Devialet Chat

Well, Hello @rooze !

Thanks for dropping in. Very good of you to come by and participate. Your posting on your website did get a bit of attention. We do still sniff around the web for comments on our equipment.

I'll apologize for the 'moron' comment, though it is not my place to do so. But I'll also defend our criticisms of your blog and our reaction to your classification of the sound as 'digitized'. And as I said, there are many established publications and professional reviewers who are also thoroughly experienced who's assessment of the Devialet Expert and Pro amplifiers is dramatically different than yours. So you'll perhaps understand why we take your commentary as a voice on your own forum. You said you can't comment on the opinions in Stereophile and other publications. Sure you can: you read them and reference them and contrast your own experiences with their conclusions. 

But it doesn't matter really. I also think it is fun to listen to a variety of audio equipment and compare and contrast the sound they produce. But once I bought my Devialet, I stopped thinking about or shopping for amplifiers. This after many years of audio noodling that saw amplifiers from Heathkit, Fisher, Eico, Rotel, McIntosh and Naim, and speakers from ProAc, Neat, GamuT, Buchardt and Lawrence Audio work their way through my various living rooms. And I'll also offer this: I'm a bass player. I've recorded, and get paid to play live. My band has a gal who plays violin. I've also played bassoon and bass trombone. Not that I'm a stellar musician, but I know what these instruments sound like, and I have not heard another amplifier that reproduces these instruments with the clarity, roundness, fullness and nuance of tone and microdynamics as well as the Devialet.

See? Thats just me; lots of us have had lots of gear and there is a whole community of members here who have a broad history of much more sophisticated equipment than I have had. So please, don't diminish the experience or value or audio sensibiltiy of the family of Devialet owners.

But let me also thank you for your kind words for the Configurator. It is funny, because, around here, the Configurator is one of the things about the Devialet that generates the most frustration and 'letters to the editor'. Personally I rarely fuss with my amp, but for those that like to fiddle, it drives some of them crazy. It is excellent that you liked and appreciated this feature.

Anyhow, clearly I like to type, even though I probably bore the crap out of most others here. Maybe you too.

(02-Apr-2021, 04:11)rooze Wrote: [ -> ]...I should also have elaborated more on how I found the sound to be reminiscent of early Class D amp technology. It just sounded overtly digital, in the bad sense of the word, hence it didn’t hold my interest, musically.

I understand that you don't like the sound - but the part about "overtly digital" is just far from true.

It's probaly just too high resolution and transparency for your taste. With some speakers Devialet could sound maybe a little analytical.

Well I don't what 'digital sound' can mean expect a sound devoid from euphonic distortions of analog perhaps?

Jean-Marie

@rooze

I also use "Amused To Death" to check staging etc. The first minute or so of track 1 with the dog is especially effective. I never used the 250 I had without room correction. My speakers and room did not work without. The original TacT Millennium amplifier sounded great, but I never owned one. I did own the RCS 2.0 though.

I am also very sensitive to phase and timing errors. Audiolense time aligned my speakers to the listening position and did a much better job than the TacT RCS. On good recordings it felt somewhat like listening to headphones. I always assumed, and still do, that this had to do with room correction and meticulous speaker alignment, but the amplifier itself may have contributed a little to this effect. I liked the sound and often had music sessions of many hours with no fatigue. I never experienced this as "Digital sound".

(02-Apr-2021, 06:26)Damon Wrote: [ -> ]"...Not that I'm a stellar musician, but I know what these instruments sound like, and I have not heard another amplifier that reproduces these instruments with the clarity, roundness, fullness and nuance of tone and microdynamics as well as the Devialet.

See? Thats just me; lots of us have had lots of gear and there is a whole community of members here who have a broad history of much more sophisticated equipment than I have had. So please, don't diminish the experience or value or audio sensibiltiy of the family of Devialet owners. "

That´s my favorite part.
Very well said.

@BoyScout

Thanks, you are very kind. I wanted to put this point in writing as I've been impressed, with very few exceptions, by the knowledge of DC forum members. Some of these guys and gals know a huge amount about all sorts of electronics, not just the Devialet products or only audio. Also, with very few exceptions, this is the most courteous and cooperative forum I know of, and those good manners remain when somebody moves on to another amplifier brand. We want people to have the system that makes the sound that they like, whatever shape that takes. Bashing of other brands doesn't seem to sit well with this group. Which I like, very much.

Playing with equipment for years does not automatically confer any gift or skill. You don't get credit for time served, so to speak. I don't consider myself to have 'reference quality ears'. But DC Chat, as a whole, brings a lot of years and focused experience to the table. Heck, that's why I come here myself to ask for advice and guidance; I trust and value the opinions of this family.

Now, where did I put my ear trumpet?

This has been an enjoyable thread. 

At one time, I owned a Carver C-9 Sonic Hologram Generator, so the mention of the device brought a grin to my face.  Bob Carver was quite a presence in the hi-fi world for decades and a great marketing guy (said with admiration).  I loved his ad copy and probably got sucked into the Sonic Hologram by one of his dense ads.  Anyway, the Sonic Hologram process was embedded in upper-end Carver preamps but I got my version as a stand-alone processor.  As CAH mentioned, the process worked well on some songs but was not as profound on others.  I well recall listening to CCR's "Suzie Q" and it cast a wide, wide stage.  In the rawest of terms, it used digital processing to eliminate acoustical cross-talk; the effect was somewhat akin to wearing headphones.

In my opinion, having listened a lot (in the past) to music altered by Sonic Holography and having owned both the Devialet 180 (later a 200 virtue of a firmware upgrade) and my current Devialet Expert 220 Pro, the comparison is a non-starter.  Again, this is my opinion but I can't find anything similar in what I recall hearing and what I hear today from my D220.

Now, if @rooze wants to have some fun, let him evaluate Sweet Room!

(02-Apr-2021, 15:23)ogs Wrote: [ -> ]@rooze

I also use "Amused To Death" to check staging etc. The first minute or so of track 1 with the dog is especially effective. I never used the 250 I had without room correction. My speakers and room did not work without. The original TacT Millennium amplifier sounded great, but I never owned one. I did own the RCS 2.0 though.

I am also very sensitive to phase and timing errors. Audiolense time aligned my speakers to the listening position and did a much better job than the TacT RCS. On good recordings it felt somewhat like listening to headphones. I always assumed, and still do, that this had to do with room correction and meticulous speaker alignment, but the amplifier itself may have contributed a little to this effect. I liked the sound and often had music sessions of many hours with no fatigue. I never experienced this as "Digital sound".

Well said


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk