Any experience with these pro amps?
- Thread starter Guest101
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
Bryston is superior as a rule to Hafler amps. The DH 500 is still the best Hafler amp they made.
Are you speaking from personal experience of hearsay? I've read Bryston is better built, but is an '70-80's Bryston a better amp than a '90's Hafler? I've also read the Hafler 9505 is their best, not the DH500. If possible, I would like to hear users experiences?
Last edited:
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
Yes, superior in every way a 1970's or 1980's Bryston is. And much better supported, Bryston is like McIntosh in build and support of their older gear, and more desirable in every way. Personal experience here and professional experience too. None of my control rooms I care for are powered by Hafler, but some of them are powered by Bryston of different vintages. Not one of them has given trouble either, and the oldest Bryston amp dates from 1977. The control rooms not powered by Bryston are powered by McIntosh.
Bryston > Hafler. Hands down. And listen to Kent.
I can't help with the specific question because I've never heard either manufacturer's amplifier offerings.
I can state that high build quality does not = superior sonics. I have found this true in my experiences in my audio journey, and I have gone through many amplifiers along the way.
I have some audio buddies on another forum and one of the leaders of this group purchased a Bryston amp, 7B model I believe, and compared it to the amplifiers that he has in his stable, two well known, (one of them oft malilgned in these kinds of forums) all with far less pedigreed reputations, and the Bryston was 3rd place in this group.
So if you have a chance to listen, I'd really recommend it.
I can state that high build quality does not = superior sonics. I have found this true in my experiences in my audio journey, and I have gone through many amplifiers along the way.
I have some audio buddies on another forum and one of the leaders of this group purchased a Bryston amp, 7B model I believe, and compared it to the amplifiers that he has in his stable, two well known, (one of them oft malilgned in these kinds of forums) all with far less pedigreed reputations, and the Bryston was 3rd place in this group.
So if you have a chance to listen, I'd really recommend it.
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
Sonically I also think the Brystons are superior to the Haflers. Bryston is my favorite non McIntosh amplifier. More modern voiced and very accurate and neutral. But in my work, reliability is also very critical in the studios. Failure is not an option.
BTW, I knew an owner of a recording studio in Chicago who has used the Hafler/Urei combination since the '80's and there has never been any durability issues, so I'm sure Hafler is up to the task of longevity. My memory of the last time I heard the system in the '90s was stellar sound in a professional setting. How this translates to my rudimentary home system is the question.
I will try to listen first as recommended by Gibsonian. If I'm not able to, I will try to buy at a very good price so I can sell the amp if it is not my cup of tea.
Kent, I've read vintage Bryston being bright. Is this an accurate statement?
I will try to listen first as recommended by Gibsonian. If I'm not able to, I will try to buy at a very good price so I can sell the amp if it is not my cup of tea.
Kent, I've read vintage Bryston being bright. Is this an accurate statement?
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
It is brighter sounding than older warm sounding gear. It is revealing of what you feed it and your sources. Which is why some of my studio amps are Bryston. But Bryston is easier to listen to than say, Krell is. Nothing against good Hafler amplifiers here though.
