Musical Fidelity V90-DAC & M1PWR Amplifier Review

Ala Owner’s Manual or…?

One of the questions I had for Anthony about the M1PWR was whether it would be stable into a 2 Ohm load, for I wished to use it with my King Sound King III electrostats. I knew this would be a stretch for this smallish Class D amp, which Anthony confirmed by advising me to use it only in stereo output for the electrostatic speakers.

I knew this was so, but I also remembered how the same question arose when using the Pathos Classic One mkIII and how that amp had handled the load well in Mono mode. I also recalled that the King III was determined to be easier to drive than previous electrostatic designs. Considering that the amp was a bargain I decided to take upon myself the risk of attempting Mono mode, knowing full well that if it failed I was on the hook for the cost of the amp. I say, “…the amp,” because I was not foolish enough to hook both of them up, as one would suffice for a dry run.

I do not often risk $500 on an audio gamble, but I knew the payoff could be extreme, so it was worth it to me. Along the way I stumbled into a very amenable benefit. I have hooked up other amps like the Wells Audio Innamorata by bi-wiring the King III from only a single set of outputs and on this occasion I did so with the M1PWR. The result was gratifying, and I hurried to power up the other amp. The test was a success, though I learned the limits of the amp when bringing the level up beyond approx. 88 dB and the orange warning light began to flash indicating the amp was in danger of clipping. What else might be expected when a 65Wpc is pushed to its limit? I was pleased that it has such a warning indicator versus simply falling apart, or worse failing. As long as I stayed below the warning indicator’s range the amps were rock solid with the electrostats regardless of how demanding the music.

Later, I was surprised when flipping through the Owner’s Manual to find that the suggested hookup for the Mono output bi-wiring was from both sets of output posts. I attempted it but was met with a horribly diffuse, unfocused, fairly poor result not worth pursuing. I hastened to hook up the single output set of posts again. From this modest product came the most pristine sound I have yet encountered with the King III! No amp regardless of cost has brought more transparency to the speaker. There was a thinning of the sense of power and strength commensurate with the thinness and clarity similar to how glass can seem more transparent the thinner it gets. Such was the case for the ears hearing the King III with the M1PWR versus the beefy Pass X600.5 Monos.

The greatest area of superiority of the Wells Audio Innamorata was in terms of tonality; the amp is more ripe or rich sounding than either the Pass or the Musical Fidelity. The Innamorata is egregiously beautiful even though not as capable in terms of transients and scale of soundstage as the X600.5, but it is quite a bit richer than the M1PWR. Swapping cables on the power, digital and speaker connections can ameliorate this to some degree but not completely eliminate it. The takeaway, however, is that neither of these beautiful amps reduced the M1PWR to the status of a joke. Here again, the pattern was sustained, an Anthony Michaelson design overcoming skepticism that it could be any good as a bargain component.

Following up, I tested the single versus dual output posts for bi-wiring on the Kirksaeter Silverline 220 speakers and confirmed that indeed the use of both sets of outputs was superior in resolution, impact, spaciousness and overall enjoyment. I conclude that the anomaly of bi-wiring the King III ESL from a single set of outputs enabled the M1PWR to perform at an unexpectedly high level with this grand speaker because of the unorthodox wiring configuration. Had I not tried it I would have concluded the amp entirely unsuitable for the electrostatic. This modest amp would make for a mighty fine selection as a first amplification scheme or an interim move when pursuing high dollar components where compromises must be made in the system to achieve a long term objective, even when a panel speaker is pursued. I hasten to emphasize again that this is not the recommended use for the amp and would not be the ideal power configuration for such a speaker. But the fact that the M1PWR was even able to deliver under such circumstances is impressive to me.

In terms of the listening experience the outcome was grandiose, a Great and Powerful Oz experience that if you didn’t look behind the curtain at the system you would insist was the result of a hoity-toity audio shop’s main listening room components. Overall the M1PWR was more thrilling the harder it was driven. Class D has a reputation of not fainting when called upon for a boost and aside from the inherent limitations of the pairing with the electrostatic the M1PWR jackhammered speakers when pushed hard. I mean that as a compliment, as the drivers were driven like pistons but so cleanly! At higher listening levels the distinction between a Class A or A/B and the diamond-like cleanness of the Class D amplification became evident. On Hugh Masekela’s Stimela the cowbell and drum strikes simulating the oncoming train could be heard to advance with each step of the performers until they reached the front of the stage. I struggle to recall such riveting listening sessions with any other entry level amplifier scheme.

The M1 components confer an arguable advantage to the audiophile on a budget. If I had no money for an upper end system at the present time these are components I would buy. In addition, they snub the rules of cost-balanced systems by facilitating the underweighting of components and overweighting of speakers. Their sound, while not close to “no compromise” is low compromise, and that is plenty good for people entering the hobby or transitioning incrementally to an upper end system.