Wilson
Alexx: new versus old
July
22, 2018
Marc,
I
just read your great review of the Wilson Audio Alexia 2 -- very
informative and helpful, especially the comparisons with the Alexx. Do you know if Wilson has made any changes or improvements to
the current production of Alexx based on the improvements they have achieved with Alexia
2?
The
reason I am asking this is that someone informed me that he recently heard the current
production version of the Alexx and to him it sounded considerably better than the early
version of the speaker.
Tom
Schwarts
Because of its development cycle, Wilson Audio lets the sort of running changes
that other companies may introduce at any point in a product's lifecycle to accumulate
until a new version is released. Regarding the Alexx specifically, John Giolas, Wilson's
marketing director, told me, "The current Alexx is the same as the original."
In
terms of the person who mentioned that a newer Alexx sounds better than an older one, I
would question if the speakers were heard with the same electronics and cables, and in the
same room. Any of those variables could -- and should -- lead to one Alexx sounding better
than another. Also, even if the system and room are the same, a different setup of the
speakers would lead to different sonic results. This is what happens with a speaker like
the Alexx that can be so carefully fine-tuned. -Marc Mickelson
Cary
Audio "pure class A" SET?
July
14, 2018
Editor,
It's
not necessary to understand how an audio device works, nor to describe some of its
functionality, to discuss it. But if that is done, what is described should be accurate,
whether it's a description of a product or in a review. And the
article describing the Cary CAD-805RS makes some statements that I find not logical
and are some of my pet peeves, since they pop up all too often in discussions of audio
equipment.
First,
what is "pure class A" mentioned in the article? Is there a form of class A that
is not pure? The way I understand it, either an output stage of an amplifying device is
operating in class A or it isn't. This is especially the case of a single-ended amplifier
(which, of course, includes all SET amplifiers), although you might argue, incorrectly I
believe, that such a thing exists in push-pull class-A amplifiers, which usually go out of
class A when exceeding their rated 8-ohm class-A output or when they operate into
lower-impedance loads. But then the push-pull amp is operating as a class-B device and is
not really a class-A amp but a very class-A-rich class-AB amp.
Second,
how can the Cary amp be rated at 27 watts class A but capable of going beyond to 50 watts
output if it's an SET, a single-ended amp? A single-ended audio device must be class A
(assuming it's not class C, which is not suitable for audio, or class D). Class A means an
output stage is biased "on" all the time. The topology of a class-A device
allows nothing else. If a single-ended audio stage is not class A, it would have to be
turned off during a portion of its amplifying cycle, anathema to high fidelity. This is
unlike a push/pull stage, where one half of the stage can be turned off because the other
half of the stage will take over.
Anyway,
what this means is that if the Cary amp does put out 50 watts, they have to be a (pure)
class-A 50 watts. The only logical explanation could be that the 27-watt rating is for a
specified distortion level, but the amp can put out up to 50 watts at a much greater
distortion level. But the description of the Cary amp states nothing like this.
There
are too many terms in audio that are poorly used and defined (acoustic suspension
is another pet peeve of mine) and just glossed over and accepted with either positive or
negative connotation, depending on what else is written. And this only has a negative
effect on our hobby, leading to many meaningless discussions and roadblocks to true
understanding and improvement in fidelity. Class A and single-ended (and SET) have always
seemed to me to be areas of major misunderstanding.
Allen
Edelstein
The
article you cite is a short news story, so the verbiage used is taken from Cary's press
release, which is all we knew of this new amp at that point in time. If it were a product
review, you can be sure we'd ask questions to make sense of the relationship between power
output, operating class and measured distortion, if applicable. -Marc Mickelson
MMGi's
and . . . ?
July
5, 2018
Guy,
After
reading your in-depth review of the Magnepan MMGi's, I will buy a pair; however,
I am considering either a Yamaha A-S801 integrated amp or Outlaw Audio 2160 receiver with
a Cambridge CXC dedicated disc drive to use with the speakers.
I
prefer the Yamaha, which I think is better designed, better engineered, with better parts
and the advantage of its "pure direct," which will afford it a
straight-wire-with-gain approach.
Which
of the aforementioned will be better suited to power the MMGi's? I live in an apartment,
so I must play them at low listening levels.
Edward
J. Roell
I
have not had experience with either the Yamaha integrated amp or Outlaw receiver, but I
have read the specs for each and feel either would be a good match for your MMGi's. Since
you say you’ll be playing music at low listening levels, the power ratings should not
be a factor in your decision. Each provide ample power into the speakers’ 4-ohm load.
The feature set should meet your needs and build quality should be what you expect. If you
do end up with the Yamaha, I‘m sure you’ll be happy with the results. -Guy
Lemcoe
Reader
list
July
1, 2018
Marc,
Please
add me to your reader list.
Very
much appreciated.
Martin
Bignell
You've
been added. To join TAB's reader list and find out about new articles first,
send e-mail to rl@theaudiobeat.com.
-Marc Mickelson
