Sounds good, dvv. I haven't biamped for decades, so I try to make amps that do 'everything' pretty well, but all else being equal, Class A tubes for the top and solid state for the bottom would be my recommendation as well. In fact, I recommended that combination to a friend just a few months ago. What tube amp? That is the question.
There are some amazing sounding pro speakers these days, especially, and powered seems to have taken over from passive. I have K+H 0300s, a small 3 way with a three inch midrange dome and quite generous amplification. Its big brother, the 0410, has a sound quality that I have never heard approached by any combination of passive speakers and amplifiers I am aware of (at the price) - none even close, actually.
I must add, though, that I am currently comparing my 0300s to a much cheaper pair of speakers by a company not yet known for "high end" quality - Presonus Sceptre S8s - and finding much to like in them too, including superior dynamic capability, imaging precision and fine detail. Tonality through the midrange zone is perhaps inferior, but so much else is better. They also look cheaper!
Dejan's "amazing sound" has been around for a long time, but for some bizarre, probably ego driven, reason this fact is generally ignored. "Amazing" sound is nothing more than 'correct' sound in fact, demonstrating how inferior the usual standard one hears is - yet it is always the latter that is pointed to, as evidence that there are "problems". Yes, there are problems, the main one being that a lot of people aren't getting their act together, and pushing harder for the overall standard of sound reproduction to be much better than it normally is ...
Yes. For me, a system (mostly speakers) should be "correct" first. Of course this "correct" term is debatable. It is then more like priority. Of what is more important and what is less. This is psycho-acoustics, so is hard to understand. I have studied for years to understand what is to be liked in a sound. "Speed", "sonic", "emotion", "foot tapping", terms only known in subjective world should have correlation with Physics. Once this correlation is found, it is then to understand how much of this is needed.
It is easy to make simple (cheap) thing to work "correctly". Magnifying this "correct" system is not easy. Money is necessary. But technically is not easy. That's why many expensive system sound wrong.
Take low frequency as one parameter for example. How important is bass for you? What other parameters you would sacrifice to get the bass (and by how much)? This is an important thinking process if you think about it. These questions will lead to deeper Physics and of course understanding of instruments.
When I said my minimum is 60Hz, it is not just a number that I picked up on the street. Higher than this is "stupid" (so you know there are many stupid audiophile/expensive systems out there
). Another target is 40Hz, but it is not as easy as going to 40Hz, because the challenge is to keep the other quality unchanged.
I agree. A low cost system can be made to sound very impressive, provided you don't attempt to go beyond its natural performance envelope - mainly, SPLs and reproduction of low bass frequencies. It's the scaling up where the problems begin to appear, sometimes very rapidly - the clearest sign that the engineering has been done competently is that it feels as if one can carelessly, constantly increase the volume with zero negative impact in the perceived sound - it never sounds "loud", which far too many people associate with "impressive"; it's not that way at all ...
Money can help, but no guarantees ... it's the knowledge of the person attempting to "magnify" that's key - and too many appear to get carried away with sillinesses, they lose their perspective on what they're looking for ... and end up with very "twisted" sound, unfortunately.
The last two posts make perfect sense from my experiences. I've heard many high priced speakers that simply sound weird. When I started designing my own speakers I realized that the overall balancing was difficult, As one area got better, other areas we're out of place, it took 6 months on one design and I was very pleased at that this point, but it was relentless pursuit..
Low cost systems can sometimes be more satisfying and more enjoyable..
Low cost systems can sometimes be more satisfying and more enjoyable..
Last edited:
Yes, there are many interacting variables to optimize in a complex system. Not too easy.
Yes, but Psychology is hard to understand. People may say "well, that's what I like!" but psychologically, do they really know what they like? That's why they are unhappy, because they don't know what they really like
As with money... There are minimum low frequency requirement for most music to sound like music. The cone must push large volume of air to produce low frequency. And this is expensive. But I think one must know what compensation is acceptable. Box speaker for example is fine for me, to increase the low frequency sensitivity, tho I prefer sealed.
Manufacturers and DIYers think differently. We think of quality, manufacturers think of profit (and profit and quality do not go hand in hand).
We often think how to create a new circuit to improve an amplifier. While I believe, manufacturer can do it easily by producing suitable/quality transistor (if only it were profitable).
Speaker drivers also. Every Hertz of low frequency extension bring money for the manufacturers. That's why most drivers are over-hung while it is obvious that what DIYers like me want is under-hung (that's why vintage speaker drivers are still getting strong).
Well, in my case, tube reads as the Otala/Lohstroh.
At this time, the Citation 24 (2*100WRMS) drives the bass units, and the Marantz 170DC (2*85WRMS) drives the mid and treble.
I regard that as an odd situation. While the Marantz is no slouch, it's a measurebale fact that the Citation is the faster of the two clocking in at just above 100 V/uS. Also, it uses just 12 dB of global NFB, facts which should make it the prime choice for mid and treble. Yet, this arrangement manages to sound just that n-th bit better.
Most (but certainly not all) H/K amp, integrated or standalone, have a gusto and energy in the lower reisters as few amps can match, a tremendous immediacy and almost instantaneous presence. Also, on the masutrement front, it will pump out just over 560W into 2 Ohms in bursts.
I tried my other resident amps, from Philips, H/K, Sansui and even the small fry Toshiba/Aurex (40 WRMS). The Philips is AH327 is allright, but no more. Other H/K amps, integrated but with separable pre-main amp spckets, used as power amps, acquitted themselves admirably, the 680 (nominally 2*85/130W into 8/4 ohms, peak impulse power 540W/2 Ohms) was especially convincing. The Sansui (2*100W/8 Ohms) was a letdown, sounding thin and insubstantial (BUT, it was made in 1986 and has not yet been recapped, so the jury is still out). The shock of the lot was the cheap'n'cheerful Toshiba, which aqcquitted itself surprisingly, not to say shockingly, well. But it was in a league well above its price range expectations.
My general feeling is that biamping provides that bit more coherence and dynamic behavior than any single amp I have tried so far could.
Russ, these were big boys, 12" bass unit, and dome mid and treble drivers. As you say, generous amplification. They were made in 1990. Pure FF class (FF = F. Fantastic).
True. You know me Frank, I will not be seduced by effects, I demand linearity, and, thank God, I have a very good reference standard in my speakers, even when driven only by Citation 24 or Marantz 170 DC.
Contrary to the popular opinion, when I get up in the morning, the first thing I do is not to switch the PC on, in fact, tht's the last thing I do. My first semi-conscious act of the day is to switch the music on, tuner, preamp and power amp.
I am indeed a member of the all but extinct radio generation, been one ever since my dad bought a portanble (!!!) tube Schaub Lorentz radio in 1956. If anything, I am a radio junkie, at no moment in my life over the last 30 years did I own at least 3 tuners, one for use, two as backups. Currently, the main tuner is reVox B760, staning by are a Philips AH180 ("Black Tulip" series) digital synthesis tuner and a Sony analog tuner from 1976.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.