Justin & Jerry's Hifi Blog

[jandl100]

At a previous NEBO we compared an stereo 20 to the Radford, I thought the Radford was better, although I liked the stereo 20.

At the last one the Radford was there again and went on late after lots of amps. I don't know what it is about it but it is just so fundamentally 'right' it actually bothers me

I know they are not easy to get hold of but it should be on your list (if not already).

Hmm.
Sometimes you (or at least, I) get put off things by circumstances that may not actually be relevant.
I've heard a Radford in a dealer's system (Len Gregory, actually) and tbh his system sounded brash and forward to me.
Of course, it could have been any of the components or combinations thereof in his system - but somehow I associate that sound with the Radford.

It would be interesting to try one if a visitor brought one round, but I can't quite see myself getting one given all the other stuff out there that I don't have negative vibes associated with.
Used prices seem OTT as well, I have a feeling they have become trendy in recent years, and that doesn't help encourage me either.

But yes, I would be curious if someone cared to bring a Radford round.

[RichB]

At a previous NEBO we compared an stereo 20 to the Radford, I thought the Radford was better, although I liked the stereo 20.

At the last one the Radford was there again and went on late after lots of amps. I don't know what it is about it but it is just so fundamentally 'right' it actually bothers me

I know they are not easy to get hold of but it should be on your list (if not already).

It a cracker that Radford ain't it. And Micks story behind it makes it even more loveable I find.

I think a bit of an error was made on the day with the Stereo 20 as the 4ohm taps were used rather than the 8ohm, I'd love to hear it given a fair crack of the whip at a future nebo.

[User211]

Hm the Restek - my Challenger got sold pretty quickly really. It just isn't in the same league as that fantastic Restek preamp you had.

If Justin came round he'd bring the Accuphase M-60s. Nowt there I'd think would do it for me into the MBLs I am afraid Jerry.

Actually looking at the current Accuphase line up there is nothing that can deliver anywhere near the M-60s power output into 4 Ohms. Even right at the top of the range. None of the contemporary designs look as cool either. They should remake the f^&%ing things as the circuit is right up there sonically IMHO easily topping even very high priced contemporary efforts by some margin. That is, in my system with my partnering kit, in my opinion.

Fabulous things and a superb discovery for me.

[walpurgis]

Nope, I've never had a Radford, Martin - so much hifi, so little time.

A Leak Stereo 20 might come closest to that? Dunno.

A good Stereo 20 is a very nice amp indeed. I've had three of them. They are very lucid and offer good grip for a mere 12 watts of EL84. Quite capable of driving awkward loads like the Quad ESL 57. It's very well suited to use with a simple passive pre-amp too.

[jandl100]

Hm the Restek - my Challenger got sold pretty quickly really. It just isn't in the same league as that fantastic Restek preamp you had.

Well - the Krell KAV250a worked much better in my system than it did in yours. I think the Chellenger is similar in that way. It does work well with the MBLs. But no, it's not quite as good as the Krell, but isn't as forward either.
Mmmm, not sure which I prefer overall. Yeah, I'd probably go for the Krell

Nowt there I'd think would do it for me into the MBLs I am afraid Jerry.

That's true, I'm sure, although the Restek might surprise you here.

But for my listening, I suspect I'd prefer the Yarland over your Accuphase monos - they are just too full-on for me - which, of course, is the characteristic that you love them for. Take them to Shaun / Haselsh1 and blow his mind.

[jandl100]

A good Stereo 20 is a very nice amp indeed. I've had three of them. They are very lucid and offer good grip for a mere 12 watts of EL84. Quite capable of driving awkward loads like the Quad ESL 57. It's very well suited to use with a simple passive pre-amp too.

Yep, I had a fully refurbed one, and it was excellent.

Prices have gone a bit potty now, though - a few years back I bought and sold mine for £400, now they are twice that.

[mikeyb]

I have an Inca Tech Claymore 2 (100w) with Colin Wonfor for a service at the moment, your welcome to try it anytime.

I would get him just to send it direct to you for a try but I still have the Phono 2 on demo so wanting to try them together before sending the NVA stuff back.

[jandl100]

I have an Inca Tech Claymore 2 (100w) with Colin Wonfor for a service at the moment, your welcome to try it anytime.

I would get him just to send it direct to you for a try but I still have the Phono 2 on demo so wanting to try them together before sending the NVA stuff back.

Thanks for that, Mike, but I'm fine with my mk1.

I've demmed the new TQ Claymore, as well, and that was quite a different beastie to the older one I have now. I prefer my older one, in fact, despite having slightly lower rez and more character overall (or maybe because of that!) - the treble is easier on the ear, imo the TQ was a bit too feisty for my classical music preferences. The TQ sounded amazing on rock & electronica, though!

[User211]

But for my listening, I suspect I'd prefer the Yarland over your Accuphase monos - they are just too full-on for me - which, of course, is the characteristic that you love them for. Take them to Shaun / Haselsh1 and blow his mind.

I don't think that is the Accuphase amps doing that TBH. I think they are pretty much as neutral as it comes.

Next time I might pull the mid range back a bit between 3 and 6K. You'd probably like that... Mind you, with no kit changes planned for yonks, probably won't be for a good while.

In fact, I might list the 211s in a week or two. I'm not giving those away though and therefore they won't be cheap.

[southall-1998]

Hmm.
Sometimes you (or at least, I) get put off things by circumstances that may not actually be relevant.
I've heard a Radford in a dealer's system (Len Gregory, actually) and tbh his system sounded brash and forward to me.
Of course, it could have been any of the components or combinations thereof in his system - but somehow I associate that sound with the Radford.

It would be interesting to try one if a visitor brought one round, but I can't quite see myself getting one given all the other stuff out there that I don't have negative vibes associated with.
Used prices seem OTT as well, I have a feeling they have become trendy in recent years, and that doesn't help encourage me either.

But yes, I would be curious if someone cared to bring a Radford round.

Was this fairly recent, Jerry? What was the rest of his set up?

S.