[cyounkman]

I spent a long Saturday afternoon at a North-Toronto dealership, listening to various systems. Sound normal? The twist: I took the De Capos with me. We were picking up my Gamut, and I thought I'd bring along the De Capos to hear with a few things they had in the store: the Audio Note Zero system, the VTL ST-85, maybe the 100w Accustic Arts amp...

I'll post a more complete report with pics and gear details on my site later, but suffice it to say we heard some very interesting and very different sounds.

The long and short of it is that we left with a Plinius 8200 Mk II under our arm for my buddy's Apogee Centaur Majors. Nice deal, too.

With my GamuT and the new Plinius, his Apogees sounded incredible--all that ribbony magic, space, palpability was there in spades; more details later...

Anyway, this buddy is letting me 'try' the Plinius, to 'give him my opinion' of the piece and see how it sounds in my system. (I think lending out a piece you bought the same night is the very definition of 'buddy'...)

It probably won't surprise anyone to hear that the Plinius blows away the Acurus in several respects: timbrally it's simply in another league; transients are better, and a gorgeous liquidity has replaced the slightly analytical bias before. Depth and dimensionality have both improved significantly.

One example: The Canadian Brass' recording of Bach's Art of Fugue (CBS Masterworks MK 44501) is warm and spacious. The depth isn't as good as it could be, with the player slightly compressed and homogenized on the stage. With the Plinius, timbral accuracy and warmth was improved significantly, and I could also hear, for the first time, the delicate sound of breath passing over metal.

What may surprise is that, with the Plinius, the De Capos seem to produce *deeper* bass; and that there were audible dynamic constraints that simply fell away with this amp.

'What's that?', you say? More dynamics than with your last muscle amp? Well, that's the way it's looking. By comparison, the Acurus sounded strained on large orchestral peaks, particularly the big stuff you get in the Mahler 6: massed trumpets, timpani and bass drum thwacks, sawing bass players, etc. The 8200 Mk II, rated at 175 into 8, is 25 more than the Acurus (for what those number are worth...). Makes you wonder...

Listening continues. I'm looking into getting the tweeter upgrade done this week...

[Jonathan]

Hey, Chris--
First off, I am not surprised that you were impressed by the Plinius 8200.  As you probably know, this piece gets great press over at the Asylum. It was on the top of my list (along with the Sim I-5) but, unfortunately, both of those units were too expensive for my blood, even used (they run around $1500-$1700 on the used market).  I opted for the Unison Research Unico, and I am pretty happy with it. Compared to my buddy's far more expensive ARC separates, the Unico lacks a bit in inner detail and separation between instruments, and is a tad muddy in the bottom end, however it's still a pretty darn good sounding unit--better in my system than the Audio Analogue Puccini SE or Musical Fidelity A3.2 integrateds I owned previously.  Actually, I'd love to compare the Unico to the Plinius head to head (anyone in NE Ohio have an 8200?).

I'm looking into getting the tweeter upgrade done this week...

I did the tweeter upgrade yesterday. Since Tash recommends at least 100 hours for the caps and tweeters to break in completely (I still don't understand why capacitors should have to break in, but that's another subject altogether) I will hold off with a critical review until then. For now, particularly at lower volumes, the new tweeters sound slightly more laid back, giving the the De Capos a bit more warmth. Overall, I have not yet noticed what I would call a dramatic difference.  I will be very interested to hear what you think, and, again, I'll give a more thorough review when I've had more time to listen critically, and when the break in period is over.

[cyounkman]

Yeah, the Plinius is a great piece. It has a lot of good reviews, a TAS Golden Ear Award, etc... Also, it seems to drive anything: my buddy's Apogees are no easy load, and it didn't break a sweat. And skull-cracking levels with the De Capos (which they handle surprisingly well) are obviously no problem.

The long break-in makes it difficult to really quantify differences effectively. I'm thinking I'll have a reference set of tracks at a reference volume level; listen to them before the upgrade, then again after 100 hours are up. Ideally I'd prefer to not listen to the speakers at all in the interim--to prevent 'human aural break-in' or whatever you want to call it. We'll see.

[mcrespo71]

That's interesting you were able to get more dynamics from the De Capo I's with the Plinius and I was not with 250 watt tube monoblocks.  Perhaps my room is too small to hear the differences- not sure.

I've heard great things about the Plinius, though I've never heard one.  At the level my Preamp/Amp is now, though, I wouldn't really consider an integrated any more.  I'm not planning on upgrading, but if I did, I'd probably just change my preamp to a VTL 5.5 or, better yet, a CAT SL 1 Ultimate.

I used to own the VTL st 85- was a really nice tube amp for the price.

MC

[Hantra]

BTW guys, my 8200iMkII took a SOLID month of non-stop play to break in.  It changed dramatically, and for the better.  Although I was impressed with it from the get-go, you couldn't pry it out of my listening room now!  

B

[wongstein]

mcrespo71,

I think that switching to a bigger tube amp won't yield an increase in dynamics as much as changing to a more (overall) dynamic topology like SS in a case like yours where you already have more power than you need (as 85 good watts should provide plenty for De Capos).  Agreed, going from a 5 or 15 watt tube amp to an 85 watt tube amp would take you from "adequate" to "overkill" power-wise with the De Capos and bring forth the full dynamic range, but amps are supposed to be linear, so if an amp already plays to the maximum desired volume without strain, the overall dynamic-response character shouldn't change by adding more of the same power.  I would guess that you would get better bass control, however - "overkill" doesn't seem to be reached as quickly in that regard.  The De Capos are very very dynamic to begin with (Dizzy's close-mic'd trumpet on XRCD does blast you the face just like you were front-row at a small jazz club, doesn't it?), so I doubt that you're short of umph in any way, but many SS amps seem to have more dynamics designed right into them.  All that being said, I'd say that what I like about tube amps is their "micro-dynamics" which seems to be manifested in realistic textures and palpability of sounds.

I bought my 8200 MKII used, so it's already "broken in", but it definitely needs to be literally warmed up with at least an hour of playing, and it should also have been turned on for at least 24 hours to sound its best.  If not, it seems to sound either a tiny bit closed-in or a smidgeon cold and "forward" (particularily with a revealing speaker like the De Capos).  That's how it sounded at the store, but not at all back at my place with Apogee Centaur Major ribbon hybrids or with Chris' De Capos.  I laughingly commented today that a cold Plinius has that slight forwardness of Classe or Krell that I don't care for.  Once it's warmed up, it has a more natural sound that is full, and transparent and with enough "bloom", but not "warm" (well, maybe warm compared to most big SS amps, but still neutral to my ear) or at all "lush" like tubes.  

Ironically, the Plinius' exceptional ability to bring out the bass from De Capos may often be mooted by the fact that most De Capo owners seem to be looking for a warmer, more pleasureable and magical sound, and that people who would want to squeeze the most bass from De Capos would probably not have bought them in the first place. To my taste, however, this combination (as heard with the Gamut CD-1) has a fantastically realistic and revealing character like I would expect to hear in a master recording studio, minus any bass below, say, 40hz.  It amazes in that it's very musical without sacrificing neutrality or power.

Anyway, in Chris' search for the right amp (something warmer or sweeter than the Plinius?  Nixon?  Cairn? Tubes?), the Plinius 8200 MKII will likely be a reference so you can expect to see more comments and maybe some in-depth reviews on how it compares to other amps.

[Paul L]

For solid state, I have been using 47Lab Gaincard and Monarchy with great success.  When Hi-Fi Plus review the De Capos, it also breifly used the Monarchy SM70 and found the combo is very good.

[mcrespo71]

Wongstein- intersting post.  So is there a technical reason why "SS designs have more dynamics designed into them?"

I agree about the incredible dynamics of the De Capo I for their size, but you can only get so far given the design.  I personally think they can do amazing things, but they will give out eventually (kind of like Quads).  After hearing some VMPS RM 40s recently, there is no substitute for size if you want unlimited dynamics.  I'd be curious to hear the De Capo I's with the Plinius now, since I trust Chris's ears.  However, as you pointed out, I am like most De Capo I owners, I'm quite content to flesh out their strengths- magical midrange, neutrality, and dynamics above 40 hz.  If I want more, I'll have to add a sub because I refuse to give up the palpability of tubes for the neutrality and dynamics of SS (generalizations, I know).  Plus, the good SS (Plinius, Rowland, Gamut) for me is more expensive than a great low powered tube amp.  That's the beauty of De Capo I's with tubes- at least that's what I thought until Chris listened to them with super high powered SS integrateds  

 

I'll post a more complete report with pics and gear details on my site later

Chris- you have a website?  Linky please.......

[wongstein]

Well, MC, I think I didn't choose my words carefully enough.  I really just meant that SS amps generally have greater dynamic range which seems to be reflected in their S/N ratio, but I couldn't give you a technical reason that relates it back to their designs.  I would venture to guess, however, that it has more to do with design limitations of tube amps rather than trends in design choices.

I think maybe you should hear the DCs with a Plinius in particular, because I don't know what other big amp has been recommended by anyone.  I think that most SS whoppers are likely to work poorly with the DCs because these speakers won't draw enough current.  Lemme put it this way, if the manufacturers publish measurments of their 200-300 watt amp as having a S/N ratio over 105 dB, it's probably going to be at levels above 30 watts.  Who knows what the S/N ratio is below 30 watts, which I think is where the De Capos live even at loud levels.  To elaborate, I mean that if you decrease the current (signal) going through a big 200 watt amp from 50 watts to 15 watts, who is to say that the noise output will decrease comensurate?  The S/N ratio probably diminishes by "bottoming out" in this case, as opposed to "clipping".  Actually, "bottoming out" is the wrong term, because you'll never really hear the sound fall off, you'll just hear poor dynamic performance in the softer parts of the recordings, which translates into the tendancy to want to turn it up (at the risk of reaching their loudness peak, once again, limiting the overall range of the dynamics), or the feeling that the speakers just don't "open up" unless you crank it a bit.  This was true of Chris' Acurus DIA-150 - I always thought that he listened too loud with it, and I do find that that amp sounds much better with my Apogees, which are 3 to 6 dB less efficient.  It takes a very special amp to perform equally well at low levels as high levels, and to do both, the price usually goes up.  That's all just to say that the first 1/2 watt may be the most important for the De Capos, considering how good they can sound with 4 or 8 watts of tube power.  With the Plinius and the oversampling Gamut CD-1, I'd say that the dynamics compare favorably with bigger speakers like the Wilson Sophias, JMLabs Mezzo Utopias or big Kharmas like I heard in Montreal with two giant Tenor SS amps in bridged mono (300 watts).  The bass isn't there, so there isn't the same "umph" but the dynamics in a small or medium room is fantastic.  Let me finish by stating that an amp can never "increase" the dynamic range of a recording.  If the output from a recording varies from .1 volt to 1 volt at the CD player, and an amp has a gain of ten, it must put out 1 volt to 10 volts - not 1 volt to 11 volts - that would be distortion.  Similarily, speakers can't add dynamics, only relay what's there, and the De Capos, with their minimal cross-overs and light drivers put it all into the air.  I don't mean to offend, MC, but I think that if you're finding your De Capos don't deliver the utmost in dynamics from 60Hz up, you might want to revisit your amp's compatibility with it.  The De Capos go plenty loud, unlike the Quad ESLs.  The Quads really don't play loud, so you must have a quiet room and a well-matched amp in order to enjoy the full gamut of loudness, but then the dynamic range seems great (dispite lacking umph, as you pointed out)

Sorry for going off on a bit of a rant; the issues relating S/N, apparent dynamics and overall power deivery in amps is a bit too complex for me to describe succinctly in a technical fashion, so this big round-about banter is the only way for me to cover all the bases

Anthony

ps. if everyone here was also a photography nut, I'd make a big analogy to the quasi-linear nature of photo reproduction.  Image contrast is much the same as audio signal dynamic range, and the fundementals of Ansel Adams' Zone System for black and white printing translate beautifully to the many gain stages in sound amplification.

[wongstein]

pps, MC, I heartily agree with your "generalizations".  I think they're more observations really - there may be exceptions in the mid-fi , but as we reach for the best in sound, I agree with increasingly common belief that there is a chasm between SS and Tubes, and the two don't cross over, but that void is where the ultimate sound will be made.

[mcrespo71]

De Capos don't deliver the utmost in dynamics from 60Hz up, you might want to revisit your amp's compatibility with it. The De Capos go plenty loud, unlike the Quad ESLs. The Quads really don't play loud, so you must have a quiet room and a well-matched amp in order to enjoy the full gamut of loudness, but then the dynamic range seems great (dispite lacking umph, as you pointed out)

Sorry for going off on a bit of a rant; the issues relating S/N, apparent dynamics and overall power deivery in amps is a bit too complex for me to describe succinctly in a technical fashion, so this big round-about banter is the only way for me to cover all the bases  

Anthony

That was no rant.  Thanks for the more comprehensive explanations;  I appreciate the time and effort.  And let me just say that I may have not fully fleshed out my thoughts on the De Capo I's, as I don't mean to say they don't have great dynamics- they most certainly do, especially above 40hz.  I'd go so far as saying they are the most explosively dynamic speaker above 40hz that I have heard, though I have not heard horns.  That said, I do think there are certainly bigger speakers that can convey the full weight of the orchestra better than the De Capo I's- the VMPS RM 40's immediately come to mind as do the Dynaudio Evidence (of course these are a lot more, so there is that to consider).  I think I was mixing terms between dynamics and full frequency response.  The De Capo I's are dynamic as hell, but they don't really have flat frequency response down to mid 20's, do they?  I guess that is what I was getting at in my post and was just misreading what Chris wrote in my cursory glance at his post.  Now I must hear the Plinius with the De Capo I's.  BTW, I take no umbrage in your questioning of my amps dynamic capabilities with the De Capo I, but I can't imagine these are holding the speakers back.  I'm not the only owner of De Capo I's that have used VTL's withe the De Capo I's, so I think I'm safe here, though I've only compared other tube amps with the speakers (Sonic Frontiers Power 3 monoblocks and an ARC VT 100 MK3).  I could hear no real increase in dynamics with either of these (perhaps slightly tighter bass, but I'm not certain about that).  I guess this converges with your statement that the first few watts are the most important with the De Capo I's.

[Paul L]

Dynamic is irrelevant to frequency bandwidth.  Dynanmic is the range between the lowest SPL that still detail and highest SPL that still uncompress it can play.

[mcrespo71]

Dynamic is irrelevant to frequency bandwidth. Dynanmic is the range between the lowest SPL that still detail and highest SPL that still uncompress it can play.

That is exactly what I was attempting to explain above.  Thanks for putting it succinctly.

Michael

[wongstein]

Sure MC and Paul, I think that we're all now agreeing that the De Capos have great dynamics, but the *impression* of dynamics that they make is lessened by the lack of bass compared to big speakers, because we *perceive* a lot of that bass energy as "slam", "umph" or in some cases "immediacy", even if the dynamics in the mid-range or treble is the same.  On the other hand, you might say that if a speaker (or amp) delivers less dynamics in the bass, it's overall dynamic "score" would be lower.

Paul, that's an excellent definition of the term "dynamics" as we've been trying to use it in this conversation.  If what you mean, however, when you say that dynamics are "irrelevant" to frequency bandwidth, is that the two are independant,  then I'd agree with you.  Dynamics can be very different from amp to amp at a few given frequencies.  In the real world, we *hope* that the dynamics of an amp are consistant across the rated bandwidth, but some amps seem to deal with bass a lot better than others, showing us more detail/texture and at the same time higher SPLs down there.  This can be due to a phenomenon observed in some speakers presenting lowered impedance for the bass frequencies, and it may also have to do with an amp's ability to handle capacitance in the load presented by a woofer.

The De Capos vs. Apogee Centaur Major comparison really demonstrates the effects of bass and *perceived* dynamics.  I always hear the De Capos as being more dynamic than my Apogees in the midrange and treble, but the Apogees' 10" dynamic driver in a big, sealed enclosure seems to make sound that slowly attenuates from 40Hz down toward the low thirties.  In that Oscar & Dizzy XRCD track that I mentioned earlier as an example of how the De Capos righteously jab Dizzy's trumpet sound at you, the Apogees clearly reproduce the sound of Oscar keeping time, thumping his foot against what sounds like a resonating, wooden floor, making harmonics in the 30s along with Oscar's piano's lower harmonics, and it really changes the presentation and overall *feeling* of impact to me, so MC, I definitely know the big speaker sound you're talking about.

I hope I'm not running us around in circles, but then again, look where we are  Anyway, definitely try the Plinius if you ever get half a chance - it's easy to set up well, and it will be a very educational experience in the least, and let me know if you ever do because then we can really talk as that would take a lot of the elusive subjectivity out of our future discussions.

Anthony

[Paul L]

Hi Anthony,  I know what you are saying.  I would call that bass impact rather than bass dynamic.  

OK, let have this example, if a full range speaker (say down to 30HZ), its bass dynamic range (with my definition) is only 60 db but its midrange dynamic range is 70db, I would take 70db as its dynamic.  Its bass has been compress to 60db, right?  If a speaker design such a way that it comprise the low bass (<40Hz) and produce the mid-bass and up with 80db dynamic range, I would say the later speaker is having wider dynamic range.  But for the feeling perspective, the 30Hz feeling of rumbling is certain has great impact.

[brucegel]

I applaud everyones comments here but there  are a couple of monkeywrenches I would like to toss in.When we talk about dynamics at whatever frequency they may be the discussion for me is not there abundance or lack but their quantities and qualities of realism.Their are any number of dynamic cone driven designs that push the envelope of dynamics in your face beyond the pale of what I consider realistic.The comments made about the limits of what can be wrung from the decapo i's are right on spot.There is a finite line if you will where the dynamics cannot get better but can be increased impressionistically.At that juncture more isn't better anymore, just more and thats not the approach that I am after.If you were to use your decaps as monitors for acoustic/electric guitars you would experience an altogether greater level of appreciation for these gems.

[mcrespo71]

After our very absent moderator, cyounkman, raved about the Plinius and De Capo I's, I knew I had to hear the 8200 MK II.  Well, I finally got my chance, as a buddy just upgraded his Creek to the Plinius and had the Plinius shipped to my apartment, as his apartment does not have a doorman (which, for non-NY'ers, is key when you are getting hi-end goodies dropped off).  

Ok, let me just say right off the bat, that the Plinius is a STUPID good integrated amp.  Probably the best I've heard, though I have certainly not heard them all.  While I don't think that the Plinius made dynamic constrictions fall away with the De Capo I's (like Cyrounkman did), I do think they handled the bass with a firmer grip than my tube monoblocks do.  Chris, if you want full frequency range with the De Capo I's, you need a good sub- a REL works well in my setup.  I can't agree that the Plinius really augments the bass of the De Capo I's, at least in my room.  The Plinius has a beautiful and continuous midrange- almost tube like- and nice refined highs with excellent bass.  

I listened to the Plinius for a good few hours before switching back to my CJ/VTL combination.  I honestly didn't feel like I lost that much in downsizing to the Plinius.  In absolute terms, the Plinius got more constricted on climaxes than my monoblocks do, did not capture the full gestalt and holography of the images that my tubes do, the highs were slightly more spotlit with less decay and refinement, and there is a slight foreshortening of depth in the soundstage with the Plinius.  Splitting hairs, I know, but there are differences, however subtle.  

I will say this, though.  I have never heard a solid state integrated sound quite so tube like and provide this much performance for $1700 used.  Unless you are fully commited to being an audiophile freak, the Plinius 8200MK II is all the performance you really need to capture the emotion of the music.  This is the type of product that the high end should be proud of.  

Michael