into lower impedances, I imagine the KSA 50 would deliver something like 100 watts at 4 ohms. That certainly should b enough power in a room that's 13x15, unless you have a 30-foot ceiling!
I'm quite sure it would be acceptable, given that power would only be 3db louder if you were driving them with a 100 watt amp. The Krell, even an older model like the KSA 50 should do fine! If you WANT more power, fine, but I've run the Rev 3s with a 30-watt Sound Labs amp, and it sounded fine (although the basement is too large to be filled by such a small amp). |
More direct experience would make for an better answer, but I will state that if Krell watts are like Classe and NAD watts, then 50 in to 8 is not enough for Hales floorstanders. The bass and soundstage size will be poor. I'm not sure about the the T or the R Ones. |
Hi, I'm considering trying the Hale REV series speakers but am concerned that My Krell KSA 50s may not be able to drive them. I Have a smaller room (13 x15) and don't listen to music at concert levels -- But I want a larger soundstage and great detail. The Krell can run at full power down to 1 OHM -- 400 watts + or -. Is this acceptable??? |
That's very exciting. I would be surprised if the the extra power did not help with your imaging problem. Have fun. |
thanks, Ohala. I'm noticing that, with the Antique Sound Lab 1003 integrated, I'm not getting very good imaging. I'm wondering if that's a matter of using the amp on the 8 ohm taps, the low ceiling in the basement (less than 7' high and with joists hanging down, which might be causing weird reflections), or the lack of power.
My dealer called me today to say that the Hurricanes can be shipped on Friday, and the Marsh amp is scheduled to arrive tomorrow, so I'll know pretty soon!
By the way, do you run your speaker from the 4 ohm tap? Oh, that's right, the Classe is solid state. Sorry, I forgot. I'd seen it suggested that the speakers be run from the 4 ohm tap. I tried that, but it seemed that the sound got murkier. A small mystery to be solved. |
(Not like there's a huge difference, but Hales go down to three ohms and the slope is steep.) I am using the robust Classe 70, so my speakers are experiencing a little over 100 nominal, and its fine, but if I were buying an amp I would go for all the quality power I could afford. With the Classe CA-300, the Threes do really well. And its not really about volume, but tonal balance, and to a lesser degree dynamics. If the Hurricanes are capable of driving the impedance and phase of the Threes, I would guess you would be happy with them, but I can't say for sure b/c I don't know anything about that amp. Good luck |
One more thing: I'm driving the Rev 3s - for the moment - with an Antique Sound Labs 30-watt Class A integrated. It sounds okay, but obviously, when it hits crescendos, is less articulate than it could be. I've replaced the driver tubes - that was a VERY good move: the old tubes had NO highs, which, having had the amp for a week, and setting it up in the basement temporarily (low ceiling, walls 10' away on one side, 30' on the other [I'm fully aware of symmetrical setups, by the way] doesn't provide the best in sonics. Still, I can hear substantial low-level detail even in this setup: the flutists' taking a breath between phrases; pages turning, things like that.
Just thought I'd put my original question into perspective here: the smaller amp works, but the eternal question looms: how much is enough. |
jrd:
I'm interested in what wattage you think would be appropriate for the Hales. What factor would make the 200 watt amps unsuitable? I know the Hales drop to 4 ohm between 50-600 range. I've already spoken to Tash at Divertech and he seemed to be aware that the Hales dropped to 4 ohms, but was quite confident there'd be no problem driving them.
Just for background, in case anyone didn't read this, when reviewed in Stereophile by Robert Deutsch, the Hales were powered by the Sonic Frontiers Power 2 amp, which has a power rating of 110 watts. Deutsch found this quite sufficient for reviewing. Fred Kaplan, in TAS, advised a "minimum of 100 watts per side," so when you say that, I'm just wondering if they neglected to mention something you're aware of.
Thanks for the comments! |
Ahem.
I am ASSUMING jrd has (1) actually heard the Hales speakers
(2) has heard them with Hurricane amplification.
Ok, seriously- I doubt he has heard this combo. Nor have I.
I've heard the Hales rev 3 (actually, the pair I owned) absolutely ROCK on a "100 wpc" Onkyo receiver. I didn't think that would work, but it did, loudly, and for extended periods of time.
Anyway, I'll concede that the Hales aren't as easy to drive via the flea powered tube amps as Coincident speakers might be, not if you want realistic levels, but I'd certainly be hesitant to disregard a possible choice without hearing it myself, just because some one(1) person suggests that it won't be enough. I never had any tube amps around when I had my R3s.
What do people say about these amps?
I've heard things... |
these are wonderful speakers..no phoney ported one note bass to be found here...as long as you give them an ample amount of power....the marsh amp is a good choice but if you use tubes your going to need an incredibly powerful amp...the antique just isn't up to power any hales speaker. |
you'll be fine.
THese are good speakers.
I owned a pair a few years ago.
I just coudn't get the center image that I wanted,
but some of the best bass ever.
Really balanced sound.
I think you'll have enough wattage, however, it's hard to get a tube amp with that "solid state" bottom octave tightness, but I MUCH prefer the shortcomings of tubes, to those of solid state. |
