Ron’s New System

[DasguteOhr]

A monster in its time!

Ohh yes, i never so much ringemitter sanken transistors in one amp 60 ampere output current no problem one of that can deliever theoretically, 15 amps, 32 pieces are installed.
Most of the time, amplifiers like this can hardly sound good and refined with so much high power, but this one is an exception.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

A monster in its time!

My first high end amp was the ARC D400 MkII in 1994. Bought it used. A brute. Used it with Wilson WP 3/2’s

Back then I did not know what I did not know. My next amp was the ML 335 stereo w/WP 5.1’s which was ‘nice’. Maybe better than my next amps, the ML 33h’s

 

[Ron Resnick]

There are transistor combinations that can do this. For example, Klyne 7lx preamp with Pass Aleph0 mono amps. In combination with a Martin Logan CLS. I have rarely heard such clean liquid, high-resolution, grain-free sound.

I had Martin-Logan loudspeakers for about 26 years. There was no solid-state amplification on Martin-Logan electrostatic panels that I did not find fatiguing and "dry."

We must have different definitions of the term "liquid."

That's what makes this a subjective and fascinating hobby!

 

[microstrip]

I had Martin-Logan loudspeakers for about 26 years. There was no solid-state amplification on Martin-Logan electrostatic panels that I did not find fatiguing and "dry."

I had your opinion until I listened to the Prodigy with Electrocompaniet. But the preamplfiier was ARC tube.

 

[Elliot G.]

I had Martin-Logan loudspeakers for about 26 years. There was no solid-state amplification on Martin-Logan electrostatic panels that I did not find fatiguing and "dry."

We must have different definitions of the term "liquid."

That's what makes this a subjective and fascinating hobby!

Just to be a contrarian did you ever hear them with ML-2's, designed to work on Quads btw. I owned ML, Stax, quads, Acoustats ( 2 different ones) 4 pairs of Maggie Tympani ( yes I know they arent electrostatics) , very familiar with the Beveridge and Servo Static too and for the most part I agree that these devices sounded better when the amps glowed in the dark. I do not however think the divide is clear today as the SS and hybrid products are way better and in my opinion at least one is better for me.

 

[DasguteOhr]

I had Martin-Logan loudspeakers for about 26 years. There was no solid-state amplification on Martin-Logan electrostatic panels that I did not find fatiguing and "dry."

We must have different definitions of the term "liquid."

That's what makes this a subjective and fascinating hobby!

These are two adjectives I wouldn't use to describe Klyne preamplifiers or Pass Aleph 0 amplifiers. Later, Klyne preamp was replaced by Pimped Audio Research Reference One. Not my wisest decision in my hi-fi history. It couldn't match the homogeneity of the Klyne. Believe me or not, read what owners of Klyne or Pass Aleph amps around the world have to say. One person can be wrong, but many cannot.
P.S
The first krell ksa 50 works pretty fine with ML Speakers( big soundstage)
P.P.S
Perhaps Dan D'Agostino's finest creation for me

 

[bonzo75]

I found Gamut m200 and Concert Fidelity power amps to be much better on Martin Logans than the Audio Research Ref 110 that I owned, and more premium ones AR that I auditioned. The best way to add valves into Martin Logans was via dac and phono, rather than pre and power.

 

[Ron Resnick]

did you ever hear them with ML-2's

At first I thought you meant Lamm ML2s (I love Lamm on an appropriate speaker) and I was going to reply "17 watts on Martin-Logan CLS?"

I do not recall if I ever heard Mark Levinson on CLS. Mark Levinson was very popular back in that era, so I probably did, but I don't remember it.

 

[Elliot G.]

At first I thought you meant Lamm ML2s (I love Lamm on an appropriate speaker) and I was going to reply "17 watts on Martin-Logan CLS?"

I do not recall if I ever heard Mark Levinson on CLS. Mark Levinson was very popular back in that era, so I probably did, but I don't remember it.

ML-2's were expensive and very popular in a certain cultish way. It was the ML answer to tubes. They were very cool since back then the ML brand was all black and mostly thin and very exotic for the time.

 

[jbrrp1]

At first I thought you meant Lamm ML2s (I love Lamm on an appropriate speaker) and I was going to reply "17 watts on Martin-Logan CLS?"

I do not recall if I ever heard Mark Levinson on CLS. Mark Levinson was very popular back in that era, so I probably did, but I don't remember it.

Yeah, not a wimpy 17 watts - - 25 instead!

 

[PeterA]

These are two adjectives I wouldn't use to describe Klyne preamplifiers or Pass Aleph 0 amplifiers. Later, Klyne preamp was replaced by Pimped Audio Research Reference One. Not my wisest decision in my hi-fi history. It couldn't match the homogeneity of the Klyne. Believe me or not, read what owners of Klyne or Pass Aleph amps around the world have to say. One person can be wrong, but many cannot.

I still have my Pass Aleph 3. I wish I had never sold my Aleph 2 monos.

 

[PeterA]

Yeah, not a wimpy 17 watts - - 25 instead!

It’s 18 actually, but you want speakers that can be driven to loud levels using only 2or3 of those 18 watts.

 

[jbrrp1]

It’s 18 actually, but you want speakers that can be driven to loud levels using only 2or3 of those 18 watts.

A Mark Levinson ML-2? 25W class A, IIRC.

 

[Ron Resnick]

This morning I unpacked Stavros' generous goodie box.

I am going to start with a fancy Mullard 5AR4, as per Brad's strong recommendation. (Stavros very kindly gave me a fancy NOS Toshiba 5AR4.)

Stavros sent me Valvo E280Fs and Telefunken E280Fs. I'm going to start with the Valvos.

Thank you, Stavros!

 

[Ron Resnick]

 

[PeterA]

A Mark Levinson ML-2? 25W class A, IIRC.

Yes, I was referring to the Lamm ML2, not the ML ML-2. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[the sound of Tao]

the goal for me is not to maximize liquidity in and of itself. it's realism.

Very much agree… I tend to look at it more as finding an appropriate balance of fluidity and angularity… music isn’t always pretty, much of music is acute and coarse and even grungy… too much fluidity and it then moves away from realism.

Maximising fluidity seens much more of a sound as you like it kind of move to me.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Very much agree… I tend to look at it more as finding an appropriate balance of fluidity and angularity… music isn’t always pretty, much of music is acute and coarse and even grungy… too much fluidity and it then moves away from realism.

Maximising fluidity seens much more of a sound as you like it kind of move to me.

Hi!

The train of thought I think might be a little bit off track. I feel that Mike inadvertently slightly mischaracterized what I was trying to say, and now you are now responding to that slight mischaracterization.

As I responded to Mike in Post #8,287.

Liquidity is for me a "sonic cue." It is not an end goal in and of itself. My end goal is "making it seem as realistic and believable as possible that there is a live person in my room, singing to me live."

 

[PeterA]

Very much agree… I tend to look at it more as finding an appropriate balance of fluidity and angularity… music isn’t always pretty, much of music is acute and coarse and even grungy… too much fluidity and it then moves away from realism.

Maximising fluidity seens much more of a sound as you like it kind of move to me.

I agree. It’s a little bit like always wanting the musician to be in your room in front of you rather than you imagining sitting in the space where the musician was playing his music when he was recorded.

 

[the sound of Tao]

Without spinning to deeply into semantics Ron I think it’s the notion of maximising fluidity as a goal that may lean into something more as a preference tilting or highlighting within the spectrum of potential characteristics in both context and spirit.

So for me both fluidity and angularity are both required and I’d just think in terms of going for appropriate balance of characteristics rather than maximising one characteristic over the other might lead to a better portrayal of realism. But this is just the way I view it.