Dear Head-Fi'ers,
First and foremost Merry Christmas to all!!
Before I head to the table, just thought of posting a few more impressions of the Taurus mkII and further A/B testing against the Lyr, now that I've had more time for listening.
In balanced mode, sound signature is quite close between the two. The Taurus is now slightly even warmer in the midrange than the Lyr, but at the same time more neutral; yes, as strange as that sounds...
The Lyr sometimes sounds very slightly "boxy" (some coloration in the 250 Hz area). The Taurus sounds quite balanced and neutral all the way from bass to low treble. I feel this is a particular strength of this amplifier. Having said that, differences are quite subtle and never definitive.
Balanced mode (especially when switching to the xlr input) sounds definitely more to my liking in terms of tone balance than SE, which to me sounds flat, soft and slightly lifeless.
However, the biggest trade-off of doing this is the detail retrieval goes back to a more "normal" level. I find myself now hard pressed to find distinct differences between the two.
Bass is now at a very similar level between the two; sometimes I slightly prefer one to the other's, but I could perfectly live with either...
One area where I feel both amps differ, tonally speaking, is in their treble presentation. Unfortunately I find (for me) the treble from the Taurus is still too soft and lacking definition in the presence area, but at the same time manages to sound slightly more sibilant. Hi-hats, certain snare drums, guitar strings/riffs played with a pick, claps during a concert and other hi frequency percussion instruments just don't seem to "hit" and "slam" as well as the Lyr. Again, difference is subtle but, like in F1, enough to "win" or "loose".
I believe this, among other technical aspects, help mark some differences in their abilities to soundstage and image.
I remember saying the Taurus rendered everything on a seemingly flat canvas, impression that changed when switching to the balanced cables. OK, now having A/B'd both for two weeks, these are the notes I have taken:
- The center image, particularly, is more clearly defined on the Lyr. Lead voices or instruments mixed at the center or near it are (within reason) clearly "seen" with the Lyr, especially noticeable with the eyes closed. Interestingly, with eyes open, things are perceived slightly different. Voices on the Taurus occupy a larger/more vague space and are not quite so focused. I suspect, with the balanced nature of the design behind the Taurus - having to tightly match components within 4 amp stages vs 2 of the single ended - this must be harder to achieve, but this is only from a theoretical standpoint, as I haven't tested other balanced setups.
- Many instruments recorded with a "halo" or envelope around them (micro information that helps locate the sound in a 3 dimensional space) are more tactile on the Lyr. The Taurus definitely shows air around instruments, just not so tactile.
- The soundstage has similar width and height on both, but is a little deeper on the Lyr. However, as "spacious" the soundstage might sound with the Lyr, it feels slightly artificial and not overly accurate (whatever that means, since this is highly debatable, depending on the perception of accuracy and the virtual listening position one might want to adopt with regards to the players and instruments). Although I wouldn't like to catalogue the soundstage of the Lyr as, what people refer to as a "3-blob stage", it does have a more prominent center compared to the other areas. The Taurus does seem to have a more even presentation.
- Sounds within the soundstage seem more crammed with the Taurus and more separated on the Lyr. Perhaps due to this, I find it's slightly easier to follow songs and lyrics on the Lyr.
After the time I've spent quickly switching from one to the other (which never took more than 3 seconds
), I feel I kept reaching more often for the Lyr, for whatever reason(s), which makes me feel a little uncomfortable... I hate speaking about value, since I am a firm believer of intrinsic value, like the people who have helped create some of the Wilson Audio legends. I absolutely don't mind about "diminishing returns", as long as the product genuinely brings simply better sound. In this case though, it is simply impossible to overlook the monetary value difference between the Lyr and the Taurus. I'm not exactly shure how to proceed now.
I have heard good things about the Taurus-HD 800 combo...However, one cannot help but wonder, even if the HD 800s image better than the HE500s (which is probable from what I have read), wouldn't this "behaviour" be also transferred to the Sennheisers? I'm willing to give it a try, but I think this would be my last attempt in trying to keep this amp.
I'll purchase a pair in a couple of days and let you know how that went...
Thanks a lot for listening and sorry for the longer than expected post!