Tube with Power IC Output Stage - JLTi

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Fine print: First of all, I'd like to stress that the results of this test should not and cannot be applied to all amps of this type. They are based on my own impressions (and of some people close to me) about the absolute quality and relative listening quality of this amp in comparison with some other amps. Listening preferences and hearing abilities vary from person to person so if I think that a piece of equipment works really well it's by no means meant as a general truth. This been said, I'd like to ask all those who will disagree with me to acknowledge the idea that this is, by default, a highly subjective account of my listening experience and that I have no pretension whatsoever to impose my conclusions on this esteemed readership or participate in discussions (or arguments?) about personal listening preferences.

TRANSLATION: My day job is a lawyer. ;)

Moamps, no wonder that you enjoyed the amp with that selection of music! But seriously, well done for going that bit further with the GC concept; I would love to be able to hear a GC without buffer, one with SS buffer and one with valve buffer. I hope to build one with an SS buffer so that will be two of the three! Pity we can't all get together for an international GC conference!
 
I have always maintained that the GC sounds better with a good pre-amp

Protos, my experience using power amps near to my speakers is that they do sound better with some sort of active preamp rather than a passive stage. BUT that's down to the fact that something has to drive the 2 metre internconnects.

Listening to the GC's with just a pot, adjacent to the two monoblocks and using two metre speaker cables, I am not so certain adding extra circuitry in the form of a buffer or gain stage would be beneficial. In fact it could be detrimental!

That's not to say that I won't try it but as with some of the other 'rules' this may be another that the GC's break and 'get away with it'.

As ever with hi-fi, it's 'horses for courses'.
 
I have tried my GC with a passive pre from Creek and although I could live with the sound there was no comparison with my BOSOZ in single -ended mode. In balanced mode it goes one class higher. The passive drive , although nicely detailed in the mids and highs just lacks the oomph factor you get with active drive. Even with more laid back fare like Diana Krall you still get a feeling that the music is more "live". Of course if you want real kick on your Bob Marley or Kruder&Dorfmeister beats I think passive just will not cut it. However maybe in your system the differences are not that great between the two.
 
small speaker cable

I think that a GC would be much happier with a small speaker cable 1.5~2m, or even less in case of monoblocks near the speakers.
In that case, you'll have to run long interconnect cables, and you'll whant to have a good active preamp to drive them.
And that's what I'm up to right now.
My preamp sounds veeeery good indeed, and it can drive a power amp on the other side of the house.:devily:
Nuuk, you have to try a good active preamp and the GC with very short speaker cables.
I know you have many projects in mind.
Sorry to give you more work (ideas?).:devily:
 
yes!

protos said:
Even with more laid back fare like Diana Krall you still get a feeling that the music is more "live".

Oh yes!
Yesterday night while I was testing my preamp, I listened to "Live in Paris" and deam, you'll notice dynamics when it's there.
I like to call it "slam".:D
And on the begining of track 12 I can hear the echo of her voice in the room (the concert room), and I can hear her breathing.
Her voice stays in the air.
And when the music comes...
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhh!:devily: :eek:
Forgive me, but I'm really enjoying.
'Gotta go and listen more.:cool:
 
In that case, you'll have to run long interconnect cables, and you'll whant to have a good active preamp to drive them.

Carlos, as I understood things, in the case of the inverted Gainclones, the interconnects form part of the feedback loop and that is why you need a buffer at the amp end if the amps are placed well away from the preamp/source.

But presumably, from what you are saying, this doesn't seem to make any difference!
 
Nuuk said:

But presumably, from what you are saying, this doesn't seem to make any difference!

I don't say it doesn't make a difference.
As long as the signal gets there strong...
I feel more confident sending a strong signal, without losses, than having to buffer a weak one at the end.
You should buffer where you have the pot.
But this is me.
Everyone can test one thing or the other.
I prefer less components on the Gainclone and to have a preamp that goes well in any situation and with anything I connect there.
 
My pre to amp interconnects are 1 meter.Speaker cables are MIT MH-750 Shotgun biwires 3 meters.

OK, 1 metre isn't excessively long but it seems to me that you have longish interconnects and long speaker cables! Is there any reason for not keeping the interconnects as short as possible and just making the speaker cables a bit longer?

My current set up has 2 metre interconnects to the power amps but that means that the speaker cables are only about 1/2 a metre from the amp to the speaker drive unit terminals!
 
I don't have monoblocks to separate , it's all in one chassis.
I don't think a shorter ic will make a change. My plan is to include the DRV "pre" in the main chassis at some stage. That will make a difference more than shortening ic. That means an "integrated" gainclone. I guess putting the monos next to the speakers is also a good choice but I have invested my speaker cables too much to make them obsolete plus my other half would not look kindly on placing extra boxes and power connections on the floor next to the speakers which are in the living room.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.