Constellation Audio - just play flat and loud or Make Music? Just Expensive orGood?

[asiufy]

First impression, after a few hours listening to the Centaur + Virgo (not mk2) combo:

It's good. Very good
In comparison to my darTZeel combo, there's a little more oomph, and depending on the song, I thought it was detrimental. Surprisingly, in terms of punchiness, the darTZeel betters it.
The midrange is extremely thick and proeminent as well, which some people will enjoy, and since this is some fast equipment, it'll provide transparency+midrange goodness. It's not as extended as the darTZeel on the high frequencies, though, which makes it lack air, and depending on the song, renders the music too "thick".
On the Q3, the Constellation made the darTZeel sound weak and low powered, since I could crank the volume way higher, and it'd still sound composed, while you can clearly hear the darTZeel straining at such high (100+dB) volumes.

Build quality is excellent, impressive even. Even the preamp is very heavy, even with the external PS.

I'm using an MIT Oracle between pre and amp, specially configured by MIT for Constellation. I'm waiting on another MIT to hook the MSB to the preamp, so I'm using some cheaper cable I had around here for the moment...

Responding to the OP, no, it's not "clinical" gear, like Soulution or Goldmund. It's actually pretty "dark" and "thick", almost too much of it actually.

alexandre

 

[still-one]

Would love to hear your thoughts on the differences between the D'Agostino and the Constellation.

Are you referring to the amps or pre-amps?

 

[KeithR]

asiufy- thanks for the initial comments

does Constellation Audio use negative feedback?

 

[asiufy]

asiufy- thanks for the initial comments

does Constellation Audio use negative feedback?

None of the blurbs I've mentioned online mention this, but sonically, there's no sign of negative feedback.

 

[LL21]

I heard Virgo preamp and Centaur monos today...in the same room I've been listening to for years, and with cables, digital equipment I know plus Alexias which I am starting to get to know. I also heard this system run by ARC Ref250 monos/Ref 5SE. This is just my two cents, and to be more definitive, i'd like to listen more. Initial impressions.

The Constellation Virgo/Performance Series monos are the real deal imho. Powerful, unperturbed by the Alexia's impedance load, clear and also with that 'touch of sweetness' that I personally look for when a violin string really starts to soar. In 'white' systems, you get the string, the clarity, the zing and power of that note...but it does not have the intensity of sweetness I hear when I hear a violin up close and live.

The Constellation delivered that...probably at the 'minimum' level I would be looking for in that particular system. I think the Krell Cipher player would probably have been replaced by the Metronome Kalista if it were up to me. And I could then increase that sweetness intensity which I enjoy.

Gut instinct...do I think it is equal to the absolute impenetrable power of the Boulder 2060 or big Gryphons? somehow, I do not get that sense. The sound was incredibly informative, clear, with a touch of sweetness (a very very subtle touch), but did not make the Alexia sound feel as absolutely solid as the earth as the Boulders did with the Wilsons I heard them with at that time (yes, yes admittedly a long time ago, but in the same store). Or the Gryphon does to my Wilsons.

In fact, although the Constellation was a more organized, decisive presentation than the Ref250, the Ref250 monos filled in the music giving it a slightly more grounded though less crystalline presentation. I preferred the Constellations by far because of their amazing ability to resolve without strain or etch...and I felt its tonal sweetness was 'barely enough' that I felt confident by changing source, I could easily tailor the Alexias to sound exactly as I would to, in order to take the whole system home. The Ref250s may have filled in the sound more, but the resolution of the Constellation was remarkable...making me felt like I was learning new things about the music I tend to use when auditioning. The Ref250s did not give me new insights, though I certainly enjoyed sitting back and listening.

The real issue I have with the Constellations is their price...I instinctively preferred Gryphon Colosseum stereo (since I could not bring Colosseum into the system to compare, I guess I should say I certainly did not feel any need to do a formal comparison), and it costs a lot less. 40% less. 50K v 30K. In the States, they might be the same price in which case I still would go for Colosseum dual-mono (for me) because its one unit and seems to create a much more solid sound...grounded deep into the earth kind of sound which I personally enjoy.

In conclusion, I told the owner of the store I felt with further exploration I might conclude them to be my favourite electronics they've ever sold in the store (including D'Agostinos, ARC, MBL, Krell, DTZL, Unico, Linn, Meridian). (I do not incl the Boulder 2060 which they had as trade in from someone who was downsizing or something.)

My two cents with all the caveats that apply.

 

[asiufy]

Humm.... Gryphon Colosseum (stereo) is US$ 43500, and the Constellation Centaur (stereo) is US$ 24000... So, cheaper. Monos? Colosseum Solo US$ 95000. Constellation Centaur Monos US$ 48000. I think the Boulder 2060 (stereo) is US$ 40000... Granted, these are US prices.

Given the prices above, and their relative performance, I'd say price is one of the advantages of the Constallation gear.

And I continue to be impressed with this combo... Will hear some more over the weekend before I switch the darTZeel back...

alexandre

 

[LL21]

Humm.... Gryphon Colosseum (stereo) is US$ 43500, and the Constellation Centaur (stereo) is US$ 24000... So, cheaper. Monos? Colosseum Solo US$ 95000. Constellation Centaur Monos US$ 48000. I think the Boulder 2060 (stereo) is US$ 40000... Granted, these are US prices.

Given the prices above, and their relative performance, I'd say price is one of the advantages of the Constallation gear.

And I continue to be impressed with this combo... Will hear some more over the weekend before I switch the darTZeel back...

alexandre

As I said in my original post, in the US it may be different. In the UK, the Constellation monos cost US$82K due to exchange rates and import duty. By contrast the Gryphon Colosseum dual-mono (which I prefer, let alone the Colosseum monos) cost $45K.

ADDED: Thinking about Asiufy...in the US market, I can agree with you...in the US, $24K for the stereo (not having heard it but having spoken to someone who owns it and whose ears I trust)...compares very well with amps like D'Agostino, Krell, ARC, where I could believe I would be tempted to stay with Constellation. In the end, not for us over here...so it is with international sales and better to have the choice than not at all.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Phelonious,

Yes, $50K amps is a small club indeed! If they sell b/w 50-100 over a few years, it will judged a triumph. But to your point, some people in this hobby prefer a thinner sounding presentation. It is considered more "high fidelity" for some reason. Others prefer a more fuller, richer, warmer, and more fleshed out sound. Many would prefer a $2k tube amp to a precise $50k SS piece.

Noticing and discussing these differences is a big part of the hobby for many of us. For us, high end audio is an experience. One of the main reason we come to this board to share and discuss these experiences. In the end it's all good. Salmon or tilapia for dinner?

Uh...yeah. If you really believe in an open discussion and you really believe it's "all good," it's probably not good to begin the discussion with the idea that if you're on the other side of these "differences," you're not a music lover, and have chosen is a thinner presentation. That's calling for sharing experiences that are all good as long as the full, rich, warm, fleshed-out club is free to insult everyone who doesn't agree with them. Sorry to be so blunt, but there it is.

Oh and by the way, the reason why linear performance is considered "more high fidelity," is because it demonstrates a higher level of fidelity to the input signal. It's not a matter of taste, and you don't have to like the way it sounds.

Tim

 

[asiufy]

Bit of a "WTF?" moment here... When I hooked up the Virgo and Centaur, using an MIT cable designed for Constellation gear, I used the "Direct" input on the amp, since that's claimed to interface with the Constellation preamps. I supposed that'd give the best sound, so I didn't even bother with the regular XLR input.

After reading a review of this pair in Hi Fi News, where they claim the regular XLR sounds better than the "Direct" XLR inputs, I switched, and what do you know? It IS better! Talk about shooting yourself in the foot...

That humpy sound, the chunkiness, is mostly gone, and the transparency level is up a notch. Mighty impressive! This is some seriously good gear!


alexandre

 

[KeithR]

Uh...yeah. If you really believe in an open discussion and you really believe it's "all good," it's probably not good to begin the discussion with the idea that if you're on the other side of these "differences," you're not a music lover, and have chosen is a thinner presentation. That's calling for sharing experiences that are all good as long as the full, rich, warm, fleshed-out club is free to insult everyone who doesn't agree with them. Sorry to be so blunt, but there it is.

Oh and by the way, the reason why linear performance is considered "more high fidelity," is because it demonstrates a higher level of fidelity to the input signal. It's not a matter of taste, and you don't have to like the way it sounds.

Tim

It's interesting Tim- I'm starting to believe that waves of negative feedback and higher order/odd harmonics cause a stripping of harmonics compared to other topologies. And I am currently using 100% Class A SS monos fyi. So I'm not sure that all "fleshing out" is distortion as you are alluding to- but the opposite.

 

[LL21]

It's interesting Tim- I'm starting to believe that waves of negative feedback and higher order/odd harmonics cause a stripping of harmonics compared to other topologies. And I am currently using 100% Class A SS monos fyi. So I'm not sure that all "fleshing out" is distortion as you are alluding to- but the opposite.

Interesting...big fan of class A SS...or I should say i am a fan of the amps I have heard that use it. Which ones are you using?

 

[KeithR]

Interesting...big fan of class A SS...or I should say i am a fan of the amps I have heard that use it. Which ones are you using?

I am using a pair of 50W Class A Valvet monoblocks---which retail for $6400/pr. Very simple design, no negative feedback, only 1 pair of transistors per side.

 

[LL21]

I am using a pair of 50W Class A Valvet monoblocks---which retail for $6400/pr. Very simple design, no negative feedback, only 1 pair of transistors per side.

Nice! I have used Class A for the last several years (Gryphon) and truly enjoy them. Enjoy yours!

 

[taters]

I heard them as well and think this is the best I've ever heard Magico. The Q7's on the other hand sounded like doo doo.

+1

 

[taters]

The Q7s were the victim of crappy audiophile drivel, poor set up, and a way too complicated system.

I think that guy Ted Denney from Synergistic is brilliant, and has amazing ideas, but he engages in over kill..

Fuses on cables, tubed power supply for the cables..and tranquility bases? Gimme a break.

Plus the fact he was rude to customers and didn't want to answer questions.

 

[Andre Marc]

Plus the fact he was rude to customers and didn't want to answer questions.

To be fair, he asked that no questions be asked DURING the demo otherwise he would never get through it. He was doing them every
30 minutes. He was willing to take questions after the demo. I think this makes sense.

 

[Roysen]

Uh...yeah. If you really believe in an open discussion and you really believe it's "all good," it's probably not good to begin the discussion with the idea that if you're on the other side of these "differences," you're not a music lover, and have chosen is a thinner presentation. That's calling for sharing experiences that are all good as long as the full, rich, warm, fleshed-out club is free to insult everyone who doesn't agree with them. Sorry to be so blunt, but there it is.

Oh and by the way, the reason why linear performance is considered "more high fidelity," is because it demonstrates a higher level of fidelity to the input signal. It's not a matter of taste, and you don't have to like the way it sounds.

Tim

I thought higher fidelity was a term used to describe the similarity of the sonic re-presentation of the recording compared to the sonics at the recording venue. I emphesize sonic and not measured. After all most of us use our equipment to listen to how they sound and don't use them to measure how the output signal compare to the input signal.

It a components output signal differs from the input signal in a way that makes the sonic presentation sound closer to the sound at the recording venue it is a good thing. Don't you agree? This is called component matching and is stressed as highly important by almost everyone on both the hobby side and the professional side of the business.

My personal opinion is that measurements should only be used for evaluering purposes by the professional side of the business. Measurements should only be used for informational use by the hobby side. Evaluation should be done in a total system context by ear.

Having said that I totally agree that sonic quality is a subjective issue where nobodys sonic taste is better than others.

 

[LL21]

My observations as a non-techie who has read many a debate by designers, audio techs about "the best design" and best technical reasons why by measurements:

1. I am not convinced there is agreement that we know everything that needs to be measured to make a 'perfect reproduction'.

2. It does seem obvious that since there is no perfect reproduction, every design is a particular blend of compromises...and that effectively the kind of distortion one cares about or is sensitive to WILL vary by person and by designer. I would not be surprised if someone measured the equipment I tend to like, that we would find there are certain levels of distortion on certain things I don't care about....which someone else would hate...and some where I am incredibly picky and will not stand for anything that does measure."almost perfectly".

For example, we can talk about THD and someone will say look at IMD. On an even more basic level, I have relatives with slight high frequency hearing loss...trust me when I say they do not care about inverted titanium dome tweeters vs silk dome tweeters...they just turn down the bass and turn up the treble so they can understand the news on the radio. Complete distortion...but that is probably perfectly flat response in their head.

So I find for me that the lack of consensus around great designers as to what to measure, and how to prioritize the amount or level of distortion of each KIND of distortion...mixed with the fact that many of us may in fact hear slightly differently...means that while measurements are a great baseline...there is good reason to gauge by ear in the end.

 

[KeithR]

asiufy- can you summarize your final thoughts on Constellation Audio?

Cheers,

KeithR

 

[asiufy]

Sure, just sent them back the other day, so the darTZeel is playing non-stop again...

First, let me tell you what surprised me: it doesn't sound as "powerful" as it should. I mean, 500W and the darTZeel has more slam.

The biggest difference to the darTZeel is on the high frequencies. The Constellation gear is simply not as extended. It makes the sound "nicer" with bad recordings, but it does obscure some of the ambience retrievel magic that the darTZeel is capable of.

It's also more generally laid back than the darTZeel, which is a more "nervous" and in-your-face. The sound stage was presented waaaay there in the back, while the darTZeel adds more layers. Again, for badly recorded music, it's "nice" to have the music presented calmly there in the back, but I prefer a more natural presentation, even if that means "in your face" sound.

It can't touch the darTZeel on sheer naturalness as well, perhaps because of those little deficiencies. Voices and instruments are just more palpable, more real, with the darTZeel. Imaging was about the same for both, not absolutely crazy pin-point 3D imaging, but that's not something I look for much anyway...

On certain material, I found it to have a little more mid bass presence, a little more energy around instruments and voices. Again, the perception was of a "nice" sound, thick and full, yet detailed.

Overall, the gear left a very good impression, mostly because it managed to get very close to my current preference. It manages to be very transparent, while also being a little dark (that lack of HF extension).

A few caveats: I got a 110V unit, while I usually prefer to run my amps on 220V. I do have separate taps for the amps, and 110/220V taps too, so the power was clean for both, but perhaps the Constellation would've run better on 220V. Also, I tested the stereo. Monoblocks could be quite a bit better too. Last thing, cables. I had to use a cheap XLR to connect the MSB to the Constellation pre, since the dealer didn't supply me with the long cable that I needed. The darTZeel was properly hooked up (RCA) with Kubala Elation cables.

I'd buy these if I didn't have the darTZeel. BUT, I still haven't heard the current darlings, the D'Agostinos

alexandre