Ya thats fine. I was just reporting my own findings so anyone reading there doesn't automatically conclude 'oh pass labs sucks'. I fucking love my pass amp. But I am not disagreeing that they may not sound good with a tube pre + YG hailey 2.2. I have no right to as I have not heard this combination. On the NS5000 they are magic.
KeithR's "Dream Speaker" Search
- Thread starter KeithR
- Start date
Ya thats fine. I was just reporting my own findings so anyone reading there doesn't automatically conclude 'oh pass labs sucks'. I fucking love my pass amp. But I am not disagreeing that they may not sound good with a tube pre + YG hailey 2.2. I have no right to as I have not heard this combination. On the NS5000 they are magic.
Ya that seems to be the implication. Kind of surprised by the comments on this thread. My personal experience has been amazing. And I have friends who also really are blown away by the magic of the pass sound. Also doesn't hurt they have incredible service and reputation of being incredibly reliable. To anyone considering pass, please audition them, they are amazing!!!!!
I love the ARC 160ms (have heard them several times at the store), just not a match on YG.
Here's a recap of all the amps I've had on the Haileys:
ARC Ref 75SE (existing amp)
ARC Ref 160m
Luxman m900
m2tech Crosby monos (Class D)
Ampzilla, 2nd Edition
BHK 300 monos (hybrid)
JRDG Model 625s2
Pass Labs X350.8
I've also thought about the Hegel H30, Parasound JC1+, and Lamm M2.2. I was close to picking up the Hegel, decided against the Parasound, and haven't seen a used pair of M2.2s. Others have recommended Sim, but I'm concerned its a little cool for my tastes. Its all personal preference at this level.
The reason I haven't tried a BAT 655SE is mainly because it's a ginormous, unwieldy amp. I've liked BAT tubes in the past (and owned them for several years on Wilson), feel their SS isn't quite in the same league but haven't tried one at home.
Last edited:
Seems KeithR you the person to go to if it comes to listening experiences. Impressive and extensive audition list, also in your other posts.
I’m a sort of doing a research what could be the next amp driving my TAD CR-1, replacing my ARC Ref 150 SE. Although a fine amp, and after reading about the CR-1 here, I’m not sure if the Ref 150 gets the full potential out of these TAD’s.
it seems ARC’s Ref 160M’s have different characteristics than we used to hear from an ARC amp, so on my to audition list, like d’Agostino Progression. Dartzeel seems to be a good fit but out of range.
Any thoughts ?
Thanks.
Keith, any thoughts about the Gryphon Essence? (https://www.soundstageultra.com/ind...ryphon-audio-designs-essence-stereo-amplifier)
it looks like a nice, Class A amp - but 100 watts into 4 ohms won't get the YG's motor started. I've always wanted to try a Gryphon, but the price of entry is just too high. I"m sure this amp will be very successful on more efficient speakers.
Keith, as a Diablo 300 owner this was my initial reaction too. But Gryphon apparently believes Essence, a high current design with a ton of capacitance, will be a good upgrade path for many Diablo owners. Early users have remarked on its understated power. If you have any interest in Gryphon, you might want to give Philip or Mike B a call.
A bit late... but it's hard to beat TAD electronics with TAD speakers.
While the TAD speakers aren't power hungry like some, they are very sensitive and many report issues with harshness or brightness. I have heard lots of TAD demos and I would definitely NOT use tubes. OTOH many SS amps will be deficient in some ways as well. Some of the best demos I heard were AJ himself setting them up with TAD amps.
I have the Pioneer S-1EX which use the same drivers as the TAD Evolution tower speakers and use an Odyssey amp with many mods, these are the "little brother" to the Kraft amps. These amps work very well with my speakers. I've tried quite a few and it's not an easy speaker to match, but in a different way vs the YGs I think.
Thanks. Although tubes might indeed not be the first choice, it is difficult to move away from it once you are used to ARC amps for a long time..... but will give it a try
Keith talked about Luxman which was not my first thought but might give it a chance. Others on my list are still a Dan d’Agostino Progression/S250, an Alieno and still a pair of ARC 160m.
But here we go. I’m currently auditioning a MSB Reference DAC directly connected to the ARC. I will eventually and most likely go first for the MSB Reference DAC directly to my ARC Ref 150 SE which really surprised and impressed me compared to MSB’s premier DAC that own now. It was actually confusing...
One reason or the other, my Soulution 520 is not a match in this set up (the TADs and the MSB Reference are here to stay, that is to say when I can agree with my dealer on purchasing the latter trading in my Premier DAC). The Soulution 520 is a fine pre-amp, but not in this set-up.
Then I will take my time to find the perfect amp match, with or without a matching pre-amp.
It is hard to disagree with your statement. We can definitely compare the objective measurements, but ultimately the reception of sound is by default very subjective in its nature.
Have heard a few speakers recently and thought I would sum up a few thoughts for folks. I just love auditioning speakers
first, Zu Druid VI:
Zu has come a long way with this speaker. The IV had a rolled off top end that never was my cup of tea and the V, while significantly better, still had a more intimate soundstage. The VI I'm pleased to share is a different animal. The first half hour, had to recalibrate my brain almost as when you hear a speaker without crossover, its quite a different experience. There is a raw, almost brashness to the sound when you remove it and they just sound different. This recalibration also happened with the Gamut, incidentally, albeit it in a different way. The setup was a Melody preamp and Quad II Jubilee amplification (I love these Quads, always have). I would say the Zu hallmark sound is still there - coherent, tone dense, and dynamic. However, the cabinet improvements have led to much more resolute sound. I prefer the Druid VI to the Definition now. Also, the sound stage is much bigger and it wasn't an "in between the speakers" type sound as before. Bass is a much bigger strength on this speaker as well - for a quasi-ported speaker, very taut and down into the low 30s.
As to other parts of the sound, I still feel Zu will be a polarizing speaker. I really enjoy them, but if you are a flat frequency, Harman method kind of person there are things that will bother you. For instance, I still feel Johnny Cash sounds more like a bass on them and there is some rising top end. But I'd also say that Revels and the like sound dead. You pick your poison at super high efficiency. I did play some classical on them, never a Zu strength, and it sounded much better than prior speakers with the higher resolution. When I owned the Definition, classical wasn't often in my rotation. What I'd like to see Sean Casey do is design his own FRD...I believe he's taken the Eminence path as far as it will go (and really, hardly anything from the original driver is left outside the paper).
first, Zu Druid VI:
Zu has come a long way with this speaker. The IV had a rolled off top end that never was my cup of tea and the V, while significantly better, still had a more intimate soundstage. The VI I'm pleased to share is a different animal. The first half hour, had to recalibrate my brain almost as when you hear a speaker without crossover, its quite a different experience. There is a raw, almost brashness to the sound when you remove it and they just sound different. This recalibration also happened with the Gamut, incidentally, albeit it in a different way. The setup was a Melody preamp and Quad II Jubilee amplification (I love these Quads, always have). I would say the Zu hallmark sound is still there - coherent, tone dense, and dynamic. However, the cabinet improvements have led to much more resolute sound. I prefer the Druid VI to the Definition now. Also, the sound stage is much bigger and it wasn't an "in between the speakers" type sound as before. Bass is a much bigger strength on this speaker as well - for a quasi-ported speaker, very taut and down into the low 30s.
As to other parts of the sound, I still feel Zu will be a polarizing speaker. I really enjoy them, but if you are a flat frequency, Harman method kind of person there are things that will bother you. For instance, I still feel Johnny Cash sounds more like a bass on them and there is some rising top end. But I'd also say that Revels and the like sound dead. You pick your poison at super high efficiency. I did play some classical on them, never a Zu strength, and it sounded much better than prior speakers with the higher resolution. When I owned the Definition, classical wasn't often in my rotation. What I'd like to see Sean Casey do is design his own FRD...I believe he's taken the Eminence path as far as it will go (and really, hardly anything from the original driver is left outside the paper).
You should try and hear the Defs 6 when Covid finally permits it's release.
Three FRDs w three concentric supertweeters and the same lighter/stiffer cabinet from the Druid 6.
Three FRDs w three concentric supertweeters and the same lighter/stiffer cabinet from the Druid 6.
Similar threads
