|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
|
|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
In Reply to: Ok I read it posted by Don T on October 20, 2005 at 21:45:04:
Ok then read my latest review on positive feedback. I make it clear in no uncertain terms which preamp I find sounds the best. I also tell you which two I find the best for the money (and no they weren't better than the more expensive top three but they were close enough that if the money is an issue you can stop right there and not really miss much). Is the Silvaweld the best in the world?? Probably not. Is it largely uncompromised and really really good? IMO yes it is. I will be putting that to the test at some point against the top of the food chain in preamps. Stay tuned...And so what if MF didn't think the RM200 was better than his reference? I have heard many people say the MF Nuvista amp is superb and one of the best in that class of amps. I personally am a big fan of hybrid amps because the best ones get very much right. He thought the RM200 was pretty competitive for a lot less money. I have heard the RM200 and it IS a very good amp. Some personal preference must come into play for a judgement call between two closely matched in performance components. If one is obviously better then it is an easy call (like the RM200 being better than the Smart or Hovland amp...the Kora Cosmos is a pretty darn good amp also), if the performance is objectively close (ie. transparency similar, bass similar, etc. etc.) then it may be some subtle (subjective) difficult to describe thing that tips the scale.
It is easy to hear objective differences between amps (if the rest of the system is high resolution) but it is not always easy to determine what is more correct and/or preferrable. To make these judgements, the reviewer should have a good sense of what correct is. Hearing a difference is never the problem. Ascribing importance to that difference is the problem.
Perhaps in the end MF feels that somehow the MF is more "correct" than the RM200 but that the RM200 is more "correct" than the others he had reviewed recently. He clearly found it less compromised overall than anything other than his reference amp (I guess that is why he used it as a reference). If it was clearly superior to his reference I am sure he would have replaced the reference. I would do so, funds permitting.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Ok I read it - morricab 05:10:56 10/24/05 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
