[rahimlee54]

I've never heard any of these amps, but speaking as an economist...............I know I could get an amp for 1k or a little over that I would be happy with driving the HT3's.  If I really had the option of spending an extra $9000 on something, it would be a better speaker.  I can think of one that Jim makes, or will make shortly,  but there may be others out there as well.

What in the 1k range would you suggest? 

[BrianM]

Dennis claims to be speaking as an economist but of course he's also speaking as the guy whose ears are responsible for the speaker in question. That should speak fairly loud and clear I would think...I'm pretty sure Jim Salk doesn't use anything particularly outlandish to test his speakers, nor in his own listening room, either.

It isn't to say you can't wring a few more ounces out of it, but some perspective is a very good thing.  To me the fact that some owners of the HT3s could not be satisfied with anything less than a $5000 Moscode, when the people who made it seem to do just fine on several thousand less, generates a certain cognitive dissonance.

[audiotom]

Brian

I've had a $1000 used amp
Audio Research D200
it didn't do the Salk justice on demanding material - retricted dynamics

I have no itch for an HT4
very content with the HT3

I bought the Moscode and found out what the Salk's could really do. I also spent significant money on isolation - and yes it is worth it - the image is holographic - the notes are articulated from the background not smeared together and really jump out at you

in my own amp evolution - I want to go even farther than the nice warmth dynamics, and clarity of the Moscode. Just the slightest, and I mean slighest grain is present. That's why I just splurged on a BAT VK600. Not the SE, good deal on audiogon. George's input, a nice review comparing it to the WYRED, etc, I knew it would be my amp. I want to make sure I'm getting as much engaging passion out of the music as possible

I respect opinions of guys like George, BigRedM, Doug Deacon, TVAD, Dan Ed, flying red (some audiogon members) and have bought certain equipment without hearing it (including Salk) based on their strong recommendations.

Dennis and Jim are pragmatic - and couldn't see spending that kind of money, as designers - I understand - they probably think it's overkill and they don't recommend pricey speaker wire that us listeners own. But for those audiophiles who quest for the sound (not the prestige of owning something) and do diligence, it's well worth it. 

[zybar]

The Moscode 401 is a worthy example by the way. I've heard people rave about it, and I've heard of others expressing bewilderment that it costs as much as it does. We agree everyone should listen for themselves. (I have never auditioned it.) My opinion is that unless your room is a very good listening environment, many of the subtleties between expensive amplifiers don't amount to a hill of beans.

Brian,

We are in total agreement on treating the room and its importance in the audio playback chain.

My room is heavily treated and I will never not have a non-treated audio room.

George

[BrianM]

Brian

I've had a $1000 used amp
Audio Research D200
it didn't do the Salk justice on demanding material - retricted dynamics

I have no itch for an HT4
very content with the HT3

I bought the Moscode and found out what the Salk's could really do. I also spent significant money on isolation - and yes it is worth it - the image is holographic - the notes are articulated from the background not smeared together and really jump out at you

in my own amp evolution - I want to go even farther than the nice warmth dynamics, and clarity of the Moscode. Just the slightest, and I mean slighest grain is present. That's why I just splurged on a BAT VK600. Not the SE, good deal on audiogon. George's input, a nice review comparing it to the WYRED, etc, I knew it would be my amp. I want to make sure I'm getting as much engaging passion out of the music as possible

I respect opinions of guys like George, BigRedM, Doug Deacon, TVAD, Dan Ed, flying red (some audiogon members) and have bought certain equipment without hearing it (including Salk) based on their strong recommendations.

Dennis and Jim are pragmatic - and couldn't see spending that kind of money, as designers - I understand - they probably think it's overkill and they don't recommend pricey speaker wire that us listeners own. But for those audiophiles who quest for the sound (not the prestige of owning something) and do diligence, it's well worth it.

Audiotom, I didn't mean to suggest all $1000 amps were good by definition, either. I don't think it's unfair to point out that your jumping from a mediocre $1K amp to a great $5K amp isn't evidence of much apart from the possibility that you (and the folks you mentioned) know a mediocre $1K amp and an excellent $5K amp when you hear one. I personally wouldn't want to be drawing many conclusions from that about the price of admission for amps.

I'm not for a minute suggesting that following the recommendations of someone you trust is necessarily a bad thing.

As for your last point about Dennis' and Jim's pragmatism, obviously I can't speak for them, but I think their ideas about overkill derive from their frequent inability to hear much of a difference, and not just thriftiness. I hope they'll step in and correct me if I'm wrong about that.

[turkey]

Dennis and Jim are pragmatic - and couldn't see spending that kind of money, as designers - I understand - they probably think it's overkill and they don't recommend pricey speaker wire that us listeners own. But for those audiophiles who quest for the sound (not the prestige of owning something) and do diligence, it's well worth it.

So you're saying that some audiophiles know better than Dennis and Jim in terms of getting the best sound out of a system using speakers they designed?

If you don't respect their hearing when it comes to wire, how can you respect their hearing when it comes to speakers?

[BrianM]

Brian,

We are in total agreement on treating the room and its importance in the audio playback chain.

My room is heavily treated and I will never not have a non-treated audio room.

George

I think it's at least as important as the speakers, for real hifi results anyway - both being more important than the rest.

[turkey]

Brian,

We are in total agreement on treating the room and its importance in the audio playback chain.

My room is heavily treated and I will never not have a non-treated audio room.

George

I think it's at least as important as the speakers, for real hifi results anyway - both being more important than the rest.

Some of the research done by people like Toole and Geddes seems to indicate that heavy room treatment is not a good idea...

[DMurphy]

Dennis and Jim are pragmatic - and couldn't see spending that kind of money, as designers - I understand - they probably think it's overkill and they don't recommend pricey speaker wire that us listeners own. But for those audiophiles who quest for the sound (not the prestige of owning something) and do diligence, it's well worth it.

So you're saying that some audiophiles know better than Dennis and Jim in terms of getting the best sound out of a system using speakers they designed?

If you don't respect their hearing when it comes to wire, how can you respect their hearing when it comes to speakers?

I wouldn't make too much out of what I said.  I'm pretty confident that there's a lot more difference between the HT3 and the HT4 than there is between the HT3 with a solid but not super expensive amp and the HT3 with a $10,000 watt machine.  But I'm not saying there isn't any difference between amps.  I'm agnostic because (1) I haven't heard all thant many amps with my speakers and (2) I've never been able to do controlled tests between the amps I have heard. 

[BrianM]

Depends what 'heavy' means, probably.

[Philistine]

I had a phone call yesterday from a prospective HT3 buyer, who bought my B&W speakers that the HT3's replaced.  What I told him was that my source and amplification had changed but the HT3's had remained constant, and I had no desire to change them either.  The HT3's are resolving enough to differentiate changes in all the hard ware and tube rolling changes I've been through - the HT3's are that good.

We all have different listening environments, different degrees of hearing and different levels of expectation.  Jim and Denis have put together a world class product, and some of us have extracted more performance from them by matching them with 'superior' components.  I see no conflict with this and the designer/builder perspective, in fact it's a compliment to the HT3 that it can serve to satisfy a whole spectrum of users with different priorities and budgets. 

[zybar]

Dennis and Jim are pragmatic - and couldn't see spending that kind of money, as designers - I understand - they probably think it's overkill and they don't recommend pricey speaker wire that us listeners own. But for those audiophiles who quest for the sound (not the prestige of owning something) and do diligence, it's well worth it.

So you're saying that some audiophiles know better than Dennis and Jim in terms of getting the best sound out of a system using speakers they designed?

If you don't respect their hearing when it comes to wire, how can you respect their hearing when it comes to speakers?

Potentially.

It isn't a matter of respect (I respect Jim and Dennis immensely) - it is a matter of choice and circumstances.

Jim and Dennis choose certain equipment (whether it is an amp, wire, source, etc...) depending on price, performance, etc... just like the rest of us do.  I am also guessing they face many of the same constraints (room, money, significant other, etc...) we all do and that they don't have unlimited funds to throw at audio. 

If that is the case, I think it would be wrong to assume that they have the ultimate setups and that they are ringing ever last ounce of  performance out of their speakers.  Heck, when you think about it, you realize it just isn't possible!

When you throw into the mix that we all hear differently, have different rooms, and have different likes/dislikes, it becomes even more obvious that the best any vendor can do is pass on recommendations (based on personal findings and user feedback) and try to help their customers.  Which is exactly what Jim and Dennis do all the time on the forums, in person, or whatever way we communicate with them.

George 

[zybar]

Dennis and Jim are pragmatic - and couldn't see spending that kind of money, as designers - I understand - they probably think it's overkill and they don't recommend pricey speaker wire that us listeners own. But for those audiophiles who quest for the sound (not the prestige of owning something) and do diligence, it's well worth it.

So you're saying that some audiophiles know better than Dennis and Jim in terms of getting the best sound out of a system using speakers they designed?

If you don't respect their hearing when it comes to wire, how can you respect their hearing when it comes to speakers?

I wouldn't make too much out of what I said.  I'm pretty confident that there's a lot more difference between the HT3 and the HT4 than there is between the HT3 with a solid but not super expensive amp and the HT3 with a $10,000 watt machine.  But I'm not saying there isn't any difference between amps.  I'm agnostic because (1) I haven't heard all thant many amps with my speakers and (2) I've never been able to do controlled tests between the amps I have heard.

Dennis,

Let's get you back up to MA so I can play my systems with different amps (all of which technically match up with the rest of my gear - i.e. no impedance or electrical mismatches) and you can hear the differences (or not).

Plus I would simply just love to hang out with you for an afternoon or evening.   

George

[turkey]

Dennis and Jim are pragmatic - and couldn't see spending that kind of money, as designers - I understand - they probably think it's overkill and they don't recommend pricey speaker wire that us listeners own. But for those audiophiles who quest for the sound (not the prestige of owning something) and do diligence, it's well worth it.

So you're saying that some audiophiles know better than Dennis and Jim in terms of getting the best sound out of a system using speakers they designed?

If you don't respect their hearing when it comes to wire, how can you respect their hearing when it comes to speakers?

Potentially.

It isn't a matter of respect (I respect Jim and Dennis immensely) - it is a matter of choice and circumstances.

Jim and Dennis choose certain equipment (whether it is an amp, wire, source, etc...) depending on price, performance, etc... just like the rest of us do.  I am also guessing they face many of the same constraints (room, money, significant other, etc...) we all do and that they don't have unlimited funds to throw at audio. 

If that is the case, I think it would be wrong to assume that they have the ultimate setups and that they are ringing ever last ounce of  performance out of their speakers.  Heck, when you think about it, you realize it just isn't possible!

When you throw into the mix that we all hear differently, have different rooms, and have different likes/dislikes, it becomes even more obvious that the best any vendor can do is pass on recommendations (based on personal findings and user feedback) and try to help their customers.  Which is exactly what Jim and Dennis do all the time on the forums, in person, or whatever way we communicate with them.

George

It seems that you are making an implicit assumption that more expensive gear is better gear.

I would argue that audio electronics are not an area where the sound quality limitation is related to cost (or space for that matter).

[BrianM]

If that is the case, I think it would be wrong to assume that they have the ultimate setups and that they are ringing ever last ounce of  performance out of their speakers.  Heck, when you think about it, you realize it just isn't possible!

No one is assuming that, though. I stepped into the discussion because someone made the comment about 'getting what you pay for.' I think that's usually worth rebutting or at least qualifying.

I don't know how every vendor does its pricing, but I'm not persuaded it's very often superior technology that constitutes the bulk of what you're paying for in an ultra high priced amp. I think a lot of it is some combination of 1) a business model that requires high prices, 2) boutique parts whose theoretical performance advantage doesn't justify the price, and 3) chassis/aesthetic overkill - all that before dealer markups if you're not buying direct. (My amp, for example, could easily sell for $3000 at a salon, and for $4-5000 if it had a thicker brushed silver faceplate, robust IEC inlet and fancier binding posts.)

[turkey]

Let's get you back up to MA so I can play my systems with different amps (all of which technically match up with the rest of my gear - i.e. no impedance or electrical mismatches) and you can hear the differences (or not).

So you're setup for double-blind testing with matched levels?

[zybar]

It seems that you are making an implicit assumption that more expensive gear is better gear.

I would argue that audio electronics are not an area where the sound quality limitation is related to cost (or space for that matter).

Nope, not making that assumption.  Believe it or not, I am always looking for a bargain and I certainly don't choose gear based on price.

Everything is always impacted by price and space.

George

[zybar]

Let's get you back up to MA so I can play my systems with different amps (all of which technically match up with the rest of my gear - i.e. no impedance or electrical mismatches) and you can hear the differences (or not).

So you're setup for double-blind testing with matched levels?

Matched levels yes.

Double-blind no.

George

[turkey]

Everything is always impacted by price and space.

Above a certain minimum price level, performance is not related to cost for home stereo electronics. There is plenty of inexpensive gear that will perform as well or better than far more expensive gear.

Anyone with enough room to allow for the proper setup of a pair of good stereo speakers has plenty of room for whatever ancillary electronics are needed.

[DMurphy]

Dennis and Jim are pragmatic - and couldn't see spending that kind of money, as designers - I understand - they probably think it's overkill and they don't recommend pricey speaker wire that us listeners own. But for those audiophiles who quest for the sound (not the prestige of owning something) and do diligence, it's well worth it.

So you're saying that some audiophiles know better than Dennis and Jim in terms of getting the best sound out of a system using speakers they designed?

If you don't respect their hearing when it comes to wire, how can you respect their hearing when it comes to speakers?

I wouldn't make too much out of what I said.  I'm pretty confident that there's a lot more difference between the HT3 and the HT4 than there is between the HT3 with a solid but not super expensive amp and the HT3 with a $10,000 watt machine.  But I'm not saying there isn't any difference between amps.  I'm agnostic because (1) I haven't heard all thant many amps with my speakers and (2) I've never been able to do controlled tests between the amps I have heard.

Dennis,

Let's get you back up to MA so I can play my systems with different amps (all of which technically match up with the rest of my gear - i.e. no impedance or electrical mismatches) and you can hear the differences (or not).

Plus I would simply just love to hang out with you for an afternoon or evening.   

George

Well, I would certainly enjoy that as well.  Thanks for the invite.  Of course, I've got to figure out a way to get a pair of HT4's on the U.S. Air shuttle so I can test my full hypothesis concerning the differences between speakers vs. amps.  Maybe I'll settle for slipping my little AVA Insight amp into a carry-on bag.