Expert Pro 440 vs. 1000

[Confused]

......... Consider some facts, the 400 and 800 have the same internals, the electronics are the same.  ..........

Question concerning your post above...I have read similar comments as yours above but also others that implied there are truly some hardware differences between the two series.  How can we confirm which of these two opposing statements is the correct one and if a difference exists what are these hardware changes?
Hard to believe they are identical units with one simply "detuned" to a lessor power threshold.

First to make sure my post was clear, I was referring to the D400 and D800 (or D200 vs D250).  I believe that there are some small differences between the current 220 Pro and 250 Pro models.  So how do we confirm if this is correct?  One point I would make here is that I cannot recall anyone stating with any degree of credibility that the electronics are different between the two.  There has been some internet chatter, that they must be different surely?  And other posts stating that Devialet deliberately reduce the performance of the lesser models using firmware, but it is just that, internet chatter and speculation, never based on anything firm.  I based my comment that the electronics in the D200 are the same as the D250 (Expert / Pre-Pro) on a statement made by Devialet's Chief Engineer Mathieu Pernot at an Oxford Audio event a few years ago.  OK - I agree that this statement is not confirmation of the fact, for all you know I might have made it up (although I did not, for the record), or indeed Mathieu Pernot may have made it up, or those at the event may have misunderstood what he said, who knows?

If there is a desire to prove the point, then a good starting point would be Manoet's thread where he completely disassembled and rebuilt a D200.  The pictures provided show the Devialet revision designation numbers on each of the circuit boards and other components.  If anyone can find equivalent pictures of the innards of a D250 Expert, then you could compare and confirm.

https://devialetchat.com/Thread-D200-Reassembly-thread

One thing I cannot find online are any definitive pictures of the electronics in a D250 Expert.  If these can be found, then it would be fairly easy to compare and confirm they are the same, or confirm any differences.  One point I would make regarding the pictures provided by Manoet, is that the D200 Expert circuit boards include the cut-out for the associated window in the D250 "muffin top" case, which does imply at least some commonality between the two.

Does anyone have any pictures of the insides of a D250 Expert?

Edit: I have just found this, which shows the D800 ADH board as Rev5.4, which is the same as in Manoet's pictures.

https://www.devialet-store.nl/sites/defa...Pro-EN.pdf

[Pim]

What would be interesting to know is whether the power supplies are the same. That would mean the 440 has a lot more juice to draw on compared to its amplification than the 1000 does. The 1000 still has the advantage of delivering more of that power though.

[Wdw]

What would be interesting to know is whether the power supplies are the same. That would mean the 440 has a lot more juice to draw on compared to its amplification than the 1000 does. The 1000 still has the advantage of delivering more of that power though.

Agree.  Would be of great interest to determine the hardware differences between these two series.  Wonder if @Jean-Marie would have any comments on this subject.  (assuming he has the ear of the company)

I have occasionally wondered during a listening session, how the 1000 would compare to my 440Pros although I have no complaints with the 440, just the usual audiophile nut bar tendency to look for possible upgrades to the system at hand.

[Confused]

What would be interesting to know is whether the power supplies are the same. That would mean the 440 has a lot more juice to draw on compared to its amplification than the 1000 does. The 1000 still has the advantage of delivering more of that power though.

Agree.  Would be of great interest to determine the hardware differences between these two series.  Wonder if @Jean-Marie would have any comments on this subject.  (assuming he has the ear of the company)

I have occasionally wondered during a listening session, how the 1000 would compare to my 440Pros although I have no complaints with the 440, just the usual audiophile nut bar tendency to look for possible upgrades to the system at hand.

Some answers to the above can be found here ....

https://devialetchat.com/Thread-D220-Pro...ht=rev5.05

Looking at the pictures, both the 220Pro and 250Pro have almost identical looking power supplies, the PSU's share the same rev6.02 designation, and the components look almost identical.  (only some slight colour differences)

One difference that can be seen is with the ADH boards.  The 22Pro is designated rev6.022/4L, whereas the 250Pro is rev6.01/6L

See pictures below, the first picture is a 220Pro, the second a 250Pro, the visual differences are obvious.

   

   

From past conversations re the old 200 versus the 250, my understanding is that the firmware used in the PSU varies between models.  So in other words the PSU in the 200 is electronically restricted slightly versus the 250, basically due to the differences in cooling capability, so the PSU is held back slightly in the 200 to stop it frying itself.  I guess it is likely that this remains the case with the 220Pro versus the 1000Pro, but I do not know this for sure.

Whilst it is clear that there are visual differences between the 220Pro/250Pro ADH boards, I do not know what the actual differences are in practical or performance terms.  Maybe related to cooling?

[damonhayhow]

I've just spent the past week exhaustively comparing a D1000 with D440 and wanted to share my findings in the only post I could find online on the topic (surprisingly? I thought more people would be curious as to the differences?).

To cut to the conclusion: even though I desperately wanted to make the "upgrade" to the D1000, the D440 sounded significantly better in the areas that count most to me.

As background, I was offered an amazing deal on a lightly used D1000 upgrade that I wanted to take advantage of. I was even luckier that I was able to bring the D1000 home and compare it to my 440, in my listening room, with my equipment, for as long as I needed. I was very frustrated to find that, while the D1000 had numerous sonic attributes that were superior, the overall result was surprisingly negative. So even though I was heavily biased TOWARD the D1000, the D440 won.

The description of the D1000 being the Devialet sound "writ large" is exactly right. While the character of the amps is essentially the same, compared to the D440, the D1000 has superior dynamics, more detail and control in the deep bass, paints a larger 3-dimensional soundstage and gives much better instrument separation and soundstage position specificity.

None of these attributes were things I felt were lacking in the D440. But, after hearing the D1000, I did want them. And initially, as I started noticing that the improvements in dynamics were real and significant, I was thinking "yes! this is great". But even then, something was not quite right? So I kept auditioning and comparing.

As I got several days into my comparisons, I started noticing that I was constantly adjusting the volume on the D1000, unlike the D440, and I was switching tracks a lot more. With the D440, from the first notes of any track the sound was instantly more relaxing. Then, Id keep catching myself forgetting that I was supposed to be auditioning gear, because I'd gotten carried away tapping my toe to the music. That never happened with the D1000.

So, one night I ran a blind comparison for my partner who had never auditioned audio gear before, with a record they had never heard before. Her response was emphatically that she wanted to turn down one of them (the D1000) because it sounded uncomfortably loud, but the other one (the D440, played loud) she just really enjoyed the song and wanted to keep listening to the next track of the record. Interestingly, someone with no knowledge or experience immediately reiterated exactly my impressions within just a few minutes of listening.

Eventually I was able to diagnose the D1000's issue as being extra hotness and bite in the treble. On any tracks with harsher sibilants, or bright instruments like trumpets or violins, it could cut the ears like a knife, where the D440 would not.

My speakers are Wilson Benesch Resolutions. While they are not warm and syrupy 1980s Sonus Fabers, neither are they more hotly-trebled B&W D3's. The speakers definitely do not suffer from harsh, biting treble. Moreover, I was listening to the same speakers, cables, source etc with both the D440 and D1000. The issue was the D1000.

The shocking realisation of the harshness of the treble came when listening on Tidal to the album "The Blues and the Abstract Truth (with Eric Dolphy)". The track I was auditioning finished and the track shuffled to track 11: Whole Nelson. I leapt for the remote to turn the cacophony down! It was horrendous. The trumpets were so harsh and bright as to be painful. The whole song was just a shambles of screaching noise. That shock made me wonder how bad it would sound on the D440? To my shock, it was nothing like the D1000 presentation. It was certainly a bright track with very high pitched trumpeting. But the knife edge was removed. It was actually a somewhat enjoyable track on the D440. I went back to the 1000 and it was a cacophony again. It was hard to force myself to listen to it.
Once I'd noticed the treble I started noticing it everywhere - on both vinyl and tidal - and realised it seems to be a defining character of the D1000. It explains my propensity to constantly fiddle with the volume and, sort of, lose the music for all the sounds. It also describes what @audio_engr had heard about the D1000 being more pure muscle, while the D440 is like an iron fist in a velvet glove. That particular description perfectly describes the difference I heard. I would just emphasise that the D1000's 'pure muscle' applies to the entire frequency range.

My hypothesis is that the increased emphasis that the D1000 put on the higher frequencies was carving a sharper outline around instruments and sounds, improving the instrument separation, imaging and soundstaging. However, the emphasis of every little click and squeak gives the impression that the actual body of the instrument/voice is too quiet (like when a person is whispering and you can only hear the sibilants). That feeds the desire to keep turning up the volume, until it is so loud that the sharp treble hurts the ears and it needs to be turned down again. This is also what makes the sound fatiguing.

As bad as being fatiguing, I found the D1000 killed emotion in songs that I love for the emotion. For example, Kishi Bashi's version of "This Must be The Place" on the String Quartet Live album is an incredible, uplifting track (IMO). As the pitch of his voice rises with emotion on the D440, it sends shivers down the spine and gives goosebumps. But on the D1000, that track literally just grated. I had to turn it down.

It took almost a week of auditioning nearly constantly to come to this realisation and understanding of the D1000 vs the D440. The only strong initial difference I noticed was that the D1000 plays louder than the D440 at the same nominal volume on the display. Other than that, they sounded near identical when listening casually, or studying for differences in multiple sound attributes.

A shorter audition would possibly make the D1000 seem more "exciting", dynamic and detailed, if you could hear any difference at all? That is what I noticed after a few hours of reconfirming the differences. And, obviously, for some speakers and recordings, the added "sparkle" of the D1000 presentation might be absolutely magical.

The more subliminal, subjective effects of fatigue and music lacking involvement are typically harder to audition quickly, prove or explain. If you get the chance to audition, I strongly recommend including some demo tracks with borderline-harsh trumpets or violins to test if the D1000 tips over that line. No doubt the bass on the D1000 is about as good as bass gets. But sit back and see which makes your toes tap on some of your favourite tracks? You (and your wallet) might be as surprised as I was.

[David A]

I haven't heard any of the double amps, just the single amp models, so I'm interested in your comments. I have one question.

Did you listen at matched volume levels, and by that I mean listening levels matched by reference to SPL measurements rather than the volume setting displayed by the amp?

0 dB on the Devialet's display is the level at which the amp is notionally outputting full power for a signal with a level of 0 dB so 0 dB on the 1000 would be 1000 W output for a 0 dB input and 440 W output for the 440 with an input signal of the same level. That means that for the same volume setting on the 2 amps, the listening level with the 1000 would be around 3 to 4 dB louder than the 440. Given that the ear becomes more sensitive to high and low frequencies as listening level increases, a 3 to 4 dB increase in level over the 440 would give thee impression of more bass in the low end and a hotter top end because increasing listening level acts to some degree like turning up the bass and treble tone controls. That's a large part of the reason why it's always recommended to use matched levels for A/B comparisons.

I don't doubt that the 1000 sounded as if it had more muscle, I would probably expect that even at matched listening levels, but if you were setting both amps to the same dB level on the volume control, a 3 to 4 dB difference in the 1000's favour would almost certainly make things sound brighter tonally and fatiguing.

[damonhayhow]

I haven't heard any of the double amps, just the single amp models, so I'm interested in your comments. I have one question.

Did you listen at matched volume levels, and by that I mean listening levels matched by reference to SPL measurements rather than the volume setting displayed by the amp?

0 dB on the Devialet's display is the level at which the amp is notionally outputting full power for a signal with a level of 0 dB so 0 dB on the 1000 would be 1000 W output for a 0 dB input and 440 W output for the 440 with an input signal of the same level. That means that for the same volume setting on the 2 amps, the listening level with the 1000 would be around 3 to 4 dB louder than the 440. Given that the ear becomes more sensitive to high and low frequencies as listening level increases, a 3 to 4 dB  increase in level over the 440 would give thee impression of more bass in the low end and a hotter top end because increasing listening level acts to some degree like turning up the bass and treble tone controls. That's a large part of the reason why it's always recommended to use matched levels for A/B comparisons.

I don't doubt that the 1000 sounded as if it had more muscle, I would probably expect that even at matched listening levels, but if you were setting both amps to the same dB level on the volume control, a 3 to 4 dB difference in the 1000's favour would almost certainly make things sound brighter tonally and fatiguing.

Yes, as I said, it was immediately audibly obvious that the nominal volume level displayed on the amps resulted in significantly different sound pressure levels. So I tested the SPL to match the levels fairly.

In my initial testing, with matched SPL, I thought the amps seemed to sound more similar than different. However, I was purely auditioning the quality of bass at the time, because thats where I expected the most obvious benefit. So the tracks I was listening to were extremely bass heavy (ie Trentemoller).

On the bass tracks, matched for SPL, every time I thought I heard a difference I would switch back and be less sure? The main problem was there was several minutes gap to switch between. I had to shut everything down, swap over all of the cables, then power up and restart the source, every time I switched. So by the time all that was done, and the intro of the demo track had played, I wasnt sure if I was hearing a difference? Eventually I was able to clearly hear some deep bass definition on the D1000 that was not present on the D440. And then with enough back-and-forthing it became more certain the D1000 bass was superior, along with the soundstage size and other qualities I mentioned. 

But I kept noticing the D1000 felt like it needed to be turned up, when the SPL's were apparently the same. So, after confirming the bass was better, and the instrument separation was better, I wanted to test what I would do if I let the amp guide me?

At this point I was actually sold on the D1000. My ego wanted it ;-) the price was too good to refuse, and I preferred the D1000 remote and how the cases looked. Plus, I had finally successfully confirmed that the sound was superior for all of the technical/objective reasons I mentioned (bass, imaging, soundstage etc). However, I have been in this game long enough to know that gear needs to be engaging and unfatiguing above all else. So I stopped matching SPL to see whether the amp drew me into the music?

It was when I stopped matching SPL's that I noticed my fidgetiness and inability to find a comfortable volume with the D1000. I also noticed I was not engaged to listen to my favourite tracks. Thats when I would switch back to the D440, to see if I just wasnt in the mood for music? But virtually every time I switched back to the D440 there was the immediate sense of relaxing straight into the music, and then toe-tapping engagement, and then listening to 2 or 3 tracks in a row before remembering I was supposed to be listening to "my" new D1000.

[Gerronwithit]

No experience of the 440 as I jumped from a 250 to the 1000. There is absolutely no equivocation about the difference in the whole package. The bass is much deeper, the midfield separation is clearer and plenty at the top end as well. It feels much more open and easier to listen to possibly because of greater clarity of vocals. The 250 was played at a minimum of -21dB whereas I have the 1000 running right now in a separate room at -28dB and certainly never attempted taking it into single figures.

Far from being tiring, I find that I am drawn into the detail of the music.

[Delija]

The choice of B&W D3 speaks a lot about your sound preference. No matter what the amplification and source are, D3 is just too bright and fatiguing for my ears.
Yes, there are details and there are dynamics, but after half an hour I'm tired of listening

Obviously, people have different expectations from the system - that's why there are so many different system configurations.

[Gerronwithit]

Your ears must be good as at my age I need all the detail I can get. I suppose the road to audio nirvana is different for different folks. My own has been defined by absolute clarity after the days of AM radio, record decks with needles like nails and mono only recordings.