Has anyone heard of Dan D'agostino Relentless Power Amplifier compared to Boulder 3050?

[Papageno]

I am currently using Boulder 3060 and 3010 with Wilson Wamm Master Chronosonics.
The quiet background and bass energy of 3060 are hard to give up.
However, the praise that many people send to Relentless made me curious about this amplifier.
I'm wondering whether to go safely to 3050 or to take an adventure to Relentless that I've never heard of.

Is there anyone who can help me?

 

[andromedaaudio]

I'm wondering whether to go safely to 3050 or to take an adventure to Relentless that I've never heard of.

Is there anyone who can help me?

I think it would be safe as you re speakers wouldn t be underpowered in both cases anyway
For a step up / something different i d try tubes /give Convergent a shot

By the way if i had the Master chronosonics the first thing i would buy is the accompanying bass towers and not an amp change

 

[Gregadd]

At these prices bass towers are optional??? Go Wilson!

 

[LL21]

I am currently using Boulder 3060 and 3010 with Wilson Wamm Master Chronosonics.
The quiet background and bass energy of 3060 are hard to give up.
However, the praise that many people send to Relentless made me curious about this amplifier.
I'm wondering whether to go safely to 3050 or to take an adventure to Relentless that I've never heard of.

Is there anyone who can help me?

Fascinating! Stunning electronics and speakers. A few comments.

1. There are owners of the big Boulders and Relentless here who may have heard the other...so hopefully they will weigh in here. In fact, I think there is another WAMM owner on this forum who got the Relentless recently??

2. I have heard twice now that the 3060 has a touch of sweetness that the 3050 does not...neither is right nor wrong...but I have heard there is that difference. The question is whether you will wish for to drop that touch of sweetness for the difference that the 3050 gives presumably in even greater power, linearity and control. On the one hand, the WAMMs are exceedingly well controlled by your 3060 already...on the other hand, the history of big Wilsons is that they typically absorb and thrive on whatever amount of high quality power you throw at it.

3. There is something about the spooky quiet Boulder which I can imagine is difficult to leave behind. Combined with its incisiveness which is a trademark, that is quite something to enjoy if you listening to the subtlest of details in your music. (Not everyone does...I for example have only just started to think about details AFTER I was satisfied the system achieved other priorities which are more important to me. By contrast many Boulder fans have also particularly gravitated towards its revelation of detail.)

The question is in your discussions with people about the Relentless...did you get the sense it was as spooky quiet (which again is part of its ability to reveal those subtlest of details.)

 

[andromedaaudio]

At these prices bass towers are optional??? Go Wilson!

Thats why they have 10.5 and 12.5 inch paperwoofers.
You gotta keep the customers wanting

 

[chuck]

I have owned a 3060 for six years, driving Wilson XLF and YGXV. I have heard the Relentless a couple of times, on Wilson and YGXV, and prefer the 3060. The Relentless sound is quite different.

 

[LL21]

I have owned a 3060 for six years, driving Wilson XLF and YGXV. I have heard the Relentless a couple of times, on Wilson and YGXV, and prefer the 3060. The Relentless sound is quite different.

Fantastic...you were one of the people I had in mind when reading this thread. How are the Relentless and 3060 different on XLF and YGXV? Thanks for any listening notes!

 

[chuck]

Fantastic...you were one of the people I had in mind when reading this thread. How are the Relentless and 3060 different on XLF and YGXV? Thanks for any listening notes!

You already know the answer -- point 3 in your post #4. Except those details (aka music) -- it's not subtle when they are not there.

 

[LL21]

You already know the answer -- point 3 in your post #4. Except those details (aka music) -- it's not subtle when they are not there.

Thank you! That is good to know...I admit my point 3 in my post #4 was speculation based on hearing earlier Boulders, understanding a bit about their design focuses...and of course speaking with various owners/people who have auditioned the 3000 series.

 

[Papageno]

I think it would be safe as you re speakers wouldn t be underpowered in both cases anyway
For a step up / something different i d try tubes /give Convergent a shot

By the way if i had the Master chronosonics the first thing i would buy is the accompanying bass towers and not an amp change

I fully agree with your opinion. I have owned the original WAMM for over 10 years. Original WAMM, the base tower(under 40Hz) also played a very important role. Can't listen to music without the Bass Tower. Unfortunately, there is currently no space for the base tower in my room.

I already tried VTL siegfried II with WAMM. Its transparency and 3-dimensional hologram are outstanding. But the lean base was difficult to overcome. The combination of VTL and base tower can be expected to be an ideal one, as Wilson's house.

 

[Papageno]

Fascinating! Stunning electronics and speakers. A few comments.

1. There are owners of the big Boulders and Relentless here who may have heard the other...so hopefully they will weigh in here. In fact, I think there is another WAMM owner on this forum who got the Relentless recently??

2. I have heard twice now that the 3060 has a touch of sweetness that the 3050 does not...neither is right nor wrong...but I have heard there is that difference. The question is whether you will wish for to drop that touch of sweetness for the difference that the 3050 gives presumably in even greater power, linearity and control. On the one hand, the WAMMs are exceedingly well controlled by your 3060 already...on the other hand, the history of big Wilsons is that they typically absorb and thrive on whatever amount of high quality power you throw at it.

3. There is something about the spooky quiet Boulder which I can imagine is difficult to leave behind. Combined with its incisiveness which is a trademark, that is quite something to enjoy if you listening to the subtlest of details in your music. (Not everyone does...I for example have only just started to think about details AFTER I was satisfied the system achieved other priorities which are more important to me. By contrast many Boulder fans have also particularly gravitated towards its revelation of detail.)

The question is in your discussions with people about the Relentless...did you get the sense it was as spooky quiet (which again is part of its ability to reveal those subtlest of details.)

I didn't expect the 3060 to be sweeter than the 3050. Thank you for commenting on the point I didn't think about.
The 3060 is being tested temporarily lent from the shop where the WAMM was purchased. Now I have to decide on the amplifier, Relentless and Boulder are candidates. It is also very important to note that Boulder's spooky quiet cannot be expected from Relentless. Thanks.

 

[Papageno]

I have owned a 3060 for six years, driving Wilson XLF and YGXV. I have heard the Relentless a couple of times, on Wilson and YGXV, and prefer the 3060. The Relentless sound is quite different.

I was looking forward to your comment ^^. I also own the Soulution 701, and I fully agree that the 3060 is another league.

 

[chuck]

I didn't expect the 3060 to be sweeter than the 3050. Thank you for commenting on the point I didn't think about.
The 3060 is being tested temporarily lent from the shop where the WAMM was purchased. Now I have to decide on the amplifier, Relentless and Boulder are candidates. It is also very important to note that Boulder's spooky quiet cannot be expected from Relentless. Thanks.

is the 3060 "sweeter" than the 3050s? If so, that is a great reason to buy the 3050s. The 3060 plays everything on the recording and adds basically nothing. My 3060 has never seemed "sweet" unless the music required it. I would have sold it otherwise. The 3050s do the same, better. If the recording is "sweet" that is what you will hear/feel. If it ain't, you don't. Same with sad music, etc. etc.

 

[Papageno]

is the 3060 "sweeter" than the 3050s? If so, that is a great reason to buy the 3050s. The 3060 plays everything on the recording and adds basically nothing. My 3060 has never seemed "sweet" unless the music required it. I would have sold it otherwise. The 3050s do the same, better. If the recording is "sweet" that is what you will hear/feel. If it ain't, you don't. Same with sad music, etc. etc.

I have never heard of the 3050. This is what LL21 said about the 3060 and 3050. When I connected the Soulution 725 pre to the 3060, it sounded close to Soulution sound overall. But when I connected with the 3010, it sounded completely different. As you say, it's a different league. The 3010 affects the sound more than the power amplifier. Great preamplifier.

 

[LL21]

I have never heard of the 3050. This is what LL21 said about the 3060 and 3050. When I connected the Soulution 725 pre to the 3060, it sounded close to Soulution sound overall. But when I connected with the 3010, it sounded completely different. As you say, it's a different league. The 3010 affects the sound more than the power amplifier. Great preamplifier.

Interesting feedback on the preamp! (I have heard the preamp called the 'heart' of the system before...in this case, it seems that saying could be true.) The Boulder 3050 is simply the monoblock version of the stereo single-unit Boulder 3060.

3050 Monos:

Boulder 3050 Mono Amplifier - 3000 Series - Boulder Amplifiers

The Boulder 3050 Mono Amplifier, our flagship, is our largest, most powerful, and most luxurious product in over 30 years of sound system design.

boulderamp.com

3060 Stereo:

Boulder 3060 Stereo Amplifier - 3000 Series - Boulder Amplifiers

The Boulder 3060 Stereo Amplifier is the pinnacle of development from Boulder and the highest performing stereo amplifier in our product line.

boulderamp.com

 

[andromedaaudio]

Boulder 3000 series absolutely stunning gear .

Pics please ??
Wamm is great gear as well off course .
Unfortunately you havent got place for the wamm bass towers ,are those passive designs ?

 

[Papageno]

Boulder 3000 series absolutely stunning gear .

Pics please ??
Wamm is great gear as well off course .
Unfortunately you havent got place for the wamm bass towers ,are those passive designs ?

Yes passive. Need two stereo amplifiers for whole system.

 

[Elliot G.]

Yes passive. Need two stereo amplifiers for whole system.

you might want to consider the CH 10 series

 

[andromedaaudio]

Yes passive. Need two stereo amplifiers for whole system.

Does nt the 3000 poweramp series have double ouputs per channel .
The 1060 i used to own had 2 outputs per channel .
4 in total
I suppose the wilson passive woofer tower needs the same gain as the maintower.
Iow are already efficiency matched

 

[Carlos269]

Does nt the 3000 poweramp series have double ouputs per channel .
The 1060 i used to own had 2 outputs per channel .
4 in total
I suppose the wilson passive woofer tower needs the same gain as the maintower

It’s not the same line level signal for both the main speakers and the subwoofer towers. You need 2 stereo amps: one to amplify the high-frequency and one to amplify the low frequency line-level outputs from the electronic crossover.