2. amps-preamps
  3. 150286-53619

Again the topic of weight of amps

I see this has been covered but not recently.
I have had a few amps in the 100+ pound range.
I liked them enormously but I am in a small space and am tired of dealing with these behemoths when I need to move them around and the real estate they take up. They were all wonderful in their way and I would like to have kept them but for their immobility. But can one find true love after such heavy weights with a feather weight 55 pounder?
Have technological advances in 2019 made such a thing possible? I had a pass 350.8 which I loved but you can't keep a Stonehenge rock in an apartment living room.

roxy1927

Showing 8 responses by bdp24

bdp24's avatar
bdp24
10,096 posts
 
Tim, I said the RM-200 is "really nothing special"? Au contraire! There is much more to the amp than what I wrote above, as a reading of the review by Fremer and Atkinson in Stereophile will illuminate. The "sales pitch" crack was made in reference to past comments by someone (I don't hold grudges, he's entitled to his opinion) about my too often mentioning of the amp. I like to bring to peoples attention over-looked products, like the Eminent Technology LFT-8b loudspeaker, another tremendous bargain.
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
10,096 posts
 
@fleschler, the RM-200 Mk.2 is an unusual tube amp, not behaving like a "normal" one. It has a lower-than-usual output impedance for a tube design (John Atkinson’s bench test results included in Fremer’s review of the amp), so interacts less with the impedance profile of the speaker. And whereas traditional tube amps lose power as loudspeaker impedance is lowered, the RM-200 provides 100w/ch into both 8 ohm and 4 ohm loads. It’s a good choice for he who wants traditional tube strengths without tube weaknesses. Not an overly-warm, soft-bass sounding tube amp. Or a bright, forward one, for that matter. And it weighs only 40 lbs. End of sales pitch ;-) .
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
10,096 posts
 
Since he likes nicknames so much Tim, turnabout is fair play ;-) .
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
10,096 posts
 

Both Tim deParavicini and Roger Modjeski are students of transformer design, a dying art. And both are, though as audiophile-centric as any other designers out there, old school in many ways (the higher the measured distortion, output impedance, power supply ripple, etc., the worse the sound quality of an amplifier. There is a direct relationship, not a coincidental one). I know Modjeski doesn’t "believe" in wire directionality (let alone that of fuses ;-), and I would be very surprised to learn Paravicini does.

As part of his research into the Hi-Fi Tuning Fuse, RM thoroughly measured them, including reversed in the fuse holder. He found differences, but at levels so low that he said the turbulence from a butterfly passing the measuring equipment would produce an equal difference (i.e. at 120-140dB down). Difference in sound? No.

Roger has an extremely transparent system: a direct-drive ESL loudspeaker of his own design and build, with dedicated OTL amplifiers. He winds his own world-class transformers (available in his amps for an additional $1,000), but an ESL loudspeaker with no input transformer, it’s drivers (the plates? The stators? The anodes? I don’t know, I’m no engineer) connected directly to the dedicated power amp’s tubes---no output transformers, is about as transparent as is currently possible.

Tim deParavicini has long history of superior design in both consumer and professional electronics. He designed and built the guts of the tube tape recorder Kav Alexander uses to make his amazing Water Lily recordings, amongst the finest I’ve ever heard. He is also involved in Roger Gilmour’s recording studio, modifying the electronics of it’s Studer and Ampex recorders. The studio is also equipped with EAR Equalizers, compressors, and microphone pre-amps. His EAR-Yoshino consumer electronics are fantastic, but get little love here on Audiogon, for reasons that elude me.

bdp24's avatar
bdp24
10,096 posts
 
Yes Tim, the Paravicini transformer/bass quote was from quite a while ago. I heard it second-hand from Roger Modjeski (who said he didn’t completely agree with Tim P on that subject), and I think it was said to make a point, not to be taken literally. It was said in reference to when Tim was designing amps for Luxman, whose competition at that time were other Japanese mass-market brands, many of whom skimped on their transformers. Tim’s EAR-Yoshino transformers are real works of art.
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
10,096 posts
 
Tim deParavicini of EAR-Yoshino says he can predict the bass sound an amplifier produces by looking at the size of it’s transformers. Transformer design is an art, requiring a compromise between various considerations. Too small and the bass suffers, too big and the highs do. Capacitance, inductance, etc., have to be balanced against each other.
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
10,096 posts
 
The Music Reference RM-200 Mk.2 is slightly over 40 lbs. unboxed, and is an excellent tube amp for low impedance loudspeakers. It puts out 100w/ch at both 8 and 4 ohms.
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
10,096 posts
 
@pehare, thanks for bringing the RM-10 to my attention. I check the new listings everyday, but somehow missed it on Saturday. It's 25/35w/ch (there are two versions of it) might not be enough for the OP's speaker demands, but it's THE amp for the old QUAD ESL.
More to discover