Bigman80
Grandmaster
AA Founding Member & Bigbottle Audio Creator
Posts: 16,063
|
Post by Bigman80 on Feb 15, 2019 19:34:56 GMT
The original Audiolab 8000a was far far too brittle sounding, whereas the Mk. 2 1992 version was quite listable and I thought a pretty good amp. Then the 1994 revision went the other way and sounded less impressive. That’s one amp that apparently did change. Trouble is so many folk awear by early, mid and late versions, I’ve literally never had one although we did have one in the shop I worked in in 1987/88. My only experience was an 8000c/p which was ok but quite veiled. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2019 19:41:33 GMT
I agree, good all rounder if a tad veiled and warm sounding.
I preferred it over the mission gear at the time though.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
AA Founding Member & Bigbottle Audio Creator
Posts: 16,063
|
Post by Bigman80 on Feb 15, 2019 19:43:11 GMT
I really didn’t lie the metal cased Mission stuff, The placcy cased Cyrus 2 and PSX was intersteing big I’m not sure I could’ve lived with it for any length of time. It was always a bit “Red Bull”.
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 15, 2019 20:11:49 GMT
Original Audiolab 8000a was a good match into anything using the Kef B series drivers and T series tweeters. The brittleness and 'surgical' quality being warmed up by the speakers. Into Monitor Audio of the day, or Proac say, maybe not working so good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2019 20:14:53 GMT
Now hows about a Grounding Box thread. Now yer talking!!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2019 20:19:26 GMT
Original Audiolab 8000a was a good match into anything using the Kef B series drivers and T series tweeters. The brittleness and 'surgical' quality being warmed up by the speakers. Into Monitor Audio of the day, or Proac say, maybe not working so good. I tried a couple of earlyish 8000a amps and wouldn't have called them "brittle" sounding. I thought they were a bit dull and bland, like the NAD 3020a and Cambridge A60. All 'safe' choices but not very exciting or involving. |
|
|
|
Post by sq225917 on Feb 15, 2019 20:46:23 GMT
I used to run a set of tag Q and 125m amps, very quiet, loads of power but a tad sterile.
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 15, 2019 20:48:50 GMT
Original Audiolab 8000a was a good match into anything using the Kef B series drivers and T series tweeters. The brittleness and 'surgical' quality being warmed up by the speakers. Into Monitor Audio of the day, or Proac say, maybe not working so good. I tried a couple of earlyish 8000a amps and wouldn't have called them "brittle" sounding. I thought they were a bit dull and bland, like the NAD 3020a and Cambridge A60. All 'safe' choices but not very exciting or involving. I know what you're saying but it is still the budget end of the market, even though I couldn't have dreamed of owning one back when they were current. There's a good 2 or 3 tiers of quality over any of those mid-range amps back then. At that level you're still trying to put together a combination that doesn't sound Sh#t. Any higher ideals are a pipe dream. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2019 21:00:13 GMT
I have to admit, I didn't bother much with popular (magazine recommended) amps back then. I treated myself to a Luxman R600 receiver about 1975 and never looked back.  |
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Feb 16, 2019 9:46:21 GMT
Paul, you fall right into the trap here and I have to correct you as I've been there and done it, especially recently. I agree the 8000A went through some tweaks over its long life, but an early one (not updated) could sound just fine in its slightly constrained way, simply by getting the cables right. Used with Chord Cobra interconnects and Carnival speaker cable (hardly 'Top End'), the amp sounds smooth, if a little 'grainy' by todays higher standards. The late mid 90's 8000A's to us, were the best of all, although the 8000S* and Cyrus 2/PSX (both more expensive) had overtaken it. For more musical tones, the Quad 77 integrated (yes, really) and endearing Myryad MI-120 were excellent I remember.
* Audiolab, starting with the 8000S and thereby the Tag amps that followed, went to a full direct coupled design I remember, the sound losing the slight 'cap coupled' warmth which was pleasant, but not very 'clear.' Amps such designed were the 8000S, 8000PX and 8000MX models. Tag also did a couple of component upgrades to the basic same designs. No idea what the more recent Chinese derivatives sound like, but prices were very keen a few years ago.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
AA Founding Member & Bigbottle Audio Creator
Posts: 16,063
|
Post by Bigman80 on Feb 16, 2019 10:30:42 GMT
Paul, you fall right into the trap here and I have to correct you as I've been there and done it, especially recently. I agree the 8000A went through some tweaks over its long life, but an early one (not updated) could sound just fine in its slightly constrained way, simply by getting the cables right. Used with Chord Cobra interconnects and Carnival speaker cable (hardly 'Top End'), the amp sounds smooth, if a little 'grainy' by todays higher standards. The late mid 90's 8000A's to us, were the best of all, although the 8000S* and Cyrus 2/PSX (both more expensive) had overtaken it. For more musical tones, the Quad 77 integrated (yes, really) and endearing Myryad MI-120 were excellent I remember. * Audiolab, starting with the 8000S and thereby the Tag amps that followed, went to a full direct coupled design I remember, the sound losing the slight 'cap coupled' warmth which was pleasant, but not very 'clear.' Amps such designed were the 8000S, 8000PX and 8000MX models. Tag also did a couple of component upgrades to the basic same designs. No idea what the more recent Chinese derivatives sound like, but prices were very keen a few years ago.
Nicked this from PFM but can not guarantee accuracy. I do know the earliest olive coloured one had Dins, but I also recall a slightly later olive one with nickel phonos. That’s the one I knew and at the time there was disagreement over whether it was significantly better or worse than the din one. Of course it could’ve been exactly the same inside and simply remarketed! There are several versions and I had or listened most: (Mk 1?) The oldest was (kind of) olive coloured case with DIN connectors. Difficult to obtain Din<>RCA cables, this versions was, I believe, 50Wpc. (Mk 2?) I never had version with nickelplated (?) RCAs in my system, but had opportunity to hear it on numerous occasions in others' systems. Sound wise very similar to Mk1 (?). Both versions can be tiring, especially highs. (Mk 3?) I suppose that Mk3 was used for models after 1990. They are distinguished by gold plated RCAs, and for sure better sound than Mk1/2 (cured highs ). Also have additional Video input and 60Wpc. Another way of differentiating 8000A is by serial. Mk 1 and Mk 2 have serials without letters (within). Mk3 (gold plated RCAs) have serials with letters (from B to F) - eg. 123B123456. Later letters are for newer models - last series "F" is from 1997/8 (before Tag purchased Audiolab). |
|
|
|
Post by pauld on Feb 16, 2019 11:59:15 GMT
Original Audiolab 8000a was a good match into anything using the Kef B series drivers and T series tweeters. The brittleness and 'surgical' quality being warmed up by the speakers. Into Monitor Audio of the day, or Proac say, maybe not working so good. I initially used mine with Whafedale Diamond II bookshelf speakers, then Linn Nexus stand mounts and it worked well. Then I moved to Epos ES14 and the Audiolab just couldn’t drive them. |
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 16, 2019 12:08:10 GMT
Original Audiolab 8000a was a good match into anything using the Kef B series drivers and T series tweeters. The brittleness and 'surgical' quality being warmed up by the speakers. Into Monitor Audio of the day, or Proac say, maybe not working so good. I initially used mine with Whafedale Diamond II bookshelf speakers, then Linn Nexus stand mounts and it worked well. Then I moved to Epos ES14 and the Audiolab just couldn’t drive them. The ES14 don't measure so well (mid bass driver breaks up at its top end) and the impedance is all over the shop according to this www.stereophile.com/content/epos-es-14-loudspeaker-measurements. I quite liked them myself on the couple of occasions I've heard them. Not bad for a small speaker, quite engaging. Would take them over something like a Harbeth. Can't recall what the amplifiers in use were now though. |
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Feb 16, 2019 13:19:35 GMT
You could tell Audiolab age by the letter on the serial numbers. we took them on deom 'D' to 'E' after which Tag had them, but had plento of older 8000A's for dems, so i feel i could comment as fairly as possible. I hated the damed thing before, but with more 'correct/sympathetic' cabling and system advances, i thought the early grey-ish models were fine, is a little closed in and nowadays 'veiled' I suspect. PaulD will conform I can give chapter and verse on ES14's, knowing Robin Marshell as well as I did from 1974 KJ days until he sold out to M-S and moved away. Later ones with bass under control and with good tweeters (I heard one or two that spat nastily for some reason), could sound enchanting on a good source and not just with Linn and Naim. I replaced mine with original spec ATC20's and felt it a good way to go as regards refinement.
Macca, it's the ES14 tweeter that's most at fault here, as I've said numerous times in the past. Robin altered the cap feeding it in the later version 'we' all know and this gave it an up-tilted response, emphasising the ragged nature that was basically hidden in the original version of several years earlier, that sounded smooth and almost soft in comparison. The later article was 'voiced' to work with Linn decks and Naim amps and this razor-like top tendency was taken on by Kudos, PMC and other speaker makers later to sell into Naim dealers ime.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2019 13:41:07 GMT
I initially used mine with Whafedale Diamond II bookshelf speakers, then Linn Nexus stand mounts and it worked well. Then I moved to Epos ES14 and the Audiolab just couldn’t drive them. The ES14 don't measure so well (mid bass driver breaks up at its top end) and the impedance is all over the shop according to this www.stereophile.com/content/epos-es-14-loudspeaker-measurements. I quite liked them myself on the couple of occasions I've heard them. Not bad for a small speaker, quite engaging. Would take them over something like a Harbeth. Can't recall what the amplifiers in use were now though. FFS macca, I wouldn't class the ES14's as small. More like semi medium. S. |
|
|
|
Post by pauld on Feb 16, 2019 13:47:40 GMT
I thought the Epos ES14 were great speakers, and worked exceptionally well with the Exposure amps I had. It took me ages to find something that did vocals as well and was better all round in all other areas.
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 16, 2019 13:58:42 GMT
The ES14 don't measure so well (mid bass driver breaks up at its top end) and the impedance is all over the shop according to this www.stereophile.com/content/epos-es-14-loudspeaker-measurements. I quite liked them myself on the couple of occasions I've heard them. Not bad for a small speaker, quite engaging. Would take them over something like a Harbeth. Can't recall what the amplifiers in use were now though. FFS macca, I wouldn't class the ES14's as small. More like semi medium. S. I'd class anything much below their size as a miniature. Wharfedale diamonds, that sort of thing. You'd class the Wharfies as 'small' I suppose? Just different frames of reference. |
|
|
|
Post by sq225917 on Feb 16, 2019 17:43:09 GMT
ES14's were 505mm tall and 305mm deep, they're pretty big for old standmounts. Taller than Kans, Saras, LS/9,
|
|
