Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo Obnoxoius and Audiosnob reviews (the best of)

I just picked up a Brystons 4B (2 x 250w or 1 x 800w bridged)
With loudness vs my Rotel RSX 1065 100W x 5 (120w x 2) the Bryston at 250W is just only a little bit louder at all volume levels. Were the Bryston totally kicked ass was in the lower level detail, soundstage and lots and lots more information. My same setup was like night and day when I installed the Bryston on the pre-outs of my Rotel receiver. All this time I was a firm believer that you would not notice sound quality between amps ... yes between Denon, NAD, Yammy and Rotel. The moment you use separates ie Bryston, Classe and Krells at least. I noticed a big difference. I was almost set with a Parasound 4004 2 x 200w channel amp but this Bryston deal came forward.

That low fi mid fi stuff does make me cringe.

ps: I also tried the Bryston with my 3Ti and they absolutely sang. The mids and bass detail was even more engaging.

Sorry my err... I mean Aragon 4004 or Parasound Halo A23...I'm just a tard sometimes...well maybe all the time.

Saturn:

Ur, welcome to the club?

Which 4B did you get? A new SST or a used ST/Pro? I see some good deals on some 4B Pro that I won't mind picking up if it's a significant improvement over the run of the mill "mid fi" integrated.

Just the ST version. I found the price between ST and SST was too great of an overall improvement.
Well for quality its better sounding than my Rotel which was not a slouch at 120w x 2 or 100 x 5. It definitely was not louder but low level information is definitely much more, soundstage and imaging specially mated with the PMC mains I currently run.
Remember the pro version over ST is just the extra balanced connections. You would only benefit if you run XLR interconnects. If running unbalanced RCA interconnects there is no difference. As per some people that have told me.

Saturn

Well Saturn, I actually have been told different (hence the question) - the Pro (and the NRB) sounds somewhat, urm, "Pro". Although to be fair the amps were probably compared against Classes and CJs instead of NADs and Haflers of the day.

I'd still be interested in what the older 4Bs sound like. There are some awesome deals to be had with a Pro.

haha.. im still using a kenwood amp that I picked up from Futureshop a few years back for $250 cnd. right now thats all I can afford, and since I have never listened to higher end gear I am satisfied with it. But I know, as soon as I go and take a listen to a quality amp I'll be wondering how I ever managed with that kenwood.

Speaking of amps, has anyone heard any of the Blue Circle products? The BC28 looks pretty decent. A tube/solid state hybrid running at 120 watts/channel into 8 ohms.



you can check out their site here:
http://www.bluecircle.com

Ask around Audiogon. I always thought the Pro models were strictly XLR balanced. You do get a more supposedly cleaner full sound with XLR. Hence the Pro stamp. But when run unbalanced RCA its no diff than the ST version. Again this came from heresay rather than actually me hearing with my ears. So my thinking was if you get a Pro version and not run balanced it would be no diff than the ST version. I checked out the spec and both have the same spec. That does mean much. Send a note to Bryston. They are good with supplying info.

I have listened to them with Vandersteen speakers. Great amp. Same league as the Conrad Johnson. Some people that like tube amps would be better qualified to answer those questions. 2X6 and real70man I believe run tube amps.

Well this isn't quite a review but nonetheless, it is some advice i found on the AVS site which is a good example as to why i generally avoid that forum.
Hometheatrespot.com has been far more practical in obtaining quality advice, much like the Axiom forums (no offense intended for avid AVS readers, this is just my personal view...sushi's recent post on the speaker break-in debate was an excellent exception).

The link to horrible advice is here.

The reposted text is as follows (original topic is about placement of surround speakers in a HT):

John A [SEE THE LINK FOR THE USER INFO]

Yes, but if you'll note, they show the couch up against the back wall which is a real no-no, so sometimes companies just whip out BS because it's easy for people to understand rather than explain the right way to do something. So, listen up folks, here's how to do it right:

5.1 - Rear speakers ~45 degrees off rear axis which is a compromise position with the speakers 90 degrees apart.
6.1 - Center rear behind, "rear" speakers at 60 degrees off axis.
True 7.1 (doesn't exist, but will soon) - "Rear Back" speakers at about 20-30 degrees off axis, side speakers about 1 foot behind your head

In all cases, the speakers should be at or just above ear level, the speakers should be pointed at the person furthest away for "time-intensity trading" and should be directional designs, not "dipolar surrounds". Included in directional designs are bipole and dipole speakers where the the front wave is pointed at the listening position and the rear wave is pointed away for ambience creation, such as Mirage, Magnepan, Martin-Logan. All speakers, including the rears will sound better and more natural if they are away from the walls with the baffle 2.5' or more from the wall. I submit that most people who prefer dipoles have never actually heard a well-setup home theater. Most magazine writers don't know how to set up a home theater and simply slap the speakers up against or mounted to the walls, which is "normal", but not high-end. All speakers should be at least 5' away from you and the listening position should be at least 5', preferable 8-10' away from the back wall.

You can do this "to taste" and experiment at will, but if you do so, it will be less "right" and less faithful to the intended experience. Dipolar speakers are a MASSIVE diversion from the intended experience and are nothing like the sound of a good home theater nor are they anything like the sound of a movie theater or mixing stage. Even movie theaters are massive compromises in order to provide "decent" sound to hundreds of people and is seriously lower fidelity than what the sound engineer hears while mixing the movie. The sound engineer in a studio has his set up much more like I have described, generally with 5 or 6 identical speakers surrounding him, away from the walls on stands with himself towards the middle of the room.
__________________
.
------------------------

I specifically think the part about ppl who prefer dipoles as never having heard a "well setup" HT as being broadly sweeping and rather obnoxious. Apparently Alan, being a former magazine writer, does not know how to setup his home theatre.

Hey Alan, do you need a hand with that "normal but not high-end" wall mounting? (Just kidding).