Jeff Rowland 535 Stereo Amplifier Review

[Billy Budapest]

this is exactly why I like to look at internals and measurements to decide to go for my purchase, at least above average measured performance and some effort in the circuit is worth any serious money, this is just plan rip off

What can you tell about the circuit other than it is dual mono and uses Lundahl transformers?

 

[Xyrium]

Yes, meaning a big, pretty box, sparsely filled with average performing components and of course it includes the privilege of paying for an overpriced amp with a JR logo.

I agree, should have at least used an EIGENTAKT like the one I am building....I'm old, not rich and can't lift big stuff anymore.

Looking forward to seeing (perhaps measuring? ) the finished product!

 

[NTSOS]

Looking forward to seeing (perhaps measuring? ) the finished product!

Yes sir, that would certainly would be interesting as simply enclosing the EIGENTAKT in my billet case will most assuredly increase the performance of the electronics by a vast amount....although it didn't work out so well in JR's case.

 

[jaulbrich]

Hmmm, kind of wonder if the tester ever listens to the products he tests. He says he cannot reccomend the Jeff Rowland amp because of the noise measurement. I guess he never reccomends tube amps. Anybody who has been in this audio game for long enough knows that a component measurement frequently does not equate to good or bad sound. We also know that components sound very different in different systems. Why would anyone, in the know, "listen" to such a review? I reccomend you listen, compare and then decide...

 

[cicastol]

Hmmm, kind of wonder if the tester ever listens to the products he tests.

ROTFL

 

[AudioTodd]

Hmmm, kind of wonder if the tester ever listens to the products he tests. He says he cannot reccomend the Jeff Rowland amp because of the noise measurement. I guess he never reccomends tube amps. Anybody who has been in this audio game for long enough knows that a component measurement frequently does not equate to good or bad sound. We also know that components sound very different in different systems. Why would anyone, in the know, "listen" to such a review? I reccomend you listen, compare and then decide..

With all due respect, you might benefit from reading about the outlook and philosophy of the founder and vast bulk of the contributors of this site since they are very objectivist and will not take subjectivist comments or criticisms without comment. Additionally, they generally take system-matching and "synergistic" effects as proof of incompetently designed equipment rather than the result of some great gift possessed by the person creating such systems.

Have fun, though, as everyone here is an obsessive music and audio lover even if they don't all share the outlook of every other forum!

 

[Geert]

I reccomend you listen, compare and then decide...

Thanks for the advice. By.

 

[Willem]

Hmmm, kind of wonder if the tester ever listens to the products he tests. He says he cannot reccomend the Jeff Rowland amp because of the noise measurement. I guess he never reccomends tube amps. Anybody who has been in this audio game for long enough knows that a component measurement frequently does not equate to good or bad sound. We also know that components sound very different in different systems. Why would anyone, in the know, "listen" to such a review? I reccomend you listen, compare and then decide...

Famous amplifier and loudspeaker designer Peter Walker once said in the design process he never ever listened to his classic amplifiers. Yes, he listened for specific issues, but never to music.

 

[jaulbrich]

With all due respect, you might benefit from reading about the outlook and philosophy of the founder and vast bulk of the contributors of this site since they are very objectivist and will not take subjectivist comments or criticisms without comment. Additionally, they generally take system-matching and "synergistic" effects as proof of incompetently designed equipment rather than the result of some great gift possessed by the person creating such systems.

Have fun, though, as everyone here is an obsessive music and audio lover even if they don't all share the outlook of every other forum!

Right, but it is complete nonsense if you actually listen and compare. You will miss out on many great sounding pieces of equipment if you only follow the measurements. If that is the goal of this site, well best of luck and how sad. I am an electrical engineer and understand the importance of testing in order to meet a spec. But the performance of an audio component is the gold standard and since audio companies generate their own specs, it really even matters less. Does this make sense to you and your listening experience? If so, let common sense prevail and give up on the purest perspective. The only thing you have to loose is you might open up the aperture on many great sounding products.

 

[jaulbrich]

Famous amplifier and loudspeaker designer Peter Walker once said in the design process he never ever listened to his classic amplifiers. Yes, he listened for specific issues, but never to music.

What a dodo. Has he never heard of voicing a audio component?

 

[Willem]

Has he never heard of voicing a audio component?

His ideal was the amplifier as a straight wire with gain, i.e. no 'voicing'. Mind you, he was one of the most innovative amplifier (and speaker) designers of his generation, and his current dumping design lives on in modern Quad products, some fourty years after their first design. My Quad 606-2 is an early version of that design, and it is indeed an impeccably neutral power amplifier.

 

[BDWoody]

Right, but it is complete nonsense if you actually listen and compare.

It's more like, if you listen without using controls, your results are going to be relatively meaningless for anything other than gross issues.

 

[Koeitje]

What a dodo. Has he never heard of voicing a audio component?

Why not use an audio component that is made for voicing: an equalizer.

 

[Willem]

Peter Walker's preamplifiers had extensive and very clever tone controls and filters to deal with unruly rooms and source material. But no sprinkling of magic.

 

[Willem]

See here for Peter Walker's obituary: https://www.aes.org/aeshc/jaes.obit/JAES_V52_3_PG316.pdf

 

[jaulbrich]

Why not use an audio component that is made for voicing: an equalizer.

Changing a resister value or a different capacitor is much different from adding yet another audio component. Why not just listen and judge for yourself. Or, just take the advice of an oscilloscope or spectrum analyzer...

 

[Willem]

Modern audio analysers certainly have a much higher resolution than human hearing.

 

[jaulbrich]

Peter Walker's preamplifiers had extensive and very clever tone controls and filters to deal with unruly rooms and source material. But no sprinkling of magic.

You ever listen to anyone else besides Walker...Pass, Curl, McGowan, Robert Harley...the list goes on.

 

[jaulbrich]

Modern audio analysers certainly have a much higher resolution than human hearing.

Right, but as a listener, if you can't hear it it does matter...

 

[jaulbrich]

Thanks for the advice. By.

Never learn, if you don't listen. By to you Mr. Stuck in his ways...