New amp recommendations :-)

[sburrell]

Hi,

Well, happy as I am with my Creek 4040 I've decided to take Butuz's comment to heart and consider getting a new amp for the BR2s.

I guess there're a few reasons for this - one, I'm bored :eyebrows: Two, the Creek has about four or five more inputs than I'll ever need, because all my stuff is digital now and goes through the Beresford - in actual fact, one input would do; three, I've always fancied a valve amp; and four, I still miss the Naim Nait 2 I used to own, and part of me wants one again (or something newer?).

My hopes are for an amp that: capitalises on the BR2s rich mid-band and high-end; compensates for the BR2s apparently woolier bass; is no wider than 28cm (depth, height and weight aren't a concern); accepts banana plugs like the Creek; and costs between £150-£200 (possibly up to £250 if people are particularly insist on an exceptional candidate). Oh, and if it had future upgrade possibilities, such as turning into a pre/power combo or something similar, that'd be great too.
EDIT: oh, and one more thing - I'm not much of a gambler. I'd much prefer to buy something that people have actual experience with. Sorry, I'm a wuss.

Cheers guys! :)

[Effem]

Marantz PM7200 will pair nicely with the BR2s :)

[sburrell]

Hey,

Well, by all accounts that sounds like a great amp - near-universally positive reviews online. But frankly it's FAR too big and feature-laden for my needs. I really do only need one input and output, and the size is almost twice what I have available :-)

Thanks though.

[Tarzan]

What about a T-amp?:cool:

[sburrell]

T-Amp? What's a T-Amp?

[Tim]

Fatman iTube

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Fatman-i-Tube-iTube-Valve-Hi-Fi-Amp-Amplifier-/300569777479?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_3&hash=item45fb5ad547

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w63/greatgig/iTube-Valve-Amp-Str.jpg

http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w63/greatgig/itube_back.jpg

Werner has one of these and somebody else, but I cannot remember who?

[sburrell]

Hey Tim (epic name, btw! Some of your namesakes include the enchanter from Monty Python's Holy Grail; and Simon Pegg's character in Spaced :) Awesome!)

That's far closer to what I was looking for. I've sent the eBay merchant a message to ask whether he's selling the Mk1 or Mk2 version.

I have some mis-givings over its marketing towards the iPod crowd and its lack of bass tautness (according to What Hi-Fi), but this is a definite contender, especially at what appears to be a knock-down price! Thanks!

[chelsea]

onix

[sburrell]

Hi stu,

Onix does seem to have a good reputation, but I see none for sale on eBay and their only (official) UK stockist lists their cheapest amp at £750! Did you have a second-hand model in mind and a place to buy it? You must have had good reason for believing I could get one within my budget.

[Butuz]

Jesus someone actually taking advice from me!! Stand back guys this could get real messy real quick!! ;)

If I was you I'd go for a power amp as the beresford does a good job of volume control and input selection. No need for an integrated. Simplify the chain Is my rule :)

Butuz

[sburrell]

lol. Well, at the very least you reminded me that I could use the variable out on the DAC. Well then: Any recommendations for a power amp then? Same requirements apply :-)

By the way Butuz, what's this "passive lithium polymer" mod on your 7520? And can it be applied to the 7510 too?

[wee tee cee]

The recommendation of a t amp is a good one.Have a look at Temple audios site.They give the best quality of valves and solid state and are really enjoyavle to listen to.I have an original bantum and now have two monoblocks.They are tremendous value for money.Theres a good couple of threads running on chip amps,have a look on ebay they start out about £20....give one a go...im sure you will be really suprised.

[Peter Stockwell]

FWIW, it was a Wee Tee Cee's post about the bantam that lead me to the Temple Audio website and to the Bantam Gold (Power Amp version, not listed on the website). It has definitively replaced an Avondale S100 in my system. The BG is even, much, better with a proper linear power supply.

[Ali Tait]

Yep, 'nother vote for the Temple Audio Bantam Gold. I use two in my active system. Simon, if you want to come and have a listen before you buy, you are welcome. You will not do better for the money, these amps are seriously good.

[Ali Tait]

Used one here for sale-

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/BANTAM-GOLD-DIGITAL-AMPLIFIER-INC-POWER-SUPPLY-CLASS-D-/150628642083?pt=UK_AudioTVElectronics_HomeAudioHiF i_Amplifiers&hash=item23122aad23

[chelsea]

I had a onix oa21 for a while.
Small classic looks and above all a very nice amp.
2nd hand around £150 - £200.

Although naim is a marmite brand the nait 1 and 2 i found to be very good although a fair bit above budget.

[sburrell]

Well, first of a big thanks to Ali for having me over for a visit at the weekend - very interesting time was had! I was, however, made privy to just how bad some of my favourite tracks sound when played through a revealing system like his - damn those compressed CDs *shakes fist*. On the other hand, I was exposed for the first time to the vocal genius of Amy Winehouse - OK, I begin to see what the fuss is all about. :)

But back to the point, and a question about the Bantam Gold: Ali, you mentioned that this amp isn't so great at feeding heavy loads, so I looked up my BR2s specs:

Sensitivity: 90dB
Nom. Imp.: 6 Ohms
Power Handling RMS: 100W
Recommended Amp. Power Output: 30 - 100W

The Bantam Gold falls 5W short of the recommended power output - does this, combined with any of the other specs, suggest I not buy the Bantam Gold? I do _not_ listen loud - I value my hearing not to mention the benevolence of my neighbours.

The BG on eBay has been sold, but I'm not that fussed, given it had no warranty, so I'd be buying new. If people agree that the BR2s and the BG would be a suitable match, then I'll take that as the final word and invest.

[Peter Stockwell]

But back to the point, and a question about the Bantam Gold: Ali, you mentioned that this amp isn't so great at feeding heavy loads, so I looked up my BR2s specs:

Sensitivity: 90dB
Nom. Imp.: 6 Ohms
Power Handling RMS: 100W
Recommended Amp. Power Output: 30 - 100W

The Bantam Gold falls 5W short of the recommended power output - does this, combined with any of the other specs, suggest I not buy the Bantam Gold? I do _not_ listen loud - I value my hearing not to mention the benevolence of my neighbours.

I use a BG power amp (you can special order the BG without the volume pot) with 89dB speakers and in a room roughly 5,5 x 4,0 m it's plenty loud enough, although it's a long way from being rock concert levels.

The best amp I've ever owned (and the cheapest!)

[Ali Tait]

Simon, you're welcome, glad to help. As for the Gold, I reckon you'll be ok, but could you save a little extra cash and go for the monoblocks? Plenty power from them for your speakers.

[sburrell]

Hey Ali,

Sorry for not responding sooner, i didn't get a notification of your post.

Well, what's happened is I sold my Creek the other week for £50 (but not the Mark Grant 5-pin DIN to RCA cable, if anyone's interested?) and plugged my stuff into the AV receiver I picked up for £50 a few months ago - I just wanted something to decode Dolby Digital and DTS from FreeSat HD and DVDs. Well, things were sounding ok, and I was on the fence about getting the Bantam Gold straight away, and just saving a little longer. But then i swapped in the speaker cables you gave me, and suddenly the desire to buy a new amp evaporated - what a difference!:eek:

The Van Den Hul cable I had before seemed to be muffling the top-end, but this new cable has opened things up nicely! :) The top-end suddenly has much more detail, and as a result I'm much happier with my system. Also, it turns out my AV receiver (Marantz SR-4200 from late 2001) was well reviewed by Gramophone magazine at the time, who declared:

[T]he SR-4200 shows itself to be more than the equal of many a fine stereo amplifier in the sub-£250 arena, and a match for some costing more! :yay:

There's also the fact that I've just recently splashed out on a 23'' HD monitor for my FreeSat HD box and a new printer, and any day soon (fingers crossed) Apple'll be releasing a new Mac Mini which I have to buy!

So, long story short: the amp may not be as vital just now as it was (thanks to your speaker cable), and other priorities have take precedence.

However, the monoblocks were already tempting me before you mentioned them, so when the cash is there again it looks like that's what I'll go for. In which case, I have a question: the way I understand it, I would be using one monoblock for each speaker. In that case, one RCA cable would go to each - left for one, right for the other. But then why in the photo (http://www.templeaudio.net/monoblock.html) are there clearly two RCA connections on the back? (scroll down to the third pic) :scratch:

Yours baffled...

PS: can you offer more info on that cable you gave me? I'd like to know how to list it in my sig, and I'm anal about the fine details. Ta! :)

[Ali Tait]

Here tis-

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Microphonic-Audio-Loudspeaker-Speaker-Cable-2-x-3m-/110715681717?pt=UK_Computing_CablesConnectors_RL&hash=item19c72b3bb5

[chelsea]

Hey Ali,

Sorry for not responding sooner, i didn't get a notification of your post.

Well, what's happened is I sold my Creek the other week for £50 (but not the Mark Grant 5-pin DIN to RCA cable, if anyone's interested?) and plugged my stuff into the AV receiver I picked up for £50 a few months ago - I just wanted something to decode Dolby Digital and DTS from FreeSat HD and DVDs. Well, things were sounding ok, and I was on the fence about getting the Bantam Gold straight away, and just saving a little longer. But then i swapped in the speaker cables you gave me, and suddenly the desire to buy a new amp evaporated - what a difference!:eek:

The Van Den Hul cable I had before seemed to be muffling the top-end, but this new cable has opened things up nicely! :) The top-end suddenly has much more detail, and as a result I'm much happier with my system. Also, it turns out my AV receiver (Marantz SR-4200 from late 2001) was well reviewed by Gramophone magazine at the time, who declared:
:yay:

There's also the fact that I've just recently splashed out on a 23'' HD monitor for my FreeSat HD box and a new printer, and any day soon (fingers crossed) Apple'll be releasing a new Mac Mini which I have to buy!

So, long story short: the amp may not be as vital just now as it was (thanks to your speaker cable), and other priorities have take precedence.

However, the monoblocks were already tempting me before you mentioned them, so when the cash is there again it looks like that's what I'll go for. In which case, I have a question: the way I understand it, I would be using one monoblock for each speaker. In that case, one RCA cable would go to each - left for one, right for the other. But then why in the photo (http://www.templeaudio.net/monoblock.html) are there clearly two RCA connections on the back? (scroll down to the third pic) :scratch:

Yours baffled...

PS: can you offer more info on that cable you gave me? I'd like to know how to list it in my sig, and I'm anal about the fine details. Ta! :)

I'am guessing incase you only use one.
If you use two r to the right on one, L to left on the other.

[sburrell]

But it only has one speaker output... :scratch:
Maybe it's a passthrough - so you can send the same signal to a second monoblock and perform bi-amping?

Temple Audio don't seem to have posted the manual yet.

[Ali Tait]

Email them and ask, they are very approachable.

[wee tee cee]

The two phono plugs on the back are now coloured yellow and white.They are high and low gain,yellow being the low gain.
I use the yellow one and then utilise the power button to set the gain level.Its a pretty good solution but changing the gain setting takes about 30s on each amp,but if you want to go back a setting you have to go through the lot which is a pain.
The monos are fantastic wee amps,Im thinking of getting another pair