Announcing the Ultra Double 550 Amplifier

martyo · « **Reply #40 on:** 20 Jan 2009, 02:28 pm »

Quote

Marty, you can't expect us to wait a whole week before hearing from you again, can you?

Sorry for the delay, I was a bit under the weather for a couple of days, but the main reason was for me to be sure of what I was experiencing. Keith Jarrett Trio (one of my favorites)sounded so real with the "double", each day I would start with another artist but soon would be back to Keith. I finally had 2 full days of listening. Artists were varied, Jarrett, Diana Krall, Oscar Peterson, Bobby Lewis, Herbie Mann, McCoy Tyner, Les McCann & Eddie Harris, John Scofield, Bela Fleck, Bela & Edgar, The "real" DEAD, StringCheese, CSN&Y, Santana, Hot Tuna, Miles, NYAR '07 & '08, AKUS, Darol Anger, Ella, Sinatra, Jerry & Merl, JG Band, Garcia & Grisman, Hornsby, Respeghi, Int'l Guitar night II, and..........So a pretty diverse group, and probably over 90% live.

What did I hear? All the familiar characteristics of the Ultra 550. Extended, Powerful, dynamic, very open and airy, very defined (revealing), delicacy, microdynamics, timbre and decay, as stated earlier, beautiful 3D soundstage, a richness of sound that provides a musical and real experience...........
The "Double" comes off as smoother, without rounding anything off, fuller, more extended and defined and powerfull low end, but also more delicate and open in the highs, quieter/darker background with an even greater "envelope effect". Just a sense of ease. Occasionally with the Ultra at louder levels, +90db, things could start to sound somewhat congested, but that has improved with the "Double".
There is much more than the increased headroom I expected. Dynamics are such an important part of creating a real experience for me and the "double" certainly moves the experience closer in that area, but the whole damn amp is just more of the Ultra which moves the whole experience a couple of notches closer to the allusion of real music happening right in front of you.
Nice job again Mr. Van Alstine

tonyptony · « **Reply #41 on:** 21 Jan 2009, 12:30 am »

Glad to hear you're getting past an illness and back to listening, Marty! Our musical tastes are quite similar, so I am familiar with many of the live recordings from many of your listed favorites. This gives me a very nice sense that the Double may be something to seriously consider.

As to the "smoother, without rounding anything off" observation, could you explain that a bit more? Can you use something from Oscar, Krall, Ella, Frank, Hornsby, or Respighi as a point of description for this? Or even some of the others like Sanata or CSN&Y or Miles!

martyo · « **Reply #42 on:** 21 Jan 2009, 02:13 am »

Quote

smoother, without rounding anything off

This is the problem with someone like me trying to articulate what I hear, someone asks you what the hell you mean.

The sound didn't loose any of the POP, quickness, sock of the Ultra, and in fact it's a little more defined, especially up on top and down on the bottom. I guess it's as if a slight edge that I wasn't even aware of is gone. It would be part of what we talked about before in Jack's drumming. It is very evident in Kralls voice on All or Nothing at All on Montreal Jazz Festival for instance. And I always have, and others have noticed and commented on, the quality of voices on my set. Sometimes smooth is used with "warm", or just laid back, and usually comes across as dull, it is less revealing. NOT smooth like that. Make any sense?

oneinthepipe · « **Reply #43 on:** 21 Jan 2009, 02:23 am »

tonyptony · « **Reply #44 on:** 21 Jan 2009, 03:57 am »

Quote from: martyo on 21 Jan 2009, 02:13 am

Quote
smoother, without rounding anything off

This is the problem with someone like me trying to articulate what I hear, someone asks you what the hell you mean.
The sound didn't loose any of the POP, quickness, sock of the Ultra, and in fact it's a little more defined, especially up on top and down on the bottom. I guess it's as if a slight edge that I wasn't even aware of is gone. It would be part of what we talked about before in Jack's drumming. It is very evident in Kralls voice on All or Nothing at All on Montreal Jazz Festival for instance. And I always have, and others have noticed and commented on, the quality of voices on my set. Sometimes smooth is used with "warm", or just laid back, and usually comes across as dull, it is less revealing. NOT smooth like that. Make any sense?

Ah, I have that Krall disc! Time to do a bit of listening to get a sense of what I hear in my system with that tune. Haven't played it in a bit.

aln · « **Reply #45 on:** 21 Jan 2009, 04:58 pm »

I have also noticed this "congested" effect when I turn up the volume. Any ideas on what's causing it?

martyo · « **Reply #46 on:** 21 Jan 2009, 06:16 pm »

Quote

Occasionally with the Ultra at louder levels, +90db, things could start to sound somewhat congested, but that has improved with the "Double".

I just edited this statement from "but not with the "double" to what is above.

Quote

Quote from: aln on 21 Jan 2009, 04:58 pm
I have also noticed this "congested" effect when I turn up the volume. Any ideas on what's causing it?

It is something I have noticed most of my hi-fi life. It's from a combination of things I believe, as all components are pushed to their limits; the speakers, the room, and the amp, the image/stage and clarity suffer. From past experience, I just assumed it was the speakers and room. Then it got better with the "Double". My unscientific opinion is that the output devices do a better job when they are not "redlined".

charmerci · « **Reply #47 on:** 21 Jan 2009, 06:35 pm »

Funny, for me the better my system sounds, the LESS there is to describe about the sound. My only personal description about the sound of my system for the midrange is that it simply isn't "there." In other words, you're listening to the instruments not the sound of the system.

martyo · « **Reply #48 on:** 21 Jan 2009, 06:52 pm »

Quote

Quote from: charmerci on 21 Jan 2009, 06:35 pm
Funny, for me the better my system sounds, the LESS there is to describe about the sound. My only personal description about the sound of my system for the midrange is that it simply isn't "there." In other words, you're listening to the instruments not the sound of the system.

I agree totally. I'm much better at listening than I am at writing.
It would have been much easier and probably more accurate to simply say that with the "Double" the system is even more out of the way than before.
That is why I kept listening to Keith Jarrett. One of my favorite artists, just saw them live in Sept at Symphony Center here in Chicago, 7th row center. They have been recording and playing concerts for 25 years with the same people and approach, they are consistent and they do a superb job. And the system was allowing me to hear it all even better than before.

martyo · « **Reply #49 on:** 4 Feb 2009, 04:13 pm »

It's been awhile. Simply put, I've moved past listening to the new amp/set. I'm just listening to the music now, and I can't get enough. I'm mighty impressed and extremely happy with the Double and yes, I would call this a "significant" upgrade to my system. aa

Kudo's again Frank

and thanks again for finding the answer for my particular situation.

Wayner · « **Reply #50 on:** 4 Feb 2009, 04:40 pm »

I was to Frank's last Sunday and heard the Ultra Double 550. One appropriate word would be "powerful", another would be "fast", and a third would be the sum of the first 2, "dynamic". We listened to mostly vinyl and you could tell that the amp totally takes control of the bottom end. The bass line is solid, not mushy, and is very quick. When there wasn't any bass content in the music, the amps behavior didn't change, it just created the usual true to the music midrange, highs were balanced and effortless. When something required a dynamic "pop", the speakers "popped", almost startlingly so on a few occasions. The amp was also doing a very nice job with soundstage. It was fun to listen to music.

Wayner

avahifi · « **Reply #51 on:** 5 Feb 2009, 03:05 pm »

So, one of you guys took me up on my offer to turn the demo Insight 440H into an Insight Double 440H and we got it up and running yesterday.

Well! My goodness! It is so close to the sound of the big Ultra Double 550 that it is almost scary. Same dynamics, same musicality, a bit less power (225 watts per channel).

Where did all the transistors go?

Price $2149 ($250 option at time of original build, $500 option for upgrade to existing Insight 440H amplifiers).

Somebody is getting a really nice amplifier, shipping out today.

Sincerely,

Frank Van Alstine

oneinthepipe · « **Reply #52 on:** 5 Feb 2009, 06:07 pm »

Frank:

How much to turn an Insight 440 into an Insight Double 440H?

avahifi · « **Reply #53 on:** 6 Feb 2009, 07:05 pm »

Turning a standard Insight 440 into a double 440H is a bit more complex. The standard Insight 440 uses four power mos-fets per channel, not six. Thus in addition to the changeover to six big die mos-fets per channel (which requires re-wiring the heat sink assemblies), the output boards would have to be replaced too. This would make the upgrade pretty expensive. Lets make a guess: $500 for the double mos-fet upgrade, $100 for rewiring the heat sinks, $150 for two new output boards and installation. plus some parts and time I probably have overlooked. That comes up to $750.

Of course it turns a $1699 amplifier into a $2149 amplifier so all is not lost.

I like mine $450 better I think, probably you will too, even if it costs you $750 as a retrofit.

Regards,

Frank Van Alstine

avahifi · « **Reply #54 on:** 6 Feb 2009, 07:06 pm »

Quote from: avahifi on 6 Feb 2009, 07:05 pm

Turning a standard Insight 440 into a double 440H is a bit more complex. The standard Insight 440 uses four power mos-fets per channel, not six. Thus in addition to the changeover to six big die mos-fets per channel (which requires re-wiring the heat sink assemblies), the output boards would have to be replaced too. This would make the upgrade pretty expensive. Lets make a guess: $500 for the double mos-fet upgrade, $100 for rewiring the heat sinks, $150 for two new output boards and installation. plus some parts and time I probably have overlooked. That comes up to $750.

Of course it turns a $1699 amplifier into a $2149 amplifier ($1899 base price plus $250 for the double die option when the unit is first built) so all is not lost.

I like mine $450 better I think, probably you will too, even if it costs you $750 as a retrofit.

Regards,

Frank Van Alstine

oneinthepipe · « **Reply #55 on:** 6 Feb 2009, 08:12 pm »

Then, the cost is approaching the Ultra range. How does an Insight Double 440H compare to an Ultra 350 or Ultra 550 or a Double Ultra 550?

Quote from: avahifi on 6 Feb 2009, 07:05 pm

Turning a standard Insight 440 into a double 440H is a bit more complex. The standard Insight 440 uses four power mos-fets per channel, not six. Thus in addition to the changeover to six big die mos-fets per channel (which requires re-wiring the heat sink assemblies), the output boards would have to be replaced too. This would make the upgrade pretty expensive. Lets make a guess: $500 for the double mos-fet upgrade, $100 for rewiring the heat sinks, $150 for two new output boards and installation. plus some parts and time I probably have overlooked. That comes up to $750.

Of course it turns a $1699 amplifier into a $2149 amplifier so all is not lost.

I like mine $450 better I think, probably you will too, even if it costs you $750 as a retrofit.

Regards,

Frank Van Alstine

avahifi · « **Reply #56 on:** 6 Feb 2009, 10:24 pm »

I still like the Ultra Double 550 better. However the Insight would be maintaince free (no tubes). Both are very close sounding, the Ultra has that tiny bit of tube romance in the middle of the mid range, but the Insight has no solid state sound at all. I am not sure I would pick them out consistantly in a double blind test.

Regards,

Frank

martyo · « **Reply #57 on:** 6 Feb 2009, 11:42 pm »

Quote

the Ultra has that tiny bit of tube romance in the middle of the mid range

That means an awful lot with the HT3's to me anyway.

martyo · « **Reply #58 on:** 6 Feb 2009, 11:47 pm »

Quote

However the Insight would be maintaince free (no tubes).

I hate that maintainance with those darn Telefunkens.

aa Just Kidding

Tone Depth · « **Reply #59 on:** 28 Feb 2009, 02:55 am »

Marty,

After listening to music with your Ultra Double for nearly two months, do you have any additional or changed perceptions about the differences you've heard? Has anything else become apparent to you as you've gotten used to it?