home entertainment 2007
home entertainment 2007
home entertainment 2007
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
not due to any bass emphasis, or to<br />
changes in speaker position or acoustics,<br />
but to the No.433’s ability to give shape<br />
to sounds that could otherwise be<br />
obscured by what was going on in the<br />
midrange and treble. One result of this<br />
was that the low end of deep voices that<br />
descend to the frequencies where room<br />
modes begin to have their pernicious<br />
effect were not differently colored from<br />
the upper end of their range. The very<br />
lowest bass was equally tight and potent.<br />
It was in the high frequencies that<br />
the No.433 most distinguished itself<br />
from the other amps on hand. The<br />
clarity of its midrange seemed to carry<br />
on up through the highest frequencies<br />
without restriction or loss of resolution.<br />
With the 802Ds, the result was<br />
extremely satisfying—the No.433<br />
opened up the soundstage while taking<br />
nothing from the defining qualities of<br />
the bass and mids. I doubt I would<br />
have made such a determination with<br />
earlier 800-series speakers from B&W,<br />
but the smoothness of the 802D’s diamond<br />
tweeter, particularly as it<br />
approaches the crossover frequency<br />
(4kHz), combined with the No.433 in<br />
a way that was a revelation.<br />
That revelation occurred when I put<br />
on Christoph Eschenbach and the<br />
Philadelphia Orchestra’s new SACD of<br />
Saint-Saëns’ Symphony 3 (see sidebar,<br />
“Recordings in the Round”). From the<br />
very soft beginning, I could hear individual<br />
instrumentalists and “see” exactly<br />
where each was seated. As the forces<br />
gathered, there was no loss of such<br />
specificity or balance, even in tuttis.<br />
Add the organ-pedal tones in the second<br />
movement and, again, there was<br />
an expansion of the tonal and dynamic<br />
palettes, but with no compromise of<br />
the rich detail. I was transported.<br />
The No.433 might seem a bit bright<br />
in direct comparisons with other amps,<br />
but, as I’ve emphasized before, you can’t<br />
make a completely objective determination<br />
of a product’s accuracy with only<br />
subjective tools and no primary references.<br />
With the Pioneer S-1EX speakers<br />
as well, the No.433 created an impression<br />
of transparency and lightness, but it<br />
was as if the otherwise excellent mids<br />
and lows played less of a role in defining<br />
the sound’s character. Perhaps this was<br />
due to the difference between the<br />
B&Ws and the Pioneers’ more highly<br />
damped bass tuning. The Bel Canto<br />
REF1000 monoblocks, despite their<br />
power, had a bit less slam than did the<br />
No.433 with either speaker, but they<br />
provided a remarkably satisfying spectral<br />
MUSIC IN THE ROUND<br />
MY ENTIRE SYSTEM, GOOD AS IT WAS, HAS<br />
BEEN PUSHED ANOTHER STEP FORWARD BY YET<br />
ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF COMPLEMENTARY<br />
ADVANCES IN SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE.<br />
balance with the Pioneers, much as the<br />
Levinson and the Classé CA3200 did<br />
with the 802Ds. I continue to waffle<br />
about whether I preferred the Levinson<br />
or the Classé with the B&Ws. The<br />
Levinson made them sound tighter and<br />
quicker, while the Classé made them<br />
sound a bit more warm and rich. There is<br />
a real difference in price, too: $10,000 for<br />
the Mark Levinson No.433 vs $6000 for<br />
the Classé CA3200. Take a careful look<br />
in your wallet but, given my experience<br />
and my current room acoustics, I’d go for<br />
the Levinson No.433.<br />
Back to Bassics—JL Audio’s<br />
f113 Subwoofer<br />
The arrival of Christoph Eschenbach<br />
and the Philadelphia Orchestra’s spectacular<br />
new SACD of Saint-Saëns’ Symphony<br />
3 drives me to say a bit more<br />
about JL Audio’s Fathom f113 subwoofer<br />
(see “Music in the Round,”<br />
November 2006). Because I listen to<br />
music, not movies, in my main system,<br />
the f113 is not called to duty every day.<br />
If fact, most of my listening is in twochannel<br />
stereo, for which there’s no easy<br />
way to do optimum bass management<br />
in this all-analog system. But after my<br />
first listen to this disc, I got myself off<br />
the couch—I had to hear it with the sub.<br />
The disc is 5.0-channel, so I tried two<br />
ways: 1) I hooked up the f113 in parallel<br />
with the L/R channels and used the<br />
built-in LP filter to roll it in from 40Hz<br />
down. Then, 2) I used the Bel Canto PL-<br />
1A’s bass management to set all of my<br />
speakers to Small. The latter might seem<br />
suboptimal (sorry) because the crossover<br />
to the sub is fixed for all channels at<br />
80Hz, and a lower crossover frequency is<br />
more effective with the B&W 802Ds.<br />
Nonetheless, I greatly preferred that configuration;<br />
in this room, the f113 is a vastly<br />
superior reproducer of low bass than<br />
even the quintet of B&W floorstanders.<br />
In 5.0 channels, the Saint-Saëns was<br />
no less than glorious (see above), and<br />
the organ was powerful, rich, and distinctive<br />
in its colorations. In fact, it was<br />
simply the best-sounding recording of<br />
this piece that I had heard. But, like<br />
Oliver Twist, I wanted more, please,<br />
sir. With the f113 rolling in below<br />
40Hz, there was added authority and<br />
weight in some, though not all, of the<br />
organ-pedal passages. It was thrilling,<br />
but not all that different from the<br />
unaugmented 5.0 sound.<br />
With the invocation of bass management,<br />
with which I passed the low end<br />
over to the f113 below 80Hz, there<br />
seemed to be a dramatic expansion of<br />
the entire soundstage and an increased<br />
definition of the extreme bass, to go<br />
along with the enhancements noted<br />
above. At several points in the second<br />
movement I could barely hear the<br />
organ, but I could feel it through my<br />
feet—and this in a steel-reinforced concrete<br />
building. Who knows what others<br />
in the building might have thought<br />
was going on?<br />
Why was this so? I think there are<br />
two reasons. First, the f113 is simply<br />
capable of more output with less distortion<br />
below 40Hz. Second, the f113<br />
is equalized to be more linear in this<br />
region. I didn’t measure the B&W<br />
802Ds, but if the unequalized f113<br />
showed a highly irregular response in<br />
this room, odds are that the 802Ds,<br />
positioned as they were for maximal<br />
imaging and midrange smoothness,<br />
probably had a low-end response that<br />
looked like a view of the Alps. Bass<br />
management simply deleted this and<br />
passed along those frequencies to the<br />
equalized and powerful f113. The<br />
result? My entire system, good as it<br />
was, has been pushed another step forward<br />
by yet another example of complementary<br />
advances in software and<br />
hardware. Now I need to rethink all of<br />
my connections to permit better and<br />
more frequent use of the JL Audio<br />
Fathom f113…<br />
Next Time in the Round<br />
Having distributed my Stereophile card<br />
to many prospects at the <strong>2007</strong> Consumer<br />
Electronics Show, I hope lots of<br />
juicy stuff will soon arrive. The Audio<br />
Research MP-1 and the Cary Audio<br />
Cinema 11 pre-pros are next in the<br />
queue, along with some more discussion<br />
of equalization. As for recordings,<br />
the spate of multichannel SACDs continues.<br />
See you in July. ■■<br />
www.Stereophile.com, May <strong>2007</strong> 43