 |
|
|
The heart of the matter. Hifi 101 is firm. Twice the power only nets us a 3dB gain in loudness (to double SPL requires 10 x the power). If that's all the 250 monos accomplished over the 225 stereo, most reasonable folks would say meh. To stop such sheepishness, we return to our beginning and the elimination of crosstalk. That's what allocating discrete power supplies per channel does. To overdraw and simplify for emphasis, now some bombast in the left channel can't sully some micro detail in the right and vice versa. We'd expect more precise soundstaging and more poise under duress. Of course the monos also get bigger transformers. Bigger reserves would promise improved dynamics. And perhaps certain circuit tuning has refined other parameters over the stereo amp. As always, subjective listening impressions can't conclusively point at specific tech specs as the cause for differences. Only the engineers who isolate parts and circuit junctures know for sure what's doing what, precisely. On that count, we do know why the 250 can hum when connected XLR. With its single-ended input stage, its XLR is a mere convenience feature. It's not a true balanced input. What's more, it includes a protective resistor. When fed from a true balanced circuit like my new COS Engineering D1 DAC/pre, this resistor can cause hum whilst RCA is dead quiet. Faux balanced connections—i.e. convenience XLR to convenience XLR—might be perfectly quiet however. It all depends on how an XLR output is implemented. Since in this instance RCA is the purer input, that's what I used exclusively.
|
 |
But to kick off and because curiosity itched this cat, I did something seemingly daft. I replaced the Job 225 with the monos on my desktop. Though it sounds truly excellent on the Boenicke Audio W5se, here already the stereo amp is wildly overspec'd. It barely gets out of 1stt gear. Common sense might predict that the extra muscle of the monos would be utterly wasted, perhaps even counterproductive. Maybe yes, maybe no. The best way to learn is always to try. The front end was my fully balanced April Music Eximus DP-1 getting 16/44.1kHz signal from my Qobuz Hifi subscription via a wired CAT6a connection to our Internet router. Bosnian singer Amira Medunjanin began with tunes from her Silk & Stone album. Because my Zu Event speaker cables here were custom-ordered on length to fit conventional stereo amps with binding posts on either side without slop, I had to flip one of the asymmetrical monos upside down so its cable would reach.
|
 |
The sonic upshot was far from upside down however. Doing the overkill mono dance cast a clearly deeper soundstage; increased contrast; benefited bass weight; and in general made things sound bigger and denser on detail. I'd frankly not expected much of/if anything. But there it was quite undeniably: more image pop of sound materialized over against the nothing of silence; heavier hammer falls for the piano's bass register; and more audible space regardless of the computer monitor being psychologically and materially in the way. These enhancements were particularly meaningful as I turned the volume down. There was a noticeable delay of things collapsing and flattening. I could listen to one click up from mute and still be solid. This spoke very highly to the 250s' first-wattiness, i.e. the ability to fully kick in at the very beginning of their power envelope like a 4x4's low gear which delivers maximal torque for slow mud crawls. Whilst I'd never recommend anyone actually duplicate my silly Job sandwich for desktop use, for review purposes I had my first justification for going mono. Something ventured, something gained.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
The same game continued in the main system anchored by my small Aptica transmission-line 2-way towers. Source was the COS Engineering D1 DAC/preamp. Some light Turkish finger foods came by way of a playlist with the below albums from Yinon Muallem, Cinguz Onural, Renaud Garcia-Fons/Derya Türkan and Okay Temiz/Sema Moritz. To an obviously more pronounced effect given far broader speaker positioning for a massively bigger soundstage, I was rewarded with the same improvements. Granted, in this hardware context I'd ideally want to be in the warmer denser climate of the Aqua Hifi La Scala MkII DAC conspiring with my Nagra Jazz preamp. DAC direct, silver cables, ceramic drivers and DC-coupled wide-bandwidth amps leaned a bit on transients to lighten follow-up tone mass for a very articulate nearly crystallized sound. But the purpose of this exercise really wasn't ultimate like or dislike but reporting on the diff between monos and stereo amps. There I could unequivocally state that doubling up—on power and cashish—once again benefited contrast ratio, depth, virtual pixel count expressed as subjective detail density and bass grounding. Bigger and fuller would be the most relevant takeaway items. Or—duh—sounding more powerful.
|
 |
To stick with relevance, I really needed a more demanding load than my Aptica. In this space those svelte Italians sing on 25 good watts as dispatched by either the FirstWatt F6 or Pass Labs XA-30.8 amps. As fortuitous timing would have it, a pair of beefy German Physiks Borderland MkIV omnis were in for review. Their downfiring 12-inch bass driver in a big octagonal and steel-shot lined enclosure represents essentially a serious passive subwoofer. That is topped by a 360° dispersion widebander that covers from 190Hz to 24kHz by its lonesome whilst traversing four different operational modes which include pistonic and bending wave. This load would be my closest attempt at a muscle-amp speaker (hey, some of us are sissies even if we think ourselves extra smart because of it).
|
 |
With the white columns I was finally tapping the Jobs for real keeps. You'd also be with a compact very bass-extended monitor which by definition would be of very low efficiency and exhibit some pretty severe phase angles around its port tuning.
In short, it's not just big-woofer'd speakers which benefit. Because of its full-spectrum omni dispersion, the German Physiks is inherently toneful. It plays with and on your room's reflective aspects. That makes it a bit less "ultra resolution" than the Aptica where said term points merely at a current convention dominated by how direct radiators separate and focus. Put differently, this speaker doesn't need a boost on warmth and mass from preceding electronics. Adios preamp, adios class A Pass Labs XA-30.8. To maintain my standard balance of speed and curves—attack and sustain, incision and tone—the DAC-direct connected Job monos became my best-matched combo. Not only that, the monaural uptick on subjective detail, bass control and voltage swings audibly widened the gap to the stereo amp on a speaker which welcomes a super-tight squeeze below and quick reflexes with brilliant extension on top. Whilst the monos sounded better already on my desktop, their lead on this speaker grew exponentially. Incidentally, buyers of current Goldmund amps would get not only posher casings with gold-plated decals. They'd also get circuitry two generations ahead of what's in the Job kit. That's their reward for getting deeper invested in the brand.
|
 |
|
| After Hans-Jürgen Kaiser and Rainer Weber from Kaiser Acoustics had finished an informal presentation of their Chiara and Classic models at Goldmund's Geneva digs, they called to ask whether they could stop by on their way back north to Germany. Rainer still showed a glow after having heard his Chiara monitor on a pair of new Goldmund Telos monos. Having recently reviewed their two-way Panzerholz super monitor with rear-firing passive radiator, I'd firmly call the Job 250 monos ideal amps for the warmish Chiara too. Such a choice would allow a prospective shopper to splurge on the speaker budget whilst still affording perfectly matched high-performance amps in the bargain. If I lusted after a Raidho monitor instead, I'd probably want a warmer DAC and/or a preamp with the 250s than my COS Engineering D1 run direct.
To conclude, over the Job 225, the 250 monos aren't just about "3dB more".
They're about upping the game to the next level. This nets dividends already in scenarios which calmer heads would peg pure overkill - like my above desktop sandwich. It really affirms itself on speakers which respond to more power very noticeably. With the speed and phase linearity of a wide-bandwidth DC-coupled circuit to eliminate the fuzz pedal of capacitors and sport the low impedance which more challenging bass alignments thrive on, these are compact muscle amps on the sunny shadow-less side of the street. They pull off any wet blankets you might have unwittingly left draped over your speakers even if you never saw them before.
That Goldmund can offer such mature circuitry and keep building in Geneva/Switzerland whilst charging Rotel/NAD prices without defaulting to class D... that remains the ongoing surprise. It should be a bit of a thorn in the sides of competitors who pay attention. And it should be a very attractive proposition to smart shoppers who pay attention. Of course rather than doing that—pay attention—it's far easier to crow about the ever-escalating costs of high-end hifi and how it's all going nuts but isn't possible otherwise. You pick what you want to believe! For myself, I rather think that with the 250 monos, the Job experiment has finally blown that argument completely to smithereens... |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
