What’s the world’s best 2 watt amplifier?

[godofwealth]

Don't quote me but In Europe around 25,000 euro and closer to $30k in the US.

It’s hard for me to think of a 2 watt amplifier that costs 30 grand. The $ per watt ratio is way too high. I am really happy with my Triode Labs 45 monoblocks that cost about one tenth of this. Sadly this Canadian company is going to close its doors as the cost of parts and labor post pandemic is making their business model impractical in an expensive city like Toronto. Used SETs are the way to explore a range of different designs. There’s a nice Yamamoto SET on Audiomart for around $3500. Art Dudley thought highly of it.

 

[christoph]

Don't quote me but In Europe around 25,000 euro and closer to $30k in the US.

Thanks, but oopsy

 

[acousticsguru]

Thanks, but oopsy

I love low-powered SET amps, but at 1.8 Watt at 25-30k, in order to be considered "reasonably priced" in my book, it would have to be, indisputably, the greatest sounding amp in the history of audio.

Greetings from Switzerland, David.

 

[godofwealth]

Nothing in hifi generates as much controversy as the opinion that amplifiers have a “sound”. They are supposed to act like “straight wire with gain”. Yet as many of us have discovered, even the best measuring amplifiers leave a lot to be desired when it comes to how they sound. The humble SET, much derided for its poor measurements, seems to still provide a greater degree of musical engagement when combined with the right loudspeakers. I keep a variety of solid state and digital amplifiers at home for comparison. I have a fairly pricey Mola Mola Kaluga that has state of the art specs. But in terms of its sound, it seems to lack the magic of SETs.

 

[Atmasphere]

digital amplifiers

If by this you mean class D, class D is an analog process. Its a switching technology, but not digital at all.

 

[godofwealth]

If by this you mean class D, class D is an analog process. Its a switching technology, but not digital at all.

The Mola Mola is class D, but I have a true digital Lyngdorf pulse width modulated amp as well. No analog conversion. Input is only digital and there is no traditional DAC in it. The PWM bitstream is converted to analog by a passive RC network. I wish I could say it sounds great. It sounds sterile to my ears.

 

[gleeds]

Ralph, please elaborate on why amplifiers of different topologies sound different. My experience indicates there is a physiological component I will call a "relaxation response" where a certain conveyance of the electronically reproduced signal to our ears (harmonically, dynamically and in the time domain) one to sink deeper into the music. I am am also of the belief that a lack of high efficiency speakers mated to compatible amplifiers is at play here for those who love these systems which having heard a number of very good ones makes total sense to me.

As an engineer, builder and someone intimately experienced with amplifier and loudspeaker you are clearly qualified to offer a perspective. Thanks!

 

[Atmasphere]

The Mola Mola is class D, but I have a true digital Lyngdorf pulse width modulated amp as well. No analog conversion. Input is only digital and there is no traditional DAC in it. The PWM bitstream is converted to analog by a passive RC network. I wish I could say it sounds great. It sounds sterile to my ears.

FWIW Dept.: Pulse Width Modulation is an analog encoding scheme that's been around since the tube era. You can convert from digital to PWM (PWM is a very typical encoding scheme for a class D amp); so this sounds like a class D with digital input to me, regardless of what the marketing text says.

Regardless, I don't see why there should be a controversy about the 'sound' of amps except for human nature. The simple fact is that harmonics of fundamental tones sculpt the sound of musical instruments; if an amplifier has distortion (and all do) that distortion further sculpts the sound of those instruments. Too often I see the comment that (paraphrasing) 'this distortion component is at -80dB so is inaudible' as if its somehow a separate signal from the audio signal itself. Its not separate and its a modifier of the audio signal.

Our ears respond to harmonics by assigning tonality (as a result, assigns tonality to all forms of distortion, including IMD and aliasing).

The tricky bit is that measurement has gotten so good that we can now predict the sound of an amplifier from the measurements, if all the measurements were actually made. Both the measurement and subjectivist guys seem to hate this!

******************

Music is processed in the limbic portions of the brain. This is why we often feel a toe-tapping or movement response. But if the brain detects a problem, it unconsciously moves the processing to the cerebral cortex. Things like distortion, the speed of the presentation, FR errors and the like can all trip this tipping point. At that point a lot of the emotional involvement is lost.

Topologies sound different because the kind of non-linearity in the topology is different and so generates a different harmonic spectrum. As an example this is why I've been an advocate of fully differential balanced circuits, since they generate what is mathematically a cubic non-linearity. This is because even ordered harmonics are cancelled throughout the circuit, resulting in a dominant 3rd harmonic, with succeeding harmonics falling off on an exponential curve as the order of the harmonic is increased. That 3rd will be at a level slightly less than the same harmonic is seen in an SET. SETs generate a quadratic non-linearity so the 2nd is dominant. They too can have the harmonics fall off on an exponential curve but one that has a different exponent. Put another way a cubic non-linearity is inherently lower distortion since distortion is not compounded as much from stage to stage throughout the circuit. When you combine both non-linearities, as seen in PP power amps with a single-ended voltage amplifier, you get a prominent 5th as well (see Norman Crowhurst; we've known this for a good 60 years or more...).

If higher ordered harmonics are not masked by lower orders, then they will contribute to harshness and brightness. This has been the sin of solid state amps since their inception and is why tubes are still around. But its an engineering issue, not an inherent failing of semiconductors, to sort that out and get it right.

 

[gleeds]

FWIW Dept.: Pulse Width Modulation is an analog encoding scheme that's been around since the tube era. You can convert from digital to PWM (PWM is a very typical encoding scheme for a class D amp); so this sounds like a class D with digital input to me, regardless of what the marketing text says.

Regardless, I don't see why there should be a controversy about the 'sound' of amps except for human nature. The simple fact is that harmonics of fundamental tones sculpt the sound of musical instruments; if an amplifier has distortion (and all do) that distortion further sculpts the sound of those instruments. Too often I see the comment that (paraphrasing) 'this distortion component is at -80dB so is inaudible' as if its somehow a separate signal from the audio signal itself. Its not separate and its a modifier of the audio signal.

Our ears respond to harmonics by assigning tonality (as a result, assigns tonality to all forms of distortion, including IMD and aliasing).

The tricky bit is that measurement has gotten so good that we can now predict the sound of an amplifier from the measurements, if all the measurements were actually made. Both the measurement and subjectivist guys seem to hate this!

******************

Music is processed in the limbic portions of the brain. This is why we often feel a toe-tapping or movement response. But if the brain detects a problem, it unconsciously moves the processing to the cerebral cortex. Things like distortion, the speed of the presentation, FR errors and the like can all trip this tipping point. At that point a lot of the emotional involvement is lost.

Topologies sound different because the kind of non-linearity in the topology is different and so generates a different harmonic spectrum. As an example this is why I've been an advocate of fully differential balanced circuits, since they generate what is mathematically a cubic non-linearity. This is because even ordered harmonics are cancelled throughout the circuit, resulting in a dominant 3rd harmonic, with succeeding harmonics falling off on an exponential curve as the order of the harmonic is increased. That 3rd will be at a level slightly less than the same harmonic is seen in an SET. SETs generate a quadratic non-linearity so the 2nd is dominant. They too can have the harmonics fall off on an exponential curve but one that has a different exponent. Put another way a cubic non-linearity is inherently lower distortion since distortion is not compounded as much from stage to stage throughout the circuit. When you combine both non-linearities, as seen in PP power amps with a single-ended voltage amplifier, you get a prominent 5th as well (see Norman Crowhurst; we've known this for a good 60 years or more...).

If higher ordered harmonics are not masked by lower orders, then they will contribute to harshness and brightness. This has been the sin of solid state amps since their inception and is why tubes are still around. But its an engineering issue, not an inherent failing of semiconductors, to sort that out and get it right.

Thanks for sharing your insights, Ralph! We hear what we hear - even if we don't know exactly where it's coming from. I suppose it is part of the fun and also part of the mystery.

 

[cal3713]

The Mola Mola is class D, but I have a true digital Lyngdorf pulse width modulated amp as well. No analog conversion. Input is only digital and there is no traditional DAC in it. The PWM bitstream is converted to analog by a passive RC network. I wish I could say it sounds great. It sounds sterile to my ears.

I too tried to replace a SET with a Lyngdorf. Honestly, it made me kind of dizzy, like the sound had been put through a blender. I had the same problem with the PS Audio Directstream DAC. Something about that digital manipulation just doesn't work for me. Bizzare.

 

[Atmasphere]

I too tried to replace a SET with a Lyngdorf. Honestly, it made me kind of dizzy, like the sound had been put through a blender. I had the same problem with the PS Audio Directstream DAC. Something about that digital manipulation just doesn't work for me. Bizzare.

I had that too FWIW...

 

[Kcin]

I haven't found the best 2w amplifier mostly because I can't live with the kind of speakers that an amp like that would demand.

I do have to acknowledge that a good SET on the right speakers - when it works- is something special. I found that for more real world speakers that I had to give up a little bit to stay with a SET that I could live with in terms of harmonic enjoyment and bass control such that it is with SET.

I chose the Wyetech 211 Topaz. With some further mods it is a really remarkable piece. If one is inclined and they do come up from time to time-- it is well worth the experience.

Otherwise I am all over the place with amps, I have the Purifi here and run my ESLs with a Futterman , Marantz Model 2's ( very nice in triode) and my custom direct drive for the Beveridges. The Bedini 25/25 gets thrown in too.

I must say for modern amps in SS I really like the big AudioNet and for an integrated I was blown away by the very latest Vinnie Rossi and AudioNet Humbolt.

Perhaps my favourite amp is the Tenor 175s it is a masterpiece as far as I am concerned.

 

[godofwealth]

I use a variety of amplifiers with my Quads (I have 3 pairs, including an original ESL 57, a 2805 and a 2905). For the 2905s, my favorite amplifier is a push pull 300B SET, the JJ 322, which puts out about 15-20 watts using a pair of 300Bs per channel. I use a Quicksilver 8417 for my Quad 57s (and the original Quad 303, which was designed for the 57s, and still remains the most musical solid state amplifier I have heard, 60 years after it was released).

But my primary speakers now are a pair of Klipsch La Scalas, which I drive with a variety of SETs, including a Triode Labs 45 mono block that satisfies all my musical desires. Driven by the right SET, the La Scalas are stunningly musical and far more dynamic than any Quad I have owned or heard in 35 years. The Tractrix horn is really something special, and it has an ease of presentation and a sound staging that puts the Quads to shame (although Quads retain their primary advantage of sheer coherence at limited SPLs). I think horns are immensely satisfying if you use the appropriate SET. For the 105 dB efficient La Scalas, 1 watt is plenty — it’s actually too much. I’d love to hear a 100 milliwatt amplifier! The world is full of 1000 watt amplifiers that sound horrible. Can someone please design a 100 milliwatt amplifier? One that sounds musical. The 45 is a great tube, puts out 1.5 watts or so, and more musical sounding to my ears than the revered 300Bs. Even the Western Electric 300B, which I have four of, doesn’t sound quite as enthralling to my ears as a pair of NOS RCA 45s. The 45 may be the sleeper SET tube of the century, while everyone runs after the 300B.

 

[Atmasphere]

The 45 is a great tube, puts out 1.5 watts or so, and more musical sounding to my ears than the revered 300Bs. Even the Western Electric 300B, which I have four of, doesn’t sound quite as enthralling to my ears as a pair of NOS RCA 45s. The 45 may be the sleeper SET tube of the century, while everyone runs after the 300B.

Its not the tube that sounds so good, its the output transformer. Due to the lower power, an OPT for a 45 has wider bandwidth. One for a 300b is usually compromised WRT bandwidth. It might be good to 20Hz but if you really want an amp to get bass right, it really should be 5Hz.

 

[Salectric]

I use a variety of amplifiers with my Quads (I have 3 pairs, including an original ESL 57, a 2805 and a 2905). For the 2905s, my favorite amplifier is a push pull 300B SET, the JJ 322, which puts out about 15-20 watts using a pair of 300Bs per channel. I use a Quicksilver 8417 for my Quad 57s (and the original Quad 303, which was designed for the 57s, and still remains the most musical solid state amplifier I have heard, 60 years after it was released).

But my primary speakers now are a pair of Klipsch La Scalas, which I drive with a variety of SETs, including a Triode Labs 45 mono block that satisfies all my musical desires. Driven by the right SET, the La Scalas are stunningly musical and far more dynamic than any Quad I have owned or heard in 35 years. The Tractrix horn is really something special, and it has an ease of presentation and a sound staging that puts the Quads to shame (although Quads retain their primary advantage of sheer coherence at limited SPLs). I think horns are immensely satisfying if you use the appropriate SET. For the 105 dB efficient La Scalas, 1 watt is plenty — it’s actually too much. I’d love to hear a 100 milliwatt amplifier! The world is full of 1000 watt amplifiers that sound horrible. Can someone please design a 100 milliwatt amplifier? One that sounds musical. The 45 is a great tube, puts out 1.5 watts or so, and more musical sounding to my ears than the revered 300Bs. Even the Western Electric 300B, which I have four of, doesn’t sound quite as enthralling to my ears as a pair of NOS RCA 45s. The 45 may be the sleeper SET tube of the century, while everyone runs after the 300B.

You need to try a 46 SE amp. With the right OPT (I use an Electra-Print partial silver) and the right input/driver (I use a 417a with IT coupling), you may well retire your 45 amp for good.

 

[godofwealth]

46 tubes are not as easy to find as 45s in my experience. Shindo and a few other SET companies have a penchant for using exotic tubes. But unlike 300Bs or 45s, a lot of other tubes are hard to find. I really like my KR 242s in my Lampi DAC, but that triode tube is almost unobtanium.

 

[Salectric]

46 tubes are not as easy to find as 45s in my experience.

I just checked EBay and there are a number of 46 tubes for sale. It’s true 46s are no longer a flat-out bargain like they were a few years ago but they’re still available.

 

[godofwealth]

Looks like the 46 is not a triode tube. Good summary here. Thanks for the recommendation. I’ll have to see about acquiring one.

Glow in the Dark Audio - Single Ended Type 46 by Oliver Sayes

Glow in the Dark Audio showcases Kevin Davis’ personal collection of small-scale, DIY and one of a kind hifi audio gear, with a focus on single ended and push pull tube amplifiers and full range open baffle speakers.

glowinthedarkaudio.com

 

[Solypsa]

Not much is a bargain anymore, but my Sayes 46 tube amp is surely one of them

 

[godofwealth]

Looking at the linearity plots of the 46, it looks more like a pentode tube. That would explain a difference in sound with the 45.

https://frank.pocnet.net/sheets/021/4/46.pdf