L10/M10 ready in june

[LL21]

Vice-versa. CH Precision 10 series is most forgiving system in my experience. Even worst records sounded pretty pleasant with it.
D'Agostino Momentum and Luxman 1000 are second most forgiving setups, but still there were some unlistanable tracks that were fine on CH.

Very, very interesting. The question Alex_nsl is whether you think that its 'forgiving' quality is due to an 'artifice' it places OVER the music...or whether you think the CH digs DEEPER into the original recording, pulling MORE out of it and thereby delivering more of the original musical event?
The reason for the question is that, for me and in our system, we have found that the greater the resolution, the dynamic attack, the capability...the BETTER ALL 3,000 CDs sound. And even the ones which never really sounded great...Bruce Springsteen masterings, take your pick...they still sound BETTER than they used to as the system has continued to evolve.

This is in stark contrast to certain components which sugar coat or dig in such a shallow manner, that while you are avoiding some of the poor recording/mastering issues...you are also inadvertently avoiding the original music buried deep down below as well. You end up with a lite-touch sound (ie, not particularly objectionable)...but also not particularly meaningful.

I suspect the CH is the digger deeper, better more thoroughly to bring music to the surface again-type of design. But that is just a guess, and would appreciate any thoughts you might have on WHY you think it is the most listenable.

 

[Alex_nsl]

In my personal opinion both those factors are present with CH setup:
- as I mentioned initially clarity and details level on 10 series were amazing, nothing to compare with. I suppose that why it sounds so musical and fluid.
- and for me it sounds a tiny wormer than completely neutral Boulder 3000.

 

[LL21]

Fascinating...exceedingly rare to hear from audiophiles in this rarified space who have heard such unique pieces! Very exciting. Thanks for sharing that insight.

 

[howiebrou]

Nope, unfortunately I was not able to find Dartzeel available for audition in US. Their US distributor bluelightaudio did not respond on that question and that was obvious red flag on that brand.

That's a shame. You should have got Mike L on the case to shake it up.

 

[ashandger]

Very, very interesting. The question Alex_nsl is whether you think that its 'forgiving' quality is due to an 'artifice' it places OVER the music...or whether you think the CH digs DEEPER into the original recording, pulling MORE out of it and thereby delivering more of the original musical event?
The reason for the question is that, for me and in our system, we have found that the greater the resolution, the dynamic attack, the capability...the BETTER ALL 3,000 CDs sound. And even the ones which never really sounded great...Bruce Springsteen masterings, take your pick...they still sound BETTER than they used to as the system has continued to evolve.

This is in stark contrast to certain components which sugar coat or dig in such a shallow manner, that while you are avoiding some of the poor recording/mastering issues...you are also inadvertently avoiding the original music buried deep down below as well. You end up with a lite-touch sound (ie, not particularly objectionable)...but also not particularly meaningful.

I suspect the CH is the digger deeper, better more thoroughly to bring music to the surface again-type of design. But that is just a guess, and would appreciate any thoughts you might have on WHY you think it is the most listenable.

Totally agree with your comments.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Vice-versa. CH Precision 10 series is most forgiving system in my experience. Even worst records sounded pretty pleasant with it.
D'Agostino Momentum and Luxman 1000 are second most forgiving setups, but still there were some unlistanable tracks that were fine on CH.

If thats the case , how can CH ever be considered " Neutral amplification "
Sugarcoating is not the way to go imo.

 

[LL21]

If thats the case , how can CH ever be considered " Neutral amplification "
Sugarcoating is not the way to go imo.

See Post 101 & 102...I think that is how he meant forgiving.

 

[andromedaaudio]

See Post 101 & 102...I think that is how he meant forgiving.

The more neutral / better the amplification is , the more it divides recording quality , it allows you to easily distinguish between bad good or excellent recordings .
And i ve got the creme of the crop of mastertapes/ copies these days from Hemiolia/ Analogue productions ultra tape / open reel records / 1 of mastertapes to compare to digital .
My loudspeakers are dead neutral / as i m able to measure them on the listening spot
Good audio gear should / rips through recording quality as a knife through butter, the better the system is, the more revealing it is .

 

[microstrip]

The more neutral / better the amplification is , the more it divides recording quality , it allows you to easily distinguish between bad good or excellent recordings .
And i ve go the creme of the crop of mastertapes/ copies these days from Hemiolia/ Analogue productions ultra tape / open reel records / 1 of mastertapes to compare to digital .
My loudspeakers are dead neutral / as i m able to measure them on the listening spot
Good audio gear should / rips through recording quality as a knife through butter.

Nice sounding statement, but unfortunately our praised members have very different views on what is neutral / better amplification and also different views on bad good or excellent recordings ...

BTW1, do you have measurements of your speakers in a very large anechoic chamber or a tall mast free space?

BTW2, can you list the titles of the master tapes you use for reference? I have found that most of the time people, including me, tune their systems to their references or simply tune their references to their systems.

 

[andromedaaudio]

BTW1, do you have measurements of your speakers in a very large anechoic chamber or a tall mast free space?

Room (freq response) measurement issues only start to be an issue under around 300 hz .
Who cares how a loudspeaker measures at a high pole or in a anechoic chamber , i know what i hear on the listening spot do you ???

Im not gonna make a list microstrip of all the tapes i cant be bothered , i dont need to convince you , by the way i cant convince you anyway because im not spending 10 -20 K on cables , ... its all good man

 

[andromedaaudio]

IMO its not wrong to add a bit of colour to the system , somebody should buy what he or she likes to listen to .

Im in the market to buy some nice solid state gear , my preference goes out to ML 32 pre and a big class A machine like VITUS SS 103 or possibly HALCRO monos .
Are they more neutral/ real sounding then the CAT combo no i dont think so , but if it sounds good who cares .

I d love to hear CH gear by the way and the latest greatest of solid state , but not many shows these days unfortunate

 

[Alex_nsl]

Just for what it worth:
I auditioned Vitus SS 103. I cannot say it is absolutely neutral like Gryphon Mephisto or top Boulders. For me it sounded even warmer than CH, though it can be different speakers and room. Still both I am describing as a "BIT" warm. Luxman 1000 and D'Agostiono Momentum are warmer.

Vitus is switchable from class A to AB. And for me it sounded better in AB. In pure class A bass was a bit uncontrollable (hollow).

By my feelings the main difference between Vitus and CH is a scale. Unfortunately I was not able to find Vitus MP-M201 which would be more fair competitor at that range.

 

[andromedaaudio]

D'Agostiono Momentum are warmer.

Looks wise i think D agostino is really on top of the game with the Momentum pre power series .
Boulder is likely to be difficult loudspeaker control champ, but sound wise ,hmmm.
On my show listening list will be CH, Dartzeel Gryphon ,... i was hoping to hear them all in Munich this year , but it needs to wait another year.
Not nescessarily for sound improvement , just easy to use , no tube warm up etc , a good integrated would be ideal

 

[andromedaaudio]

See amplifier dynamic capability originates in a large part from its power supply , CH seems to have that well in order with all those well mounted red power supply caps , i took the pic from the 2 nd page of this thread.

Mono & Stereo © 2023: CH PRECISION M10 STEREO POWER AMP

 

[andromedaaudio]

 

[andromedaaudio]

The comparison is not too fair as I auditioned Gryphon and CH systems in very different rooms and with different speakers. My personal impressions:
1. Gryphons had amazing woofers control and speed. That is very showy \ spectacular setup. Again, huge scale, second only to CH M10 monos (which are in another price league). Probably Boulder 3060 is on the same level (again much more expensive).
2. CH much more fluid \ musical \ pleasant, even bigger scale. Though not that fast.

Gryphon setup had one bright show stopper for me. It is unforgiving. If the record is bad it sounds unbearable.

Your last sentence is not necessarily a bad thing in my view ( given its a good design in itself off course with no faults ) , as it might force you again to switch other components , but in the end this is the way to lift overall system level .

 

[microstrip]

Room (freq response) measurement issues only start to be an issue under around 300 hz .
Who cares how a loudspeaker measures at a high pole or in a anechoic chamber , i know what i hear on the listening spot do you ???

You were the one advertising the measurements ...

Im not gonna make a list microstrip of all the tapes i cant be bothered , i dont need to convince you , by the way i cant convince you anyway because im not spending 10 -20 K on cables , ... its all good man

Not a question of convincing anyone - IMHO it is not the purpose of high-end forums - just asking you to share information that is needed for a better understanding of posts.