"Dating" for Audio Components

No, we're not talking about online dating here. It is something just about as archane and mysterious (for many) as the other kind though. What we're talking about is matching audio components based on their characteristics. The concept is to get a setup that's greater than the sum of its parts, but more importantly (at least to me) not to let their individual weaknesses exacerbate each other! I know, there's lots of folks out there that don't believe in this; I know, I was one. They think it's just a bunch of hocus-pocus/mumbo-jumbo that's designed to sell outrageously priced interconnects and such. Humor me, and bear with my story for a little while and you might learn something from my own cautionary tale.

It was the late 80's/early 90's and I was just at a point in my life where I had some money to spend. Like any red-blooded (Chinese-) American male, having grown up in the 70's and 80's, I wanted audio "big-iron". That's separate component audio equipment to you of the great unwashed! And having been taught well, I bought the best speakers I could afford at the moment which was a pair of Bowers and Wilkins DM550 complete with the matching port-tune-able sub.  They were driven by a most unusual combo of Philips equipment: an AH-572 Pre-Amp and an AH-578 amp. When I say "big-iron", this was it! It was rated at a solid 210 watts RMS per channel. Not the most detailed or "revealing" equipment, but it was a start. As I spent more time listening, I wanted something that was more up-to-date, as well as more capable of plumbing the depths of the music. 

This brought me to my first encounter with Rotel. To be honest; I had not even heard of the company at that point and only really knew about Japanese manufacturers. But when I sat down and listened to the above set of RTC-850 Pre-Amp/Tuner and RB-850 Amplifier, I was sold! This little amp was only rated at 50 watts per channel, but it sounded great. First lesson partially-learned (keep reading, I'll explain); that rated power isn't everything. When I hooked it up to my DM550s, it was a match made in budget-audio heaven! Something about the way the Rotel electronics worked with the detailed sound of the little B&Ws on CD sourced music just worked. This state of affairs continued for some time and I was really happy with this system. 

You know..... even if you marry the prom-queen, it will be inevitable that you'll keep looking around..... wondering what she might look better as a blond, ...... maybe taller, ........ yeah.

For me, it was the pursuit of detail. And being young, single and stupid; which means, have disposable income, too much time to think, and stupid, I made the worse audio mistake of my life. I broke up an audio system that worked for one that should sound better. Yup.... sold the Rotel for an Adcom GTP-500II (Pre-Amp/Tuner) and Adcom GFA-545II (Amp). In my defense, the Adcom was "the flavor of the month" at that time. The amp was rated at 100 watts per channel. And the salesman who I thought of as a friend should have known better, knowing full well what speakers I was running..... yada, yada, yada.....

I can say what I want, but in the end, it was a train wreck..... simple as that. Oh, don't get me wrong; I don't hate Adcom, that amp just didn't sound good with those speakers. I learned several lessons here that I put to good use, both for myself as well as later, working as a salesman at that same store. 

So, after that rather drawn out preamble, here's what I'm here to pass on today:

• Know the characteristics of all of your equipment as you assemble your system. Those DM550s tended to be dry and analytical which was fine when I gave them more "sweet" and forgiving electronics..... but when paired with dry and analytical gear...... analytical turned into harsh and fatiguing!
• Power rating isn't all that important. You have to turn up the volume a full 3db to be perceptibly louder to a human ear. That takes doubling the power from an amp. So a 100 watt amp isn't really twice as powerful than a 50 watt amp. It's just one step up the ladder.
• Power ratings don't necessarily lie, they just don't tell you the whole truth. Without getting into details (means math, yuck), there's fat and skinny ratings. An amp can be rated at a fairly meek 50 watts, but can do that all day long, meaning that it should be really rated at 60/65 versus another amp rated at a 100 watts, but it's straining some to get it. But why would a company do that? Let's say for instance a company such as Adcom (as an example) back in the late 80's had an amazing little amp.... lets call it the GFA-535 (just sayin) that was rated at a FAT 65 watts, but the next amp up chain rated the same way..... could only get say..... 75-80 watts, but really needed to sell for more money. That's just too close for marketing purposes, but lets say you rate it at a skinny 100 watts..... why, that would seem almost twice as much..... right? Maybe hook some idiot looking to upgrade! Yeah.....
• Ratings from a "receiver" is virtually never the same as the same power rating from a stand-alone amp. With few exceptions; you almost always get skinny power from a receiver as compared to fat power from an amp. Why? It's mostly in the power supply, but also in the power delivery "devices". The power supply in a receiver has to do everything. Power the amp, the pre-amp, and the tuner. Plus, there's simply not as much room in those things to put in the huge heatsinks to cool all the devices used (either the size or the number) in stand-alone amps. But what about those "flagship" receivers I told you about a few posts ago? They're a little different. Did you notice how big they are compared to the ones you see at Wal-Buy/Best-Mart? Go ahead; try to pick one up.... I dare ya! Just don't send me the doctor's bills! Basically, those are a separate Pre-Amp AND a separate Amp AND sometimes a separate Tuner crammed into one box, so NO, not really a receiver at all, just in name only!
• The last thing is the concept of head-room. What that means is this. When a pencil-neck like me goes to pick up a 50 pound bag of dog food, I can do it "OK", but when my much "heavier-built" brother-in-law does it; he's got some "reserve". And that's what you get from a stand-alone amp regardless of the rating. 

 

So, what I'm saying is that when you look at my am stack of Rotel RB-976 and RB956AX, there's more than one thing going on here. On the surface, when you look at the RMS ratings of roughly, 150 x 3 channels and 100 x 3 channels just isn't that much more than the 100 x 6 channels that my receiver was giving me. You'd be right. And it isn't really even the reserve that having the system powered by stand-alone amps gives me that makes the difference. I just don't drive my system that loud. It's really how the B&W DM603/S3 speakers sound when they are driven by Rotel amps which is the reason that I did it. After all these years: I'm finally back to a system "that just works together". Might have something to do with Bowers and Wilkins buying Rotel back in 1981.....