best budget integrated amp?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frenchmon

What do you mean by non-believers? And you still did not answer the question I asked above.

---

As if we couldn't post hundreds of glowing reviews of high powered solid state amps? :rolleyes:

Fetish - look it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnMichael

RGA I get a kick out of you. You sure like to type. I wonder if you are the same about other aspects of your life. If you like single malt scotch must I also like it. Do I have to work to develop a taste for it. Just for point of fact and not point of argument I do like single malt.

My point being I have heard two tube amps and was not impressed. I have a solid state integrated amp that I enjoy and presents the music as I like it and as it sounds to me at concerts. I have to ask why you think I need to try other tube amps. I neither have the time nor the interest. Why would I shop for something in which I have no interest. No need to further try and lure anyone to the tube side. Enjoy what you enjoy but the rest of us are not wrong.

---

This is an audiophile forum - let's take your food example - if you hate the taste of scotch then it probably doesn't matter which scotch you try you will hate it.

But stereo equipment as an analogy to beverage or food you have to try and make a better one. It's not like a guy who likes wine is the tube guy and the guy who likes SS is a Scotch guy - it's not that far apart.

Tubes have a much wider range of sonic types - based around the tube. An EL 84 based tube amp doesn't sound the same as an EL 34 based amp or a KT 88. There are plenty of tube guys who hate the sound of some of these output tubes.

Personally I do my best to ignore the design cause I really don't care - Technical Brain impressed me, Sugden and Heed impressed me and they're all solid state. I would buy these over plenty of tube designs - I am not a slave to the design.

Having said that however, the best amps I have heard in virtually every price class has been SE, and with little to no feedback (whether SS or tube). The blind tests would indicate this as well - and it's pretty obvious as well since everyone who makes the comparisons that I know always choose it as the designers of all those top SS makers illustrated when they chose a no feedback amp over their own design and why the Sugden A21a has won every blind test it's been in - again with manufacturers sitting in the listening chairs.

An analogy with scotch doesn't work. It has to be something where there is a same general classification - wine makes more sense to me but I am not a wine guy so I can't make a good analogy of that.

I would use hamburgers - McIntosh may be a McDonalds double 1/4 pounder with cheese - lots of beef but will like give you the craps. But lots of SS amps are also McDonalds level burgers

A better than average SS amp may be a quality burger at Earls or proper restaurants where it's not sitting in a warmer for an hour.

If you are going to fairly compare amplfiers or burgers you can't compare McDonalds grade stuff to Gordon Ramsey level burgers which will like be a steak between home baked buns.

My argument here is more on the absolute top end of the range. At normal prices I can find good SS amps - but after a certain point Tubes take over and really they don't have competitors in SS. Even with high power demands as there are 800Watt+ per channel tube amps out there.

Like I say - an audiophile forum suggests that people are interested in audio gear - so I assume that people are interested in trying more than two tube amplifiers. And personally I could care less if you never want to try another one - but don't think for a second because you tried two you have any clue what you're talking about when you start dumping on tube amps. I dislike a lot of tube amps as well - so I am not terribly surprised but it would be like me trying a Crowne and Sony receiver and saying - all SS sucks because those amps were atrocious. I will never audition another SS amp because I heard those two and that represents the technology fairly. C'mon - it's an audiophile forum - the point is to try stuff out.

I was judging some technologies myself unfairly until I heard some of the better examples of it. And Tube amps are in no way shape or form the same as SET amps. My amp comes in a Push Pull version with more feedback - sounds good but completely outclassed by the SE version. But then it's about half the price so that's fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frenchmon

Is that based on just a objective fact? Subjective? Or both?

---

First the only truly linear amplifiers is the single ended triode - that is an objective fact - every other design and all designs using feedback skew the timing of a system and it can't be fixed. There are Solid State Single Ended no feedback amplfiers - like the A21a which you can make the case falls into this camp - but it's still not the same - not quite and that not quite can be heard - nevertheless it's one of the closest you can get without having a tube so it's actually a nice compromise since tubes to me are a pain in the ass. A necessary evil.


The problem with feedback amplifiers:

"all amplifiers introduce some delay to passing a signal from its input, to its output and then back to its input. During this delay period, a feedback amplifier is operating at its natural (referred to as "open-loop") gain. It is not until this initial delay period is over, that the circuit begins to exhibit its intended operating ("closed loop") gain characteristics. There must be, by the very definition of a feedback system, some change in the gain factor G, during the transition from open to closed loop operation. This gain modulation would probably not be audible by itself, as the propagation delays of most good amplifiers are quite small, except that the increased gain of the amplifier during the initialization period results in a decreased maximum input capability before overload. Simply put, an amplifier which utilizes 20 dB of feedback (a relatively modest amount by modern standards) and requires an input of two volts to clip during closed loop operation, would overload with only two tenths of a volt input during the forward delay period. Once the amplifier is overdriven, it may take many times its delay period to become fully restored to normal operation. The distortion created by this condition has been commonly referred to as Transient Intermodulation Distortion (TIM), Dynamic Intermodulation Distortion (DIM), and Slew Induced Distortion (SID).

In addition to this obvious form of feedback induced distortion, there exists another more subtle effect of signal regeneration. Because all amplifiers have some forward propagation delay, the fed back portion of the output signal will always lag behind the input. There is therefore a constant introduction of "out of date" information into the amplifier. Under transient conditions (which is what music is; transients), this results in the presentation of an error correction signal intended to reduce the distortion of an input signal which has already passed through the amplifier and is either already out of the circuit or well on the way out of the circuit. The signal present at the input by the time the feedback has arrived may bear no relation to the previous signal and thus will not be properly acted upon by the regenerated information. The current input signal is then distorted once, through the subtraction of an erroneous feedback waveform, and again by the amplifier. Additionally, the error signal present in feedback is passed through the amplifier and again fed back, with all of the newly created distortions, to make yet another trip through the circuit, until it is allowed to decay through successive attenuation. Thus, a distortion signal which originally may have lasted only a few microseconds, can pass through the amplifier enough times for its effective duration to have exceeded the threshold of human audibility. The mechanism originally designed to reduce audible distortion, actually, under transient conditions, serves to regenerate, emphasize and, in fact, create distortion."

There have been several blind level matched tests done to show that when people are not listening and judging tube amps unfairly due to their preconceived biases (like the folks who say SS measures better so it will sound better) when that bias is removed and all they can do is use their own two ears - they ALWAYS choose the no feedback amplifier - whether a no feedback tube amplifier over SS or a No feedback amplifier like the Sugden A21a over any and all high negative feedback amplfiers "regardless of price."

In the tests that have been down the no feedback aspect is a big key but as no feedback tube also beats SS then at the very least the tubes are not having a negative impact to the result even if the main quality being chosen is a lack of feedback. What I have not seen is a test between the Sugden SS no feedback amp versus a tube no feedback amplfier to determine if the tube aspect would win or not.

As for subjective - there is always a subjective element - there are people who like processed cheeze wiz over top grade Belgium or French hand turned from the best milk cheese available - that fact that people with horrible taste buds and general taste like crap more than real quality is still an opinion - there will always be people like that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RGA

Like I say - an audiophile forum suggests that people are interested in audio gear - so I assume that people are interested in trying more than two tube amplifiers. And personally I could care less if you never want to try another one - but don't think for a second because you tried two you have any clue what you're talking about when you start dumping on tube amps.

---

I do not dump on tube amps I just have not enjoyed any I have heard. So I am looking no further. You dump much more on SS so get down from the soap box and let people like what they like. You are boring me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnMichael

I do not dump on tube amps I just have not enjoyed any I have heard. So I am looking no further. You dump much more on SS so get down from the soap box and let people like what they like. You are boring me.

---

You auditioned 2 tube amps.

I have heard well over 100 Solid state amps. You have no idea if you would enjoy tube amps based on hearing 2 of them (especially when the noted McIntosh line-up has a huge number of detractors within the tube fandom world) just as any tube die hard could not dismiss Solid State by hearing just two.

Just like there are many different tube designs there are many different SS designs - is the SS a single ended design, is it class A, A/B, B (Naim), Class T, is it DC coupled - what kind of transformers. And then what about the hybrids?

The fact is a Krell sounds a LOT closer to a $400 Rotel than a $400 tube amp will sound to a $3000 tube amp. And yet SS guys dole money out for tiny little subtle improvements (none of which they could hear in a blind audition) and dump on Rotel and rave about Krell. But they'll audition 2 tube amps which can have wildly different sonic attributes? What the hell is that? One of the reasons I don't like a lot of SS is the very reason that expensive SS tends to sound too much like a $150 Crown amps I can buy in a pawn shop. It's irritating to spend so much on something that sounds a lot like very cheap audio. Tube amps show dramatic improvements over lower priced kit.

This is not unlike CD replay - same small improvements - going from a $300 cartridge to a $1000 cartridge is a beyond belief improvement - $1000 cd player versus $300 cd player - meh - it's better but it's mostly never beyond belief and in a blind test - well most "fail" - with the cartridges - no one fails they always choose the $1000 cartridge. In other words I want massive upgrades (and I want to hear them - not just see the dollars I spent and assume it's better) for my bucks.

Any given design can beat out others - I liked the Heed amps for under $3000 as well as Sugden - both are Solid State and wildly different from each other.

I even get people who like Bryston - I liked it too - as I said I nearly bought one that's how much I liked it. But I also liked it so much because I only heard umm two tube amplifiers - a Copland and later McIntosh. To me Bryston is a fine place to start out in this hobby - but there is way more out there and the more you hear the less well it held up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RGA

You auditioned 2 tube amps.

I have heard well over 100 Solid state amps. You have no idea if you would enjoy tube amps based on hearing 2 of them (especially when the noted McIntosh line-up has a huge number of detractors within the tube fandom world) just as any tube die hard could not dismiss Solid State by hearing just two.

Just like there are many different tube designs there are many different SS designs - is the SS a single ended design, is it class A, A/B, B (Naim), Class T, is it DC coupled - what kind of transformers. And then what about the hybrids?

The fact is a Krell sounds a LOT closer to a $400 Rotel than a $400 tube amp will sound to a $3000 tube amp. And yet SS guys dole money out for tiny little subtle improvements (none of which they could hear in a blind audition) and dump on Rotel and rave about Krell. But they'll audition 2 tube amps which can have wildly different sonic attributes? What the hell is that? One of the reasons I don't like a lot of SS is the very reason that expensive SS tends to sound too much like a $150 Crown amps I can buy in a pawn shop. It's irritating to spend so much on something that sounds a lot like very cheap audio. Tube amps show dramatic improvements over lower priced kit.

This is not unlike CD replay - same small improvements - going from a $300 cartridge to a $1000 cartridge is a beyond belief improvement - $1000 cd player versus $300 cd player - meh - it's better but it's mostly never beyond belief and in a blind test - well most "fail" - with the cartridges - no one fails they always choose the $1000 cartridge. In other words I want massive upgrades (and I want to hear them - not just see the dollars I spent and assume it's better) for my bucks.

Any given design can beat out others - I liked the Heed amps for under $3000 as well as Sugden - both are Solid State and wildly different from each other.

I even get people who like Bryston - I liked it too - as I said I nearly bought one that's how much I liked it. But I also liked it so much because I only heard umm two tube amplifiers - a Copland and later McIntosh. To me Bryston is a fine place to start out in this hobby - but there is way more out there and the more you hear the less well it held up.

---

I have said my peace and I am finished with this thread.

A few years ago I owned what many consider to be a pretty good example of the ss amp - the Classe CAP-150. When new it sold for a few grand. While it performed very well and had the big watt slam factor, it never drew me into the music like the SET's do. When I try to remain detached and objectively evaluate what I'm hearing with the 2a3 or the Minwatt I get so distracted by the music I usually forget what I'm trying to accomplish.

After living with the Classe for awhile it started to seem sterile, fatiguing, way too clinical and devoid of life compared to the purity, solid imagery and hauntingly holographic sound stage I get from the simple circuit triodes.

There are probably more different sounding tube amps than ss but the triodes are a SET apart ( pun intended ).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poultrygeist

A few years ago I owned what many consider to be a pretty good example of the ss amp - the Classe CAP-150. When new it sold for a few grand. While it performed very well and had the big watt slam factor, it never drew me into the music like the SET's do. When I try to remain detached and objectively evaluate what I'm hearing with the 2a3 or the Minwatt I get so distracted by the music I usually forget what I'm trying to accomplish.

After living with the Classe for awhile it started to seem sterile, fatiguing, way too clinical and devoid of life compared to the purity, solid imagery and hauntingly holographic sound stage I get from the simple circuit triodes.

There are probably more different sounding tube amps than ss but the triodes are a SET apart ( pun intended ).

---

I am glad you enjoy what you enjoy. We had a local audio store where the owner kept pushing his interests on others to the point where he is out of business. You can lose out if you keep pushing your ideas and ignoring what is important to others.

JohnMichael do you believe an audio forum could survive for long if all the members shared the same opinions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poultrygeist

JohnMichael do you believe an audio forum could survive for long if all the members shared the same opinions?

---

This place could use the action and when you two get rolling it's almost like having Spanky posting about his beloved JBL Control series speakers..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markw

This place could use the action and when you two get rolling it's almost like having Spanky posting about his beloved JBL Control series speakers..

---

Watch out Mark, you may wake the sleeping troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RGA

First the only truly linear amplifiers is the single ended triode - that is an objective fact - every other design and all designs using feedback skew the timing of a system and it can't be fixed. There are Solid State Single Ended no feedback amplfiers - like the A21a which you can make the case falls into this camp - but it's still not the same - not quite and that not quite can be heard - nevertheless it's one of the closest you can get without having a tube so it's actually a nice compromise since tubes to me are a pain in the ass. A necessary evil.


The problem with feedback amplifiers:

"all amplifiers introduce some delay to passing a signal from its input, to its output and then back to its input. During this delay period, a feedback amplifier is operating at its natural (referred to as "open-loop") gain. It is not until this initial delay period is over, that the circuit begins to exhibit its intended operating ("closed loop") gain characteristics. There must be, by the very definition of a feedback system, some change in the gain factor G, during the transition from open to closed loop operation. This gain modulation would probably not be audible by itself, as the propagation delays of most good amplifiers are quite small, except that the increased gain of the amplifier during the initialization period results in a decreased maximum input capability before overload. Simply put, an amplifier which utilizes 20 dB of feedback (a relatively modest amount by modern standards) and requires an input of two volts to clip during closed loop operation, would overload with only two tenths of a volt input during the forward delay period. Once the amplifier is overdriven, it may take many times its delay period to become fully restored to normal operation. The distortion created by this condition has been commonly referred to as Transient Intermodulation Distortion (TIM), Dynamic Intermodulation Distortion (DIM), and Slew Induced Distortion (SID).

In addition to this obvious form of feedback induced distortion, there exists another more subtle effect of signal regeneration. Because all amplifiers have some forward propagation delay, the fed back portion of the output signal will always lag behind the input. There is therefore a constant introduction of "out of date" information into the amplifier. Under transient conditions (which is what music is; transients), this results in the presentation of an error correction signal intended to reduce the distortion of an input signal which has already passed through the amplifier and is either already out of the circuit or well on the way out of the circuit. The signal present at the input by the time the feedback has arrived may bear no relation to the previous signal and thus will not be properly acted upon by the regenerated information. The current input signal is then distorted once, through the subtraction of an erroneous feedback waveform, and again by the amplifier. Additionally, the error signal present in feedback is passed through the amplifier and again fed back, with all of the newly created distortions, to make yet another trip through the circuit, until it is allowed to decay through successive attenuation. Thus, a distortion signal which originally may have lasted only a few microseconds, can pass through the amplifier enough times for its effective duration to have exceeded the threshold of human audibility. The mechanism originally designed to reduce audible distortion, actually, under transient conditions, serves to regenerate, emphasize and, in fact, create distortion."

There have been several blind level matched tests done to show that when people are not listening and judging tube amps unfairly due to their preconceived biases (like the folks who say SS measures better so it will sound better) when that bias is removed and all they can do is use their own two ears - they ALWAYS choose the no feedback amplifier - whether a no feedback tube amplifier over SS or a No feedback amplifier like the Sugden A21a over any and all high negative feedback amplfiers "regardless of price."

In the tests that have been down the no feedback aspect is a big key but as no feedback tube also beats SS then at the very least the tubes are not having a negative impact to the result even if the main quality being chosen is a lack of feedback. What I have not seen is a test between the Sugden SS no feedback amp versus a tube no feedback amplfier to determine if the tube aspect would win or not.

As for subjective - there is always a subjective element - there are people who like processed cheeze wiz over top grade Belgium or French hand turned from the best milk cheese available - that fact that people with horrible taste buds and general taste like crap more than real quality is still an opinion - there will always be people like that

---

When I buy gear...the first thing I want to know is does it sound good to me in my sysytem....the second is whats its history with reliability....the third is how much does it cost. Thats it!

Thanks for answering my question RGA but I could care less about an amp being " the only truly linear amplifiers is the single ended triode" or such other things that don't mean a hill of beans to me...no offense RGA...and I respect your opinions and understandings in these matters, but I don't share your sentiments about it.

...frenchmon---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poultrygeist

JohnMichael do you believe an audio forum could survive for long if all the members shared the same opinions?

---

No but when I post that I am not interested and someone keeps quoting me and telling me I am wrong for not listening to tubes. Yes we need exchange of ideas but the same ideas again and again is not an exchange but preaching.

"this place could use the action"

markw, just don't get me started on open baffles vs monkey coffins ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poultrygeist

A few years ago I owned what many consider to be a pretty good example of the ss amp - the Classe CAP-150. When new it sold for a few grand. While it performed very well and had the big watt slam factor, it never drew me into the music like the SET's do. When I try to remain detached and objectively evaluate what I'm hearing with the 2a3 or the Minwatt I get so distracted by the music I usually forget what I'm trying to accomplish.

After living with the Classe for awhile it started to seem sterile, fatiguing, way too clinical and devoid of life compared to the purity, solid imagery and hauntingly holographic sound stage I get from the simple circuit triodes.

There are probably more different sounding tube amps than ss but the triodes are a SET apart ( pun intended ).

---

The link I provided earlier from the Bryston owner made a good analogy - "I realised then what it is about solid state audio that makes me uneasy and dissatisfied. It's analogous to the feeling I get working under fluorescent strip lights with their 50Hz switching cycle. It's light right enough, but it makes me feel uneasy and eventually fatigued." General Asylum: REVIEW: Audio Note Level 3 system Other by KevinF

I grew up with SS amplifiers - and ultimately that analogy holds true IME

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by frenchmon

When I buy gear...the first thing I want to know is does it sound good to me in my sysytem....the second is whats its history with reliability....the third is how much does it cost. Thats it!

Thanks for answering my question RGA but I could care less about an amp being " the only truly linear amplifiers is the single ended triode" or such other things that don't mean a hill of beans to me...no offense RGA...and I respect your opinions and understandings in these matters, but I don't share your sentiments about it.

...frenchmon---

---

Frenchmon

Thanks for reminding me of that fact. The problem is audio is an experiential thing. When you try to rip that down into words it falls apart. You ask my why I like the sound of AN - what can I really say? I am a science first guy - so when I listen to something that handedly destroys most stuff when actually listening to it I am in the chartered territory of Jehovah Witness that comes to my door trying to tell me they know the "truth." And it's entirely not the side of the fence I like being on.

The fact is an AN complete system is a difficult proposition to make the case for. It's very easy to dismiss. It's bad enough to be in the camp of vinyl or SET - you can make measurement arguments for SET - there is possibly enough measurement merit with regards to feedback and low distortion at low level to get someone to at least try one. Vinyl - no chance - no matter how good the turntable measures a single pop or click (surface noise) will have people write it off entirely.

The speakers - are so-so in the measurement department - they're well balanced in the listening chair and if set-up correctly but in general measurements are never taken where anyone actually listens to them - I can argue that case and the more objective may consider trying them based on that - some will not because they believe all speakers should be measured the same way because that's the way they measure.

AN CD players - well without the analog and digital filter - they measure worse than any CD player on the market. Add all of those technologies together and frankly I can't really make the case for it. I am left to the only real argument of "it simply sounds more accurate, more realistic, and thus better, than alternatives that I have heard. Well gee - anyone can claim that kind of stuff. I can attempt to bend the English language all sorts of ways but at the end of the day the legs I have to stand on are very wobbly indeed. But I can't throw out my experience of it - when it embarrasses a top various combinations of Sim Audio/Audio Research/YBA/Classe/Mark Levinson/Bryston/Naim/Krell connected to Wilson/Magnepan/B&W/Paradigm/Genelec/Elac/.Martin Logan/ PMC/Meridian/Dynaudio/Quad/Sonus Faber/ etc then I have to go by experience - I simply can't chuck it out because the technology and the numbers makes me uncomfortable.

Ummmm.....

outlaw 2150 receiver is getting a lot of positive reviews.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markw

Ummmm.....

---

Ha! classic!

RGA VS JohnMichael


Albert Einstein Quotes
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RGA

An analogy with scotch doesn't work. It has to be something where there is a same general classification - wine makes more sense to me but I am not a wine guy so I can't make a good analogy of that.

I would use hamburgers - McIntosh may be a McDonalds double 1/4 pounder with cheese - lots of beef but will like give you the craps. But lots of SS amps are also McDonalds level burgers

---

a) That's just disingenuous and you know it.
b) Clearly you have no culinary skills.

Deleted