Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30
  1. #1
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    Forté Model 5 on the way

    Acting on suggestions for a more "musical" amp than my Class D Audio SDS-258, I "won" a Forté Model 5 on eBay. The Forté was the very low end of recommendations but about all I was willing to pay at this time.

    The Forté 5 and SDS-258 should be a very yin-yang comparison, but we'll see.

    -back.jpg-front.jpg
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails -front-top.jpg   -front.jpg  

  2. #2
    Forum Regular harley .guy07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Springfield, Mo
    Posts
    1,594
    While I have never heard that amp before in my life I was real surprised when after owning my Class D Audio 440c amp for almost a year and trying my best to live with it I one day after trying to listen to my system for a long session and making my ears bleed from the brightness of the Class d amp went ahead and hooked back up my old trusty Adcom 545 II amp that I bought brand new back in 94. I was shocked at how much I missed the easy to listen to nature of my Adcom and class A or good A/B amps in general compared to the Class D. I listened for many hours that night and new I had realized that the fight to make the Class D work in my system was over. It just was not for me and never would be. I knew that I wanted higher end and more power than the Adcom which led me to my Pass amp now.

    My point is that I will be interested to see how you feel about the Class D Audio amp once you take some time and listen to a good Class A/B or Class A amp. You opinion may differ from mine and you will go whole hearted back to your trusty Class D amp but then again you might just realize what you missed out on while using it. let us know.

    Marantz SR5008(HT)
    Nu Force P8 Preamp (2 channel)
    Pass Labs X150.5(2 channel)
    Adcom 545 mk2 power amp(rear channel amp)
    Spatial Audio M3 Turbo S Mains Speakers
    Dayton 8" HO custom sealed subwoofer(2 channel)
    Yamaha NS-c444 center channel
    Emotiva ERD-1 surround speakers
    JBL e250p subwoofer highly modified
    Samsung 46" LED TV
    OPPO BDP-83 blue ray/multi format player
    ps-audio NuWave dac (2 channel)
    Dell I660 music server running fidelizer windows 8 audio optimizer
    PS Audio Quintet power center



  3. #3
    Forum Regular blackraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    5,421
    Congrats on the new amp Feanor. Post your impressions when you get it.

    Harely, I find that my Class D Audio amp really shines with a tube preamp. It loses any brightness and is smooth as can be. I ran mine with my Grant Fidelity unit. My son is currently using it with his Maverick Audio DAC/Preamp for now till I can buy another unit.
    Pass Labs X250 amp, BAT Vk-51se Preamp,
    Thorens TD-145 TT, Bellari phono preamp, Nagaoka MP-200 Cartridge
    Magnepan QR1.6 speakers
    Luxman DA-06 DAC
    Van Alstine Ultra Plus Hybrid Tube DAC
    Dual Martin Logan Original Dynamo Subs
    Parasound A21 amp
    Vintage Luxman T-110 tuner
    Magnepan MMG's, Grant Fidelity DAC-11, Class D CDA254 amp
    Monitor Audio S1 speakers, PSB B6 speakers
    Vintage Technic's Integrated amp
    Music Hall 25.2 CDP
    Adcom GFR 700 AVR
    Cables- Cardas, Silnote, BJC
    Velodyne CHT 8 sub

  4. #4
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by harley .guy07 View Post
    My point is that I will be interested to see how you feel about the Class D Audio amp once you take some time and listen to a good Class A/B or Class A amp. You opinion may differ from mine and you will go whole hearted back to your trusty Class D amp but then again you might just realize what you missed out on while using it. let us know.
    But of course I have had some experience with a good Class A/B amp, my Monarchy SM-70 Pro's. They were high-bias without global feedback.

    It's sort of odd. I preferred the Monarchys to my previous Tripath-based Bel Canto amp with about 70% of recordings; when I later got the CDA SDS-258, I still preferred the Monarchys on about 30% of recordings. But here's the thing: the recordings with which I preferred class D amps were the best recording, (i.e. the ones I thought the best regardless of equipment).

    However upon the advice of the great guru and opinionator, Morricab, at AA, I decided to give the process at least one more iteration. Morricab recommended the Forte 5 as low cost option that came close to delivering the qualities he like. (OTOH, he had reservations about the Monarchy SM-70 Pro's though not the SE-250 hybrids.)

  5. #5
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    ARRIVED! the Forté Model 5

    My Forté 5 arrived yesterday after a quick transit considering the need for cross-border handling.

    My initial impression is that the
    Forté Model 5 is an easy listen and thus pretty much lives up to its billing. Positive characteristics are:
    • A silky, mellow top end that is, at the same time, pretty transparent and grainless
    • As smooth mid-range, (some have called it "liquid"), that's especially nice with vocals
    • A slightly warm bass, but not too prominent or boomy.


    The
    Forté 5 is a high bias A/B design without global feedback; 100 wpc at 8 ohms. It shares these technical characteristics with my former Monarchy SM-70 Pro's and sound is somewhat similar too, especially the treble and mid-range.

    The
    Forté 5 is a big contrast to my Class D Audio SDS-258. Like most class D's apparently, and some other s/s designs, the SDS has a bright treble that can sound rather shrill with some recordings and upstream components. However I think the SDS has the edge for transparency, imaging, and (I suspect at this point) width & height of soundstage. Further more I feel the SDS has better PRaT, (microdynamics) and a leaner but solider bass. (We have to acknowledge the 20 y/o capacitors might the lessening the Forté 5's performance, especially in the bass.)

    But as I'm hearing it at the moment, my big problem with the
    Forté 5 is that it just sounds kinda boring. I'm not sure whether this is the mellow top end or a lack of PRaT or both -- TBD.

    Life has it's trade-offs. Throw enough money at a problem and you might find an ideal solution, e.g. a Pass Labs X150.5. But sort of investment is 'way out of my league.


    To be confirmed thru further listening, my assessment of the
    Forté 5 is that it's a nice choice vs. other older used s/s 100 wpc amps such as NAD, Adcom, or Parasound in the price range. The going price is about $400; (I was lucky to pay slightly less). It is likely to have sweeter, more transparent, less grainy highs than this sort of competition. However I wouldn't recommend it to folks with tube or otherwise warm-sounding upstream components -- the result could be very bland.

    The
    Forté 5 isn't the end of the line for me, (I hope!), but I stick with it for a short while at least. I might experiment with passively bi-amping my MG 1.6 speakers with the Forte 5 on top, (>700 Hz) and the SDS below. The Forté 5 is less sensitive than the SDS but the latter has volume pots so I can trim it to match; (both amps are 47k ohm input impedance).

  6. #6
    Forum Regular harley .guy07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Springfield, Mo
    Posts
    1,594
    You might be on to something there. I do remember the bass on my class d audio amp was very good and controlled. It might be the best of bothy worlds to put the Forte up top to get the grain free smooth top end and put the class d on bottom to get the bass that those are known for.

    Marantz SR5008(HT)
    Nu Force P8 Preamp (2 channel)
    Pass Labs X150.5(2 channel)
    Adcom 545 mk2 power amp(rear channel amp)
    Spatial Audio M3 Turbo S Mains Speakers
    Dayton 8" HO custom sealed subwoofer(2 channel)
    Yamaha NS-c444 center channel
    Emotiva ERD-1 surround speakers
    JBL e250p subwoofer highly modified
    Samsung 46" LED TV
    OPPO BDP-83 blue ray/multi format player
    ps-audio NuWave dac (2 channel)
    Dell I660 music server running fidelizer windows 8 audio optimizer
    PS Audio Quintet power center



  7. #7
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by harley .guy07 View Post
    You might be on to something there. I do remember the bass on my class d audio amp was very good and controlled. It might be the best of bothy worlds to put the Forte up top to get the grain free smooth top end and put the class d on bottom to get the bass that those are known for.
    So I tried passive biamping my Magneplanar MG 1.6QR's with the Forte 5 on top and the Class D Audio SDS-258 below. Note the the cross over is a rather low about 600 Hz. I was able to use my Dayton Omni-Mic system and the SDS' input pots to equalized the amps' output.

    Unfortunately the results were quite disappointing. The SDS restored the tight, controlled bass and the PRaT, that is, stored most of the "life" to the sound. The Forte ensured a mellower high top end than the SDS along. However the most of the midrange and low top were a complete disaster: the sound of brass instruments was tinny and that of strings just plain weird -- this despite that I used the Electri-Q equalized to yield a measurably smooth, flat response. (As usual I roll off the highs smoothly starting at about 4k Hz, down about 5 dB at 10k Hz.) Basically the mids and highs were kind of the worst of both worlds.

  8. #8
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127

    Progress report -- Disappointing

    If you are looking for a relaxed amp with above average power without going to a tube amp, maybe this Forté 5 is your ticket. To be sure, the Forté 5 has smooth, grain & etch free highs with good transparency, though subjectively a bit rolled-off. The midrange is sweet and relaxed; I'd say very nice with vocals. Bass is a bit warm but not boomy or prominent.

    However for my tastes the Forté 5 is just too relaxed -- frankly boring.

    I suspect the Forté 5's downside is a lack of PRaT, (so-called "pace, rhythm, and timing", a.k.a. microdynamics). Maybe this has to do with using this amp with my Magneplanar speakers. There ought to me enough power, say 150 wpc into 4 ohms, but I don't know whether the Forté 5 is a "high current" design.

    As a final test I'll try boosting the Forté 5's treble output using my Electri-Q Foobar plug-in to flat from the slightly rolled-off level I usually use. However I doubt this will solve the PRaT issue; if it doesn't I'll be selling the Forté 5 on pretty soon. Fortunately I got it a good price.

  9. #9
    frenchmon frenchmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    St. Charles Mo
    Posts
    3,271
    Sorry it did not work our for you. I have it on good word that Pass Labs and Maggies are a great match! Why not bite the bullet and be done...or look for one of those Threahold S/300? And what sound are you after?
    Music...let it into your soul and be moved....with Canton...Pure Music


    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    W10 i5 Quad core processor 8GB RAM/Jriver 20/ Fidelizer Optimizer/ iFI Micro DSD DAC-iUSB 3.0/Vincent SA - T1/Vincent SP-331 MK /MMF-7.1/2M BLACK/MS Phenomena ll+/Canton Vento 830.2

  10. #10
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by frenchmon View Post
    Sorry it did not work our for you. I have it on good word that Pass Labs and Maggies are a great match! Why not bite the bullet and be done...or look for one of those Threahold S/300? And what sound are you after?
    I'd be delighted to try either of these, but I'm rather poor and I can't spring that kind of money at the moment.

    My disappointment isn't very deep about the Forte 5; I'm not so silly as to assume I'd get nirvana for <$400. The Forte 5 was suggested as an amp with desirable sound characteristics (for cheap), specifically smooth highs. I honestly don't know whether the recommender really though that the Forte would be better all round than my Class D Audio -- in which case he'd be wrong -- but I do know that he is a hater of negative feedback regardless of tube or s/s.

    Actually I'm not all that impressed with the Forte 5's highs come to that. The highs sound rolled off and I feel that I'm missing instrument timbres from strings for example. If the recommender thought this is acceptable, he's wrong again.

  11. #11
    frenchmon frenchmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    St. Charles Mo
    Posts
    3,271
    Well you can try and enhance the Forte with sound enhancements like cables , cords and such. Also, synergy is a very real thing with gear...every thing does not work with every thing.

    On another note...would you know who this is performed by seeing you are very much into Classical music?

    20130618_135201.mp4 - YouTube
    Music...let it into your soul and be moved....with Canton...Pure Music


    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    W10 i5 Quad core processor 8GB RAM/Jriver 20/ Fidelizer Optimizer/ iFI Micro DSD DAC-iUSB 3.0/Vincent SA - T1/Vincent SP-331 MK /MMF-7.1/2M BLACK/MS Phenomena ll+/Canton Vento 830.2

  12. #12
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by frenchmon View Post
    Well you can try and enhance the Forte with sound enhancements like cables , cords and such. Also, synergy is a very real thing with gear...every thing does not work with every thing.

    On another note...would you know who this is performed by seeing you are very much into Classical music?

    20130618_135201.mp4 - YouTube
    I can't tell you who performed it but my guess is that the composer was George Friderick Handel, possible an overture to one of his many operas.

    Speaking of synergy, a possible problem in my case with the Forte 5 is that I'm using a passive preamp. The Forte might prefer an active preamp and/or i/c's shorter that the 4' ones I was using.

  13. #13
    Charm Thai™
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    862
    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.

  14. #14
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by TheHills44060 View Post
    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.

  15. #15
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    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.

  16. #16
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat View Post
    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.

  17. #17
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
    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!

  18. #18
    Forum Regular blackraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    5,421
    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
    Pass Labs X250 amp, BAT Vk-51se Preamp,
    Thorens TD-145 TT, Bellari phono preamp, Nagaoka MP-200 Cartridge
    Magnepan QR1.6 speakers
    Luxman DA-06 DAC
    Van Alstine Ultra Plus Hybrid Tube DAC
    Dual Martin Logan Original Dynamo Subs
    Parasound A21 amp
    Vintage Luxman T-110 tuner
    Magnepan MMG's, Grant Fidelity DAC-11, Class D CDA254 amp
    Monitor Audio S1 speakers, PSB B6 speakers
    Vintage Technic's Integrated amp
    Music Hall 25.2 CDP
    Adcom GFR 700 AVR
    Cables- Cardas, Silnote, BJC
    Velodyne CHT 8 sub

  19. #19
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by blackraven View Post
    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.

    -35jas7n.jpg -arcls9.jpg

  20. #20
    Forum Regular blackraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    5,421
    Congrats on the LS9. I really like AR gear as well. I am sure it will be a great addition to your system.
    Pass Labs X250 amp, BAT Vk-51se Preamp,
    Thorens TD-145 TT, Bellari phono preamp, Nagaoka MP-200 Cartridge
    Magnepan QR1.6 speakers
    Luxman DA-06 DAC
    Van Alstine Ultra Plus Hybrid Tube DAC
    Dual Martin Logan Original Dynamo Subs
    Parasound A21 amp
    Vintage Luxman T-110 tuner
    Magnepan MMG's, Grant Fidelity DAC-11, Class D CDA254 amp
    Monitor Audio S1 speakers, PSB B6 speakers
    Vintage Technic's Integrated amp
    Music Hall 25.2 CDP
    Adcom GFR 700 AVR
    Cables- Cardas, Silnote, BJC
    Velodyne CHT 8 sub

  21. #21
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat View Post
    ...
    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.

  22. #22
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
    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

  23. #23
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat View Post
    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

  24. #24
    Music Junkie E-Stat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
    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.

  25. #25
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat View Post
    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

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •