less refined power or more unrefined power

[misterdoggy]

I have a friend that is trying to take a choice between either:

A Mark Levinson 383 integrated Amplifier which is a preamp and Amp but only 100 watts a channel to drive 802D's or

Go with Rotel's New 1091's which are 500 watts a channel.

So either refined ML sound versus Rotel which is a fine brand but more power.

What would you tell him.

They are similar in price but the Rotel needs preamplification

The choice is between these 2.

[Eliav]

Hi
I would go with rotel power amp and an appropriately matched pre. over an integrated ML .
my reasons are : as good as ML are,separate components (rotel level) IMO will do an overall better sonic job ( refinement, imaging, noise etc.)
I think that in certain conditions the 802d may suck the life out of the 100w ML,it will be directly influencing punch,bass tightness and speed.
the disadvantage of the 802d-rotel cobmo may include posiible harshness, and lack of nuances, I think though that this will be very much dependent on the pre amp you choose.

Eliav

[misterdoggy]

Problem is Rotel doesn't have a bypass Preamp

[Eliav]

Doggy
I take it that rotel stereo pre lack HT bypass mode ? you can still use a processor such as the 1098/1068 , and switch to analog bypass for two channel music, i used to work with the rotel 1068 on analog bypass before i got the classe cp700 stereo pre, IMO, the 1068 did a pretty good job with the two channel mode. What about ML or other more affordable (Bryston )pre amps?
Eliav

[misterdoggy]

I guess the big question is are 100 watts ML from the 383 enough for the 802D's.

I read somewhere someone was using the rotel 7 x 100 watt D amp with 802D's and it was fine, so why not 100 Watts ML.

Its an inexpensive solution where there will only be minor differences from what i am powering with 436's and the 326S preamp.

I mean for Amp and preamp mine is 28,000 Euros and the 383 is 4000 euros all in one.

[Eliav]

You know how it goes,within 50-500w any amp should be able to drive the 802d, however,the more power you have etc. etc...Since you know how the bigger ML sounds with the 802d, is it possible for you to audition the 100w integrated and see where the potential weaknesses are ?
Eliav

[misterdoggy]

Thats the problem my friend has. He can afford a used one and where would he find one to play with.

I'll tell you the 433 I have which is 200 Watts a channel x 3 has more than enough power and hardly can tell the difference between the 433 and the 436 which is 350 watts mono.

I'm starting to think that brands have trademark sounds up and down the line and the differences are slight in the sound but the real differences are the power available.

So pick a brand ie: Classe, Mark Levinson, Rotel, MCintosh, etc etc and they "sound" is very similar up and down the gamme. You pay top dollar for the top of the line and the sound might be "slightly" better and more power available, but the difference between the bottom and the top remains the same timbre, and type of sound.

So what I am saying is the 100 watt model of a certain brand might be very similar indeed to the mono amp flagship 350 watt in style of sound. Of course if you push big speakers to the clipping point, you will arrive with a 100w and 802D's, but that would have to be very very loud, louder than most play.

[chinets]

In this case ML unrefined and Rotel Refined with it's power!!

Misterdoggy,

I would not define ML as refined and Rotel as unrefined in the first place IMHO!! :E

Second, The ML would not run your 802D's properly ,as there would be not enough juice to hear all the details and Low bass, and that could be called In my opinion unrefined, but having a Rotel 1091 with 500W power..That is in my opinion refined sound, because you will get the best detailed and most sound and better bass out of these speakers. You might not like the sound of Rotel or ML, so you must hear and audition both before choosing. Let your ears make that vital decision!! More power will get those speakers to sing ,but do you like the sound of that Amp etc... is a different story. ( IMHO, I believe amps are amps, with very little sound differences, so go for the largest bang for the buck! More POWER better detail and Dynamics!! Rotel is better priced too!! :T

I really believe that the Pre 1098 of Rotel with the 1091 amp should do the job brilliantly ,and YES you can Bypass with the 1098 pre amp IN HT and Music in multi channel and Stereo..I know, as I have the 1098 myself for HT. :W

Rotel makes good stuff ,and you will be more happy with the powerful 500w Rotel over the weak ML with only 100w. That is my opinion. 8)

I also don't agree with Eliav when he says that the Rotel will be harsh sounding and have lack of nuances..Don't think so ,unless you are so used to the ML sound that NO other sound will make you happy!! It's in the mind!!! 8O

You gave us the choice between the Rotel( 500w power) and the ML ( 100w
power) and which should we choose???

Rotel Hands down...That is what I would choose!!!! BLIND FOLDED!!!!!!!!!! ;x(

Good Luck, and let us know what you have decided on??

Cheers :T

[misterdoggy]

I have owned a 1098 and thought it was one of the best Processors out there, if not THE best. The Lexicon 12B was touted to be the very best so I switched. There is more things going on in HT with the lex, but the ease of use and choice with the Rotel is great.

However, in 2 channel stereo, the rotel lagged behind and even the lexicon which was an improvement in 2 channel sound (only slightly) still couldn't match a dedicated Preamp.

So even though you have bypass in the 1098, that isn't where you need the bypass, you need it in a preamp. So you can use the RL fronts thru the preamp bypassing volume control of the preamp not the processor.

[chinets]

What if you use your Rotel 1098 as a processor and a Pre Amp would that make a difference??
I am confused Misterdoggy. Sorry my friend ,as I am an avid Multichannel freak, and Stereo Bypass is not really my thing. Could you explain this more as the 1098 can Bypass In Stereo too..Right??
So why the pre Amp issue. Sorry confused!! Can you explain??
Cheers to you!!!

[VictorHRS]

Misterdoggy,

I think the 100 ML watts are enough, specially from the wonderful No.383. I´d go with it, elegant, simple solution. It does have enough current to double its wattage in 4 ohms. I almost bought a 383 before I bought my Accuphase E-308 which handles the 802Ds fine and is weaker in terms of power and current compared to the 383.

One interesting number to look for when matching amps and speakers, is the german magazine Audio AK index. You use this way, if an amp has an AK index higher than the speaker´s index, it will be fine driving them regarding many electrical parameters. Fortunately they have tested both 802Ds and 383. The 383 AK is much higher than the 802Ds, so it will drive them perfectly. That doesn´t mean that will be the best sound available or anything like that, only means that the amp has proper electrical capabilities to drive the load provided by the speaker.

Hope it helps! :T

[tboooe]

I would always go with refined power. The reality is unless you intend on listening to very high SPLs or if your room is very big or if you speakers are really inefficient, you will not need a lot of power. I was trying to decide between 600 watt monoblocks or 160 single ended Class A monoblocks and I went with the latter. My amps come with meters that show the output of the amps and I have neve seen the meter moves during my listgening sessions. When auditioned the 600 watt monoblocks, the meters also never moved beyond its Class A output (push pull). Since I was never out of Class A, I decided to get the smaller total output amp with the higher single ended Class A power. Just my opinion of course.

[ChrisssB]

I think 100w are NOT enough to drive properly 802ds. There are other amps in that price range that would provide more power like MF A5cr. I would check on them.
Actually I'm gonna cause I'm also on a hunt for an amp to drive my 804S.

Regards Chris

[misterdoggy]

What if you use your Rotel 1098 as a processor and a Pre Amp would that make a difference??
I am confused Misterdoggy. Sorry my friend ,as I am an avid Multichannel freak, and Stereo Bypass is not really my thing. Could you explain this more as the 1098 can Bypass In Stereo too..Right??
So why the pre Amp issue. Sorry confused!! Can you explain??
Cheers to you!!!

Chinets,

I use a bypass like this. I have a DVD player that sends the signal to the Processor. The processor controls the volume for the front L&R. The signal then goes to the Preamps' bypass which meaning the unity gain or volume of the signal is not controlled by the Preamp therefore bypassing its volume control and the pure signal then goes to the Amps and on to the speakers.

Then when using a CD player it can go directly into the Preamp and directly to the Amps not having anything to do with the processor. The volume is controlled by the Preamp and the sound will ALWAYS be better with a dedicated Preamp than a Processor as will a dedicated CD player as compared to a DVD/CD player.

I will always use a Processor and Preamp and dedicated Cd player and DVD player as the results are better. ;x( ;x( ;x( ;x( ;x(

Here's a wiring schematic showing how I've incorporated bypass in my system

[dknightd]

I think it depends on what your friend wants. does he/she want good sound at
normal volumes, or, do they want concert level volume?

[misterdoggy]

I think it depends on what your friend wants. does he/she want good sound at
normal volumes, or, do they want concert level volume?

Well if you mean put the speakers on a stage and blast it for 100,000 people I think not. But there should be 'ample' power to listen at 75 dbs.

[tboooe]

Well if you mean put the speakers on a stage and blast it for 100,000 people I think not. But there should be 'ample' power to listen at 75 dbs.

Assuming you are sitting 3m away and your speakers are 90db efficient, and nominally at 8ohm, then at 75 db you would only need the following power:

8 ohm: 0.18W
4 ohm: 0.35W
2ohm: 0.70W

Now assuming that at any one time in a song, the db increases by 12db, then you would need the following momentary power:

8 ohm: 2.83W
4 ohm: 5.66W
2ohm: 11.31W

So as you can see, at 75 db listening level you really do not need that much power. Again, go for quality power.

[Aldo]

I vote for quality power!
It is not just about watts, just take a look at the giant Halcros, only 225 watts!

[misterdoggy]

Assuming you are sitting 3m away and your speakers are 90db efficient, and nominally at 8ohm, then at 75 db you would only need the following power:

8 ohm: 0.18W
4 ohm: 0.35W
2ohm: 0.70W

Now assuming that at any one time in a song, the db increases by 12db, then you would need the following momentary power:

8 ohm: 2.83W
4 ohm: 5.66W
2ohm: 11.31W

So as you can see, at 75 db listening level you really do not need that much power. Again, go for quality power.

Thanks Tboooe,

I just love it when Forum members come up with this kind of information.

I mean there's all kinds of watts around aren't there. 50 watt tube Amps, 500 watt cheap SS amps, 100 watt A amps, 500 watts D amps and efficiency is all over the place.

Sounds like my friend would be OK with ML 383. I mean there's a lot of the 32 preamp technology in the preamp section and a lot of 33h technology in the amp section. Its easy to navigate, with bypass and all and its compact.

I mean, I will give a serious comparison with my 326S preamp and 436 mono blocs against the 383 at low levels and see how different the sound is.

I can tell you that I did not hear night/day differences between the 432 433 and 436's and wondering at low levels what differences to expect.

[VictorHRS]

As far as I know, the 383 doesn't have HT bypass, at least the last time I checked when it was one of my options. It might have been incorporated though, since ML products are software upgradable. Anyway, that isn't a problema at all, you can integrated it easily into a HT without bypass.

It's a very integrated amp, one of the best around, along with Accuphase E series, Gryphon Diablo, GamuT DI150 and many others.

[Fraise]

Assuming you are sitting 3m away and your speakers are 90db efficient, and nominally at 8ohm, then at 75 db you would only need the following power:

8 ohm: 0.18W
4 ohm: 0.35W
2ohm: 0.70W

Now assuming that at any one time in a song, the db increases by 12db, then you would need the following momentary power:

8 ohm: 2.83W
4 ohm: 5.66W
2ohm: 11.31W

So as you can see, at 75 db listening level you really do not need that much power. Again, go for quality power.

but aren't the efficiency ratings taken using a 1khz tone? so wouldn't those required power figures be dependant on the frequencies being played?

I would go with the ML hands down. Personally i think its a tragedy to put rotel on any of the 800 series.

[tboooe]

but aren't the efficiency ratings taken using a 1khz tone? so wouldn't those required power figures be dependant on the frequencies being played?

I would go with the ML hands down. Personally i think its a tragedy to put rotel on any of the 800 series.

Good point. I am not sure how to deal with efficiency other than to look at the impedance fluctuations across the freq curve. Also you can tell a lot by looking at the freq curve of the speaker to see the peaks and valleys. I think most good speakers will not have any large dips but lets assume that the speakers are only 80db efficient in some freqs which is half as loud. Then at 80db at 3m listenind distance you would need the following power:

8ohm:1.78W
4ohm: 3.56W
2ohm: 7.13W

Again, assuming a max peak of 12db:

8ohm:28.51W
4ohm: 57.01W
2ohm: 114.04W

So you still do not need that much power. I have never seen speakers that are 80db efficient. You should look for amps that has the current draw to deal with peaks but as you can see, a lot of power really is not needed, even in the worse case scenario.

[misterdoggy]

As far as I know, the 383 doesn't have HT bypass, at least the last time I checked when it was one of my options. It might have been incorporated though, since ML products are software upgradable. Anyway, that isn't a problema at all, you can integrated it easily into a HT without bypass.

It's a very integrated amp, one of the best around, along with Accuphase E series, Gryphon Diablo, GamuT DI150 and many others.

I was reading the manual on the 383 and it definitely has SSP mode now. This is very important to me as haveing separate preamp for stereo is important to stay purist in the stereo realm :T

[Fraise]

Good point. I am not sure how to deal with efficiency other than to look at the impedance fluctuations across the freq curve. Also you can tell a lot by looking at the freq curve of the speaker to see the peaks and valleys. I think most good speakers will not have any large dips but lets assume that the speakers are only 80db efficient in some freqs which is half as loud. Then at 80db at 3m listenind distance you would need the following power:

8ohm:1.78W
4ohm: 3.56W
2ohm: 7.13W

Again, assuming a max peak of 12db:

8ohm:28.51W
4ohm: 57.01W
2ohm: 114.04W

So you still do not need that much power. I have never seen speakers that are 80db efficient. You should look for amps that has the current draw to deal with peaks but as you can see, a lot of power really is not needed, even in the worse case scenario.

But the power requirements change based on frequency. ie. a speaker would require much more power to play a 100hz tone than a 1khz tone.

I do agree with your comments about the actual required power. When i had my N803's and an old school SAE amp temporatily, it would rarely exceed 10W at what i consider to be decent listening volumes. The only time this changed was when playing material that was bass heavy. The amp was only rated for 100W x 2 and it did the job. I did notice a huge difference when i switched to my classe but i attribute that more the the fact thats its a quality piece rather than 180W / channel

[gerardhn]

doggy,
ML 383 is wonderfull peice of equipment.
it was once my discovery what an amp could do
it blew away all advertised amps as the nuforce completely...
i heard it on a set of dynaudios
iám surprized why so little forum members have this amp.

[chinets]

Thanks Misterdoggy,
That was very interesting Information you gave me ,and Now I understand your set up. Thanks!!
Nice set up you have... Very Impressive!!!
Have a wonderful day mon ami!!
Cheers

[misterdoggy]

Thanks Misterdoggy,
That was very interesting Information you gave me ,and Now I understand your set up. Thanks!!
Nice set up you have... Very Impressive!!!
Have a wonderful day mon ami!!
Cheers

I figure a picture is worth a thousand words.

I will always no matter what have separate bypass preamp. I started with the Passlabs X.1 and was very very impressed, but the remote was not well thought out in terms of incorporating a navigation for macro was not a possibility. And although I loved the sound, I couldn't use it.

So then went to all the same brand.

[Eliav]

It is interesting to see that most of you focused on power issue and non related to the advantage of separate components versus integrated ones. The ML 383 is as Doggy indicates is an intergrated amp. could this by itself be a disadvantage ? would this defeat it's 'refined power" advantage ?
IMO this is as important as power and watts, IMO an integrated IS in somewhat a disadvatage that will interfere with " refined power" production per definition !
Eliav

[Mark_C.]

It is interesting to see that most of you focused on power issue and non related to the advantage of separate components versus integrated ones. The ML 383 is as Doggy indicates is an intergrated amp. could this by itself be a disadvantage ? would this defeat it's 'refined power" advantage ?
IMO this is as important as power and watts, IMO an integrated IS in somewhat a disadvatage that will interfere with " refined power" production per definition !
Eliav

Bah! I use a Musical Fidelity A5 integrated to power my 2-channel setup (Nautilus 804s). Sounds pretty damned refined to me.

[RNKC]

I used to have a Proceed Amp5 driving everything. (N802 up front.) If I recall correctly, this was 125w x 5. Then I switched to Mark Levinson 432 for the mains (400w x 2).

At 125w, the sound from my N802 was adequate. I got the detail, I got the bass, I got that typical B&W sound.

At 400w, the sound from my N802 was markedly superior. I got more details, I got much more bass, I got a far more controlled sound, I gained the ability to listen at much louder levels if I wanted to, and I felt I was getting everything I could out of my N802.

I'm admittedly biased - I love the Mark Levinson sound. (Which is a bit of an odd statement since a good amp isn't supposed to sound like anything at all really.) In the store I've heard the ML383 driving N802 (but not the diamonds) and I did hear that sweet ML / B&W combination.

I think the 383 will do an adequate job of driving the 802D but, as others have noted, only if he listens at lower levels. If he expects to have a grand crescendo culminate in a room shaking experience, it's not going to happen. If he's expecting the deep bass to occasionally rumble straight through him, it's not going to happen. The 383 will fill a room with sound, but it won't fill a house. But if he doesn't care about that kind of volume, then IMHO I think he'll be fine with the 383.

[RNKC]

P.S. Having said all that, I think that all of us here agree that separate components and a real power amp is clearly the way to go.

[misterdoggy]

P.S. Having said all that, I think that all of us here agree that separate components and a real power amp is clearly the way to go.

RNKC

I definitely agree that separate everything everywhere, dedicated it ideal. Also in this ideal world (brave new world) All the speakers would be 800D all around, and all would be bi-amped with either CAM400's or 436's or 1201's etc etc.

But I was trying to figure out something for a friend with a budget in mind. There are sme advantages to Integrated Amp
a.) space reduced
b.) less wiring = less loss of signal (because the amp and preamp are attached
c.) cost is usually attractive for these types of Amps
d.) Stepping into a high end brand at a % of the cost if you pick one up used

I have the 326S preamp which is in Europe 12000 Euros + with 2 x 436's at European prices 19000 Euros pair. So pay new 31,000 Euros ($40k usd) or pick up a used 383 for $3000 usd.

[kurtholz]

another way to go

hey all

your friend might consider a Bel Canto for amplification, they can be found on audiogon at great prices, and in my opinion offer a substantial upgrade in sound over Rotel

I believe our resident stereophile reviewer had a pair of monoblocks in his reference system,

Kurt

[RNKC]

Budget is indeed a key factor. That's why I started with hand-me-downs from Dad; the price was right - free!

I think ML383 is a good way to go for a budget-minded person who wants the ML sound. And I think it will adequately drive 802D but not to the degree of perfection that some of us enjoy.

[RebelMan]

I think high-end integrateds are often underrated. Many that I have heard do their namesake proud. Quality brands will traditionally carry a "house sound" that starts with the top of the line and is usually disseminated to some extent further down.

The ML383 will satisfy most of the 802D's power needs and if you friend likes the sound quality then this is the approach he should take.

The RB-1091s will not have an equivalent impact on sound quality, regardless of its total output power, because the pre/pro that it gets paired with will dictate most of these terms and is unknown.

My choice would be the quality of the ML over quantity of the Rotel.

[chinets]

A Misterdoggy Question!!

Misterdoggy,

Thanks for all your Information that you sent us with a full diagram. As you well put it, a picture is worth a thousand words!! Bravo!!! ;x(

The question I would like to put forth to you is: What would be the difference in sound ,and how clear and visible would the difference be by having a Processor and Pre amp separates VS. having the sound go Via ByPass through let us say a 1098 Rotel processor without any Pre Amp ????
Is there a huge sound difference, and could you kindly describe that difference to us?? Very curious here!! We want to see what we are missing in sound here. Would I hear the difference IN DVD-A, SACD besides Red book too In your connection through Pre Amp amd Processor Vs. a Processor ONLY all In ByPass mode of course. ( Both set ups In PURE ByPass Modes)!! :roll:

Thanks In advance Misterdoggy!!!!!!!!!!!! :T

Cheers!!!!

[misterdoggy]

Chinets,

I am a Stereo purist so I only use and listen to stereo right and left channels. The 1098 is truly great processor, but it is not a dedicated preamp. A dedicated preamp will definitely sound better. Whether you bypass to a Rotel preamp or any other decent preamp, it will sound better.

There will be a marked improvement. Large enough that you won't go back. Not small like the difference of cables, or 2 quality Amps of the same stature ie: Krell FPBMX versus MAC1201 where it would take hours of listening to decide, this is something you could A/B and decide in 1 minute (I did)

SACD and DVD-A are different and I don't have first hand experience to offer. I'm not sure how many preamps offer bypass to 5 channels, but I imagine there must be some that do.

Remember bypass is only interesting bypassing the volume control of the preamp to allow the signal to pass directly through the preamp from the processor. Not the other way around. You want the purest signal possible to go from the preamp to the speakers and this is the path.

[chinets]

Thanks Misterdoogy!!!

Misterdoggy,



Merci bien mon ami!! That was very kind of you to explain all this to me. I personally love MultiChannel as you can see, so I am going to hunt down a 5.1 channel dedicated Pre Amp In order to Audition and hear the sound difference between A Dedicated Pre Amp Vs the Processor only and see what I was missing with DVD-A and SACD too. :T



Does anyone know or recommend any 5.1 channel Pre Amp???????? :roll:

I will do my homework ,but I would appreciate any feedback on 5.1 channel Pre Amps!! :W



Salut!!!!!!!!!



Merci pour tout!!!! ;x(

Chinets

[misterdoggy]

c'est rien de tout

avec plaisir

abientot

[johan]

McIntosh C45 has 5.1 analog bypass, two of them actually. In fact there is no decoder built in at all, it's pure analog. If you have a multiplayer with 5.1 out you let the player do the processing.

It's an interesting approach from McIntosh I think. This way you know all the money has been put in sound quality, no digital, no video just audio. Maybe not the best choice if you're more into HT though.

[chinets]

Thanks Johan and Thanks Misterdoggy for all your precious input and kind attentive help.

Will pursue the Mac approach, although I do have an HT sweet tooth too!!! I must add!! But for SACD and DVD-A that could me amazing!! Don't you think?

Ciao!!
Chinets!

[misterdoggy]

McIntosh C45 has 5.1 analog bypass, two of them actually. In fact there is no decoder built in at all, it's pure analog. If you have a multiplayer with 5.1 out you let the player do the processing.

It's an interesting approach from McIntosh I think. This way you know all the money has been put in sound quality, no digital, no video just audio. Maybe not the best choice if you're more into HT though.

Johan,

So you would have the 5.1 pass thru the volume and processing of the Preamp. Have your DVD-A or SACD player send 5.1 direct to the C45 for processing DVDA and SACD for playback and then The DVD player also send a Digital connection to the Processor for 5.1 HT.

I don't see why that isn't ideal for HT. If the signal passes thru something like a C45 it probably sounds the same. > NON ?

[Rolex]

Looks like I'm jumping in late here. I wanted to add my two cents.

383 and B&W....there are much better combos out there at the same price....Like the Rowland Concentra II. Same price, more power, much better synergy with the B&W's. The Nautilus line liked much more power than the new diamond series, so you can get away with 150 watts on the 802d.

Integrateds are in no way less value or quality than separates. My preference is to take an integrated any day of the week. I get more value for the same amount of money.

There are some expensive integrateds out there. And some fantastic ones. Rowland Concerto. 6.5K, I think. The Vac Phi Beta right around 22K.

Integrateds are not a lesser animal, only different.

[PavelL]

Looks like I'm jumping in late here. I wanted to add my two cents.

383 and B&W....there are much better combos out there at the same price....Like the Rowland Concentra II. Same price, more power, much better synergy with the B&W's. The Nautilus line liked much more power than the new diamond series, so you can get away with 150 watts on the 802d.

Integrateds are in no way less value or quality than separates. My preference is to take an integrated any day of the week. I get more value for the same amount of money.

There are some expensive integrateds out there. And some fantastic ones. Rowland Concerto. 6.5K, I think. The Vac Phi Beta right around 22K.

Integrateds are not a lesser animal, only different.

Jeff Rowland Concerto? class D based on Bang & Olufsen modules? just like the new Rotels?

[johan]

misterdoggy,

No "processing" can be done in the c45, it's analog only. You have to rely on the DVD's processing ability and I guess you have to look for a long time after a DVD player that can compete with a dedicated processor. Also, you can forget about room correction and auto calibration etc that HT fans like to play with. And no videoswitching.

johan