ying and yang--Lamm ML3 and darTZeel 458

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,807
4,700
2,790
Portugal
(...) one that I find peculiar is that you can "hear" higher power amplifiers sounding better than lower power amplifiers with the same topology when both operate within a power envelope that does not clip or distort either.

I have found the opposite, especially with SS amps, that when operating within the power envelope on reasonably efficient speakers that the lower power SS amps using fewer output devices sound better. I don't think I have ever heard a behemoth SS amp that I liked much, except perhaps the Nelson Pass unobtanium VFET beast based on Sony vintage VFETs at shows. (...)

IMHO most of the times this type of comparison is unfair - in general the high power amplifiers have better power supplies, better mechanical structures , better selection of components and better building techniques. I remembers that Krell and Constellation Audio addressed this subject and clearly presented technical reasons why their higher power amplifiers sounded better, even at lower levels.

Surely if someone believes that all decent designed amps sound the same or prefers the sound quality of low power using fewer output devices, their words and explanations are useless. In the high-end we have mainly opinions about our preferences.

When I got the XLF's I was enthusiastic about going towards more simple, lower power amplifiers. I must say experiences were not a success, I am again it the high power (> 200W) zone.
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,587
11,663
4,410
In the pantheon of audio beliefs, promoted by audio critics selling high ticket items, one that I find peculiar is that you can "hear" higher power amplifiers sounding better than lower power amplifiers with the same topology when both operate within a power envelope that does not clip or distort either.

I have found the opposite, especially with SS amps, that when operating within the power envelope on reasonably efficient speakers that the lower power SS amps using fewer output devices sound better. I don't think I have ever heard a behemoth SS amp that I liked much, except perhaps the Nelson Pass unobtanium VFET beast based on Sony vintage VFETs at shows.

I suppose if you believe that you can hear the power even if your peak program material is modest, I suppose you can, because you can't enjoy the system otherwise.

It seems that this would be a reasonable double blind type study, but I have never heard of one being attempted.

not sure who you are addressing. the big bad darts are ss minimalist champs. only 6 pieces in the signal path, and zero global feedback. and you can 'not' hear.......what you should not hear, and only what you should. no; it does not 'enhance' (add nice things) like an SET, but it's the real music other than that. and all of it. nothing stripped out and emancipated.
 
Last edited:

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,628
13,653
2,710
London

I am amazed you call this 92 Db waveguide-tweeter-on-a-woofer a horn. In that case Audiophile Bill's focal maestro utopia at 93 Db were more sensitive horns
 

KeithR

VIP/Donor
May 7, 2010
5,156
2,821
1,898
Encino, CA
Nice way to try to snip off a rebuttal.. All I can say is that there was something wrong with your SIT if with a 101db speaker you couldn't get more than 93db at the listening position.

Forgive me, it was 95dbs of wide band pink noise. I should have clarified.

But I don't understand why you continuously tell people they are wrong despite having their own listening experiences to the contrary.
 

bonzo75

Member Sponsor
Feb 26, 2014
22,628
13,653
2,710
London
IMHO most of the times this type of comparison is unfair - in general the high power amplifiers have better power supplies, better mechanical structures , better selection of components and better building techniques. I remembers that Krell and Constellation Audio addressed this subject and clearly presented technical reasons why their higher power amplifiers sounded better, even at lower levels.

Surely if someone believes that all decent designed amps sound the same or prefers the sound quality of low power using fewer output devices, their words and explanations are useless. In the high-end we have mainly opinions about our preferences.

When I got the XLF's I was enthusiastic about going towards more simple, lower power amplifiers. I must say experiences were not a success, I am again it the high power (> 200W) zone.

+1
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 25, 2015
6,029
1,501
550
Eastern WA
KeithR said:
10% distortion at 32 watts is never gonna sound good...entire point of SET is using it at low power levels with declining distortion pattern unlike other topologies

If it is mostly low order harmonics and the SPL is 112db then it might not even be audible...at worst it will probably start to sound somewhat compressed because likely the amp doesn't actually hard clip at that power.

morricab is correct. Sorry Keith, but the reality is that so long as the distortion isn't higher order or a hard awful clipping, you could hear 10% all day and never notice. To detect 10% it has to be above 500hz and a distortion pattern that is offendable. Because it takes almost no power at all to drive above 500hz, you won't be getting distortion in the 500-20khz range very often; even on a stereo that could be giving you lots of potentially higher order distortion in the bass region.

It all sounds weird because we quibble over things that have distortion that is 0.1%-0.0001% all day long. But low distortion figures are coincidental to good sound, more than causational. Essentially what it takes to achieve lower distortion is typically a benefit to sound - when done right. It should help phase, which we are very sensitive to. But there are many devices out there that hurt high frequency phase, but may improve distortion in general. There are many ways not to do it, too.

Brad, I've owned a half dozen SETs and had another half dozen in my system.

spraying loads of 2nd harmonic at high powers may be pleasing to you, but its not right and certainly not SOTA. I encourage you to borrow a First Watt and hear just when your systems start distorting- I'm pretty sure it will surprise you. On my 101db speakers, the 10 watt SIT2 didn't last 93dbs in my largish room.

my own 92db speakers with a very flat 8 ohms are getting 15 watt RMS peaks easily from my Ref75SE and have hit 30dbs on very high dynamic stuff (ie. Sheffield) at higher volume levels. So when I hear you saying SETs on Thiels is cool, I beg to disagree. Also, I've recently heard Maggie 3.7s and run a consistent 60 watts per channel on McIntosh 601s whereas you have suggested folks run SETs on them too. I honestly don't get it.

Anyways, that's all I'm going to say on Mike's thread - because honestly I'm more interested in reading his thoughts in his listening room vs. someone's predilections from half way across the world.

Nice way to try to snip off a rebuttal.. All I can say is that there was something wrong with your SIT if with a 101db speaker you couldn't get more than 93db at the listening position. I have a friend with 91db Thiels and when he had McIntosh MC501s he almost never went above 50 watts on those big blue meters...and he likes to listen very loud by my standards. I get those levels easily from my 93db Rigolettos and my 20 watt JJ-322 300B SET.

PvW makes it clear also that transistor amps don't seem to be able to swing this extra voltage on sudden transients, which then means a 10 watt SIT will run out of steam long before a 10 watt SET.

Audibility of 2nd harmonic is poor to begin with and gets poorer as the SPLs go up. 10% could very well be inaudible at over 100db.


Gentleman, and morricab:

You need to note that what the meter says isn't the amount of wattage that is turned into pure acoustical noise. While the meter are very nice indicators, they are not fully exploitative inclusion into how many decibels are created. They are literally just how much power the amplifier is using. Because the amplifier is part of a complex impedance that goes back to your substation and then all the way to your speaker drivers, the way each amplifier's power is used will vary.

Different amplifiers will respond differently depending on the type of noise coming from the AC and also the type of power conditioner/transformer they are plugged into. From there different amplifiers have their own current sinks in design as well, where they may be spending a fair bit of power to overcome themselves. And upon that different amplifiers respond differently to the reactive loads presented in speakers such as the capacitors in crossovers, the inductors in crossovers, the impedance of the drivers, the inductance of drivers, and even the style of wiring. Then consider there is a relationship all the way say, from the inductance of the speaker driver back to the substation...

The point being just because one amp shows you 15w, does not mean that it's the same decibels as another amps 15w. It could be, but it doesn't mean that it is. Sometimes you're just witness to the vast differences in design, and how they play out.

This doesn't include the differences in clipping and such, which is a whole other ball game that presents different abilities of listen-ability of volume... Anyways, there are lots of reasons why we aren't comparing apples to apples, per se, with all this talk about power. So I suggest that you merely keep note, not dictate "truth" out of it, for the subjects at hand.
 

andromedaaudio

VIP/Donor
Jan 23, 2011
8,469
2,821
1,400
Amsterdam holland
Its not only sensitivity but what also is extremely important is the impedance graph. .
Nominal impedance means ****.
Low impedance suck out means your speaker is draining the amp robbing IT dynamically
 

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
Its not only sensitivity but what also is extremely important is the impedance graph. .
Nominal impedance means ****.
Low impedance suck out means your speaker is draining the amp robbing IT dynamically

+1---Totally agree!
This seems to be something that many a'philes miss. So important in the overall SQ that you are going to hear. This is what non-plussed me when I read the review by Jason Victor Serinus of the Jadis JA200 Mk2 amps...and his concerns about his findings of those amps. Mismatched impedance ( incorrect setting at the amp transformers to begin with!) and low impedance from the speaker clearly draining the amp. Inexperience on the part of the reviewer to not recognize this condition...:(
 

cjfrbw

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,356
1,346
1,730
Pleasanton, CA
not sure who you are addressing. the big bad darts are ss minimalist champs. only 6 pieces in the signal path, and zero global feedback. and you can 'not' hear.......what you should not hear, and only what you should. no; it does not 'enhance' (add nice things) like an SET, but it's the real music other than that. and all of it. nothing stripped out and emancipated.

As I said, it would be an interesting DBT type exercise, although I have never heard of one being done, so everything remains in the realm of claims, desires and assertions.

I do think I have seen Dart circuit diagrams that use local feedback in the driver circuits. Global feedback comes from the output devices, which I think most designers like to avoid these days with SS. The original Dart amp got some high power ratings from a single pair of output devices per channel albeit bipolars.
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 25, 2015
6,029
1,501
550
Eastern WA
IMHO most of the times this type of comparison is unfair - in general the high power amplifiers have better power supplies, better mechanical structures , better selection of components and better building techniques. I remembers that Krell and Constellation Audio addressed this subject and clearly presented technical reasons why their higher power amplifiers sounded better, even at lower levels.

Surely if someone believes that all decent designed amps sound the same or prefers the sound quality of low power using fewer output devices, their words and explanations are useless. In the high-end we have mainly opinions about our preferences.

When I got the XLF's I was enthusiastic about going towards more simple, lower power amplifiers. I must say experiences were not a success, I am again it the high power (> 200W) zone.

He (cjfrbw) could be correct on some designs, but clearly not others. You've got the right idea micro. Typically larger amps use a brute force of overcoming things that would be a problem for a smaller amp with more restrictions. Sadly were you to try and use the larger amp to power extraordinarily inefficient speakers, it would exert the same problem as the smaller amp on more reasonable efficiency speakers.

I'll put it to you this way... most given amps will have a little bit of self current sinking. If your solution is to go from 100kuf to 10,000kuf capacitance and from 18ga to 10ga wire, you might subvert the problem (at least while using lower overall amounts of power the device can make).

But if you can work to correct those issues, you can make the smaller device sound the same. Electronics are complex. If I told you it's possible to make large speakers like Mike's sound powered well at reasonable volumes, with 10feet of 30ga wire (smaller than 0.4mm diameter) in the power path of a stereo amplifier, you might think I were nuts... But the reality is that the 10ft of 30ga wire makes a 1.0ohm resistor that can stop a resonation between an inductor and power supply capacitors, and there for provide more power, perhaps greatly so, than without the 30ga wire. And in this example I'm talking about sub 30v, not 600v.

There are lot of possibilities. However in general, micro is right that due to either lack of knowledge or caring, the larger amplifiers tend to sound better - if even only coincidentally - since the lack subjugation from subtle problems in smaller gear is their inherent forte.
 
Last edited:

DaveyF

Well-Known Member
Jul 31, 2010
6,129
181
458
La Jolla, Calif USA
This is quite interesting. Mike has, debatably, both a SOTA SS amp and a SOTA tube amp. Are you suggesting, and is Mike saying, that they still exhibit characteristics that we describe as either SS or tube sound? I would have thought that at this level, those characteristics would have pretty much merged or disappeared, with both amps sounding more or less similar and real, within today's technology limits and that differences will continue to diminish over time.

I assume that people agree that top level gear is sounding more and more real/convincing. Over time, does anyone think that the best SS and tube amps will truly converge and sound indistinguishable, or will there always be recognizable characteristics which we call SS or tube sound? Are these differences just intrinsic to the technology/typology?

It seems these differences would remain even if Mike had a speaker with say 110 dB efficiency. The Lamm would be less likely to run out of steam, but it would still do the bass, the holographic/palpable images, continuousness and musical flow better while the Dart still would be better with the detail and soundstage portrayal. These are the flavors or different presentations that Mike wants to switch between. Will we someday have an amp that can do it all, given an easy enough speaker load?

Peter, I'm not suggesting this is a fact, I'm stating that this is what I always hear when I compare the two topologies. So, if one were to say that the ss sound can and should bridge the gap towards tube and vice versa, then I would agree---in theory. So far, this has not been my experience.
Last Saturday, I had the pleasure of hearing another great tube amp ( well except for the fact that one could boil eggs on top of it :rolleyes: ). This amp was the new AirTight 2001 Reference stereo model. Utilizing 6550's and with a separate power supply box, the amp sounded wonderful. Much more interesting (to me) to listen to than the new D'agostino mono's or the Dart's that I have heard. Not to say that these amps are in anyway bad, just not what I feel elicits the more 'realistic' sound that I am looking for. So personally I am in the tube camp...and once in awhile in the ss camp--IF I want to hear more low end slam and authority. All depends on the music I'm trying to playback. Which is why I totally understand where Mike is coming from with his desire to have both topologies in his system.
 

KeithR

VIP/Donor
May 7, 2010
5,156
2,821
1,898
Encino, CA
morricab is correct. Sorry Keith, but the reality is that so long as the distortion isn't higher order or a hard awful clipping, you could hear 10% all day and never notice. To detect 10% it has to be above 500hz and a distortion pattern that is offendable. Because it takes almost no power at all to drive above 500hz, you won't be getting distortion in the 500-20khz range very often; even on a stereo that could be giving you lots of potentially higher order distortion in the bass region.
.

Thank you for the thoughtful response Folsom. As I mentioned, a single ended transistor amp had notable break up at 95db on pink noise in my system. This has a similar distortion pattern to a 300B amplifier per Pass' SIT white paper. Yes, tubes distort (which is generally speaking more pleasing and warm, yes?) and clip more softly, but I wouldn't want any of that in a SOTA system (especially when designers attribute SET magic to low wattage output).

And speaking of audibility, my ears don't prefer second harmonic distortion as i have concluded from my own listening tests with over a dozen amplifiers. I close my eyes under SET amplification and usually my mind starts swirling from the holography! I must prefer 3rd harmonic like most push-pull and SS topologies. I have no problem with others preferring SETs and am happy for them.

Anyways- I'm sorry Mike. Back to your opinions and viewpoints with these two stellar amps of differing topologies.
 

cjfrbw

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,356
1,346
1,730
Pleasanton, CA
"There are lot of possibilities. However in general, micro is right that due to either lack of knowledge or caring, the larger amplifiers tend to sound better - if even only coincidentally - since the lack subjugation from subtle problems in smaller gear is their inherent forte."

I think there's the ancient rub that has been pissed and moaned for audio eternity. The behemoth amp that flogs it's way through caps, coils, drivers, and complex impedances with high slew rates also strangles the first watt?

I don't know that that HAS to be true. My high power VFET amps sound glorious and hypnotic, but I do think the lower powered one (Pass DIY design) sounds best. However, that is on a panel speaker with a fixed impedance. Also, the older amps have a more complex driver circuit with higher feedback. The TAN 8550 has been largely rebuilt and re-capped. Most of the SS high power amps of conventional design I have heard at shows I still don't like much, they put out the steel daggers somewhere.

After hearing ML3s on Steve Williams system, I heard the identical speakers playing reel to reel tapes at a local Philip O'Hanlon demo, with the Luxman Class A mono blocks. There was no comparison, the Luxmans just sounded dry and a bit brittle by comparison, even though the Luxmans had much higher nominal power.



One of the reason that I went with SET originally was because nothing duplicated the incredibly open, fluid, linear sound and tonal texture that I heard from them. However, directly heated triode driver with VFET comes close with more incisiveness and inner detail, without losing tonality. VFETs, however, are an entirely different type of device than the bipolar or even Mofets and they go deeper into the tone.
 
Last edited:

RogerD

VIP/Donor
May 23, 2010
3,734
319
565
BiggestLittleCity
SS can let the music soar with a effortless aplomb.
SS can project the music out into the listening environment
SS can reproduce the recording with a realistic soundstage
SS can produce a realistic frequency range Top to bottom
SS can produce a soundfield that is both holographic,3D,and bordering on 4D...spooky and magical
SS can render great power, very nuanced and a very involving presentation with a great faithfulness to the original recording.
Ok what are SET amplifier attributes that are not mentioned above.
 

morricab

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2014
9,491
5,044
1,228
Switzerland
Thank you for the thoughtful response Folsom. As I mentioned, a single ended transistor amp had notable break up at 95db on pink noise in my system. This has a similar distortion pattern to a 300B amplifier per Pass' SIT white paper. Yes, tubes distort (which is generally speaking more pleasing and warm, yes?) and clip more softly, but I wouldn't want any of that in a SOTA system (especially when designers attribute SET magic to low wattage output).

And speaking of audibility, my ears don't prefer second harmonic distortion as i have concluded from my own listening tests with over a dozen amplifiers. I close my eyes under SET amplification and usually my mind starts swirling from the holography! I must prefer 3rd harmonic like most push-pull and SS topologies. I have no problem with others preferring SETs and am happy for them.

Anyways- I'm sorry Mike. Back to your opinions and viewpoints with these two stellar amps of differing topologies.

https://support.biamp.com/Calculators/Power_Draw-Heat_Dissipation_Calculator/Duty_cycle

As you can see pink noise is a very difficult stress on an amplifier so a resonable conclusion cannot be drawn from the fact that the amp struggled short of its rated power with a pink noise signal.
 

morricab

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2014
9,491
5,044
1,228
Switzerland
not sure who you are addressing. the big bad darts are ss minimalist champs. only 6 pieces in the signal path, and zero global feedback. and you can 'not' hear.......what you should not hear, and only what you should. no; it does not 'enhance' (add nice things) like an SET, but it's the real music other than that. and all of it. nothing stripped out and emancipated.

Simple circuits, with large, low impedance power supplies (arguably more important than the size) have often been at least decent sounding to my ears.
 

morricab

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2014
9,491
5,044
1,228
Switzerland
Peter, I'm not suggesting this is a fact, I'm stating that this is what I always hear when I compare the two topologies. So, if one were to say that the ss sound can and should bridge the gap towards tube and vice versa, then I would agree---in theory. So far, this has not been my experience.
Last Saturday, I had the pleasure of hearing another great tube amp ( well except for the fact that one could boil eggs on top of it :rolleyes: ). This amp was the new AirTight 2001 Reference stereo model. Utilizing 6550's and with a separate power supply box, the amp sounded wonderful. Much more interesting (to me) to listen to than the new D'agostino mono's or the Dart's that I have heard. Not to say that these amps are in anyway bad, just not what I feel elicits the more 'realistic' sound that I am looking for. So personally I am in the tube camp...and once in awhile in the ss camp--IF I want to hear more low end slam and authority. All depends on the music I'm trying to playback. Which is why I totally understand where Mike is coming from with his desire to have both topologies in his system.

I have not heard a so-called convergence either. Each side gets somewhat more refined but in their own track...I think it is inherent the topologies and general complexity differences (Pass First Watt amps notwithstanding).
 

morricab

Well-Known Member
Apr 25, 2014
9,491
5,044
1,228
Switzerland
IMHO most of the times this type of comparison is unfair - in general the high power amplifiers have better power supplies, better mechanical structures , better selection of components and better building techniques. I remembers that Krell and Constellation Audio addressed this subject and clearly presented technical reasons why their higher power amplifiers sounded better, even at lower levels.

Surely if someone believes that all decent designed amps sound the same or prefers the sound quality of low power using fewer output devices, their words and explanations are useless. In the high-end we have mainly opinions about our preferences.

When I got the XLF's I was enthusiastic about going towards more simple, lower power amplifiers. I must say experiences were not a success, I am again it the high power (> 200W) zone.

Actually, most lower power Class A amps have significantly larger power supplies for a given power output than a much higher output Class AB amp. I would argue that probably also a Krell KSA 50 has a larger, relative to the output power, power supply capacity than its bigger brothers and for sure more than something like a Bryston 4BST.
 

Folsom

VIP/Donor
Oct 25, 2015
6,029
1,501
550
Eastern WA
I am with you Keith, I don't like an abundance of 2HD (2nd harmonic distortion). But I'll take a tiny bit of it over 7th, any day. To me it doesn't sound real when it is gobbed on.

I think it is relevant to discussing ML3 vs. 458. Mike does experience soft clipping on occasion, but it isn't being thrown in his face. All he knows is it doesn't sound as loud at a few particular moments. So one has to ask what is important, that little bit of occasional SPL, or the overall experience? I think Mike's purchase of the ML3's is enough to show that he has interest beyond purely crest factor. I doubt they would last long in his system if they clipped harshly, early. Also it is possible that the ML3's use power more efficiently, in that their 30w go farther than 30w on the 458, as in what the speaker actually "sees".

Thinking about it you realize that the ML3 has output transformers, and these make the amplifier more indifferent to the reactance of the load. While this can limit feedback use, it also negates a lot of the necessity in design for feedback, because the amplifier sees a more linear load across the transformer than it would with straight wire. Instead of sinking power into a reactance issue, it is able to provide somewhat indifferent power.

And furthermore the higher operating voltage lends itself to reducing problems within the topology, because it naturally reduces complex impedance issues through the use of higher resistance resistor & parts that are appropriate for the type of amp.
 
Last edited:

cjfrbw

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,356
1,346
1,730
Pleasanton, CA
I have not heard a so-called convergence either. Each side gets somewhat more refined but in their own track...I think it is inherent the topologies and general complexity differences (Pass First Watt amps notwithstanding).

I got a First Watt M2 (push pull class a, no feedback) which is about as simple a circuit as it gets. I got it as a backup amp rather than a main amp. The input jfet circuit is only an impedance buffer, but the rest is a single transformer doing voltage amplification into a single pair of push pull MOSFET, no feedback. I think I would rather hear the distortion of the output devices, anyway, than the distortion of either global or local feedback.

I put the M2 in my system sporadically for short periods but never at length. It did some things very well, but was a bit "wonky". I almost sold it. I finally put it in for a full audition and left it on for a week. The wonkiness disappeared, and it became quite an amazing "little" amplifier, although I personally don't find 25 watts@8ohms class A to be low powered. It has the distinction of bearing no comparison to anything but itself rather than the usual "tube vs. SS" stuff. It has an organic, interwoven wholistic presence with great 3d soundstaging and plenty of see around the corner details. On vocals, it nearly hearkens to the mighty Lamm ML3, itself in the holographic thing. It has a flashbulb lighting of the instruments when there are lots of voices on stage. It also has a gloss and sheen without glare that makes massed strings sound very vivid and natural.

Nice sales pitch for SS, Mr. Pass, in the M2 First Watt model.
 
Last edited:

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing