Best Tube Amplifiers under $10k?

[NewAudio]

I am looking for a system max $10k (used preferred and <$10k used is OK for higher prices amps)..

This is my short list so far. I would really appreciate any thoughts/experiences around my list or if you have any further suggestions. I will have 96 db sensitivity speakers and also would like to be able to drive the speakers really loud for a party or simply if I feel in the mood!

My bias is SET (I like their sound) with power > 40 wpc. But the Moscode for example looks good if someone can say it stacks up to a SET amp. I would buy the Lamm ML1.1 if everyone didn't gush so much over the ML2.x.

thanks very much, Brian

Amplifier wpc New Used Comment
1 Von Gaylord Nirvana monoblocks 110 $8,500 $4,000 Best buy for the price?
2 Lamm ML1.1 monoblocks 90 24000 9000 Reviewers all like ML2.x "a little better"
3 Lamm ML2.0 or 2.1 monoblocks 18 30000 9000 18 wpc may not work for the loud party?
4 Audio Aero Prestige monoblocks 40 25000 8000 Mostly sold in Europe, really good reputation and good looking amps.
5 Rogue Audio M-180 monoblocks 180 5500 Reviewers (well 1 at least) likes ultralinear mode better?
6 JL2 Signature Mk 2 Stereo Amplifier 100 17000 ? Massive amp full of 6550 tubes (well 16)
7 Moscode 402au tube hybrid amp 200 6500 Hybrid - much newer version of my old Moscode 300.

 

[JackD201]

I'd look into these other manufacturers too

SET - 40+ wpc you'd be looking at paralleled 211s and 845s mostly. Maybe the odd T1610*

deHavilland
Cary*
Coincident
KR Audio*
Antique Sound Labs

Push Pull - I like the smaller amps of

ARC
C-J

 

[NewAudio]

Thanks very much. I shall Google away at those amps. KR Audio does have an interesting look to it. Is the * your top choices or..?

On Lamm - any thoughts you can share? Is the ML1.1 at $8-9k used a steal or does one so much miss the musicality or such of the ML2.x? I have also heard claims the ML2.0 is better than the ML2.1 but very anecdotal and not with a real direct comparison test.

Brian

 

[jap]

Welcome to WBF.

With 96 db speakers, these should be on your list:

http://www.decware.com/newsite/MYSTERY.html

http://www.decware.com/newsite/TORII.htm

 

[JackD201]

Thanks very much. I shall Google away at those amps. KR Audio does have an interesting look to it. Is the * your top choices or..?

On Lamm - any thoughts you can share? Is the ML1.1 at $8-9k used a steal or does one so much miss the musicality or such of the ML2.x? I have also heard claims the ML2.0 is better than the ML2.1 but very anecdotal and not with a real direct comparison test.

Brian

Hi Brian,

The * denotes the use of the T1610 tube in some models. It is a triode that can do 50watts all by its lonesome.

I think a used ML1.1 is a steal but I am biased What it is however, is a bit fussy. It is not a fire and forget affair so will need a quality multimeter to keep its bias and PP balance spot on. If the latter isn't an issue, then it is a very good amplifier that while not as breathtaking as the 2 or 2.1 in the mids, still sounds more like its sibling than it doesn't. I still own a pair and I am not giving it up A very strong piece of advice is to be absolutely sure which 6c33 goes where. I do not recommend getting tubes from anybody else other than Lamm. When time comes to retube, you will have to give your serial numbers after which tubes earmarked for your specific amps will be sent to you. The cost isn't much more than 6c33s sourced elsewhere but they will last longer. That tube is not the paragon of quality control so best to avoid failures by getting pre-selected ones. Trust me I speak from experience having suffered the foolishness of "false economy". I suffered quite a few tube failures from generic Ulyanov replacement tubes on both my Lamm and BAT amps. Oh, BAT is also a good option

As far as the ML2.1s vs ML2.0s go, the 2.1s are more extended and many equate this with being "less SET like". On the other hand, others think it is an improvement.

 

[zztop7]

Interested
zz

 

[microstrip]

IMHO, when you consider buying a tube amplifier you should also consider its partnering preamplifier, unless you specifically prefer to avoid using it.

 

[KeithR]

what speakers do you have? was curious to impedance.

you really are looking at PSET at 40 watts, but the old Bel Canto i40 is supposed to be very good. I recommend Melody 845 amps in your price range- but they MUST be retubed.

KR Audio's Kronzilla would also work- I believe there is one used on the 'gon inside your budget. KR doesn't sound like a traditional SET, so depends on what you want. KR's biggest issue are tubes (only source for them)

 

[caesar]

Arc Ref 75 should be a strong audition option.

For speakers that don't need the power, I believe it sounds better, than the bigger, more complex brothers in the line up. And by better, I mean they disappear into the music.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Arc Ref 75 should be a strong audition option.

For speakers that don't need the power, I believe it sounds better, than the bigger, more complex brothers in the line up. And by better, I mean they disappear into the music.

+1, the real honey of the line.

 

[KeithR]

deHavilland KE50s also might work well. They are around 40 watts triode mode.

 

[flez007]

deHavilland KE50s also might work well. They are around 40 watts triode mode.

1 mas

 

[NewAudio]

Hi Brian,

The * denotes the use of the T1610 tube in some models. It is a triode that can do 50watts all by its lonesome.

I think a used ML1.1 is a steal but I am biased What it is however, is a bit fussy. It is not a fire and forget affair so will need a quality multimeter to keep its bias and PP balance spot on. If the latter isn't an issue, then it is a very good amplifier that while not as breathtaking as the 2 or 2.1 in the mids, still sounds more like its sibling than it doesn't. I still own a pair and I am not giving it up A very strong piece of advice is to be absolutely sure which 6c33 goes where. I do not recommend getting tubes from anybody else other than Lamm. When time comes to retube, you will have to give your serial numbers after which tubes earmarked for your specific amps will be sent to you. The cost isn't much more than 6c33s sourced elsewhere but they will last longer. That tube is not the paragon of quality control so best to avoid failures by getting pre-selected ones. Trust me I speak from experience having suffered the foolishness of "false economy". I suffered quite a few tube failures from generic Ulyanov replacement tubes on both my Lamm and BAT amps. Oh, BAT is also a good option

As far as the ML2.1s vs ML2.0s go, the 2.1s are more extended and many equate this with being "less SET like". On the other hand, others think it is an improvement.

JackD,

I very much appreciate your expert advice! I do have a first degree in electronics engineering, though it has been many years since I practiced that profession, I did a PhD in applied math and Geophysics so I have been working as a scientist for most of my career. Given that I can handle the bias and balancing business w/o issue. Thanks for letting me know on the tube replacement protocol - does not seem to be a "tube rolling" choice but I don't mind that.

Now the Von Gaylord Nirvana is also a "push-pull" amp with claims to sound like a SET with more power. I don't know - comparison of Von Gaylord and Lamm would be nice but I expect very difficult to find anyone who did that test.

Now for a 96 db speaker (anechoic) sensitivity I calculate 108 db for 18 wpc (Lamm 2.x) and 115 db for the Lamm ML1.1 - clearly the ML1.1 can easily take care of the “loud party” situation though the 108 db might be more than loud enough as well?! 115 db is at the “loud rock convert” level and 108 db is “sandblasting”. Now 95 dbish is where sustained exposure results in ear damage.

Other context – currently I am using a pair of Polk LSiM703 speakers with claimed 89 db sensitivity and powered by a Yaqin MC-100b tube amp, in triode mode. This is not loud enough for me and I can easily clip it. The amp sounds beautiful, and especially considering the price ($800) is amazing. Claimed power is 30 wpc for the amp, but I have seen reviews where they claim it is somewhat less, so let’s say 25 wpc.

So calculated 103 db max is situation now, and 109 db would be double sound pressure of course, which the Lamm 2.x is almost there with. Question – is the Lamm truly 18 wpc or is it higher as many people have claimed? I haven’t seen measurements to back that claim up, so expect 18 wpc is reality. Lamm ML1.1 is 4 times the sound pressure though, and likely too much for normal listening but not likely to clip at the loud party. What it looks like if I want a Lamm, the ML1.1 is best choice but I keep reading the glowing reviews of the ML2.x amps – people seem to fall in love with them. Though note the sound level decrease of 6 db per distance doubled, 1, 2, 4, etc. I sit 4m from the speakers, so reduce sound level by 12 db. Let us say party is average 8 m, reduce by 18 db. Looks good for the ML1.1 - on the Lamm topic and hence my desire for 40 wpc+...

So I am running down the yellow brick road so to speak and lust for more. So I am replacing my Polks with higher sensitivity/better speakers and also bring in a super subwoofer. Sub is the Funk 18.0 (http://funkaudio.ca/) which is on it’s way and I am looking seriously at the 8.2P Loudspeakers for the main speakers – to be powered by the new amplifier. I am space constrained and I am speaking with Nathan at Funk about a cut-down version (33 inches high versus 48) of the 8.2P to fit under my large Plasma TV screen – would push the low end of the bass up to 50 Hz or so from 35 Hz, but I would not care with the 18.0 sub also in play, 80 Hz and below is well looked after, in fact sub can cleanly push up past 120 Hz if desired.

BTW Yaqin amp I will keep - it will go in my office powering a pair of AR 9LS tower speakers that sound really great but don't fit in my living room... Now the Yaqin amp will be the comparative reference for any new amp I will get!

Regards, Brian

 

[NewAudio]

deHavilland KE50s also might work well. They are around 40 watts triode mode.

Thanks very much. I looked at deHavilland web site, also suggested by JackD, and found the latest deHavilland Aries GM70. Now here is one review,
http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/dehavilland_gm70.htm where reviewed compared to ML1.1 and said ML1.1 was better, though costing 3 times as much. But used ML1.1 versus new deHavilland looks like used ML1.1 might get the nod... Also the deHavilland Audio KE-50A of course, with KT88s closer to my Chinese Yaqin MC-100 B amp - would be interesting to see how a blind test between the Yaqin and other 30 wpc ish amps fare...

Brian

 

[NewAudio]

IMHO, when you consider buying a tube amplifier you should also consider its partnering preamplifier, unless you specifically prefer to avoid using it.

Thanks very much. I confess I use an iPod which works beyond my expectations (no hum and sounds great - using Apple Lossless format) or a Mac Laptop with a stereo-link DAC converter - the latter should be better in theory, I haven't heard it, but haven't listened to the comparison in earnest. I don't have a turntable (but that could come) or high-end CD player. I do use a pre-amp, also tube, which is a "Little Dot Mrk IV" Chinese amp, and used only for the fixed gain output of the TV right now. if I do get a good turntable for example I then would think about if I needed a better pre-amp. I guess for a test I could connect inputs via a switch to go through pre-amp or not and see if I can hear the difference...

 

[NewAudio]

what speakers do you have? was curious to impedance.

you really are looking at PSET at 40 watts, but the old Bel Canto i40 is supposed to be very good. I recommend Melody 845 amps in your price range- but they MUST be retubed.

KR Audio's Kronzilla would also work- I believe there is one used on the 'gon inside your budget. KR doesn't sound like a traditional SET, so depends on what you want. KR's biggest issue are tubes (only source for them)

See my other reply on speakers, considering Funk 8.2Ps. Not sure if it is 4 or 8 ohms in fact - will check....

Bel Canto Design SETi40 does look good - just read a rave review.

 

[NewAudio]

As far as the ML2.1s vs ML2.0s go, the 2.1s are more extended and many equate this with being "less SET like". On the other hand, others think it is an improvement.

JackD201,

Well I confess I have been Googling and find a lot of discussion in http://www.goodsoundclub.com/ on ML2.0, 2.1, quite negative to the ML2.1 and actually positive for the ML2.0 but very anecdotal information colored with a lot expletives around Lamm's marketing practices and reviewers ethics (a quote from a thread "There are no "reviews" anymore. It is simply Product Placement."). The authors are a skeptical lot and don't take any prisoners, which I am fine with. In fact though I am not "anti-audiophile" I take issue with some of the snobbery and do protest, for example, against paying 1000s of dollars for a power cable and 10s of thousands for speaker cables (e.g. Audioquest Everest). (and I can elaborate on these topics if desired, though best in another thread!)

 

[JackD201]

JackD201,

Well I confess I have been Googling and find a lot of discussion in http://www.goodsoundclub.com/ on ML2.0, 2.1, quite negative to the ML2.1 and actually positive for the ML2.0 but very anecdotal information colored with a lot expletives around Lamm's marketing practices and reviewers ethics (a quote from a thread "There are no "reviews" anymore. It is simply Product Placement."). The authors are a skeptical lot and don't take any prisoners, which I am fine with. In fact though I am not "anti-audiophile" I take issue with some of the snobbery and do protest, for example, against paying 1000s of dollars for a power cable and 10s of thousands for speaker cables (e.g. Audioquest Everest). (and I can elaborate on these topics if desired, though best in another thread!)

That is not a site I frequent I much prefer sites where opinions can differ but tone is still civil

I do know of one 2.0 owner on this board and that would be Bill aka whart and there are two 2.1 owners here, one current being Keith aka nephilim and one former being Steve Williams. I believe Neville Kepidea(?) may be familiar with both. The 2.0 was before my time with Lamm so I can't really comment. One thing for sure is that all 2.1 owners I know have been happy with them. Having heard them extensively, I can see why. The same goes for 1.1 owners I know, myself included.

In the end I think intended use will dictate. Since part of your requirement is "party" levels, I'd look to speakers higher than 96dB sensitivity if the bass isn't actively augmented. That would dictate a very large loudspeaker with a lot of internal volume. Something I believe you made reference to as not practical in your case. That or go for an amp that gives more power and put those into less sensitive speakers.

 

[NewAudio]

I much prefer sites where opinions can differ but tone is still civil
.

Thanks very much and I agree completely - hence I am posting here

Just to note - I will be actively augmenting bass with at least one high-level subwoofer (and 1 18.0 Funk subwoofer w 2400 w rms active amp is on its way!). My strategy is (partly governed by my living room but I think would happen anyway!) is mid-bass to high f handled by main system and 60 Hz and below, for example, handled by the subwoofer(s). I love really good, low f bass, clear, crisp, no boom. Pipe organ music, rock music, classical - my sub will have power to 10 Hz and below- I will feel the music. Your ears can only separate, say, 80 Hz and above, so the sub can take care of all those octaves below. So 96 db with the MTM speakers I mentioned may not be enough with 18 wpc Lamm (or it may be enough - still an open question!) but I suspect 90-100 wpc amp will not ever clip and if you even get close the plaster will be falling from the walls with how you are driving the subwoofer. An anecdotal note - I read in a piece the neighbours in a house beside a person with a like subwoofer complained that their dishes were rattling and shaking off the table. I know I am setting myself up to be called a "basshead" but I love all frequencies - my acoustic strategy has simply changed from massive tower speakers that do it all to powered subs for the bass punch and tube amp and high quality speaker above.

best regards, Brian

 

[JackD201]

Hi Brian,

I'm not familiar with the funk towers but my gut feel is that 18watts won't be enough for the midbass on those. If it were a vented, large diameter cone/shorter excursion design like say a Wilson X1/X2 I might think differently particularly in the punch region which is in the hundreds of Hz. Generally I don't cross subs over above 50Hz. 60Hz is borderline and often times I will have to turn them down so as not to "hear" the sub's character. I also typically will go for two smaller subs over one big sub because I find two much easier to integrate than one.

I've had some success with a 61/2" driver with low wattage augmented by subs and it was very coherent and punchy but the catch is that listening distance for such a small woofer usually has to be in the area just approaching or inside mid-field, somewhere between 5 and 7 feet.

I think we are all bass freaks at heart, good clear and crisp bass as you put it that is. In my experience, it is the midbass that is trickiest to pull off with limited amplifier headroom. I think it is highly dependent on the speaker design of that which is reproducing it and not something a sub can easily come to the rescue of. No surprise that dynamic speakers that do very well with low power have large and light diaphragms and hefty magnets. Given that like me you like to rock the block from time to time, it is my honest opinion that very few speakers with small woofs will do well in this regard. The funks might fit the bill, I know Living Voice OBXs which have the same form factor can. I however would definitely try before I buy.