[Anton]

Good day Klaus!

I have been following the digital amp posts in here. I do not know if you had the chance to view my recent post relative to the use of B&O IcePower modules.

A close friend of mine bought a pair of Jeff Rowland 201 Monoblocks. These use the B&O IcePower modules. After break-in I went to listen to them. I did not like what I heard. The excellent Jeff Rowland "sound" was missing. They sounded no better than some cheap amps. My Stratos Monoblocks killed them. In fact, my firend sold his amps just four months after buying them.

I have noticed similar results with other "digital" switching power amps, inlcuding Spectron and Linn Klimax. Although the Linns are much more sophisticated and superb in many areas they did not confer the musicality that I look for.

I do not know what type of design are you planning to use and experimenting with, but I am worried that the Stratos "sound" may be degraded. And that would be a shame, given the acceptance of the Stratos brand name in high-end audio.

Perhaps I am mistaken and they will sound as good as existing Stratos, but I do offer my advice in terms of "digital" amps.

Happy listening!!

[zybar]

Anton,

I won't talk much about your post since this is an Odyssey forum, but I have a very difficult time believing what you wrote.

I own the 201's and to say they can be equaled or bettered by some cheap amps is rediculously off base.

I have never directly compared them to an Odyssey amp, but I would suspect that they wouldn't be "killed" by them.  

Different sounding?  Yes.  

Klaus, sorry again for talking about another product in your forum.  I just hate when I see posts like Anton's and felt they need to respond.

If you want to move this out of your forum I will understand.

George

[mr_bill]

I agree with Zybar - and no offense to Odyssey owners.
As a fellow 201 owner - if you don't like clear, fast, extended sound with tight bass then you won't like the new Rowlands.
bill

[klaus@odyssey]

This is becoming the new tube vs. solid state discussion,  which is ultimately pointless.

A few of my thoughts:

1.  Synergy,  synergy,  synergy.  A $ 300.  receiver can sound better than a $ 3,000 amp in the right circumstance. One should know about that by now.

2.  As for Anton, I know him and his background,  and active musicianship in classic music.  ACTIVE,  and as far as he's concerned,  I trust him blindly,  and if the 201's or other switching digital amps weren't as satisfying to him  as our Stratos,  then I believe that's what he heard and liked.  And of course I like his judgement,  hehehe.

3.  Accidentally,  I agree with Anton.  This to me the biggest challenge by coming out with our digital amps in that I still prefer the Stratos and some tube amps over the digital amps.

4.  Looking at our digital amp,  and soon putting it into perspective with much more expensive digital designs,  a lot of people will be stunned,  hehehe.

5.  As for the lovers of digital amps,  and the reason why I get into this arena,  yes,  you're correct. Tons of information,  and super clean power.  And we can do that superbly soon for less $$$.

6.  There's also more to music than these traits that are embedded in the realism of musical texture,  emotions etc.,  and that's where I hands down prefer good  analog amps.  But hey,  if you like the cleanliness and efficiency and the detail that digital amps deliver then you're a top candidate for our new units.

7.  Do they sound different ?   Absolutely,  because that's what the new digital amps do.  They have traits that have never been heard before,  but they also have shortcomings.  Bottom line,  are you a truck or sedan person,  do you like Coke or Pepsi ???  Get it ???  

8.  To call the Stratos cheap is an outright insult no matter how you slice it.  News flash here:  a Stratos is more expensive to manufacture than a 201 !!!!  Also,  the Stratos  is really a $ 3,500  Symphonic Line amp,  that just happened to be offered in all its glory for a bit over 1 K.  However,  that's not a news flash.   It has incredible pedigree and guess at this point it's well established.  Do I say that it should be your choice ?   Of course not because it gets back to synergistic system matches,  personal listening preferences,  and also ultimately teh audiophile ego.
Instead of calling the Stratos cheap,  how about congratulating the Stratos owners of having  good sense of not paying overpriced hyped equipment ???


Lastly,  regarding any equipment,  be it the Stratos,  the 201's,  other digital amps,  $ 300.  receivers,  or $ 60,000 monos with $ 20,000 worth of cables:  if you're happy with your choice then I'll be happy for you and that's how this hobby should be.  
As for you guys:  as far as digital amps go,  teh 201's are a fine choic in my opinion and heads and shoulder above some other units I've heard.

Late,

Klaus

[Rob Babcock]

Klaus, I don't think Zybar is saying the Stratos is a cheap amp:  I think he's responding to this from Anton: "A close friend of mine bought a pair of Jeff Rowland 201 Monoblocks. These use the B&O IcePower modules. After break-in I went to listen to them. I did not like what I heard. The excellent Jeff Rowland "sound" was missing. They sounded no better than some cheap amps. My Stratos Monoblocks killed them." [my bold].  My thinking is that Zybar is only doubting the JR is bested by the unnamed cheapo- he doesn't seem to be referencing the Stratos.

I wouldn't butt in here except to ask a question (that might be a stupid one   , if so I'm sorry).  That is:  Do I understand correctly that in your new digital amp it will be the PS that's digital, but it won't use a Tripath/ICEPower/TI or any other truly digital chip?  I'm not positive I'm totally sure just what the new amp will be, but I am interested to see.  

[klaus@odyssey]

Oooops,  you're correct as to the chep amps. I apologize for the harsh tone here in this regard.   As to the digital amps of ours,  more info will come.  Everything but the output stage will be digital with a similar efficiency.

[zybar]

Klaus,

I was just quoting Anton, I was not calling your amp cheap.

Personally, I understand why you got a little heated, but I think making this type of statement doesn't foster good dialogue

Instead of calling the Stratos cheap, how about congratulating the Stratos owners of having good sense of not paying overpriced hyped equipment ???

When you have your digital amp ready I will be happy to try it and see if it is more to my liking than the 201's.

I have auditioned your Stratos in the past and found that it wasn't for me.

George

[Anton]

First, I stand by my remarks. My firend has been an avid Rowland fan. He has had Rowlands since I can remember. He got into the 201 because he wanted something smaller than the other Rowlands he had. He did not like the 201 and that is a fact. I brought my Stratos to his home and we performed multiple comparisons for hours on end. In fact, we started at 2:00 p.m. and ended at 1:00 a.m. and, since it was late, I left my Stratos with him for three days in which he continued to make comparisons.

On the fourth day he told me the following:

1. The 201 did not measure up to his prior Rowlands. They sounded like (and I quote him) "much cheaper amps".

2. The Stratos sounded much better than the 201. He was surprised by this as he was not expecting that a less expensive amplifier would sound better than any Rowland.

3. He was going to sell the 201 (he sold them already) and get either a new Rowland (NOT a 201) or an Edge amplifier.

The equipment he was using included an Aero Capitole player, a Wadia transport and DAC, a Rowland preamp, a Clearaudio Reference turntable with Graham arm and Clearaudio cartridge, JPS cables and Avalon Diamond speakers. His setup is well setup (pardon my repetition) having spent a lot of time and money to achieve excellent sonics in the room. This includes dedicated electrical power lines.

He likes classical music but mainly jazz and has a very good collection of reference recordings that he knows by heart. Thus, we are not talking about an amateur here, but some highly seasoned audio enthusiast. And he has very good ears.

So, in conclusion, neither my firend nor I liked the 201 and we both found that my Stratos performed much better in his system and our experience, bothe at that moment as in the past, showed that the 201 sounded no better than other cheaper amps that we have heard.

[Horsehead]

Hi Anton,

Just wondering if you could provide some specifics that you and your friend did not like about the 201s or feel where they were bettered by other amps?  Slow bass, grain, poor imaging etc.

As the owner of 4 201s I would like to know what deficiencies you recognized in the 201s to see if I can hear the same things- maybe there is something I do not hear yet that is wrong with them.

In my system the 201s are pretty amazing, besting my Pass Labs X350 which is considered an excellent amplifier by most all accounts.

Obviously personal preference and system matching play a big part in overall component satisfaction, but I just don't hear anything in the 201s that would associate them with cheaper ampifiers.

Thanks.

[StevenACNJ]

I dont understand the $4000 (plus) price tag for a pair of the Rowland 201 digital monoblock amps

Each amp is only made up of the following:
1. Lunahl input transformer (max $100)
2. IcePower 500 ASP - 500W digital amp module with built in power supply (max $100)
3. Then there is the case, IEC connector, power chord, balanced & rca in jacks, LED, on/off switch, feet, & binding posts ($350 max)

I have never heard the Rowland 201 amp, but for that price it should sound pretty darn good.

[zybar]

Do we really need to go down the parts cost "x", so why does the amp cost "y" route again?

Look, listen to the amps and decide for yourself if they are worth the price being charged.  

As Horsehead pointed out, they sounded better than amps that cost significantly more (in Horsehead's case the Pass X350 - in my case the Pass X250 and the Kora Cosmos Reference Mono Blocks) in our systems and to our ears.

I would love to spend less and get better sound...

I just haven't been able to find a product that achieves that in my system.

Who knows... maybe when Klaus has his digital amp it will be that magical product we are all searching for.

George

[Horsehead]

Dealer mark-up
Advertising
Fancy faceplate and chassis
Name recognition
Customer Service
Build quality
Sound quality

In terms of "real" manufacturing dollars, they are no way near their $4700 retail.  I stand by my statement that it is an excellent amplifier, whether it is an excellent value is another story and can only be judged by those willing to purchase it.  I'm sure it is not for everyone- both in terms of sound quality and cost value.

[maxwalrath]

With regards to using the cost of the parts used in Odyssey products vs. competitors...

I think it's a valid arguement since this post is in Klaus's forum, and providing a product that uses parts and a chasis more commonly found in much more expensive amps is a big part of Odyssey's marketing strategy.

[Anton]

This is what we (my firend and I) found:

1. Soundstaging - When listened on its own, the 201 presents a very credible soundstage. However, when compared to the Stratos the soundstage is less ample. When we switched from the Stratos to the 201 it was as if the soundstage collapsed and singers, in the case of choruses, and instruments, in the case of symphony orchestras, tended to sound much closer to the speakers and grouped around the speakers rather than being placed in a larger soundstage. In a recording such as Reference Recordings' production of Testament with the Turtle Creek Chorale, you can detect the ample size of the soundstage in which the chorus and orchestra are placed and you can easily detect the dephth at which the chorus is located relative to the orchestra. The Stratos resolved this soundstage positioning with ease. The 201 sounded much less ample and the dephth of the soundstage was presented shallower than in the Stratos. The same happened with other recordings in which a large recorded soundstage is present. For example, in the Proprius recording Cantate Domino you can detect the height, width, dephth and size of the church where the recording was made. Even without any kind of surround you can "hear" the sound going above you to the rear (yes, that good is the recording) and you can detect the effect of the solidness of the stone walls reflecting the sound into the nave. With the 201 the effect was lost. The venue sounded much smaller and there was no experience of the size of the church as with the Stratos.

2. Height - The recording of Gustav Mahler's Das Knaben Wunderhorn with Dietrich Fischer Dieskau and Elisabeth Scwarzkopff, the Philharmonia Orchestra and Otto Klemperer conducting (EMI recording) is a very fine sample for detecting the ability of a system to present individual singer's size in terms of their height. You can easily detect, from your sitting position, the height of Fischer Dieskau (FD) relative to Schwarzkopff (S). FD is located center right and his voice emanates from a position much higher than an imaginary line drawn from the top of each speaker. S voice is higher than the top of the speakers but lower than FD. This was very apparent with the Stratos. Not so with the 201. FD voice did come from center right but at a height lower than the top of both speakers. In addition, the bass drum that opens the recording's first song should sound to the very rear and left of the left speaker. With the Stratos this was represented like that, but not with the 201. In the case of the 201, the drum appeared slightly to the rear but extreme center left (within both speakers but close to the left speaker).

3. Pace - This is probably one of those more subjective items to judge. However, as recordings changed the presentations made by the Stratos in terms of pace varied widely from recording to recording, some sounding very "pacey" with angular tempi and some more relaxed. Differences between conductor's tempi preferences were very noticeable from recording to recording. Not so with the 201. The range of pace differences were much less noticeable with the 201. One very unconscious response to pace is "feet tapping" and me and my friend found ourselves tapping our feet unconsciously with the Stratos. With the 201 we were made more conscious that we were listening to a recording and did not motivate us to respond.

4. Musicality - Another very subjective item. The Stratos sounded more musical than the 201. The musical involvement that we found with the Stratos was much more than with the 201. The closings of choruses, specially when they were diminuendo to pianissimo grabs you with the Stratos; you just sit there spellbound till you hear the last whispers of the choruses. Listen to the closings of Bruckner's motets in Sony's recording of Kammerchor Stuttgart, specially the Locus Iste, and you will understand what a great chorus that one is. The control in terms of dynamic shadings towards the end in pianissimo is just marvelous. This was not transmitted with the 201 in the system. It sounded flatter in terms of shadings. It did not produce in us, as the Stratos did, the breath holding experience as the chorus dies away ever so slowly into silence.

5. Liquidity - None of the amplifiers is as liquid as a tube amp. There is just something about the best of tubes that is impossible to imitate with a solid state design. But the Stratos showed a more liquid presentation than the 201. The 201 made us more conscious that we were listening to a solid state amplifier than the Stratos.

The 201 is faster than the Stratos. In addition, the imaging is more etched in the 201 than in the Stratos. The 201 sounds as if you were in the first row of a symphonic concert while the Stratos sounds more as if you were in the mid concert hall. However, transients were delivered similarly by both amplifiers although the leading wave of each transient seemed faster in the 201. Bass is slightly tighter in the 201 although the Stratos is no slouch in this area. There are other areas that we covered where the Stratos proved slightly better than the 201, but I think you get the idea.

I hope this helps you in your examination of the 201 in your system.

[Peter]

Anton,

I agree. Amplifiers with switch mode power supply is certainly not my cop of tea. This is why I have abandoned them.

Br,
Peter

[zybar]

Anton,

Thanks for taking the time to write a detailed response.

I will try and write one like that in the next few days (right now my one week old is crying and I need to give mom a break   ).

The short version is that I don't necessarily agree with your assessment.

Again, I didn't directly compare the 201's to the Stratos.

I did try the Stratos in the past and found that I preferred other amps to it (such as Plinius, Forte, and Sunfire).  I found these bettered by the Pass amp, which was bettered by the 201's.

Anyway, each person obviously has their own opinion and mine isn't worth anymore than yours.

Happy listening.

George

[rosconey]

audio has nothing to do with manufacturing cost,country of origan,looks, selling price,or even build quality-
its what floats your boat not what floats mine
i have a 60$ dvd that according to the experts isnt worth a dam, i love it-others dont .

i find it amazing the way we get upset when others dont share our opinion-like there must be somthing wrong with your system or mine because we dont hear the same thing.

[DARTH AUDIO]

I have had it with this web site I came to AudioCircle to be informed about what is happening in the Audio world. I was upgrading my system and wanted to hear what other people felt was "Good Sounding" audio. I always new it would be up to me to decide what I liked as far as sound for my musical taste and  listening room. No matter what price(within my budget) or product. But now it seems every post is how some product SUCKS There is a way to communicate pros and cons without attacking someone's decision on what product make them happy. Anton, you were way out of line with your comments. Has everyone forgotten the reason we buy audio?? For OUR enjoyment. I didn't buy my system to please any of you here @ AudioCircle. Sound is in the "EAR of the Beholder and how dare you tell George that his amps SUCK. And by the way I have heard the Stratos Extreme Monos. Very nice amps, well built but not my taste. Does that make them bad?? NO!! They have quite a great following for the sound that they produce. I think George made a GREAT decision when he bought the 201's. Rowland has been making high quality products for many years. So, can we get back to constructive information on audio to help each other? And for you other Anton's out there.. Keep your opinions to yourself

G

[Marbles]

If everyone kept their opinions to themselves there would not be any audio forums including AC.

So keep those opinions coming.

[DARTH AUDIO]

Marbles, I didn't mean the helpful, intelligent opinions. I meant the senseless negative attacks like Antons'!!