Mark Levinson

[Feanor]

....
Ajani

Why would that be a cheap shot? Peter never claimed to be an engineer and continuously corrects anyone who is under the impression that he is. He was a dealer who had close relationships to manufacturers. Basically an audiophile who has enough money to hire people to get him what he wants. He wants a DAC he hires the owner of Sonic Frontiers and Parts Express to help his own designer build one. he wants a turntable he - hires Guy Adams to build it.
...

It's true that we shouldn't under value Qvortrup's role. Components are designed by his hirelings to his taste, such as that is.

[Ajani]

It's true that we shouldn't under value Qvortrup's role. Components are designed by his hirelings to his taste, such as that is.

It really would be great to be a millionaire with hirelings to design products to suit my tastes.

[Mr Peabody]

RGA "I don't make cheap shots - I tell it like it is (like it is means like I hear it)."

You may hear but when you learn to listen then you might gain some insight.

RGA "And like I hear it is based on what else I have heard for the same money or less money. The people who get insulted "

First of all I am not insulted, I merely disagree with you and went on record for those who have not heard Levinson and may be interested. I have no reason to defend the brand other than you are off base in slamming their amps. Just as you are on most of your rants against anything solid state.

RGA "rarely have heard what I have heard and perhaps if they got off their ass and auditioned stuff I would not have to read about mediocre overpriced stuff being raved about because it beats other overpriced mediocre stuff."

I can find this same quote on several threads and it's your way of dismissing everything not RGA. Obviously I have heard a good selection of Levinson or I would not have voiced an opinion and I've also heard a fair number of similarly priced amps or higher in order to form that opinion.

I am also very excited that in the near future I will be able to hear a full AN system, so I will see whether your fanaticism is warranted. I had an AN DAC which I am on record around here saying it was good and I enjoyed it, if I had to buy the transport to match the pair would be more than $3k, I prefer my T+A player over the AN which is just under $3k. So the AN is good but not the last word. It will also be interesting to see how or if AN gets off the ground around here.

[frenchmon]

Well after having an extensive listen to Harmans Mark Levinson amps, when its time to purchase a new AV home theater, I will take a good look at the HK products.

[Glen B]

I suspect that part of the reason it was so easy for Madrigal Audio Labs (now part of Harman) to drop Mark Levinson (the man) from Mark Levinson (the brand) is because he was likely just a salesman and had little or nothing to do with the design of the products. Just like Peter Q at Audio Note (Sorry, I couldn't resist a cheap shot at RGA's favourite brand).

I hope my previous statement did not demean the man Mark Levinson's role in the company. There is more to bringing out a product than circuit design. Parts have to be selected, prototypes have to be listened to, and the product "voiced" prior to going to production. Levinson's trained ear as a musician and recording engineer would have come in handy. There's nothing wrong with that. If one looks at the history of Marantz as an example, Saul Marantz did not design every product that bore his name. He had others employed as chief engineer and developer throughout the years he was company president.

[RGA]

Mr. P

If you follow the speaker thread about Horns you will read the exchange I had with Joe. Peter and Audio Not don't have all that much interest in the U.S market. Only 5% of AN's business is in the U.S. Here in HK their dealer recently sold 3 M10 preamps halfway through the month.

AN gear mixed and matched may or may not yield good results - especially not with SS gear.

I have heard only three ML products labelled as such - a CD player that was very expensive and didn't sound it, a so-so amplifier that was also very expensive. I wasn't impressed with the build quality at the price either. Then the whole - is it an ML or is it something else - and the Chinese knockoffs but not knockoffs or are they routine.

There is a guy on Vancouver Island who has had Mark Levinson himself come and set up his stereo system with his top flight ML gear. That guy now owns an AN level 5 system. Levinson has a home on Vancouver Island and was/is married to an actress from Sex and the City (who was born on Vancouver Island) - not far from Diana Krall's home apparently.

I don't hate SS - it's either good or it isn't at a given price - and a number of SS amps at high dollars are not much if at all better than lower priced SS. Certainly blind listening indicates this. People are attracted to names, looks, physical weight of the box, prestige factor of owning a "high end" brand - same as spending $400 on a pair of jeans that are no better than Wrangler at $29. Sometimes of course they are better made and better sounding but that should not be "assumed"

I don't recall hearing ML amps that existed before he sold out. Those may have been great - the new stuff sounds like new Anthem - old Anthem sounded better - the Anthem with tubes coincidentally.

[RGA]

It's true that we shouldn't under value Qvortrup's role. Components are designed by his hirelings to his taste, such as that is.

Well if the taste is "correct" and "right" then yes it's designed to someone who has "correct" taste.

Fortunately I have heard a lot of speakers and systems including your speakers. The stamped on "everything sounds the same" of most gear is precisely what Peter isn't after - he wants to be able to hear the recordings - not a homogonized stamped on signature whether it is Gaga or Beethoven.

AN is designed to be accurate to the differentiation of recordings in an actual room and at Sounhounds AN gear is the only gear they sell that truly does that - Some of their other lines do a decent job but they tend to have a very audible "signature" that continuously imprints itself on every single recording.

"Some orchestral recordings, for example, will present stages beyond the the confines of the speaker borders, others tend to gather between the speakers; some will seem to articulate instruments in space; others present them in a mass as if perceived from a balcony; some will present the winds recessed deep into the orchestra; others up front; some will overwhelm us with a bass drum of tremendous power; others barely distinguish between the character of tympani and bass drum. In respect to our critical evaluation process, it is of absolutely no consequence that these differences may have resulted from performing style or recording methodology and manufacture, or that they may have completely misrepresented the actual live event.

Therefore when comparing two speaker systems, it would be a mistake to assume that the one which always presents a gigantic stage well beyond the confines of the speakers, for example, is more accurate. You might like -- even prefer -- what that system does to staging, but the other speaker, because it is realizing differences between recordings, is very likely more accurate, and in respect to all the other variables from recording to recording, may turn out to be more revealing of the performance.

Some pop vocal recordings present us with resonant voices, others dry; some as part of the instrumental texture, others envelope us leaving the accompanying instruments and vocals well in the background; some are nasal, some gravelly, some metallic, others warm. The "Comparison by Reference" method would have us respond positively to that playback system, together with the associated "reference" recording, that achieves a pre-conceived notion of how the vocal is presented and how it sounds in relation to the instruments in regards to such parameters as relative size, shape, level, weight, definition, et al. Over time we find ourselves preferring a particular presentation of pop vocal (or orchestral balance, or rock thwack, or jazz intimacy, or piano percussiveness -- you name it) and infer a correctness when approximated by certain recordings." Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell? by Leonard Norwitz and Peter Qvortrup

Article reviewer Enjoy the Music.com Reviewer's Bio Leonard Norwitz

Audition it then come back.

And I know their prices are what people look at and think - something's wrong but The Longer Vision. - Peter Qvortrup - Critic's Corner

[Ajani]

Well if the taste is "correct" and "right" then yes it's designed to someone who has "correct" taste.

Fortunately I have heard a lot of speakers and systems including your speakers. The stamped on "everything sounds the same" of most gear is precisely what Peter isn't after - he wants to be able to hear the recordings - not a homogonized stamped on signature whether it is Gaga or Beethoven.

AN is designed to be accurate to the differentiation of recordings in an actual room and at Sounhounds AN gear is the only gear they sell that truly does that - Some of their other lines do a decent job but they tend to have a very audible "signature" that continuously imprints itself on every single recording.

"Some orchestral recordings, for example, will present stages beyond the the confines of the speaker borders, others tend to gather between the speakers; some will seem to articulate instruments in space; others present them in a mass as if perceived from a balcony; some will present the winds recessed deep into the orchestra; others up front; some will overwhelm us with a bass drum of tremendous power; others barely distinguish between the character of tympani and bass drum. In respect to our critical evaluation process, it is of absolutely no consequence that these differences may have resulted from performing style or recording methodology and manufacture, or that they may have completely misrepresented the actual live event.

Therefore when comparing two speaker systems, it would be a mistake to assume that the one which always presents a gigantic stage well beyond the confines of the speakers, for example, is more accurate. You might like -- even prefer -- what that system does to staging, but the other speaker, because it is realizing differences between recordings, is very likely more accurate, and in respect to all the other variables from recording to recording, may turn out to be more revealing of the performance.

Some pop vocal recordings present us with resonant voices, others dry; some as part of the instrumental texture, others envelope us leaving the accompanying instruments and vocals well in the background; some are nasal, some gravelly, some metallic, others warm. The "Comparison by Reference" method would have us respond positively to that playback system, together with the associated "reference" recording, that achieves a pre-conceived notion of how the vocal is presented and how it sounds in relation to the instruments in regards to such parameters as relative size, shape, level, weight, definition, et al. Over time we find ourselves preferring a particular presentation of pop vocal (or orchestral balance, or rock thwack, or jazz intimacy, or piano percussiveness -- you name it) and infer a correctness when approximated by certain recordings." Are You On The Road To... Audio Hell? by Leonard Norwitz and Peter Qvortrup

Article reviewer Enjoy the Music.com Reviewer's Bio Leonard Norwitz

Audition it then come back.

And I know their prices are what people look at and think - something's wrong but The Longer Vision. - Peter Qvortrup - Critic's Corner

You really should take a chill pill -

Quotes from Peter Q are not going to inspire persons to try AN gear. Owners, Designers, salesmen etc all chat loads of smack about the competition and make magical claims about their own products. Your years of raving does little to convince persons either. Just about every product in HiFi (including most of the stuff you bash) has fans and reviewers who claim the product is the second coming of Christ, Hence it is hard to get excited about another brand being raved about.

I suspect that most of us (like me) have auditioned loads of raved about products and found them to be OK, but nothing to shout about.

I have a long list of gear I intend to audition eventually and AN is just one brand on the list.

Heck I even plan to audition a pair of active monitors from Dynaudio (BM5A MKii) despite my previous experience with passive Dynaudio gear - Since the BM5A are sold as a combo with my Benchmark, so I expect the synergy should be good. I want to try out some of the MJK Open Baffle DIY designs that Poultry keeps raving about. The SDS Class D amps that Feanor is raving about as well as the Monarchy Class A he used to own are also gear I want to own/audition. Not to mention the Bottlehead Stereomour and Decware Zen Triode SET amps. And that's just some of the affordable items I want to try out - all of which would require ordering (and even building) to audition.

[RGA]

Ajani

If people would spend their time to audition then I would not have to use words. Especially when people attack stuff they've never auditioned or auditioned as intended.

Audio Note is not the ONLY brand that gets raved about - it is one of them that gets continually attacked by people who have never heard them.

I can say that I agree in a major way with Arthur Salvatore in principal that there is a lot less stuff that deserves to be called "GREAT" than is being called great by forumers and the review press.

Take the "technology" of SET. To my way of thinking if someone is going to judge the capability of any technology in any field one must audition what is deemed the "best" of that technology from the best makers of it. To me if you have not heard an AN SET amp you have not heard what SET can do. And that applies to LP replay, Reel to Reel, Tape Decks, CD players etc. (I should point out other SETs like say a Shindo but they're even harder to find a place to audition that AN).

But the problem is the press recommends everything - a fellow writer at dagogo recommended the B&W 805 but on AA pointed out that he prefers the Audio Note K and Teresonic standmounts. The B&W is a $5k standmount the AN K is a $3k standmount. No one has reviewed the AN K - the 805 gets the press when the reviewer likes it less than a speaker that isn't reviewed.

Certainly he liked the 805 so there is no question that if you like it you recommend it but no one ever writes - "but for the same money or less I would choose the AN K for X,Y and Z reasons."

The trick is to be able to read the review and get that impression. I read Jack's review of the 805 and I picked it up almost immediately. Yeah it's a nice speaker but he didn't LOVE it and I knew he preferred the Teresonic for the same money more.

Again - I am not saying AN is the only answer - it isn't the only answer for me and as Joe pointed out there are better systems - even PQ makes the point - how many makers admit that something else is better than what they make? I know of none.

But looking at a wide sampling of review press and my own experience AN is the upper echelon of a very small group of elite manufacturers - Stuff no one here likely can afford but elite nevertheless.

PS - The over the top rave that exist for many manufacturers - like you I am not swayed. I am swayed if I read it continuously over many years with many different writers/review publications. Then it means something. The one guy who raves about one amp or CD player or speaker doesn't move me - if I read 12 reports all around the world - then it has some sway with me.

I don't read over the top praise about much stuff - I read a lot of it on AN. Sure I do read high praise for entry level stuff - competing well with the nebulous unnamed "beats SOME stuff I heard at 3 times the price" but that is more of a value for the dollar claim - or a lack of value for the dollar about stuff that costs 3 times more and isn't better!"

But even guys who don't like AN think Peter's a jerk - have been known to set that aside and stay objective as this reviewer did StereoTimes - Commentary (bottom)

Another recent one 2011 Montreal Hi-Fi Show Report

They consistently year after year after year are in the top ranks of what people hear - which is why they can sell so many $100k amplifiers and $60k two way boxed speakers. And $150k cd players over SACD machines. It sure as hell isn't because it looks good. And hey - the guy running it isn't even an engineer!

Audio for many is a hobby - and if it is a hobby - just like cars - then why not spend the time with the BEST stuff. I know guys who love cars so they go to the car show and they want to see the new Bughatti or Bently - but it seems to me a lot of the guys on audio boards would rather rip those cars and talk about whatever new Ford Festiva comes out and how it compares to a Civic. Where is the fun in that? As a buying decision I get that because that's what we can afford but for the hobby side - I want to hear the half million dollar systems and want to sit in a $1million dollar car. That's the "hobby" aspect.

And unlike cars where they won't let you DRIVE the Bughatti for free with Audio you can test drive it. If you could drive a Bughhati it might tell you which of the Camero/Mustang etc gets closer to the best experience. Audio does that - hearing the elite allows you a compass to get the best inexpensive system that somewhat resembles the elite sound.

[JohnMichael]

You really should take a chill pill -

Quotes from Peter Q are not going to inspire persons to try AN gear. Owners, Designers, salesmen etc all chat loads of smack about the competition and make magical claims about their own products. Your years of raving does little to convince persons either. Just about every product in HiFi (including most of the stuff you bash) has fans and reviewers who claim the product is the second coming of Christ, Hence it is hard to get excited about another brand being raved about.

I suspect that most of us (like me) have auditioned loads of raved about products and found them to be OK, but nothing to shout about.

I have a long list of gear I intend to audition eventually and AN is just one brand on the list.

Heck I even plan to audition a pair of active monitors from Dynaudio (BM5A MKii) despite my previous experience with passive Dynaudio gear - Since the BM5A are sold as a combo with my Benchmark, so I expect the synergy should be good. I want to try out some of the MJK Open Baffle DIY designs that Poultry keeps raving about. The SDS Class D amps that Feanor is raving about as well as the Monarchy Class A he used to own are also gear I want to own/audition. Not to mention the Bottlehead Stereomour and Decware Zen Triode SET amps. And that's just some of the affordable items I want to try out - all of which would require ordering (and even building) to audition.

Yes sometimes when you bang the drum and serve the Kool-aid about one brand for so long you lose any interest in hearing the products. Much like religion or anything shoved down your throat you rebell against it.

[RGA]

Yes sometimes when you bang the drum and serve the Kool-aid about one brand for so long you lose any interest in hearing the products. Much like religion or anything shoved down your throat you rebell against it.

I happen to think that is because people are "afraid" that if RGA is right then they wasted the last 20 years spending a lot of money on what turns out to have bee a big fat waste of their time and money. Please note the word IF.

I never really get people who take issue with my stance on this. There is absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Hypothetical:

You are looking to buy a B&W 705 speaker priced at $2300US. A person who has owned B&W and heard this model on several occasions tells you that for $650 there is an AX Two from Audio Note that sounds a lot better (the dealer selling both brands will say the same thing) what exactly is the downside?

1) you audition the product side by side and you agree with RGA and his over the top ramblings - YOU WIN - you saved $1650 plus tax.

2) you audition the product and you disagree with RGA. You lost some time and some gas money - but you still win (small win) but a win because now when you buy the 705 you turned over another stone before the purchase which will make you happy that you did your due diligence.

It's either a big win or a small win.

Being irritated by the messenger only serves to put yourself "out" because IF I and a lot of others am/are right then you are sacrificing the "chance" at hitting a number 1 and saving a whole lot of money and getting a whole lot better sound.

And one reason I do this is because I wasted 15+ years listening to the the usual suspects - it was "luck" that I stumbled onto something playing in a much higher league. Unfortunately I get the idea that some people can't relate to something being so much better than the usual suspects since the usual suspects don't really separate themselves from each other very much so it can't be conceived that something could utterly trounce the usual suspects. And trounce in this contest is "purity and rightness" of sound - it's not about more bass treble or bigger stages - it's about eloquence and getting the goose-bump factor up.

And while there are many other brands that do this - IME to this point (and it could change with systems Joe Roberts pointed out) few of them do it at sane price points.

[tube fan]

I still have fond memories of the original JC-2. It was a landmark product in its day which was in some respects better than the Audio Research SP-3a-1, my previous reference circa 1975. My DIY attenuator box pays homage to its slim and elegant form factor.

I did a blind test of the JC-2 to the audio research SP-8, and I preferred the SP8 by a mile. I have NEVER heard a ss pre-amp that matches the SP8 (yes, of course, IMO).

[Feanor]

But even guys who don't like AN think Peter's a jerk - have been known to set that aside and stay objective as this reviewer did StereoTimes - Commentary (bottom).

Endorsements, endorsements ...

There were parts of the above that I did find instructive and amusing ...

Where do I begin sharing on my experience in the Audio Note (UK) room? I've written on how bad I thought of their setups years back and still think they've really some poor tastes showing some of the most expensive hi-end equipment in the world on top of cheap hotel furniture. ...
Believe me, I never want to like Audio Note setups because of their outward disdain for anything conventional when it comes to, for example, keeping the loudspeakers out into the room and away from the side and front walls. Also, the lack of using real equipment or isolation racks of any sort just annoys me. Most disturbing of all is the legendary price for these components. ... Opening my eyes, I see loudspeakers loaded against the walls, no fancy AC conditioners, equipment platforms or isolation of any sort. There was no soundstage that could call attention to itself. No 3-D imaging of any sort whatsoever. {!! emphasis added} None of that stuff we all attempt to qualify our systems by. ... In the end, I think the Audio Note way is a totally different philosophy on hi-end sound and the setup is going to take a very long time, if ever, to become accustomed to. After countless nights of listening I realize that I still do love my system ...

I can agree with the reviewer that good sound can be had without exotic AC conditioning, fancy racks, or isolation measures -- these are waste of money under all conditions I have personally experienced. I do think I would miss a good sound and imaging.

[Ajani]

I happen to think that is because people are "afraid" that if RGA is right then they wasted the last 20 years spending a lot of money on what turns out to have bee a big fat waste of their time and money. Please note the word IF.

I don't think that many people care about whether RGA is right. It's not fear that AN will sound great that keeps people from auditioning. I'm sure that if AN was at all our local dealers we'd audition them.

Hypothetical:

You are looking to buy a B&W 705 speaker priced at $2300US. A person who has owned B&W and heard this model on several occasions tells you that for $650 there is an AX Two from Audio Note that sounds a lot better (the dealer selling both brands will say the same thing) what exactly is the downside?

1) you audition the product side by side and you agree with RGA and his over the top ramblings - YOU WIN - you saved $1650 plus tax.

2) you audition the product and you disagree with RGA. You lost some time and some gas money - but you still win (small win) but a win because now when you buy the 705 you turned over another stone before the purchase which will make you happy that you did your due diligence.

It's either a big win or a small win.

And what if the speaker you really would have loved was the Magnepan MMG? Or a MJK Open Baffle Design?

Then you haven't really won anything by comparing the AX two to the 705, since neither is the ideal speaker for you. So you've just spent time and gas money/bus or taxi fare to discover that neither B&W nor AN are the brands for you.

The point being that there are so many options to be considered and AN is still just one brand of many.

[RGA]

Endorsements, endorsements ...

There were parts of the above that I did find instructive and amusing ...


I can agree with the reviewer that good sound can be had without exotic AC conditioning, fancy racks, or isolation measures -- these are waste of money under all conditions I have personally experienced. I do think I would miss a good sound and imaging.

Yes and as usual you key hole on one thing ignoring the bigger picture - like one of the best overall systems he's heard - the only one he liked better was a set of speakers retailing for $400,000.

And I take my own ears as well as numerous other critics who describe the staging as "panoramic" or Rochlin who rated the AN

AN E - AN J thus:
Attack
95 - 92
Decay
95 - 95
Inner Resolution
95 - 95
Soundscape width front
95 - 92
Soundscape width rear
95 - 92
Soundscape depth behind loudspeakers
95 - 92
Soundscape extension into the room
95 - 92
Imaging
95 - 92
Fit and Finish
95 - 90

Staging and imaging effects are recording dependent NOT speaker dependent. Speakers create a house sound with staging - it's one way on EVERYTHING. The AN E doesn't do that - if the stage is deep you will get it - if it is wide you will get. The issue clearly is that people get used to their "stamped on" soundstage effect and then when it's not there they blame the speaker - well no it's not on the recording you think it is because your speaker presents it the same way all the time.

The entire notion of a speaker and system's ability to "contrast" or differentiate recordings is the reason why descriptions of the AN E run the gambit from non-existent staging and imaging to panoramic staging (as described by Soundstage in their review of AN speakers) to just about as good as it gets from enjoythemusic to the Hi-fi Choice review that managed to contradict itself on the AN E with staging.

I really do love the AN E speaker - it is a fascinating nimble little beast indeed. Big stage to small stage - vague imaging to right on, to big bass to ok bass, to coloured but somehow utterly transparent (huh?) to hard to warm. It's called balanced.

The reviewer was probably right not noticing the staging or the "artificial effects perpetrated by the loudspeakers" since most classical is recorded in a pit - and never once have I sat in any live event of any kind and turned the person next to me and said - wow check out the imaging and soundstage of this symphony - LOL. Man so many people are so on the WRONG track it's quite depressing.

How Important Is Soundstaging? - The Columns - Dagogo

[Feanor]

...
...
The reviewer was probably right not noticing the staging or the "artificial effects perpetrated by the loudspeakers" since most classical is recorded in a pit - and never once have I sat in any live event of any kind and turned the person next to me and said - wow check out the imaging and soundstage of this symphony - LOL. Man so many people are so on the WRONG track it's quite depressing.

How Important Is Soundstaging? - The Columns - Dagogo

The article represents a certain point of view on soundstage and imaging -- yes, it is a valid point of view.

Soundstage and imaging in the recording depends on choices of the producer & engineer -- just as the same attributes in the concert hall depend on the hall and your seat in it.

It isn't true to imply that you never get imaging (instrument location) in the concert hall -- it depends, as I said above. But if you get a great imaging, (i.e. instrument location and separation), from a recording from one system but not from another, then the latter is deficient. Imaging, I would say, depends on high, distortion free, resolution and smooth, linear, frequency response.

[frenchmon]

RGA....thanks for the article "How Important Is Soundstaging? - The Columns - Dagogo" I enjoyed it.

[Poultrygeist]

I have two Red Rose SACDs and sound wise they suck.

The Chinese have made high quality audio of their own design for years but they mistakenly thought they would not sell without a western name attached. I once owned a Chinese Tube Fidelity amp which was thought to be a clone of a MF design but I'm not so sure it wasn't the other way around.

[RGA]

I have two Red Rose SACDs and sound wise they suck.

The Chinese have made high quality audio of their own design for years but they mistakenly thought they would not sell without a western name attached. I once owned a Chinese Tube Fidelity amp which was thought to be a clone of a MF design but I'm not so sure it wasn't the other way around.

Some of the Chinese stuff mops the floor with most of the American brands I've heard for far far less money - and the build quality is MUCH MUCH better.

A Grant Fidelity beats the hell out of gear from McIntosh - and Shengya makes some serious serious stuff - a Fellow writer at Dagogo raved about these. I also liked their entry level monoblocks - and would buy it over most anything I've heard in the higher power camp at a sane budget. Pretty sure Shengya is the outfit that makes Vincent - but Shengya makes upper scale stuff.

I think the problem is perception - if they see it is Chinese they assume it's bad. Yeah like Americans building cars for 30 years is indication they make quality - chortle chortle.

ShengYa CS-6 fully balanced tube preamplifier & PSM-600 monoblocks Review - Equipment Reviews - Dagogo

If I was to buy a hybrid amp that had oodles of power under then have a serious look at this amp for $1300 - the build quality from these guys is bettered by no one at the price. If it sounds as good as the PM 150 monoblocks in terms of value at the dollar then this is what people should look at over the likes of ML - since ML is all Chinese made anyway - why not go with Chinese made from one of the two best Chinese makers - Shengya or Jungson. Why pay extra for the marketing cache name badge?

For $1295 this looks like an absolute beast Shengya A-216 Integrated Hybrid Amplifier

[Mr Peabody]

That's interesting RGA since there's a very vigorous market to buy and sell American gear in Asia, that's where my Krell amp went, my friend who recently sold his Levinson 433, and Clayton Audio who makes pure Class A amps sells the majority of their amps in Asia.

You know RGA you really distort the facts, most of the American companies I'm aware of who began getting their gear built in China suffered an immediate QC issue, including Krell's recent adventure over there. You said you weren't impressed with a Levinson amp, I'd like to know which model because every single one I've ever seen has been over built, and most are over 100 lbs. All of my experience with Levinson is post 80's.

[RGA]

The Asian market is arguably the biggest market in the world so of course American companies and Brits and every other Western country selling hi-fi wants to get in on the pie.

It's not like people here are better or smarter and don't pay for prestige based items with no "real" reason - Gucci and Rolex is all over the place. In fact watches seems to be the number one craze in this country - it's unbelievable how much people will spend to know what time it is - something their cell phone already does and does much better.

Slap the word "import" on it and people will pay large. Sometimes it's actually good but not always.

Any company that moves operation to a foreign land is likely to have issues - there is no distortion of facts. The fact that some American companies open shop in China and have higher failure rates is STILL the fault of the manufacturer - learn to train employees properly - don't just have some OTHER company build them for you. Virtually everything today is made in China some of it is trash some of it lasts decades. And that's no different that audio equipment. There is no "inherent" reason for something to be bad or good by the mere fact that it is made in China or the U.S. or Canada, Japan or Switzerland.

As for the ML Gear - the the 390s CD player sounds artificial and wooden. I did like the various connection options but to me if you plan to upgrade the DAC anyway you can buy a rock solid transport CD player at a lower cost with the same or similar connection options. For less than half the price Grant Fidelity CD-1000 Impression II Tube CD Player

Indeed for a bit more money you can buy this Consonance Droplet CDP-5.0D Fully Balanced Tube CD Player

This thing has a top shelf Transport in the Philips Pro/2 and would be reason enough to buy it.

There are a multitude of two box options from numerous makers as well.

The amp I heard from them was an integrated that also started N3___ but I don't recall the exact number. I remember I liked the looks of it because it had white knobs on a charcoal black body and reminded me of some of the Brit gear finishes.

In around the same period I heard their preamp (same period don't know the model numbers - I have trouble remembering models where they are numbered - it is easier to recall names) with the same cd player with Krell flagship Monoblock power amps and didn't love what I heard on either Wilson Sophia speakers, Magnepan 20.1 speakers or large PMC speakers and Dynaudio Contour speakers (the latter two speakers sounded better with less expensive kit and Dynaudio sounds better on Octave amps for a mere $5k or so which is pretty absurd since it's less than 1/10 the price. The 20.1 I have yet to hear sound even decent on anything so that's no fault of the ML or Krell - the Sophia was replaced so it's hard to judge it but I really liked the sound of the Sophia II on much less expensive Rogue amps (granted their power amps were around $10k).

ML apparently has an all new line up so I suppose my views are moot since now I'm out of date.

[Poultrygeist]

I sold my Classe amp to a Chinese guy who cared more about it's name than it's performance.

[Poultrygeist]

Here's a Red Rose Passion which is the same as a $500 Dussun.

Red Rose Music Passion

[RGA]

I love that when you click on "About Red Rose" you get a picture of Mark Levinson - I guess that says it all.

Pay me 6 times the price to have my name on it - oh wait - you don't get his name on it - you get Red Rose.

From the pictures anyway - the Harman run ML look better made - and they were well made when I saw them - I simply had problems with the price and the resulting sound quality at the price. Take the price out of the equation and the sound itself was good with some speakers.

I just wish more people would audition some high quality SET amps running a good SET friendly speaker.

[TheHills44060]

...In fact watches seems to be the number one craze in this country - it's unbelievable how much people will spend to know what time it is - something their cell phone already does and does much better.

So funny you say that because my gf's parents are visiting from Chengdu and guess what all of their friends/relatives wanted them to buy and bring back to China....Watches!!!