[James Tanner]

Hi All,

New review on 9B SST2

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/amplifiers-products-menu-column1-40/768-bryston-9bsst2-multi-channel-amplifier.html

james

[CABrystonOwner10]

I am puzzled by this review. In fact, given what the reviewer did, he likely did the 9B SST-2 an injustice. May be the reviewer could try other equipment to better explore 9B's capabilities or limitations?

I have heard the Denon 4308 while comparison-shop against the Marantz 8003. We were searching for our first HT gear set-up then. The Denon 4308 sounded worse than the 8003. The sound was hard, lacks details, mid-range was not rich, micro-dynamics were lacking, general dynamics were lacking, just not a good cohesive sounding amplifier. The 8003 was much better with fuller richer midrange, airier highs and better controlled low end. It was less hard on my ears.

The 8003 cannot compared against the older 9B SST (not squared). The 9B SST offers beautiful airier highs, dense images, hugh soundstage, with some front to back layering and superb clarity when compared against the 8003. The 9B is seamless top to bottom. Its silent background means our ears never ring. I cannot say the same for the 4308 nor the 8003. The 8003 sounded like a high-quality mass-produced amp while the 9B SST sounded like a high-end performer.

This review lost me completely when it says that the 9B is not much different than the Denon's built-in amplifier? In that case, I will point to the pre-amplifier section, possibly poorer upstream components, may be poorer cables? Speaker resolution?

I have compared the 9B to Audio Research VT200 MKII and the 9B equals that amplifier in many areas except in the lowest micro dynamics. The 9B beats the vintage plain VT200 (no upgrades) hands down. How is it possible that the 9B is no different than the Denon's amplifier section?

The ARC VT's killed the Denon and the Marantz in our audition. We did not even exploit balanced connectors because neither the Denon nor the Marantz had true differential set-up so everything was done single-ended.

This is one strange review.

[Corrected "8300" to be "8003". This is the Marantz Pre/Pro 8003. Sorry for the mistake.]

 

[JRace]

Wow. over a 100 veiws and only one comment.

Thanks for commenting CAB, let me address your post:

I am puzzled by this review. In fact, given what the reviewer did, he likely did the 9B SST-2 an injustice.

Injustice?
Do you mean I did the amp injustice, or you, the reader, injustice by not comparing the amplifier to more amplifiers?
If it is the former, then I am truly puzzled, and confused by your usage of the word. If it is the latter, then I can understand. While it would be most advantages for the reader to hear and read of comparisons to plenty of other amplifiers, in this case it was not possible as I was unable to procure more amplifier samples in a timely manor, nor would I have been able to accurately compare them due to time and logistic constraints. As such I used what I had on hand to make my comparisons.

Maybe next time I will not tell the other manufactures that i have a Bryston amp for comparison...

I have heard the Denon 4308 while comparison-shop against the Marantz 8300. We were searching for our first HT gear set-up then. The Denon 4308 sounded worse than the 8300. The sound was hard, lacks details, mid-range was not rich, micro-dynamics were lacking, general dynamics were lacking, just not a good cohesive sounding amplifier. The 8300 was much better with fuller richer midrange, airier highs and better controlled low end. It was less hard on my ears.

Interesting results. Was your listening session done with your speakers, in your room with your gear and your music? Did you have ample time to audition both products equally and for sufficient length? Your results tell me that you preferred the sound of the Marantz over the Denon.

The 8300 cannot compared against the older 9B SST (not squared). The 9B SST offers beautiful airier highs, dense images, hugh soundstage, with some front to back layering and superb clarity when compared against the 8300. The 9B is seamless top to bottom. Its silent background means our ears never ring. I cannot say the same for the 4308 nor the 8300. The 8300 sounded like a high-quality mass-produced amp while the 9B SST sounded like a high-end performer.

Again, quite interesting. I personally have never found the Denon to be 'noisy', to cause my ears to ring or have a small soundstage. And in my comparisons between the Denon, the Bryston and a Rotel amplifier I did not experience any of the huge differences you mention. Nor have I ever heard those kind of differences in any amplifier comparison done in a controlled session.

This review lost me completely when it says that the 9B is not much different than the Denon's built-in amplifier? In that case, I will point to the pre-amplifier section, possibly poorer upstream components, may be poorer cables? Speaker resolution?

I am getting the feeling that you have mis-intrepted my comments. What I wrote was:

I did not notice a life-changing difference going from the Denon’s built-in amps to the Bryston, nor did I notice a significant output difference.

 
Now, it seems to me that you read this to be : there was no difference.
Sure there was a difference.
Was it significant?
No.
Was it astonishing?
No.
Was it an Epiphany?
No.

I have never found such amazing differences between components (other than speakers) in all my years of reviewing and listening. I just simply do not hear these life changing improvements going from Amp A to Amp B that other subjective writers write about. What I did notice was minor, subtle differences.

I must say this, I am glad to hear I did not lose you until the end!

I have compared the 9B to Audio Research VT200 MKII and the 9B equals that amplifier in many areas except in the lowest micro dynamics. The 9B beats the vintage plain VT200 (no upgrades) hands down. How is it possible that the 9B is no different than the Denon's amplifier section?

Again, you took my words out of context.

The ARC VT's killed the Denon and the Marantz in our audition. We did not even exploit balanced connectors because neither the Denon nor the Marantz had true differential set-up so everything was done single-ended.

This is one strange review.

In then end, I enjoyed my time with the Bryston, it powered a full MartinLogan electrostatic 5.0 speaker system without a single issue. Perhaps my reviewing philosophy and personal experiences are just not the same as yours. To each his own, thank you for your frank and candid reply.

Jared Rachwalski

[SHV]

I guess that I am missing something in the review.  i thought it was a very positive review of the Bryston amp. without getting caught up in over blown "Golden Ears" comparisons.  (I own four Bryston amps and a pre-pro)

Steve

[werd]

Hello

I think the review is more gracious of the 9Bsq than CAbryston10 does.  but he is right in the context of using the Denon as a pre. Its going to smear the Bryston to a degree that makes it much more difficult to compare both amp outputs.

[James Tanner]

Its tough reviewing a product - look at what happen to me on the Martin Logan CLX review!

james

[JRace]

Its tough reviewing a product - look at what happen to me on the Martin Logan CLX review!

james

Can't please them all...but it sure beats my day job.
Helping grumpy old men hear their wives better.

[CABrystonOwner10]

JRace,

First, I did not mean to cause you lots of angst and it was not meant as an "attack". So peace, peace! We all have our own tastes and prefer different gear, that was why we did our own experiment rather than trusting magazine reviews. We are grateful writers like you work to provide information that many can use, so we definitely respect and appreciate your role.

That said, the word "injustice" is totally due to my special liking for the 9B-SST. It was not meant to criticize you. A poor choice of word! I just thought that the 9B can get a better airing if matched with top-notch upstream components and cables. Four of us audio-nuts did our little experiment because two of us were venturing into home projection theater for the first time. Our experience confirmed that neutral gear tended to reveal whatever is upstream and whatever the cables could convey. Each change could result in audible changes.

For example, we first tried a CD via HDMI into the 8003 and then all BlueJeans interconnet from 8003 to the 9B and the same from 9B to speakers. Later we switched to all Nordost Tyr from the 8003 into the 9B to speakers and finished with Nordost Valhalla for everything. The same was done with the 4308 in the chain. Each set of cables gave a distinct voice with the Tyr closest to Valhalla and with Valhalla getting the most "points". Each amp also had its own voices.

We tried the BlueJeans interconnect paired with the Valhalla speakers once and instantly heard differences so to be fair and given we had enough cables, we decided to not mix-match cables. One type of cables would run everything from source to speakers. That saved us a lot of time and effort.

Later, we started with a simple Sony player then changed to an ARC CD-3 and finally to an ARC Reference CD7. Each clearly gave a totally different voice feeding the 8003 and the 4308 and in turn the 9B.

We also tried an ancient Technics turntable followed by a Rega 7 with a special-built arm all fed into 8003, and then fed into the ARC PH3SE and finally the PH7. Each turntable and each phono section also gave its own distinct voicing with the PH3 and PH7 sounding closest and the 7 winning by a slim margin.

The speakers used were Thiel 3.7's, 7.2's and Wilson Sophia. Each definitely gave its own voicing too with the 3.7's our unanimous favorite. For surrounds, we had only the Thiel SCS4's so we used only those.

In this test, we did not use the ARC VT amplifiers. That was done at another time with only the 9B SST well before we knew anything about the 4803 or the 8003. All four of us are already intimately familiar with the ARC VT sound so further listening was unnecessary. I own the vintage VT200 and a friend owns the VT200 MKII. They are huge heavy monsters and we were glad to just leave them be.

It is against this backdrop that I used the word, "injustice". I should have clarified that in my original post. You must forgive me (and my buddies) for having a special liking for the 9B and charging in all-mouths-blazing to defend it . This will teach me to not get overly attached to the 9B!

Peace! Peace!

[JRace]

JRace,

First, I did not mean to cause you lots of angst and it was not meant as an "attack". So peace, peace! We all have our own tastes and prefer different gear, that was why we did our own experiment rather than trusting magazine reviews. We are grateful writers like you work to provide information that many can use, so we definitely respect and appreciate your role.

No angst felt!
I thought it best to comment on your reply as you thought the review was strange.

I do appreciate constructive criticism, and will attempt to address your many good points in my future writings.

JR