SS Amp Performance Characteristics

[Kingrex]

Try no connector bare cable

All the speaker cables from my crossover to the drivers are as such. I even at one time had Anticables that I attached pretty much the same way.

I am looking at my Inakustik speaker cables and they have a soldered wired end, then screw connect a spade, or bannana on the end. I am considering removing the spade altogether. But I will eventually crush the end of the wire in the amp and speaker lugs. And when it is worn out from changing in and out, I will be out a very good speaker cable. Unless I send it back to be reterminated. Probably cost as much as a new cable.

 

[DasguteOhr]

s

spendy

~ 4.5k For what it can do with matching loudspeakers(>90db I consider it a bargain
For your measurement, the DC offset is harmless; perhaps you can adjust it by techican to the lowest value when you get the chance.

 

[Kingrex]

~ 4.5k For what it can do with matching loudspeakers(>90db I consider it a bargainView attachment 159681
For your measurement, the DC offset is harmless; perhaps you can adjust it by techican to the lowest value when you get the chance.

I thought I saw 9,000 Euro for the Valvet amp. I think I looked at a single ended stereo version with 20 watts or so.

 

[DasguteOhr]

I thought I saw 9,000 Euro for the Valvet amp. I think I looked at a single ended stereo version with 20 watts or so.

U.S dealer valvet

VALVET

from Germany, produces elegantly-designed and -built amplifiers that are insider tip. Hand build tube preamps and pure Class A solid state power amps.

highend-electronics.com

 

[Kingrex]

I remember looking at a Valver years back.

A friend has the Parasound monoblocks at his place on loan. Loves them. Says I could find the JC5 for maybe $5k. Thats supposed to be a great amp

 

[morricab]

Right. I know nothing of what I speak. Except that for example you also advocate SETs for Wilsons, here (#118):

I know this is an age old debate, but I need a technical explanation why one would choose tubes over solid state

I listened to the "tubes rule" crowd and had a tube preamp to go with my Boulder SS amp for 10 years. I learned that the tubes actually last half the claimed hours before the sound degrades, then bad sound for months. Five years ago switched to a Boulder preamp that sounded better and there...

www.whatsbestforum.com

And you also have used SETs on Apogees (#226 here);

Oh my, oh my - Aries Cerat Helene DAC

I can't stay silent - today we received Helene DAC, "baby" DAC from Aries Cerat. What a baby, what a beauty. From the very fist second the sound was sublime, digital rarely gets better than this - in form of Kassandra DAC only probably. I am not saying this lightly, just compare Helene to all...

www.whatsbestforum.com

Yes, they work well on the old X1…go look at the measurements and you will see why. Never said they work for other models, although Steve used them for like 20 years on his big Wilsons, and yes tried on Apogees but didn’t stay with it even though it works reasonably well if you have a high power model…ask Christoph on this forum who drives his Studio Grands with a 42 watt SET..

The real difference is that I have done the actual experiments to know and you will just attack with what you “know”.

 

[morricab]

Thats too low for flea watts , 109-112 db for flea watts

Not true, my 3.5 watt Silvercore 2A3 amp drives my Hornings Eufrodite Ellipses with aplomb. However, I use a 20 watt SET Aries Cerat Protos as my main amp on those speakers.
My DIY horns use an 18 watt Ayon Spark on the midbass and the Silvercore now pulls duty on the 110dB compression drivers.

 

[morricab]

Really

Really…

 

[Al M.]

Yes, they work well on the old X1…go look at the measurements and you will see why. Never said they work for other models, although Steve used them for like 20 years on his big Wilsons, and yes tried on Apogees but didn’t stay with it even though it works reasonably well if you have a high power model…ask Christoph on this forum who drives his Studio Grands with a 42 watt SET..

The real difference is that I have done the actual experiments to know and you will just attack with what you “know”.

The point is that you defended yourself by saying:

You know nothing of what you speak. I don’t have a single pair of speaker lower than 97dB in the house.

And yet, you have clearly stated that you used or recommended SETs on much lower sensitivity speakers.

Sorry, you can't wiggle your way out of this one.

 

[morricab]

The point is that you defended yourself by saying:



And yet, you have clearly stated that you used or recommended SETs on much lower sensitivity speakers.

Sorry, you can't wiggle your way out of this one.

No, I have said that it works fine with them...that is not the same as a recommendation. Used briefly is not the same thing as using them for long term.

That being said, Wilson X1s have a true sensitivity of 95dB and an easy load...this means that they do actually work long term with SETs...again ask Steve as he used Lamm ML3s on his for a couple of decades and by most accounts had a very good sound.

I personally used a pretty high powered hybrid on my Apogees but if you go listen to Studio Grands with 42 watt GM70 based amp you can't say that it doesn't work well...it does. The Apogee is a flat 6 ohm speaker, which makes it easy to drive and 40 watts of power will play them plenty loud without strain (this amp does 35 watts with <1% distortion, BTW.).

My point was clear, I moved to all high sensitivity speakers to get the most out of SET technology, I chose amp first then migrated to more optimal speakers. Kind of what Peter did when he put Lamm ML2s on Magicos. He heard the potential but realized he wasn't going to get all of it until he changed the speakers.

 

[andromedaaudio]

SET maffia

 

[bonzo75]

Ask Christoph on this forum who drives his Studio Grands with a 42 watt SET..

The real difference is that I have done the actual experiments to know and you will just attack with what you “know”.

Sorry but his studio grands just don't work with his KR, and his Acoustats don't either, no matter what the two of you say. Both acousticsguru and I had listened to his Acoustats with the KR and it sounded broken. On an earlier trip sounded fantastic with that hybrid you had recommended. How you cannot hear lack of dynamic range and compression is beyond me. It is not possible to not hear it, so the only answer is strong defense bias for one's belief.

 

[morricab]

Sorry but his studio grands just don't work with his KR, and his Acoustats don't either, no matter what the two of you say. Both acousticsguru and I had listened to his Acoustats with the KR and it sounded broken. On an earlier trip sounded fantastic with that hybrid you had recommended. How you cannot hear lack of dynamic range and compression is beyond me. It is not possible to not hear it, so the only answer is strong defense bias for one's belief.

We will have to agree to disagree. And since I had Acoustats with all manner of amps, I think I know what worked and didn't. You haven't heard the STudio Grands with the Amplifon I guess...

 

[bonzo75]

We will have to agree to disagree. And since I had Acoustats with all manner of amps, I think I know what worked and didn't. You haven't heard the STudio Grands with the Amplifon I guess...

No not with the Amplifon.

 

[Audiohertz2]

Morricab listens at 68db so its possible he did not hear broken

 

[Audiohertz2]

Yes, they work well on the old X1…go look at the measurements and you will see why. Never said they work for other models, although Steve used them for like 20 years on his big Wilsons, and yes tried on Apogees but didn’t stay with it even though it works reasonably well if you have a high power model…ask Christoph on this forum who drives his Studio Grands with a 42 watt SET..

The real difference is that I have done the actual experiments to know and you will just attack with what you “know”.

42 watts SET @ what thd level ..?

 

[morricab]

42 watts SET @ what thd level ..?

Around 3%. 35 watts at 1%.

 

[microstrip]

IMO particular anecdotal cases of compatibility tell us very little in general, as one key word in the subject is room gain, in the broad sense.

Thirty years ago I lived in an old house, with suspended wood floors over a 3 feet basement, high ceiling, built around 1900. Even modest power tubes such as the Leak TL12 or the Quad tune amps sounded powerful in any speaker - no acoustic treatments were needed. Later I moved in a similar dimmension room in a 1970 typical european build - reinforced concrete and brick. Well, things become much more critical - bass modes needed treatment, the same speakers needed more power. Fortunately I stayed there just for some years.

I always remember the great sound I had with with Audio Research REF 750 and the Mini Magico speakers. A good friend tried to duplicate such system in a room of similar size - they always sounded poor, at some point he gave up.

 

[Kingrex]

I played the MF A3cr again. Then plugged in the Blade KT88 PP. Very different. One very SS sounding, the other very tube sounding.
The MF does things different. Take vocals for instance. The low distortion of the MF allows one to hear individual singers among a group of singers. The background singers come out more. The vocals are a little forward in the recording. Not in space. They are accentuated.
With the tube and the distortion, the background vocals are a little harder to distinguish, but they are definitely there. The purity and realness of the singer is much higher with the Blade. The voice is much more like a human voice. It is less forward and prominent in the recording.

Piano is the real tell. Both present piano clean and clear. The MF more clear and again, more forward. The MF has good weight with the piano.
The Blade presents piano plenty clean and clear. The Blade is much more natural and true to the sound of a piano. But it has less weight. Its not as fleshed out in the lower octaves.

I don't sense any difference in decay in either. I do find the MF to be very dynamic. It has punch and jump. The Blade is dynamic, but not quite as much. its more fluid. The MF place more emphasis on parts. It brings things like vocals or piano or a horn to the front and accentuates it. It is dynamically present. The Blade keeps the vocals or piano or a horn more in the whole of the music. It does not highlight any one part as much.

The MF has much more gain.
I can see why people say they like the MF. As long as you don't push it too far, its a easy to digest, enjoyable playback. It does what I expect a SS amp to do.

I don't remember the Dartzeel that well. What I do remember I would say is that is did not bring any one part as forward as the MF, and it did not have a much sense of dynamics. It flowed more with everything pretty balanced. It was more refined.
There is nothing wrong with the amp I have functionally. Its just very different than the Blade KT88 PP. Neither amp is perfect. Oddly, I think what I am experiencing is exactly what a friend of mine was saying about the AR Ref tube amps and the Parasound Halo Monoblocks. Both have their strengths. I would love my Blade to have a more midbass weight. More flesh on a lower piano register note. I would love the MF to have a less forward presentation and to have a more natural and real sound. More accurate voices and piano.

 

[morricab]

IMO particular anecdotal cases of compatibility tell us very little in general, as one key word in the subject is room gain, in the broad sense.

Thirty years ago I lived in an old house, with suspended wood floors over a 3 feet basement, high ceiling, built around 1900. Even modest power tubes such as the Leak TL12 or the Quad tune amps sounded powerful in any speaker - no acoustic treatments were needed. Later I moved in a similar dimmension room in a 1970 typical european build - reinforced concrete and brick. Well, things become much more critical - bass modes needed treatment, the same speakers needed more power. Fortunately I stayed there just for some years.

I always remember the great sound I had with with Audio Research REF 750 and the Mini Magico speakers. A good friend tried to duplicate such system in a room of similar size - they always sounded poor, at some point he gave up.

Why do you think his setup sounded poor and yours good?