Music Reference RM Mono?


I am using an RM10 MKII (35 watts) with my Merlin VSMs (89db, smooth, high impedance)in an 18x12 ft room. Listen to jazz at moderate listening levels (I think)- it plays plenty loud with 35 watts. I was wondering if I would get any significant improvement by buying another and running them as monoblocks with 70 watts given the type of music I listen to and the size of my room. Any Music Reference lovers try the monoblock congifuration? Better? In what way? I'm think another 3db is volume isn't going to make any difference to me, but....
pubul57
One of the best things about mono's is that they are much lighter and you don't need a crane to help you move high power SS class A or Tube amps around. For lower power though, stereo will serve most folks well, except for the few that have associated equipment and listening skills that will easily reveal the marginal increase in benefits from monos, such as power supplies, and channel separation.
I have no experience with the RM10s, but I had a similar situation when I went from a single Monarchy SM-70 Pro to using two as monoblocks, driving 90dB Von Schweikert VR-1s in an 18x14 room.

The monoblock configuration was better in every way. The best way to describe it would be "effortless". The additional headroom makes for better bass, more vivid midrange, and smoother highs, all without changing the fundamental sonic characteristics that I loved in the Class A SM-70s.

I believe that the reason for the difference is that the two channels don't have to compete for the power supply. As for you, the ability to play 3dB louder was a non-factor for me, and I think that most of the monoblock advantage would remain even if the monoblocks only made the same power as the stereo amp channels.

For me, it was revelatory. I'm guessing monoblock RM-10s would produce the same results.

David
I sort of feel that way too (I do use Atma-sphere monoblocks as well, in the colder months:), and also us various Quicksilver monoblocks). My hesitation with pulling the trigger is that like Clio9, the manufacturer was very hesistant to make any such claims for the benefits of going mono; which gives me pause since it would be an easy sale for him. Boy.....
I think Roger is a scholar and a gentleman, having owned one of his EM7s at one point. However, I'm guessing that amp designers don't necessarily have the same priorities as we crazy audiophiles, hence his very practical answers to your and Clio09's questions.

If you're already using monoblocks, then you already have a pretty good idea what the answer is for you.

David
The RM-10 power supply is overbuilt by a factor of 10x. I have to imagine the two channels can coexist just fine with something that overbuilt. Also, with Roger's custom written application for an EL-84 circuit (that generates 35 watts where others struggle to attain half that) the amp is designed to run effortlessly in stereo mode. I just cranked out Machine Gun and Hear My Train a Comin' from Jimi Hendrix Live at the Fillmore and there was no hint this amp was struggling.

The RM-10 was designed to be efficient, reliable, and affordable. IIRC, the main reason for it's existence was to drive Roger's Quad ESL 57's. If there was ever a speaker that required RM-10 monoblocks to drive them, I'd have to think the ESL 57 would qualify.

Like Pubul57 I figured RM-10 monoblocks would just be plain better, but Roger shot straight with me so I'll defer to him. I'm sure some amps are designed to be monoblocks or work better in bridged mode. Perhaps the RM-10 does in certain applications, but I have easy to drive speakers with a smooth impedance curve so perhaps mine isn't the best scenario.

BTW- I also own a set of VAC monoblocks. They're sitting in the closet right now. I'm not even tempted to pull them out even though the weather has cooled quite a bit of late and the extra heat would be beneficial.