60 watt Rogue Tubes for Vandersteen 3A Signatures

Should work just fine unless your trying to rattle windows and shake floors. I drove a pair of 2ce's with my Jadis Orchestra Reference (about 45 w/c) and it sounded really good to me. Your opinion may vary, but, Happy Listening.

Bass will suffer but it will work.

Wendell

Greetings
Agree with Narrod if you have a nice deal on one
It should be a great starting point with tubes.
Best Johnnyr

I'd want more power than that for Vandy's; just sayin'

I power my 3A Sigs with Vincent ST-800 monoblocks which are a tubed/ss hybrid with 200 w/ch. This works really well. My rule of thumb - tubed power will sound like SS power of twice the watts. So, the 60 tubed watts will sound like 120 watts ss. I don't think that will be enough with the 3A's unless you only listen to chamber music. I would suggest at least 100 tube watts.

My rule is an inch is an inch, and a Watt is a Watt.

I understand Krisjan's subjective take on the difference between tube and ss watts. I've felt the same for years.

Wendell

Considering the speakers under consideration, one might argue the opposite is true.

60 watts of tubes will do ok except for the bass unless that amp has a good amount of current. Otherwise, it will be uncontrolled, flabby and without any real slam.

Wendell

Tvad, OK. I'm just sharing my experience with the speakers and lots of different amps. That's what I heard.

Wendell

The specs seem to differ a bit from the measurements:

http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/128/index6.html

Agreed! It's been my experience that the old audiophile axiom that one should double the recommended minimum power, holds true much more often than not.

Unsound - power specs for amps are developed under static conditions. Music, however, is dynamic and that is where the difference between SS and tubes becomes evident. In my experience, tube amps deliver more dynamic power and hence sound more powerful in practical music listening than SS at comparable static power specs. This has been a consistent observation over many years and many different ss and tubed amps. Of course there are MANY factors that affect the resulting sound (like power supply, distortion profile of ss vs. tubes, etc) but for sheer dynamic power, tubes seem better to me.

"but for sheer dynamic power, tubes seem better to me."

I'm not sure about dynamic but I do believe a 100 watt tube amp sounds louder than a 100 watt ss amp. I still don't believe 60 watts, tube or ss, is enough to get the best from the 3As.

Wendell

Perhaps into higher impedance loads most tube amps might seem more powerful, into lower impedance loads ss might seem more powerful. According to Stereophile's measurements of the speaker in question, the impedance drops to 2.8 Ohms and the sensitivity was measured at 85 dB/W/M. That drop happens in the bass region, where a bigger cone needs to be moved. Perhaps with speakers like some 'stats the argument might be reversed.

"stay away from tubes for this speaker"

Agreed. With the exception of the Jadis Defy 7 I never heard a tube amp bring out the strengths of the 3A better than quality solidstate.

Wendell

I should say that I have heard the bigger Vandersteen's being run with Audio Research tube amps, and they sounded absolutely sublime.

Tvad, yes they were.

Unsound, I know that Vandersteen did voice his speakers with Audio Research. I don't know if he still does. When I had 3As I tried Muse, McCormack, Belles and Jadis with success. I didn't care for Rogue, C-J, Quicksilver or Audible Illusions with them.

Wendell