the first thing that crossed my mind in the comparison, is that (from memory, correct me if i'm wrong) the anthem has internal phase and timing adjustments. this would definitely lead to a description of flat and incoherent if the anthem was in phase with the speakers and the 950 was not. (see kcb's thread 'the 950 and 5.1 vs analog/coax bass management and phase'). if so, and kcb's findings on the subject are correct, simply playing a dvd-a or sacd disc could have revealed a marked difference. you might borrow a sacd player and without touching anything else in your setup, see what you hear.

this leads to the second thought i have and alluded to in my 1st post above: a cd is not a good test of the 950's dacs and doesn't serve to isolate any specific problem. i would try all the formats (once any possible phase and timing questions are settled), starting with eagles "hell freezes over", then a dts cd like steely dan's "gaucho", then dts-es cd "studio voodoo" or, don henly's "end of innocence". of course, as i stated earlier, dvd-a/sacd should be auditioned to test 5.1 bypass.

it's very coincidental to me that the only speakers you've heard so far are the s312s and dynaudios. i recently gave my custom built dynaudio 3 ways to a family member, as i'm building new speakers. in the meanwhile, i am using 4 s312s. i know that when calibrating the system, the dyns had to be 4db hotter as they are much less efficient than the jbls. don't get me wrong, they sound superb, they just need more juice to perform. the jbl s312s, i find, are excellent speakers for the money. a tad harsh in the upper mids, but very detailed and certainly not at all muddled or mushy. this is one reason i think there is a problem somewhere in your setup.

there may well have been a whole other problem or set of problems in the comparison which coincidentally seemed to verify poor performance at home.

try the suggestions. believe me, the 950 is a keeper. my agenda is that you enjoy it as much as i am (and save a small boatload of dough in the process). try all possible solutions, up to and including exchanging your 950 for another one. remember...these new prepros ain't our old stereo preamps. they are extremely complex and this one warrants a bit of detective work before sending it back. just my thoughts.

Hi Charlie,

I can't tell you what's changed in analog preamplifier audio technology in the last 26 years. I owned a Pioneer in the early 80's and thought it sounded fine at the time. But it sounded lousy compared to the Harmon Kardon I bought a few years later. Later, that Harmon Kardon in turn sounded lousy compared to the Sony I got in the 90's. And that sounded lousy compared to the 950.

Each improvement was to me, significant. Of course I also got newer interconnects over the years as well. I think radio shack cables today are much better than some of the "premium" cables from fifteen years ago, believe it or not. A few years ago, I replaced my old "premium" cables with newer RatShack cables since they sound so much better.

EDIT: This is only comparing raw stereo, not multi-channel which has also significantly improved over the years.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited October 04, 2002).]

I would submit that the improvements you observed might not be only due to technological advancements, and would further submit that HK has a long track record of pretty decent product.

I'm also not infering no improvement has been made, just thinking in the specific case cited by the OP (stereo CD via analog) age might not be the most significant, or even very significant, factor.

Definitely check to see if the speakers are hooked up in phase, that would be responsible for a bad sounding experience.

Charlie,

I agree. I used an HK pre-amplifier in the 1980's. At the time, I thought it was awesome!

I still have that HK pre-amplifier from the 1980's. I don't know where you live but you are welcome to drop by if you'd like to hear it sometime, and compare how it sounds to my 950, using a stereo CD via analog.

I think there's no comparison between the two, but you are certainly welcome to come over, hear them yourself, and draw your own conclusion.

Will

[This message has been edited by Will (edited October 03, 2002).]

It's not worth wasting a lot of time or effort on to me. Some folks have older equipment and swear it sounds plenty good. I see no reason to doubt them.

I just don't think a single example of an older device that sounds worse than a new device to a single person is enough to condemn an entire decade of products.

If you think so you're certainly entitled. Enjoy!

Charlie,


I remember liking my solid state pre/amp from the 1980's a lot. If I'd never heard a newer pre/amp, I might be thrilled with it to this day!

[This message has been edited by Will (edited October 03, 2002).]

Patman,

I wish the speaker phasing were it. I heard the difference with both my speakers and the shops. Red goes to Red...Black Goes to Black.

regards,
Santa Clara Jim


[This message has been edited by santaclarajim (edited October 03, 2002).]

Santa Clara Jim has an older item of equipment he seems to hold in some regard. I wouldn't dismiss his opinion out of hand based on the vintage of the equipment alone. But that's just me. And that's really all I have to say about it I guess - I was just trying to lead you to the logical conclusion, but you either don't want to go there or can't see it. Doesn't matter. Have a good one.

I'll try to give santaclarajim some help here (we need a little more starter fluid).

I had a pre - fix 950, a pre V2 AVM20, and a Denon 3200 in my system for about a month.

First, I think bossobass is right, the AVM doesn't "bury" the 950, anymore than the 950 "buries" the Denon.

That said, the 950 is flat and lifeless in two channel via DAC or analog. I did not notice imaging or soundstage problems. In fact, I really liked the imaging compare to the AVM/Dennon. I also thought the bass on the 950 was really well articulated, both by test CD and music. I would characterize the AVM (and Denon, if anybody cares) as more "furry'.

As far as 5.1/6.1, I really had problems with the stability of the image, and a lack of "space" with the 950. The 950 really seemed to collapse/jump front to back. This is obviously dependent on software (pre/pro and DVD). The best example is the 5th element at the beginning scene with the president. The hall is created perfectly by the AVM and Denon as a large space. The 950 was unable to produce this effect. Also, in that scene when the speaker walks forward, his voice pans from back to front smoothly on the AVM/Dennon. On the 950 it just jumps. My speaker setup was built around the Denon, maybe moving stuff around or some judicious sound treatments might straighten this out. (The $$ you save would buy a pretty good room upgrade.)

On the upside, I found the 950 had a lot of resolution, and I did not find it lacking in low or high end (other than reproducing ambience). I thought at both frequency extremes it sounded really good (analytical).

If the major ergonometric flaws and lack of an easy software upgrade are not a factor in your installation, the 950 is definitely worth $75 shipping to try.