine choice. Actually, in my opinion, I thought the Classe was more detailed. I heard the Classe with B&W and Hale speakers. The Audio Research with B&W and Martin Logan. AR & ML was a magical combination. I am not a B&W fan. Dynaudio runs circles around them at any price point.

[dennis]

Mr. Peabody......I see where you're coming from and you have a point....what I mean by sometimes for eg: is the fleetwood mac greatest hits disc tha t came out a couple years ago....another one of those "REMASTERED" discs.....UPDATED...Made BETTER....yah right.......the dire straits series..."REMASTERED....IT MUST SOUND BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL DISCS"....RIGHT.....THEY DONT SOUND NEARLY AS "MUSICAL {analog}"......In these cases ..the REMASTERED discs are "bright and nasty....they are edgy sounding.....maybe the new remastered "for car stereo and Boom-boxes" disc that accentuates the treble"sizzle" and Bass"completely oversaturated"...is not remastered for "high -end"2 ch. stereo.....we're the minority ...You surely know that!

[Mr Peabody]

I think "remastering" is a way to try and make more money off older recordings. I have heard some that were terrible and some that did improve the sound quality. My experience with remasters is not so much edgy, it's more like they sound somehow artificial. Some of the noise may be gone out of the background but it's like they also stripped the soul out of it. I heard one explanation that original masters made for vinyl had to be massively equalized to sound good when transferred to vinyl and these are the masters used to press some of the early CD's and now that they have figured out the correct way to master for CD, they are going back and trying to correct these early CD transfers. If true that's only one aspect of what they are doing. I don't think an EQ adjustment alone could account for the difference in some remasters.

You should list your equipment on your profile. Let us see what you listen to.

[dennis]

I think "remastering" is a way to try and make more money off older recordings. I have heard some that were terrible and some that did improve the sound quality. My experience with remasters is not so much edgy, it's more like they sound somehow artificial. Some of the noise may be gone out of the background but it's like they also stripped the soul out of it. I heard one explanation that original masters made for vinyl had to be massively equalized to sound good when transferred to vinyl and these are the masters used to press some of the early CD's and now that they have figured out the correct way to master for CD, they are going back and trying to correct these early CD transfers. If true that's only one aspect of what they are doing. I don't think an EQ adjustment alone could account for the difference in some remasters.

You should list your equipment on your profile. Let us see what you listen to.

I've been trying for a long time to express the feeling I have for the "NEW REMASTERED VERSION" and you hit it right on......they took out the "SOUL" of the music and made it sound very analitical......thank you...now the question is " DON'T THEY REALIZE WHAT THEY'VE DONE ? And why are they doing it ?