|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Difficult question . . . or not. posted by BobH on May 15, 2003 at 07:44:37:
my b&k is rated at 350 watts into 4 ohms.i think the bryston and mccormack are at 400 watts.even at the same wattages,i've been told the current delivered could be very different.just wondering if anyone had heard the mccormack with the maggies.i'm sure either the bryston's or mccormack's would be an improvement over my b&k's.by the way ,have a pv10a preamp on the front end.thanks bobh.
Follow Ups:
The 4B-SST is rated 2x500w into 4 ohm. I’m not familiar with the McCormack, but the 4B-SST is a very nice amp. Very clean sounding and dynamic. I actually like it better then far more expensive amps from makers such as Krell.
Again, speaking from ignorance, I believe the McCormack and Bryston will be similar if not identical current output. Current and wattage are linearly related in similar designs. If the b&k delivered less than twice the wattage at 4 ohms than 8 ohms then you will certainly hear a difference with either the McC or Bry vs. the b&k. (current should double in a good design) But they may sound different in subtle ways.There seems to me to be audible design differences between different "levels" of equipment but not within a level. Maybe in preamps there is more difference because the ciruit design is so much more susceptible to layout and materials. I am an expert in microelectronics so I can imagine the effects of trace dimensions and layout vs. material constants. But good power amps are good power amps. McCormack and Bryston have always made good, solid designs.
Of course you can read opinions on the internet that A "blows away" B and vice versa. Should my opinion be any better?
thanks everybody.i guess short of listening to both,i'll probably go with the bryston,you just can't beat that 20 yr. warranty.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: