DM10 vs B130 and B150

[ryder]

Hi all,

My first post.

I begin to develop an interest for Densen amps after reading excellent reviews on them particularly the DM10 that was said to be one of the best integrateds of all time created. When the DM10 was launched more than 10 years ago, the integrated was seen as a premium model sitting at a higher level compared to the B100. The DM10 was said to be a significant improvement to the B100 in all areas.

As of today the DM series are no longer in production as the B series of integrateds evolve from B100 to B110, B130, B150 and the top-of-the-line B175.

My question is, in terms of sonic performance which integrated in the current line is comparable to the DM10? I was informed that the DM10 has a better sound quality than the B110 and even the B130. Several posts in the forum pages here have concurred on this.

I would like to seek a 2nd opinion here in the Densen user forum. A brand new B110 is more than 2X the price of a used DM10 but was said to be not up to the DM10's standards. Is the B130 comparable to the DM10 in terms of sonic performance? Do we need to go up to the B150 in order to get the DM10's performance?

Any advice would be most appreciated.

[vilhelmw]

Very good questions!! I hope our "head honcho", mr. Sillesen will answer this. I'm the proud owner of a DM-10, who has served me truthfully for over ten years now. I have done some thinking about buying a new one, and it migh be a B-150, but I'm also considering amplifiers from Electrocompaniet and Bladelius. I have tried Electrcompaniet ECI 5, but that amp didn't beat my DM-10 in any matter. The DM-10' s still playing here...

Kindly Vilhelm, Norway

[barytone]

I had a DM10 for about 10 years and was very pleased with it. However a year ago I changed to a B-130 and I think it is an even better amp. More direct, more clout, more music. And then it´s possible to build on with DNRG (great upgrade), electronic crossover and so on.

[28v10a]

is it a good move to dwell with those older model? have you listen to the B150 integrated amp; it comes with a B200 preamp inside. or the B200 / B320 combo?

[flinte]

B200 / B320 combo it will be better.

[28v10a]

B200 / B320 combo it will be better.

thanks for your reply. as it is going be another 2 grands in my country. how could validate the extra grands? isn't that a pre/power combination is always smoother playback. clearer wider sound stage. firmer control of the lower end response.

[Holger_67DE]

To start with my conclusion first: I think you can build a very good system with all of these choices. As always it will cost you time, experience and the possibility to change/test associated equipment including the optimisation of your listening room.

The long answer is in line with some of my previous comments on the DM-10. After testing some costly alternatives and after several changes in the rest of my system the DM-10 is still in my system and stood the competition for nearly 10 years. For sure this is partly due to years of fine-tuning and system synergy. I've performed what I like to call "the ultimate test": subsequent to an Accuphase demo at my local dealer I had the opportunity to play around with the system (at a value of ca 100.000 Euro) system including the new Accuphase DSP room treatment and the power conditioner with various speakers. In particular the dealer allowed me to bring my DM-10 and to insert it into the system substituting an Accuphase C2810/2xM6000 combo. Therefore I was able to perform sequential A-B listening in otherwise identical systems. (At that time I was looking for new speakers but I used the opportunity). I find really no flaws in the DM-10 except of that the Accuphase combo has substantially more control in the lower regions and naturally it is able to maintain its sonics to much higher volumes. At medium listening levels which I prefer I liked the DM-10 better because it was faster, more life like and maybe a hint sweeter without any lack in detail or transparency in the highs and the mids. Again, the bass was clearly less defined and a bit muddy. But that is what you buy for the extra cash and the reproduction of the lower registers. Nevertheless, my DM-10 wasn't bad but lacks in that comparison. Here I must admit, that I "have pimped" my DM-10 since years with better fuses, better feet and a (600 Euro) power cord to let him play to its best. I've reported on this earlier and in particular the fuses are the cheapest and most effective tuning I experienced in the past....

(If someone is interested: For many years I've used the HIFI-Tuning silver fuses with gold caps, nevertheless after testing the new silverstar fuses (HiFi-Tuning with silver caps), the Padis/Furutech ones and the AHP's with gold and with copper caps I can truly say that the AHPs boost the performance once again by a large margin adding even more detail as well as more homogenity/continuity and less grain. There are also significant differences between the gold capped and the copper capped versions but both better than the rivals. Currently, I prefer the gold capped AHP because its greater presence and immediacy in the mids, nevertheless the copper version once more reduces the grain and shows even a little more detail with a different (in part deeper and wider) soundstage. But with the feeling you are sitting one row back. As a nice side effect these are also the cheapest of the above mentioned fuses).

The DM-10 with the standard power cord and fuses is somewhat limited in the frequency extremes and its transparency and detail. Overall it can be a little bit mellow in the mid-range which might be noticed as a very pleasant colouration, resembling the glowing sound of some older triodes. Replacing both the power cord and the fuses and the DM-10 is as transparent and detailed as the modern "big buck" amplifiers but retains to play extremely musical.

Back to your question, I also heard the Denson B110 and B150 at another dealer in more or less fixed systems. I do not liked what I have heard and it was simply classes worse than my setup with the DM-10 at home. Obviously the systems were not matched properly so don't cite me as saying the B110 and B150 are bad amps. For example the B150 was matched with a top of the line Piega speaker. The sound of the system was so analytical and clinical that not much music was left. At that day I was able to convince the dealer to change the speaker for another listening. He was not very enthusiastic but connected a new ProAc Response D (I think it was the entry floorstanding model). Though it only costs a fraction of the Piegas, the sound was clearly much more balanced and enjoyable. So it is all about synergy. However, both experiences with the B110 and the B150 gave me the impression that these models have evolved towards the analytical and cooler clinical side and are not as musical and balanced as my DM-10 is. I still have the same or more details with my 'improved' DM-10 compared to the standard B150. However, similar or more improvements might be possible for the B150 if it would be given the better fuses and better power cord too, I don't know.

With respect to construction it is my personal (non-expert) opinion that a DM-10 manufactured today would be more expensive than a B-150. I like the dual mono construction of the DM-10 with the two toroidal transformers, the puristic layout, the acrylic front, the bi-wiring posts, and the high-quality (selected) parts. All gives me the impression that the DM-10 was a no-compromise approach. As good as it is, I do not share this feeling with the B150. According to the Densen web site i.e. the description of the new B175 states: >>The poweroutput is transferred internally from the poweramp to the speakerterminals using a custommade cable, which is silvercoated copper with an isolation of Teflon. This cable was first used in Densens DM-10 amplifier, and now sees its rebirth in the B-175, securing a unsurpassed signal transfer.<< Neither of this means, that a DM-10 is better than a B150. But for sure you can build an excellent system around the DM-10 as well as around the B150.

Regards,
Holger