Has anyone tried SET tubes amps with maggie 1.6's

Hey Richard,
I'm using MMGs not 1.6s - so mine are a little more efficient than the 1.6s. I would buy a used Aleph 3 before a 30, myself - the 30 is not the same. The Aleph 3 is pretty dynamic, great from top to bottom. It may be a little warm but not by much. Picked mine up from a guy that bought it and never used it - for a grand, right near where I live lucky enough. Best solid state amp I've ever owned, and I've owned a few. There are a few other amp manufacturers that use the mmg for voicing because it is so neutral. I got tired of going back and forth from ss to tube so I purchased one of each on the cheap; the AESsas was new of course but it is great sounding at full retail of $1500/no tax though(from Upscale Audio). I use the REL just to fill in the very bottom reaches. I run it straight off the amp's output terminals in order to capture the voice of the amp. It took a while to get it set up properly - it was moving a little slow in time behind the maggies which are pretty fast. But I finally dialed it in. You will have to adjust output level from time to time depending on what genre or quality of music you are g\feeding it. The REL is the best sub I've owned/auditioned - ever! They do give the soud a great foundation - when you have that last octave working in the system it just "Clicks" together - Complete. I swear it helps further up the range by filling in the lower registers of all the instruments; plus the venue/hall.
Talk to ya later,
David

Hi David,

Thanks for the information. You have cleared up a question I had
about the differences between the Aleph 3 and the newer iteration, the Aleph 30. There has been so much written about these two amps! It now appears that the company that actually manufactured
the Aleph 30 with (apparently) Nelson Pass's blessings, is out of
business(?!?!). I thought they were selling well.

It is amazing how many serious music lovers have deep
respect for the Aleph 3, and still love it as their amp of
choice in their systems.

I have been visiting audioasylum recently (yes...I know...
whatever must have come over me!) and picked up a thread
about the Carver Professional ZR series of "T" class digital
amps. It seems that Carver Professional uses the Tri-path
chips, like BelConto "digital" amps to perform signal matching
between the incoming signal and outgoing signal to make
certain they match correctly. There rate of pulsing is higher
than the PS Audio HCA-2 which could point to a higher
resolving of the audable signal, although this is not certain,
since in the realm of so-called-digital amplification there may
be a point where more is not neccessarily audible.

On the other hand speed of "pulsations" may become
a benchmark that amp designers may use in marketing
hype, not unlike bit depth in scanners.

If the tri-path chips can control mosfet transisters, which is
what is used in the Carver Professional ZR series, why can't
they be used to control tubes (yes...yes...I am commiting a
grievous crime here, saying chips and tubes in the same
breadth). David Berning, for instance uses radio waves
to "control" his tube sets in his ZH-270 "OTL" amp to great
advantage. Just a thought. But I feel it definitley will lie in the
future as a possible "controlling" factor in tube typology.

More later, my wife wants me to drive her to the Fed-Ex
store...

Best-Richard

Yeah,
I'm almost afraid to try a digital amp.
The ones I've heard sound fairly dry - I need something with a little texture.
I been reading some descriptions of a couple of products that may possess the character of sound I am looking for - somewhere between warm/romantic and accurate/analytical/dry. The first one is Merlin TSMs. Great reviews (mags and individuals) The individuals, actual clasical musicians (not rock), speak of the sound sounding the most authentic they have yet heard from reproduced/recorded music. This speaker got them interested in listening to recorded music 'again'.
The other is the Audiopax mono tube amps - quoted as "not being able to tell what amplifying device is being used, transistor or tube". It would probably take me a while to adjust to such neutrality - but I think I would like to see if I can handle what is termed 'accuracy that let's the emotion come thru' without the equipment placing it's own signature on it; it almost sounds boring - it's kind of hard to describe but - you know, natural, accurate w/o the life of the music/emotion being sucked out of it. I think it is attainable, but at what price? Ok...enough of my babbling - check ya later.

Hi Dh,

I am following your thinking very carefully and I believe that you find yourself exactly where many of us who listen critically find ourselves...what I mean is that you can locate more or less what you are looking for in reproduced sound...I can say in all honesty that it has taken me several years to identify what it is that I find in reproduced sound that stimulates the suggestion that I am experiencing the essence of the musical experience...

Music is ineffable...I have often pondered on the idea that of all the art forms that we take seriously, and place on a high level culturally, music is the most mysterious and incorporeal...unless we "play" it, whether we do it ourselves with a musical instrument, or through the "reproduction" of an already existing musical event, it has no real "existence." Of course "film" shares with music a similar lack of existence until it is "played." But film contains images that were once "real," even if they are transformed by film into something else, something more like texture and patterns perhaps. Although silent film could convincingly create a narrative through the juxtaposition of a sequence of events, it did depend on written text to "key" the viewer into story and music played live to give the film its pace and emotional cues.

Music seems to be a fundamental part of our expression of what it is to experience life as a human being; how we speak and laugh and cry has a powerful musical presence "built into it." It must be this ground, the emotional expression that is fundamental to speech and human communication that is the basis for musical form. Of course the animals make music as well. I recently saw a show of a certain species of primates that actually do sing during their courtship ceremonies, and to warn other primates to stay away from their territory. Birds sing to each other during courtship as well, and the best male "singers" of certain species of birds will get the girl (no kidding!). The wind sings through the trees, the ocean sings the sound of rippling surging water, the thunder roles like a giant drum across the skies; all of life makes music. It is not merely a coincidence that much of music replicates the heart beat, which we “hear” on the unconscious level every moment of our lives...perhaps even in our sleep!

In any former time I would have to have been rich to summon musicians to my house to play the masterpieces that I can hear now by carefully assembling an audio system that reproduces music with a good degree of realism. Of course in the great ages of music past, almost everyone played a musical instrument and could get together and play music for their own entertainment.

I have often pondered on the fact that if we allowed ourselves to be trained in musical accomplishment, like our conterparts in former times, our preoccupation in assembling an audio system might not have the passion that it does for us.

In any case, I am geniunly astounded that I can hear/play music from all over the earth and from the far reaches of musical history up to the present, including music made by my own contemporaries, just by purchasing a CD and playing it on my audio system. This is astounding to me and I do not take it for granted...ever.

Like many audiophiles/music lovers, I also have a facination with technology. However I think I am more interested in tracking down and "aquiring" information than I am in purchasing the latest and the greatest and making expenditures that I really can not afford (that is; that would make it impossible to do other things that I also find important to pursue). Can I imagine someone who might spend his/her life savings on audio eguipment because they love music to much it becomes their very "food" for life? Yes of course I can and I would respect them for it.

My interest is to spend the least money but to approach the "state fo the art" in musical reproduction. To that end I have no prejudice when it comes to amplifier or speaker design.

If a so-called digital amp can get me where I want to go, musically, I will not hesitate to purchase one. Admittedly, those of us who have had experience with well designed tube amps have developed a certain "romantic" connection with them, and this may well have something to do with the tubes themselves, which exhibit a certian "life" that we can connect with...they glow as if alive and they eventually die, like we do, and they have the look of an older technology that seems accessable and understandable. The fact that tube rolling can help us to "shape" our experience of how the music sounds is another plus.

Which leads me to believe that the technology of the future should allow us to shape the sound we would like to hear with infinite control and finesse...why should we accept the sound of any one amplifier designer...aren't they merely giving us what they "think" is the musically "correct" ideal, based on their personal experience? We so-called audiophiles know what we like and what we want. The amp of the future should give us the control we crave to shape our musical experience to fit our mood and temperment.

My rambling is entirely your fault Dh, your own thoughts have inspired me to wax a bit philosophical. Sorry!

Best-Richard

Hello Richard,

I am currently doing much what you have done. I am running my Martin Logan's with a 7 Watt SET (Decware Integrated). I am experiencing much the same results as you. Overall, much more involving, but only so much volume on tap. It is hard to give up that magic. Clearly, not the best setup. I am probably going to try to find a more efficient speaker to match better with the SET and would like to get another tube amp around 20 Watts to run the Martin Logan's. I'll have 2 systems.

On the matter of subs, I have recently introduced a Hsu VTF-3 sub to my system. It integrates extremely well to my stats'. Although there is no knocking REL subs, the Hsu is incredible for the money. I would venture to state that it would hold its' own very well to the much more expensive REL subs at a small fraction of the price.

best wishes on your quest, Paul