Goodbye to Devialet - after upgrade program

[Confused]

I would have to agree with Guillaume. I recall talking to Mathieu Pernot shortly after the launch of the D400. I asked which was best, the D250 (Which Mathieu knew I owned) or the D400. I kind of expected Mathieu to be diplomatic about my lovely (and very expensive) D250, but no, his answer was direct, the D400 is better because the dual mono allows much lower distortion.

As for power, a while back I would have agreed with the view that beyond a sensible limit, power is not important. However, during the 1000 Pro launch Mathieu Pernot explained for about half an hour why in fact it was the most important thing (Ian G posted about this in the 1000 Pro launch thread.) It is an interesting topic, and far more complex than you might first think, but for sure there is a lot more to this subject than looking at the back of your speakers and seeing the little maximum power label and comparing this with the amplifier power.

[KIBM]

I would have to agree with Guillaume.  I recall talking to Mathieu Pernot shortly after the launch of the D400.  I asked which was best, the D250 (Which Mathieu knew I owned) or the D400.  I kind of expected Mathieu to be diplomatic about my lovely (and very expensive) D250, but no, his answer was direct, the D400 is better because the dual mono allows much lower distortion.

As for power, a while back I would have agreed with the view that beyond a sensible limit, power is not important.  However, during the 1000 Pro launch Mathieu Pernot explained for about half an hour why in fact it was the most important thing (Ian G posted about this in the 1000 Pro launch thread.)  It is an interesting topic, and far more complex than you might first think, but for sure there is a lot more to this subject than looking at the back of your speakers and seeing the little maximum power label and comparing this with the amplifier power.

I've always been in the Jeremy Clarkson camp - Power! 
But to be serious, you can have all the grunt in the world but if it can't be delivered effectively and essentially instantaneously at low distortion then it is moot. There are some great examples (and prices) of relatively low power amps with stunning sound quality e.g. DartZeel's first amp for example was superb.
I guess I've always had low efficiency speakers such as Wilsons - the low impedances (e.g. 2 ohm in mid-bass) really needed a powerful amp that can double its power when the going gets tough.

[Soniclife]

If I were a 200 owner I would be faced by a bit of a quandary here, and I say that knowing first hand what the benefits of some of the Pro innovations are. 

I think your probably right, and I expect it will come down to how easy or not your speakers are to drive, well behaved speakers not being driven to huge levels might like the 220, sink holes for power like mine (that forced me to get the companion) the 400.

[Axel]

I would have to agree with Guillaume.  I recall talking to Mathieu Pernot shortly after the launch of the D400.  I asked which was best, the D250 (Which Mathieu knew I owned) or the D400.  I kind of expected Mathieu to be diplomatic about my lovely (and very expensive) D250, but no, his answer was direct, the D400 is better because the dual mono allows much lower distortion.

As for power, a while back I would have agreed with the view that beyond a sensible limit, power is not important.  However, during the 1000 Pro launch Mathieu Pernot explained for about half an hour why in fact it was the most important thing (Ian G posted about this in the 1000 Pro launch thread.)  It is an interesting topic, and far more complex than you might first think, but for sure there is a lot more to this subject than looking at the back of your speakers and seeing the little maximum power label and comparing this with the amplifier power.

I agree here: power is important. 
What I got when I added a 200 companion, was a sense that the amps exerted more grip and control to the bottom end in particular. Bass notes seemed to start and stop with more definition, with no hangover or flap.

[IanG-UK]

I would have to agree with Guillaume.  I recall talking to Mathieu Pernot shortly after the launch of the D400.  I asked which was best, the D250 (Which Mathieu knew I owned) or the D400.  I kind of expected Mathieu to be diplomatic about my lovely (and very expensive) D250, but no, his answer was direct, the D400 is better because the dual mono allows much lower distortion.

... in fact, at the recent Oxford event, Mathieu told me he still owned his original D-Premier, one of the first ever made.

He probably gets to try out so many new toys at work that it might be a relief for him to go home and listen to something familiar.

[Soniclife]

... in fact, at the recent Oxford event, Mathieu told me he still owned his original D-Premier, one of the first ever made.

He probably gets to try out so many new toys at work that it might be a relief for him to go home and listen to something familiar.

Maybe AIR works on the D-P with old firmware  

[RebelMan]

Wouldn't it be better in most cases to just get a second unit to double up in terms of SQ improvements ?

I mean, going from D200 to D400 by getting a second D200 seems as though it would offer a larger improvement in sound and be far more cost effective.

There are some very very good deals on the current models at the moment and that too me is far more attractive than the upgrade price offered for the D200 to move up.

No.  More power does not equate to better sound quality.  More power equates to more output (SPL) and more headroom but that's all.  Unless your system requires more power to suppress potential distortions from driving the volume up it would be unnecessary to increase it.

I tend to disagree. When I upgraded from 170 to 200, my Dynaudio C1's (Love power!) sounded much better at low volumes. I understand not all speakers need power though

I reviewed the impedance and phase curves for your speakers and while they are rated a nominal 4 ohms, they never dip that low throughout the pass band.  On average they perform more like 6 ohm speakers.  Although they are rated with an 88 dB sensitivity they test closer to 85 dB and while they won't win any awards for being the easiest speakers to drive they really aren't that difficult either.  At 100 watts output (into an 8 ohm load) the a Devialet 120 would have no problem pushing the C1's to near reference volumes (96 dB+ in your case) at a listening position less than four meters away in a typical home environment.  Given the stiffness of the Devialet's power supply (it's linear down to 2 ohms!!!) it will never run short on current given the light (6 ohm) load.  So it really comes down to how loud you listen and for how long.  Assuming a 10 dB delta swing you could set your volume to 86 dB and never breach the limits of any Devialet.  The 200 will add about 2dB more headroom but its inconsequential, especially if you value your hearing for the long haul.

[Confused]

This was posted by Ian G after the Oxford Audio 1000 Pro launch event. A fascinating take on power. I have to be honest, I struggle a bit to rationalise how 'infinite power' would improve on say a much lower figure, such a 1 billion watts, but there you have it. This was the view of one of the great minds behind the original Devialet project, food for thought.....

This was very interesting. Mathieu explained that, from the current starting point, the priorities were (a) power (b) volume control © quality. What I interpreted from this was that, given Expert’s current quality, their aim was to increase power (Mathieu said that the best power was theoretically infinite power) and then to ensure that existing optimum quality was delivered at all power (volume) levels. In terms of quantifiable measures, he said that the 1000 Pro would now deliver continuous full power for a whole minute whereas the 800 could only deliver continuous full power for two seconds. He also explained that the theoretical optimum mix (but practically unachievable) between A and D was 0% A and 100% D; but that the changes had moved them from 2%/98% to 0.5%/99.5%, improving precision by a factor of four.

So there you have it folks..... Infinite power is what you want!

Plus, this does remind me of when I listened to a D170 with the KEF Blades, even at modest volume it did not sound good, bass definition, punch etc. was very poor. With a D240, the Blades were singing. On paper, the D170 should be fine, easily fine with the Blades, but it wasn't. It's not a simple topic this one.

[RebelMan]

Wouldn't it be better in most cases to just get a second unit to double up in terms of SQ improvements ?

I mean, going from D200 to D400 by getting a second D200 seems as though it would offer a larger improvement in sound and be far more cost effective.

There are some very very good deals on the current models at the moment and that too me is far more attractive than the upgrade price offered for the D200 to move up.

No.  More power does not equate to better sound quality.  More power equates to more output (SPL) and more headroom but that's all.  Unless your system requires more power to suppress potential distortions from driving the volume up it would be unnecessary to increase it.

It's not just a matter of power although with many speakers that certainly helps.

Dual mono configuration divides by a factor of 4 distortion and minimises crosstalk with a gain in lateral information and image realism.

If I were a 200 owner I would be faced by a bit of a quandary here, and I say that knowing first hand what the benefits of some of the Pro innovations are. 

Guillaume

True but the architecture doesn't change, the formula is identical between them.  When the units are combined they enter a quasi mode of differential signaling.  This mode will suppress distortion and thereby improve signal separation (quality) which can be audibly observed if the noises were sufficiently large to begin with.  Given that we have the ability to detect distortions as low as 0.1% it's becomes increasing difficult beyond that but even if it were likely it would be physically impossible to detect them down to 0.001% much less 0.00025%.  The harmonics that are produce will amplify this some but not enough to be noticed before the signal decays.  As the Pro uses new architecture the variables are changed as will the results be.

[Confused]

I expect one day someone will do a D400 vs 240 Pro shootout! Even that would be far from definitive, the end result as to which is best could well be speaker dependant.

As a complete punt now, I'd go with the D400, but this could easily be wrong.