it all depends where are you...what did you have before and where would you like to go...that said the FM always works the best together...means if you want to have all FM you may be going in the right direction... |
Currently I use a Lamm LL2 preamp with Wavac EC300B power amp. The plan is to replace the Lamm preamp with FM acoustics preamp which will drive the Wavac. The next step possibly is to get a Pass Labs F6 to replace the Wavac since I need more power, keeping some of the triode sound intact. And finally I may or may not upgrade to the FM power amp depends on how good the Pass F6 turns out. |
totally different sound...Lamm and FM, you probably know, but it will still be some head scratching for you. But it is in the same "level" so you should be fine with the change of character if you are looking for that. |
One is SS, the other tube. Sound completely different.Only you can decide what you like unless you are in to collecting brand names. |
The Lamm LL2 sounds definitely more lifelike than the FM Acoustics. And the Wavac 300B is an excellent Design. I think, that combination is great. No 300B has the ability to drive conventional speakers, They are not made for that. They are super with Horns. When you still hold your Westminster speakers, believe me, you will never get the triode sound with these. No way. You will always get an impression but never the full monty. They play loud but that's it. None of them is able to deliver the miracle of the sonic fascination which is in the first watt...
Good luck :-) |
Yeah, FM sounds better with preamp and amp together. Plus, I suggest you use their interconnects and speaker cable. |
Dave, I believe that FM supplies only their own cables and requires that their products are used only with their cables. I am not sure about interconnects but speaker cables for sure nothing else can be used since they have their own custom plug. This is one of the things that turned me off from FM even though otherwise I find their gear to be among the best ever. This is the same thing that bothers me about Spectral, they require that only MIT cables are used which place additional passive components in the signal path, something that should be avoided IMHO or at least not be required. I wonder how much more successful these brands would be if they didn't have so many requirements and restrictions. |
As a former FM owner (I had to sell it, long story,) you can use your own interconnects, no problem. You're correct about the speaker cable. I don't see this as a problem as the FM equipment is optimized and designed for use using their own cables, which are excellent, imo. I still use FM interconnects in my current system. They in fact work very well, which surprised me a bit. I think what makes FM less successful is the limited production for most units, and the super high prices. Very few people can afford it, and perhaps the ones who can have a hard time justifying paying that much for stereo equipment. But, that is the FM philosophy, I suppose. I would probably go for a used unit nowadays. The prices used to be much less years ago. And the production and philosophy was pretty much the same back then. Of course the new units are the latest designs, but are they really head and shoulders above the older models that were much less expensive? Are they really that much different? I can't answer that at the moment. Even though I had units that are now discontinued (I had the 244C pre and the 611 amp,) I do regret selling them off, but again it's a long story, and let's just say I was in a pinch. |
Hi Pani,
Congrats on your F10 acquisition!
I think you've already got all grounds covered and knew prior what you wanted--hence I posted here. Unless for some reason you are less than totally pleased with your new purchase, if it were me, I'd get the 155 Pre and later when funds permit, add on the 133 Linearizer.. Bet it'll be perfect with your F10--Just as Manuel intended. ;)
In the meantime, hang on to your Lamm, and wait for a nice used 155 or 245 to surface. Don't waste anymore money/time.
http://www.monoandstereo.com/2013/05/fm-acoustics-fm-155-preamplifier-line.html
Re cabling, yes as Dave mentioned above, use their PITs and Forcelines.. A good thing--reasonable cost for near perfect synergy (in the context of complete FMA system). You could perhaps do better/different but for much much more $$--not really worth it. My 2c |
Thanks, Bvdiman. The FM cables are very neutral like the FM equipment. Which i why I suspect they are such a good match. They do not really act as tone controls like some competing products. |
Hey thanks guys. Yes I have been listening to music through FM Acoustics F10 for the last couple of days. Even though I bought it pre-owned it still seems to have improved after some further listening. Initially I felt my Wavac 300B SET has higher resolution, a bit more speed, a bit more crispy transients and in all fairness I felt it should be the case because the Wavac and Lamm preamp are a good match whereas the FM + Lamm is just an average match. After putting some playing time on FM the gap has been reduced to a single line. Today morning when I swapped the amps I could not point a finger at the FM compared to Wavac. They are crazily alike sounding even though one is a 300B SET and other is a SS push-pull. If one is not in the listening room or not listening very carefully it is difficult to tell when the amp switched!
However, if one has lived or experienced SETs extensively he will know that SETs have a special way of presenting music which is exclusive to SET club. The sound is very direct, coherent, rich and present almost like "they are here". This happens with all kinds of music. Whereas push-pull designs sound more laidback, relaxed, deep and wide, more space between instruments (which also sometimes feels less coherent), it is almost like "you are there". That differentiation still remains between Wavac and FM. If one is habituated with one kind, the other kind will feel like a cultural change. Difficult to accept at once. Will need some unlearning and readjusting of expectations to fully appreciate the new sound.
I am doing just that. I am listening to FM althroughout. Wavac will come in only once in a few days just to for a quality check.
My preamp selection in the mean time will be tedious i guess. I am on a budget at this time. May be $5-6k max. I am thinking of tube preamps with low output impedance. Something like Einstein audio "The Tube" or Symphonic Line "Die Erleuchtung". Lamm preamps generally have a higher output impedance else that could have been a great alternative too. |
Pani,
Following your various posts and threads for some time now. It's hard for
me to get a feel for what you want musically speaking. The Wavac/ Lamm
seemed an ideal choice for " natural" sound. Perhaps your
Tannoy speakers dictate another direction (not sure as you seemed very
happy with the Wavac SET presentation). FM Acoustics is a different sound
(based on my experience) but it just may be what you're seeking all along.
Ultimately we choose what suits us best and keeps us happy. If the FM
Acoustics meet this objective for you then congratulations and enjoy them
for many years. They could simply mate better with your speakers.
We're all different, that's for certain. In your position I'd have kept the
Lamm and Wavac and found a more compatible efficient speaker. My
decision isn't superior to yours, just different objectives based on our
individual taste. I don't personally believe that we have to accept or get use
to a different sound in the sense of "retraining" our ears, they sound different for a reason. Eventually listeners
discover what type of sound character they're most satisfied with. If you say
the two amplifiers sound very similar in your system I obviously accept that as what you
hear. That wasn't my impression when I've heard FM Acoustics in the past by
any means compared to a SET (very distinct contrast). I believe that a matching FM preamp would be the choice to
optimize the full potential of your amplifier.
Best regards,
Charles, |
I did lots of SETs on Tannoys and ProAcs in the past and know full well their capabilities. Even older recorded jazz on digital sounded mesmerizing.. As well portrayal of acoustical instruments, magical--almost eerily so in their own unique ways of sculpting natural/organic true to life 3D-holographic images--each having its own individual living spaces--great palpability. Yes, the likes of Louis, Ella, Nina to Shirley Horn, Carol Sloane then literally came alive well spotlighted in room during listening sessions--most times, their presence, spooky real!
During that period, circa early '90s, only the FMA 611 managed to slowly lure me away from that SET magic sound--hence kept it for 21yrs+ as my constant go-to/reference amp where many others (SS and tubes) come and go. To me, while they don't lure you to any particular magical areas (to me, midrange stood out for SETs), but rather spread its magic more evenly and balancely throughout entire spectrums.. Ie.Although ultimately missing by a hair bit that SET midrange goodness, they 'overall' portrayed the more natural and complete package, IMHO.
In fact, I found the FMA Resolution Series midrange (vocal, piano etc) to be much akin to SETs/OTLs amp in that they presented them in a more direct/realistic manner than most P/P tube amps I've had/owned.. With better bass and highs to boot.
Anyway, agree when talking audio, there will be endless debate concerning individual choices and I fully acknowledged that there are quite a few great alternates to 'getting-there'.. ;) I'm sure Pani with his vast experiences will finally be able to find what's best suiting him--music/taste/preferences.. Goodluck, whatever it may be, either routes you are currently contemplating seem to be excellent matured ones. |
Bvdiman,
I agree with your sentiments and perspectives. What's ideal for you may not be for me and the converse is true. I can't speak to the state of SET amplifiers in the 1990s. I can say that today there are excellent choices available with very appropriate matching speakers to choose from. One can enjoy top to bottom frequency performance and isn't limited to just a superb midrange. If the FM products have been the most satisfying in your home then there's no reason for you to look elsewhere. I'm glad you've reached your desired audio fulfillment and hope that Pani will obtain equal sucess with them as you have.
Charles, |
I did lots of SETs on Tannoys and ProAcs in the past and know full well their capabilities. Even older recorded jazz on digital sounded mesmerizing.. As well portrayal of acoustical instruments, magical--almost eerily so in their own unique ways of sculpting natural/organic true to life 3D-holographic images--each having its own individual living spaces--great palpability. Yes, the likes of Louis, Ella, Nina to Shirley Horn, Carol Sloane then literally came alive well spotlighted in room during listening sessions--most times, their presence, spooky real!
During that period, circa early '90s, only the FMA 611 managed to slowly lure me away from that SET magic sound--hence kept it for 21yrs+ as my constant go-to/reference amp where many others (SS and tubes) come and go. To me, while they don't lure you to any particular magical areas (to me, midrange stood out for SETs), but rather spread its magic more evenly and balancely throughout entire spectrums.. Ie.Although ultimately missing by a hair bit that SET midrange goodness, they 'overall' portrayed the more natural and complete package, IMHO.
In fact, I found the FMA Resolution Series midrange (vocal, piano etc) to be much akin to SETs/OTLs amp in that they presented them in a more direct/realistic manner than most P/P tube amps I've had/owned.. With better bass and highs to boot.
Anyway, agree when talking audio, there will be endless debate concerning individual choices and I fully acknowledged that there are quite a few great alternates to 'getting-there'.. ;) I'm sure Pani with his vast experiences will finally be able to find what's best suiting him--music/taste/preferences.. Goodluck, whatever it may be, either routes you are currently contemplating seem to be excellent matured ones. Thanks Bvdiman, I couldnt have said it better even after 10 trials :-). This is exactly why I am unable to let go of the Tannoy. There is a organic realism about their whole presentation which I have not heard often. Even for the sake of one of the best 300B SET I am unable to let the Tannoy go. What a coincidence that you too have compared good SETs to FM and your observation is extremely close to what I am hearing too. The FM 611 is of course a much better FM than my F10 yet the values they imbibe in their amps are the same so it is all audible. I may not be able to afford a resolution series FM amp at the moment but I may buy a resolution series preamp if I stay with the F10. Ultimately I have to live with the fact that, that special midrange presence is a hallmark of SETs and unless I have an SET at home I will have to miss some of that. The question is what do I gain in return ? In the case of FM at least I get a feeling that I am gaining some over all band width and a further control and accuracy in the lower end. Of course power is more so I also get more headroom. Hi Charles, As you can see, it is not an easy decision. Which I means I really like the Wavac. If there was anyway to circumvent the power issue I would have never even bothered to look at any other amp anywhere. Just like I have stopped bothering about looking for better speakers after using the Tannoy. But the power issue is real. 10 watts of 300B is a limiting factor in around 25 to 30% of my listening time. Sometimes I carefully choose music not to hear this "limitation". That is not a good way (all would agree). But it is also true that around 50% of the time I hear music that is tremendously lifelike and hence it keeps me going. The comparison between FM and Wavac 300B looks chalk and cheese and in a typical demo room will also sound very different because they are normally partnered and presented with items of their own domain. But when you hear them as closely as I am doing now, where everything remains constant except the power amp, you can relate to similarities between them. Very similar in purity of tone, transient response, decay and overall liveliness. 300B being a DHT has a little more inner illumination to the tones with little more 3D like thingie. FM sounds cleaner and smoother with a bit more spread out stage. I am taking it as a good confusion to have :-) |
Hi Pani,
That explains a lot and I see your situation very clearly now. Your have two superb amplifiers confirmed by your listening standards and that's not a bad position to be in. It appears to me that given your needs, the FM amplifier is the one for you. You want to get the most from your speaker specifically and ultimately your system. Why settle for an amplifier that requires limits on what you listen to? If the Tannoy needs more amplifier power in your opinion then give it to them.
My situation is different in that my 8 watt SET imposes no limits of music genre and what I choose to listen to. All that means is that my speaker is easier to drive than yours (14 ohm load and very simple 1st order crossover) and we likely have different listening needs/environment. I still have a 100 watt and a 40 watt push pull amplifiers but the SET retired both of them. That's my outcome, it's very individual and subjective. For long term happiness you must select what pleases you more and we both have learned to recognize this. Based on your description the FM amplifier sounds to be the right choice for you. Pani your choice was do I keep the excellent amplifier or the excellent speaker and you chose the latter. You can't go wrong either way.
Regards,
Charles, |
