Solid State Power Amp Reviews

I was not in a position to disagree at the time—my listening seat that night was on the floor, stage left, about 5' in front of and just to the outside of the left loudspeaker. But I will observe that a dozen or so "6', biological Tube Traps" (listeners) in an already moderately well damped, 15' by 20' listening room, will do a number on high-frequency detail and "air," as well as significantly increase the required power output. As a frequent solo listener in that room to the Rowland Model 1–driven Stages in the month prior to the writer's conference, I had been struck by the Rowland amplifier's ability to perform superbly with this load. But shortly after the conference, I was informed that an upgrade to the Model 1 was in the works. It was put aside temporarily to move on to other equipment.

When the time came at last to put the new version of the Model 1 through its paces, I wrestled with the choice of loudspeaker. The experience of the conference with the Stages was not far from my mind, but neither was my personal experience listening to the combination. Since I've done more listening to the Stages in the last several months than to any other loudspeaker, I decided to put the latest version of the Rowland to the challenge. The very different-sounding Mirage M-3s were also selected for use to provide an alternate load.

Where should I begin? With the observation that the Model 1 is one of those components which encourages prolonged listening. The musical flow from this amplifier is fluid and virtually without grain, characteristics which make its sound, initially, not at all dramatic. But you soon begin to notice things. You notice that there is no hard "edge" to the sound. You observe how subtle and delicate its high-frequency response is: the silky hi-hat on Reference Recordings' new LP, The Oxnard Sessions (RR-37); the precisely "right" percussive timbre to the piano accompanying Radka Toneff on the Fairy Tales CD (Odin CD-03); the feel of natural air and ambience surrounding the voice on the same recording. You note the naturally expansive soundstage: there is no obvious "editorializing" here by the Model 1. Neither depth nor lateral image focus call obvious attention to themselves, yet neither seems lacking. On Julianne Baird's Songs of Love and War CD (Dorian DOR-90104), the harpsichord sparkles, the voice and instrument set back in a natural acoustic which complements them and brings the event to life.

You notice also, however, a low end which, though deep and powerful, could not be called tight and punchy through the reference system. But you hear a low end which, though somewhat short of the room-shuddering power of more powerful amplifiers, can still hold its own with them on 90% of program material in reasonably sized rooms at high but not ear-shattering volume levels. If the deepest bass on Rhythm Devils Play River Music (Wilson Audio Specialties W-8521, LP, footnote 4) is a bit grumbly, it is nonetheless deep and powerful—and certainly conjures up visions of more than 60W at work. Which there are, of course, into the near–3-ohm load (over most of the range) of the Stages. Still, those who seek a lean, hair-trigger tautness in the nether regions will need to figure the Model 1's softer, fuller LF response into their decision equation.

But not its way with the midrange. This is the special glory of the Rowland. Voices have a gripping rightness. The voices of the King's Singers on The Beatles Connection (EMI CDC 749556 2, CD) are full, rich (though never to an unnatural degree), and vibrant. Instruments, too, appear fully formed, from the believable body sound behind the reed in the sax on the classic (some would say warhorse) audiophile LP Jazz at the Pawnshop (Proprius PROP 7778-79), to Hopkinson Smith's woody, rounded, yet realistically detailed lute on band 6 of the Astrée Sampler CD (E 7699).

Discounting its mildly soft and fulsome bass, which bothered me little, and its power output, which may be a disadvantage to some users, the Model 1 has only one real weakness: its tendency to be almost too sweet. There are times when you know that a recording is full of hard-driving, transient-rich energy. When these recordings sound as if their punches are being pulled, however slightly, a certain dynamism gets subtracted from the sound. Too many amplifiers (though thankfully fewer today than in the past) err in the direction of almost always sounding punchy and up-front, constantly acting as cheerleaders for the music until the listener screams for mercy. But you should at least occasionally, on some recordings, get this feeling. The Rowland doesn't seem to want to do this, at least not with the Apogee Stages. That may well have been, in the final analysis, what the group was reacting to on that warm, early August night, aggravated as it must have been by an overly damped listening-room acoustic. I've since found this characteristic of the Mirage M-3s as well, though to a lesser degree.

But ultimately I couldn't get very worked up about the Rowland's "limitations." Even the best amplifiers (in whose company the Model 1 certainly belongs) have them. I found this amplifier a joy to listen through.

Musing with the Rowland
It's a cruel world out there, what with high-end amplifiers, even modestly powered ones, fetching prices that once bought a respectable car. How do such amplifiers compare with more "affordable" (in a manner of speaking) products? First of all, that question can never be definitively answered. By the time we had scoured the mid-priced landscape for everyman's amp champ, the landscape would change—in both the mid- and high-price ranges. But there are some pretty decent performers available for a lot less cash than the Rowland. How does one of the better ones stack up?

I chose to compare the Muse 100 (reviewed by CG elsewhere in this issue) with the Rowland, driving the Mirage M-3s. The Muse has a quick, open, somewhat lean and crisp sound through the Mirages. It was a bit "processed"-sounding next to the amplifier under review. That does not take away from its essential strengths; it merely recognizes economic realities.

Further thoughts & Conclusions
First of all, it must be emphasized that I was more than somewhat surprised that I never really felt the need for more power with the Rowland in driving either the Apogees or the Mirages. I wasn't blowing out the walls with the sound pressure, but I was definitely using levels which seriously compromise attempts at conversation. Nevertheless, it's impossible, from my vantage point, to determine if 50–60W (into 8 ohms) will be sufficient in your system under your listening conditions. Only a home trial will decide that.

With that important factoid on the record, it should be evident from my comments up to this point that while the Rowland Model 1 made a strong positive impression, the Rowland insisted on softening Michael Hedges's Taproot CD (Windham Hill WD-1093). This sweetening was not unpleasant in this recording, which seems to have an inherent, electronic edge to it, but it did seem to lose a bit of its musical texture in the process. But on "I Carry Your Heart," the only sung track on the disc, the Rowland conveyed a vocal warmth and natural richness and I found myself listening to bands on this disc which I had avoided before.

The slight softening of the Rowland was less in evidence on LPs than on CDs. But its delightfully musical timbre was evident on all good program material. It was never analytical or etched. The fingering details on Leo Kottke's My Father's Face LP (Private Music 2050-1-P) were more alive with the Mark Levinson No.29, yet the Rowland excelled in conveying the guitar's subtlety and warmth of tone.

When I tell you that the Levinson presented a more convincing sense of depth but that I felt the Rowland to be more three-dimensional, you may find yourself confused. [Yes—Ed.] Depth is front-to-back layering—distancing from the loudspeakers. Three-dimensionality is the sensation that individual instruments and voices have front-to-back depth within themselves and a natural, resonant timbre. Of the two, I consider the latter the more musically important.

The Model 1 also excelled in the reproduction of ambience. On "Lady Madonna" from The Beatles Connection, the cut opens with the King's Singers firing off a series of sharp, staccato notes. Over the Rowland, you can clearly hear the buildup of ambience as reverb from later notes builds on that remaining from the previous ones.

As to how my sonic impressions of the two amplifiers varied with the loudspeaker in use, I had the most difficulty coming up with a hard preference with the Apogees Stages, perhaps reminiscent of DO's difficulties in finding a totally happy match for those loudspeakers. The Rowland was a bit more relaxed, less obviously detailed than the No.29, but with highs which could, with the right recording, be almost breathtakingly delicate and silky-smooth. The Rowland also had a midrange which was lucid, strikingly tactile, and musically convincing. Not an easy choice.

With the M-3s, I had a clearer preference for the Rowland. These speakers have more top-octave energy than the Apogees, making the crispness of the Levinson less appealing. But with both loudspeakers, the more effective amplifier depends to a certain extent on the program material. If the latter responds better to a more lyrical quality—to a warmth, fullness, flow, and three-dimensional rendition of instruments and voices—I'd have to come down on the side of the Rowland.

In the interest of fairness, I elected to listen briefly to the Model 1 using a different preamp. The Rowland Consonance was used for the bulk of the auditions for the simple reason that it is my current reference, but one might certainly argue that it could very well be synergistic with the Model 1. When DO (with whom I currently share the Stereophile listening room) wasn't looking, I borrowed the Coda Technologies FET Preamplifier 01 he is currently auditioning and inserted it into my front-end (footnote 5). Everything else in the system was kept the same (at this point the M-3s were in use).

I had listened to the Coda very briefly during the final stages of my review of the Rowland Consonance preamp, and my general impression was that it was an excellent preamp with a somewhat "darker" sound than the Rowland. My general feelings of the relative merits of the two amplifiers didn't change, although with the Coda the Rowland edged a bit further into the "warmth" region, which suited even less material dependent on crisp transient leading edges for its full impact.

You might have figured out by now which way I lean. I was ultimately won over by the rich, fluid, naturally textured sound provided by the Rowland throughout the auditioning over both the Mirages and the Apogees. This amplifier is a compelling performer that belong solidly at the top of our Class B "Recommended Components" list. I pondered long on nominating it for Class A status; it doesn't miss that level by much, and on a given day I could be persuaded to promote it both to the top ranks. For a given listener, in the right system, the Model 1 is capable of Class A sound.

---

Footnote 4: This is, to my knowledge, no longer available through Wilson.

Footnote 5: Dick Olsher keeps his front-end on one side of the room, I keep mine on the other, and we rotate amplifiers and loudspeakers in and out of position as required.