 
|
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 |
174.104.194.136
Why do my Vandersteen 2Ce Sig II's sound great with jazz and horrible with orchestral music? The midrange on them gets all glassy and hard sounding, almost compressed and choked. It is almost like they turn into cheaper speakers. I am super frustrated and thinking I will move on and try to find something else, but I would love if one of you guys had any thoughts on this. I am running them on a KT-88 tube amp. I can get high volume out of them with it, it is just a sound quality issue. Almost like the midrange drivers can't deal with an orchestra.
Thanks for your thoughts!
Follow Ups:
The 2Ce sig3 have a VERY tube friendly impedance curve that is almost a straight line at 5 ohms. The curves almost look to perfect, but they are real.
Have you tried the 4ohm speaker connections? This would e best fit for 2CE SIGS based upon the impedance curve
Does the mid hardness happen in both Triode 22 watts and the Ultralinear 38 watts setting on the integrated?
If there is no difference using 8ohm, 4ohm, Triode or Ultra , I'd suggest to try different source
Is that amp optimal, possibly not, but it should do a better job than on most non hi efficiency speakers
Thank you. I like your train of thought here. I have tried both 4 and 8 taps and both triode and UL. They are all different but not terribly different. Trying a new source shortly.
I'm a'guessin' that with an 8" woofer, never mind the low sensitivity, the speakers are dynamically challenged regardless of power. With many small woofer box speakers the woofer compresses at fairly low levels and more power is just converted to heat rather than more output. Meanwhile the treble drivers haven't compressed yet leading to a change in tonal balance as the speaker gets louder.
Just guessing.
Along with midrange and tweeter. So not actually a small speaker
Not a Soundlab though
I stand corrected, thank you.
.
"Why do my Vandersteen 2Ce Sig II's sound great with jazz and horrible with orchestral music? The midrange on them gets all glassy and hard sounding, almost compressed and choked."
It's not an easy question! There are several possible reasons for this. Without being in your room, it's not possible to know.
First of all, it's essential to recognize that people often ascribe an attribute to something which has already been on their mind. This biases their thinking.
In this case, however, you may be right. It's well-known that loudspeaker manufacturers "voice" their speakers to sound a certain way, to appeal to a certain demographic.
Yours may be "voiced" to sound good on some styles, and not necessarily on others.
Another is your room. Room size and acoustics are important.
Another is your expectation.
My first guess is that your speakers are voiced to sound good on certain types of recordings. My second and third guesses do not involve your "upstream" electronics.
*********
We are inclusive and diverse, but dissent will not be tolerated.
How could one recording sound great and another recording sound bad? The answer is in the question: it's the recording. Ever think of all the ways recordings can sound bad? I have heard studio albums sound awesome, and some studio albums sound very bad. Funny thing is they were recorded in the same studio in the same year on the exact same equipment. So how can one album sound so good and another sound so bad?
The sound engineer that's how most are just average, and some are masters at their craft. Like Phil Spector, Les Paul, Alan Parsons, Eddie Krammer to name a few. But like I said, unfortunately most sound engineers are just average with average results. So, there can be huge differences in studio recordings, and studio recordings are the easiest to get right.
Live recordings are more difficult you're no longer in a controlled studio environment with sound deadening treatment and no room noise. So now let's say you're recording a live jazz quartet in a small venue you only have four instruments to capture with four microphones you can strategically place those microphones to accurately capture the sounds of the instruments perfectly and many live jazz recordings sound really really good.
Now imagine having 100 musicians playing 15 different instruments in a ginormous concert hall and you have to record them live!!! I would pass out faced with this incredibly difficult task. And you specifically said string instruments sound bad. Out of all the instruments in an orchestra the string section plays the lowest in volume/dB level brass and woodwinds are way louder than strings. Maybe that has something to do with the way they sound especially if those other instruments are drowning them out in the recording/Mix I would search maybe in some forums and try to find a well recorded orchestra recording if one even exists.
As far as your Vandersteen go don't sell them it's not their fault. Did you know the Vandersteen 2 is the most successful American high-end speaker ever made they sold over 200,000 pairs of these speakers. That is crazy and true. And since there are so many pairs in use today there is a lot of information on them and your Vandersteen 2Ce Sig II's as good as they are will not make bad recordings sound good no speaker on earth could do that.
I see a lot of people have an opinion on the amp you're using, and I must agree you need a different amp for those speakers. Did you know there is a Vandersteen speaker forum? Go on that forum and see what amps the actual owners of the speakers say are best. I know one amp will pop up and that is a Bryston 4b SST2 the Bryston has been around as long as Vandersteen speakers and has a huge following.
I appreciate this line of thought and agree 100% that good and bad recordings make a huge difference. However, I have listened to a plethora of both in high-res formats and even the good ones get choked out to a degree with which I am uncomfortable.
And yes, they are popular and the due excel at many things. I just don't believe orchestral music is one. I am very particular about string sounds because I have experience playing in orchestras and feel the need to recreate that as closely as possible. I absolutely know what "real" sounds like and even after borrowing and trying a number of different amps they never get there. They get closer, but don't get there. I think it is just time for a change.
Thanks again for your kind and helpful response!
I have the Magnepan 3.7i and can tell you that they will make _very_ clear any recordings with poor string sound.
Have been fighting this problem for years. As you have played in an orchestra, some of my ideas might make sense.
I've been told by the concertmaster of a medium sized orchestra that a lot of the problem originates with the use of ever more powerful and brighter steel E strings. He would like everyone to go back to all gut, but that is not going to happen.
Many orchestral recordings were done with the mics _above_ the violin sections. This is not the way the audience hears them and it accentuates, I think, the edginess. Telarc mics from the front of the stage and I have found their orchestral recordings less problematic.
I think it also might have to do with the intonation of the whole vln section. I find the Cleveland under Szell sounds much better than most other recordings, and it sounds like the strings are simply playing more in tune. Some of the Philadelphia recordings also have very in-tune fiddles, and this makes a big difference.
I simply use digital EQ to tame the harshness on those recordings which need it, generally a dip between 4 and 5 kHz.
Also have an analogue Schitt EQ, the least expensive and smallest one, and it can be very useful. It is connected with fairly long cables so I can have it at my listening chair and adjust on the fly. Once I find the best setting for a given recording, I make a note of it on the sleeve or box.
Purists will decry, but so what.
only trivia but he Dynaco A25 was probably the most successful speaker which takes absolutely nothing away from the Vandersteen 2 which was also both wonderful and successful and it did have a significantly longer life span
Do you have a subwoofer? If so you might want to use the hi-pass filter on the sub to the speakers. This will do two things. It will ease the load on your speakers allowing them to play louder with less strain/more clarity. And it will re-enforce the sound stage!
But unfortunately they're not a good match.
Your amp would work best with horns, your speakers need 100w or more from tubes and 200w or more from solid state.
Another possibility if your speakers are new, we went from 2Ce to 3A Sigs and the 3As were more authoritative more open and played louder without strain, but there was a smoothness missing than took some time to smooth out and eventually surpass our 2Ce's.
Thanks. Fair points.
Not too many making actual recommendations
some audiophiles don't understand matching . That article stated the obvious pretty well...
"If different makes of pre- and power amplifier are being considered it may become necessary to compare the output impedance of the preamplifier and the input impedance of the power amplifier. Generally for full frequency response it is advisable to match component impedances with a look-up factor of at least 200 ...
However what can happen with disparate impedances is that there could be substantial frequency response roll-off between the two components, particularly in the low frequency bass region. This is only potentially a problem when considering a tube preamplifier to drive a solid state amplifier, as many tube preamplifiers have very high output impedances, (designed to drive high input impedance tube power amplifiers) and most solid state amplifiers have low input impedances. "
There can be issues if you don't know what you're doing. :)
I had Vandersteen Quatros for years (original cloth version, before the new carbon drivers), and they also sounded as you describe: great on small ensmeble jazz and classical, but unsatisfying for large scale orchestral music.My suggestion is to trust your ears and move on.
Adding some info on amplification used:
Bryston 3B-SST (150W@8R)
Rogue M-180 monoblocks (power tubes used at various times: KT-90, KT-120, KT-88). Spec'd at 180W@8R
Edits: 12/22/24
This is telling and helpful. Thank you. I have now heard from a couple of other people that this is an issue with the way Vandersteens are voiced. I have now tried several amplifiers of varying power: A, AB, D, and tube and while some are better than others and some almost clear it up, it never goes away. I think it is preference on my part. They sound incredible on other material but for what is most important to me, they don't hit the mark. I appreciate you chiming in with info from much further up their line. I think you hit the nail. Time to move on. Will likely be selling them.
You've got a lot of responses - and I'm afraid I haven't read them all.
But the first thing that struck my mind was ... your tube amp doesn't have the grunt which your V's need to have delivered to them, to play orchestral music well.
Because there's so much more 'body' to the sound of an orchestra than most jazz ensembles; if your V's sound great with this lesser 'body' ... shirley, lack of sufficient amp grunt is the cause of the " compressed & choked " sound you hear with orchestral music?
Can you borrow, say, a Sanders Magtech to see how your V's sound with that? Or, if you hate sand amps ... an Audio Research 250SE?
I believe you're on to something. The KT88 amp mentioned doesn't really let us know anything. Could be a 30 watter or an amp of 100+ watts. But with the 84db Vandies, I would think one should shoot for the 100+ watt territory if they want to pull off full orchestra. In regard to tube amps, I'd suggest the Quicksilver V4's or similar.
After re-reading ... it looks like his Line Magnetic integrated makes ~25w per side.
That LM integrated could very well be pooping out on large scale music. A 100w per side seemed be the beginning of the sweet spot for Vandys based on my own experience. Initially I drove my 2Ci's with an 80w Counterpoint SA12. I ended up driving 3A Sigs with one of Mike Elliot's NP100 amps. Both amps were hybrids with tube drivers and SS output devices.
Vandys are not overly power hungry, but on large scale orchestral music they likely would be under served by only 25w.
25 watts(even tube watts) into 84db yields decent results with girl/guitar or acoustic jazz trios, but falls woefully short on large scale, complex rock or raw blues. IOW, material that requires a lot of drive to present a realistic presentation requires power. I'm not guessing here, I speak from my own experience. Two options...buy a 100 watt+ tube amp or 200 watt+ sand amp. Option #2....keep your current 25 tube amp and a buy a pair of Klipsch Cornwall's or similar.
have you noticed his source?
I'm not familiar with streaming in general, so I'll take your word that there may be a weak link there as well. Yet I think the most noted flaw is a 25 watt amp trying drive an 84db speaker in what appears to be a large room.
This especially if one is trying to reproduce large scale complex music.
...-we have a winner!
Don't worry about avoiding temptation. As you grow older, it will avoid you.
- Winston Churchill
.
digital transport and DAC.
Lots of choice between that and a dCS stack.
playing loudly (forte and above) are tough to record... and reproduce. Some recordings are just much better than others in this regard, imo.
I've owned the Vandersteen 2CE and 3A. Placement with Vandersteens are the most critical of any speaker that I have owned. I had to tilt them at about a 10 to 20 degree angle slant for them to blend in my listening room. I finally gave up and moved on to something else!
Edits: 12/21/24
to this loonie bin of enthusiasts. :)
From my perspective, there is nothing more challenging than attempting to replicate orchestral music. Not that I don't enjoy other genres, but there is a scale of performance and reference to the sound of unamplified live unlike any other.
What I and others find helpful is to fully describe your system and environment as each plays a role in the outcome. As an example, click my moniker (everything in blue is a link) and you'll be led to a page with options to see my stuff along with some pics. You're free to create your own if desired.
Source is most definitely a player. What are your(s)?
Thanks, e-stat! Good tips.
Running a Cambridge MXN10 as both Streamer and DAC. Actual source is high res from Qobuz.
I suspect that is your weak link.
While I find it amazing what can be done with miniaturization and budget today, that doesn't always translate to better quality. While this is an AXN, the differences between it and MXN are largely in form factor. Not sure why they chose this case.
Audible performance does increase beyond a $400 budget covering both functions.
While there are countless available alternatives, I would recommend considering separating the endpoint from the DAC.
Why not call Vandersteen and see if they have any suggestions?
Speakers too small for the room can sound... too small. At least with certain types of music.I wonder if your Vandys are designed for smaller rooms that would not require as much from the drivers it uses ?
Edits: 12/20/24
I've had Vandersteen 2s twice, but they do seem to like larger rooms to sound their best.
LowIQ
Thanks, Peppy. Not sure about that. They are 44" tall and have 8" and 10" woofers. My listening room is 20x26. My listening position is in an 8' equilateral triangle with the speakers about 7' into the room.
I have managed to load the room to 104dB with them playing electronica, it is just massed strings that seem to be an issue. It is very weird. Or maybe I am very weird. ;-)
> it is just massed strings that seem to be an issue.
I often have problems with massed strings, too. It might be the recording. Have you ever heard massed strings sound good in a different system from the same recording? If so, what speakers and amplifiers were being used in that system?
I recently discovered Magnepan magnetic planar speakers, and they sound better to me than other speakers I've owned. I'm currently using Mini Maggie speakers with 500-watt monoblock amplifiers and they sound spectacular. Nevertheless, I still have orchestral recordings that don't sound good to me. On the other hand, I have other orchestral recordings that sound great. Therefore, maybe it's the recording that doesn't sound that good.
Anyway, I like these Mini Maggie speakers so much that I'm considering buying full-size Magnepan speakers.
Happy listening!
In the photos I've seen so far, your room looked pretty small.I used to own Maggie 1.6 speakers about 15 years ago, and I had problems with excessive mid-bass in rooms too small for them. OTOH, I couldn't afford enough high-quality power to make them sound good in much larger rooms.
Good sounding power has gotten a little cheaper since then, thanks to advances in Class D designs. But the excessive mid bass problems might still be there (for me and my smallish room) today, if I went with anything bigger than the Mini-Maggies (or possibly, the .7 model)...
If your room is as small as it looks in the photos I've seen, I'd think about trying out the "medium-sized" .7 model. The bigger models might cause you some problems.
For subwoofers, I'd think about using open-baffle...
Edits: 12/20/24 12/20/24 12/20/24
My listening is 19-ft long by 15-ft wde, but there's a dining room and galley kitchen on the side. The kitchen is separated by a partial wall and a counter while the small dining room is completely open to the listening room. The ceiling goes from 8-ft high at the rear to 14-ft high at the front of the room. My speakers will be set up on the diagonal just like the Thiel's in the picture below, but they will be farther out into the room and farther apart. My sofa will be set up on a 45-degree diagonal facing the fireplace, TV and speakers. I think the room is large enough for the new Magnepan 3.7x speakers. The sofa in the picture below is gone completely, and I have a new sofa set up behind the black chair, which is also gone.
It's about the same height, but a little bit narrower, but still has a true ribbon tweeter, which is a very good thing to have, as you should know from your Mini-Maggies. Also somewhat less expensive.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
1.7i is around 6" narrower than 3.7i. Noticeably thinner than 2.7i or 3.7i, but still quite wide...
A pair of .7i or.7x (plus GR Research open-baffle subs ?) is the true "space-saving" option.
Nt.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
To some of us, 1/12th is a lot , since it's a semi-tone. Wow, talk about being out of tune! Not a little sharp or a little flat - that's a whole different note!
Sorry, just had to write that. ;)
*********
We are inclusive and diverse, but dissent will not be tolerated.
Nt.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
To me though, 2" is not enough to matter. Mattering starts at 5" or 6", IMO...
Nt.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
That's a good recommendation. I think you might be right. Perhaps the 2.7i might be the better choice for my listening room.
I just noticed that Magnepan has a new line of speakers with an "x" designator instead of the "i" designator. The new line of speakers have high-end crossovers and gold plated connectors. The Magnepan 2.7x costs $10,000, and I think I'll probably spend the extra money. However, I have a feeling it might not make that much difference in sound, if any.
What do you think about the 1.7x for $5,000? It's stated to be a 3-Way,Full-Range, Quasi-Ribbon speaker just like the 2.7x. Does it also have a ribbon tweeter?
Thanks,
John Elison
as I understand it, a single strip of foil conductor on the QR tweeter that is crossed over fairly high and acts as a kind of "supertweeter", the advantage presumably being that it gives a little bit better dispersion. But it's not going to have the same extreme lightness as the true ribbon, and therefore isn't going to have the same extension and resolution. And, if I'm not mistaken, there is no LP crossover on the rest of the QR. None of this is to say that it's going to sound bad, though.
Opinions about the "X" versions seem to be all over the map.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
Edits: 12/21/24
The 3.7s would sound nice with their true ribbon tweeters. Just like your Mini Maggies... but gigantic.I know you already have nice subwoofers, but you might want to consider one or two of those DIY GR Research open baffle subs for the most seamless blending of sound... if in fact you'll need subs at all with those big panels.
Have fun, good luck !
Edits: 12/20/24
The 2.7i is slightly smaller and the 1.7i is even smaller still. I'm thinking about one of these other two models instead.
Thanks,
John Elison
just give them room behind to breathe. Heard a nicely driven pair in a smallish room.
Edits: 12/23/24
I really want the 3.7x speakers. If I could get the 2.7x speakers with flat bottoms like the 3.7X speaker, I might consider them. Of course, I want the true ribbon tweeter, whatever that means. I don't actually know what a ribbon tweeter is, except that everyone thinks its better. ;-)
The smaller ones tilt back or stand completely vertical. Aftermarket stands are available to raise and tilt all models backwards.The 3.7i is already tall enough to sound "room-filling" as-is ? And are heavy enough to fall over if tilted back... I guess ?
Anyway, it appears that Magnepan might prefer that the 3.7i speakers would NOT be tilted backwards...
Edits: 12/24/24 12/24/24
I want the true ribbon tweeter, whatever that means. I don't actually know what a ribbon tweeter is, except that everyone thinks its better.
Part of what has to move with the mylar diaphragm with Magneplanars is the conductive wire. Ribbons avoid that.
> Part of what has to move with the mylar diaphragm with Magneplanars is the conductive wire. Ribbons avoid that.
How do ribbons avoid that?
I know that Magnepan's have copper wire glued to their mylar diaphragm because I took the cover off a pair some years ago. Some of the wire had broken free from the diaphragm. However, I think some of the new Magnepan speakers might have aluminum foil attached to the mylar diaphragm instead of wire. I thought I read that somewhere, but I can't find it now. Have you heard anything like that?
Thanks!
It's used in the bass and midrange sections of the three-way models, and mid/bass and tweeter sections of the two-way models.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
Although, I don't think the term "quasi-ribbon" refers to foil conductors instead of wire conductors. I think it simply means that the diaphragm has conductors glued to it, instead of being a true ribbon. My Mini Maggies have wire glued onto the mylar diaphragms, yet Magnepan still refers to them as quasi-ribbon drivers. Only the tweeter is a true ribbon driver.
Nevertheless, I'm glad they switched from wire to foil, because not only is it probably more reliable, it probably has lower mass, too. I just hope it can still handle the current as well as wire. It would be nice if they used silver foil.
Thanks!
No, the "QR" designation applies specifically to the method of using foil glued to the mylar instead of wires. They came up with the term to differentiate it from the older wire system that was used on both bass and tweeter sections previously. The Magnepan website has explained this since its introduction of the QR technology.
The foil, to the best of my knowledge, doesn't have significantly lower mass than the wires; they kept it the same because the impedance needed to stay the same, but it probably has a bit lower distortion because the foil is adhered to a larger area of the Mylar than the wires are.
I've read discussion in the past on various forums about using other metals as conductors, but the consensus has generally been that aluminum has the best combined mass/conductivity characteristics.
I've been a Maggie guy since 1998, and it's been head-spinning to try to keep up with all of their changes in methods.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
Edits: 12/24/24 12/24/24
the foil is conductive. Not sure. The 20.1s and 3.7s I've heard had a really sweet top end. The earlier "dot ones", however, sounded to these ears like a collection of separate drivers.Click here for a general diagram and terminology.
You'll get detailed answers over at MUG, aka Planar Forum. Click here for more detail from Magnepan.
Edits: 12/23/24
That's exactly correct. With the true ribbon tweeter, the radiating diaphragm is also the conductor. It's about 5 feet long and about 1/4 inch wide, and is extremely light and thin. It's aluminum foil that is significantly thinner than kitchen-type aluminum foil. The electrical contacts are at each end, but there are small, alternating supporting dots of silicone rubber along its length on each side attached to the magnet structure. The resolution and inner detail in its range are marvelous.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
Edits: 12/23/24
.., for 10 milliseconds of backwave return, a pair would make a great pair of room dividers...Used as dressing screens for the sake of modesty, a change of trousers during listening sessions has never been easier !
Edits: 12/23/24 12/23/24
that was determined empirically by measurements for the most linear bass in the bottom octaves. A mentor taught me the "Rule of Thirds" placement which I've found quite useful for minimizing room modes.
I don't have that latitude with the smaller ones in the family room, but still walk behind them on the way to the east side of house.
Pics in gallery.
Closer to 20 milliseconds of back-wave delay, and in line with my own findings in "the rule of thirds" for speaker placement.
Should you ever decide the 1.7s are too small, Maggie 1.7 speakers have many fans. So, not very hard to sell the 1.7s to move up to the 2.7.Try to find a local buyer for a home pickup deal in order to avoid box shipping, that's all...
Edits: 12/22/24
that I'm considering buying full-size Magnepan speakers.
for it!
Even with those large woofers and mids, I'd try positioning the speakers closer to the wall behind them for a weightier sound.
The suggestion to contact Vandersteen for best speaker size and best placement recommendations etc.., is a good one.
I've always thought my system sounded better with small groups rather than large bands and orchestras. How does your system sound with small classical ensembles like trios, quartets and sextets? My system sounds great with small jazz groups and small classical ensembles, but not as good with large bands and orchestras. I just think it's due to the somewhat small size of my listening room and speakers. Furthermore, I sit very close to my speakers, which are arranged in a near-field listening configuration.
I think you need to have a large listening room and large speakers to make a full-size orchestra sound its best. However, maybe that's just me. I've never had a real large listening room with large speakers.
Happy listening!
John,
I appreciate the comments. I am not sure what is considered large as far as speakers and space goes. The vandys have 8 and 10" woofers and are almost four feet tall. My listening room is 20x26. My listening position is in an 8' equilateral triangle with the speakers about 7' into the room.
Sounds more like a source/preamp issue based on your descriptions.
Hard to say without knowing more about your system.
Had Vandys for nearly 20 years and can't say I experienced that issue with them. First I had 2Ci's and then 3A Sigs.
Thanks, Sondek.
The KT 88 is an LM 216 integrated with Gold Lions and has had Tung Sol 12ax7s in it. I just rolled them to Mullards to see if that changes anything. The fact that you didn't have issues with your Vandys is good. I have been so frustrated that I am debating selling one or the other of the integrated or the speakers or maybe just started by with a whole new system
Before you possibly chuck the baby out with the bathwater I wish you'd consider trying the JJ E83CC/12AX7 frame grid tube in your integrated.
The link below is to info about this tube as offered by The Tube Depot. I am not advocating for TD. Just trying to provide specific info since JJ offers several different versions of the 12AX7, and this is the only frame grid version of the bunch.
I've found this tube to be far more revealing and detailed than any of the Russian stuff, and this may be just the ticket for airing out the mid-range on complex classical stuff.
Some thoughts,
The Vandersteens could be revealing problems upstream.
When I had 2ce's I drove them with Quicksilver Mono's and Silver 70 Mono's and I did not have the problem you are having.
When I used cheaper, solid state electronics, their midrange could sound thinner and glassy at times.
By all accounts my integrated is pretty decent. Maybe it is just underpowered?
After reading your additional comments, I don't think the problem is your amp. I think it may be the dac in your streamer and possibly both your streamer and dac. Maybe even the interconnect cables between your dac and amp could be contributing to the problem. I would consider borrowing a better dac and/or warmer sounding cables and see if that helps. The dacs I use contain a Rohm dac chip that was designed with the objective of reproducing classical music. There are also some ladder dacs that supposedly reproduce acoustic instruments accurately.
What's the source before the amp? Whether CD player, streamer, turntable or whatever, there are better and worse sources.
Also, have you had the amp's tubes tested lately? Tubes, especially power output tubes, deteriorate with age. A set of power output tubes like the KT88 may start going downhill at 1,500 to 2,000 hours, and will sometimes fail before that. Preamp and driver tubes typically last much longer but don't have the near infinite lifespan of solid state gear. I used to have tube amps and ended up buying my own tube testing meter so I could check things out regularly.
| 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 © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
