Benefits of upgrading to C2 Pre-pro?

[bcgator]

Hi all,

I'm a frequent poster on the B&W speakers forum, but a first-time poster here on the Parasound board.

Tonite I'm going to pick up a Parasound Halo A51 amp that I picked up on Audiogon. It will be running my set of B&W 805 Signatures. My pre-pro is currently going to be my Onkyo 701 receiver.

Nobody has had to sell me on the benefits of giving those 805 Sigs proper amplification...I'm looking forward to a nice improvement in sound quality over the Rotel RMB-1075 I have been running (which was just sold). But what I'm not well-schooled on are the benefits of high-end pre-pros, like the Parasound C2.

Not that my Onkyo 701 is audiophile quality, but it's not a junker either. Would I actually be able to hear the difference in sound quality using a C2 vs. the Onkyo, when paired with the Halo A51 + 805 Sigs? I know that's a question asked far too often, about too many pieces of equipment, but I can't get my brain around spending $2500-4000 on a pre-pro when my Onkyo seems to pull off home theater duties pretty well. Maybe the difference in sound quality would be more obvious with 2-channel audio?

Any and all feedback would be appreciated, even if it's just to heckle me for asking the question in the first place!

Thanks,
BCGator

[SpOoNmAn]

I just happen to be selling my C2, once it returns from Parasound with the updates, but thats for another time.....

I used an Elite receiver as a pre/pro for 3 years and thought it was good enough. Now that was a 1,400 receiver mind you.

I then bought the Outlaw 950 for $899.00 to try it out and lol, what a massive difference. The center was sooooo much better. The surrounds came alive for the first time, and the LFE was much much tighter and lower. I could NOT believe what an actual pre/pro did to my system, and kicked myself for not doing it sooner.

Then something happened, I got the Halo A52 amp and the 950 just didnt look right. So as I could sleep sound at night, I returned it and got the C2. Again, a huge difference in most aspects.

The least difference was the Surrounds. Not much to tell here. But the Center became even more focused, and the LFE... a LOT tighter and cleaner and lower. Ask anyone here who has the C1 or C2, the "LFE out" is just amazing. The calibration with the mic is another kick ass feature. I used my sound meter afterwards each time I tried it and it was dead on.

I actually like the Rotels(rcd1072 cd player) dacs better, but the C2 came damn close to matching it. But thats preference, its not the fault of the dacs.

Now for overall 5.1 comparison, the C2 just walks all over the Outlaw, which in turn made my Elite sound like a boombox. But the C2 should be better, it was more than 4 times the price of the Outlaw afterall.

I am a firm believer in seperates, and I just dont think any flagship receiver can touch a high end dedicated pre/pro. Youll get arguments from some who disagree with me, but you asked for my opinion. :T

If you want an updated C2 for cheap, check the Pawn Shop thread.

I am not exaggerating in any way with the above in order to try and sell you my C2. I am afterall getting the C1, even though sonically they are the same. The C2 is amazing, and is highly regarded as one of the better units out there, and for good reason too.

Try and borrow a pre/pro from a dealer, and let your ears be the judge my friend. Thats the best advise I can give. 8)

[Kingdaddy]

Hi all,

Not that my Onkyo 701 is audiophile quality, but it's not a junker either. Would I actually be able to hear the difference in sound quality using a C2 vs.

My opinion closly matches Spoons.

Yes, there should be a huge difference, the signal processing quality of the Halo compared to nearly any but the latest processors will be major improvement. I noticed such a big difference between my old Sony TA-E9000ES and the C2 it was hard to believe, the low end was tremendous with the C2, no more clipping or bottoming out, and the dynamics were far superior. IMO changing your processor will make far more difference then an amp upgrade; at least it did in my system.

[bcgator]

Spoon and Kingdaddy, thank you for the responses.

Kingdaddy, you probably wouldn't be that suprised to hear, given your response, that after installing the Halo A51 amp I can hear almost no difference between the Halo and my Onkyo 701.

I was expecting a more full sound at lower volumes, cleaner sound at high volumes, and more oomph. The only differences I'm getting, with the $4000 Halo amp vs. my $500 Onkyo, is that the Halo is bringing out just a tad more detail on certain jazz recordings. Cymbals sound a touch brighter. But that's it. Strangely, the fullness of the sound, and the low end, is better with the Onkyo. Obviously, something just isn't right.

Either my cables (Sidewinder interconnects, Monster THX speaker cables) are severely limiting the sound, or the Onkyo as a pre-pro is limiting what the Halo A51 can give me. But I know there's no way my Onkyo 701 is supposed to sound as good (and better in many ways) than the Halo A51.

Unless I now want to spend another $2500 on a C2 (used), then maybe another $500 on interconnects (with no guarantee of improved sound), I'd have to seriously consider whether it's worth keeping the Halo A51 amp. At this point it's a $3000 shelf decoration. Like many of you, I understand the quest for the "perfect sound", but this can easily turn into a multi-thousand dollar wild goose chase.

BCGator

[Kingdaddy]

Try a Halo Preamp, then see what you think, you might want to keep the amp just to have a matching set. I noticed very little difference between my Halo A52's and my old Sony TA-N9000ES amps, almost identical, except the midrange was much more forward. Since I have an all-active system and separate gain controls for each driver, I just cut the gain to the mids and viola, sounds the same as it did with the Sony amps. I tend to believe the statement that all amps are basically the same, especially if you have the ability to adjust the individual gains for each driver and have no passive components in the system. A typical speaker with it's passive components will make cretin topologies sound different, but IMO it's more the amp reacting to the passive crossovers then the anything else.

Trust me, the Halo Preamp will make a major difference in your system, and even if you had your old amp back you would soon want the matching amp to finish the system. I was able to get a loner for demo from my dealer for 2 weeks, no obligation.

[bcgator]

Kingdaddy, your comments are very interesting to me. What I don't get are all the other comments, reviews, magazine articles, everyone extolling the virtues of high-end amplification. Every dealer I called explained that the B&W 805 Signature is a demanding speaker, that requires good amplification. They all said I'd hear dramatic differences with the 805's, that the Parasound would "bring them to life". While it could be said that they're just trying to sell something, their sentiments are no different from anyone else's. In fact, I would venture to guess that half the people on this forum would say you're crazy for thinking all amps sound the same, and they'd say I'm crazy for thinking that my Onkyo 701 sounds as good as the Halo A51. I guess what I"m wondering is, rhetorically, how do high-end amp companies stay in business if a $500 Onkyo offers 98% of the high-end detail and 110% of the low-end fullness of a $4000 Parasound A51? Again, something here just doesn't add up. All these people buying $4000 amps can't be wrong. And if the answer is, "you can't buy a $4000 amp without also buying a $4000 pre-pro", then I guess I would have to confess to just not doing enough homework before embarking on this quest for sonic excellence.

BCGator

[SpOoNmAn]

a seperate power amp isnt going to give you a very different sound, some will be brighter, more forward, while others are laid back..

the difference is the current it gives your speakers. Check the power consumption for your Receiver, I guarantee its no higher than 500 watts Max, thats the problem.

Your A51 at loud levels has to be 100 times easier to listen too, less fatiguing. Its sending a lot more current and wattage to your speakers. You run much less risk of clipping due to all that power. Its got a lot more juice behind it so when something like an explosion happens, the amp doesnt have to strain as much to get the job done, and in turn, sounds, or should sound a lot more robust to you. A power amp is just plain better for dynamic shifts in music and movies, its as simple as that.

Remember, your receivers internal amps are matched to the preamp/processing part very tightly, so that they work together very well. Your preamp stage might not be all that good in that receiver.

I dont mean to offend, but anyone who drops that kind of $$ on an amp like that should be willing to atleast get a seperate pre/pro, even if its not a matching one. Thats not a cheap toy, and it deserves something that brings out its best.

If you ever get around to trying a seperate pre/pro and you dont hear a difference, then theres something wrong elsewhere in your system, or you arent able to hear the difference. And I dont say that sarcastically, some people just cant. I have a few friends that honestly cant tell the difference between sounds, they say it "all sounds the same to me". But you stated you do hear a difference, so thats not the case here.

I think if youre hearing less when you use the receiver as a pre/pro, its because your taking away from the direct signal chain, and its preamp section is definitely lacking.

The amps in all the receivers Ive had sounded thin and weak compared to a seperate power amp, no doubt about it. The bass blossomed, mids were clear, highs were wonderful sounding. More power and current is always a good thing. If youre not getting that with A51, theres something amiss.

[bcgator]

Spoon, I don't find your comments at all offensive. On the contrary, they're invaluable. I'm not afraid to confess that I'm probably out of my league with some of this stuff, if not most of it. You're right, I'm doing this wrong in matching an Onkyo pre-pro with that amp....I think I just had higher expectations of the Halo A51 addition. Probably mistaken expectations.

While I don't think I have musician's ears, I think I can tell the difference between various levels of sound quality. Or, at least, I think I can. Otherwise I really am tossing a lot of money down a black hole.

I do agree that something is amiss, and it likely is a combination of pre-pro quality and cable quality. It's also possible that the 805 Sigs are the wrong speakers for me, and I shouldn't be chasing the level of quality that most 805 Sig owners would chase.

Please, don't hesitate to "give it to me straight"....I can take it. I need all the help, guidance and advice I can get, in order to maximize my return from all the time and money I'm putting into this hobby. As of right now, my results are disappointing and I'm not willing to give up yet.

BCGator

[Rags]

I am also a bit surprised - the biggest weakness of intergrated receivers is their power amps. I would have expected a significant improvement.

Personally I would be surprised if the C2 will make a huge difference on the movie sound front. Whilst it is better than most integrateds on the processing front differences are always going to be subtle but worthwhile imho (as long as your Onyo isnt years old). Stereo listening maybe another matter an this is where the C2 should improve things significantly depending on whether you are using the internal DACs on your source or not. However if its stereo abilty your after in the main then there are other pre pros out there that should be higher up your priority list. A second hand Bryston SP1.7 or a Meridian 568 would be better for stereo. I have done a side by side comparison of the C2 and a Meridian 568 (using a digital out from my source and hence utilising the DACS in the pre pros rather than in the source) and although the C2 was better for movies the 568 was a touch sweeter with CD's.

The 805's sigs are imho one of the best speakers B&W currently makes.

[SpOoNmAn]

Personally I would be surprised if the C2 will make a huge difference on the movie sound front. Whilst it is better than most integrateds on the processing front differences are always going to be subtle but worthwhile imho (as long as your Onyo isnt years old).

Thats what I thought, and I couldnt have been more mistaken, The LFE difference alone is astonishing. Everything else really opened up, and thats comparing it to a cheap Outlaw pre/pro. Ill put that Outlaw against any flagship receiver too. The surrounds actually became a part of the soundstage, very clear/pronounced.

5.1 was the biggest jump in performance, and the C2's DACs, as you mentioned, are nice indeed for 2 channel as well.

I highly doubt its bcgators cables that are the culprit. He needs to demo a dedicated pre/pro with that A51. I can almost guarantee the sound will be what he expected from the beginning.

Then he can sell the Denon and put the $$ towards a pre/pro :T

[Q-Man]

I don't believe that multi channel amps are that much better then the multi channel amps in good receivers. I didn't hear that much of a difference when I went to separates untill I got rid of my multi channel amps and went to two channel amps. Two channel amps made a major difference and they were from the same manufacture. I also had a chance to A/B these amps, because I didn't sell the others that I was using.
I also don't think the A51 has enought power for B&W speakers.

[SpOoNmAn]

2 channel amps from the same company usually send more amperes per channel. Use the A52 and A23 for example...

The A52 5 channel rates at 30 amperes peak per channel, while the A23 2 channel, rated at 120 watts per channel(same as the A52) gets 45 amperes per channel. Its all about current. The A51 gets 60 per channel, thats awesome. That amp should be plenty to run those speakers at 250 watts @ 8 ohms.

Maybe the houses wiring is fitting into this. I highly recommend a dedicated 20amp circuit, with nothing else running on it.

Ive never heard a flagship receivers amps sound as robust as even the weakest of seperate amps. They just dont have the juice, and are always way overrated as far as all channels driven is concerned. I wont argue about this though, I just dont see the point.

[bcgator]

So many good replies, thanks guys....keep 'em coming.

Rags, I'll take a look at the Bryston and Meridian pre-pros. And I should point out that movie processing is absolutely fantastic on the Onkyo. I have no complaints whatsoever about the Onkyo's ability to do home-theater. No matter how many high-end systems I've listened to in audio shops, I'm always still happy to run that Onkyo with my favorite flicks...it absolutely rocks, with power, detaill, clarity, everything. And your comment about the 805 Sigs being one of B&W's best is exactly why I'm on this thread now. I believe they're supposed to sound magical, and they just don't for 2 channel music. They don't sound bad, not at all. And compared to the average guy's Infinitys or Polks, they probably sound heavenly. But I've heard them at a retailer with much better bass response and power than I'm getting out of them. Hence, my belief that I was underpowering them, and subsequent disappointment when the Halo A51 didn't improve matters.

Spoon, your pre-pro recommendation isn't falling on deaf ears. I spent several hours this morning reading reviews, doing research, etc. I have an opportunity to pick up a used, almost new C2 for $2500 and I'm considering that. But after spending $2600 on the Halo A51, and getting minimal return initially, I think I'm gunshy.

Q-man, thanks for the input, but I have to agree with Spoon that the A51 should have more than enough juice for the Sig 805s. The house wiring suggestion is a good one, as well.

So much good info, I really dig this forum.

BCGator

[SpOoNmAn]

Spoon, your pre-pro recommendation isn't falling on deaf ears. I spent several hours this morning reading reviews, doing research, etc. I have an opportunity to pick up a used, almost new C2 for $2500 and I'm considering that. But after spending $2600 on the Halo A51, and getting minimal return initially, I think I'm gunshy.
BCGator

Is it coming with the new updates? They wont be out for another week or 2, mines sitting at Parasound in San Fran waiting for them to be added. Im also including shipping and insurance in mine with the $2,600.00 asking price.

With mine, the buyer knows its has the new,more robust power supply added, plus whatever updates we get, and that Parasound gave it a once over. The President of Parasound knows Im getting the C1 so its being looked at extensively so the new buyer has less to worry about buying used. Richard Schram rocks :T

You seriously need to borrow a pre/pro and play with it. Youll be sorry you didnt so earlier.

[Kingdaddy]

As spoon stated and I agree whole-heartedly, the difference a clean signal can make is astounding. My old Pre/Pro made my subs clip at moderate levels, with the same wiring and amps and just changing to the C2 there was a monstrous difference in bass quality and now I can’t clip the subs at all, haven’t heard them clip since.

IMO the differences people hear as I said is the passive crossover interaction with the amps output. Many speakers are difficult to drive because of the huge swing in impedance that these passive devices introduce not to mention the decoupling the speakers driver action from the amplifiers control. Since I’ve gone all active I have noticed that even a good amp like my old Adcom GFA555 can sound as good as a amp costing 10 times that.

[bcgator]

Spoon, the one I'm considering won't have the updates. But the seller would throw in $500 worth of balanced cables. The actual price is $2450, and I'd have to add paypal fees. He's local, so no shipping required.

The one thing that scares me, in addition to being slightly gunshy, is the non-transferability of the Parasound warranty. I had a slightly greater sense of comfort buying the used amp, though the lack of warranty coverage there could bite me in the butt just as easily. I've considered something something like the Cary Cinema 6 just because of its price point and warranty.

BCGator

[Kingdaddy]

I got a b-stock unit with full warranty from my Parasound dealer for a few hundred less then that. I wouldn’t have one without warranty. The one spoon has might be a great deal since it has been scrutinized and loaded with the latest revisions.

[SpOoNmAn]

I got a b-stock unit with full warranty from my Parasound dealer for a few hundred less then that. I wouldn’t have one without warranty. The one spoon has might be a great deal since it has been scrutinized and loaded with the latest revisions.

You got a b stock from a dealer for how much? the bstocks at my dealer were $3,600.00.

Gator, thats quite a deal, any reason why hes selling it so cheap? thats almost 2 good to be true. And almost 500.00 worth of cables being tossed in?

He must need or want to unload it fast, as to where I am not willing to lose out that big. Im already losing out on over 1,100.00 just because I played with it for 3 months.

[Rags]

I don't believe that multi channel amps are that much better then the multi channel amps in good receivers. I didn't hear that much of a difference when I went to separates untill I got rid of my multi channel amps and went to two channel amps. Two channel amps made a major difference and they were from the same manufacture. I also had a chance to A/B these amps, because I didn't sell the others that I was using.
I also don't think the A51 has enought power for B&W speakers.

The A51 has enough juice to power the majority of B&W speakers imo apart from maybe the 802, 801 and 800 where in anycase I would recommend a better amp to partner them with. The amps in good receivers in the main suck big time. When I changed from my close to top of the line Yamaha receiver by adding a Rotel 1095 things improved substantially. However when I finally totally got rid of the Yamaha by adding a TAG processor to the Rotel 1095 there was a marginal improvement in sound quality. To take this further, the amps in current top of the line receivers like the Yamaha Z9, Pioneer AX10 etc etc provide nowhere near the power/current of the A51. Put simply the A51 is in another league.

[Rags]

So many good replies, thanks guys....keep 'em coming.

Rags, I'll take a look at the Bryston and Meridian pre-pros. And I should point out that movie processing is absolutely fantastic on the Onkyo. I have no complaints whatsoever about the Onkyo's ability to do home-theater. No matter how many high-end systems I've listened to in audio shops, I'm always still happy to run that Onkyo with my favorite flicks...it absolutely rocks, with power, detaill, clarity, everything. And your comment about the 805 Sigs being one of B&W's best is exactly why I'm on this thread now. I believe they're supposed to sound magical, and they just don't for 2 channel music. They don't sound bad, not at all. And compared to the average guy's Infinitys or Polks, they probably sound heavenly. But I've heard them at a retailer with much better bass response and power than I'm getting out of them. Hence, my belief that I was underpowering them, and subsequent disappointment when the Halo A51 didn't improve matters.


BCGator

If two channel music is a priority please do check out the Meridian and secondly the Bryston. The Meridian 568 really does do the business with two channel. I used one in my house for a few weeks with my A51 amp and Nautilus 804's whilst my C2 was out for repair and for two channel it was better than the C2. Really sweet and luscious sounding. Dont get me wrong the C2 is good as well (after all I have one ) but the 568 just nudges it on stereo. I am not sure of second hand prices in the States but with the new G series out you may be able to get yourself a 568.2 for $2,500 or so and with the new beta software release it really is supposed to be nudging on the door of the G series. Regardless before parting with any more cash I would demo before making a decision (preferably at home, hooked up to your A51 but this may not always be possible).

[Q-Man]

I stand corrected, I thought the A51 was smaller then the A52, but it's the other way around. The A52 should do it.

Rags,
I too was using a Yamaha. I had the RX-V3000. When I switched to a multi channel amp I went with the 6 channel Mc206 amp from McIntosh. It was an improvement from top to bottom, but not $4,500.00 worth. I use the Yamaha as a pre-pro. Then I tried a McIntosh MC202 two channel amp and that is when I heard the WOW factor that I was looking for. I immediately went out and bought another one. That's why I now believe in two channel amps.
I'm now in limbo trying to figure out what AV/Porcessor to get. I'm waiting to see what Parasound has to offer at the CES show.

[Rags]

Q-Man - your right in that benefits tail off exponentially as you move up in price. I can also understand why two channel amps sound better in stereo than their multichannel counterparts.

[bcgator]

Spoon, I believe the gentleman with the C2 is the 2nd owner, so I'd be the 3rd. He's not into it for full retail, so isn't selling for much more.

Given some of the replies yesterday, and the fact that I'm now on the hook for further expense, I went to a local dealer (one which I'd never visited previously) and checked out some 2-channel tube integrated amps, along with Proac and Quad speakers. Since my issue has resolved around 2-channel stereo (I'm happy with the Onkyo's home theater capabilities), I figured any amount that I'd spend on the C2 or another pre-pro was also fair game for 2-channel tube equipment. The thinking being that I could get a nice 2-channel tube amp for the 805 Sigs, and just continue using the Onkyo to power the center and rears. And I'd just sell the Parasound Halo A51 to finance any new purchases.

Some observations:
- listened to the Quad 21L: wow. I had no idea they sounded that good. I'd never listened to Quads before, but was amazed at how they sounded. Though they sounded nicer on a $1750 Shanling STP-80 than on a $3000 Audio Research VS55, which added too much glare and brightness.
- then hooked up some Proac D15's to the Audio Research, and got another "wow". But, those Proacs are $3300 (prices just went up), so for $2000 more than the Quad 21L I did expect them to sound good.
- both the Shanling and Audio Research tube amps look cool, and sound beautiful on those particular speakers.

He has a demo policy, so I plan on bringing home the Shanling this weekend, just to see how they do with those 805 Sigs, since the Shanling is an integrated and I can see what happens if I take the Onkyo out of the signal loop. Just another option to consider, in lieu of a multi-channel pre-pro.

BCGator

[NMyTree]

The Quad 21L are very nice speakers.

I own the Quad 22L and I absolutely love them.

[bcgator]

NMytree, I will likely bring home a set of the Quad 21L when I demo the tube amp this weekend. Just to see how they sound in my particular living environment, compared to the B&W 805 Sigs.

[bcgator]

Well gang, it's all a fun and sometimes surprising learning process.

As mentioned, I have brought home for the weekend (demos) 2 integrated amps and some very nice Nordost interconnects and bi-wire speaker cables. My plan was to remove my Onkyo from the loop, and just run my source player through the integrated amps and into the B&W Sig 805s, to see what a high-end pre-pro and/or amp would do, above and beyond the Onkyo.

The 2 integrateds I brought home were the $1750 Shanling STP-80A Tube amp and the $3000 Audio Research VSi 55 Tube amp. At the point of testing, with the new interconnects, speaker cables, and integrated amps put into the test, the only carryover was my source player, an Onkyo 802 Universal Player.

After listening to approximately 50 songs, across 9 hours of testing (taking frequent breaks to fight off listeners fatigue), using an SPL meter to keep volume levels consistent between the Shanling, Audio Research and Onkyo, it appears that the Onkyo might be the best $500 Home Theater receiver ever built by man.

I simply cannot detect any differences in sound quality between the 3 units. I suppose it could be said that sophisticated sound level measuring equipment could easily detect differences, but my ears cannot. I played back certain samples from Pink Floyd's "The Wall", disc 1, where there are subtle howling wind effects, and background voices, up to 10 times on each unit. As hard as I tried, I could not tell the difference.

I should run the same tests with a higher-end source player, just in case my Onkyo DVD player is the real weak link in this chain and it is limiting the sound no matter what amp or pre-pro is being used. But even if that's the case, I still expected to hear some difference between a $3000 Audio Research tube amp and a $500 solid state Onkyo receiver.

For what it's worth, I could also detect no difference between my Sidewinder interconnects and the Nordost cables, or my Monster THX Ultra speaker cables and the Nordosts.

I'm not sure what conclusions can be drawn, if any. To some degree, I"m not entirely surprised as Onkyo does make good equipment, getting better all the time. And there is a factor of diminishing returns with the high-end equipment. Maybe the B&W 805 Sigs aren't good enough to exploit the differences between the Onkyo and Audio Research? Maybe I'm legally deaf, and/or dumb?

I"m going to now compare the 805 Sigs to the Quad 22L (brought a demo pair of those home too), just for fun. I'll let you know what I come up with.

Happy New Year!
BCGator

[SpOoNmAn]

I'm confused. I thought you were going to compare a pre/pro. Maybe I missed it, but I see you brought home 2 tube amps. So now youre comparing the tube amps to the receivers amps? Maybe the past 3 days of Nyquil consumption has ruined my mind, but I thought you were on a quest to test pre/pros, not compare amps.

When my headache goes away, Ill go thru this thread again and see what I missed.

:Z

[bcgator]

Hey Spoon,

You had it right. After buying the Halo A51, and finding no difference in sound with or without the Halo attached to the Onkyo 701, I (and most people in this thread) started thinking that the Onkyo pre-pro was my weak link.

So my goal was to get another pre-pro to test out, just to see how bad (or good) my Onkyo receiver was making things sound. Very few dealers in my area will allow for in-home demos, so I had a few options:

- buy that used C2 Halo (spending another $2500 with no guarantees or return policy didn't appeal to me...I hesitated, he sold it to someone else)

- demo (in-home) a B&K Ref 50 v2 from a local dealer. But I didn't read that many great reviews on it, and the guy at the deal was a real mule-hole. When I explained why I was looking for a pre-pro to test, he went on about how the Parasound was a weak-current product, not high quality, and that was the problem, and how I needed to get a B&K amp. I ended up just leaving.

- another local dealer, who has treated me very nicely, offered to let me take home a couple of integrated tube amps. While I didn't exactly need additional amps for demo purposes, I liked the idea of bringing home an entirely new pre-pro, built right into the integrated tube amp, to run those B&W 805 Sigs. His integrated tube amps (Shanling and Audio Research) allowed me to do an A/B comparison of the Onkyo running the 805 Sigs vs. the Audio Research and Shanling running the 805 Sigs. Though this left the Halo out of the test, it allowed me to just judge the pre-pro qualities of the Onkyo against gear of supposedly higher quality.

As per my previous post, the sound quality of the Onkyo + B&W 805 Sig combination matched that of the Audio Research + 805 Sig combo. Which, to some degree, helps me put to bed any suspicion that my Onkyo producing poor stereo signals.

BCGator

[bcgator]

Just a follow-up, slightly tangential, but fun nonetheless....

Did a comparison of the Quad 22L floorstander vs. B&W 805 Signature, just for kicks. Let's just say I didn't realize how spoiled I'd gotten with the 805 Sigs.

On their own, the Quads are beautiful speakers. Gorgeous birds-eye maple finish, superb build quality, and great looks. Using the $3000 Audio Research VSi55 integrated tube amp, the Quads exhibited great low-end kick, and nice balance. I believe they go down to 30hz, or close to that, which was readily apparent vs. the 805 Sigs which don't go as low.

However, in every other department the Quads couldn't keep up with the Sigs. The best way to describe the midrange of the Sigs vs. the Quad is to say that the B&W are like smooth glass, and the Quads are like fine sandpaper. It's actually a very dramatic difference in sound quality, which I guess shouldn't be surprising given the $1900 difference in retail price. The B&W's extend higher, sound much more liquid and smooth, and much prettier. The Quads don't sound pretty - they sound good, but not sweet or pretty like the B&W. Female vocals are much sweeter on the 805 Sig, as are strings and piano. Percussion instruments also sound more defined and articulate.

This is not meant to minimize the value or quality of the Quad 22L - after all, even a BMW M3 will seem slow after driving a Ferrari 430. So this comparison is only posted for fun and information; in truth, it's not really a fair comparison, and money-wise there are many more people who can afford the Quads than can afford the 805 Sigs. Heck, I can't even afford the 805 Sigs, I just got lucky and found a guy in some financial trouble who needed to sell them fast so I got an insanely good price. Otherwise, they're fantasyland for me too. But knowing how important I found other peoples' comments when i was doing my shopping, just wanted to post some feedback of my own. Take it for what it's worth. And, my apologies if I've strayed too far off-topic per the rules of this forum.

BCGator