Thank you, Tango. I wonder if anybody on WBF has compared these side-by-side with the NAT Magmas in the same system?
Highest Power SET Amplifier?
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
Thank you, Tango. I wonder if anybody on WBF has compared these side-by-side with the NAT Magmas in the same system?
Whilst In jeopardy of flogging a Dead Donkey here, We're I in your position Ron I would most certainly at least consider and look into the feasibility of a home demonstration of a pair of Atma-Sphere MA1's or MA2's, the practical advantages....being Manufactured In USA ergo no exchange rate headache, plus on shore servicing if required.
The technical advantages being.....no transformer saturation to take into consideration especially as high voltage/ output transmitting valves generally require ever larger Mains and OPT which bring their own set of problems, 'Genuine ' Class A operation with invariably lower distortion levels at 50-100% output over most if not all SET topology.
The subjective/ no empirical evidence as yet measured advantages being......Most likely a more Linear response from your 200Hz crossover point and upwards, and perhaps particularly in that crucial 100Hz > 200Hz range when handing over to the also most likely linear SS driven actives increasing the chances of a smoother transition from Valve to SS Amplication.
In the main, one of the appealing strengths of an OTL topology is also one of Liquid and Texturally satisfying midrange tonality.
I hope that you remember my PayPal account details Ralph
my apologies, that should have read.... "and perhaps particularly in that crucial 200Hz > 300Hz range "
The technical advantages being.....no transformer saturation to take into consideration especially as high voltage/ output transmitting valves generally require ever larger Mains and OPT which bring their own set of problems, 'Genuine ' Class A operation with invariably lower distortion levels at 50-100% output over most if not all SET topology.
The subjective/ no empirical evidence as yet measured advantages being......Most likely a more Linear response from your 200Hz crossover point and upwards, and perhaps particularly in that crucial 100Hz > 200Hz range when handing over to the also most likely linear SS driven actives increasing the chances of a smoother transition from Valve to SS Amplication.
In the main, one of the appealing strengths of an OTL topology is also one of Liquid and Texturally satisfying midrange tonality.
I hope that you remember my PayPal account details Ralph
my apologies, that should have read.... "and perhaps particularly in that crucial 200Hz > 300Hz range "
Last edited:
Whilst In jeopardy of flogging a Dead Donkey here, We're I in your position Ron I would most certainly at least consider and look into the feasibility of a home demonstration of a pair of Atma-Sphere MA1's or MA2's, the practical advantages....being Manufactured In USA ergo no exchange rate headache, plus on shore servicing if required.
The technical advantages being.....no transformer saturation to take into consideration especially as high voltage/ output transmitting valves generally require ever larger Mains and OPT which bring their own set of problems, 'Genuine ' Class A operation with invariably lower distortion levels at 50-100% output over most if not all SET topology.
The subjective/ no empirical evidence as yet measured advantages being......Most likely a more Linear response from your 200Hz crossover point and upwards, and perhaps particularly in that crucial 100Hz > 200Hz range when handing over to the also most likely linear SS driven actives increasing the chances of a smoother transition from Valve to SS Amplication.
In the main, one of the appealing strengths of an OTL topology is also one of Liquid and Texturally satisfying midrange tonality.
I hope that you remember my PayPal account details Ralph
Thank you, Harlequin.
I am familiar with Ralph's great work and I have enormous respect for his amplifiers. I would be very interested in trying the MA-2 Mk. 3.3 on the Pendragon ribbon panels. I was in direct communication with Ralph several months ago discussing the possibility of this in the future.
There is a view that while the Atma-Sphere amplifiers have a transparent and a "clean" sound unequalled by any other amplifier in the tube amplifier world, the other side of that coin may be a kind of "lean" sound which I might not cotton to. This is the question I would like to answer.
If the manufacturer is satisfied that tubes can be used on the mid/high, than he obviously either designed the speakers for that eventuality or has heard them that way and finds it OK. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, subject to variability like all audio. I have mixed the amplifier types with my ribbons over the years with subwoofers etc. with good results depending. Ribbons can be reasonably integrated with dynamic drivers, much more easily than with electrostats.
With OTL, you are going from single ended to push pull, which isn't fatal but it is different. OTLs that I have heard are clean sounding, but not quite as fluid and open as SET. Also, there is no impedance specified for the Pendragon ribbon array. A low impedance would likely require an impedance matching transformer for the ribbon array with OTL, also not fatal. With my ribbons, I wound up using some impedance matching transformers with my VFET amps, which like to see impedances in the 8 to 10 ohm range. It sounds great that way. Impedance matching transformers are a single unbroken wound wire without any gapping, so they can be pretty transparent.
Localization cues drop off rapidly below 200 Hz, but the 250 Hz crossover point is certainly impinging into the localizable lower midrange. Again I think that the manufacturer is the best one to consult on any particular topology, but Gryphon seems to have taken into account that many of it's customers don't wish to sacrifice tube midrange.
With OTL, you are going from single ended to push pull, which isn't fatal but it is different. OTLs that I have heard are clean sounding, but not quite as fluid and open as SET. Also, there is no impedance specified for the Pendragon ribbon array. A low impedance would likely require an impedance matching transformer for the ribbon array with OTL, also not fatal. With my ribbons, I wound up using some impedance matching transformers with my VFET amps, which like to see impedances in the 8 to 10 ohm range. It sounds great that way. Impedance matching transformers are a single unbroken wound wire without any gapping, so they can be pretty transparent.
Localization cues drop off rapidly below 200 Hz, but the 250 Hz crossover point is certainly impinging into the localizable lower midrange. Again I think that the manufacturer is the best one to consult on any particular topology, but Gryphon seems to have taken into account that many of it's customers don't wish to sacrifice tube midrange.
Last edited:
Chiming in late, but the Big envelope tube wavac monoblocks. About 100W each into the speakers. Heard them once at David Robinson house in Portland (PSOnline). Most convincing drum-set rendition I have ever heard. I think they are megabux though, maybe $250K?
I chose something more affordable, 805A-T monoblocks, because my Vapor Nimbus speakers are 92dB efficient. The bass is incredible. I believe the Nimbus speaker stands alone as the most efficient 3-way speaker that competes with the best speakers on the planet. I've heard a lot of efficient speakers at shows for 15 years, some open-baffle, lots using one driver. Nothing like the Nimbus.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio
I chose something more affordable, 805A-T monoblocks, because my Vapor Nimbus speakers are 92dB efficient. The bass is incredible. I believe the Nimbus speaker stands alone as the most efficient 3-way speaker that competes with the best speakers on the planet. I've heard a lot of efficient speakers at shows for 15 years, some open-baffle, lots using one driver. Nothing like the Nimbus.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio
You just need to ask Flemming for an impedance curve for your speakers, Ron.
And on the NAT - I would email them for a chart on wattage vs. distortion. This will make a lot of things clear.
And on the NAT - I would email them for a chart on wattage vs. distortion. This will make a lot of things clear.
You know exactly what you want. You are open to possiblilties. You are not shaken by well intended opposing comments from someone who have such great experience in this hobby. You calculate risks that you could be heading into. You make your choice. I like you Ron.
Tang
Last edited:
Awww, thank you, Tang.
I just attempt to make effective use of the brain trust we have here at WBF.
I just attempt to make effective use of the brain trust we have here at WBF.
I don’t think we’re talking past each other everyone seems to be in agreement regarding the issues dissimilar amps create the debate is wether the problems can be overcome or not and if so how and at what cost.
david
Come on Francisco you know better than that, it’s even called servo bass. Anyway the discussion isn’t aimed at or limited to Genesis or any other speaker brand in particular, it’s simply about wether it’s possible to have convincing coherent results from dissimilar amps or not.
david
Ron,
I just spent a few minutes on the Gryphon website studying the Pendragon details. I was trying to understand exactly the interface between the bass tower signal path and the main tower signal path. I was not able to determine where the bass towers receive their signal. it only describes a separate active crossover for each bass tower; but it is not disclosed where the signal for the bass towers is received.
do they take the signal from the main tower speaker terminal?
or do they take it from your preamp?
my question is; whether the character of the amps for the main passive towers with the Pendragon are part of the signal source for the bass towers?
with my Evolution Acoustics MM7's; the active bass towers take their signal from the speaker terminals of the main towers; which allows the character of whatever amplifier is used to be mimicked by the bass tower amps. which allows for a seamless character between the two towers in the bass. I've had a few tubed amplifiers in my system and never had a discontinuity in the bass related to different topographies.
if the Pendragon does get it's signal from the main tower speaker terminals, then the integration will be done for you already regardless of the amp you choose for the main towers.
we can all have an opinion or guess on how this might work. but I live with this approach, and it's awesome and the best bass integration I've yet heard anywhere.
I just spent a few minutes on the Gryphon website studying the Pendragon details. I was trying to understand exactly the interface between the bass tower signal path and the main tower signal path. I was not able to determine where the bass towers receive their signal. it only describes a separate active crossover for each bass tower; but it is not disclosed where the signal for the bass towers is received.
do they take the signal from the main tower speaker terminal?
or do they take it from your preamp?
my question is; whether the character of the amps for the main passive towers with the Pendragon are part of the signal source for the bass towers?
with my Evolution Acoustics MM7's; the active bass towers take their signal from the speaker terminals of the main towers; which allows the character of whatever amplifier is used to be mimicked by the bass tower amps. which allows for a seamless character between the two towers in the bass. I've had a few tubed amplifiers in my system and never had a discontinuity in the bass related to different topographies.
if the Pendragon does get it's signal from the main tower speaker terminals, then the integration will be done for you already regardless of the amp you choose for the main towers.
we can all have an opinion or guess on how this might work. but I live with this approach, and it's awesome and the best bass integration I've yet heard anywhere.
You’re using solid state, ie similar amps in the entire system Mike integration isn’t a problem in your scenario the debate is over mixing dissimilar amps, SETs or tubes in general with solid state in the same system vs using same type amps like you’re doing.
david
and i'm saying that assuming sufficiently transparent bass tower amps, that they can mimic tube amps in the lowest octaves allowing for both character integration, and better linearity along with it. this, of course, requires taking the signal for the bass amps from the output of the main amps and not the preamp.
I've done it with a few tube amps of various topologies and power levels.....and it works.
I respect you likely see things differently. so be it.
Last edited:
Mike, I am grateful to you for looking into this, but I do not want to derail my own thread, as this is a system-specific issue. I replied to your post on my system thread: http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...able-Power-and-Room-Treatment-Upgrades/page62
May we pick this up there?
-SET is always Class A
-Many of the SET designs are optimized for half rated output so high efficiency is key. 89B is not really efficient, but it might be enough if you use a high powered SET like the Magma
-The Gryphons use a pass through on the Bass tower so you dont need to Bi-amp (and shouldn't). The line out from the the master circuit means you can use much less cabling running from that output to the mid/hi tower rather than a dual output from the pre. Most pre's that have more than one output use a parallel output and are not wired to be independent so it wouldn't make sense to do this anyway
- You could use OTL (although it would be PP) using an autoformer to raise the impedance from 6ohms closer to 12+, but I wouldn't consider this since #1 it wasn't designed for it and #2 you could blow up your drivers
-Many of the SET designs are optimized for half rated output so high efficiency is key. 89B is not really efficient, but it might be enough if you use a high powered SET like the Magma
-The Gryphons use a pass through on the Bass tower so you dont need to Bi-amp (and shouldn't). The line out from the the master circuit means you can use much less cabling running from that output to the mid/hi tower rather than a dual output from the pre. Most pre's that have more than one output use a parallel output and are not wired to be independent so it wouldn't make sense to do this anyway
- You could use OTL (although it would be PP) using an autoformer to raise the impedance from 6ohms closer to 12+, but I wouldn't consider this since #1 it wasn't designed for it and #2 you could blow up your drivers
I emailed NAT Audio for a wattage vs distortion graph. Will let the forum know if they accommodate. The only measurements online for this company are for a preamplifier.
Sometimes I wonder if people would just prefer to speculate all day and spin their wheels rather than using hard information as a guide. Good grief!
Sometimes I wonder if people would just prefer to speculate all day and spin their wheels rather than using hard information as a guide. Good grief!
Mike,
The best bass integration is when the bass + mids/highs are using the same amp and not running through an additional bass amp. While tapping off the mains speaker terminals provides the flavor of the mids /highs amp it additionally takes on the character of the bass tower amp, not to mention the potential for phase issues which can sometimes be corrected depending on bass tower / or sub flexibility. This is the same setup for powered Martin Logans (I had Summits) and Rel subs (Had these also). Net is - there are still 2 different amps at play albeit they are both SS.
I have seen independent measurements and the old SE2SE and SE3 are serious powerhouse SETs! We are talking 80+ watts at only a couple % distortion and fairly monotonic at that. It looks like they go to Class A2 because I have never seen so much power from a pair of 211s in SE. Only the SE1 was not up to ratings, making 15 watts or so and clearly staying in Class A1 (distortion pattern was nicer with less high order harmonics).
Keith, did you invest in yr Zus based on specs and esp frequency response graphs?
If you did, you should have saved yr cash.
If you did because you liked the sound, you chose well.
Why make such a big deal of this w the Magmas when you patently weren’t that bothered choosing Zus?
If you did, you should have saved yr cash.
If you did because you liked the sound, you chose well.
Why make such a big deal of this w the Magmas when you patently weren’t that bothered choosing Zus?
Similar threads
Staff online
-
treitz3Super Moderator
Members online
- wbass
- bonzo75
- Kingsrule
- mtemur
- rsorren1
- TLi
- andromedaaudio
- Bonesy Jonesy
- moby2004
- Gamlas
- Horidori
- hornfly
- brad225
- SOS
- MOTU
- Sharok
- GroovySauce
- Antonio66
- jazzdude99
- Thorens 2018
- hopkins
- baocrazy78
- treitz3
- SlapEcho
- Anyoldears
- oldvinyl
- Juiced
- jadis
- morricab
- AudioHedonist
- GuyB
- MarkusBarkus
- John T
- Republicoftexas69
- orrman
- kodomo
- tsaett
- Zeotrope
- MasterparK
- Maurits
- Ricco275
- Mikeg1
- Final
- alex3
- trekpilot
- wbfhet
- JeremyMTB
- Salectric
- Another Johnson
- Golum
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |