Forté Model 5 on the way

[Feanor]

Awww man sorry to hear Feanor. I was hoping the Forte would be up your alley because they've always been dear to me although I haven't heard one in over ten years. Funny the exact reasons you do not like it are the same reasons i do like the Fortes. Just goes to show its all about personal preference. At least you gave it a shot.

Hi, Hills,

Yes, personal preference is a big factor. I'll confess that I'm tolerant of brightness & crispness that others can't stand. What is bothersome in my scenario was the insistence of a few gurus that my preference was wrong or misguided, that is, if I were to become an experience listener & audiophile that I ought to abandon this preference.

These folks like a smoother, more relaxed sound, especially on the top end, (like you, I guess). Nothing wrong with a preference, BUT instead of acknowledging that their own preferences are just that, they contrive a technical explanations to justify themselves and contemn people who don't share their preference.

Their theory revolves around the fact, (yes, it is a fact), that negative feedback produces more high-order harmonic distortion, (HOHD). It is also probably true that appreciable HOHD sounds nasty. However there is a lack of scientific proof that very tiny amounts of HOHD are audible or disagreeable, yet they insist that even the most minute amounts of HOHD sound hideous. They tend to prefer zero negative feedback or, at least, very low, non-global feedback. However designs that achieve this tend to have higher low-order harmonic distortion, (2nd & 3rd order), and higher overall distortion.

It is probably true that relatively more low-order distortion is more euphonic than relatively less high-order distortion. However distortion is still distortion, and there is point were relatively high "nice" distortion becomes distinctly less accurate -- and potentially less desirable -- than very low "nasty" distortion.

[E-Stat]

Gee Feanor, I don't know how to respond. It would definitely help for us to hear each other's systems to evaluate the overall synergy. I've never heard either the SDS nor the Forte, so I just don't have any perspective.

Here are some random thoughts:

The new 1.7 is considered brighter than the 1.6. Is the 1.6 itself a bit rolled off? I heard the 3.7 at Harry's and found it had a nice extension at the top.

Passive arrangements are definitely subject to top end roll off if the capacitance isn't extremely low. Do you know the total value of your cables?

My '81 Stasis was always sweet and extended at the top. Where the VTLs are far superior is providing a much more lifelike rendering in the midrange. I confess that I do not find overly etched highs realistic. The real treasure lies in the midrange.

[Feanor]

Gee Feanor, I don't know how to respond. It would definitely help for us to hear each other's systems to evaluate the overall synergy. I've never heard either the SDS nor the Forte, so I just don't have any perspective.

Here are some random thoughts:

The new 1.7 is considered brighter than the 1.6. Is the 1.6 itself a bit rolled off? I heard the 3.7 at Harry's and found it had a nice extension at the top.

Passive arrangements are definitely subject to top end roll off if the capacitance isn't extremely low. Do you know the total value of your cables?
...

I've often heard passive preamps blamed for dulling the dynamics, though I never felt I had a problem with the SDS amp. With the Forte I was using 4 foot cable, either Blue Jeans LC-1 at 12.2 pF/ft or Belden 1505F at 17 pF/ft.

Thef Forte is much softer than the SDS; but while the latter are bright, I've never considered it "etched" or grainy.

I am giving serious thought to getting an active preamp once again. Presently I'm looking at an Audio Research LS9, (solid state), on the 'Gon. I expect that it's about as clean & neutral as I'll get for the money, and it's a balanced design.

[E-Stat]

I am giving serious thought to getting an active preamp once again. Presently I'm looking at an Audio Research LS9, (solid state), on the 'Gon. I expect that it's about as clean & neutral as I'll get for the money, and it's a balanced design.

Good luck on that option!

[blackraven]

I would consider a tube preamp for the SDS. I have the CDA amp and my tube preamp smooths out the brightness and the sound is stunning. Here is an AR LS-2b at a great price, it comes with a remote-

Audio Research LS 2B mk 11 R | Tube | Fairview, North Carolina 28730 | AudiogoN - The High-end Audio Community

I have good friend that runs this with a pair of Nuforce Model 9se monoblocks and PSB Synchrony's.

This Van Alstine T-8+ with remote is excellent as well, it is the preamp that I should have bought instead of the Hybrid Ultra preamp.

Van Alstine Transcendence 8+ With Phono and Remote | Tube | Sugar Land, Texas 77479 | AudiogoN - The High-end Audio Community

[Feanor]

I would consider a tube preamp for the SDS. I have the CDA amp and my tube preamp smooths out the brightness and the sound is stunning. Here is an AR LS-2b at a great price, it comes with a remote-

Audio Research LS 2B mk 11 R | Tube | Fairview, North Carolina 28730 | AudiogoN - The High-end Audio Community

I have good friend that runs this with a pair of Nuforce Model 9se monoblocks and PSB Synchrony's.

This Van Alstine T-8+ with remote is excellent as well, it is the preamp that I should have bought instead of the Hybrid Ultra preamp.

Van Alstine Transcendence 8+ With Phono and Remote | Tube | Sugar Land, Texas 77479 | AudiogoN - The High-end Audio Community

I understand where you're coming from on the tube preamp option. My current train of thought is that I will eventually look at other power amp options, maybe a Threshold or the like that is inherently sweeter on the top end. Unlike so tube purists, I believe you can add some filtering effect with a tube pre, but I'm leaning to let the power amp do the work.

In any case I bought the Audio Research LS9, HERE is the link. Not necessarily the lowest price at which LS9's can be had, but better than average copy I'm hoping. I like the reduced gain mod as the SDS is quite sensitive.

BTW, I've always loved the "technical" but elegant look of ARC equipment.

[blackraven]

Congrats on the LS9. I really like AR gear as well. I am sure it will be a great addition to your system.

[Feanor]

...
My '81 Stasis was always sweet and extended at the top. Where the VTLs are far superior is providing a much more lifelike rendering in the midrange. I confess that I do not find overly etched highs realistic. The real treasure lies in the midrange.

Do you have further thoughts on the Threshold? I'm feeling that I'd like to avoid tube power amps and some older models might be in my price range.

[E-Stat]

Do you have further thoughts on the Threshold?

I remain quite attached to mine having used it essentially daily since 1981. By any measure, it remains an exceptionally good amplifier three decades later. As I mentioned before, it has wonderfully sweet top end response, solid but not overly lean bass (has reasonably and not overblown damping factor) and great dynamic response - especially at the bottom of the scale.

I remember years ago borrowing Conrad-Johnson MV-75As from JWC to compare with the Stasis on my Acoustats. While they were a bit superior in the midrange, they positively fell apart at the lowest levels where resolution disappeared. The Stasis resolves all the way down to the lowest levels in a remarkable way. Below about 2 watts, you are effectively hearing only the class A voltage amp with the current mirror idle.

You may recall that Harry Pearson was quite taken with the 2 and gave a glowing review in issue 19. I went upstairs to review it and as an aside, remembered another detail. I think I've mentioned that I have a nearly complete set of TAS starting from Issue 1. There are a couple of holes, but the last time I visited Sea Cliff, Harry gave me issue 19 and signed the index. Anyway, I've put together a small care package on the Stasis for you perusal.

Click here

[Feanor]

I remain quite attached to mine having used it essentially daily since 1981. By any measure, it remains an exceptionally good amplifier three decades later. As I mentioned before, it has wonderfully sweet top end response, solid but not overly lean bass (has reasonably and not overblown damping factor) and great dynamic response - especially at the bottom of the scale.

I remember years ago borrowing Conrad-Johnson MV-75As from JWC to compare with the Stasis on my Acoustats. While they were a bit superior in the midrange, they positively fell apart at the lowest levels where resolution disappeared. The Stasis resolves all the way down to the lowest levels in a remarkable way. Below about 2 watts, you are effectively hearing only the class A voltage amp with the current mirror idle.

You may recall that Harry Pearson was quite taken with the 2 and gave a glowing review in issue 19. I went upstairs to review it and as an aside, remembered another detail. I think I've mentioned that I have a nearly complete set of TAS starting from Issue 1. There are a couple of holes, but the last time I visited Sea Cliff, Harry gave me issue 19 and signed the index. Anyway, I've put together a small care package on the Stasis for you perusal.

Click here

Thank you!!

How does this Threshold S/150 II sound to you? ...

threshold 150 stasis S150 11 | Solid state | Fairview, North Carolina 28730 | AudiogoN - The High-end Audio Community

[E-Stat]

How does this Threshold S/150 II sound to you? ...

Although I haven't heard that model, it is a slightly newer version, the first of which to use a toroidal transformer. It has a somewhat lower output and fewer output transistors for 75 watts per channel into 8 ohms and double that into 4. Appears to still have a pair of large Mallory caps. Should be similar sounding to mine at an equivalent power level.

Here's the innards

Has a taller, but less deep chassis vs. the 3. You'll note this guy added bypass caps to the mains as well. BTW, the first four digits of the serial number are the year and month of manufacture. There is an S/300 on ebay with a matching preamp where you can make out the serial to be a 1983 model. Similarly, I saw a 400A where the seller said it was a "twenty year old amp". Its serial number indicated that it was built in 1979. Which makes perfect sense since it was the forerunner to the Stasis 3 introduced in 1980.

[Feanor]

Although I haven't heard that model, it is a slightly newer version, the first of which to use a toroidal transformer. It has a somewhat lower output and fewer output transistors for 75 watts per channel into 8 ohms and double that into 4. Appears to still have a pair of large Mallory caps. Should be similar sounding to mine at an equivalent power level.

Here's the innards

Has a taller, but less deep chassis vs. the 3. You'll note this guy added bypass caps to the mains as well. BTW, the first four digits of the serial number are the year and month of manufacture. There is an S/300 on ebay with a matching preamp where you can make out the serial to be a 1983 model. Similarly, I saw a 400A where the seller said it was a "twenty year old amp". Its serial number indicated that it was built in 1979. Which makes perfect sense since it was the forerunner to the Stasis 3 introduced in 1980.

Great info. His price doesn't seem out of line considering the supposed upgrades.

I'm also looking at an Ayre V-3 MkII on the 'Gon. Any experience with Ayre? This one's quite a lot more money than the Threshold, though ... HERE