Topic: Wharfedale Diamond 9 Series

[av_phile1]

The Pacific Evo series was a notch higher than the diamonds 8 series in the past.  But I think the diamond 9 inherited some design philosphies from the pacific series like the curved baffle to reduce internal standing waves. 

[Dracula]

What stores can accomodate auditions of diamond 9 speakers?

[EHMBU]

What stores can accomodate auditions of diamond 9 speakers?

Sa spectra(Park Square 1) po...

[iamlet]

guys,

can the HK235 provide enough power to fully appreciate the wharfes 9.6?

[av_phile1]

While the 9.6 is specified for 40-200watts, I don't see any problem.  The HK is conservatively rated at around 50watts RMS into 8 ohms at full bandwidth, with all channels driven.  The diamond is 6 ohms, so expect the HK to deliver more current and is said to be equivalent to some receivers rated at 100watts RMS into 6 ohms at 1khz with only 2 channels driven.   

[iamlet]

thanks av_phile1 for the immediate reply.

let's say cost-effectiveness being an issue, do i need a HK335 to fully appreciate a 9.6?

would it really make a difference?

[av_phile1]

thanks av_phile1 for the immediate reply.

let's say cost-effectiveness being an issue, do i need a HK335 to fully appreciate a 9.6?

would it really make a difference?

I don't think so, the 335 is only 5 watts more powerful than the 225, if not mistaken.  You need twice the power rating to make a perceptible 3db difference.  But ofcourse, the more power, the better the wharfe will sing.  But 5 watts would hardly make that much difference. 

[MAtZTER]

I don't think so, the 335 is only 5 watts more powerful than the 225, if not mistaken.  You need twice the power rating to make a perceptible 3db difference.  But ofcourse, the more power, the better the wharfe will sing.  But 5 watts would hardly make that much difference. 

While it is true that 335's power is only 5 w difference from the 235. The 335 uses a different, higher quality amp. Just like Yamaha uses a different amp for the RX650 (equivalent of HK230/5) and the THX certified 1500 (equiv of 330/5?). I was told that the 335/330 series & up sounds warmer than its lower end series.

can the HK235 provide enough power to fully appreciate the wharfes 9.6?

Fully appreciate? Try the HK 630/635. It wont dissapoint. 

[H a n $]

Pacific Evo series are more refined and controlled than Diamond 9 series IMHO..

[av_phile1]

While it is true that 335's power is only 5 w difference from the 235. The 335 uses a different, higher quality amp. Just like Yamaha uses a different amp for the RX650 (equivalent of HK230/5) and the THX certified 1500 (equiv of 330/5?). I was told that the 335/330 series & up sounds warmer than its lower end series.

If you were to put the  tech specs of the 235 and the 335 as pubished on the net side by side, it's interesting to note that the only difference between them is the 5 watts RMS power.   Maybe a circuit diagram of the two would be more revealing, whether one  uses FET front ends, symmetric mirror power amp configuration, servo-assisted negative feedback, coil-less output stage, etc.   But even if there's substantial circuit difference, the frequency reponse, slew rates, interchannel separation, signal-to-noise ratios, Transient Intermodulation Distortion, Total Harmonic Distortions, Instantaneous current ability, input sensitivities and not surprisingly even the power consumption figures are IDENTICAL - all pointing to the same sonic quality.  Curious if they had some misprints somewhere. Or I may have missed one.   

Ofcourse the standard retort to the above is to say, you can't judge an amp by its published specs.  True.  I don't.   But it would nice if the perceived sound difference is backed somehow by a difference in even just one area of measurable specification, however small.  But no matter, if you heard differences, good for HK.  At least it justifies HK coming out with a model that is not just 5 watts higher than another lower model.        

[iamlet]

whew.. thanks   

so much to learn, so little time..

[MAtZTER]

let's say cost-effectiveness being an issue, do i need a HK335 to fully appreciate a 9.6?

would it really make a difference?

It would IMO.

Audition them with different receivers so you would hear the difference.

And SARS is a deadly disease. "should've, would've, could've" is a very nasty thought. And selling your receiver to upgrade to a higher model is not very "cost effective".     

[ndy]

bought  a 9cm yesterday nung nakabit ko na sya pinatulog ko muna sya ng nakaon ang receiver ko naka tune in ako sa fm na walang broadcast nung ginising ko na sya kanina para maexercise and wow ang laki ng tunog at ang laki ng linaw sa dati kong center. pumantay na tunog ng center sa 9.5.

salamat pdvd

[iamlet]

It would IMO.

Audition them with different receivers so you would hear the difference.

And SARS is a deadly disease. "should've, would've, could've" is a very nasty thought. And selling your receiver to upgrade to a higher model is not very "cost effective".     

Matz,
thats what im afraid of =(

[lynds]

Just wanna ask what diamond 9 series model would work best with Denon 1905.  Which is better bookshelf or floor standing?

[MAtZTER]

Just wanna ask what diamond 9 series model would work best with Denon 1905.  Which is better bookshelf or floor standing?

IMO and IME (In My actual Experience), lower model AVRs,--->Bookshelf speakers.
Higher powered/model AVRs, --->floorstanders.

[skylynx888]

master matz, for 9.6,which avr would you prefer, hk335 or yammy659? btw, does 659 have pre outs? thanks bro....

[MAtZTER]

master matz, for 9.6,which avr would you prefer, hk335 or yammy659? btw, does 659 have pre outs? thanks bro....

Lol, master? 

For 9.6, of course use HK335/ Yamaha 1600 or better if higher. I used to have Yamaha 650, medyo manipis yung tunog. I needed to use subs to compensate for the lacking LF in music. Pero sa HK 630, kahit no subs pa, 2 channel lang, ganda ng tunog for floorstanders.

The more power you give your floorstanders, the better they will sound. Like I always say, floorstanders is NOT equal to bookshelf plus stands (COST-wise). You need to factor in the cost of the higher power/model amp needed to power your floorstanders to sound their best.

----------------------------------------------------------

659 has preouts, an alternative is to use a power amp.

Stereo (2 channel) power amps are recommended if you are into music. 5 channel amps are not as good for music reproduction. You will notice that the prices of the 2 are not that far from each other. Iba quality ng 2 channel amp sa 5.

As what my friend ricky discovered at the Rotel threads internaionally, Most Rotel users have a processor, then a 2 channel amp for their fronts, then a 5 channel amp for the center and 4 surrounds, instead of a 6 or 7 channel amp.

In the 659's case, a stereo power amp is gud enough if you are not into multi channel music.

[MAtZTER]

Ever wonder guys why some power amps are even HEAVIER than your receivers? The quality put into power amps are different. I remember someone mentioning that receivers are actually processors with thrown in tuner and amp for free.

In my case:
Yamaha 650: 26 lbs (90wpc daw )
Kenwood THX (130w) stereo amp: over 30 lbs.

Harman HK630: 46 lbs (75wpc)
Rotel 5 channel (120w) THX amp: heavier than the HK630 w/ 7 amps and processor.

[ricky]

sorry ot rotel 1090 2cha amp is at 90lbs

[av_phile1]

Stereo (2 channel) power amps are recommended if you are into music. 5 channel amps are not as good for music reproduction. You will notice that the prices of the 2 are not that far from each other. Iba quality ng 2 channel amp sa 5.

As what my friend ricky discovered at the Rotel threads internaionally, Most Rotel users have a processor, then a 2 channel amp for their fronts, then a 5 channel amp for the center and 4 surrounds, instead of a 6 or 7 channel amp.

While I myself use a 2-channel Acurus power amp for my fronts, and a 3-channel Acurus amp for the center and rears mated to Rotel processors,  I can't generalize about 2 ch being better than multi-ch amps.  Receivers maybe, but not among separates.  I am sure there are exceptions.  But as a general rule, most, like the Parasounds, Adcoms, have multichannel models with very generous power supplies that are more than adequate to sevice all channels.  And above a certain price point, you can expect them to behave similarly.  You can check some Aragon 8000 series and the Bryston AMP 5 to find this out and even some Krell and older Acurus 5 channel models.  Channel amp configuraiton in a multichannel gear is simply a matter of adding channels - they're almost always using identical monoblocks in the same box.  This is more an offshoot and a demand from multichannel sound from SACD and DVD-A, it is of paramount interest among audiophiles that the power amps are identical.   You can ofcourse opt to use multiple stereo power amps or even mono amps.  But most 5 channel amps out there have really generous power supplies and their circuit designs are exact copies of their monoblock and stereo siblings.  

[MAtZTER]

The more power you give your floorstanders, the better they will sound. Like I always say, floorstanders is NOT equal to bookshelf plus stands (COST-wise). You need to factor in the cost of the higher power/model amp needed to power your floorstanders to sound their best.

Just remember guys, the 9.6 costs a lot more in other countries. I saw it for $800 in a magazine. We are lucky indeed that it is a lot cheaper here. I think its best if its paired with higher model receivers fit for speakers at the price range abroad rather than our prices.  

 

[av_phile1]

Just remember guys, the 9.6 costs a lot more in other countries. I saw it for $800 in a magazine. We are lucky indeed that it is a lot cheaper here. I think its best if its paired with higher model receivers fit for speakers at the price range abroad rather than our prices.  

 

Pinoys are indeed lucky that Wharfes are relatively inexpensive here than in Europe or even online.   I recall seeing online prices where a Diamond 9 model is more expensive than a Monitor Audio model. Just can't recall the specific models.

[MAtZTER]

While I myself use a 2-channel Acurus power amp for my fronts, and a 3-channel Acurus amp for the center and rears mated to Rotel processors,  I can't generalize about 2 ch being better than multi-ch amps.  Receivers maybe, but not among separates.  I am sure there are exceptions.  But as a general rule, most, like the Parasounds, Adcoms, have multichannel models with very generous power supplies that are more than adequate to sevice all channels.  And above a certain price point, you can expect them to behave similarly.  You can check some Aragon 8000 series and the Bryston AMP 5 to find this out and even some Krell and older Acurus 5 channel models.  Channel amp configuraiton in a multichannel gear is simply a matter of adding channels - they're almost always using identical monoblocks in the same box.  This is more an offshoot and a demand from multichannel sound from SACD and DVD-A, it is of paramount interest among audiophiles that the power amps are identical.   You can ofcourse opt to use multiple stereo power amps or even mono amps.  But most 5 channel amps out there have really generous power supplies and their circuit designs are exact copies of their monoblock and stereo siblings.  

Point taken sir AV!  But my post refers to purely musical considerations and based from what a friend read in other forums. Maybe where power is involved, there is no contest on the generosity of their construction. But the way they will sound for music might be different or better as said in the forum.

In my experience, when I first tried my stereo amp vs. my 5 channel amp in my setup several months ago. I seem to recall liking the sound given by the stereo amp (in music) compared to the 5 channel one. But I opted to use the 5 channel one since the brand had a bit more of prestige. 

I suddenly recalled this experience when I was told about this 2 channel vs. 5 channel thing. But I wasnt aware of this that time. Sayang, I sold the stereo amp already.

But you are right, we cant generalize every amp to be that way. But for the non-krell, aragon , etc expensive amps like the ones that most members here (opting for the wharfe, the general MASA, me included  ) can afford and use,  maybe, just maybe this generalization might be a bit..ok

[av_phile1]

Point taken sir AV!  But my post refers to purely musical considerations and based from what a friend read in other forums. Maybe where power is involved, there is no contest on the generosity of their construction. But the way they will sound for music might be different or better as said in the forum.

I was also responding from a musical perspective.  Which is why I did mention about multichannel SACD and DVD-A which prompted mannufacturers of multichanel gears to have IDENTIAL amps in their set-ups. 

In my experience, when I first tried my stereo amp vs. my 5 channel amp in my setup several months ago. I seem to recall liking the sound given by the stereo amp (in music) compared to the 5 channel one. But I opted to use the 5 channel one since the brand had a bit more of prestige. 

I suddenly recalled this experience when I was told about this 2 channel vs. 5 channel thing. But I wasnt aware of this that time. Sayang, I sold the stereo amp already.

You may be refering to two(2) different brands of different amp designs, and thus, different sonic signatures, between your stereo and multichannel amps.   Your 2-ch brand may indeed have a better sonic character than the 5-channel amp of another brand with an entirely distinct amp design and construction.  Or even the same brand but on a different series.    Otherwise, if they're in the same model series,  there's always a good chance each of the multichannel amps in a box is IDENTICAL to their monoblock or stereo cousins.  

But you are right, we cant generalize every amp to be that way. But for the non-krell, aragon , etc expensive amps like the ones that most members here (opting for the wharfe, the general MASA, me included  ) can afford and use,  maybe, just maybe this generalization might be a bit..ok

Maybe.   

Then again,  I have yet to encounter a multichannel power amp I can consider "MASA."  Most are really expensive, at least those that are available locally.  Even the modestly priced and powered 5-ch Rotel RMB 1066 sounds good enough for me.   I am not sure that 60T for a power amp can be considered "MASA."  But I have to say that an old HK Citation stereo power amp will beat it  in 2-channel sound.   But that's because we're talking of two different brands of entirely different designs and construction.     

[ricky]

Hi guys,I know this is a bit ot. But I believe what matt is trying to convey is what I told him that 2 channel amps are better than multi-channel amps when it comes to audio listening using a separate processor. Before I was a bit puzzled why in international forums of ROTEL, they prefer using a 2 channel amp for their fronts instead of multi-channel considering the very small price diff between the 2(ex. 2cha=$700,5cha=$1t) so i read more regarding the topic and was convinced later on(based from their testimonies) that indeed there was a sound difference between the two.What the foreign guys did(since they have the money) is to try both set-ups in an A-B configuration just to see(hear) the difference, and almost all that went to this route was saying the same thing.

I myself was planning on adding an additional 5 channel amp just to bi-amp my 5.0 set-up hoping to further improve the sound quality of my system in audio listening, Getting a $1t 5channel amp compared to a $700 stereo amp seems to be the more logical move but having read that its the other way around,Matt and I are now scouting for a 1070 unit(unfortunately only BN is available) to use with our fronts.

By the way 1066 is a 6x60w power amp bridgeable to 3x130w

(talking and specific only on ROTEL brand,sorry if you think we are generalizing)

[av_phile1]

that 2 channel amps are better than multi-channel amps when it comes to audio listening using a separate processor. Before I was a bit puzzled why in international forums of ROTEL, they prefer using a 2 channel amp for their fronts instead of multi-channel considering the very small price diff between the 2(ex. 2cha=$700,5cha=$1t) so i read more regarding the topic and was convinced later on(based from their testimonies) that indeed there was a sound difference between the two.What the foreign guys did(since they have the money) is to try both set-ups in an A-B configuration just to see(hear) the difference, and almost all that went to this route was saying the same thing.

Such a generalization may be quite difficult to back.   Maybe it applies to Rotel, so it can be specific to Rotel,  but not necessarily to other brands at all times.  I've seen the specs of their 2-channel RMB 1070 compared to a similarly powered 5-ch  like the RMB 1095, and indeed they read differently even within the same series, the 1070 being better spec'd.   So I wouldn't be surpirsed that the better spec'd 1070 would sound better than the 1095 on the same stereo processor.   And I probably don't need a DBT to verify that.  Most Rotel stereo amps do look better spec'd than their multichannel cousins.     And between the two, I'd go for the 1070 as well. 

My 3-channel Acurus sounds exactly the same as my 2-ch channel model in the same series fed from the same Rotel and Denon pre/pro on stereo sources.   

I also did some researches between 2ch and multich before I plunged into the Acurus 2 years back.  I was contemplating on whether to get a Rotel RMB1066 multichannel or to split the fronts from the rest using good old stereo amps.  The specs on the Acurus stereo is so much better and with their equally spec'd 3-ch amp, were priced together (due to their being display units) just the same as getting the 1066.  So I settled for the Acurus (even if it was already a dead brand at that time.)   

By the way 1066 is a 6x60w power amp bridgeable to 3x130w

You're right, it's 6 ch not 5.  Just got carrried away with the 5-ch thought.   Not as good sounding as a Citation stereo power amp that a coleaugue had and replaced with for his HT and SACD set-up.  But even with that knowledge, I still wouldn't generalize.   

[Weng!]

Hi guys,I know this is a bit ot. But I believe what matt is trying to convey is what I told him that 2 channel amps are better than multi-channel amps when it comes to audio listening using a separate processor. Before I was a bit puzzled why in international forums of ROTEL, they prefer using a 2 channel amp for their fronts instead of multi-channel considering the very small price diff between the 2(ex. 2cha=$700,5cha=$1t) so i read more regarding the topic and was convinced later on(based from their testimonies) that indeed there was a sound difference between the two.What the foreign guys did(since they have the money) is to try both set-ups in an A-B configuration just to see(hear) the difference, and almost all that went to this route was saying the same thing.

I myself was planning on adding an additional 5 channel amp just to bi-amp my 5.0 set-up hoping to further improve the sound quality of my system in audio listening, Getting a $1t 5channel amp compared to a $700 stereo amp seems to be the more logical move but having read that its the other way around,Matt and I are now scouting for a 1070 unit(unfortunately only BN is available) to use with our fronts.

By the way 1066 is a 6x60w power amp bridgeable to 3x130w

OT: sir, ano po mga processors (only) na binebenta dito sa atin?

[classicman]

Pacific Evo series are more refined and controlled than Diamond 9 series IMHO..

i absolutely agree w/out any reservation whatsoever.......

[bumblebee]

They are midlevel. Dapat lang.