March Audio P701 Mono Block Power Amp

[March Audio]

I do believe you should amend your specifications as they currently incorrectly state the amplifier will deliver 1200W @2ohms with a THD of 0.001% which is not the case is it?

View attachment 27829

No that's not what is stated. It doesn't state the full conditions which is not quite the same . BTW this is Hypex data which I will update when I have the amps independantly tested.

The full plots are at the start of this thread and also shown on the product web page, but yes I will clarify the specs.

 

[restorer-john]

No that's not what is stated. It doesn't state the full conditions.

The full plots are at the start of this thread and also shown on the Web page, but yes I will clarify the specs.

It states no conditions, that's the problem. Just add the 20-20Khz@1W for the headline THD number and that would be fine IMO.

 

[restorer-john]

which I will update when I have the amps independantly tested.

$70 million dollar jackpot tonight. I'll get us both fully loaded APX-555s.

 

[March Audio]

$70 million dollar jackpot tonight. I'll get us both fully loaded APX-555s.

I do indeed have my ticket

 

[RayDunzl]

I do indeed have my ticket

Send me four of your "Going Out of Business!" clearance amps if you win...

 

[Thomas savage]

Well iv ordered a pair, combining it with my TAD cdp and a anthem str pre .

I want to see if this room correction , dual sub integration DSP preamp combined with class D amps can really deliver as they represent incredible value if they can.

I will hook it all up with basic mogami XLR cables .

It will replace my fancy belles statement monoblocks and top range preamp not to mention insane'o'price wires.

If it sounds bad I'm disowning you all

If it sounds great ... Well I won't stop banging on about it lol

 

[DonH56]

Thomas must have gotten quite a severance package from Amir for his sherriffing...

 

[March Audio]

Well iv ordered a pair, combining it with my TAD cpd and a anthem str pre .

I want to see if this room correction , dual sub integration DSP preamp combined with class D amps can really deliver as they represent incredible value if they can.

I will hook it all up with basic mogami XLR cables .

It will replace my fancy belles statement monoblocks and top range preamp not to mention insane'o'price wires.

If it sounds bad I'm disowning you all

If it sounds great ... Well I won't stop banging on about it lol

You are my new favourite person

Oh someone wanted some pics.

Mola Mola Kaluga (I gather $8K US each)

P701 $1395 (introductory price rising to $1895 USD soon! – prototype picture, cabling layout on bottom half has been revised in production versions. Highlighted cabled now runs at top edge with power cables/tidied up.

 

[DonH56]

I don't like it. I was wending toward a pair of AHB2's and now this... And Kal's Trinnov review... Too many new toys to decide among!

 

[Soniclife]

Well iv ordered a pair, combining it with my TAD cdp and a anthem str pre .

I want to see if this room correction , dual sub integration DSP preamp combined with class D amps can really deliver as they represent incredible value if they can.

I will hook it all up with basic mogami XLR cables .

It will replace my fancy belles statement monoblocks and top range preamp not to mention insane'o'price wires.

If it sounds bad I'm disowning you all

If it sounds great ... Well I won't stop banging on about it lol

Very interesting. I'm most interested in the anthem str pre, it's like a posh mindsp, that should work nicely.

 

[March Audio]

Totally amateur video of the first P701 on test. Completed technical testing and 24 hour soak, just a final listening test (this is only a part of it).

Youtube and the recorded sound is obviously useless for judging the sound quality but these NC1200 modules have some serious punch.

 

[restorer-john]

I am most impressed with the casework, the cable looms and dress and the essential woven audiophile techflex.

There really is zero reason to buy Kalugas vs your implementation. One could buy a decent near-new car with the difference.

 

[March Audio]

I am most impressed with the casework, the cable looms and dress and the essential woven audiophile techflex.

There really is zero reason to buy Kalugas vs your implementation. One could buy a decent near-new car with the difference.

Yeah, the reality is that the techflex is not strictly necessary but it does tidy things up.

Video of the March audio stereo P701 and DAC1 stack

I was going to perform some power rating tests later but my 4 ohm dummy load only goes up to 400 watts. Im gonna need a bigger boat.

 

[restorer-john]

Yeah, the reality is that the techflex is not strictly necessary but it does tidy things up.

Just market it as OWTAM (optimally woven triboelectric absorption material). You need an acronym that no-one else has.

 

[March Audio]

Just market it as OWTAM (optimally woven triboelectric absorption material). You need an acronym that no-one else has.

I like it

 

[HammerSandwich]

You need an acronym that no-one else has.

And that's why it can't be Braided Sleeve...

 

[March Audio]

And that's why it can't be Braided Sleeve...

I have one better than oxygen free copper cable, I use BS free copper cable.

 

[svart-hvitt]

Totally amateur video of the first P701 on test. Completed technical testing and 24 hour soak, just a final listening test (this is only a part of it).

Youtube and the recorded sound is obviously useless for judging the sound quality but these NC1200 modules have some serious punch.

Just curious here, you wrote «these nc1200 modules have some serious punch». What do you mean by «punch»? Do you define it further (than just using the word in an informal setting)?

See latest JAES for reference:

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=20484

So we have two types of «punch» definitions:

(1) Punch in recorded material (as per JAES article)
(2) Punch reproduced by audio gear

Curious about your remark on «punch»

 

[March Audio]

Just curious here, you wrote «these nc1200 modules have some serious punch». What do you mean by «punch»? Do you define it further (than just using the word in an informal setting)?

See latest JAES for reference:

http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=20484

So we have two types of «punch» definitions:

(1) Punch in recorded material (as per JAES article)
(2) Punch reproduced by audio gear

Curious about your remark on «punch»

It's terribly and uncharacteristically subjective for me and a bit of an off the cuff comment

I think due to the very high power capability of the amps they seem to drive speakers to high dynamic levels without distortion or shall we say "limitation". Just seems effortless and unstrained.

I will take a look at the paper.

 

[svart-hvitt]

It's terribly and uncharacteristically subjective for me and a bit of an off the cuff comment

I think due to the very high power capability of the amps they seem to drive speakers to high dynamic levels without distortion or shall we say "limitation". Just seems effortless and unstrained.

I will take a look at the paper.

Take a look a the paper for reference. However, the paper is not my main point, which is:

(1) We have «punch» in recorded material
(2) We have «punch» in reproduction gear

The paper looks at (1). But people often talk about (2). We’d better separate the two in order to avoid confusion and promote clarity.

The «punch» factor in audio gear was proposed by Hedd’s Klaus Heinz in another thread. So maybe this discussion would better be had in a designated thread?

I suspect that what you meant by «punch» in your remark is actually the more engineering based concept of «headroom»? But I don’t know for sure, and it seems like different people think of different things when talking about «punch», so an own thread for discussing the concept may be a better way to deal with the term?