Boulder 3060 smooth and a maybe even a bit warm?

[LL21]

When I was in the market for speakers someone mentioned Analysis Audio. I hadn't heard of them but was always a fan of Apogees, Martin Logans (CLS/CLX), and Magnepans. It so happened that the Analysis Audio distributor wasn't too far from me so I paid him a visit. I'm a huge fan of human voices and acoustic music which are strengths of Analysis Audio. Regarding other speakers, I travel a lot so I made quite a few stops in music stores. I couldn't even begin to list all of the speakers I listened to. The problem is most of the time I was listening to gear I hadn't heard before. The more I listened to the Analysis Audio, the more I loved the sound of the music I was playing.

To take a quote from you, I "prefer to get it 'just right', than to wait around til I get it 'perfect'"

Well said! They must be fabulous...congrats!

 

[andromedaaudio]

Hey Ron,

As always, perceptive and insightful both in conclusions and in questions! Your questions and my answers:

1. Why Mephisto over Boulder?

- The first real comparison for me was the Antileon vs the Boulder 2060. The Antileon was dark...it never bothered me but when I heard certain amps 'illuminate' the treble, I found I preferred that even if dark was perfectly fine by me. The Boulder was probably its equal in sheer grunt, all out control and probably more detailed/precise in its presentation. Yes, it was also a bit cooler but never in a way that I minded because it was so effortless, I did not get that sense of 'plodding mechanical reproduction' you sometimes get with grainier or strident amps.

- So I took the Antileon...and it did not hurt that (both being 2nd hand) the Antileon cost less.

- So I was now in the Gryphon family and made my progression vertically up the 'Class A SS' designs by Flemming because I admired his work, could trust in his ear...and so when he had a flagship (the Colosseum and then the Mephisto)...it was an easy leap for me.
- Despite being an audiophile who has very definite aspirations...I also prefer to get it 'just right', than to wait around til I get it 'perfect'. So going around to listen to loads of new amps did not make sense to me time- or effort-wise. Furthermore, with both Colosseum and Mephisto coming 2nd hand, economically, they also made the decision a lot easier to make.

2. Sonic reasons for Koda over Boulder

- This really was not a shoot-out situation between Koda and Boulder at all. I was actually searching for a preamp to supercede the mighty CJ GAT 2 (after 20 consecutive years of owning CJ preamps) that did not present me with [occasional] tube noise, re-tubing, hiss that would come, then go. And I was [perhaps overly] concerned that even the milliwatts of DC might be doing something to the Gryphon long-term...and some even new tube amps do leak an infinitesimal amount.

- And I thought back to Robert Koda: trained under Kondo San, his own singular vision of purist audio reproduction, and by all accounts (including the venerable Martin Colloms) a truly gifted designer who is also seriously committed to his artform. AND, it was designed with the ethos of Solid State without ever sacrificing the ultimate characters that make many of us love tubes refuse to give them up.

- And at that moment, I realized there was his now legendary K15EX preamp...through various circumstances I became the first owner in this country and arguably was even there as 'a board observer' when Absolute Sounds came together with Robert Koda to create a distributor relationship which is quite exciting.

- And that first touch of Robert Koda was pure magic. Never have I heard SS create magic of the kind that people who love CJ and Zanden crave...while also honoring all of the hallmarks of great solid state - accuracy, illuminated treble that extends well into the ether, propulsive power in the bass...and the super quietest noise floor ever that allows the most finely-woven gossamer details to float effortlessly and untouched into the room

3. 3060 vs Robert Koda K160s
Here came the tough part. For 11 years, I have been exceptionally happy with different pre and amp designs...CJ and Gryphon. So clearly Robert Koda and Boulder 3060 was potentially a perfect pairing for me.

Who could not love the idea of the most pulverizing, effortless Class A SS planetary-sized amp plugging into perhaps one of the finest preamps most of us may have ever heard...whose signature is organic, natural and yet infinitessimally low noise floor for detail and nuance?

As the saying goes, I came THIS close to pulling that trigger. But not having heard Boulder in 10 years (earlier gen 2060) and having to fly to Denver potentially to hear it...was quite difficult when they are also made to order. The positives I received from those who owned/auditioned the 3060 were: effortless...in a way few if any amps are (perhaps none), absolutely no noise floor and freeing up details to come forward, and bass that is in a class by itself perhaps with Gryphon as its closest toe-to-toe competitor...a whole new weight class if you will.

There were also health warnings: it is crystalline in its exacting delivery, one hair out of line, and you will hear it. This did not bother me too much as with Zanden front end, Robert Koda K15EX preamp, TA Opus cables...organic was pretty much baked into the system.

And then there were a few more itches in the far distant back of my mind:
- Robert Koda is a proven, talented designer of BOTH preamps and amps. Not all designers can do both equally well. The preamp is a resounding and unequivocally brilliant design. Why not go MATCHING for the first time in well over a decade?
- PLUS, there is this 'hang up'/idealogy of liking no global feedback, no excess circuitry whatsoever, no feedback loops, not even an overheating sensors that reset the amp when the temp returns to normal...you simply go to 70 degrees and blow the fuse (which is 20 degrees above target temperature so something has to be seriously wrong to hit it...and then you have to put in a new fuse.)
- PLUS, there is just something about his equally obsessive approach to build quality...every component, (cooling fan, IEC inlet, mu-metal shielding) of each individual major component inside has been hand selected by Robert to be 'the best'. I know the fans in there, and I am not surprised to hear he auditioned scores of different ones and ended up with these...not just his binding posts and capacitors but even his wiring, his IEC inlet is specially made by one of the best players like Furutech, etc...which really made me think, "This is it."

So in the same vein of 'how can one lose with 3060'...I stayed on the path I was already on and went with the Robert Koda Monos. Now at just over 500 hours, they are magnificent in a way that frighteningly shows up the mighty Gryphon Mephisto in multiple ways I did not think was possible.

And most interestingly (to me)...of the 8 owners of this amp today, 3 of them owned Gryphon Mephisto before...all-out, pure Class A powerhouses...and one of them owned the Mephisto monos. And our collective agreement is unanimous that there is not one element where the Robert Koda does not best the Gryphon Mephisto...and that shockingly includes bass which for me was the bedrock of Gryphon's magic.

FINALLY,
- I will not comment on digital vs analogue with either set...I own digital and have ever only owned digital...Zanden for last 13 consecutive years
- I can say that Robert Koda as a set definitely sets its own standard for magic...and that by dividing the preamp and amp between Robert Koda and Boulder, I feel confident that this magic would not exist. In its place would almost certainly be tremendous technical prowess, limitless dynamic capability, and yes quite a lot of insane detail, nuance and delivery...but I think that the special voice that Boulder creates or that Robert Koda creates would not be there from a Koda standpoint. Robert is about insane levels of purist simplicity of circuitry...'dynamic simplicity' is literally his motto.
- So I do think that it makes sense in the case of Robert Koda to keep the preamp and amp together.

- With Boulder, given the one element of water-clear delivery with Boulder, I could easily see someone going for a warmer source through a full Boulder set...I kind of intuitively like that.
- As for adding a tubed preamp with the Boulder (as I happily did with CJ/Gryphon for over 10 years)...just bear in mind, that my very limited experience with Boulder combined with discussions with 3000 series owners/auditioners leads me to believe there is an extreme magic to Boulder preamp/amps combos as well. And THAT magic is its OTT attention to noise floor, infinite dynamic capability and invisibly clear sound delivery.

- If you mix that with another manufacturer, you may lose that extreme magic...and inadvertently end up with excellent but not necessarily the extreme magic that (let's face it) you just paid dearly for in the 6-figure 3060. Do that, and you might find you could have acquired an equally competitive preamp/amp set for a lot less money because the 'extreme magic' is now missing with 'excellent magic' in its place. My gut says tread carefully. My instinctive (non-empirical) vote would be to keep the warmth in the source at that extreme level of design performance and stick with Boulder pre/amp.

Great post lloyd !!

 

[andromedaaudio]

You made me curious about the robert koda purist designs.
I hope to hear them in munich next year
But regarding detail that will flow through im 100 % sure my speakers with only a duelund copper cap in the signal path will be more revealing then those resistor adjusted wilsons

 

[microstrip]

“And unless dCS has changed their house sound, I do not think that dCS components are on the warm side of the sonic spectrum.” You really áre a gentleman !

Yes, the dCS gear does not have any euphonic coloration to make it sound warm. They have plenty of information and high resolution and surely need a well balanced system to keep a natural balance.

 

[LL21]

You made me curious about the robert koda purist designs.
I hope to hear them in munich next year
But regarding detail that will flow through im 100 % sure my speakers with only a duelund copper cap in the signal path will be more revealing then those resistor adjusted wilsons

Hi...you are far more technical than I will ever be. If you read the Robert Koda description of their amp, I would be curious to know what you think. Here are some bullets I have taken off of articles and various distributor information:


Only N type transistors - There is no "push pull" complimentary circuitry in this amplifier. Crossover distortion and a multitude of other anomalies are thus completely avoided.

Perfected balanced, single ended or floating inputs with no "conversions" needed.

Zero negative feedback. Completely servo free.

Zero modulation on power supply. There is no circulating broken signal...No circulating signal current at all. Just a static, unchanging DC current- No matter what the volume, no matter what the load, with K-160 power supply effects are cleanly circumvented.

Only two stage - Yet 100% independent in operation. The first realizes voltage gain; 26dB. The second delivers current gain. Each section is able to execute its task diligently and can function in isolation. Extra high voltage (160V) power supply on first stage.

"Super Ground" technology to provide high frequency noise "blocking"

Reactor power supply for power output stage. "Ripple" voltage on the DC output is reduced by a magnitude not otherwise practically possible with conventional supplies. In fact the use of reactors reduces unwanted ripple by 12dB average, extending by an extra 10dB at higher frequencies.

Since the current pulses are delivered via the AC wiring and power cable, any imperfections will be presented as a reduction in sound quality. It is the nature of both our reactor power supply and our power amplifier that, in tandem, such issues cannot exist and instead, purity is maintained.

Distortion
- 0.0009% at 5 watts into 8 ohm, 1KHz. (-101db)
- 0.005% at 50 watts into 8 ohm, 1KHz. (-86db)

Signal to noise: At 1 watt, A rated 106dB, rising to 126dB at 100W.

Power: 240 Watts Pure Class A into 4 ohms

Standing Current: Over 8 Amps of standing current.

 

[andromedaaudio]

It reads impressive , but so do many other designs .
Regarding him being a Kondo student ?
The times i have heard Kondo Japan i found it a overly sweet / coloured sound , not entirely my cup of tea /neutral .

Im afraid aluminium in the power cables is not appreciated by robert koda

Since the current pulses are delivered via the AC wiring and power cable, any imperfections will be presented as a reduction in sound quality. It is the nature of both our reactor power supply and our power amplifier that, in tandem, such issues cannot exist and instead, purity is maintained.

 

[LL21]

It reads impressive , but so do many other designs .
Regarding him being a Kondo student ?
The times i have heard Kondo Japan i found it a overly sweet / coloured sound , not entirely my cup of tea /neutral .

Im afraid aluminium in the power cables is not appreciated by robert koda

For me, I see Kondo and I think 'institutional quality credibility'. The taste/flavor is always the reflection of the person in control. But the quality of the firm, its long-term reputation and standing...those are hallmarks where when their 'alumni/ae' then leave to go out and build their own firms, they do so with a background that reflects that 'upbringing'...but with the freedom to create their own 'voice'. Personally, I really like to see that as a base foundation.

If the head circuit designer left Boulder to start his/her own company...again, great credentials. Or Zanden. But their own personal taste might run very different to the founders of Boulder.

Do let me know what you think when you hear Robert Koda. For me, I instinctively do think it is both technically and subjectively the best amplification I have ever heard. Given the stability of the sound character of our system over the last many years, I do feel like I have a handle on what other amps (FM Acoustics, Goldmund, Dartzeel 108, MBL, Krell, D'Agostino, Bel Canto, Sugden, ARC, CJ, Shindo, Gryphon, among others which we have heard over the years, and now Robert Koda) have contributed to the system.

I would never say they are for anyone else, but for me they are peerless, though I would like to hear the 3060, CH M10 and (so the legend goes) the FM 1811.

 

[pk_LA]

Has anyone here heard the M10? I have read the couple of write-ups on it. They speak very highly of it but they largely focus on its relative strengths to the M1.1 etc.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Do let me know what you think when you hear Robert Koda.

Sure .

In general the japanese dedication to detail is of course excellent .
And a transistor Koda aint a tubey Kondo

 

[andromedaaudio]

Has anyone here heard the M10? I have read the couple of write-ups on it. They speak very highly of it but they largely focus on its relative strengths to the M1.1 etc.

Marty has , there is his Wilson Alexx thread, where he tested the M10
As far as i understood they lacked (absolute) bass control on optimal setings

 

[chuck]

Thank you so much for your replies!

Some responses to the various questions.

1) Why am I not considering a number of the various uber high-end but less known options? More than once I have had to pack up an amplifier and send it in for repairs. As such, I am very mindful of reliability and mfr support infrastructure.

2) Why not the m400s? I am kind of ready for something different. The s250 is fantastic. But, it also has a 'sound' to it that is, well, a signature if you will.

3) Do I want every recording to sound 'musical'? Yes and no. I would like recordings to sound enjoyable. That said, I do not like it when certain recordings sound muddy or interpolated. I find myself occasionally messing with the volume or the settings on the dCS because I am either trying to find more granularity or punch. I am not sure if that makes me someone seeking more of less 'truth'.

Again - thank you so much for the thoughtful replies.

Based on this, IMO you picked the right amp. I think I am the only one on this thread who owns a 3060. I have had it for almost 7 years. In that time, it has powered Wilson Alexandria X2S2, Wilson Alexandria XLF and now YG Sonja XV. It has many thousands of hours on it -- never a problem. "Musicality" generally means the very thing you object to about the S250. Enjoyable? It is amazing. Recordings never sound muddy unless the artist wants them to. For the first 5 years I used a tube pre, ARC Ref40, and now a SS Boulder 1110. It sounds quite different with the tube pre in the expected way. I have heard most other uber amps. I disagree with everything Ron says about this amp he has never heard. You are welcome to come by if you want to hear it for yourself.

 

[nirodha]

Yes, the dCS gear does not have any euphonic coloration to make it sound warm. They have plenty of information and high resolution and surely need a well balanced system to keep a natural balance.

A quote from Jacob Heilbrunn on an Ypsilon product; and I would broaden this up to my taste of music reproduction:”Since I’m in the camp that thinks that, in one way or another, all gear has a coloration, this doesn’t bother me. Quite the contrary. I’d rather that a component err on the side of musicality, bliss, and all the other things that can gently propel you into a meditative state when listening to your system.” I have owned dCS in the past (and heard it on many occasions) and its products simply lack musicality. But as everything, it is all a matter of taste. And there are no “winners“ or “losers” in the realm of taste. Enjoy !

 

[ashandger]

A quote from Jacob Heilbrunn on an Ypsilon product; and I would broaden this up to my taste of music reproduction:”Since I’m in the camp that thinks that, in one way or another, all gear has a coloration, this doesn’t bother me. Quite the contrary. I’d rather that a component err on the side of musicality, bliss, and all the other things that can gently propel you into a meditative state when listening to your system.” I have owned dCS in the past (and heard it on many occasions) and its products simply lack musicality. But as everything, it is all a matter of taste. And there are no “winners“ or “losers” in the realm of taste. Enjoy !

Interesting that Jacob Heilbrunn has used DSC Vivaldi for many years now.

 

[chuck]

A quote from Jacob Heilbrunn on an Ypsilon product; and I would broaden this up to my taste of music reproduction:”Since I’m in the camp that thinks that, in one way or another, all gear has a coloration, this doesn’t bother me. Quite the contrary. I’d rather that a component err on the side of musicality, bliss, and all the other things that can gently propel you into a meditative state when listening to your system.” I have owned dCS in the past (and heard it on many occasions) and its products simply lack musicality. But as everything, it is all a matter of taste. And there are no “winners“ or “losers” in the realm of taste. Enjoy !

A quote from Yoav Geva when asked if loudspeaker design is more of an art or a science: "That's easy -- it's a science. Our goal should be to accurately convey what's on the recording, and leave the art to the composers and musicians who created the content that's on the recording. Any subjective preference that we impart on the signal would be nothing more than an arrogant attempt to override the musicians' intent. While music is pure emotion, a speaker is nothing more than a machine that converts electrical signals into air-pressure fluctuations. Machines are developed by scientists and engineers, not artists."

My problem with coloration in electronics is it tends to narrow the recordings you wind up playing to just recordings where that coloration is appropriate. If that is your sole focus, fine. In Mr. Heilbrunn's example, such a system will favor music that aligns with ". . . bliss, and all other things that can propel you into a meditative state when listening to your system." That is great for Tony Bennett, Ella or Julie London. But does Led Zeppelin music fit? Or Tchaikowskey Piano Concerto No. 1? etc. etc.

 

[LL21]

Hi Chuck,

Interesting quotation. I fully acknowledge that some designs actually put color in...I fully am with you on that one. I am not a fan.

That said, my understanding of audio design & engineering is that while key science elements may be relatively clear...what is NOT clear is:
- the priority of WHICH engineering measurements does the designer think are the most important to focus on?
- Additionally, how does the designer prioritize which measurements or technical achievements to focus on...particularly if that means other technical performance may by definition not be as optimized? (ie, is it all about bit perfect, or about phase irregularities, or jitter, or analog/digital filtering, EMI/RFI, etc)

It is impossible to say all performance characteristics must be perfect, AND furthermore that the designer knows every single designer parameter to make music reproduction perfect. If we knew that, presumably somebody would have gone ahead and built the perfect set of equipment...or all attempts to do so would sound identical at any given price point.

But I hear from pretty much every manufacturer I have spoken with (Gryphon, CJ, Wilson, TA, Robert Koda, Naim, Focal, Zanden) that we dont know exactly the perfect set of things to measure (and what the 'recipe is' to ensure perfect combination of these priorities to create perfect audio reproduction. Hence why each designer (even with virtually unlimited budget) sets about prioritizing which elements of technical production he values most...and then designs his own attempt at delivering that.

And THAT is where the art lies.

 

[Mdp632]

Interesting how 2 out the 3 American made SOTA Loudspeaker companies have pursued pistonic driver cones (Magico+YG) but, Wilson remains dedicated to the paper cones in 2021.

Two really different approaches. But, they all play in the same MSRP sandbox.

What good is an amp if the driver cones are flexing and adding distortion at the end of the signal chain?

I guess, it is a subjective hobby after all and we all accept some kinds of distortion

 

[andromedaaudio]

Interesting how 2 out the 3 American made SOTA Loudspeaker companies have pursued pistonic driver cones (Magico+YG) but, Wilson remains dedicated to the paper cones in 2021.

Sorry to go slightly off topic here ;

Its Thiel accuton Magico YG Avalon Kharma etc who invented these claims to differentiate themselves from others (same as high end cable manufacturers do that )
Any manufacturer who works with a hard / stiff membrane material claims his are the best , although they also have to take into account that internal dampening plays a big role in the whole picture, iow how fast ( past )vibrations/ tones naturally dissipate in the membrane .
Not fast enough dissipated membrane vibration is also called distortion.
Some people can hear it others are probably not as sensitive .

A modern paper cone midrange can operate perfectly pistonic in the midrange , bass freq is another story
These days papercones are composite (reinforced )cones look at this scanspeak 4 inch baby , i might use this in my next design .
Does it look familiar if you look at the most expensive wilsons ( wink wink )

Look at the perfect behaviour in the midrange absolutely ruler flat .
Black line is on axis
Now take a look at the thiel accuton website , you re not gonna find a ceramic midrange cone with this kind of behavior.
A paper composite mid is capable of moving air while dissipating resonances in a perfectly fast /natural way .
Designing a loudspeaker just like a machine isnt the way to go , its both engineering/ listening .
Because a lot of things you cant even measure but the ear can determine whether it sounds natural or not

 

[Mdp632]

Sorry to go slightly off topic here ;

Its Thiel accuton Magico YG Avalon Kharma etc who invented these claims to differentiate themselves from others (same as high end cable manufacturers do that )
Any manufacturer who works with a hard / stiff membrane material claims his are the best , although they also have to take in account that internal dampening plays a big roll in the whole picture iow how fast vibrations naturally dissipate in the membrane .
Not fast enough dissipated membrane vibration is also called distortion.
Some people can hear it others are probably not as sensitive

Off course a paper cone mid can operate perfectly pistonic in the midrange , bass freq is another story
These days papercones are composite (reinforced )cones look at this scanspeak 4 inch baby , i might use this in my next design .
Does it look familiar if you look at the most expensive wilsons ( wink wink )

Look at the perfect behaviour in the midrange absolutely ruler flat , now take a look at the thiel accuton website , you re not gonna find a ceramic midrange cone with this kind of behavior.
A paper composite mid is perfectly capable of moving air while dissipating resonances in a perfectly natural way .
Designing a loudspeaker like a machine isnt the way to go , its both scientific design listening , because a lot of things you cant even measure but the ear can determine whether it sounds natural or not

Very interesting.

Thanks for this info. Sometimes you don't know until you ask

 

[KostasP.]

Hi Chuck,

Interesting quotation. I fully acknowledge that some designs actually put color in...I fully am with you on that one. I am not a fan.

That said, my understanding of audio design & engineering is that while key science elements may be relatively clear...what is NOT clear is:
- the priority of WHICH engineering measurements does the designer think are the most important to focus on?
- Additionally, how does the designer prioritize which measurements or technical achievements to focus on...particularly if that means other technical performance may by definition not be as optimized? (ie, is it all about bit perfect, or about phase irregularities, or jitter, or analog/digital filtering, EMI/RFI, etc)

It is impossible to say all performance characteristics must be perfect, AND furthermore that the designer knows every single designer parameter to make music reproduction perfect. If we knew that, presumably somebody would have gone ahead and built the perfect set of equipment...or all attempts to do so would sound identical at any given price point.

But I hear from pretty much every manufacturer I have spoken with (Gryphon, CJ, Wilson, TA, Robert Koda, Naim, Focal, Zanden) that we dont know exactly the perfect set of things to measure (and what the 'recipe is' to ensure perfect combination of these priorities to create perfect audio reproduction. Hence why each designer (even with virtually unlimited budget) sets about prioritizing which elements of technical production he values most...and then designs his own attempt at delivering that.

And THAT is where the art lies.

In the final analysis, it becomes both a science and an art, for we do NOT want to compile an array of components and create an electro-mechanical machine that makes sound but NOT music! And here begins the vicious circle of subjectivity \ objectivity, priorities \ compromises and, at worst, the Audiophilia Insecurity Syndrome!

Cheers to all, Kostas.

 

[nirodha]

A quote from Yoav Geva when asked if loudspeaker design is more of an art or a science: "That's easy -- it's a science. Our goal should be to accurately convey what's on the recording, and leave the art to the composers and musicians who created the content that's on the recording. Any subjective preference that we impart on the signal would be nothing more than an arrogant attempt to override the musicians' intent. While music is pure emotion, a speaker is nothing more than a machine that converts electrical signals into air-pressure fluctuations. Machines are developed by scientists and engineers, not artists."

My problem with coloration in electronics is it tends to narrow the recordings you wind up playing to just recordings where that coloration is appropriate. If that is your sole focus, fine. In Mr. Heilbrunn's example, such a system will favor music that aligns with ". . . bliss, and all other things that can propel you into a meditative state when listening to your system." That is great for Tony Bennett, Ella or Julie London. But does Led Zeppelin music fit? Or Tchaikowskey Piano Concerto No. 1? etc. etc.

I had to think this over . I think it is a question of semantics. Colorisation as in using crayons to warm up every (!) recording can’t be the way. That’s why I don’t have a tube system. However, producing all the natural colours of an instrument, ís the way. To achieve this one might implement tubes somewhere in the set. dCS just didn’t help showing off the natural colours. That is all. But, again, all this with my ears and processor (brain)