Attn: 300a, Rga

[newbsterv2]

I'd like some tube amplifier recommendations for auditioning. Which amps would you 2 say around $1,000 that are non-fatiguing?

[RGA]

I'd like some tube amplifier recommendations for auditioning. Which amps would you 2 say around $1,000 that are non-fatiguing?

I'll suggest two that are just barely under a thousand and that should be the most widely available in most areas. The Jolida 302B http://www.goodsound.com/equipment/jolida_jd302b.htm

The other is the Antique Sound Labs AQ1003DT and possibly the MG Si 15DT. I preferred the old AQ1003DT to the Jolida 302B. The 1003 has been upgraded since but their price went up as well. Still I like the ASL warranty of 5 years over Jolida's 1. SO an extra $50.00 or so is worth it to me. There is virtually no audible difference in volume going from 30-50 watts. http://www.divertech.com/antiquesl.html#INTEGRATED
Also Check out Passion...much harder to find and they are typically sold as kits. Same design as the Antique Sound Labs.

Reviews: The AQ1003DT is two models old here and has been improved.
http://www.divertech.com/antiquesl.html#INTEGRATED


For further suggestions post a question here http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/tubes/bbs.html

Try not to be seduced by the look and "NEAT" factor of tubes because they are out of the ordinary. Sound is still the goal. These are some of the better inexpensive ones but there is certainly no gaurantee that you will like them more than a Solid State amp. The Audio Refinement "Complete" (from YBA) is a terrific amp that I would take depending on the speakers. I would like to hear the upgraded ASL though. The ASL sounds less tube like and more tightly controlled as a SS amp.

My headphone amp is from ASL and exhibits none of the SET characteristics often discussed. Audio Note's SET integrateds for instance have no bass softness. Some are simply better implemented than others. Their Ongaku-On is considered by many to be the best amp in the world with a price tag to follow. Their DAC 5, with a ridiculous price that no one can defend no matter how good it is(well unless you got the money) has the highest rating Stereophile has ever given anything. It's just a review of course but there is consensus by the other rags that have heard it. It is a Tube design of course. http://www.enjoythemusic.com/superioraudio/equipment/0903/audionotedac5.htm

Yes it can get silly...but Krell makes an $80k monoblock and that is every bit as ridiculous.

[300A]

I haven't looked at amps around 1k in years, prefering the stratosphere.
Here are three of the best I have heard though.

1) Pass X250, a little dark

2) SAS Audio Labs, 25 wpt amp.

3) VTL 70/70, modded though

Not cheap, but the best I have ever heard, including SETs.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

While he only received it recently, and has less than 100 hours on it, he then purchased the ASL Tulip 2a3 and found it MUCH more to his liking. Of course, he has spend even less time with it. Still, in his words; "This is what I like, a amp that plays great right out of the box"... "The build quality of the Tulip is much better than the SI-15, and a little bit heavier." The Tulip lists for $1099 and is a true SET. The max output is 3.5wpc, the MGSi15 DT is a pentode run in triode rated at 15wpc. Depending on your choice of speaker this is important. As a reference, I use a 3.5wpc 45 SET with a three way dynamic speaker system rated 93db [gentle impedance curve, 8ohm, simple x-over]. There are many factors that come into play other than wpc and efficiency [room, listener position, music / loudness preference, partnering components] but a mid 80db speaker is not going to work well with 3wpc. Though at present I'm using mini-monitors rated at 86db and with most of my music this combo swings just fine. Just don't ask it to play complex passages or 90+db levels. Of course, being a small two way, it has no bass - nor designed to - regardless the amplification.

I realize this is not a very accurate comparision between the two amps. And while my friend is somewhat new to low-powered tube amps he is very familiar with tubes, and audio in general. I'm not familliar with either of the two products or amps at this price point but I have read many complimentary reviews about the ASL product and the Tulip in particular. Which probably has more to do with it's SET topology than anything else. And to clarify my alligence, I own a 45 SET myself and couldn't be happier. Even with the less than ideal speaker partnership [93db+3.5wpc]. YMMV. Tells us more about the profile of your system and replay preference and if you are considering any upgrades in the near future that may impact your decision of amplification device.

MikE

http://audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=12230&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

[300A]

First I used to be a SET man, but not anymore, and I heard alot of SET amps.

I have heard some PP and SS amps that sound much better than any SET amp, and don't have the limitations of low power output.

They have better midrange magic as well as better bass and highs and without needing a sub to extend the bass of horns and single drivers, which really don't go very low, although the claims are out there. There are other amps with much much better imaging too.

After years in the SET market, and then listening to some really great amps again, I now realize how deficient SETs really are.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

I'm curious what equipment - specifically amp + speaker - you speaking when you made the "much better than SET" statement. Any info on specific brands/model/tube compliment/mods[if any], partnering components, room, listener distance, music type and volume levels would also be helpful to put your opinions in context. And what is your opinion on the issue of system compatibity. I.E. All systems have strenghts and weak points and will not perform equally well for all listeners / music types.Thanks.

MikE

[300A]

I'm curious what equipment - specifically amp + speaker - you speaking when you made the "much better than SET" statement. Any info on specific brands/model/tube compliment/mods[if any], partnering components, room, listener distance, music type and volume levels would also be helpful to put your opinions in context. And what is your opinion on the issue of system compatibity. I.E. All systems have strenghts and weak points and will not perform equally well for all listeners / music types.Thanks.

MikE

I have heard the amp brands listed in my above post, vsmp(?) speakers, modified System Audios, B&W 802s. Rooms typical etc etc etc. Testing is sometimes side by side.

The point is I have found out the SETs are deficient in a lot of areas since listening to these newer components.

Lack of bass is one of them. Speakers to only 50/75hz just aren't producing accurate, or quantity bass that sounds right. Technically, Horns drop off at 36db per octave, and single drivers 12db. And they sound that way.
Sorry but I am sick of trying to add subs to get it to sound right. Some systems I have heard don't use them and they just aren't cutting it either.

I hear the problems with single driver cones breaking up and they don't cover the highs and lows either. It is becoming more annoying. The horns distort and don't give a very good soundstage.

System capatibility works some, but doesn't fix all the problems I am hearing. Tonal balance may be fine, but I am finding the SETs just don't have the imaging, depth, soundstage that some other components have that I have heard.

I am seeing SETs being clearly eclipsed by some of the newer technology coming out. And these are components that work with regular efficiency speakers. The System Audio, B&W 802s are only 88/89fdb efficient.

Actually, SETs always left me with a sense that something was wrong. Maybe it was the soundstaging/depth problem, lack of bass and highs, getting the sub to match the rest of the system, or a combination.
After listening to the newer systems, it became obviously to me that we were listening to just one parameter, midrange, while neglecting all the other areas of audio.

I have certainly tried over the years and heard lots of other systems, trying to match, but I have come to realize that there are just too many problems with SETs. The newer stuff is just more complete sounding to me.

[RGA]

I'm not here to defend sets as I've only heard one for any length of time. The Audio Note Soro. With my speakers the sound was quite exceptional - I didn't even know it was a set...bass was deep tight and full. But these are not your 3 watters either. 12-18 watt Sets in their lower levels is still pretty powerful as tubes go. And they need higher efficiency than the B&W's which present much more diffcult imopredence loads than say Audio Note's own speakers.

http://www.audionote.co.uk/reviews/an_soro_hfh_11-2k2_01.jpg
http://www.audionote.co.uk/reviews/an_soro_hfh_11-2k2_02.jpg

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

Thanks but you didn't address any of my questions. I was asking about what SPECIFIC SET amps and partnering speakers you have prior experience, that lead to your conclusions. Your response, "I have heard the amp brands listed in my above post." The only amps listed were two PP and one SS amp. Again, what SET amps have you heard? I respect your right to voice your opinion. I was just looking for a little context to better interpret your position. Your rebuttle was too generic. What "new stuff" are you talking about? Of course, that is your choice... and our's... in what is revealed... and evaluated.

MikE

[300A]

I'm not here to defend sets as I've only heard one for any length of time. The Audio Note Soro. With my speakers the sound was quite exceptional - I didn't even know it was a set...bass was deep tight and full. But these are not your 3 watters either. 12-18 watt Sets in their lower levels is still pretty powerful as tubes go. And they need higher efficiency than the B&W's which present much more diffcult imopredence loads than say Audio Note's own speakers.

http://www.audionote.co.uk/reviews/an_soro_hfh_11-2k2_01.jpg
http://www.audionote.co.uk/reviews/an_soro_hfh_11-2k2_02.jpg


RGA, the B&Ws etc were with the more powerful amps, not the SETs. No one would use a B&W with an SET amp, at least I don't think so.

Wanted to clear this up.

What speakers are you using to get this tight, powerful bass?

[300A]

Thanks but you didn't address any of my questions. I was asking about what SPECIFIC SET amps and partnering speakers you have prior experience, that lead to your conclusions. Your response, "I have heard the amp brands listed in my above post." The only amps listed were two PP and one SS amp. Again, what SET amps have you heard? I respect your right to voice your opinion. I was just looking for a little context to better interpret your position. Your rebuttle was too generic. What "new stuff" are you talking about? Of course, that is your choice... and our's... in what is revealed... and evaluated.

MikE

I am not going to get into all kinds of discussions over this. Over the years I have heard Wavelength, Bottlehead modified and straight, Midwest Audio, Wright etc. Edgarhorns, Fostex, Lowthers etc but time has passed so I cannot remember exactly which models of speakers. I have heard alot of homebrew of both speakers and amps too. Can't remember it all.

For awhile I liked the SETs but now I can honestly say at least one SS I have heard is blowing them away. The X250 with vmps(?) speakers were simply incredible ( that is the highest compliment I can express). It was that good, lifelike. The VTL PP 300bs 70/70s (modded) and SAS Audio Labs 25 watters were also just incredible.

New stuff is becoming available and I am going to hopefully keep up (finances the limit). When I can I hope to evaluate some more models. I am sure many will not sound that good, but one never knows when another great amp will come along.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

I believe your response - however limited - is sufficient to shed light on your previous statement.


I am not going to get into all kinds of discussions over this.

I thought that was the purpose for forums such as this. Though I realize that we can pick and choose with whom and to what extent we elaborate. I just enjoy sharing my experience with others, especially those that have similiar associations - regardless our conclusions. As one much wisher than I said, "The PP and SET camps tend to divide along the lines of musical tastes." Which doesn't mean that a PP can't play simple music but that THAT is the strenght of SET. Like using a tractor for your rush hour commute - not the best application of technology. At the level of replay that I'm at, or wish to aspire, it comes down to synergy and knowing exactly what I'm wanting to achieve and then finding the best [within my means] technology to satisfy that end. One system can not do all things equally well. Often satisfaction comes from choosing wishly among the myriad of choices. And like most things in life, first you must know yourself.

MikE

[300A]

I believe your response - however limited - is sufficient to shed light on your previous statement.



I thought that was the purpose for forums such as this. Though I realize that we can pick and choose with whom and to what extent we elaborate. I just enjoy sharing my experience with others, especially those that have similiar associations - regardless our conclusions. As one much wisher than I said, "The PP and SET camps tend to divide along the lines of musical tastes." Which doesn't mean that a PP can't play simple music but that THAT is the strenght of SET. Like using a tractor for your rush hour commute - not the best application of technology. At the level of replay that I'm at, or wish to aspire, it comes down to synergy and knowing exactly what I'm wanting to achieve and then finding the best [within my means] technology to satisfy that end. One system can not do all things equally well. Often satisfaction comes from choosing wishly among the myriad of choices. And like most things in life, first you must know yourself.
MikE


SETs, SS, and PP tube amps all have room acoustics, and other setup procedures to deal with, so I am not going to get into an exchange like I have seen at other sites. Enough said on that.

With that said, the amps l listed above are, in my opinion, beating the SETs at there own game as well as in other areas such as better bass, highs, soundstage, just sounding more live and real than any of the SETs I have heard over the years. I am hearing depth and width, etc I haven't heard before. And I am hearing the same, if not better nuisances than the efficienct speakers, which I have been hearing are required to reproduce the smallest inner details.

"Like using a tractor for your rush hour commute - not the best application of technology." They are clearly beating the SETs hands down, in my opinion.

"At the level of replay that I'm at, or wish to aspire, it comes down to synergy and knowing exactly what I'm wanting to achieve and then finding the best [within my means] technology to satisfy that end. One system can not do all things equally well. Often satisfaction comes from choosing wishly among the myriad of choices. And like most things in life, first you must know yourself."

I have heard "synergy" many times before, same with SS and PP amps etc as well. And the synergy I heard was unbelievable. One system may not be able to do all things well, but these amps I have heard are certainly doing more things right and better than any of the SETs I have heard and tried. And I realize that synergy doesn't fix all the problems as I have been led to believe. To expect a $500 or $1000 amp, with upgrades, to be the best in the world, or better than SS and PP is simply a farse, no matter how good the synergy is.

I do think SETs probably helped designers realize the weaknesses of their own SS and PP designs, and they seem to be improving them. Unbelieveably, extemely clear and open sounding. Only problem is affording these systems.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

I think you misunderstood me. What I was asking wasn't your preference in replay or equipment choice, though that is always an interesting subject, what I wanted was for you to put your "SET post" into context by disclosing what specific brands, models and systems you had listened to reach that conclusion. Instead you just repeat what you prefer to SET without giving details about what you're actually comparing. In your previous post you did address this to some degree, "Wavelength, Bottlehead modified and straight, Midwest Audio, Wright etc." Like PP or SS, not all SET amps are alike. In fact, I've heard greater differences among SET amps than those previously mentioned. The first three SET amps [all excellant examples; Wavac & Cary] I heard left me underwhelmed, and were clearly bested by the VAC 30/30 [also excellant] using 300b in PP triode. I eventually purchased the VAC but after three years I found the PP topology troubling [or so I suspected]. Perhaps it was a combo of the output tube and the topology, regardless once I experienced lower-powered SETs I was convinced that this was what I was after. Though after spending extended time with the charming 2a3 I eventually found it's euphoric signature bothersome. So far, I've found musical bliss with 45 output tube, primarally because of it's transparency and neutrality. There are a number of other SET types [10 / 845 / 71] I've yet to sample, and perhaps the 45 will be surpassed. Still it has provided satisfaction longer than any other type. So it's not just SET, it's a bit more complex than that.

The "tractor" reference wasn't used as a descriptor for SS or PP, instead to illustrate a misapplication of technology. Just as a SET amp wouldn't be the best answer for dance music, driving inefficient speakers. Components do not function alone, instead .........work with their partnering components / room. Depending on those factors along with music type, volume levels, and your replay preference could influence performance and your perception of it. If you don't wish to get into details that is your right, but then we are left to guess on how your conclusions were derived.

MikE

[DMK]

Like PP or SS, not all SET amps are alike. In fact, I've heard greater differences among SET amps than those previously mentioned.
MikE

So true. I'm not really a SET triode aficionado as a rule. Most of the ones I've heard have all the problems you read about - soft bass, rolled off treble and a distinct euphonic character. However, the finest amp I've ever heard was a SET - the Wyetech Labs Topaz. The best way to describe it is a SS amp without the life sucked out of it. It had the best bass I've ever heard, an extended treble and all the midrange life I could want. It's also $8K. Not for me. Too much good music out there to spend that kind of money on an amp.

How's your Moth amp and the rest of your system coming along?

[300A]

I think you misunderstood me. What I was asking wasn't your preference in replay or equipment choice, though that is always an interesting subject, what I wanted was for you to put your "SET post" into context by disclosing what specific brands, models and systems you had listened to reach that conclusion. Instead you just repeat what you prefer to SET without giving details about what you're actually comparing. In your previous post you did address this to some degree, "Wavelength, Bottlehead modified and straight, Midwest Audio, Wright etc." Like PP or SS, not all SET amps are alike. In fact, I've heard greater differences among SET amps than those previously mentioned. The first three SET amps [all excellant examples; Wavac & Cary] I heard left me underwhelmed, and were clearly bested by the VAC 30/30 [also excellant] using 300b in PP triode. I eventually purchased the VAC but after three years I found the PP topology troubling [or so I suspected]. Perhaps it was a combo of the output tube and the topology, regardless once I experienced lower-powered SETs I was convinced that this was what I was after. Though after spending extended time with the charming 2a3 I eventually found it's euphoric signature bothersome. So far, I've found musical bliss with 45 output tube, primarally because of it's transparency and neutrality. There are a number of other SET types [10 / 845 / 71] I've yet to sample, and perhaps the 45 will be surpassed. Still it has provided satisfaction longer than any other type. So it's not just SET, it's a bit more complex than that.

The "tractor" reference wasn't used as a descriptor for SS or PP, instead to illustrate a misapplication of technology. Just as a SET amp wouldn't be the best answer for dance music, driving inefficient speakers. Components do not function alone, instead .........work with their partnering components / room. Depending on those factors along with music type, volume levels, and your replay preference could influence performance and your perception of it. If you don't wish to get into details that is your right, but then we are left to guess on how your conclusions were derived.

MikE

This is the same hype I have been hearing. That is what I have been hearing for years. I would think you would be thrilled to find better and better sounding components.

The better the audio system, being more neutral and accurate sounding, the better it should play all kinds and types of music, unless one wants to color the sound. That is a secondary benefit, if you will. One wouldn't have to compromise with his music.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

You call it "hype" I say it's wishful thinking on your part. I would rather accept the inherent limitations found in today's technology than pretend they don't exist.

MikE

[300A]

You call it "hype" I say it's wishful thinking on your part. I would rather accept the inherent limitations found in today's technology than pretend they don't exist.

MikE


Have you heard these amps? I think not. Why make such claims when you haven't heard these products?

SETs certainly have their own inherent problems as you should know.

SET output Z changes throughout the audio cycle, so the damping factor changes throughout the waveform whereas PP doesn't, if run deep class A.

Core saturation problems with DC current through the OPT and accompanying high distortion, especially at the bass frequencies.

Parafeed have their own problems with two sets of leakage inductance and capacitance problems to contend with if an inductor and smaller OPT are used.

Constantly changing signal levels cause the low frequency response to change.

Another extra capacitor is used to couple parafeed designs too.

SETs have higher harmonic distortions than PP, even at one watt, with neither using negative feedback.

Obviously these companies, and maybe more, are addressing inherent problems in PP design. Obviously, they are suceeding as they are bettering SETs now. Maybe the inherent problems in designing SS and PP aren't as severe, or limiting, as you thought.

Up to now I have been content with the midrange "magic", but now I am hearing better sounding components, plain and simple.

The world isn't going to stand still no matter how much you and I want it too. I am ready to move ahead. Are you?

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

I'm not interested in defending SET, I was only interested in getting you to defend your position. I don't see one "right" and another "wrong". Instead I know what I like and wish others well in finding what makes them happy. As for if I've heard the amps in question. No, nor have I heard every other amp known to man. My associations, like yours, are limited and based on those we choose. Instead of trumpeting one device while finding fault with another I've focused my attention on a "system approach".

As far as claims I've made. I only spoke of "inherent limitations", without naming names [or brands/product type]. You're not suggesting that the products you tout are free of such issues? And even if they were what would that matter given the problems with microphones and loudpeakers to name just two limiting factors that affect every partneering component/system. And looking beyond the devices themselves let's not forget the listener. After all isn't that what this is all about... discovering what technology best serves OUR music?

Personally, I enjoy conversations such as this, that is why I frequent these forums.

MikE

[RGA]

It sounds to me as though SETs require extremely careful system matching...perhaps a very bad sound can ensue of the system is not matched well.

The New Audio Note Soro had none of this soft bass or rolled off highs and it's not obscenely priced as some units from Cary. My dealer dumped Cary because he said it was "out of its league" against the much cheaper Soro.

I have very limited experience with SETS...as the Soro is the only one I can remember listening too for any period. Like other amp makers perhaps they are improving SET amps as well.

Now how the Audio Note Soro would do with a non Audio note speaker I don't know???? One reason Audio Note insists on delaer's setting up full AN systems is because they supposedly work best together. Ie; the speaker is geared with the SET in mind at the design level - no other speaker company I know of would do that.

But thet amp had no trouble with bass, or anything else. In fact I doubt most people would even guess it was a SET. Indeed, with the bass slam, and the fact that Audio Note hides the tubes, some might mistake it for a 200 watt Solid state job.

Soft bass IMO is a sign of a speaker that simply does not have enough power to move the woofer at the impedence dips that are going on. 3 watts anyway you slice it is 3 watts and if you push it the bass dissapears.

[300A]

Well, are we seeing games? No system is perfect, as I mentioned before, but when one sounds better in most areas, it is better and more neutral. And if you want your SET for a certain type of music, fine, but it sounds to me like you are admitting it is colored. The amps I mentioned sound more neutral and accurate, so less coloration and the ability to play more kinds of music.

I would think you would be thrilled if audio sound quality has advanced to a new level. But you seem to hate it without ever hearing it.

Are you being compensated in anyway for pushing philosophy or product? Remember your answer will be in writing.

By the way, look at all the horns and single drivers speakers response, 75hz is the cutoff point with expensive ones maybe to 50hz. Horns drop at 36db/octave, or down approx 36db at 37hz while single drivers drop about 12db per octave. How are you, RGA getting such deep bass?
By the way, SS and PP are just as critical in setup, matching, as SETs.
Maybe we didn't give as good a shake to these as we should have.

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

Remember your answer will be in writingYes, that is one benefit of forums such as this; our responses are visable for all to digest / review. Though I'm afraid it would appear YOU are the one with the agenda, and perhaps need to re-read my posts. In my replies, any such advances of SET or superiority over other topologies / systems were limited in application, not a universal truth. And any comments that could be construed as negative were not pointed at any one marque, model or product type, instead could be applicable for ALL products or systems. All I've stated is MY preference. Is that alone reason enough to draw suspicion? I realize that you identified specific models because I requested that information but at the same time you've taken every opportunity to drive home your position on SET vs "new stuff". That is what, in part, caused me to reply initially - my curiousity in what experiences and associations were the basis of this "philosophy".

And while I have managed to get you to disclose enough information to get a pretty good idea of where you're coming from, in the process all you've done is misinterpret or misrepresent my POV. Case in point, where did I say I "hated" this "new technology"? I didn't, instead I called into question the "inherent limitations" in ALL technology. And as for my respect of the current state of technology, regardless the limitations, I think it's just wonderful. We are blessed to have the quality, value and diversity of gear to choose. I've been involved in audio since the early 70's and just as time marches on so will advances in the SOTA. So while the limitations are not as pervasive they were they are still [sigh] with us. So, no I'm not ungrateful or belittling anyone or anything. I love the level of replay I enjoy and realize there is more than one way to achieve the desired result - enhanced replay and listener satisfaction.

I don't know if SET is more sensitive to setup than other types of systems. I think fine-tuning is critical for all systems to achieve optimal results. But I will say that tube amplification in general requires [or allows?] more tweaking than SS. And because of the pure SET approach, there is less manipulation of the signal. As such what may go unnoticed in less revealing systems becomes more apparent and critical. There I one [1] supporting comment about SET. Of course, while you may question this statement, in my associations I've found it to be true.

MikE

[DMK]

[QUOTE=300A]
By the way, look at all the horns and single drivers speakers response, 75hz is the cutoff point with expensive ones maybe to 50hz. Horns drop at 36db/octave, or down approx 36db at 37hz while single drivers drop about 12db per octave. QUOTE]

My single driver speakers are -3 db at 20hz with audible output at 15 hz. Where are you getting your information?

[300A]

Sorry if I came off so strong. Have seen too many people touting info at this site (other strings) and other sites over the years that are very suspicious.

I agree tubes May be a little more sensitive to setup. Haven't had enough exposure with SS to be absolutely sure on them.

RGA, which brand speakers are you using that go that low and yet go that high with only one driver? Is it a two cone arrangement, center "fuzzy" cone which produces the highs? What size driver is it?

[Mwalsdor_cscc_edu]

This site [the old AR] certainly had it's share of trolls/sock puppets and shills. As I'm not familiar with your monikor, you aren't familiar with myself either. I'll be the first to admit that I love tubes and have finally found happiness [approaching 2 years] with my SET. And while I'm not shy about sharing my satisfaction I would be careful about ensuring that others would find similar bliss by adopting my choice of amplification.

I'm far from a expert regarding SET, and only beginning to explore a full blown SET+Hi-Efficiency system. I've sampled single drivers and horns, and while I've heard some good things from both I haven't heard anything [save Edgarhorn Titan's last year] that bested what I'm using now. Still I see this passion as a journey and feel I'm on the right path [for me] to long term satisfaction. I'm always interested in listening to opinions - pro-n-con - on the direction I've chosen.

MikE

[300A]

One other point I have noticed is that all three used different topologies and different output parts. The Pass X250 is of course SS. The VTL uses 300bs and the SAS Audio Labs uses KT88s.

The SS is of course SS, the VTL uses directly heated cathode 300b tubes and the SAS Audio uses an indirectly heated cathode tetrode wired triode.

I am seeing that it is the design that makes the most difference, not necessarily the type of device used. Of course the best brand of each type makes a difference.

[RGA]

Sorry if I came off so strong. Have seen too many people touting info at this site (other strings) and other sites over the years that are very suspicious.

I agree tubes May be a little more sensitive to setup. Haven't had enough exposure with SS to be absolutely sure on them.

RGA, which brand speakers are you using that go that low and yet go that high with only one driver? Is it a two cone arrangement, center "fuzzy" cone which produces the highs? What size driver is it?

I never said I had a single driver speaker...I used Audio note speakers which for ~200.00 to 30kUS are all two-way two driver designs.

I used my own Audio note AN K Spe speakers which are 90db, 8 ohm(never dip below 5ohms making them vary easy to drive), 8inch woofer .75 inch silk dome. The speakers are well braced but non damped(or very very little damping). Sealed wide baffle box. 36hz - 20khz in a corner placement or ~50hz (-6db).

However I also heard their larger standmount that AN E/SEC($20k), with another of their SET amps. That speaker is 18hz to 23khz >94db 8inch woofer 1 inch tweeter Alnico magnets. Rear port, again little to no damping(they take the ferrofluid out of the driver from Vifa.

It should be noted that their SETs (all their amps I believe are sets) run to 27 watts per channel - the Ongaku On is considered in a number of quarters as the best amp on the planet - with a price of around $90,000.00US I would hope bloody well so.

There is zero problem with bass depth or impact or much else with the Soro at around $2k. I had read a lot about the SET sound and that is why when I heard it and the dealer said it was a SET I said "Seriously?"

It exhibits none of the flab or roll off I was expecting, what it did do that even my considered "good valve like" Sugden didn't do was a complete grain free treble and a "Music coming out of the black background" quality. The system was the best I have ever heard(the AN E Sec that is). And I have heard a lot of very good set-ups some do certain things better, but musically not up to snuff in the end.

Part of the reason I bought their lower model speaker was due to a striking similarity of tonal/timbral structure with the lack of the big visceral impact of the AN E.

I was expecting a SET amp to be a 3 watt thing...10-18 is still a fair amount and a lot with sensitive speakers.

Mono block SETS http://www.stereotimes.com/amp100501.shtm

[300A]

Yes RGA, the other companies also used either multi driver speakers , electrostats, or ribbons etc. for deep bass as well as gorgeous mids, highs too.
Would rather do that than try to match sub. Never heard one yet that really sounded right.

[RGA]

Yes RGA, the other companies also used either multi driver speakers , electrostats, or ribbons etc. for deep bass as well as gorgeous mids, highs too.
Would rather do that than try to match sub. Never heard one yet that really sounded right.

To match a sub properly(a powered sub anyway) first to do it right requires TWO subwoofers and IMO near the front speakers. You also need to use at minimum and SPL meter and likely a parametric eq. Allof which is a pain in the neck...but properly done of course you can get far deeper and world class bass relatively cheap...at least cheaper than buying some 60k set of speakers from JM labs, Dynaudio or B&W etc. Rarely very rarely have I heard subwoofers properly set-up...I assume that most dealers don't know how. They know how to sell, they just don't know anything about acoustics. I'm no expert either...so I would want a professional in to set it up...or I'd have to bother reading the endless set-up procedures of the Parametric EQ from Behringher

[300A]

Yes I would agree, most don't know how to set it up, although it is rather a pain in the neck.
I also would use 2 subs if I were to use them.


To match a sub properly(a powered sub anyway) first to do it right requires TWO subwoofers and IMO near the front speakers. You also need to use at minimum and SPL meter and likely a parametric eq. Allof which is a pain in the neck...but properly done of course you can get far deeper and world class bass relatively cheap...at least cheaper than buying some 60k set of speakers from JM labs, Dynaudio or B&W etc. Rarely very rarely have I heard subwoofers properly set-up...I assume that most dealers don't know how. They know how to sell, they just don't know anything about acoustics. I'm no expert either...so I would want a professional in to set it up...or I'd have to bother reading the endless set-up procedures of the Parametric EQ from Behringher