Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Any and all comments welcome on amp selection...

Hi everyone,
I wanted to post to ask the always helpful Axiom crowd what they think about the 2 amps I'm looking at (no need to post the 'all amps sound the same' bit please). I have Axiom m60ti's and plan for the QS8's and VP150 soon. Processing will be through a Yamaha receiver (till the plastic is ready for another beating). I've narrowed it down to the following two:

Sherbourn 5/5210 here: http://www.sherbourn.com/products/5_5210.html
Anthem MCA 5 II here: http://www.anthemav.com/OldSitev1/frames/mcafr.html

I won't be able to do a proper A/B with them, but have listened to both (completely different setups though). The Sherbourn would be about $1000 Cdn more ($730 USD). And I do like it's upgrade option with the ability to plug in two more channels later. It's a great piece, essentially a monoblock design. The place I was in on the weekend said they've had 3 people already cancel orders for Bryston 9BSST's to take home the Sherbourn. It rocks, but $1000??? What does everyone think????

Despite the monoblock design of the Sherbourn, its 200W/300W rated power output at 8ohm/4ohm doesn't look particularly good with respect to current tolerance.

What are the actual prices of these amps you can nail?

Masa,
Sherbourn should be had for around $2500 cdn (taxes freight included) or $1830 usd
Anthem for around $1600 cdn (taxes in) or $1200 usd. I could probably haggle the Anthem down a bit though, maybe another $100 or so.

As far as performance into lower resistance, my understanding was that doubling down of amps is not a realistic number. I've heard a lot of companies just 'fudge' their numbers to give the illusion of the amp doubling-down (usually by reducing the posted 8ohm output number). For example, if it's 200@8 and 300@4, they reduce their 8ohm spec to 150watts and it appears to double down. Or is this incorrect and most manufacturers are honest about it????

I have the M60ti's, VP150, and QS8's powered by a Rotel RMB-1075. It's amazing.

Here's a link to my HT gear. Personally I think the Rotel amp is terrific looking as well.

http://www.funnyfarmcomics.net/ht.htm

You can find a used RMB-1075 on audiogon for around $800 quite often. Brand new they can be had for $1000.

If you MUST have 200 wpc...then look at the Rotel RMB-1095. That's a BEAST. Far more than you could ever possibly need. It's $2000 brand new.

Whatever it is you end up with, I HIGHLY recommend looking for a used unit on audiogon.com. Amps are generally built like tanks, and rarely "go bad". Audiogon.com is full of equipment that audiophile geeks have bought, get "upgraditius" and sell soon afterwards. You can find tons of gear that's only a few months old, and save yourself hundreds of dollars.

hey Spiff
I'm actually kind of set on either the Sherbourn or the Anthem at the moment. As far as price comparison, it's tough to even get a used 1075 for as cheap as I was able to get the Anthem for, and the MCA 5 was brand new. I really like the Anthem for the balanced ins (just in case they're needed someday) and i'll probably be looking at an AVM20 in the future as a pro, so the matchup would be nice (though not essential). Great setup by the way Spiff.

No one else has listened to the Sherbourn line?

One other note on the Anthem. A friend of mine here at work bought their processor, and it's only worked for about 2 weeks. He's had a lot of trouble getting it fixed. It's been about 2 months now, and I don't think it's working yet. I'm pretty sure if something like this had happened with Rotel, they simply would have given him a new unit. He's not happy at all. Granted this is only one experience, but Rotel is quite well known for their great customer service.

Regardless of what you end up with, you're going to have some sweet sounding music. These Axiom's are amazing!

that's really strange, it seems like on AVS and HT Forum they get nothing but top marks for their customer service?!? No one's perfect I guess. I am not dead set on that processor though, I'm still debating yet, and that purchase is a long ways away. I've got to buy an amp first I suppose. Any thoughts from anyone else?

Perhaps the issue was with his dealer, rather than Anthem themselves?

definitely possible, I think the only complaints i've read ended up being more of a case of the dealer (refusing to do board installs, being unaware of the most recent software, etc). Some people didn't want to end-around the dealer and had more trouble. When they finally went direct to S.F., they always seemed to have good luck.

Scott,

Okay, strictly between those two choices, I would go with the Anthem given the prices. You know, the primary purpose of the monoblock design is to have a better regulated, current-tolerant power supply. So, the Sherbourn's design doesn't make lots of sense to me if it has the rated power of "only" 200W/300W to start with (as compared to 200W/350W of the Anthem) -- now, I do note that Sherbourn specifically stated that these numbers are with all channels driven. However, the very advantage of the monoblock design dictates that it will NOT perform much better than that with only 1 or 2 channels driven -- i.e., the Anthem will beat it at least when compared 2-channels-driven. Incidentally, even my lowly Adcom GFA-565II delivers 200W/325W, conservatively spec'ed.

With regard to the intentional fudging and "under-spec'ing" of 8-ohm ratings, I don't think the manufactures would ever do that -- after all, the 8ohm power rating is still the primary number with witch an amp is "labeled" and marketed. I don't think that, at this price range, the manufactures cannot afford to overtly over-spec the power output, either (unlike in the market of much lower priced AV receivers) -- their brand image is at stake here.

Both amps seem to be solidly and beautifully designed; both brands are well established and highly respected -- I don't think Sherbourn has a good justification of the additional US$600-700 here, IMHO.

Now, I don't have any experience or information regarding their reliabilities.