Integrated amp for magneplanar 1.6s

[Feanor]

All good points, but one correction... Naim makes pure Class B amps for HiFi... So at least one company does...

That's interesting. I suppose class B will work if you have sufficiently fast transistors, so for example I think MOSFETs are typically faster than bi-polars. What matters is that the one-time buggaboo, notch distortion, has been effectively eliminated as a cause of s/s distortion and bad sound.

[E-Stat]

I don't understand the fascination with inefficient speakers/high powered amps.

The choice of speaker drives amplifier choice.

The best high power amp by nature of it's complicated circuit design will produce more grain and worse imaging sound stage than the best low powered amp.

While some high powered amps have complicated circuits (especially pro amps), many don't.

rw

[RGA]

On the other had SETs and tube in general generate substantial 2nd order and 3rd order distortion. According to most investigators, 2nd distortion sounds pleasant. Personally I strongly suspect that this extra distortion is the principal reason people like sound of tube equipment. It is most likely the reason for the "holographic soundstage", "depth", "presence", "organic wholeness" often attributed to tubes.

IMHO, (one man's opinion), this tube "holographic soundstage" is an artifact of tubes' distortion. The remark, "Feedback a problem? If you don’t mind the time smear it creates and the resulting 2 dimensional sound stage, then no I guess it’s probably not", is actually the reverse of the truth which is that tubes are artificially creating an effect that isn't on the recording. See my recent thread, here. If you like the effect, fine: who can argue with personal preference? On the other hand if you believe that you're interested in HIGH FIDELITY, maybe you're kidding yourself.

The problem is that you are making an assumption on a fact that doesn't really support the assumption.

Okay. So we see a measurement plot that says amp A has 5% of a type of distortion that amp B does not have at all. So you say that amp A has all these wonderful things like "holographic soundstage", "depth", "presence", "organic wholeness" often attributed to tubes." But you are now making the "leap" that the ONLY reason that the amp generates these wonderful sounding attributes is SOLELY and ENTIRELY based on the distortion figures.

What you have not considered and may very well be equally true and there is no hard evidence either way is that the amp here may in fact be "accurately" resolving "ALL" of these traits from the recordings by the nature of the design such as"holographic soundstage", "depth", "presence", "organic wholeness" but that they are ALSO adding the 2nd order and third order harmonics.

In other words the great tube amp may be giving you 95% of what is on the recording and adding 5% in various distortion artifacts but it a SS amp may only be providing 70% of the recording and .0005% distortion but it has missed 25% of what is really there on the recording.

And if the tube amp was really adding an ambiance artifact it would be adding it to every recording in the SAME EXACT way no matter whether it was a classical acoustic recording or an amplified rock recording. It would tie in with every frequency at the same volume all the time always. That would be a distortion generator - the best tube amps don't do this. The SF-1 may do this - the Grant Fidelity Tube Dac 09 kind of does this - a tube buffer may do this and adding a resister in a speaker wire may do this. But the assumption that distortion only affects some recordings and can somehow improve transient attack and decay and ambiance and depth and wholeness is ridiculous IMO. I might give you ambiance in the sense that more low level noise can add a kind of foundation to the music - you hear more low level sound which would be a boost to the lower midbass and bass - but SET is pretty much universally praised for transient speed - that means crisp and incredibly clean open sound getting the initial notes down - and if it was distorted it could not possibly hope to do that it - it would be the exact opposite - difficult to make out clearly and sounding muddy. It can't do both.

[Feanor]

The problem is that you are making an assumption on a fact that doesn't really support the assumption.

Okay. So we see a measurement plot that says amp A has 5% of a type of distortion that amp B does not have at all. So you say that amp A has all these wonderful things like "holographic soundstage", "depth", "presence", "organic wholeness" often attributed to tubes." But you are now making the "leap" that the ONLY reason that the amp generates these wonderful sounding attributes is SOLELY and ENTIRELY based on the distortion figures.
...

No, not exactly. I'm suggesting that there are tube artifacts caused by something. The higher distortion of tubes is acknowledged, so I am speculating further that that distortion causes the artifacts ... but I agree that it might be some other factor.

...
What you have not considered and may very well be equally true and there is no hard evidence either way is that the amp here may in fact be "accurately" resolving "ALL" of these traits from the recordings by the nature of the design such as"holographic soundstage", "depth", "presence", "organic wholeness" but that they are ALSO adding the 2nd order and third order harmonics.

In other words the great tube amp may be giving you 95% of what is on the recording and adding 5% in various distortion artifacts but it a SS amp may only be providing 70% of the recording and .0005% distortion but it has missed 25% of what is really there on the recording.

Maybe so -- because science & engineering haven't devised the tests the correlate closely with the subjective phenomenon. But note that in another, concurrent thread I described the "tube effect" in a test of a tube component against a simple, purely passive device, i.e. potentiometer. In that test any flaws of solid state obviously don't apply.

Also, I remind us that people have heard the tube effect having inserted a tube buffer into system; obviously (unless it's purely their imagination), it cannot be argued that the tubes are passing a purer signal because all the other, supposedly signal distorting solid state components are still in line.

...
And if the tube amp was really adding an ambiance artifact it would be adding it to every recording in the SAME EXACT way no matter whether it was a classical acoustic recording or an amplified rock recording.
...

I don't think you conclusion is warranted. Individual recordings could make the effect more or less apparent.

[Poultrygeist]

"The biggest conformation of this is reports from audiophiles who used to have several hundred watts and many thousands of dollars invested in show winning audio gear, but now report that even a good 2 watt SET on efficient speakers has better dynamics and weight which they find simply amazing. If you've ever observed how audiophiles rotate through audio gear during their lifetime you might also find it interesting that the ones who finally land on SET amps and good speakers seldom find anything they like better."

Steve Decket probably knew this many years before this quote but it took years longer for me and lots of wasted money along the way.

[E-Stat]

Also, I remind us that people have heard the tube effect having inserted a tube buffer into system

I realize this is one of your favorite topics, but magic $200 buffers offered by *distinguished* companies like Yaquin are purchased by folks who don't have a clue about electronics, much less tubes. Marketing tells them they can get the same "effect" just by adding their wonderful buffer. There is a good reason why companies who have been engineering tube designs for decades like McIntosh, Audio Research, Conrad-Johnson, BAT, Manley, etc., don't bother to make them.

Here you'll find some really funny stuff:

"The Yaqin tube buffer is based on the 6DJ8 / 6922 tube and is guaranteed to add the magic of tubes to any system without adding any significant noise or distortion...
Once in place, you will hear an added level of richness, warmth and musicality previously attainable only with a tremendous investment in world-class tube gear. "

On the other hand, they actually tell the truth at "The Watercooler" and focus on the real design goal of the product:

"It can smooth out just about any harsh CD player and add a tube quality without the expense of equipment replacement."

Translation: they are building an intentional filter for bad sounding cheap players. A harsh sounding player will still sound harsh with my preamp. Most likely yours as well.

rw

[Feanor]

I realize this is one of your favorite topics, but magic $200 buffers offered by *distinguished* companies like Yaquin are purchased by folks who don't have a clue about electronics, much less tubes. Marketing tells them they can get the same "effect" just by adding their wonderful buffer. There is a good reason why companies who have been engineering tube designs for decades like McIntosh, Audio Research, Conrad-Johnson, BAT, Manley, etc., don't bother to make them.
...

The question is not how well buffers do it, but that they do it at all !!

...
Here you'll find some really funny stuff:

"The Yaqin tube buffer is based on the 6DJ8 / 6922 tube and is guaranteed to add the magic of tubes to any system without adding any significant noise or distortion...
Once in place, you will hear an added level of richness, warmth and musicality previously attainable only with a tremendous investment in world-class tube gear. "

On the other hand, they actually tell the truth at "The Watercooler" and focus on the real design goal of the product:

"It can smooth out just about any harsh CD player and add a tube quality without the expense of equipment replacement."

Translation: they are building an intentional filter for bad sounding cheap players. A harsh sounding player will still sound harsh with my preamp. Most likely yours as well.

rw

I submit that a lot of people use tubes that way ... not you of course, nor presumably anbody willing to spend 10's of thousands on their tube equipment.

[E-Stat]

The question is not how well buffers do it, but that they do it at all !!

And the truth has been around for decades by the companies who know...

rw

[Feanor]

"The biggest conformation of this is reports from audiophiles who used to have several hundred watts and many thousands of dollars invested in show winning audio gear, but now report that even a good 2 watt SET on efficient speakers has better dynamics and weight which they find simply amazing. If you've ever observed how audiophiles rotate through audio gear during their lifetime you might also find it interesting that the ones who finally land on SET amps and good speakers seldom find anything they like better."

Steve Decket probably knew this many years before this quote but it took years longer for me and lots of wasted money along the way.

I hope you're not suggesting, Poultry, that I, after 40+ years of flipping equipment will come around to tubes, single-driver, and vinyl?1? Maybe some just get old & tired and want listen to something smooth and inocuous will they sip their scotch and read a book. Well I'm old & tired but I'm still interested in accurate sound.

Hahaha! I had just had a vision of Florian, (still a young man), selling his Apogee Grands and his Krell amps to kick back with a SET and Fostex speakers. Who knows, eh?

BTW, don't suggest I'm not familiar with bad s/s equipment. In my ignorance, I once lived for a number of years with a Phase Linear 400 amp. Despite being on most TAS writers' list of 10 Most Significant Amplfiers, the device encorporated every vice ever attributed to solid state.

[Poultrygeist]

Sitting here as I type listening to a simple 6 watt 2a3 amp driving $200 DIY horns with a tear welling up in my eye - the beauty of the SET and full range single driver is just emotionally overwhelming. The high dollar inefficient Aerials and powerful Classe ( aka Canadian Krell ) I once owned never moved me in the least.

Here's hoping your system makes you cry but for the right reasons.

[Feanor]

Sitting here as I type listening to a simple 6 watt 2a3 amp driving $200 DIY horns with a tear welling up in my eye - the beauty of the SET and full range single driver is just emotionally overwhelming. The high dollar inefficient Aerials and powerful Classe ( aka Canadian Krell ) I once owned never moved me in the least.

Here's hoping your system makes you cry but for the right reasons.

Thanks you, PG. Yes, it often does. I'll be heading upstairs momentarily to resume listening to this performance of Haydn's The Seasons, directed by Renee Jacobs: terrific performance and sound.

[Poultrygeist]

As our resident classical enthusiast, I hope you can some day hear a string quartet or baroque horns played on some good full rangers driven by a flea power 2a3 amp.

[Feanor]

As our resident classical enthusiast, I hope you can some day hear a string quartet or baroque horns played on some good full rangers driven by a flea power 2a3 amp.

I hope so too, PG. And I even suspect that these ensembles would sound very pleasing on such a system.

[Fred70433]

In reviewing the Magnepan website I never found a bright line recommendation for watts. i.e at least 100 watts per. In fact, Magnepan's website says that they use a 35 watt NAD at their factory. What they do hit upon repeatedly is high current and true 4 ohm load. Your amp needs to be able to support both. Now the question is, does my Jolida 502B fit that bill?

[blackraven]

You should be ok with the JOLIDA as long as you don't play it at very loud levels. Its not a very dynamic amp (with inefficient speakers)with 60wpc and 85wpc peak. For moderately loud music it will do just fine.