currently have 212s activ with 2 4200s...my ultimate goal would be activ solos then upgrade speakers... So,
would 1 pr of solos outperform, tunedem, activ 4200s with 212s?

the answer is no. linn states that their smallest amps outperform bigger, when played aktiv. i've listened to katans and klimaxes 500 solo vs. majik 4100 aktiv. aktiv was better in all aspects including tunedem.

i dont mean to be argumentative, but where is it that Linn says this about smaller, lesser amps? your example with the katans poses another question...which source,pre were you using. Does a better source make your example stronger or weaker? Im wondering if a pr of solos with a klimax kontrol will outperform activ 200w, seeing as both klimax products are being used.

The question active vs. passive has been discussed on all Linn Forums I read in the last few years. I think there is no definitive answer on this topic.

I myself was a follower of the "active is in any case better than passive"-Theory. Until I compared Ninkas active with 2 x 2250s vs. passive with a Klimax Twin Chakra. The second configuation was so much better that I ordered the Twin right away. Some time later I heard the Artikulate 350 on a pair of of Solos. I blew me away, I never heard a better Speaker since then. A year ago I listened to The 350A and I wasn't as imprssed as I was with the passive Speakers.

Today I believe that the Klimaxes are very hard to beat even with a active configuration. I would look for a dealer who can demo both set-ups.

Regards
Paul

Remember, an active system needs much more time (and loving care) during the set-up.

So when comparing active vs. passive - make sure both systems are tuned correctly before.

Regardless what is "best", an active system have "something" that I always miss in ANY passive system.

Music Lover wrote:an active system have "something" that I always miss in ANY passive system.

I agree, but a Klimax system have "something" that I always miss in ANY non-Klimax system.

The solution is very simple: Go active with Klimax! :mrgreen:

thx guys.my wheels are spinning as ive seen second hand solos going for almost the same as 2 4200s and activ cards, second hand, would go for...so not much out of pocket, and factor in savings of multiple silver ICs...

I agree with Paulinko and prefer passive artikulates with solos.
Having owned aktiv isobariks and keltiks, i am familiar to what aktiv offers. Having heard 242s in various configurations, definitely do not prefer 4100 aktiv to klimax passive.

Paulinko wrote:The question active vs. passive has been discussed on all Linn Forums I read in the last few years. I think there is no definitive answer on this topic.

I myself was a follower of the "active is in any case better than passive"-Theory. Until I compared Ninkas active with 2 x 2250s vs. passive with a Klimax Twin Chakra. The second configuation was so much better that I ordered the Twin right away. Some time later I heard the Artikulate 350 on a pair of of Solos. I blew me away, I never heard a better Speaker since then. A year ago I listened to The 350A and I wasn't as imprssed as I was with the passive Speakers.

Today I believe that the Klimaxes are very hard to beat even with a active configuration. I would look for a dealer who can demo both set-ups.

Regards
Paul

I have to agree that the question is not necessarily that simple. I found Ninkas passive with a 2250 more tuneful than Aktiv with a 5125 although that was using an external tunebox (Brilliant PS) so I'm not sure how much effect that had on the outcome. The 5125 Aktiv was more detailed and more Hi-Fi and even had more of a sense of ease as all good active systems do but it still wasn't as tuneful as the passive 2250 setup was.

On the other hand I found the opposite was true in the case of the Akurate 242s. Here I found two 5125s Aktiv was all around better than two 2250s or even a Klimax Chakra Twin. (Unfortunately I did not have Solos on hand to try.) Not only did the 242/5125 Aktiv setup do all the Hi-Fi things better but it was more tuneful as well. My feeling was that the more complex 4.5 way crossover on the 242 caused the improvement going Aktiv to be larger and to overshadow the difference between the amps.

This might not have been the case if Klimax Solos were used and I know some prefer passive with the Solos to Aktiv with anything else and I can understand their point. The musicality of the Klimax Kontrol/Klimax Solo combination is so beguiling that we sell a fair number of Sonus Faber speakers with that as the driving components. It is a lovely combination and one that offers simplicity in the number of boxes and cables necessary as well as in setup. As mentioned in another thread there is really something almost magical about Linn's reference products. I notice on the Topica forum a similar feeling has been noted by a few in preference of the Komri over the Artikulat with some feeling the Artikulat was just missing something only the Komri offers.

That said I still find it difficult to live with a passive system now that I have been spoiled by active. And I expect that Komris with 8 Solos are likely to remain out of my price range at least for this lifetime (although with prices on Keltiks and Klouts what they are now, who knows what Komris and Solos will go for in ten years).

Hi. Remember that the "passive" Artikulates is not really passive. There are active servo controlled basses. Therefore the active-passive comparison should be made with other speakers.

ThomasOK wrote: That said I still find it difficult to live with a passive system now that I have been spoiled by active.

Agree

ThomasOK wrote:
And I expect that Komris with 8 Solos are likely to remain out of my price range at least for this lifetime (although with prices on Keltiks and Klouts what they are now, who knows what Komris and Solos will go for in ten years).

Price erosion follow the performance enhancement.
The reason Keltik/Klout are affordable now is that a giant step in performance was taken by the successors. (and it has also been many "better" products released since Klout; 2250/chakra amps/twin/twin chakra/solo)
As you, I also hope I one day can afford today’s top of the line Klimax system but unfortunately we have to wait until much better products than Komri/Solo's are released.
I’m afraid that going to take longer time than with Klout/Keltik.
8)

Music Lover wrote: Price erosion follow the performance enhancement.
The reason Keltik/Klout are affordable now is that a giant step in performance was taken by the successors. (and it has also been many "better" products released since Klout; 2250/chakra amps/twin/twin chakra/solo)

This is true but the degree of erosion is still somewhat scary. Keltiks have a hard time fetching even $2000 on the market right now. Can you think of any $4000 speaker that even comes close to the Keltiks? Of course the big problem is the need for 3 or 4 amps.

Music Lover wrote:As you, I also hope I one day can afford today’s top of the line Klimax system but unfortunately we have to wait until much better products than Komri/Solo's are released.
I’m afraid that going to take longer time than with Klout/Keltik.
8)

I'm afraid you are probably right on this!

ThomasOK wrote:This is true but the degree of erosion is still somewhat scary. Keltiks have a hard time fetching even $2000 on the market right now. Can you think of any $4000 speaker that even comes close to the Keltiks? Of course the big problem is the need for 3 or 4 amps.

Yes, but 2*5125 is not THAT expensive and they are OK as interim.

I think the low WAF factor and that you never hear a perfect tuned Keltik system in a demo being the real issues.
VERY few have heard Keltik at it's optimum!
Same goes to Komri if you ask me.

ThomasOK wrote:

Music Lover wrote:As you, I also hope I one day can afford today’s top of the line Klimax system but unfortunately we have to wait until much better products than Komri/Solo's are released.
I’m afraid that going to take longer time than with Klout/Keltik.
8)

I'm afraid you are probably right on this!

Hello you two(!),

Is it possible that improvements are on their way? In the fields I've worked in, major architectural shifts tend to yield relatively less-visible gains at first (the progress is ongoing, but the end result isn't yet good enough to replace existing products), but then -- as the R&D folks begin to really understand the new system -- the apparent progress becomes more breathtaking. If we're to believe the Chakra White Paper, the adoption of Chakra is an architectural shift of this nature & magnitude, and after the initial "pause" the developments might start coming quite rapidly.

But that's just a general technological conjecture, perhaps born of wishful thinking (a Solo for Klout money? -- ooooooo!). :D

-C

Of course, improvements going to come. But not as fast on speakers/amps.

In the past, Linn speakers/amps didn't impress on all parameters.
Tuneful yes but not as exact, sweet sounding and detailed as the best high end competitors.
The Klimax range is ALL that AND even more musical. The Klimax technology has now been implemented on entry level systems.

During the last decade, Linn spent a lot of R/D time on speakers/amps. But I think the main improvement potential is on the source. Klimax DS is just the first product in a new category =Linn going to learn more on improving the technology!
And we haven’t seen the last vinyl enhancement :mrgreen:

More focus on the source PLEASE!

Music Lover wrote:Of course, improvements going to come. But not as fast on speakers/amps....

...During the last decade, Linn spent a lot of R/D time on speakers/amps. But I think the main improvement potential is on the source. Klimax DS is just the first product in a new category =Linn going to learn more on improving the technology!

More focus on the source PLEASE!

Hello Music Lover(!)

Fair enough! If the R&D focus has shifted away from amps, then so too will the rapid gains. I'm just a little sad that the Source components (where you suggest the R&D has shifted to) tend to be the most expensive part of the system (but then, maybe it'll also be the fastest to depreciate if progress becomes rapid, so there'll be hope on the used market).

Along these lines, what do you think of the Classik DS mentioned in Azazello's post? Would you think it possible that it'd exceed the Majik CD's performance? (i.e., Is the DS avenue predominantly a path towards convenience, or is it the most promising approach towards better sound quality as well?)

I guess I've hit the entry-level limbo where all the things I can afford to try have mostly been tried, and the stretch to the next level is a bit daunting. But if the DS-style products evolve quickly (and if they "trickle down), then that'd be exciting for the entry-level folks like me!

Best wishes. :D

-C

Ceilidh wrote:[If the R&D focus has shifted away from amps, then so too will the rapid gains. I'm just a little sad that the Source components (where you suggest the R&D has shifted to) tend to be the most expensive part of the system (but then, maybe it'll also be the fastest to depreciate if progress becomes rapid, so there'll be hope on the used market).

No, it's actually the opposite!
The most rapid gains are to be found at the source and these improvements are less costly than similar improvements at the playback portion.

Classik DS...for sure the technology going to be introduced in less costly products in the future. If it's going to be separate units or Classik I dont know.

Hi Music Lover,

Yes, I see your (and ThomasOK's) point! => Moore's Law should be working healthily on Source Components, given the increasing role of digital processing and the decreasing reliance (with DS-style products) on mechanical transports. So the future should be exciting for all pricepoints!

If it makes any difference to anyone, my wistful laments centered on the current entry-level situation with Linn (which the developments you refer to might soon rectify) -- or rather, my personal experiences at that entry level: For some reason I'm finding it tougher to upgrade the Source part of my system than I am the Control or Playback, given eBay pricing: to go from bare Classik to Classik+LK140 took less than $600, and even the 5103 I tried out for a while cost under $500 -- but Ikemis go for near $2000, and used Unidisks for far more. So I haven't been able to do much on the Source end of things. But that's not Linn's fault(!), and I guess it's mostly a reflection on how the source components hold their value on the used market -- certainly when I (someday) start purchasing new (as opposed to used) equipment, the Source upgrades won't seem so much more expensive than the Control and Playback.

Music Lover -- I started a little thread on DS-style technology (it had some technical questions that might be tough to answer, but mostly I'm curious what people find interesting about it). If you have a chance, I'd love to hear your views -- it's a new world to me, but it's starting to sound exciting. Any comments you have would be greatly appreciated (but no worries at all if you're too busy!). Thanks very much!

-C

Ceilidh wrote:mostly I'm curious what people find interesting about it

Sound quality!

I agree: It's the performance that is interesting! Nothing else, for me anyway. I don't enjoy having music listed on screens, I would rather hold an LP cover in my hands when listening to a record.

The technology is not new, they've just made a "Sondek" version of it.

bonzo wrote:currently have 212s activ with 2 4200s...my ultimate goal would be activ solos then upgrade speakers... So,
would 1 pr of solos outperform, tunedem, activ 4200s with 212s?

Hi Bonzo,

To shed some light:

I have A-B-A-B-A tested 242´s with 5x2250 Active and 2xSolo in my home for a week.

Power, speaker cables and interconnects were identical during the test.

I had to retune the speakers for optimum sound between the two setups.

I sold the 2250´s and bought the Solos.

Better tunedem, better homogenity, the sound were more "real" - Dylan was Dylan, strings were strings. The only downset I found was that the Active setup had blacker background.

I know this was made with older amps than the x200 series but my internal loom mod 2250 outperformed a standard C2200 at the time.

So go for Solos, especially as you have a future plan to go active with them...

/ Zeedje

thx for posting your findings...great info.. Ive since changed direction a bit and bough a klimax chakra twin to replace the 2 C4200s...picked one up from a dealer for the same price as im selling one of my 4200s for...so money in the bank is always good. Amp should arrive this weekend and i will be able to audition/ compare passive twin vs. activ 4200. im sure activ may be better, but Klimax amp(s) are part of my long term plan. Source first :D

We are dying to get your test result so please report! :mrgreen:

results...
from activ 4200s to chakra twin passive...clearly evident the twin is a far superior amp. i am missing the activ sound, especially on the 3k array...highs seem a bit stronger, not as lush or effortless. But, bass is amazing...strong, fast, tight. all other things were kept the same during a/b. hifi stuff, imagining is way better, soundstage is deeper and taller, notes seem to start, stop better faster, decay is longer. Tune dem terms, the boogy factor has gone down a bit, but not a whole lot. im very happy with the decision especially as its part of my long term plans to go activ with klimax amps. Curious as to results of another twin (bi amping 212s with 2 twins)...bang for buck there or no?

bonzo wrote:results...
from activ 4200s to chakra twin passive...clearly evident the twin is a far superior amp.

So, how are you getting along with the Chakra Twin?
I'm considering making a similar move. Actually I would be going from active 242s with Majik 5100s to 212s with a Chakra Twin. This would be a way to free up some funds to go more source first.
It would be interesting to hear peoples views on this.