HIGH end 7 channel amp

Boy, what an intersting day.I spent over half the afternoon at Hi fi sound in downtown Minneapolis.

I have narrowed the Mcintosh mc207 as one of the posibilities if I did not keep the Gemstone. I brought my Gemstone into the to store to a/b it against the Mcintosh mc207 to have a reference point. I spent about an hour each with both amps and listened to the same tracks from 3 different cds. The system consisted of Vienna acoustics top line speakers, a 5 thousand dollar cd player and a Mcintosh preamp.

I hate to use terminalogy like this but the Gemstone smoked the Mcintosh. I really had a hard time getting into this amp. It did not have the detail and resolution. The bass is good on the Mcintosh. I believe part of what was up with the amp is it may not be the fastest amp where the Gemstone is fast. Things sounded muddy and clouded. Not knowing the system I did not think it was the amp, but system as a whole.

I was wrong when the Gemstone was installed. All of the sudden I heard detail and clarity within the system and of course...music. The bass is where this amp is king...perhaps one of the very top 7 channel amps anywhere in this department. Its so authoratative and detailed in the bass notes. So thats why I wont say the Mcintosh had sub par bass, it just went up agaist Mike Tyson in his prime. The Gemstone had a better and extended airy treble. I have had people tell me the Mcintosh is rolled off in the highs and perhaps thats the part of its issues.

The crazy thing is in all this is the Gemstone retails at $2800, and the Mcintosh retails for $8000. Don't let price fool you...thats what I am learning. I guess Mac like most big names have so many costs with advertising and the middleman, but I guess in the end It comes down to us paying for it all. I may see about getting a different Gemstone amp in case the issue is isolated to the one I have, cause I am more motivated now to keep this thing!

As a sidenote,I heard for the money the ati amps are nice. I thought I heard that its similar to parasound.

Mnnc, I just checked on the Halo, and it don't look like they have a 7 channel,

Freemand- "Then theres the many companys that make 6 channel amps??? Are not all procesors 5.1 or 7.1. I don't get that but thats for another discussion."

From everything I've read, the two "Back-L/R" chnls are the exact same signal (6.1) with larger rooms potentially benefiting from two "back" speakers instead of one (7.1).

Regarding Mnnc's sugestion, many feel that the two "main" front speakers benefit from having their own 2-chnl amp, minimizing taxation from all the "effect" chnls. Those uninterested in multi-chnl "audio" (SACD, etc), may opt for even higher quality "stereo" amps to drive "premium" front speakers during 2-chnl listening only. Their are other topics you can search regarding all "mono-block" application, three "stereo" amps, two "3-chnl" amps, etc.

Several options out there other than single chassis.

Good luck,

Frank

Frank,

When I run surround with the two side and two back speakers, I will get (depending on recording of course) different sounds from the rear/side left and rear/side right. From what I have noticed, what differintiates the rear to side is more of a delay type thing to give the effect of more bigger and enveloping surround. I thought of it as what dolby surround was with traditional two channel recorded movies. This is of course if its the traditional 5.1, cause the rare 6.1 is a different ballgame. Of course, I could be wrong in that thinking.

Back to the forum topic, a seperate two channel or 3 mono blocks for the front channels would be my prefered way of amplifing, but that often requires much space. I have one shelf set aside for 1 amp, thus a 7 channel.