Halcro's measured performance is superb and perhaps unequaled; however, despite that and glowing reviews, it was a failure in the marketplace. Listeners didn't like the way it sounded. My original response was directed at the comment that the subjective review system is broken; I don't necessarily disagree with that, but we don't have anything better to replace it with.
The reviewer's reviewing system.
- Thread starter DaveyF
- Start date
Not necessarily the only interpretation. Maybe they liked it, but at the price it didn't sound sufficiently different from all the other well-measuring amps to be worth buying. 0.01% or 0.001% THD or whatever - I certainly couldn't tell the difference.
Sanity has never been a pre-requisite to participate in this crazy hobby of ours.
Steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
I totally agree rbbert. I also agree with Mike and Davey as to their thoughts re the amp. Our very own Philip O'Hanlon used to be the USA distributor for Halcro so I heard the amp not only at shows but also several times at Music Lovers in Berkeley. I was drawn to hear the amp because of the measurements. Each time I left shaking my head and asking myself what am I missing. For my ears the amp was cold and sterile with absolutely no emotion. This for me is a classic example of something measuring superb but sounding completely cold. As rbbert said no one liked it and the company went belly up. What more needs to be said.
Amir, I believe that the difference between my opinion and the glowing review could be explained like this: The reviewer was either a) unwilling to state what he heard accurately, b) The reviewer's ancillary gear was not resolving enough to hear what I heard ( see my OP ) or c)The reviewer didn't actually hear what I heard ( along with Mike L and Steve W) for whatever reason. Or, maybe a combo of some/all of the above.
You will have to ask Mike L as to why he apparently had a change of opinion from his original post to now....which IMHO he is entitled to- and I think we can all say that we have had this issue with gear in the past vs. what we now hear and value....at least I can!
Well the Goose has a new set of feathers--Halcro is being resurrected in Australia as I write--still bad as ever I've heard them--not much worse out there sadly
just goes to show great measurements mean stuff all to ears
BruceD
Thanks for the answer. Will you hit me if I offer some other alternatives?
Everyone of course is entitled to their opinion. The issue arrives as I mentioned when they are trying to convince others that so and so gear is no good or gift to humankind, with no way for us to validate either way. I mean how could the amp be lean when we have this other review: http://hometheaterreview.com/halcro-dm58-monoblock-amp-reviewed/?page=2
"Damn, is this a fine amplifier. Even though the beast requires a long warm-up period, it sounds so good at cold temperatures that you can only wonder how it might improve. What the warm-up does is free the sound, increasing the already wide dynamic contrasts, while sweetening the treble to almost tube-like levels. Y'see, this amp is so clean and naked-sounding, as the Candy-man intended, that it is merciless in revealing the ills of all which go before it. And in a certain sense, yes, it could be mistaken for the clinical or the overly hygienic. But it isn't: it's merely open-sounding, probably the most untainted sound I've ever heard.
And yet how does one account for the following: it's neither colourless nor characterless. But if it's truly neutral and clean, and therefore lacking any artefacts (either dissonant or euphonic), how can it have a personality? But it does. It swings, by virtue of the freest, deepest, most life-like bass I've heard this side of the ARC Reference 600, with such speed and precision that I even subjected myself to Rob Wasserman CDs. The Bass is so luscious that you're tempted to disconnect the WATTs..."
I don't know how we could read this amp as being lean based on this subjective writing. He goes on to say:
"The Halcro delivers all of the textures and nuances with the flair of a Radford STA25, but with reserves of grunt which no brace of EL34s can, alas, muster.
It loved the WATT Puppys, and a few minutes with the Apogees showed it to be oblivious to loads. Quad electrostatics? No sizzle, no sting, and a dose of control which had me fantasising about how these would sound in the SME Music Room. I understand now why the importer hated to part with this pair even for a miserly week."
BTW, what he says here can be backed objectively. The reason you need state-of-the-art amplification with a ton of power is to have it be load independent. This is what I love about high-end amps. They are so over-designed that you can't find corner cases where they fail as you would with an amp built to a low price. So do I know for sure it is load independent? No but I know there is basis for that. But I can't find any basis for the amp being lean.
Of course we could also conclude that this is a useless review as they would have said same stuff but with different words for any expensive amp. In which case, it is not a situation of what they have or do as reviewers. But the fact that we just need to ignore the whole industry as it works today.
I've never heard a Halcro amp. But I noticed its input impedance is very low; 600ohms. If the pre driving such an amp didn't have low enough output impedance, then it's easy to see why the bass would be rolled off and could sound lean.
I've seen the Halcro measurements and I don't get the hysteria about it. There are many amps which measure better and the input impedance is stupid low.
Michael.
I've seen the Halcro measurements and I don't get the hysteria about it. There are many amps which measure better and the input impedance is stupid low.
Michael.
OK, it seems that you are accepting the amplifier-speaker is a complex system that can not be analyzed separately. And can only explain some of the subjective impressions people have. And that only a few experts can do it. Probably those who say that all competently designed amplifiers in non clipping conditions sound similar. Curious that you do not defend your cause, but prefer to switch in attacking magazine and forums reviews.
We have very different opinions about reviewing in this forum, my opinion has been always the same - reviews are mainly informative and entertainment, and only if you are an experienced reader you can get a lot more from the good reviews.
Sorry to see that when reviews and magazines say good things about the products you appreciate they are great, as soon as they dislike them they become broken.
I am sure that some specific, non standard measurements can correlate with perceived sound quality in high-end stereo. That the complexity of the interaction with the speaker is so great that it is beyond the measurements shown in commercial reviewing. But my point is that simple measurements, as shown in most audio magazines, can be misleading for consumers in the process of selecting equipment.
Thanks for the answer. Will you hit me if I offer some other alternatives?
Everyone of course is entitled to their opinion. The issue arrives as I mentioned when they are trying to convince others that so and so gear is no good or gift to humankind, with no way for us to validate either way. I mean how could the amp be lean when we have this other review: http://hometheaterreview.com/halcro-dm58-monoblock-amp-reviewed/?page=2
"Damn, is this a fine amplifier. Even though the beast requires a long warm-up period, it sounds so good at cold temperatures that you can only wonder how it might improve. What the warm-up does is free the sound, increasing the already wide dynamic contrasts, while sweetening the treble to almost tube-like levels. Y'see, this amp is so clean and naked-sounding, as the Candy-man intended, that it is merciless in revealing the ills of all which go before it. And in a certain sense, yes, it could be mistaken for the clinical or the overly hygienic. But it isn't: it's merely open-sounding, probably the most untainted sound I've ever heard.
And yet how does one account for the following: it's neither colourless nor characterless. But if it's truly neutral and clean, and therefore lacking any artefacts (either dissonant or euphonic), how can it have a personality? But it does. It swings, by virtue of the freest, deepest, most life-like bass I've heard this side of the ARC Reference 600, with such speed and precision that I even subjected myself to Rob Wasserman CDs. The Bass is so luscious that you're tempted to disconnect the WATTs..."
I don't know how we could read this amp as being lean based on this subjective writing. He goes on to say:
"The Halcro delivers all of the textures and nuances with the flair of a Radford STA25, but with reserves of grunt which no brace of EL34s can, alas, muster.
It loved the WATT Puppys, and a few minutes with the Apogees showed it to be oblivious to loads. Quad electrostatics? No sizzle, no sting, and a dose of control which had me fantasising about how these would sound in the SME Music Room. I understand now why the importer hated to part with this pair even for a miserly week."
BTW, what he says here can be backed objectively. The reason you need state-of-the-art amplification with a ton of power is to have it be load independent. This is what I love about high-end amps. They are so over-designed that you can't find corner cases where they fail as you would with an amp built to a low price. So do I know for sure it is load independent? No but I know there is basis for that. But I can't find any basis for the amp being lean.
Of course we could also conclude that this is a useless review as they would have said same stuff but with different words for any expensive amp. In which case, it is not a situation of what they have or do as reviewers. But the fact that we just need to ignore the whole industry as it works today.
Amir, I think you posted a great example of why it is such a bad idea to simply rely on a review or reviews to compile a list of potential purchase options...or worse, to actually buy based on the review. Certainly reading the review you posted, and actually others that I have read, one could conclude that the amp is a superb all round performer.
The same could be said for relying on just the measurements that are posted with reviews....the measurements on this amp are about as good as one can get. Yet, like I said before, I have personally heard this amp---and it did absolutely nothing for me.
The lean sound was very off-putting and the overall lack of life was the same. Now, if one wants to put aside the human ability of actually hearing and enjoying the sound of 'live' music,and IF one was not exposed on a regular basis to the 'live' sound, perhaps...perhaps, I could comprehend the glowing review and the description that was written of the sound.
Maybe we have to come up with a simple fact, or point of agreement on this forum...
that is: there are some members who will not rely on their ears and instead will 'live and die' by what their measurements and measuring gear are telling them, even though their untrustworthy ears are maybe telling them something else entirely; and then there are some members who will only believe in their ears and put no creed whatsoever in what the measurements are telling them and lastly, there are members ( who BTW, i count myself as ) who utilize measurements for a basic understanding/expectation of the sound, but rely only on our ears as the final arbiter.
Some manufacturers, such as Jeff Rowland and Atmasphere to my knowledge, match the impedances of the preamplifier and amplifiers for maximum power transfer - same value of impedance at output and input. It is why the 600 ohm in both sides.
Nope. I universally dismiss all subjective reviews, to my favor or not. Now, in the context of folks like you arguing with me, and who believe in such subjective views, I am certainly not shy about quoting their opposite views to you.
They are a system. But only if you want to optimize them. In other words, if the maximum power you can afford is 50 watts, then there is a way to know if that 50 watt amplifier is suitable for your specific loudspeaker. Now, if you bought an amplifier that had 500 watts and can withstand a near short all day long without its protection circuit kicking in, then you can buy that amplifier knowing that whatever you throw it, it won't change its dynamic performance. Measurements of such things as power, impedance, phase and efficiency of the loudspeakers help you save cost, space, heat and weight. If those are not concerns, then you should buy the ultimate amplifier and be done with it.
Everything I just said is based on understanding of the technology and how the loudspeaker and amplifier work together. Such insight then can strongly guide you toward the proper appraisal of equipment when you listen to it. It allows a decision to be made comprehensively.
If we are lucky. So many subjective views differ from what we can prove that your standard bias should be that the subjective view is wrong until demonstrated otherwise. I explained a case where I could see the reviewer being right but even there, who knows if he just made up that impression as opposed to what really hit his ears. So please don't start with the notion that subjective view is right and it is the engineering that fails to explain it. Subjective view needs to demonstrate its correctness first.
Now I am really going to get it
. So I will retire to my listening room once again....
That's a ridiculously low input impedance. The problem is that a reviewer wouldn't necessarily understand that it really matters which preamp is used with such a fussy amp. In Lavigne's case, he obviously didn't understand this issue with Halcro; eg. He recommended driving it with a tube pre-amp.
Amir,
I think to dismiss all subjective reviews is a bit extreme. I think you would have to believe that measurements explain everything. However, after 30 years in audio, both listening and recording, I know that to be false.
I think to dismiss all subjective reviews is a bit extreme. I think you would have to believe that measurements explain everything. However, after 30 years in audio, both listening and recording, I know that to be false.
Steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
I agree as well Lee
Measurements for most all of us are a starting point. To discount anything with no measurements is absurd. The Halcro amp IMHO is a perfect example.
Measurements for most all of us are a starting point. To discount anything with no measurements is absurd. The Halcro amp IMHO is a perfect example.
Again the same vague considerations. Once you get all data from Stereophile, and add the listening room you are faced with a problem that relies on real experience.
The successful systems of WBF users and thousands of posts at WBF are a proof that the subjective perspective converges and really works in the high-end. I have not seen any one fully explaining how he successfully used the measurements of his amplifier to chose it. Even when we just debated what are maximal loudness requirements of audiophiles we have shown a lot of disagreement!
Parenthetic comment: Halcro is allegedly coming back under new ownership - http://halcro.com/history/
Similar threads
