Optical to Arke's (Part 1 & 2)

(Part 2)

So onto Jasons . . . .


I arrived late afternoon, as the sun was dipping. A lovely area in Derbyshire indeed and Jason's house is idyllic regarding location and how the house itself (nearly finished) was coming along. At least it is to me, a relative city dweller (well, town at least) by comparison.

He has pretty much 100% finished the music room (bar a couple of small planned additions) regarding treatment possible, so he's had his priorities right from day 1!

After a quick refreshment we got straight into listening. Oli had leant us a Kenward CDP so we could stick some CD's on for a comparison so we had some options. I think we actually listened to some CD's first, ENYA and whatever else was about, haha.

Okay, the CD player was cold and although some stuff sounded pretty decent on parts, it developed an audible distortion problem, so that was enough of that . . .

Vinyl straight on, we were using Jason's Purifi amp, as it had been on for a while and seemed sensible just to get a reference.


Took me a few minutes to adjust . . . . not that I was actually instantly drawn to anything in particular or was having my senses mangled or anything like that. Just because the room is so much larger than mine (or indeed Oli's which I'd just come from), it was difficult to get into a soundstage position that I was used to. Initially I wondered around and pulled up a chair half way into the room, between the speakers where it seemed most natural (to me).


What I was hearing was nice, really really nice and also sounded fairly familiar actually. With the speakers projecting a large, natural soundstage with excellent detail and a liquid smooth bass output. Basslines were dealt with perfectly, with no overhang or boom etc etc. Yeah, it sounded like mine however much MUCH more balanced and with a healthier dose of realism and texture. Granted most of my comparison to mine is digital vs vinyl now but I can't attribute more than a little bit to that. Overall, I too prefer the presentation of vinyl with all it's inherent distortion/noise 'issues', but when you're hearing it all through a system of this calibre, it doesn't matter a jot, the realism and texture more than makes up for any shortcoming in my opinion.


By now I was hearing a few differences between the listening positions as well as getting the feeling that the more I listened the more this system was pulling away from mine in all the stakes to be honest. I'd adjusted to the differences and decided to have a go on the sofa's located at the back of the room.


Jason had told me that overall he preferred this location as a listening position as it just sounded more 'natural', I know that's a bit of a generic term but in this case it's 100% apt.

I think I sat there, slightly to the left hand side (and I'm an on axis, dead centre kinda guy) for about 4 hours straight. Wow, things sounded very different now. Complete game changer.

There would be no point in trying to describe how it sounded and certainly the comparisons to my system were now pointless, this was it, this was where music lives.


The night continued and we played a few familiar tracks, there's some guitar stuff that I've played to Jason a few times now, Chet Atkins and Jerry Reed - Me & Jerry, RCA recording. Always sorts a good system from a bad and when played on a good system is just a super enjoyable listen from start to finish. Lot's of interplay between two absolute top pickers.


I was floored by it here, totally floored. I thought I'd heard it at it's best on my system a few times and to be honest if I hadn't heard it here I'd have never searched for anything more, but tehre it is, right there. It's levels better on this system, it just managed to take apart every single element and put them together without bringing any attention to the fact it's a recording, magical.


We paused for dinner . . . got an Indian in and swapped the Purifi amplifier for the Keces. We left it for a good hour also to give it as fair a chance as possible against the Purifi . . .


We actually played that same "Me & Jerry" album as it was still pretty fresh in our minds and we both know it quite well by now . . . .

We weren't playing it for long . . . . the contrast to what we had heard before on the Purifi was actually quite staggering. I moved around the room to see if it improved in a different listening position, no, still not there . . . I was gobsmacked (again).

By comparison to the Purifi the Keces just didn't manage to create an acoustic picture of what's going on within the recording. The music was playing, I can't even quite put my finger on exactly what was missing (apart from it sounding a bit flat perhaps) because most of the tone, texture and certainly detail was there but the sense of realism and coherence had gone. It actually sounded a little off time almost like there was a "wow" issue with the turntable (which there obviously wasn't).

We did check all the connections, and again because it did sound really off by comparison. We played a couple of other tracks which were perhaps a small improvement but neither of us were getting the enjoyment level we were from the Purifi.

Another take is that had we started with the Keces instead of the purifi, it's possible the gulf between them in perceived performance, would not have been so great . . . then again maybe it would have done.

As we weren't there for a scientific time, we're there for a good time, the Purifi went straight back in and normal service resumed.


To be honest I was expecting the Keces to hold it's own a little more against the Purifi, however there may be a couple of reasons it didn't . . . . another question bothering us was how the Keces was so enjoyable within mine and Oli's systems and then really fel down at Jason's? Also Oli has had the Purifi in his system and preferred his 686 (and I assume my Keces), so work that one out!!


Now mine and Oli's setups are actually relative 'near-field' listening (by comparison to Jason's anyway). Okay it's still a bit further away than actual near-field, but there is a hell of a lot more space to/in and around the speakers when compared to Jason's room. It's possible that the presentation of all the amps work better in one room compared to another. I've never heard any amps sound this radically different within the same circumstances though. What is even more surprising is that they are all similar power outputs and all have (supposedly inaudible difference) superb distortion figures . . . .


It may well be the case that a 686 fit's Oli's room best as he has some bass reinforcement and a live floor (neither of which I have). My room has a dead zone around the listening area so needs a big boost of low end from both the EQ of the Vaders and possibly an amp with a big bass sound signature (the Keces) to balance things out a bit. So maybe Jason's room has the least effect on the sound (as it's so large by comparison) and it's possible that the cleanest and most transparent amp of the lot (purifi) is doing the business in there. Being Class D it also has the best control of the bass drivers (both the passive and active ones) and therefore comes across as the most realistic . . . . I don't know, maybe thats it, or maybe it's something else all together, but we've all heard it now, and so did Steve too I believe!


As ever, it seems synergy is playing a huge part in these setups and of course I now need to try a purifi (or similar) within my system to prove/disprove the theory . . .


So just like what had happend to me at Oli's probably a year or so before, I now had my perception of a 'reference' system warped by Jason's . . . it truly is on a completely different level, especially when say near the back 


Thanks very much to Jason for hosting a very enjoyable evening and giving me a proper bed for the night, had an awesome time as ever, and to Oli for a quick listen and bite to eat on the way up.


Good times and I'm sure we'll sort a few more get togethers shortly.


Cheers


Chris

optical

Great writeup. I enjoyed reading that.

Regarding the Keces:

I was actually pleasantly surprised by the Keces. To my ears the tone was very similar to the 686. It wasn't as transparent, and decay of notes definitely didn't linger for as long. If you recall i was listening for the close mic'd noises of Marlon Williams' mouth opening and closing to sing. It's quite obvious via the 686 due to his slight speech impediment. The Keces managed some, but not as many of them were present as with the 686.

Where the Keces scored well against the 686 was it's LF control and weight. The 686 doesnt lack power, but when the Keces hit some notes it was noticeably more powerful, had more density and were tighter. The control of those LF notes actually helped clean up the frequencies further up range, meaning the soundstage was very clear and concise...better than with the 686 i feel. The Keces was a great listen, but i did wonder if that extra punch and weight may become fatiguing after a while. I remember hearing a Colin Wonfor design some years ago now that the Keces reminded me of. The Wonfor was great, but it was just too heavy with the punches for me. When you tried to listen to delicate music, it couldn't hold back. Finesse was exchanged for brute force. Different room, different system...but that was the impression.

Whilst we didn't have very long to listen, i think we got a good handle of its performance in my room with all that entails, which undoubtedly will be completely different when listening to it in any other space, which i think your visit here and to Jason's proved. Therefore, everyone should take my observations with a pinch of salt!

From a personal perspective, it is great to know that where my system once was the benchmark for you...it is now not, and you have surpassed what you heard here. Your commitment to the hobby has been very evident and deserves to be rewarded with great sound. Well done mate.

Your comment while you were here of "god, i can heard the room" is exactly what i am trying to resolve here, albeit it with limited hopes of success.

Great write up Chris - summed everything up nicely. It was a pleasure to welcome you and great to share wine, whisky and tunes until 2.30am! 😂 I still can't unhear that incredible Herbie Handcock track we heard near the end of the session. That Bass!

The Keces, 686, Purifi comparisons have shocked all three of us and it still surprises me how amps could be so different (comparatively so) in different systems. Just shows the massive importance of synergy. My preconceptions of the Purifi were of transparency and perhaps slightly 'lightweight' presentation. It my system it is somehow incredibly transparent and has NEVER got close to sounding lightweight or thin. I couldn't get over how different the Keces sounded in my system. After glowing reports from you and Oli I had expected to be selling my Purifi. In reality the Keces simply didn't do anything right in my system. Never before has sysnergy been so conclusively and shockingly portrayed.

It's no consolation 😂😂

I know the room here will be less of a factor once we get the new rig up and running, but I'm under no illusions that it will still limit what I can do. So, I have decided that my pursuit of Audio perfection will end with this new rig.

I am not saying I won't buy and sell a few bits out of interest or for fun, but my days of chasing the dragon are over. I want to do other stuff and I have prioritised the system over other pursuits for too long.

Anyway, back to the OPs thread ....

optical

Is the search in full swing for a Purifi?

Sounds like everyone had a great time as well as interesting to listen to a mixture of kit with some constants.
Synergy is the main thing to me - currenty listening to an old CD on an old CD player, playing through an old integrated amp through newer speakers using a mixture of ancient and new cables.
In my room and to my ears it just works so well.

Looking forward to my next sojourn to Jason's place hopefully this year to see and hear all the changes now made as it is sounding like he has achieved a lot in a short space of time - good on ya son

Need to pay a visit to Oli's at some stage in my life to to see what all the fuss is about (need to get my SP10 to Angus for a fettle as I was supposed to do last year.....)

Thanks again chaps.

 If I'm going to Angus' place to drop the SP10 off, may as well pop in and say hello - don't have to turn your system on as I will understand

It sort of is . . . however a couple of other things need to make way first. 

As it is the Keces is doing a damn good job in my room, it's not really a problem, but if it shifts, no doubt I'll be straight on a purifi . . . . as are a few now most likely 

The first rule of purifi club is ?

Was the Herbie Hancock track Watermelon Man ?

Can I ask what is the pre-amp in Jason's system?

IME you can get very different results from the power amp depending on what pre-amp is being used, which is why I ask.

Seems to me more likely to be the reason for the big difference as both power amps should handle the speakers without any issues.

Good pre amp I have one also - but like all the pre-amps I've owned, it doesn't play equally with all power amps.

Possible that with a different pre the roles might be reversed?

Also... Oli preferred the 686 in his system and the Purifi in mine. Although that is probably due to room and speakers.

Keces sounds great on my system, identical preamp, identical speakers.

Also sounded darn good at Oli's.

Most important variable here is the rooms.

Different power amps playing differently in different rooms, fairly conclusive from the previous impressions.

If the Keces sounded how it was at Jason's, in MY room, I wouldn't entertain it for very long.

Luckily, it doesn't sound like that here, with identical kit.

Having said that we did only play vinyl through it at Jason's but vinyl sounds fine here too, again, practically identical kit there....

Edit: my room does have a lot of issues, audible bass 'weakness' from 80-120hz even though it can measure okay (far cry from sounding right).

Obviously it is tuned and boosted in that area but it does not thump at all, the best amp I've found to combat this is the Keces (possibly due to it's ridiculous Amperage output capability or damping factor, or perhaps its bias Class A operation).

It's possible with a less challenging room the differences are more obvious.

The BT2 is measurably impervious to any amplifier load we have put on it, including that of the Krell KSA50s.

The "issue" you are experiencing with the Krell and BT2 is nothing to do with the BT2. Unless you have some measurable evidence or quantifiable technical explanation to assign blame to the BT2, i am afraid i suspect you are either imagining it or your subconscious/conscious bias is playing a part.