 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
73.42.229.40
In the past I have been a 300B owner, and had amplifiers from Electra Print and Art Audio. However, I bought a pair of JBL 4365 speakers and discovered they were not SET friendly, well at least to 300B amps.
I experimented a bit here and there. Have found that a First Watt F7 works well with them at 25 wpc. Had good results with a Musical Fidelity NuVista M3 integrated, which is a hybrid. Currently have a pair of AVM Audio AMP Essential monoblocks installed, and they are a high power SS design that sounds good though with the JBL.
But I have been a tube guy for most of my life, and feel like I would like to return to the fold. The JBL are 93 dB efficient, but need a bit more current than a standard 300B amp can provide. The two options I have seem to be an amp with parallel 300B tubes or transmitter tube.
I am a person of modest means, so the top end transmitter tube amps are probably out of my reach. I do remember that Bel Canto used to make an 845 based amp that was reasonably priced. I also see that Cary has a couple of amps based on 805 and 211 tubes that can be had for sane money off the pre-owned market. I think ASL had an 845 based amp. Then there are offerings from companies in East Asia such as the PSVane amplifier.
The questions are
In general how do transmitter tubes present music compared to a 300B or other tube amps?
How do transmitter tube based amps work with speakers requiring higher current levels, not necessarily low impedance loads but have large woofers that need to be controlled?
How are they in terms of maintenance and longetivity?
Do you have any experiences of observations to relate on the Cary amps, and the Bel Canto? With the Chinese ones being a wild card.
Thanks for any info you can pass along.
Follow Ups:
at 08:09:38
One afternoon I did bring home a pair of SET amps based.on 811B tubes, which made 19 wpc. A definite no go. The bass got out of control, instruments sounded compressed, and the soundstage collapsed. Definitely did not work at all.
Also have a pair of Dynaco MK IV clones that are an extra set of amps for me. Have pre driver boards from Triode Electronics, and Solen power supply caps with Auricaps in the signal path. We will see what happens, it will be a fun experiment. Unfortunately Mom fell a week ago and fractured a pelvis, so all my audio projects are on hold till I get her situated. I haven't been home in over a week.
I have owned a pair of Tubeguru GM70 monoblocks for over a year now. Each amp has two GM70 output tubes and puts out about 45 watts.
I'm using them to drive modified Altec 604e speakers and they do a great job. Overall I feel that the sound is full bodied and that the midrange is all there in a way that I had not heard before with my other amps which was a pair of MFA M120D (modified by Scott Frankland). I also tried a Shindo el84 based amp but they did not pair well. I'd characterize the sound as thin so I sold the Shindo.
I've never tried 300b amps in the Altec because I wanted to use only amps with more power. I have two Don Allen amps, one with 2A3 and the other with 45 tubes but the Altecs still did not sound as good as they should. So in my own experience the GM70 amps work extremely well with my Altecs.
One afternoon I did bring home a pair of SET amps based.on 811B tubes, which made 19 wpc. A definite no go. The bass got out of control, instruments sounded compressed, and the soundstage collapsed. Definitely did not work at all.
Also have a pair of Dynaco MK IV clones that are an extra set of amps for me. Have pre driver boards from Triode Electronics, and Solen power supply caps with Auricaps in the signal path. We will see what happens, it will be a fun experiment. Unfortunately Mom fell a week ago and fractured a pelvis, so all my audio projects are on hold till I get her situated. I haven't been home in over a week.
I certainly want to thanks everyone for taking the time to put their thoughts and experiences into this thread, its given me a fair amount to think about. This is not a purchase I plan on making without a good deal of thought, and while I do not have a time table I need to hit, I am certainly interested in traveling this path.
211 based amps sound interesting, and for my modest budget there are a couple of Cary amps I can afford on the used market. Cary can be a controversial company it seems these days, at one time they were a giant in the SET market, and then they have seem to fallen into disfavor. Any thoughts on why? As mentioned, there are a couple of versions of the 211m currently available.
I have given some thought to Atmasphere and an OTL amp. These JBL 4365 do drop to 6 ohms, and so they should be a reasonable match. I have not spent any considerable time listening to OTL, so I am not sure if this is something I should explore.
Other than that I don't see much that works for me. The Shugaung T845 no longer seems available. I did see some NAT Audio 211 amps, but even used they are past my financial reach. ASL also seems to have fallen out of favor. Mastersound 845 based amps are also a bit too far of a stretch. But perhaps if I wait awhile longer and build the audio kitty, it might be worth delaying a purchase for a year or two.
Yes I do have the AVM Audio Amp Essential monoblocks, these are an early version from around 2005. Lots of very good sounding SS power on tap, 200 wpc at 8 ohms, and perhaps one of the most evenly balanced and honest SS amps I have heard. I can easily listen to them, and they are great all around performers. I just have been away from tube audio for a long time, and its hard to leave a path that has been so well traveled and consistently provided me with top notch sound. I feel like I might be missing something.
But once again, thanks all for your participation, and if you have more to say on the subject then please do.
About 20 years ago, a good friend built me a pair of 845 SET monoblocks. I was using Conrad Johnson Premier 12s at the time (140 wpc) and couldn't believe how much better the 845 amps sounded, in every way. They use 3 tubes, the 845s, EL34 drivers and 6n7/ECC31 input tubes. Humongous trannies he had built by Magnequest.
After hearing mine, a friend had another pair built for him. These have now been modded to use 211 tubes and the owner is very happy.
My speakers are Gallo Nucleus Ultimates, circa 1996, not especially sensitive, yet the amps have no trouble filling my 18x40' room, unbelievable as it might seem.
As I said these amps are approx. 20 years old. They're not going anywhere. _
Hi Mister Pig, I can not speak on Transmitter Tube Amps. And you have some interesting suggestions, here is another. Audio Mirror REFLECTION 6C33C - 45w/ch mono blocks SET class A amps. I used them with excellent results with Ascendo C8 Renaissance speakers, which were are hard to drive 89dB. He runs the 6C33C tubes in parallel.
Hello Mr. Pig! I've been the owner of a 135 LBs, 40W/ch, Mastersound Reference 845 , SET amp/integrated amp --{ depends on which option I select on a front dial, but I use it as an amp }-- so trust me when I say there's an SET amp out there for you! I've been using my Mastersound SET amp for 20+ years. I used to run an online group on Yahoo called SETriodes for 18+ years -{ that's before they drastically changed it and turned it into an email-based forum }- now SETriodes is on Facebook, but I digress. I started the SETriodes online group because this was my first, and only, SET amp and I wanted to talk with as many SET owners as I possibly could. Truth be told over those 18+ years I've talked with literally 100's of people who were looking to obtain their first SET amp, but they didn't want to spend thousands of dollars and they needed it to have some power. One of the 845 amps I remember that seemed to get really good feedback from owners was the Shuguang SG-845 Amp! It has 21W/ch and uses 6SN7 as preamp tubes, 300B as driver tubes, and 845 as output tubes. You can -{ and you should }- look around to get the best price, but I included a link below because it describes the amp pretty well and has a few good pictures of it -{ I like the black one best! }- and it has the lowest price I could find when shipping is added.
Now as far as their sound goes 845 tubes are getting incredibly close to the 300B's midrange but with better bass and treble. You could start with the very inexpensive, but nice sounding pair of Psvane HiFi Series 845 tubes on eBay for about $160/matched pair --{ I was using a quad of these in my Mastersound amp as I saved for the quad of literally jaw-dropping, great-sounding, Shuguang WE845 tubes that arrived last week! These Shuguang WE845 tubes are the best WE845 tubes I've heard from any company! In fact, they are much better sounding than the other companies WE845 tubes I previously used }- so take your time and save up, contact AliExpress online and buy a pair of the Shuguang WE845 for about $490/matched pair! The level of sonic improvement will amaze you. You can check them out here "if" you're interested: https://tinyurl.com/Shuguang-WE845 Unfortunately, I'm unable to answer any technically-oriented questions you might have but look for the moniker deafbykhorns he can answer any tech questions you might have. He's very knowledgeable and he's a great tech. In fact, he repaired my Mastersound a few short months ago when at just over 20 years old it needed its first repair job! Oh yes, I almost forgot, a couple more 845-based SET amps you might want to check out are the Mr. Liang 845, and the Musical Angel XD845, Good luck Mr. Pig and happy hunting....
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom)
Central Florida Audio Society -- SETriodes Group -- Space Coast Audio Society
Full-range/Wide-range Drivers --- Front & Back-Loaded Horns --- High Sensitivity Speakers
Is the Shuguang amp available in a monoblock version?
Todd, I honestly don't know, but I checked the Asylum and located some comments from a fellow member named Gopher when he obtained a pair of 80 lb, Shuguang S845 monoblock amps. So apparently Shuguang does make mono 845 amps, but Todd, remember this post is from 2010, so think about how much Shuguang has improved since then.
Also, I checked Grant Fidelity in Canada and they have a gorgeous pair of Consonance Cyber 845S mono amps for $4890/pr. you can check out here: https://tinyurl.com/845S-amps
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom)
Central Florida Audio Society -- SETriodes Group -- Space Coast Audio Society
Full-range/Wide-range Drivers --- Front & Back-Loaded Horns --- High Sensitivity Speakers
I did see where PSVane offered what looks to be a very interesting 845 based amp. However it seems to no longer be available from most sellers. Also buying directly from a Chinese exporter for that kind of money seems a bit risky. But it certainly looked to be an interesting amp.
https://www.hifi-amplifiers.com/en/psvane-vacuum-tube-amplifiers-c-67/psvane-t845-300b-vacuum-tube-power-amplifier-hiend-monoblock-set-amp-pair-p-5257.html
Mr Pig,
Grant Fidelity dropped Psvane tubes and amps after Linlia Audio, which was created by some engineers that left Psvane and started LinLia Audio started selling tubes through Grant Fidelity. Turns out Psvane issued Rachel at Grant Fidelity with an ultimatum, i.e., either drop LinLia Audio and sell just Psvane tubes and amps or we will pull our gear from you! Rachel responded by discontinuing the sale of all Psvane tubes and amps. If you want a pair of great-sounding 845 mono amps check out the Consonance Cyber 845S mono amps for $4890/pr. or even better a pair of Line Magnetic AS-125PP Integrated Mono Amps for $11,000/pr. Just scroll down the link below...
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom)
Central Florida Audio Society -- SETriodes Group -- Space Coast Audio Society
Full-range/Wide-range Drivers --- Front & Back-Loaded Horns --- High Sensitivity Speakers
The only one I've ever heard was an Air Tight 211 based amp. My dealer used them to power his Quad 988's and the sound was superb. They were somewhere around $10,000/pair at the time, which was many years ago, so I don't know what the current retail is, probably in the stratosphere by now.
It's that 15" woofer that is needing lots of power. JBL 4365 on the back has binding posts for high/mid and another for low, so it's fairly easy to try. I run 300B on my compression driver and class AB SS on woofer, which sounds much more coherent than many would believe..
This was probably the best response to this post - I am surprised that others have not jumped on board. Use the low powered SET amp for the highs and a grunt amp for the woofer. Biamping works great for my setup.
Retsel
I looked at some literature about these speakers, and it seems that to use a SET amp with the tweeters, you could not simply connect the SET amp to the tweeter terminals; the tweeter crossover would have to be bypassed and another crossover used in its place. This is because the tweeter crossover is designed to reduce the output of the high frequencies to match the level of the woofer and connecting a SET amp to the tweeter terminals would continue to suffer this reduced output. If wanting to use a SET amp, using a different crossover would be the best way forward.
Retsel
I once owned a 300B SET amp, know people who own them, and use other DHTs for SETs, mainly the 45..... I personally like the 45 and 10 a lot better than the 300B..... I just think the 300B makes the sound somewhat "syrupy," if you will.... (Don't have any opinion of the 2A3.... And haven't heard higher power tubes like the 845 or GM70 on enough occasions to have an opinion.)
I drafted and post... then decided not post it. But now...Those speakers appear to like a low, but maybe not ultra low, impedance drive. And JBL bass drivers have developed a bit of a rep for needing volume (power) to come alive. I wouldn't run them with a zero negative feedback (NFB) SE amp of any type. A PP with zero or mild NFB might work.
As for others' blanket comments re 15" driver needing power: I'd say it depends on the driver, the alignment, and the quality of amplifier.
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
Edits: 09/08/21
I'm in agreement here. Use a P/P amp
of about 30 WPC to run JBL woofers.
The JBL woofers also benefit from GOOD
solid-state. If you wish to run a low-power SE amp,
then you're looking at Altec & Great Plains Audio 15 inchers
in 10 1/2 to 11.25 cu. ft. cabinets that are well tuned.
-Dennis-
Thanks for the information and the observations. Especially @ Gordon Rankin!
Seems like the 845 is considered a fine all around tube, and I do find it interesting that there is a great deal of support for the 211.
Anyone able to present a picture of how either tube compares to the prototypical 300B or 2A3 presentation?
I'm sure the tube itself is fine. But as you increase power in an SET the OPT is progressively harder to get bandwidth, to the point that its a stretch to call it hifi.
You're going to need some power with those speakers- 60 watts at least unless you have a smaller room or never crank things up. So barring the two caveats SETs seem out of the picture unless you replace the speakers.
Keeping in mind of course that if you really want to hear what an SET does don't play it past about 20-25% of full power. Otherwise the distortion will cause it to sound very 'dynamic'.
SE amps need High-Power, low DCR power supplies.
Ordinary power supplies that use time-honored
power supplies that were historically designed
for push/pull amps were also used for SE amps,
which is a severe power mismatch for SE operation.
Properly designed SE amps don't have the
described distortions mentioned.
-Dennis-
Properly designed SE amps don't have the
described distortions mentioned.
Single-ended circuits have a quadratic non-linearity. That's a thing unaffected by the OPT. I'd be very interested to see a 'properly designed' SET that behaves as you describe.
I agree with the quadratic non-linearity.All topologies have some kind of problem(s).
Really good push/pull-- really good--- sounds
just like the best SE, but they're very different
animals as you point out.I would point out that the P/P or any balanced topology
is processing the signal (if it had started out as a SE signal--
there are some sound labs that use all SE topology-- ),
applying Common-Mode rejection to it-- the
distortions & noise are lowered.Just how much of what is filtered out was music? Is
perhaps the lack of this filtering why we love SE amps?Yet I have heard all balanced systems that sound exactly
like the best SE systems-- NO audible differences!It comes down to the designer-- what you get in your
listening room. It is very possible that the best
SE amps require certain speakers, and those speakers
may offer some sort of corrections---?.High power SE's have never interested me because of
the output trans limitations and the power required
to drive the large output device.It's an amp driving another amp, so why not just
listen to the stage before the output device?
You get fewer signal quality losses due to excessive parts,
better sound-- so why not just get a speaker that needs less power?As your top-notch work indicates, the two
examples are different anyhow-- the handling of
musical data will be different depending on how many
stages are used. I certainly agree with your work
on P/P amps-- different coupling methods, etc.,
will deliver different handling of waveforms.In the end, one may decide to change or even
compromise one topology in some way in order to
get a better overall result. For instance, one may
choose to drive a P/P output stage with a single triode
that is driving an interstage transformer-- using
the transformer as a phase inverter.You would see a flaw right there, and you would be
correct. Someone else, however, might look at it
differently-- see that it is very simple, has a truly
balanced phase inverter, and has
few signal losses in the circuitry even though
things look better if that amp is just balanced all
the way-- giving a far different handling of the signal.One could point out-- why not trash the transformer
phase inverter and just install two triodes-- that's
better, isn't it? SURE-- for about 10 minutes.One need only wait until the two tubes decide to
differ from each other. Then, the single-triode
driving the transformer/phase inverter will CREAM it.Now, which one is going to be the most fun for the
user? Especially if he keeps it for long time, and
puts many hours on it?Why wear-out tube sockets-- that's another signal
compromising problem for sure....Well, which one is going to sound the best?
That would depend on what the designer did with
the rest of the amp, and what he did to minimize the
effects of the flaw.Kudos to you and your fine work, Ralph!
-Dennis-
Edits: 10/04/21 10/04/21 10/04/21
Just how much of what is filtered out was music?
None, although if poorly executed you might wind up with a poor distortion signature (what most people call the amp's 'sonic signature').
Operating fully differential (and therefore balanced) there is nothing specifically acting as a filter unless you include the fact that all audio circuits are filters in that they have limited bandwidth.
Distortion cancellation won't remove actual musical information, just distortion. Its never perfect of course. But what that means isn't that some music got thrown out; it means that some distortion got left in the signal.
In the case were a transformer is used to convert from single-ended to balanced (which is one of the things they do really well), if you are using a single-ended circuit to drive it you'll still get some of that pesky 5th. So you'll want to drive it with a balanced circuit rather than single-ended.
The way I get around drift in the triode driver is done by using a triode differential cascode with a highly effective constant current source. With the extra gain possible and with the current in the circuit highly regulated, the drift is really minimal and tends to drift to a design center rather than away. That solves a number of problems at once- the only issue then is driving the power tubes. I use direct coupled cathode followers for that. Over a period of weeks and months the drift is surprisingly minimal- no adjustments needed in that time unless a tube failed.
"Distortion cancellation won't remove actual musical information, just distortion. Its never perfect of course. But what that means isn't that some music got thrown out; it means that some distortion got left in the signal. "
I just wanted to add to that for clarity. The distortion cancelled by a differential circuit is just the distortion that would otherwise have been created by the circuit, not distortion present in the signal from the source. On a related topic, the hum/noise picked up by the cable is the only thing "rejected" by a balanced connection between units, not any hum/noise present in the signal on the recording. Either way, none of the music is being filtered out by these methods.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
TRE and Ralph:Thank you BOTH for the excellent discussions.
You've given readers a good grip on how the
circuits you describe are supposed to work.I agree with you both, but I DO hear ANYTHING
that complicates a circuit, adding and subtracting
it's own artifacts, no matter what it is.For instance, CCS. Lots of people use them in many
ways and swear by them-- no argument there.Trouble is, I and others can hear the extra circuit
operating on the music. With the best circuits, and
speakers, it's subtle, but obvious. I really hate CCS circuits
because I can spot one operating anytime I hear it--
in anyone's amp-- two sounds for every one that's really
there. It's very small, and it's subtle. But over months of
use, CCS circuits eventually become musically boring.Another most excellent performing Band-Aid. BUT,
you can HEAR the thing doing it's thing....A super simple amp with a huge power supply can feed
the load without a CCS circuit better, and not color
the musical timing cues.So------- a few of us break a few rules now and then.
And why do we do that, when everybody knows we're WRONG?It's only because that's how we get really good
performance.I've been doing this all my life. When racing Motocross bikes,
I always had more usable power than the other guys in the same class.
They ran more RPM's= more horsepower.BUT-- I had more low-end torque AND decent hi-rev power, but
not as much as theirs.. TRE would call my engine linear and point
out that my amp isn't truly linear, only my Motocross engine is!
(the engine was putting better power to the ground, sooner).Most people today listen to a lot of single-taste music,
and build amps for their tastes, which is fine with me.I don't like that because I want to play anything I want
and have IT sound right-- no matter what it is.So----ooooo---- what is necessary gets done, trying to
keep it all simple, transparent, and honestly dynamic.It is perfect? No, it's not perfect. But it is reliable,
and you never want to replace it with something else you've
heard somewhere else.Overall, not to any particular taste. It's still not
perfect, it's still not absolutely linear, it's still
got some forms of distortions-- like everything else.It does do one thing right: it plays music like it really
sounds. With your kind understandings, it could make some
sense to you. The reviewers and the guys who play with it
agree-- even if you don't, and I am sometimes at a loss
to explain it all in engineering terms because I don't
groove-out on bringing-up online data-- I figure people
can easily already have that..After all, when a tube is operated in the lower 3/4 of
it's linear curve, why would it sound good? It might not--
unless the system is transparent enough to convey what's
taking place-- the sound of unstressed physics playing
through minimal interference circuitry..Anything-- everything-- that you do to force a vacuum
tube to comply with YOUR demands for some coveted thing--
linearity, loading perfection, etc., is audible as
something or somebody tampering with music if the audio
system playing it is sensitive enough so you can tell.Vacuum tubes-- above all-- operate best when as little
as possible is attached to them, and their operating
temperatures don't stress them in any way.-Dennis-
Edits: 10/04/21
I don't use a CCS in single-ended circuits so I can't comment, but I use them in differential amps all the time and I do have this to say:
Most CCS circuits I've seen are detrimental, because they leave performance on the table and often have linearity problems. I solved that issue about 25 years ago by implementing a 2-stage CCS in our circuits. By having 2 stages it could be referenced to ground at one end- so it knew what 'quiet' was supposed to be; at the other end it was referenced to the power supply, so it could suppress noise from the power supply as well. You really do need a 2-stage CCS to get the job done.
In our amps the power supplies were not regulated. So the performance was affected by line voltage. With the CCS installed as described, the performance of the voltage amplifier circuit was unmeasurable with the line voltage variable from 105VAC up to 130VAC. The CCS over that range varied in performance by 17 parts per million. That's pretty sweet- works really well to reduce noise and distortion while increasing gain.
I can't speak to use in single-ended circuits.
GOOD STUFF. Wonder how many DIY guys are NOT paying attention to what you typed here. Thank You, Ralph.
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
Thanks, Ralph. I like that it "sees"-- both sides--
that's an excellent idea, and a good implementation of it.
A two-sided CCS. Better-- much more so,
it's a far more stable circuit.
-Dennis-
-
"Keeping in mind of course that if you really want to hear what an SET does don't play it past about 20-25% of full power. Otherwise the distortion will cause it to sound very 'dynamic'."
My 211 SETs can output 30W in Class A2, and distortion is very low all the way out to that maximum capability. I can't speak to the OP's speaker characteristics, but it is certainly possible to design a SET well above 300B power levels with low distortion and the nuance SETs are known for.
Much of the credit for this performance admittedly goes to the OPTs - Magnequest FS-100 with 10K primaries. Don't know if anything comparable is still available.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
~!
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
> > > Much of the credit for this performance admittedly goes to the OPTs - Magnequest FS-100 with 10K primaries. Don't know if anything comparable is still available. < < <
We can get custom-wound CC cores, nanocrystalline, really high B, or partial Ni, wound in OCC Cu or Ag that could easily replace those and more. There are still some good winders out there.
Output transformer quality certainly matters... and the bigger they get, the tougher they are to wind for a given performance. I'm not sure where the point of "not worth the compromise" sets in... and it probably differs between folks.
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
My 211 SETs can output 30W in Class A2, and distortion is very low all the way out to that maximum capability.
Class A2 (and now class A3) do help get more power at low distortion out of any tube amp. We use class A2 in our amps quite a lot.
I'd be interested in seeing what the distortion signature of your amp is really like. I'm not disputing your claim; I've just not seen an SET that does not make more higher ordered harmonics when you get past about 20-25% of full power- somewhere in there anyway; it varies from amp to amp.
Even though you might not consciously hear them because they are masked by the lower ordered harmonics, the ear does respond to the higher orders because the ear/brain system uses them to sense sound pressure (fundamental tones without overtones being pretty rare in nature...). Since this distortion is initially turning up on transients as you run the volume up (since that is where the power is) it can give the amp a very lively 'dynamic' presentation.
We've all read about this frequently in comments about SETs, particularly in reviews where the reviewer simply didn't have speakers of sufficient efficiency.
Another way of putting this is that your amplifier in particular does not sound as 'dynamic' as other SETs (which IMO is a good thing, since real dynamics come from the recordings, not the electronics). Do I have this right?
"ven though you might not consciously hear them because they are masked by the lower ordered harmonics, the ear does respond to the higher orders because the ear/brain system uses them to sense sound pressure (fundamental tones without overtones being pretty rare in nature...). "
I don't think this is right. Can you provide a reference for this?
My understanding is that you detect the "loudness" only if it is unmasked...masked is masked and you don't sense it. Otherwise, SET amps would probably not sound as good as they do (and they DO sound good when done right).
You are right that high order harmonics not being masked will impact sensation of depth perception and loudness.
BTW, the low order harmonics do no mask all higher order harmonics. It only masks relatively near neighbors. A bit more masking occurs when the ears own distortion rises with SPL level and this expands a bit to even higher orders but if you have significant higher order harmonics at low volume (by this I mean 7th and above), these will not be masked and will show up in the "character" of the amplifier...even at extremely low levels.
"ven though you might not consciously hear them because they are masked by the lower ordered harmonics, the ear does respond to the higher orders because the ear/brain system uses them to sense sound pressure (fundamental tones without overtones being pretty rare in nature...). "
I don't think this is right. Can you provide a reference for this?
Which part?
My understanding is that you detect the "loudness" only if it is unmasked...masked is masked and you don't sense it. Otherwise, SET amps would probably not sound as good as they do (and they DO sound good when done right).
OK- now that part doesn't sound right to me? Are you really saying that if the higher orders are completely masked, that you'd not be able to tell how loud the sound is? I'm not talking about filtering out the higher orders, I'm talking about how an amplifier makes distortion just so we're clear.
You are right that high order harmonics not being masked will impact sensation of depth perception and loudness.
I don't recall making a comment about depth perception with respect to the higher orders. If I did do that, it was a mistake.
BTW, the low order harmonics do no mask all higher order harmonics. It only masks relatively near neighbors. A bit more masking occurs when the ears own distortion rises with SPL level and this expands a bit to even higher orders but if you have significant higher order harmonics at low volume (by this I mean 7th and above), these will not be masked and will show up in the "character" of the amplifier...even at extremely low levels.
If this is correct then the reason why tubes are smoother than solid state goes away. Tube amps make more higher ordered harmonics than solid state amps do. By rights they should be harsher. But they aren't and the big difference being that in a solid state amp the lower orders are suppressed.
If you refer back to Jean Hiraga though I think you can see why he says an exponential decay is important- the lower orders are thus able to mask the succeeding orders. What this comes down to is what is the formula for the exponential curve describing this decay? You and I differ in this regard (I think...). I prefer the cubic since the decay is more rapid.
Sorry Ralph this is kind of a dumb comment on your part. Loudness perception is only in small partially determined by high order harmonics. Masking unnatural ones (as all non_linear artifacts are unnatural) only prevents the unnatural excess of loudness that has the effect of also making things sound closer than they should because depth perception is dependent on the relative HF content. High order distortion impacts HF perception the most and pushes the sound forward in an unnatural way.
Masked is masked, it means you don't hear it. 2nd and other low orders are largely masked by the ear\brain's own self_distortion. The extension of that masking does not go beyond the next couple harmonics, so all the high order stuff is largely unmasked.
Cubic is wrong. It is the pattern as well as the decay...Keith Howard demonstrated this as well. One might speculate why...I personally think it has to do with the gap in the harmonic spectrum breaks up the masking effect... and our ear\brain evolved to hear natural sounds in an exponential decay if harmonics...that is how the ears own distortion pattern looks...not cubic.
I totally concede that I say dumb things. Do it all the time. But in this case, I've no idea to what you're referring- do you have a link? I'm also interested in the Keith Howard thing, but there are a lot of Keith Howards out there.
So far, a cubic non-linearity seems to have a good pattern. Since the harmonics drop off at a faster rate, and since the overall distortion is considerably lower at any given power level than you see in an SET (quadratic), the result is more neutral and smoother. Its easy to hear too. So you have measurement, the subjective experience and the math all on the same page. But I would like to see what Keith Howard was/is up to.
The distortion products are always there regardless of the power...they are just not visible below the noise floor. What you mean is that they rise above the noise floor with > 20-25% power (maybe...again depends on the specific amp). Does this mean they are now audible? Not necessarily. The sensitivity to higher order harmonics is dependent on the SPL level and so just because they rise above the noise floor doesn't make them immediately audible. If the rise is linear with power increase then they could easily remain inaudible as the low orders are also rising and will provide masking. The problem comes if the high order harmonics are rising at a faster rate than the lower order harmonics thus disrupting the pattern that was set at low power.
The problem comes if the high order harmonics are rising at a faster rate than the lower order harmonics thus disrupting the pattern that was set at low power.
Correct! And that is why SETs have such a reputation for being 'dynamic'. Its also why they sound 'loud' like they are making a lot of power when they aren't. People that are into SETs often talk about things you can hear that are not measured, amps that sound good but measure poorly. This is one of those things you can easily hear.
IMO/IME when audiophiles talk about 'dynamics' you can safely replace the word 'dynamics' with the word 'distortion' without changing the meaning of the conversation.
No, this is not why Ralph...look at the experiments from Peter Van Willenswaard. He found tubes do things dynamically that SS does not. He found it was more pronounced in SET.
Sounding loud and sounding dynamic are not the same perceptually. Sounding loud pushes the sound in your face, which is a sign of distortion taking over. Many amps sound dynamically lifeless at all levels but a good SET sounds dynamic at all levels. Sounding dynamic doesn't depend on SPL and the perception happens even at lower volume levels and perception of soundstage is unaltered.
There are many SS and some tube amps (usually those with a fair amount of feedback) that sound dynamically constipated, where one feels the need to turn them up to try to get dynamics but all they get is loud and still lifeless sound.
But if I had to say, those amps that you try to turn up to get them to play ball have too little feedback (20dB isn't near enough), with no way to add the amount needed to get them around that problem.
Sounding loud and sounding dynamic are not the same perceptually.
Yes and no... both come from higher ordered harmonics. Music has a lot of transients- that's where the power usually is needed. In an SET, when these transients occur, if they happen at a power level where the amp's linearity is reduced (usually about 20-25% and above) then the higher orders show up on the transients and nowhere else. That makes them sound dynamic. At higher levels though it becomes 'loud'. This is why so many SET owners seem to think that 85dB is all the 'louder' they need.
Not sure what you're referring to in your first statement. I googled Peter's name but don't know what I'm looking for. Do you have a link?
When you get rid of that issue, you can't even tell that they system is playing that loud. Now the dynamic structure is coming from the recording rather than the electronics. When sitting right next to someone, you may find you have to yell to be overheard. IOW, its lot harder to tell how loud the stereo is playing.
"Sounding loud and sounding dynamic are not the same perceptually.""Yes and no... both come from higher ordered harmonics. Music has a lot of transients- that's where the power usually is needed. In an SET, when these transients occur, if they happen at a power level where the amp's linearity is reduced (usually about 20-25% and above) then the higher orders show up on the transients and nowhere else. That makes them sound dynamic. At higher levels though it becomes 'loud'. This is why so many SET owners seem to think that 85dB is all the 'louder' they need."
The answer is just no. You may have heard the term "micro"dynamics? This is where little, seemingly subtle shifts, in intensity can make or break realism. Things like action of a pedal on a piano or a clack on the rim of a snare. The initial draw of a bow on a string etc. These are not loud in the context of SPL but there is a relatively large shift in level.Dynamics is the shift in level, loudness is the level.
For a car analogy: Dynamics is like acceleration and loudness is like velocity.
Speakers and especially amps that are dynamic show this prowess at ALL listening levels. Because the realism is retained throughout the SPL range. Quiet sounds shifting in level, loud sounds shifting in level...dynamics is about the shift, the speed of the shift and how accurately the shifts final level and speed is captured... not the actual SPL.
High order harmonics from the electronics has nothing to do with this perception. It has to do with accurate tracking of the recording of all these subtleties and tracking the shifts accurately as they would have occurred on the recording...or in real life.
One of the most disturbing effects of negative feedback that I have heard is this loss of natural dyanmics. The sound is so tied down that it no longer breathes like it should. I think that when you are feeding back the output to the input you are also somehow blunting these dynamic cues from the music...you are not only removing distortion (or creating new harmonics).
All of the best amps I have heard from a dynamic expressiveness perspective were zero feedback designs.
I would have thought, given your bigger models at least seem to be feedback free (the S30 at least is not I believe) that you would understand what I mean here and that it has nothing to do with loudness per se but the perception of a shift in level that reminds one of what one hears live. This could mean a very high instantaneous SPL but one that would be gone almost before it is perceived. However, it is prevalent (or absent) at all SPL.
No SS with feedback and no Class D I have owned or heard has the same "acceleration" as a good no feedback amp.
I realize that not everyone hears this properly so they are not bothered by it's absence, but once heard and understood it distinguishes true high end from mere hifi.
Edits: 10/18/21
'I think that when you are feeding back the output to the input you are also somehow ... '
I have to agree ... you DO think that!
it has little to do with reality but you're certainly entitled to your opinion
be well,
OUTSTANDING!!
Thank you, Thank you, and Thank you!
This is the most useful post EVER on this forum...
-Dennis-
One of the most disturbing effects of negative feedback that I have heard is this loss of natural dyanmics. The sound is so tied down that it no longer breathes like it should. I think that when you are feeding back the output to the input you are also somehow blunting these dynamic cues from the music...you are not only removing distortion (or creating new harmonics).
Yes- I've heard that too. That is why the feedback in our smaller amps (S-30 and M-60) is really minimal (2dB) and zero in our larger amps.
But that isn't a function of feedback as it turns out. Its a function of not enough feedback. And its not enough to say its not enough, because you can point to a Futterman OTL which claims to have 60dB (which it does at bass frequencies). At higher frequencies (like so many other amps out there) it has considerably less, owing to a lack of enough Gain Bandwidth Product.
Dynamics should come from the recording. The amp should not mess with that in any way. And they don't; the problem is distortion affects how we perceive the dynamic contrasts. If you don't have enough feedback you can have proper presentation in the bass, but as frequency goes up, things get messed up. There's more higher orders so while the bass might right, the highs are not.
If you have enough gain bandwidth product you can get around this problem. What you're looking for at any rate is a distortion figure that is the same at all frequencies. You can do that with zero feedback if you have enough bandwidth. Or, if you can get enough GBP you can do it that way, but you have to have enough GBP to support 35dB or more at 20KHz.
At that point the 'dynamic compression' you seem to hear with lessor amounts of feedback goes away. The sonic signature of the amp is another matter; it still needs to have the proper distortion signature (lower ordered harmonics as the dominant distortion product) even though that distortion might be quite low.
I've seen many 'objectivists'(?) (people who simply look at the specs) denigrate high end audio amps as 'tone controls'. In a way they are right, the problem they are having is they are not being pragmatic to understand that distortion is never going away. So if its not going away, you have to make sure that its as innocuous as possible. That will allow the amp to sound like music.
I have heard ultra high feedback amps (mola mola for example) that still sound relatively dead dynamically. Sure they play loud and clean but not dynamic.
If you feed a large % of the signal back you are in fact combining fedback signal with "fresh" incoming signal...this must create some kind of phase shift and "noise".
In fact, Norman Crowhurst noted that one of the most insidious aspects of feedback was a signal correlated "noise" floor. Which is another way of saying a myriad of distortion products, that covers the whole spectrum none of which is large enough to stick up as a clear harmonic peak. What it does do though is modulate with the signal level because, as you know, true noise is not correlated with the signal.
This is why you can easily hear "below the noise floor" on a recording with tape hiss, which is uncorrelated with the music signal. Your brain can pick out the correlated signal and reject the uncorrelated signal (a bit like an organic lock-in amplifier).
What happens though with a correlated "noise floor" though is that you can no longer hear below that noise floor because it is correlated with the signal, which has the effect of truncating low level information and I would argue probably has a deleterious effect on the dynamics as well.
An amp with huge amounts of feedback would also have a very strong and correlated response to the noise floor and this has negative impacts on perception...I can't see how adding even more feedback would magically take you out the other side for this particular problem.
I think Ralph has a way to balance two
feedbacks against each other, cleaning up
the mess that is created by using only one NFBK .
(By doing NFB ALSO in the opposite direction, we balance-out
most of the unwanted aspects of a single NFB loop).
I like it better, but I still don't like it much because
it still truncates dynamics-- simply by lessening
amp sensitivity to "microsignal" information.
The 2-stage amp is made possible-- partially-- by
not using NFBK.
If a balanced NFBK system is employed, many desirable
items in music are restored. But if we do this, the NFBK
loops still reduce gain. When we do that, the gain must be
restored-- add another stage of amplification if you please.
Now, what do we have? GAIN restored. Microsignal musical
information further reduced by what?----- the extra stage AND the
NFBK loops.
Not too bad when driving a medium-eff speaker using several
watts from the amp.. Sterile (by comparison)
when driving a large surface area, high-eff model that is wired
with silver, and has a great crossover system..
That speaker will tell you that your amp is OK-- better than
most-- but in comparison it lacks quite a bit of life-- it's
got power, it's got bandwidth, it's got pretty good phase alignment.
But there's one thing-- in spite of all of it's "A" scores, that
earns it a "D" score when playing music. It doesn't sound ALIVE--
like music dancing in an actual real life listening area.
-Dennis-
When we do that, the gain must be
restored-- add another stage of amplification if you please.
The gain of a class D amp is the relationship between the triangle wave and the incoming signal, if the amp uses pulse width modulation. You can get quite a lot of gain this way. In practice, we get enough so that we can drive the module directly with our preamps (which have no worries driving low impedances, even though they are all-tube). Most preamps don't have that kind of output voltage or current, so we boost the input signal by about 6dB using a set of low noise opamps. When opamps run with a gain of only 2 (6dB) the feedback is so high that the distortion is really stupid low so they tend to be very neutral, even at 20KHz. We're using some pretty nice opamps for this service, so the class D amp will be low noise on horns.
We do not run any significant feedback in our tube amps, because you have too many problems with phase margins and insufficient gain bandwidth product to support the feedback needed. So the distortion product tends to be a simpler kind with more lower ordered harmonics and less higher ordered, much like an SET in this regard although usually a couple of orders of magnitude less.
Thanks, Ralph! An excellent discussion,
as usual.
I break rules whenever I think that it
might work-- maybe it won't work.
I have been lazy in that regard because
I always wanted to play with a high-gain
solid-state device, and run it Class A, with zero FBK..
Everyone I ever talked to on this said mostly
the same thing-- it won't work with solid-state
devices-- they're not tubes-- they require all that
FBK.
Someday I think I'll try it anyhow-- I just want
to know for myself--- hah!
Who knows what that will sound like!
-Dennis-
-
I have some idea on this because I had in the past an amp from the company NAT out of Serbia.
The amp was the Symbiosis SE, which was a single ended hybrid that had a tube input, tube driver and an output stage with a single large MOSFET that was strapped to the bottom of a huge heat sink...per channel. There were two other heat sink towers that also had a single MOSFET that were regulating the output of the other MOSFET. Being single ended it was pure Class A where it consumed 800 watts even at idle.
This amp in some ways was the most amazing sounding amp I ever heard...if you could wait 2 hours for it to fully warm up (it was 155lbs. so there was a lot to warm up). It got spookily transparent...like an OTL and yet had much of the tonality of a good SET. It didn't quite have the same inner resolution and holography of a top SET but it wasn't absent either.
Of course there was not Feedback on this amp at all and it sounded that way. The most interesting part was that it actually put out 100 watts into either 8 or 4 ohms and was 2 ohm capable.
So, while a MOSFET doesn't sound quite like a triode it could in many ways sound quite convincing when used like a triode.
The only reason I sold it was the very long warm up to where it sounded almost psychedelically good...before that it was kind of like you knew it could do much better so it was a bit disappointing until it really came on song.
Most interesting, and confirms some of
my suspicions about it.
The question for me is-- is that long warmup
a function of zero FBK, or is it just power supplies,
etc., finally getting warm enough to clean-up.
I suspect that, but don't know it, so I'll just
have to build one. Mine would be much simpler--
maybe I'll get away with something-- it could work.
Thanks! -Dennis-
you know, I see where you were going with your earlier post that I ['tongue in cheek'] 'snarked' on and have to say it does resonate with me morricab
thanks for expanding on it here!
with regards,
-
nt
I have heard ultra high feedback amps (mola mola for example) that still sound relatively dead dynamically. Sure they play loud and clean but not dynamic.
Yes- something is wrong with the distortion signature. Its not enough to simply get the distortion low.
I agree (and quite a lot) with most of what you wrote.
An amp with huge amounts of feedback would also have a very strong and correlated response to the noise floor and this has negative impacts on perception...I can't see how adding even more feedback would magically take you out the other side for this particular problem.
Its not magic... its just when you get to that much feedback (and it has to be that much even at 20KHz) then it gives the amp the ability to clean up the mess that feedback otherwise leaves. It corrects phase and even corrects the harmonic and inharmonic noise floor (which sounds like hiss, but cannot be penetrated by the ear the way regular hiss can) as well as the bifurcated harmonics it otherwise creates. Back when Crowhurst was writing, this kind of feedback wasn't possible- the gain bandwidth product needed simply was decades out of reach.
But even though that's different today, you still have to pay attention to the distortion signature even though the distortion is much lower. Its got to be right or the amp will still get shot down.
Thanks again, Ralph. From you we learn more
about feedback. I try everything I can
think of to avoid it, but you point out more--
something else-- that people should pay
attention to.Negative global FBK is a TIMING issue, above
all else-- as far as music sounding real is
concerned.This is what makes your post important.
Read between the lines of your post and
one can deduce:The amplifier and the speaker should be viewed as a single
part-- should follow the dynamic events occurring with the
music sources and their components,, their interconnects, etc.Some setups will require a bit of NFBK in order to have
the timing cues come out -- shall I say-- unmolested.IF, however, one can invent ways to get these timing
cues ("microdynamics", etc.) to come out of the speaker
intact, WITHOUT any global NFBK being necessary, then
you've just won the sonics lottery.-Dennis-
Edits: 10/18/21 10/18/21
"But as you increase power in an SET the OPT is progressively harder to get bandwidth, to the point that its a stretch to call it hifi."
I've had this suspicion with higher powered SET amps..... It seems like the flea-powered units ( < 5 watts per channel) provide the most "magic"..........
I find this true with push-pull solid state as well.....
As a rule of thumb, yes, as power requirements of output transformers increase, it becomes more difficult to get good performance.
I think really, really good transformers can be wound for amplifiers producing greater than 5 Watts, and the point at which size becomes a problem depends on the winder, the design, and materials used.
I order transformers with oversized cores because considering the design compromises, this provides better lower mids and bass with little to no compromise of other areas of performance. But, these transformers are custom wound and I'm in the realm of being able to accomodate maybe 10 Watts (and the amp is really more like 4 Watt). Headroom has its benefits.
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
~!
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
-
I've had this suspicion with higher powered SET amps..... It seems like the flea-powered units ( < 5 watts per channel) provide the most "magic"..........
I find this true with push-pull solid state as well.....
This is why the type 45 is the King of SETs and has been for a while. You almost have to try to mess things up to not get bandwidth.
Just for fun I designed a little 5 watt P-P amp using EL95s to see how it might compete against SETs of the same power. At least with the amps I used (which use 2A3s) the EL95 amp was better in every way: more 3D, more detailed, smoother and more relaxed, especially at higher power. But it was better at low power levels too.
I think the reason SET lovers like them so much is they don't really get a chance to compare apples to apples. IMO/IME you can do that one of two ways. Either compare a PP amp using the same tubes as the SET, or compare a PP of the same power as the SET. I've done both so I have a pair of PP type 45 amps that I built up to compare against a type 45 SET. It wasn't even fair- the PP was better in so many ways (def.: 'better', adj to have greater detail, smoother presentation, greater impact, overall more musical and organic sound).
I did all this in order to sort out what kind of amp I wanted for my bedroom system. Since I never push the volume hard SETs were in the running until I tried this comparison. The little 5 watt amp demonstrated that technology had indeed progressed since the time when DHTs were the only game in town.
Do you know of an Amp or Kit similar to what you designed (EL95) that is for Sale? - I have used the SET 45 Amps for over 15 years now.AND ..... Why do you think that this is not widely known, especially with us Low Power Devotees?
Edits: 09/10/21
AND ..... Why do you think that this is not widely known, especially with us Low Power Devotees?
That one is easy! I think you're aware of how much care most SET aficionados put into their designs. But how many really high quality low power PP amps have you ever seen? I've been in the business for over 46 years and personally (so this is anecdotal) I can count them on one hand.
So when people are comparing SETs, probably the lowest power PP amp they could get their hands on used either 6V6s or EL84s. In either case those amps probably were not optimized nearly as much as the SETs were in comparison.
One issue is the way the amps make distortion. SETs tend to have a quadratic non-linearity while PP has a cubic non-linearity. But if you have a PP amp with a single-ended voltage amplifier, you get both. This algebraically tends to enhance the 5th harmonic. That gives such amps a harder edge which I think most SET lovers point to as wrong, and I agree with them.
But if you avoid any single ended circuitry and make the amp fully differential, then you get the cubic non-linearity by itself. IOW the even orders are cancelled, but as you increase the order of the harmonic they fall off at a fast rate than seen with a quadratic non-linearity, since distortion isn't compounded from stage to stage in the amp.
The 3rd is treated by the ear the same as the 2nd (its innocuous) and masks the higher orders so such an amp can be nice and smooth, but because its overall lower distortion, also more detailed. Its easy to hear.
Regarding my little EL95 amp, I put up a post about it on the amps and preamps section of this website months ago, maybe even last year. It uses (FWIW) one 12AT7 and a pair of power tubes in each channel. The 12AT7 is wired differentially so each plate is driving the grid of a power tube, and the EL95 is designed to be very easy to drive. A constant current source is used in the cathode circuit of the 12AT7 to linearize its operation and get the most differential effect- its also tied to a -300V supply. Only one grid is used for input; the other is used to receive feedback, which is mostly used to reduce the gain of the amp since its quite linear with no feedback at all. The advantage of doing it this way is there is no IMD introduced to the amp at the feedback node.
The result is a low distortion amp that expresses a nearly ideal cubic non-linearity with good masking of the higher orders. So it sounds very smooth but its also nicely detailed. I used an off the shelf output transformer which was claimed to have 50KHz response; I got full power 100KHz response so that part turned out quite well.
My point of making this amp was simply to build a low power amp that was properly designed and constructed- something I'd not seen in PP amps of that power level prior; they nearly always have some compromise built in on account of being built to a price.
I don't know of such an amp that's actually for sale, although when I designed this amp it was nearly the same price to make 10 chassis as it was to make one, so I can do it again. I'm working on one now that's done in chrome, just for fun.
Link Below ....
-
As for a powerful true SET the 845 or 211 tube sums it up.
Edits: 09/16/21
I have zero interest in More Power, as the 45 Amp provides more than I could ever need with my speakers (115db Horns)
nt
I would consider 60 watts a minimum. In a bigger room you'll need more.
And for this reason I would consider SETs a non-starter. If you want power out of an SET you won't get bandwidth as that is what they trade off. Usually bass is sacrificed.
If I were you I'd look at a triode push-pull amp, perhaps one that is class A and zero feedback. They're out there. You might also be surprised at how much more musical they can be than SETs. The trick here is to find one that has a distortion character that diminishes with power to unmeasurable (that's what SETs do).
Ralph, you clearly haven't been keeping up with what is out there for higher power SET. Bandwidth? check, bass grunt and control? check Plenty of power headroom in most normal sized rooms with normal listening distance?? Check
I know that to prevent phase shift as a designer you have two options. The first is to have wide bandwidth, the 2nd to have high feedback (+35dB). The latter isn't practical for tube amps and most solid state (insufficient gain bandwidth product, insufficient phase margins), so they have to go with the former.
To prevent phase shift at 20Hz you have to be flat to 2Hz. To go to 10KHz without phase shift you need to be flat to 100KHz.
Phase shift at a single frequency is inaudible. But over a spectrum of frequencies its perceived as a tonal coloration and can affect the soundstage presentation.
So are you telling me there are high power (+30 Watts) SETs out there that have full power bandwidth from 2Hz to 100KHz?? That would be really impressive; I know of very few P-P amps that can do that!
http://aries-cerat.eu/products/amplifiers/concero-65
Power: 65W
Power consumption per channel: 400W
Noise floor: -90db(Ref) un-weighted
Gain: x2.7 (8.5db)
Inputs: RCA, AC link proprietary input
Energy storage: 2000j
1,800VA power transformer
Signal bandwidth: 10Hz-110KHz @80% max power
Output impedance: User selectable(impedance matching system)
1.6ohm(8ohm setting),0.8ohm(4ohm),0.4ohm(2ohm setting)
Distortion: -70db H2 @ 1W -50db H2 @10W
Adjustable bias on the fly
Output and driver on line monitors
No capacitor in signal path
SuperCapacitors used for output and driver power supply(1mohm ESR
capacitors)
Dimensions: 490mmW X 590mmD x 350mm (Reference line)
Weight: 95kg each
http://aries-cerat.eu/products/amplifiers/concero-25
Specifications:
Power : 20W ~ 25W depending on bias setting
Gain: X1 (x7 medium gain)
Noise floor: <-100db A-weighted
Power Bandwidth: 15Hz ~ 80Khz -3db @ 20W
Tube list: 1x Elrog 845, 1x RCA 814 (per channel)
Power Consumption @ idle: 200W
Dimensions: 550 mm W x 430 mm D x 280 mm H
Weight : 65Kg each, unpacked.
Not quite 100Khz but I doubt the phase shift is too significant
http://aries-cerat.eu/products/amplifiers/diana-forte-mezzo
Specifications
Max Power: 60W SE Class A (70W peak)
Max Power bandwidth: 15Hz- 110Khz
Noise floor: 100db
Combined gain: X 20 (26db)
Dimensions: 570mmW X 590mmD X 350mmH
Weight: 110Kg unpacked
Tubes: 2X814, 4 X 813
https://www.nataudio.com/products/vacuum-tube-power-amplifiers/item/27-transmitter-hps.html
echnical Specification
Name Value
Type Single Ended Class "A" Triode
Power Output max. 80 Watts @ 1 kHz
Frequency Response 8 Hz to 110 kHz -3dB
Input impedance 100 k ohms parallel with 100pF
Input Sensitivity 1.5 V RMS for 80 Watts
Gain 24.50 dB (x18.8)
Noise 110 dB below rated output "A" weighted
Tube Complement 2 x 6N6P, 1 x QB5/1750
Power Requirement 110 to 240 VAC @ 50 to 60 Hz, 370 VA max. (set in factory)
Dimensions 11.8" (300 mm) wide ´ 20.9" (530 mm) deep ´ 10.2" (260 mm) high
NET Weight approx. 89 lbs (40 kg) unpacked / per block
TOTAL Weight approx. 220 lbs (100 kg) packed in polypropylene crate / per pair
https://www.nataudio.com/products/vacuum-tube-power-amplifiers/item/24-se1-gm70.html
Technical Specification
Name Value
Type Single Ended Class "A"
Power Output up to 25 W @ 1 kHz, 8 ohms taps
THD 0.95% @ 20 W @ 1 kHz
Frequency Response 10 Hz to 70 kHz
Input Impedance 100 kohms parallel with 100pF
Input Sensitivity 1 V RMS for 25 Watts Output @ zero feedback
Gain 23 dB (x14)
Noise 108 dB below rated output "A" weighted
Tube Complement 1 x EC1010, 1 x 3E29 & 1 x GM70 (3 tubes/block, 2 tubes inside a chassis)
Power Requirement 220 to 240 (110 to 120) VAC @ 50 to 60 Hz, 180 VA max.
Dimensions 11.8" (300 mm) wide x 20.4" (520 mm) deep x 10.2" (260 mm) high
NET Weight approx. 60 lbs. (25 kg) unpacked / monoblock
TOTAL Weight approx. 133 lbs. (60 kg) packed in two polypropylene crate
Not quite 100Khz but 70Khz isn't bad...
https://www.ayonaudio.com/product/ayon-crossfire-evo-mono/
Bandwidth to 60Khz...
http://www.mastersoundsas.it/1/power_amplifiers_4432639.html
MasterSound amps have bandwidths of 80Khz + ...
https://www.wavac-audio.jp/ec300b_e.shtml
One of the better 300B amps out there...rated to 100Khz...
https://www.wavac-audio.jp/ec838_e.shtml
also to 100khz
None go to 2 Hz but several are single digits Hz while getting to 100Khz or close.
http://aries-cerat.eu/products/amplifiers/ianus-series/essentia
https://www.nataudio.com/products/hybrid-power-amplifiers/item/155-magneto.html
Something different for you. Single ended, single element hybrids that are OTL...
We still see in all these examples that bass impact will be an issue. Its the full power (not the 'signal bandwidth', whatever that means) bandwidth that really tells what is going on, keeping in mind that in this particular application, the OP will be pushing the amps for all that power.
I agree that if you can do 80KHz its probably just fine. But in terms of 'bass grunt and control' you'll be able to do better on account of the phase shift in the bass region will be robbing the amp of the impact that's really there in the recording.
As I said, its usually the bass region that gets compromised, although I'm sure they sound musical.
Hi Ralph!Brad is 100% correct. As an owner of an amp by one of the manufacturers he mentioned i.e., a 135LB, 40W/ch, Mastersound Reference 845, SET amp/integrated amp -{ depending on which I select, but I use it as an amp with a Don Sachs "Custom" SP14 preamp }- for the past 20+ years it has produced the most musical presentation you could imagine! I use it with 92 dB sensitive, Phase Coherent, Reference 3A Taksim speakers in a 15.7" W x 12.7" D room with an 8ft to 10ft sloped ceiling. The speakers are placed on the 15.7" W wall and where the ceiling is 8ft H.
When I listen to music I listen to about 75% smooth jazz, i.e., Spyro Gyra, Fourplay, Flim & the BB's, Acoustic Alchemy, etc., and 25% Prog-rock, i.e., Genesis, Kansas, YES, Marillion, Boston, etc. Now when I listen I usually like to listen to music a bit on the louder side, but not blasting the music by any means. The music is always musical with clean, crystal-clear highs due to the Taksim's pure Beryllium dome tweeter which uses a single, non-inductive, capacitor as the sole high pass filter! And below that wonderful sounding tweeter is a single, wideband, 8" driver with absolutely no Whizzer!
The rated freq. response is 31Hz to 40KHz and I can tell you the bass is deep enough I've never thought of getting a subwoofer. Why should I when a couple of times I've even been asked where the sub is? Truth be told I've never enjoyed listening to music as much as I do with the Mastersound/Reference 3A combo. Ralph if you ever visit Orlando, FL. send me a private message and I'll give you a way to get in touch so you can come over and hear what it sounds like for yourself. I think you'd be very surprised by what you hear. I just got the Taksims a few short months ago and I know I still am...
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom)
Central Florida Audio Society -- SETriodes Group -- Space Coast Audio Society
Full-range/Wide-range Drivers --- Front & Back-Loaded Horns --- High Sensitivity Speakers
Edits: 10/08/21
Have you used a sound pressure level meter to see how loud you're actually playing the system?
Ralph,
Believe it or not, I actually have an SPL app but never thought to measure the loudness. This coming Saturday when my wife goes shopping I'll be sure to set the preamp at a normal listening volume --- for me --- and measure what the loudness actually is! Now you have me curious...
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom)
Central Florida Audio Society -- SETriodes Group -- Space Coast Audio Society
Full-range/Wide-range Drivers --- Front & Back-Loaded Horns --- High Sensitivity Speakers
Nice speakers the Ref 3as. I owned 3 different pairs; Master Control MMC upgraded to the same Be tweeters as in yours, Le Integrale which I upgraded the soft dome tweeter to a better one and La Veritas... a smaller floorstander than the Le Integrales. All had the 8 inch hyper exponential driver with no xover. I upgraded to Odeon horns where I have stayed to this day. I am sure you're make a good combo with the Mastersound.
Hi Brad!
I may be mistaken, but I believe you may have mentioned owning some Reference 3A speakers before upgrading to your Odeon horns in the past! Perhaps you'd be willing to tell me what sonic improvements, other than an increase in sensitivity, you heard when upgrading to the Odeon horns? Your impressions about the sonic improvements you heard when switching from 3A to Odeon would be very much appreciated. Thanks for your time...
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom)
Central Florida Audio Society -- SETriodes Group -- Space Coast Audio Society
Full-range/Wide-range Drivers --- Front & Back-Loaded Horns --- High Sensitivity Speakers
Primarily dynamics...the Odeons sound significantly more realistic with acoustic instruments, particularly horns, strings and especially piano. There is more "action" in the presentation with a stronger sensation of a real person putting pressure on keys and hitting strings (for a piano) or the draw of the bow on strings. The blatt of horns is far more real (my daughter plays trumpet so i have a contemporaneous comparison) and gets a lot closer to my believing i am hearing the real thing.
Coherence and tonality are similar and the basic sensation of transparency is also similar...until you take into account the "action" and dynamic scaling. Then you realize there is additional information coming through with the Odeons that was not coming through with the Ref 3As.
Another friend of mine had Ref 3As (He also had the Master Control MMC like me...both of us upgrading to Be tweeters), that he got to replace Verity Audio Rienzi speakers. Then he heard my Odeons and was bowled over and went out and bought first a pair of Rigolettos (not the current version, which is hugely dynamic as well) and then a pair of No. 32s (a great, great speaker). His system now is very realistic sounding (with Aries Cerat Diana integrated amp that he bought from me) and doesn't think of upgrades anymore.
Just quietly off topic: those Odeon Rigoletto 2020 speakers do something for me. When I downsize, they are on the list! Back to normal programming.
Cheers.
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
I just ordered myself a pair! Are they better than my 20 year old Odeon La Bohemes? But they are so good for so little money I had to have a pair. They are also dramatically better than the previous, already very good Rigolleto.
I say, go for it!
I was going to say the money is not so little...- the point is though that they appear to represent good value at their price point.
Let us know what you think when you've lived with them for a while. I'm curious!
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
In today's high end world, 6.5K is pretty low money for the level of performance I heard.
Bass is a problem of using too small of a core leading to saturation and a huge amount that increase in distortion that is surely audible as the harmonics run right through the midrange. The amps I linked mostly have huge output iron (particularly Aries Cerat...that weight is about iron.) so saturation is almost non-existent and bass has slam and control as well as texture.
Frequency response of the Hirata Tango 805 transformer. Maybe does not qutie meet your requirements, but from a listening perspective is more than acceptable at 50 watts. If you haven't heard one, perhaps talking it down is inappropriate.
The issue here is the OP is using speakers that are bit low in efficiency for use with SETs. I find that if you push an SET hard enough that it sounds 'dynamic' you're pushing it too hard, since that dynamic quality is caused by distortion. This is why you see so many comments about how 'dynamic' an SET is for its power output in reviews. They're simply asking too much power of them.
I suggested that he get an amp of at least 60 watts but to be successful with that kind of power he's going to need an amp that he can push to at least 90% of full power. You can't do that with SETs, not if you want to hear what they are all about.
This particular transformer is a bit curious as its equipped with a feedback winding. Have you heard it with the feedback applied?
No Ralph that is called clipping and it sounds unpleasant not dynamic.
Peter Van Willenswaard demonstrated that a SET will generate several times higher voltage on dynamic peaks than its static rating. Waveforms looked not real good but he declared it still sounded audibly clean.
I tend to agree, providing the power
supply can quickly supply the peak's
requirements without causing the amp
to go into clipping or time-delay
distortions.The "extra dynamics" that people note
when pushing a SET with an ordinary
power supply is current sag and LAG.
This causes the speaker woofer cone to misbehave,
causing the effect by pushing and pulling the woofer cone
as an AFTER EFFECT (time-lagged) effect of
the power supply sagging and restoring..This effect is initially started by a musical
low-frequency pulse, but it has departed
from following the music-- it departs from the music--
it's not following the music ON TIME.
The time sequence is LATE and distorted. The dynamic effect
is fake......The effect is eliminated by giving the SE amp low-DCR,
fast attack and quick restore power, with minimal timing
issues and minimal voltage & current sag when pulsed by
a low frequency "hit". The more repetitive these pulses
are, the more the conventional power supply lags behind the
music (in SE operation).. in many aspects, pushing and pulling
the woofer cone, when it shouldn't.Power supplies for SE amps must be low DCR, super fast, and
must be much larger than the amp is calculated to need....,
for instance, a power supply for a one-watt amp should be
the same electrical size as one for a 75 watt push/pull amp.At one audio show, a visitor asked me to take the front grille
off of my speakers so he could watch the woofer cones.He said, "if I see that cone move more than 1/32nd
inch, I'm outta here! And I expect great bass."He later said, "now that amp has a great power
supply".Next year, he asked if that pair of amps was still
around-- he wanted them.The man would go all over the Hotel, listening to music and
looking at woofer cones!-Dennis-
Edits: 10/02/21 10/02/21 10/02/21
-unless we're using different definitions. Since I have an technical/engineering background, I'm used to seeing amps clip on an oscilloscope and so define clipping as that point when a sine wave can no longer be increased in amplitude and so the amp clips off the top bit- that is where the term comes from.
But Stereophile defines clipping as 'anything above 1% THD' which is a different thing altogether!
So I'm not talking about clipping since we're talking about an amp that might only be making 50% of full power (although at that power level its in danger of being overloaded due to the logarithmic nature of the ear).
Yes, only with the feedback applied, per the schematic. I gather Hirata Tango made custom order transformer sets specifically for certain Shishido designs. Apparently the Shishido designs were initially produced commercially in Japan by Fine Arts, and later by Wavac (using ISO Tango or later xformers).
Not questioning your intent. OP asked specifically for SET options that he could try. I agree with you that limited power SET would likely not work acceptably with his speakers. Given the 6db down point at 30 Hz, bottom end of the speakers might be limited anyway. Don't know.
There is potentially a large difference between pure performance specs and musicality. Specs certainly do not assure musicality, and some pretty poor spec equipment can sound great. Listener impressions, like many on this thread, can be very useful (taken with caution).
There is potentially a large difference between pure performance specs and musicality. Specs certainly do not assure musicality, and some pretty poor spec equipment can sound great. Listener impressions, like many on this thread, can be very useful (taken with caution).
IME this is everything to do about the distortion signature. If there isn't a nice 2nd or 3rd harmonic to mask the higher orders, the latter will be audible as harshness and brightness since the ear converts distortion into tonality. The 2nd and 3rd are relatively innocuous so the ear can tolerate a lot of it.
I'm of the opinion that the distortion signature is more important than the amount of distortion. The signature will say how smooth the amp is. If you can get the same signature but at a lower overall level, you can get more detail.
So SETs do fairly well in this regard because of the 2nd harmonic. But you can get a better distortion signature by going fully differential and balanced from input to output. This will cause the predominate harmonic to be the 3rd (which is treated by the ear same as the 2nd) but at about 1/10th the level. Further, because distortion is compounded less from stage to stage throughout the circuit, the overall distortion will be lower and as the order of the harmonic is increased, its amplitude will fall off faster.
The SET has what is called a Quadratic Non-Linearity and the fully differential amp has a Cubic Non-linearity.
IMO/IME the cubic non-linearity is better because its smoother and more detailed. Its also quite a bit lower distortion. For example, our amps make about 0.5%THD with no feedback while an SET does about 10% before clipping. But the SET might make 7 watts, while one of our amps might make 60, 140 or even 200 watts. If you run them at the same power levels the SET can run, the distortion is a lot lower since both amps have the property of distortion dropping to unmeasurable as you decrease the output power.
So that's one thing. Another thing to look for is that the distortion should be the same at 100Hz, 1kHz and 10kHz. A lot of solid state amps (which otherwise have great specs) actually have distortion rising as frequency is increased; their feedback is falling off with frequency due to insufficient gain bandwidth product. This is part of the reason they are bright and harsh (the other being that feedback has suppressed the lower ordered harmonics).
So yeah, the specs don't tell the whole story but we do know how the amp is going to sound based on what we can measure. Its just that the measurements you need to see never show up on the spec sheets, and for that matter what's often considered important quite often isn't; its marketing rather than engineering.
If there isn't a nice 2nd or 3rd harmonic to mask the higher orders
Hey Ralph,
do you have a good reference on this? I have seen it mentioned in passing but have never seen a good paper on the concept.
dave
the article below isn't it but its certainly worth a read, from Nelson Pass.
I'd like pointers to the articles.
It is interesting that Nelson wrote the linked info back in 2013 and since then I hear he has been playing with the phase of the harmonics in successive stages so any 2nd generated remained in phase rather than nulled. Take a simple driver and output with a typical H2 dominant distortion spectra and the nature of the phase inversion puts the even order harmonics from each stage out of phase from the other creating a new overall spectra where the evens partially null leaving the odds to possibly dominate. The story goes Nelson would inset a 1:1 inverting transformer between the stages to keep the evens summing in phase so 2nd dominates and each following order declines.
The above is a rough paraphrase from my fuzzy memory... if anyone knows nelson's current thoughts please chime in.
dave
If you google "preamp variable 2nd harmonic added" you see that people are getting 'tube sound' with plug-ins and the like that add a variable 2nd harmonic.
Nelson made a harmonic generator that did that- he sold kits at the Burning Amp festival. Link below.
I am specifically looking for a citing in support of the following statement:The 2nd and 3rd are relatively innocuous so the ear can tolerate a lot of it.
this seems to suggest they are on equal footing and 1% 2nd is equivalent to 1% third. My experience has been that even order distortions are "friendlier" than odd and as the order increases the level of distortion needs to go down substantially to avoid objectionable sonics.
In respect to Nelson's 2d generator, I am having a hard time understanding what he actually means by the phase of the H2. As near as I can tell he is operating under the belief that there will already be some H2 in the signal and by adding additional H2 from an external source the phase relationships of the two are important.
I dove into spice and built a simple 300B stage that has 1.3% distortion with this spectra.
I then attenuated the signal to make it a unity gain stage and fed it to the grid of a second 300B operating in the same manner. I could then reverse the phase of the two "H2 generators" to illustrate what I believe to be the two conditions (H2+ and H2-) that nelson is referring to and came up with these two spectra.
if we then compare these harmonic profiles to nelsons genral tonal description things become much more (or less??) clear
from listening tests we learn that there is a tendency to
interpret negative phase 2nd as giving a deeper soundstage and improved localization than
otherwise. Positive phase seems to put the instruments and vocals closer and a little more
in-your-face with enhanced detail.It does seem to me that this is not a 100% direct correlation to exactly what nelson is discussing but I cannot envision how the phase of any given distortion spectra is relevant until it is combined with another spectra so you can get sum and difference effects. The biggest 2nd order generator in a system is typically the air speaker driver interface so none of this exists in a vacuum.
dave
Edits: 09/21/21
Take a look- see what you think.
the two things that strike me in the article (and the linked article by Lynn Olson) that jump out at me are this thought referenced to Norman Crowhurst:
Research by Norman Crowhurst points out that feedback mostly reduces the level of the 2nd and 3rd harmonics, leaving the upper harmonics more or less alone, or sometimes at higher level than before feedback. It doesn't take very much level of a 5th, 7th, or 9th harmonic to make the sound "bitter", "dry", "clinical", "cold" "small" "dynamically limited" or "harsh". This is all part of the psychoacoustics of distortion and masking.
This is all in reference to feedback reducing distortion and has nothing to do with masking even though both 2nd and 3rd are mentioned.
Later on in the article he does get into masking but at that point the "masking" generator is a tubed circuit that generates only 2nd order distortion and the "tube noise" raises the noise floor to bury all of the existing harmonics higher than 2nd in the increased noise floor.
both of the points that I extracted from a precursory glance do not seem to support the idea that the third harmonic is benign and helps mask higher orders. He does call 2nd order "sonic gold" but in all of the examples the third is way down and not seemingly a factor in the "sonic flavor" I do like that they give both the measured objective and the sonic subjective results for a number of different music selections which allows the reader to get a better feel for the relationships at hand.
dave
The pattern definitely matters, which is implied here by Crowhurst as the higher orders are largely left alone and the 2nd and 3rd are reduced having a negative impact on the sound.
Cheever also finds that SPL affects the sensitivity to high orders and the ear is more tolerant at higher SPL. This is why having no high order harmonics at lower SPL is critical because our hearing sensitivity to them is the highest.
-
I agree that anything odd other than the 3rd is not perceived well. They become more audible the further they are from the fundamental tone. That is why the 3rd is considered innocuous as the 2nd (and to a lessor degree, the 4th). I read this somewhere in the last 2 weeks but pounding google hasn't resulted in the page I viewed.
If you want to look at an example of where the 3rd shows up, look at any sort of analog tape recording. A properly working tape machine will have a primary distortion amount of the 3rd generated at 0VU which might be 3% at +3VU. Its also a product of output transformers although I've not spent a lot of time on the latter.
A lot of people say that a good reel to reel can't be touched by any other format; it would appear that the 3rd harmonic is relatively innocuous on that basis alone.
It seems that the 2nd and 3rd are somehow helpful to assist the ear/brain system in making out soundstage depth; I was interested to see that Nelson commented on that too. I've noticed using direct mic feeds in the studio if you use an amp that makes significant lower ordered harmonic distortion as opposed to one that does not, you seem to get a more accurate sense of depth out of the monitor system. I don't know why this is but Nelson's comment about this is not the only one I've seen. I'd love to see more research on that but I'm not holding my breath...
There are manufacturers that design to specs and those that design to produce sound. Pretty sure that both can not be the #1 consideration (since there is only one first).
The Tango winders probably came from generations of winders, since skills/jobs were generally passed down. Unlikely that these were trained engineers, but their connection with the product allowed them to create exceptional transformers. Which came first - the transformer or the spec? Meet the spec rather than fully optimize the xformer? There is a reason for exceptional products, and it goes beyond technology.
I consider/buy equipment based on sound rather than spec. Then I can be happy listening to music, rather than being proud that I have an expensive, high spec system that just sounds the way it sounds.
Everyone I knew that was playing around with building OPTs had a garage full of prototypes. And certainly with any transformer-coupled amp the OPT is the heart of its nature and quality.
The OTLs allowed me to get crazy bandwidth. Before I started bandwidth limiting in the voltage amplifier some of my prototypes (this was in the 1970s) could be used as a Radio Frequency booster amplifier- I used one to make 50 watts as a booster for a walkie talkie at 27MHz. But that sort of bandwidth can cause tweeters to get damaged if any RF gets into your system so we never made any production amps with that sort of bandwidth.
But we do make them that have no phase shift at 20Hz or 20KHz. Since I've also produced LPs from some recordings that I've done I have a pretty good idea of what that actually sounds like. I recommend any audiophile do something similar if they can; having a real reference recording on hand really allows you to know what you're hearing.
I used to think that there were things that could not be measured that we are hearing. I don't think that anymore; instead I've come to realize that usually what's happening is that most of what's important that we can measure never gets reported on the spec sheets. To that end, I feel that the distortion signature (the spectrum of harmonics generated) is more important that what the THD is; if you can get the signature right then its OK to get low THD but not the other way 'round!
Phase shift is important in my book. You don't need bandwidth to get it right if you run enough feedback, but if you're not running enough or if you run none then you need bandwidth. You can't hear phase shift at any one frequency but the ear will perceive it as a coloration if it occurs over a spectrum. So an amp that is rolled off at 50KHz can sound dark as a result.
I like what the head engineer at Scott said about this decades ago:
"If it measures good and sounds bad, -- it is bad. If it sounds good and measures bad, -- you've measured the wrong thing."​
I would simply add that it helps to also understand how the ear perceives sound and how that relates to engineering. Most spec sheets ignore human hearing perceptual rules.
Make a single ended OTL!
http://aries-cerat.eu/products/amplifiers/collatio-series
I spotted a few false comments on that page.
There are class A OTLs. There are OTLs that are zero feedback. This statement from that page is entirely false:
Feedback is mandatory in this designs to cancel out the artifacts generated by the problems of not true complimentary driving of the signal, and of course cross-over distortion.
Cross-over distortion isn't a thing if the circuit is designed correctly... I could go on but its clear that there is misinformation on that page.
Good perspective. Hopefully one day I will get to hear one of your OTL amps.
OTL has interested me for several years, so I had the objective of renovating a Futterman H3 just to hear it. The right occasion / opportunity never occurred. An Atma-Sphere would likely be a bit more practical. It certainly would provide an interesting and relevant listening experience of a unique approach to music amplification.
I have some 211 monoblocs that I think sound really good. I have listened to 300B amps but was never tempted to own one. I like that there is good competition in current production 211 tubes. I have 93db AudioNote J-Spe speakers. The amps are the Consonance Cyber 211 made by Opera Audio, a relatively high end Chinese manufacturer. The reviewer (link below) had owned the Ongaku and felt these were very close in performance. I have a local friend with the big Maggies and Parasound Halo gear who was favorably impressed. His system and room are set up for concert level sound. Mine is focused on clarity,tone,and first row sound.
I also had a couple of 300B based amps, mated earlier with a pair of Silverline Audio monitors that weren't very efficient, that sounded great in my room (also had a powered sub and an active crossover with that setup). It played plenty loud to me with the pot on the pre at ~11 o'clock.
After the move to full range floorstanders, the 300B amp(s) still sounded pretty good, but the lower freq lacked definition - as I removed the sub and the crossover.
Now I have a pair of mono's with 211 tubes driving the same floorstanders - that was an eye (or should I say ear?) opening experience. The highs were there, the mids were mostly there (300B had tad more midrange 'warm'), AND the lows were also there.
Safe to say, I never looked back, and can sit listening to the system for hours on end.
nada aqui
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
Yeah, I like a good 211 amp...better than most of the 845 implementations I have heard.
I have tried an 845 as well, and prefer the 211. Not to mention NOS/old 211 tubes are much cheaper than 845 tubes.
MP,
First paralleling DHT are not good. What happens is when you have a transient one of the tubes will pretty much shut down the other unless you directly couple the driver stage to the grids. Then the whole heater thing is a mess.
You can make a good sounding 845 amp that will pack close to 20W at 900V. But make sure you use big iron.
Stay away from 805's and the other transmitters they all pretty much suck.
You can make a pretty good sounding 6550/KT88 SE amp to 20W pretty easily. I made a bunch of directly connected driver stages that got A & A2 power to 20W+ in some of the guitar amps I built.
Thanks,
Gordon
J. Gordon Rankin
wHat is your feeling on the 6C33C tube? I find they have a lot of drive and will give you around 15-18 watts.
A professional review on an 805 amp, but I did not see the term 'suck'. Perhaps implementation and transformers make a difference.
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/superioraudio/equipment/1105/wavacmd805m.htm
I built a 805 amp with monolith magnetic 3.5K output transformers with 16 Ohms local feedback, and it sounded great. Biased at +28V, it was driven by a mosfet source follower.
I went overboard using 211 as a driver :-). Its 2 chassis per monoblock. The power supply is a separate chassis. The parts selection was carefully chosen
- Coleman +ve Bias Supply
- Bartola Valves -- Ale's source follower modules
- Daitron low noise SMPS supplies
- amphenol 97 series connectors
I had the amp for 2 years before building a 211 driving 211 with monolith magnetics 15K output transformers, parts from the folks as above.
Repurposed the 805 to 211 driving 845 with MQ FS100 10K transformers I had on hand a friend.
Now I am planning a simpler 805 build, single chassis monoblocks with 5687 as the driver with EX001 plate choke as the plate load. Will reuse the same 3.5K output transformers.
I was just responding on 805 sound. Made well, they sound punchy, powerful and can handle any music thrown at them
thx
btw, the schematic is not updated to show ale's and coleman supplies, so the description does not match the schematic. They were driving zu audio definition speakers which are pretty efficient
Plus it's not made anymore and it use to cost more than the car you drive.
I heard it and well it wasn't worth the money I thought.
G.
J. Gordon Rankin
$18K in 2005? OK, my car cost more than that, but t
The WAVAC amps of those days, be they 805 or 833, were regarded by most, including me, as some of the BEST sounding SET amps shown in the 2000's at CES/T.H.E., and that's saying something.
The Wavac HE805 (one of the really expensive ones from them) was also one of the very best sounding amp I have ever heard...gobsmacking really.
The problem with all audio shows is you're not just listening to the amplifiers. The room is an unknown the speakers, cables, sources.
As you may know, I am an Audio Note fan but let's be real - if the AN E speaker doesn't do it for you then it's game over for everything driving the speakers. Room 2 may have a WAVAC on some horn speaker you love or a single driver 100dB and so room 2 may sound better overall - even though the AN amp may utterly trounce the WAVAC - all because of the speakers. I own the AN E and I have heard it sound downright middling boomy, coloured at Audio Shows.
On top of that - they always seemed to sound worse when they ran their old Meishu (300B) amplifier versus the Jinro (211). I think I was right since they have come out with the Meishu Tonmeister to replace the Meishu.
Plus an audio show has limited time to audition - stuff can grow on people over time. I hated Audio Note the first time I heard them. I loved the ATC Parasound combination when I first auditioned them but on several follow up auditions it was unlistenable to me on music I liked - I don't blame Parasound - Bricasti at $15,000 was far worse (probably got class A in Stereophile) - groan.
Indeed, I have done the same - probably misjudged a ton of speakers based on the fact they were being run with high negative feedback class A/B SS amplifiers. So I think back to those "bad speakers" and wonder - "gee what if I put a Jinro/Tomei/Ongaku on that speaker? Probably going to sound a helluva lot better than the Brightson(I mean Bryston).
Heard the AN-E in various iterations at the dealer's and at the shows with Meishu, Jinro, Oto SE signature etc. and that speaker NEVER did it for me...sounds like it is seriously holding back some good amps.
I had a guy chasing me around on forums for years telling me the AN E never sounded good to him - then bam he heard them in a Warren Jarret set-up and said it was the best sound he ever heard (aside from his own system of course). I get a lot of such PMs so let's say I have a lot of patience that they're a "grow on me" kind of speaker.The problem in audio is there is rarely a shared experience. If you drive a fully loaded Toyota Camry in London and I drive one in Vancouver and assuming the roads are good then we have a shared experience that is far closer than in audio. So let's say we drove all the cars in the Camry class then we can both evaluate the seats the steering the handling relative to other cars and we probably come to very similar conclusions.
That generally isn't possible in audio. I listen at CES, you listen in Germany - the rooms are different the volume is different, the music is different, the gear is different.
I listed both MBL and YG Acoustics as two of the 5 worst-sounding rooms at CES and then ranked them 1-2 at the California Audio Show - and both rooms used the same electroniocs - MBL uses MBL and YG Acoustics used Ypsilon. Audio Note didn't make my top 15 at the second show and ranked top 5 at the first.
Even at the same show - I auditioned the AN room in 2017 (CAS) and then ran into a reviewer who didn't like it - ok - we went back to the room together - I put on my albums - I played it at my volume (the people running the room left) and he wound up choosing them as a top 3 room. Because when he was there they were playing some snooze fest coma-inducing classical music.
In 2019 (CAS) I sat with a couple of symphony pianists in their 20s (I think they were a couple) and I decided to compare notes - which rooms do you two like best for piano? Their top three rooms were my top three rooms. (Audio Note E, Acapella Audio Arts (with AN front end), SoundChaos with class A PureAudio amplifiers (run by David Cope - former Audio Note show runner who left and now sells other brands).
I don't care what the speaker is - the reason there are so many speaker options is that they don't all appeal to everyone. Steve Hoffman is one of the biggest names in all of the music recordings - he has mastered some of the absolute biggest artists in the music industry for decades (and at the top audiophile labels) - he has attended many shows and heard all the major speakers - he noted recently that the AN E is the best speaker he has heard in 40 years. He is using the speaker at home for pleasure and now in the studio.
But, if those first auditions didn't go well then things would be very different wouldn't they? You never get a second chance to make a first impression? I mean in my case the AN's were so bad I made fun of them on an old Audio-Forum (AR) back in 2000.
I was in the shop mainly for Reference 3a. My favourite boxed speaker maker at the time. In future auditions, the AN K bettered the De Capo. That wasn't the case the first go-round, however.
But hey I continue to listen to all kinds of speakers I have not liked much over the years - I mean Magnepan does zero for me but they're massively popular and have been for decades - but so far not yet for me. I am still waiting for the BAM moment where I have to pick my jaw op off the floor like so many others have felt about them.
Fortunately, I live in an Audiophile hotbed with plenty of chances to audition a huge variety of gear. The problem is that on various forums there is always someone who says I must hear X because X is way better than what I have or anyone has. Right now it's Benchmark - I must hear Benchmark because it measured the best on some AMR site or some such. But last year it was some Cherry Class D and the year before it was Devialet and years before it was nOhr speakers that were all the rage and Scaena and KingSound and on and on it goes. And invariably I listen and am not at all impressed - I just heard those silly Devialet speakers in their system - the speakers look sop cool they sides pump in and out as they sing along to the music - but boy did it sound dreadful to me. If they just sounded decent they would be a great thing to own. A lifestyle product with respectable sound can justify it.
Anyway - too many flavours of the month to keep up with.
Edit: sorry for the long post - I get on the AN E train and lost the point I made in my prior post - the companies like AN who makes the whole train largely lives and dies on the speakers. So if a person goes into the AN room doesn't like the speakers then they won't likely consider the amps or days or cables etc. Other brands can get around that - a person auditions a Soundlab and likes it - well one show it might be Bricasti and other a Benchmark another a Bryston. If you like the way Soundlab presents music then chances are you will have a favourable impression of all three amplifier brands. There aren't too many audio shows where a Meishu Tonmeister is connected to some HE speaker from some other brand. So it doesn't get the benefit of the doubt - because after all it is ALWAYS shown with an AN E and it is never shown with anything else. Whereas a Wavac you may hear with 10 speakers - you might love it on 3 of them but that's enough to be remembered and it gets the credit for the sound - even if it was middling with 7 other speakers.
Memory tends to work with things that are dazzling.
Edits: 09/08/21
And that 101st time the lights will go on and I will "get" the AN-E? Sure...
Look I know the Swiss dealer, heard them setup in his shop with the better electronics offerings from AN and was still unmoved. If it is that hard to make them click then something ain't right...
That's ok they're not for you. They are for a lot of other people. I mean I have auditioned most speaker brands over the last 30+ years too. A lot of the speakers you like I have auditioned and they didn't click either. So it goes.Indeed, I find most discussions on preferences pointless. There is no way to win on a preference - you can tell me all the ways Brussels-Sprouts are a great vegetable and then when I eat one I have a gag reflex where I want to puke it up. Other people love the damn abominations.
Edits: 09/09/21
But you never heard Odeon speakers, right?
When I heard mine I knew that was what I was looking for (at least for what I can afford) and that was like 8 years ago...still have them.
I am adding another pair of Odeons they have a new version of their small horn, Rigoletto, that I heard at the Odeon factory in Northern Germany and it was smokin'.
Do they sell in one of the biggest Audiophile hotbeds in the world? Hong Kong?I have only heard one of their speakers: the La Traviata which was many years ago and wasn't very good. I would not read the Stereophile review.
Generally speaking, we take the recommendations of people we tend to agree with - if I agree with a film critic about films 9/10 times then I will probably be more motivated to seek out films he recommends. If I read another film critic and I agree with him only 2/10 times then I am less motivated to seek it out.
It may be hard for you to be objective but the AN-E, in the audio press, is one of the most well-regarded speakers in the entire history of audio. Even if you don't like the speaker - they have been well-reviewed by almost every publication. And unlike a lot of other speakers, they have stood the test of time selling (and being well reviewed) in one form or another since ~1981.
Just like Magnepan - I can admit that lots of people love Magnepan (or Apogee) including reviewers - but they're not for me, they've never impressed me. Nor does Soundlab or Quad.
Unless they can open a dealer here then I won't be able to audition another one.
If I had a larger room - my current preference is for Acapella Audio Arts. The High Campanile 2 I can afford but I don't have the room for them. And I'd probably have to replace my power amps to accommodate them.
Edits: 09/10/21
The model you mention was a short lived thing 15 years ago and not one of their mainline speakers. I am very familiar with Acapella and have nearly bought one of their speakers a number of times (just auditioned a pair of La Campanellas a couple months ago). They have serious potential BUT Odeons sound more alive and need less power to sing. Two of my friends switched to Odeon after hearing my speakers and a couple more switched after hearing my friend's rather ambitious system that has fully upgraded top model Odeon 38.X (I say X because his are upgraded to the latest Carnegie drivers and crossover).
It's funny you always trot out this one unsatisfying experience to dismiss a really excellent brand of speaker but I am supposed to not judge AN-Es despite more than a dozen blah experiences? A friend of mine bought Es and sold them within 2 months from that same dealer I know. When you have heard dozens of Odeon demos and they are all blah and o you then I will say "gotta keep trying...they will grow on you" like you do about Es. I was hooked on Odeons from the first notes when I first heard them in 2004. A non-Audiophile friend went with me to a show because it also had home theater. He seems as kind of bored until we went into the Odeon/Einstein room. Then he said "Hey that sounds GOOD"! I said "YEAH" and we spent the rest of the afternoon there. When it's right it doesn't need to "grow" on you...
"It's funny you always trot out this one unsatisfying experience to dismiss a really excellent brand of speaker"You asked me if I heard Odeon speakers - this is the speaker I heard. It is a speaker they felt were really good if they were willing to send it to Stereophile.
The reviewer said it was bad. The measurements were bad. I heard it and they were bad.Are they great now? According to you, they are. And maybe they are and maybe I will absolutely love the new ones. I am perfectly willing to audition products multiple times or multiple products. I have had reversed opinions on speakers I hated and then liked later.
Step back - put your anger away for just a minute and put yourself in my shoes. You yourself admit this La Triviata was a bad speaker correct? (If I am correct and you also think it was a bad speaker or a "mistake" then we agree do we not? We both agree that that particular speaker was poor. Yippee Brad and Richard agree!
Now, remember - this is the ONLY speaker Richard has heard from Odeon.
So if you were me and you heard a speaker that stunk - the measurements stunk and Stereophile who also hated it then you would be in my shoes and you would not have much motivation to listen to another one. Be honest - you would not.
Again just for a moment try to put yourself in my shoes here. You seem to be getting angry at me for my experience level with Odeon that somehow being from Vancouver Island and living in Hong Kong where no dealers exist that I should be wholly well-versed in their product line and have auditioned them many times. Be reasonable Brad. There are only 8 dealers in the world - hell there are at least four places that I have been to in Hong Kong alone that sell Audio Note. There may be more as I have not been to them all. On top of that, the dealers will put people in touch with customers who own the products so I can go to their homes and audition them! Ditto back on Vancouver island as customers owned higher-end AN gear than the dealer carried.
What I am saying is I can't audition stuff that isn't available to me to be able to audition. I feel you are angry at me for not being next to one of the 8 dealers?
What do you expect me to do - I have said on this forum several times that speakers I ranked near dead last at one audio show - at the next I attended I ranked them 1 and 2 best. I am always willing to listen to speakers or brands that in the past I did not care for. I always try and listen to Magnepan and Quad and just 3 days ago I auditioned for Reference 3a.
But the stuff has to be here - what can I do?
Edits: 09/11/21
I have not actually heard that particular model. So, I have no comment on it other than you didn't like it. However, my point stands. You get offended when people put down the AN-E after hearing it only once or twice. Don't tell me you don't when you will spill tons of virtual ink defending their honor.
You heard one model, one time and it was a model that didn't stay in the lineup for very long (can hardly find this model in Europe). I am not angry but surprised by your inability to step out of your own shoes and see how you are being a bit hypocritical. You are judging based on one experience and you chide others about AN even when people don't like them after multiple exposures.
I am not angry with you Richard, just disappointed that you are willing to vocalize a judgement based on a single exposure but those of us who have heard a significant amount of AN-E speakers and found them lacking are somehow just needing more exposure??
It is not about old vs. new Odeons. Mine are 20 years old and sound amazing...but not all models from all companies are at the same level (experiment that went wrong) as I am sure you are aware, creative people are often trying new things and they don't always work at the same level.
All I can tell you is that everyone I know who was exposed to or bought AN-Es either did not buy them or sold them after a relatively short time. Everyone I know who bought Odeons has kept them and is in love with them except one guy...but he went to even bigger horns (hoRNs Universum III). ToddA here on this forum luckily found a pair of Odeon La Boheme speakers (my exact model...very rare) and he is in love with them as well. Of course if I had the money I would probably buy Aries Cerat Symphonias (even as a distributor they are too pricey for me) as that is the best horn short of the mega expensive Living Voice Vox Olympians.
I would like to try someday one of ANs 211 based amps, like a Jinro or above. Or maybe a parallel 300B like a Kegon or P4 balanced. Based on the designs they should sound very good. I am not impressed with the DACs so far. I have heard the Oto Signature, and it wasn't bad but an old Ayon 300B amp we had on hand was better...and then came the Aries Cerat Diana integrated and my customer's (who was trying these other amps) jaw hit the floor. On paper the same power as the Ayon (it had 32B tubes for 20 watts) but in practice the Diana might have had 1000 watts (it has 25) such was the difference in dynamics.
Just to note I didn't judge the brand I judged the one speaker I auditioned.I am surprised though that after 30 years they only have 8 dealers total worldwide. It makes it a bit tough to try another one.
The more speakers a company sells the more often there will be "some guy" who sold them to buy something else. I have those stories too.
Jack Roberts on our staff sold the AN E for Teresonic Ingeniums - I auditioned them - they were very nice and a single driver has certain strengths that better the AN E - but it also has drawbacks. In other words Jack decided the Ingenium was better sounding - I did not agree with his assessment so no I would not have traded the AN E in for the Teresonic. Art Dudley traded the AN E for the DeVore 0/96 - again I have heard the DeVore and I would not have done that either. Albeit it is an easier speaker to drive. The Acappela I would trade for but it's moot since the room demands are totally different - Acapella doesn't work in rooms designed for AN E and vice versa.
As an aside - my initial post in this thread was meant to be about system synergy that some people didn't like an 805 amp and some did and I was saying that it could be down to the speaker used. The guy who loved the 805 Wavac loved it because he loved the speakers and the guy who hated it heard it on some other speakers that may not have been his cup of tea.
Edits: 09/14/21
Do you mean stacking an expensive shimmering junk in the small bedroom sized living rooms and claiming the supremacy in the audiophile world of the internet forums? Geez, I met many Asian philes and they are kind of the same. They like shimmering junk with a name behind it and have a means to buy it.
I like Audio Note. Liked it for several years because it uses a simple approach and delivers good results. It's rather expensive for what it is but many brands are way more expensive and do not provide fraction of what AN does. Do I think Audio Note offers a really serious sound? No, I don't.
"Do I think Audio Note offers a really serious sound?"
Given this is a SET board - I'd like to see which SET company goes to the lengths AN goes to - or any amp manufacturer for that matter.
Name me another company that designs and builds its own capacitors, resistors, transformers, volume pots, soldering materials, boards, Valve bases, speaker connections, cabling, etc.
Most companies, because they have to buy the parts, are forced to design around 'whatever' happens to be available from the parts bin at Tranformers-R-Us. And they have to "trust" that the "other" manufacturer did a good job.
Some people value what is inside the box and not what the label on the outside of the box says. AN makes their own valve base because they're serious. And that's why they are desired doesn't he second-hand market because a certain segment values the idea when they buy an Audio Note the majority of parts in the box are made by Audio Note - not a Chinese transformer and valve bases from Cambodia and wiring from South Africa made by some guy in his garage.
Show me which maker makes their own valve base and you can come back to me about who is serious - at 10 minutes. And skip to 31:30 - serious?
There is nothing about AN E speakers that is remotely connected to the subject of this thread.
Give it a rest.
Yes my bad for using my speakers as an example - my first reply and the main point was system synergy.
I have been on forums for over 20 years and it's the same posts over and over - what do you think about this amp or this tube and in virtually 100% of cases the person answering the question has not heard said amp with your speakers, your cables, your source players or in your room. And they may not listen to the same kinds of music you do. A person who listens 95% to big orchestral works and pedal organ has a different requirement than someone who primarily listens to Eva Cassidy or The Eagles.
The 211 sounds more powerful than the 300B - I like the way Hong Kongers describe amplifiers perhaps because English is their second language but the 300B is described here as a Lady amp - which is to be taken as beautiful and pretty and gentle. The 211 is like Indiana Jones. Big and bold with enough gentility that it never becomes brash or overbearing.
But all of that can change depending on the speakers.
I spoke to Steve Hoffman about amplifiers as he has been attending audio shows for 40 years and has mastered the likes of Miles Davis, John Coltrane, Eva Cassidy, Pink Floyd, Linda Rondstadt, Art Pepper, CCR, Bill Evans, Sonny Rollins, Gene Amons, Wes Montgomery, Duke Ellington, Johnny Cash, Nat King Cole, Ray Charles, The Eagles, The Doors, The Beatles, The Beach Boys, Metallica, Van Halen, Sinatra, Steely Dan (Aja), Steppenwolf, (you get the idea).
And his favourite tube is the 211 and he has both the Audio Note Jinro and Ongaku.
Audio Note is crushingly expensive for a 211 amp which is why I opted for the 2a3 Empress. But it doesn;t have the big tone of the 211.
There are monoblocks from Opera Consonance - I tried to get a pair for review but Opera told me they were pulling out of the west and didn't need English language reviews.
I did buy the Line Magnetic 219IA integrated as a kind of poor man's Jinro. That amp along with the Jinro has a softer more valve-like presentation than my Empress.
I mean you already have AVM amps that output 1000 watts into 2 ohms (am I correct?) and so if you want to listen to maximum volume symphony music you have that already. If you want the beautiful smaller music at normal levels then I would opt for the amps that add the pretty and the beautiful. 2a3, 45, 211
A secondhand Line Magnetic 219IA should be fairly reasonable and has 24 watts per channel - it's just really really big and heavy 55kg.
I think it takes more money to do 211 well due to more demanding output transformers and power supplies etc. And while some outfits in China offer lower-priced units most don't really sound as good as you'd hope.
If you look at Chinese units - Cayin is pretty good - they actually make the transformers for Line Magnetic and Prima Luna. I recently auditioned a really superb-sounding anniversary edition 845 integrated from them - it runs $5,000 USD in Hong Kong. Perhaps they have affordable 211s. Ditto a company called Sound Master (Not Mastersound). They still make the only KT88 amp that I liked.
HK is a nice market for classic JBL - Japan is probably better though.
The first sign of a racist is lumping everyone into one box. Maybe check that at the door.So let's take your nonsense point by point. Audiophiles come in all shapes and sizes - the LS-3/5a is hugely popular here because they are small and fit relatively small rooms. They are, as are some other speakers, quite good in small rooms. I live in such an apartment here, while I am here and I have 9-foot ceilings, 13 wide and 17 long - this is not massive but it's fairly close to a typical living room in Canada or the US. Having solid concrete walls, ceilings and floors are superior to a room with wooden walls that sing along with the music. I can choose a larger living space that would yield higher quality sound but I prefer living in the penthouse overlooking the ocean and having access to three clubhouses with three outdoor pools and 2 indoor pools and being a 1-minute walk to the white sandy beach. If I move to a village house I would get more space but no view and no clubhouses. So you make a sacrifice.
There is a limit to the sound that can be generated in small to medium-sized rooms. The ability to generate a realistic dynamic scale that a large horn speaker can offer in a larger room really can't be realized in a small medium-sized room (no matter what system you put it in there). It's a compromise. Albeit most big multiway speakers also have certain weaknesses that tend to bother me. It may impress in a big room at an audio show or a big room at an audio dealer but if it is stuffed into the average room it will probably suck.
As for expense - I bought the Audio Note J/SPe brand new in 2003 for $2500 and I sold it in 2016 for $2917 (+ $417 after 13 years) and that owner could sell it for more than he paid me.
And that was a rush sale as a friend sold it for me - it was also in the worst colour option - black.
I bought my Audio Note OTO Phono SE in 2003 - I can sell it for $400-$500 more than I paid for it.
I sold my Audio Note TT2 turntable in Hong Kong after 3 years of ownership for a couple hundred more than I paid.
So it sure doesn't "seem" too expensive to me. The same day I bought the Audio Note J/SPe - for the exact same price I could have bought the MM De Capo from Reference 3a ($2500). I saw a mint condition set here at a second-hand shop for $900.
So which brand is expensive? $2500 down to $900 is a $1600 loss - or the AN J (a much better sounding speaker which is why the value didn't tank) has a $417 gain. The De Capo and AN J both retailed for $2500 but the DeCapo actually costs you $2017 more a decade down the road - and it doesn't sound as good for the 13 years you owned it.
It's also somewhat reassuring that 10 years later if something breaks the company will be in business and still has replacement parts. That also helps the resale value. Plenty of companies change models 7 years down the line and it's bye-bye your chance to get a tweeter replacement.
There are some factors to consider here beyond sound. Like if I have to buy an amp or speaker from Switzerland from a handful of person operations and they have a proprietary design and 3 years later they go belly up and I paid $40,000 for the thing then what? I have a very expensive product from a tiny outfit using unobtanium parts? And good luck selling it.
Edits: 09/11/21 09/11/21
You can't really make a bad sounding component sound good with other good components, but you can make a good component sound bad with other bad components.
Not quite sure what your comment is trying to say. Somehow a component sounds really good and yet it is actually not? That miracle component would make a great business - 'only buy this one crappy component and it will make your whole system sound great'.
Something of a complicated topic with a lot of variables.
I am currently using an 805 SET amp, and am VERY pleased with it. Aside from an early life capacitor failure, it has worked flawlessly for about 5 years now. It has certainly been worth the cost of entry. I use vintage tubes, which have now become somewhat costly, so I cannot comment on NOS tubes and how they sound.
Formerly I was running a Primaluna power amp with the best tubes I could find, and was quite happy with it. The SET amp pretty much blew it away. Of course, that is MY opinion, and based on my ears and taste.
I am running Altec 604s, which have a 15" woofer, similar to your speakers. I would agree that driving a 15" WELL takes some power, and 25 watts might be adequate. I'm running around 50, and it is definitely adequate. Remember that distortion starts setting in when the amp is strongly driven, so likely it would not be optimal listening when driving the amp hard (towards the limit). Your JBLs are rated 6db down at 30Hz - you might want to look at the response curve down there to see where it starts to drop off, and where the 3 db down point is. That will properly temper you expectations on the bass side of things.
A critical aspect of SET amps, and I guess all amps aside from OTL, are the output transformers. Crap begets crap. So useful to make sure that the transformers used are as good as you can afford.
Personally I am a fan of vintage Tango and Tamura transformers. Wavac made some 805 amps with later Tango iron. There are a couple of sources of amps, but note that many of the Japanese amps are 100v, but some have 110V taps on the power transformers (which might sustain operation at 120v). If nothing else, the links might be provide some ideas. I have not purchased anything from Yahoo auctions Japan, so no idea how that works. One upside is that a domestic amp with Tango iron will likely retain its value, so perhaps can be justified as an investment.
http://soundgate.net/productlist/22.highend
https://www.hifishark.com/search?q=tango
Just my opinions, of course.....
but I could be wrong.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
