There's no accurate word to express listening perceptions. People is highly required to use logic, to connect the dots and to read between the lines.
For me it's a fact (more than just something interesting). And I think I know why.
The writer agreed that moving from the old analog to the modern digital he heard improvements but lose something related to enjoyment. I experienced this more than two decades ago. And instead of going back to tube amps I decided to find the best of both worlds, starting with solid state class A.
In simple words, I wanted a modern system that sounds sufficiently enjoyable (I don't want super duper enjoyable system that will corrupt my time from doing more useful things in life).
I tried to figure out where this enjoyment came from. After two decades, am I successful? I don't know yet. I have found my amps are superior than all the best amps designed by others that I have built but the enjoyment experience is not quite there yet. But note that I'm not using high quality source/CDP/DAC like I was, which may be the bottleneck!
I'm in the process of building several class A amplifiers. Then I will restore my digital players. Then side by side comparison. If I were disappointed with my (best) class B amps, I will go back to class A solid state (not tubes!) only this time I will design my own best class A amp, starting with the Extrema output stage. If it still fail, I will use hexfets output ala Nelson Pass.
You assume people build SET for high H2. Aren't there some that design for low (all other HD), then work for lowest remaining H2?
That would be a cheap shot if it wasn't such a clueless assertion.
Last edited:
Typically with the speakers used, a SET is running milliwatts where all distortion becomes vanishingly small (in a well sorted amplifier).
dave
Absolutely, a low power class A would be a great option, for a woofer though with a powerful amp it's low frequency limitations could be EQ'd instead of stimulating resonance.
Prima Luna is a crossover?Thanks Dave !
I rehearsed this and the sound was fantastic!Bi-amplification achieves what a hyperdeveloped passive crossing and their respective speakers for much less cost and more versatility. IMHO....
Yes, it is a DTQWTII Troels cabinet. There is really no electronic cross over, the crossing of the bass zone is 150 hz, with the passive xover of the cabinet, the JBL external speakers replace one of the Eminence. Troels suggested that I do not leave the speaker offline by acting as a passive radiator, which was the idea, and that it directly covers that hole on that side of the horn. I never did it, because it was just an experiment, something unsightly because of the loose connections.
Well the SIT1 and 2 are both SE (caps instead of OPTs) and the SIT3 — a CCS loaded SE?
dave
I don't know what a way out I don't understand when you say that you decided to enter the best of both worlds, and then "not the valves!". Do you mean using only valves at the CDP outlet? Lampizator style modifications?
The test of the article is quite strict in that the tube amplifiers give more musical enjoyment and do not irritate the ear, then, if you do not go through the tubes in the amplifier and prefer the class A SS (you will have equal or worse heat problems and consumption there), what is the reason? The trouble of tweaking bias when you replace tubes? That's why I chose Prima Luna, the autobias works really well, without problems, I have changed many different valves without needing to austen anything. And the switching from pentode to triode "hot" is another virtue of this amplifier. I do not apologize for the brand, I must clarify, only my experience. I don't know what a hexfets output is but I think I guess you are talking about field effect transistors.
I understand that its behavior similar to the valves is more noticeable in the preamp stages, but it is probably repeating things once read as a parrot.
Last edited:
Perhaps it was going between post #109 saying Zo is not good, to post #119 telling us about harmonic distortion?
Fair enough, then it boils down to efficiency, Bruno Putzey's latest Class D amp springs to mind, you don't need high efficiency speakers anymore or to worry about manipulating resonances to get an acceptable frequency response at the expense of accuracy. There's more than one way to skin a rabbit 
So, these are the best amps in the world, yet designed for responsible enjoyment
Most of the enjoyment issues regarding tube vs solid state is actually issues between class A (tube) versus class B (solid state), especially the global feedback which is a must in class B. I'm fine with ss class A enjoyment. The next issues are (1) transconductance (2) distortion.
In general we can arrange in order of similarity (such as transconductance): tube in triode mode --> tube in pentode --> fet class A --> ss class B. I'm sure that choosing any one in the middle (or its hybrid) is possible for best of both world. Solid state will be technically easier (such as to achieve high power high transconductance), while tubes, as you know there are unique issues.
So, these are the best amps in the world, yet designed for responsible enjoyment
Yes. It's comparing between class B. Basically because electricity issues. It's the drawback, so class B design must pay attention to enjoyment aspect while class A design must pay attention to transconductance and distortion.
I think the major aspect with kt77, el34, kt88, kt120 is very subtle....
You cannot find issues that distinguish the audibility of coloration if you do a THD test.
Actually EL34 properly implemented have lower THD than kt77, and kt88 at lower volume, so it should sound better, however the kt77 sounds a little better and the kt88 a lot better, just why?
If you run square waves, sine, triangular, change the duty cycle, etc, all those tubes have similar defects and similar qualities...
If you run IMD, they all are excellent, the kt120 is by far better in IMD of course, you can have more feedback, more power etc...
But it doesn't explains anything... only if, you run a IMD in high resolution and you combine 2000hz and 2040 hz and you push it to clipping, it doesn't take much but you will see the clipping in IMD is very bad for el34, kt77 little better, but kt88 and kt120 does not clip that bad in IMD close signals and not at such low power,
it takes only two close signals of combined power of 10 watts to produce a real horrible mess of a noise with el34, it doesn't matter if it can play with 40 watts a single signal, it will fail at under 2 watts with a real music signal.
You cannot find issues that distinguish the audibility of coloration if you do a THD test.
Actually EL34 properly implemented have lower THD than kt77, and kt88 at lower volume, so it should sound better, however the kt77 sounds a little better and the kt88 a lot better, just why?
If you run square waves, sine, triangular, change the duty cycle, etc, all those tubes have similar defects and similar qualities...
If you run IMD, they all are excellent, the kt120 is by far better in IMD of course, you can have more feedback, more power etc...
But it doesn't explains anything... only if, you run a IMD in high resolution and you combine 2000hz and 2040 hz and you push it to clipping, it doesn't take much but you will see the clipping in IMD is very bad for el34, kt77 little better, but kt88 and kt120 does not clip that bad in IMD close signals and not at such low power,
it takes only two close signals of combined power of 10 watts to produce a real horrible mess of a noise with el34, it doesn't matter if it can play with 40 watts a single signal, it will fail at under 2 watts with a real music signal.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.