High value, high efficiency speakers for SET amps

Should you ever decide that you want to drop some bigger dollars you might consider the Von Schweihery dB 99 speakers if you can find them on the used market. I have a pair of beautiful Von Schweihery dB 99 speakers with Super Tweeters (the bass section has a built in adjustable amp in each speaker) I used it with a 4 watt 2A3 amp, thats in storage now.

Hi, Lak,
I'd never heard of the Von Schweikert db 99, which isn't surprising because according to some research I did, they may not have made more than 200 pairs of them before dropping them from the line-up.
Wow, they are gorgeous - you are lucky to have them. And the reviews are ecstatic! There's a guy on Audio Circle selling a pair right now for $5500, I think. Unless he's REALLY desperate to sell, I don't think we can come to a deal.
:-D
But thanks again for the interesting information!

Atmasphere,
Rebbi's room is about 11x12, my office system, 14x16. Believe me, even true 92db, 8ohm, no problem. My 8 watt Coincident Dynamo is sublime with my 95db or 98db Lores depending on model. How loud do you listen? I generally like about 80db, sometime louder, never a problem. I could't listen much louder in a sustained way without ruining my ears. I really loved the Gizmo and OTL, but even he eventually went The Big Tannoy with 300B. Best Rob

The big Tannoys seem a better match for SETs. They also work well with our amps. FWIW, Harvey tampered with our amps when he had them at his place, and not in a good way.

Just so you know, SET listeners tend to play at lower levels due to the distortion aspects of the amp. Once you get over about 25% of the output power, the higher ordered harmonics come into play. The ear uses these as loudness cues, which is to say that when these distortions show up, the amp sounds like it is playing louder than it really is. So you tend to say "that's loud enough!".

I like to play the system at louder levels, but the amps that I use don't make the higher ordered harmonics until very near full power, so the system is absent of artificial loudness cues. IOW, at 95 db it does not sound loud at all.

My speakers are 98 db, my room is 17' x 22' and fairly well damped.

Audiokinesis makes speakers that are more efficient than the Coincidents, and often they are 16 ohms. If I am not mistaken they are less expensive as well. So they might be good to have on the radar as well.

How about These if any are still around in good operating condition.

Wouldn't cost much most likely.

I never cared for them off the common SS Japanese amps and receivers they were typically used with back in their day, but I would liketo hear them off a SET amp.

Hi Atmastphere,
All the tech stuff is well and good. I welcome your expertise, but bottom line in my home I just enjoy SET sound the most. I've been without a 300B DH SET for a couple of years, to be remedied very soon. I didn't mean to mislead readers, 80-85db is my usual listening level, but no problem cranking it a little, also about 95db on occasion. I didn't know Harvey well enough to comment on your OTL, but he did give sound advice on tweeking-up my 300Bs at the time as well as turning me on to thin silver wire to use with the 300Bs. Ultimately I think he convinced Goertz to make their original silver interconnect, I could be wrong about that.

I've only heard Audiokinesis once in my life and liked them, but before I drop the larger bucks once again I'm going to hit a lot of shows, get as much listening in that I can in New York, Chicago area and LA. High on my list is DeVore O/96, Daedalus, Line Magnet 755 Field Coil, Tannoy, Coincident and some others, you get the idea. Thanks again for your input.

P.S. I also meant to comment that in the meantime I'll be very content to live with the various Tekton that I own. Best, Rob

Rebbi, if the new Omen II have the new FRD it will sound much better then the older Omens. I have their Druid V with an Undertone sub and the sound with my Franks is wonderful!
Their customer service is great and I think you have a 60 day return policy.

Agree totally with Atmasphere, if you REALLY want to hear what those SETs can do, go with higher efficiency, particularly if you have wide musical tastes. I'm sure they sound great for certain music, in specific rooms at moderate levels. Is anyone listening to music beyond small scale with these amps? I really am curious because the general discussion seems to be around the quality of the sound with moderately efficient speakers, not truly high efficiency speakers. Just something to seriously consider Rebbi moving forward since you have made the committment to the amp.

I would bet serious money that most of the long time users, those who can't live without the enticing purity and tonal qualities found in these amps will encourage you more in that direction. Of course in the end the only way of knowing what works for you is listening to as many speakers as possible without making a committment to something that may end up being less than desired in the long run. On the other hand that is part of what makes this hobby so enjoyable and at times frustrating, finding the ideal we each seek. Read the writing on the wall, particularly the comments from those with experience.

I would say that SET oawners listen at levels they prefer just as owners of non SET amplifiers choose to do. I didn't listen at higher sound levels when I used Solid state or tube push pull, 75-85 db was simply loud enough for me in my home. We all have our individual level of comfort regardless of amplifier topology or power.Atamasphere if the SPL at shows Is indicative of your preferences (Atamasphereand Classic Audio speakers) that's louder than I'm comfortable listening to. But again no right or wrong at all just an example of how we prefer different sound volumes. What's ideal for one isn't suitable for another. I'll make the assumption that we as seasoned listeners know what we like.
Charles,

In answer to Tubegroover, and for the general benefit of anyone reading the thread, I do use the same amp as Rebbi, as many people know, and my large Klipsch Epic CF-4 speakers are claimed by Klipsch to be 102db efficient. I have read a couple of times that they are more likely 99-100.
I trust Ralph of Atmasphere when he states that distortion rises quickly with these amps before they reach peak power, but I can tell you that that is not the case with my speakers. I, like Charles, choose to listen at moderate levels, but when I am off and around the house in different rooms, I will turn it up to levels that are pretty loud by any standard, and it still sounds great, without a sign of strain.

Tubegroover,
I listen to big band recordings fairly regularly and believe me the SET is fine and preferable to my PP tube amp I mentioned in an earlier post. The is no single type of amplifier that is the best for all genres of music, I don't care what amplifier it is, there's inevitable compromise somewhere. I honestly believe that enough SET owners have posted often enough that they enjoy a very wide spectrum of music. The stereotype that only small scale music is appropriate needs to be put to rest as a tired and worn cliche. Mikirob, Jetrexpro, Brownsfan, Snopro, Grannyring and others have made it clear that they enjoy their larger scale recordings with great satisfaction.
Charles,

i'm of the mindset that good performance is largely objective and that good performance facilitates good sound however what sounds good to each is a purely subjective call in the end.

Thats fair enough Charles, if the case. I'm not questioning anything other than the fact that the Decapo speakers, which Rebbi obviously loves were not sufficient enough, or maybe, lets just explore this further to see what might be possible. I agree, there is no ideal amplifier BUT if one is committed to an SET amplifier the question might be, what is the ideal speaker choice for ALL the music I prefer listening to, what would take? Shouldn't that be a legitimate consideration or point to pose?

Big band is not orchestral/large scale music Charles and much less taxing on an amplifier than large scale. So far as SET owners enjoying a large spectrum of music I would only ASK what are the speakers they are using with the SET and what are their listening choices? Really Charles, I'm not debating the merits of SETs with a given speaker only that those reading THIS thread shoule be well aware of limitations depending on their musical choices. It just hasn't been discussed enough and for an individual that may be influenced by the merits of SET amplifiers a worthy point. One thing I always love in this hobby is folks with passion and this most certainly includes you Charles, I would LOVE to hear your set-up, I'm sure it's quite special!

Tubegroover,
I listen to large scale classical everyday, get the scale, dynamics, l can go as loud as I wish, go electronic, techno, big band, Jazz, folk, yes, even head-banging Rock n Roll (I played it live back in the day). But the really great aspect is, when called for I can achieve what SET does better for me than any other tube or SS I ever owned. I agree wholeheartedly with Charles.

Hi Tubegroover,
Thanks for your kind comment concerning my system. I clearly understand your point and actually agree with you in regard to what's required to make an informed decision. Everyone doesn't listen to symphonic orchestral music so I don't view it as some universal litmus test. I do believe it's a significant part of Jetrexpro and Brownsfan listening (they'll correct me if I'm wrong). If this music is a must for a potential SET owner then
yes, certainly speaker compatibility is crucial to ensure a good match for proper reproduction of this fare. I frequently acknowledge that what works for me may/will not for another with different needs.

In my listening experiences low power amp/ high efficiency speaker is preferable to high power amp/low efficiency-sensitive speaker. I can only report what I hear and readily admit it is an individual matter. Rebbi has been down that road and has expressed more contentment and satisfaction with his current discovery and I for one can relate to this. A speaker like the Tekton or one of similar sensitivity will work splendidly with his amplifier. It seems he's been quite clear on that point.
Charles,

Tonight I was listening to Walton's viola concerto, Bartok's concerto for orchestra and some rock music shaking the floors. Finishing the evening with Johnny Hartman and John Coltrane serenading me - each of these genres is handled convincingly. Soothes my soul after a very hard day - life is good, jet

Jet,
Exactly! You and Rob make my point. Time to retire the SET limitation cliches.
Charles,

Charles,

A question for you that I'm genuinely curious about, which relates to this discussion. A while back you indicated that you planned to order Chesky's CD remastering of the 1962 performance of Dvorak's New World Symphony, Jascha Horenstein conducting the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, which I had recommended. If you have done so, how well were your Franks + Coincident speakers able to handle the dynamic peaks on that recording? And also, of course, what were your impressions of the sonics of the recording?

Best regards,
-- Al

Hey, Folks,
I find this conversation fascinating and appreciate all of your input.
Tubegroover, I love my Kit 1 and am sold on the SET "thing." It sounds more like music and gives me more pleasure than any other amp I've owned, including a Unison Unico hybrid, a Bel Canto Class D amp, and a pair of Manley push-pull mono-blocks. That isn't to say that any of these amps was bad by any stretch, but the Kit 1 made me smile and say "ah" like none of the others, if that makes any sense.
Now I am in an interesting position in terms of musical genres. I listen to a little bit of everything. I'm not a huge jazz buff but I played trumpet in high school and have a fondness for some big band jazz as in Maynard, may he rest in peace). I am not a huge classical aficionado, either, but one of my favorite CD's is a big orchestral music soundtrack that HAS to sound great or I get grumpy. ;-) I'm not a huge techno fan or electronica fan but my teenager turned me on to Lorde and the synth bass "bombs" have to sound convincing. I'm not hugely devoted to raucous, hard rock, but when I play The Eagles' "Victim of Love" or Sheryl Crowe's "If It Makes You Happy," I want the guitars to sound as grungy as the recording engineer intended. And while I don't have huge piles of "girl with guitar" music, when I DO listen to Joni Mitchell or Ingrid Michaelson, I want to be transported to girl with guitar land.
You get the idea.
What I discovered with the Tekton Lore Reference is that it gives the Kit 1 the breathing room to "go big," really big, when the need arises, in a way that the De Capo's, as marvelous as they are, do not with this amp. I've also never had a speaker in my home that at least began to bump up against the bottom octave as the Tekton did, and found that to add a lot to the overall presentation. My only hesitations with the Tekton were:
* I found the imaging to be a little vague, and I'm kind of an imaging and sound stage freak (so sue me, as they say...) ;-) Of of course, some of that may be a positioning issue which, since I was borrowing them, I didn't really have the chance to dial in.
* I found that the Lore Reference needed to be "cranked" a little more than I'd like to really sing.
* Eric told me that the Lore and Lore 2.0 aren't as "refined" as the Reference, but that the Lore is much better at lower volumes. So, there's that old "tradeoff" thing again...
And as for your question about orchestral music, I will say that with the added breathing room that the more efficient Tekton's afforded the Kit 1, orchestral music sounded quite convincing. I don't mean first row at the symphony convincing, but "yeah, that’s what an orchestra in a big hall would actually sound like" convincing.
What's fun about this stage of system building is that there are so many choices out there, even discounting those I cannot afford:
There's Tekton (and the 7 or 8 speakers in my budget that they offer)
There's Zu Omen Mk. II
There's the Omega Super 7 XRS or (if I can swing the $) Super Alnico Monitor
There's Used Audio Note - there's one on Audiogon right now for $1500 but it looks like it's a little beaten up
And, if I really want to get freaky, there's Blumenstein Deluxe Orca with a matching sub or two...
So, we'll see.

Hi Al,
Oh yes, thanks for that recommended CD as I really enjoyed listening to it.First off I'll admit that I don't listen at the same volume and peaks as you're accustomed to and relish. However I found this recording very exciting and engaging due to the energy, dynamic ebb and flow and realistic presentation/venue capturing. Its been awhile since I last listened to it as I've been rotating through numerous recently arrived CDs. I will replay it again tomorrow and measure the SPL db range it spans. I have RCA Living Presence CDs of the CSO circa late 1950s that I'll use as a SQ reference. Al, I'm certainly a jazz aficionado but when it comes to classical I seem drawn to Russian pianists and cellists (more emotional to me).
Charles,

Rebbi, I'm a former trumpet player(began at age 10).though I don't play anymore I still have 2 horns (trumpet and cornet) for sentimental reasons.

"Time to retire the SET limitation cliches."

Charles, c'mon get real.

Are you saying SETs do not have limitations?

Fact is they are the MOST limited of amp designs. One has to adapt in other places to make them work well.

Not to say that they cannot work well when mated with the right gear, but it is a disservice to suggest a SET amp with just a few watts does not have limitations.

Its not a cliche but a fact that just s few watts IS A LIMITATION.

Not an insurmountable one, nor one that might not well be outweighed by other benefits in some cases, but a limitation nonetheless.

One will have to jump through some very special hoops for best results, as Rebbi has recently determined as well.

We all love what we love but let's just keep it real. :^)

I also started on the trumpet at about ten, thanks uncle Bill. Rebbi I have to disagree with your imaging assessment of the Tekton. Now I realize you are in your venue and I am in my venue. If you aggregate all of the reviews of Tekton, I believe all the reviewer's thought the Tektons imaged extremely well. Also, this might be an apples/orange thing, you heard the new Lore Reference, I own the M-Lore and Lore. But I believe the house sound is similar. When I did compare the DeCapo directly against the M-Lore, yes, the DeCapo slightly edged out M-Lore/Lore in imaging, but it was more of a case of spotlighting, which is not the way we actually hear music live. The M-Lore/Lores throw an enormous stage in my venue. Great scale, height, width, depth. All the reviewers agreed on this aspect. When it comes to tone, color, texture, a weighty fullness, harmonic rightness, solid bass, and more...the DeCapo couldn't compete in my room with the 8 watt Coincident Dynamo and Tekton combo. By comparison the DeCapo was thinner and you could tell it was stressing where the the Tektons were relaxed and handling everything thrown at them. I'll give a couple of examples pertinent to this discussion: on the Bach, Stokowski London Phase Four, Toccata & Fugue in D minor, Czech Philharmonic Orchestra, it pretty much starts full tilt violins/violas, then with major thwack descends into deep Cello and Bass strings, then loud cacophony of French Horns and Brass. The Tecktons handled this piece with aplomb, the DeCapo's went yelping down the street completely thin and missing all the power of the deeper notes, as was always the case on the deep end that ultimately affected the balance of the music, what you should hear from a live orchestra when it hits those big moments such as also in Mussgorsky, Gates of Kiev.

Even playing Jazz you would lose a lot: one of my faves was diminished, Louis Armstrong & Duke Ellington/The Complete Sessions/Deluxe Edition, because the DeCapo could not capture all of Mort Herbert's terrific bass, especially the body and volume of air and fat notes floating out, it totally missed the foundation. You made my point with Lorde and that type of music. In sum, to my ears/room the Tekton beat the DeCapo pretty much in every parameter.

We all hear differently. I like the quality of sound top to bottom much better as presented by the Tektons. YMMV and it obviously it does. Same goes for everyone else and that is a good thing. After all, variety is truly the spice of life. Best.

Mapman,
It seems you've missed the fundamental point of this current topic. "keep it real"? that's what I and other SET users have been doing. We couldn't be more clear in stating that SETs require appropriate speaker matching. Once achieved, you can enjoy listening to all manner of musical genres. Thus SETs "don't" limit or restrict one's choice of music. The cliché that SET has " limitations" as to what one can listen to is in fact wrong. I can't make it more clear rhan that Mapman. The point Tubegroover's raised concern over had to do with limitation of various music genres. No one here has suggested SETs aren't limited in their ability to drive certain speakers. You may need to reread the above posts for proper context.
Charles,

"We couldn't be more clear in stating that SETs require appropriate speaker matching"

That's keeping it real.

There will be more limitations with more speakers than otherwise.

As long as people realize this, then they should be fine.

Nothing wrong with building a system around an amp if that is what floats ones boat but keeping it real means knowing this will be the case with a SET more so than with most anything else.

For example I thought it inevitable that Reb would eventually choose to dump the Decapos as a result of moving to SET, though I hoped I was wrong. There was false hope that somehow the combo would work out when on paper it seemed apparent to many that that would not be the case.

Now changing speakers to optimize for use with an amp is not not the end of the world, just another choice that we all make all the time, but the fact is the choice of speakers that will perform optimally with a set is much more limited than otherwise.

Most speakers WILL NOT perform optimally with a SET amp, certainly less so than otherwise. Nothing will change that fact.

The good news is that it is probably not any harder to choose the right speakers for a SET for optimal performance than any other kind of amp. The bad news is that one will find their choices more limited. Also those choices will likely tend to be physically larger than otherwise, which might not work for everyone, and also might be quite expensive in the case of the best and largest choices.

Different strokes for different folks. Let's all just be real about the obstacles one is likely to face. Sugar coatings taste good at first but tend to wear off over time.

Mapman,
You've always said you wanted to see how De Capo's stack up against your Triangle's. I know where you can get a nice pair. ;-)
Oh, and by the way I think you and Charles might want to settle this whole "SET limitations" thing via a gentlemanly arm wrestling match. Or, better yet, you could play "catch" with his Coincident Frankenstein mono-blocks and the first one who drops one has to shut up about SET limitations.

Or something.

Reb,

I've done some downsizing and will be putting some items up for sale shortly.

One item I am planning to part with are my STAX electret "ear speakers". These are entry level STAX and not expensive and tehy always tend to shine in particular with tubes upstream. I;ve always thought these would do some very nice things with a SET amp as a source but that won't be happening with me anytime soon. They connect to an amp like speakers. LEt me know if interested. I would like to find these a new home where they might get more use.

Thank you everyone for your responses, I feel it is worthwhile information to lurkers viewing this thread with interest.

Rob your comments regarding the Decapos sounding thin and lean "yelping down the street" (LOL) kind of underscores MY point. If everyone recalls very early on when Rebbi asked the original question about "best value in SETs" this very point was questioned with some of the manufacturers' claiming "no problemo", others questioning whether 92 db is enough for a SET amplifier for all types of music. I WILL say this Rob, I don't know if you have listened to the Decapos with a good tube PP amp but I can attest they are anything but lean and can throw a HUGE soundstage, up, out and back, for those interested. I've listened to these speakers to date with 5 different amplifiers including a First Watt SE M2 but not an SET where my opinion might be valued less than someone that HAS listened first hand which is fair enough.

The Tekton/Decapo comparsion is a perfect example of how a speaker with higher efficiency is better suited and in direct comparison with a speaker with less efficiency gives a seemingly negative impression to you Rob. Your amp is different than Rebbi's but the power is similar enough. The Kit 1/Decapo combo may have been less objectionable to him but still, not enough for him to keep them, "lets explore further options". So if one is going to explore the options, what might be the BEST option? Good enough for me is not necessarily good enough for someone else. The question has hardly been put to bed as far as I'm concerned, only for some it is quite satisfactory. I have listened to numerous SETs over the years the most recent a pair of 7 watt DHT 300b sets with a 95 db speakers which I've listened to numerous times over the past 4-5 years in different rooms as well. Another I'm quite familiar with are different, integrated stereo 845s in parallel producing a whopping 35 watts with a diy compression driver in a very large transmission line enclosure! In both cases I hear limitations in large scale music, at least I DO. The dynamics on transients are just not the same with less power IME, this is where I HEAR the limitations first, things just sort of level out. The clipping characteristics on these amps are quite benign so I don't hear anything objectionable, just a ceiling.

Roxy, the speakers you are using are getting closer to the type of efficiency required that is going to minimize constraints on the music offered by an SET/DHT 8 watt amplifiers, IME.

It appears that what may be good enough for one listener may not be enough for another, at least speaking for myself. If someone is influenced to try the SET route it is important to pay close attention to all considerations MOST IMPORTANTLY, the speaker used! The higher the efficiency, the greater chance of long term success. There is NO substitute than listening first hand.

Rebbi,
One thing I have found about orchestral recordings is they vary quite a bit in recording technique. Some sound like they were recorded at the first row or actually from the conductor's seat and some sound like they were recorded way back in the cheap seats. Recording an orchestra is a real challenge for recording engineers. I guess what I am trying to say is hopefully which ever speakers you choose they will portray those differing perspectives accurately.

Hi Reb.

I've downsized my second system to a 60 watt/ch Class D integrated (Bel Canto C5i) so if any new speakers on my horizon, tehy may well need to be more efficient as well. So far I'm liking the combo with the OHM 100s. Eventually I will try with my Triangles and Dynaudios just for fun.

The DeCapos would be a nice upgrade over my Triangles off my main rig still, but they are holding their own for now plus my audio budget is shot. I am looking to downsize and sell not buy these days. In addition to the STAX, I am also plannign to sell my TAD Hibachi monoblocks and mhdt Paradisea tube DAC.

I am a bit of a Klutsz so surely I would be the one to drop the Frankensteins. Charles would surely never forgive me for that one.

The is no single type of amplifier that is the best for all genres of music, I don't care what amplifier it is, there's inevitable compromise somewhere.

Charlesdad, while I appreciate many of your posts and your primary tenant (paraphrasing: 'get the system that sounds right to you and enjoy it'), the above quote is simply incorrect. Electronics don't care what signal you give them and can't express taste. If the amp is excellent for classical it will be excellent for rock, because it is excellent.

I trust Ralph of Atmasphere when he states that distortion rises quickly with these amps before they reach peak power, but I can tell you that that is not the case with my speakers. I, like Charles, choose to listen at moderate levels, but when I am off and around the house in different rooms, I will turn it up to levels that are pretty loud by any standard, and it still sounds great, without a sign of strain.

102 db is the kind of efficiency that is needed to work with many SETs. I suspect though that the Klipsch are really 99 db (which is still helpful) due to the difference between efficiency and sensitivity; unless I am mistaken I would expect that they are 4 ohms in the bass region despite the '8 ohm nominal' impedance claim.

'Strain' BTW has nothing to do with what I was talking about in my prior posts. If you have ever wondered why SETs are so dynamic, especially considering their low power, the reason has to do with how they make distortion without clipping. As you get over 20-25% of full power, the higher ordered harmonics start to show up. Its important to understand that the ear uses these harmonics as loudness cues, so their presence will make reproduced sound seem louder than it really is. At the volume is increased, these harmonics show up on transients (where the power is) so essentially the loudness cues that the ear detects will be more prominent on the musical peaks. This gives the amp a very 'dynamic' quality.

However what is really happening is more distortion is present for brief periods. Actually in about 95% of audiophile conversations, the word 'dynamic' or dynamics' can be safely substituted for the word 'distortion' without altering the meaning of the conversation at all.

I may have ruined it for some as the awareness that distortion is driving this phenomena may mean that you become more aware of it.

Tubegroover, Others,
The DeCapos are my brother 2nd system, usually paired with Leben CS600. Admittedly, in his system everything is fine, except the lower bass realm, yet does not best the Tekton with said Leben. The DeCapo Ref is a very nice speaker, I have said so here many times. I personally like the tone and presentation better with the Tekton. My brother's primary speaker is the Harbeth SHL5 also very good. Another thing to note as previously mentioned here is that between my brother and I, we often enough have audio shootouts at our houses with usually 6 to 10 audio buddies, their systems are all over the map. Between my brother and I we have owned or listened to many, many serious systems. Not as reviewers, but music lovers...I've even shopped at one of the stores Mapman worked at back in the 70s.

With regard to "limitations" all audio equipment/amps have limitations and must be matched synergistically with appropriate ancillaries. Monitors have limitations, usually a a lot missing below say, 55hz; Ribbons have limitations and usually require amps with over a 100 watts and high current; Electrostatics present other problems; many speakers have a Head In The Vice sweet spot; some speakers are difficult to set-up; and so on and so forth. A SET is no more problematic than anything else. Historically low-powered amps with gigantic horns filled large movie theaters with loud dynamic sound. I would argue that just because an amp is powerful does not make it a good match for many speakers, sure they'll play loud, likely dynamic; but what of the quality of sound?

Too me, like Charles, Brownsfan, Roxy, many non Westener listeners such as the Japanese, we seem to be Timbral listeners and have very specific musical requirement as outlined above where I pasted Jeff Day's blog on "Listening Bias". As a former professional musician I care for the above musical attributes. Directly heated SET matched with appropriate high efficiency speakers does it for me and I suspect legions of others. I also think speaker manufacturing took a wrong turn with 4 ohm based solely on financial considerations. I strongly believe we would all be better served with efficient, easy to drive speakers, perhaps, some rare exceptions.

So, Atmasphere,
Then why don't we have manufacting that promotes high efficiency nominal 8 ohm or higher speakers. Seems like it makes amp manufacting funnel into a narrow "limiting" high power proposition that does Limit and force a specific choice that doesn't often times serve music by my definition, but does loud/dynamic. As a maker of a fine amp, don't you realize many benefits with more efficient speakers in the manufacturing process.

I'd imagine that the vast majority of SET owners had a variety of different amplifiers prior to discovering SETs, this is true in my case. At some point with experience under our belt we realize what sounds preferable to us individually. To state the obvious, these choices/tastes will vary. I can only speak of my own listening encounters. I've found SETs as a group sound better and closer to what I seek. That's it.

Tubegroover, Ralph and others,I understand that you are drawn to something else and move in a different direction. This is as it should be, I chose what moved me the most in terms of music enjoyment and involvement. I really don't understand what the dispute is, if SET doesn't float your boat then find what does (there's plenty of options).

Ralph I stand by my statement that there is no perfect amplifier, some will excel in some sonic areas and be less than ideal in another. We choose the tradeoffs we can live with.

Mapman, I don't get your "sugar coating" comment, sugar coating what? Every SET owner who has participated in this thread has been clear and open concerning proper amp/speaker matching. Their comments simply support and express the satisfaction they have found going the SET route. How is this perceived as sugar coating? Is Rebbi strongly preferring the AN Kit1 SET over his former Manley or Bel Canto an example of sugar coating?
Charles,

Charles,
Agreed.

As discussed many times SET amps need a very well designed power supply so they can handle dynamics and bass as well as they handle midrange. Even a small change in the design of the PS can either improve or detract from how the amp handles bass and dynamics. It is not an exact science so if one hears a SET amp with well matched speakers and it's dynamics are weak and the bass is soft and uncontrolled the possibility exists that the amps power supply could use more attention from the builder.

Amps are either well designed and built, or not. A perfect measurement does not necessarily equal good sound.

Rob,
You make many logical points. SETs aren't unique in requiring some thought and planing regarding synergy and component matching. As you cite this is true for virtually all audio product to ensure successful outcomes. If you like Maggie speakers, be prepared to seek out high power amps to drive them. I don't understand the singling out of SETs as if nothing else mandates compatibility considerations. I would expect any person interested in a particular amplifier or speaker will do their due diligence as to what's required.
Charles,

Charles,
Completely logical. Everything in audio requires planning, experience for one's self...that is, how you explained, how we ultimately got to SET. It is a journey, in the end we make a decision as to what satisfies us the most according to our own personal value system. Different folks make their own, perhaps different choices. But you and I don't run around trying to tell them their choice was limiting or wrong.

I want to ask all the speaker makers here, why did you go to 4 ohm? You have forced amp makers to have limited choice. Why make speaker loads and efficiency harder to comply with, not easier? Do 4 ohm speakers inherently sound better? I think not.

"I don't understand the singling out of SETs as if nothing else mandates compatibility considerations."

As Atmasphere likes to point out, SETs along with many tube amps like his OTLs operate under a different paradigm than most gear in today's world. In addition, SETs have the additional disadvantage of delivering just a few precious watts.

So its not an issue unique to SETs, just perhaps of greater magnitude in general than in most cases. For top notch performance in all common cases a home audio enthusiast might encounter, you have to find speakers that are both efficient and an easy load to drive and the choices may be limited.

So its not a problem that is not solvable, just one in which there are more ways to go wrong and perhaps also of greater magnitude or consequence when they do.

Again, if listening mostly at low to moderate volumes, it may not be much of an issue at all but that does not address the needs of all home audio enthusiasts.

For example, in my case, it might work for a second system but not likely for my main system in that I could neither afford nor fit any of the speakers I have heard run off a SET that I considered to not have limitations that would matter to me.

Of course as always YMMV.

Just beware of teh limitations in any case. They are always there.

""I don't understand the singling out of SETs as if nothing else mandates compatibility considerations."
"

Of course they always do but also this thread is about speakers for SETs specifically so that is the topic at hand here. There are pros and cons with everything.

"Tubegroover, Ralph and others,I understand that you are drawn to something else and move in a different direction."

While we may be drawn in different directions Charles, I do believe our goals are essentially the same. I, like you and Rob believe that correct tone is the most important factor in realizing long term enjoyment and reduces the encroachment of fatigue more than any other factor, at least to me. If tone, timbre and pitch is off just a bit, very little else matters. Tone, energy (is this pratt, toe-tapping that is referred to?) realistic transients, dynamic contrasts and low level musical information are some of the things that make music more real to me. What contributes to great tone the question might be? I have come to the conclusion that correct tone is directly attributable to the reduction in distortion, the less the distortion in the system, the better the resolution and tone. The wild card is that tube amplifiers seem to get this more right than SS, at least most I've listened to, "anyone got a recommendation of a ss amp that sounds like tubes" never the reverse. Something I always marvel at is listening to a pair of well set-up Quad speakers, how natural and convincing they are in getting tone and timbre right, more right than anything I've personally listened to. I don't and wouldn't own them because they have other limitations I personally can't live with.

So far as SETs are concerned, I DO agree with you guys! We're not in disagreement on any point other than that IME they require very efficient speakers to reduce the distortion characteristics that would make them more appealing to ME and quite possibly others for the wide genres of musical tastes I and others might have.

Please don't take offense. I've made the points of my comments clear. There is nothing wrong with SETs, they have magical qualities, just to others watching which I include myself, there may be more restrictions using these amps because of their power limits so if you take that path you have PLENTY of information above to use as a guide going forward.

Tubegroover,

I'm with you on teh pros and cons of teh Quads. They were one of my main references when undergoing changes in my gear in recent years. Macrodynamics being the main limitation.

My other reference is all manner of live performances. I go to and soak in as many as I can.

Still, I ended up going a certain way to achieve my reference sound. Interestingly each "walks that lonesome valley" in their own way despite often having similar goals and references.

Tubes have helped me along teh way but I am still of teh opinion that they are optional in that quest and I am still seeking to minimize my dependencies and finding I am able to make progress in that direction.

My philosophy is to attempt to take advantage of modern technical advances and innovations. Digital and related technologies have made great strides in recent years. I am finding I can ride that wave a lot further these days then I was able to even just a couple years ago, when I turned more to tubes to help close the gap.

I'd be curious if the 8 watt SET folks on this thread have tried 845s to see if the sound was more effortless.

I had a 10-watt, stereo First Watt SIT on my 100 db Zu Def IVs and it started breaking up in the mid-90s. The adjustable bias, monoblock SIT-1s (same 10 watts though) however could give me more range.

Also, when I was looking to purchase a Shindo amp, the 10-watt SE Cortese was not recommended by JH given my speaker specs- only the P/P EL34 model and single-ended GM70 monos.

Every room and speaker is different, but I'd like to hear those who have tried multiple SET amps.

I bought a new Coincident Dynamo & pretty quickly determined it wasn't going to cut it power wise for my louder listening. It was a great experiment because for years I've lusted after the Frankensteins but 8 watts per channel ain't gonna cut it in my world. Been enjoying my RM10 for over 4 years now w/nary a glitch & it's a phenomenal combo w/the Partials. Every room & system is a different animal.

Pehare,
I also loved my RM 10, I was stupid for selling them about 10 years ago, but I love the Coincident Dynamo even more. Like anything audio, careful system synergy, your ears, your room. Best, Rob

So, Atmasphere,
Then why don't we have manufacting that promotes high efficiency nominal 8 ohm or higher speakers. Seems like it makes amp manufacting funnel into a narrow "limiting" high power proposition that does Limit and force a specific choice that doesn't often times serve music by my definition, but does loud/dynamic. As a maker of a fine amp, don't you realize many benefits with more efficient speakers in the manufacturing process.

I'm a big advocate of high efficiency- tube power is expensive! My speakers at home are 98 db and 60 watts is pretty good power on them and I don't feel like the extra power is wasted at all. I like to play things at a lifelike level. I'm also an advocate of higher impedance- 8 ohms or more. This reduces the distortion of all amplifiers, tube, solid state, class D, whatever. Higher impedance is also a lot less critical of speaker cables and connections! IOW if high quality reproduction is your goal, there really is no good reason to use a 4 ohm speaker. If sound pressure is your goal and you have solid state then there is a reason, albeit a 3 db reason... it would be cool if speaker manufacturers figured this out as a simple way to make any speaker sound smoother and more detailed is to reduce the distortion of the amp by increasing the impedance of the speaker.

Ralph I stand by my statement that there is no perfect amplifier, some will excel in some sonic areas and be less than ideal in another. We choose the tradeoffs we can live with.

Restated in this fashion I've got no beef; I agree 100%.

One of the huge strengths of SETs that many audiophiles don't realize is that 'first watt'. SETs might make a lot of distortion at full power, but as the power output is reduced the distortion decreases linearly to unmeasurable- at lower power levels most push-pull amps make a lot more distortion (one of the few exceptions being our OTLs which have the same reduction of distortion as power is reduced). This is where that great 'inner detail' and 'magic' comes from- without distortion you just get the music (distortion masks low level detail via the ear's masking principle).

That's a lot harder to do than it sounds!

This is why if you really want to hear what the amp does you need a speaker with real efficiency.

Jetrexpro, you nailed it. Well done sir. One 8 or 10 watt SET amp can play much louder than another 8 watt SET amp without the distortion Ralph talks about, if the amp has a robust power supply and iron.

10 watts is not created equal in all 10 watt SET amps. One amp may run out of gas well before another based on power supply and iron. This has certainly been my experience. My current 10 watt SET amp drives my 90-92db 8 ohm speakers wonderfully. A past 12 watt SET amp ran out of gas!

Grannyring,
Agree, the same rating doesn't mean they're the same amplifier by any means.
Pehare if the Dynamo didn't suit your needs then yes you should move on. One point though, don't confuse the Dynamo with the Frankenstein. Yes they're both 8 watt amplifiers yet are in reality very different. Very different design objectives, far more power supply and trannsformer capacity for the Frankenstein MK II. The Franks are 3 times as heavy as the Dynamo for a good reason. Note the comments of Jetrexpro and Grannyring regarding power supply quality and grunt. This factor and output transformers make or break SETs and thus a hierarchy is established. Franks drive the Coincident Total Eclipse brilliantly.
Charles,

Tubegroover,
There's absolutely no offense taken by any stretch of the imagination. We're just all sharing our varied experiences and opinions. The irony for me is that the SET ownere here as a group are about as an experienced bunch you'll ever find. We've as a group have owned or experienced a multitude of different amplifiers and by this time and place know what we want and how to get it. Class A, AB, D, SS or tube, OTL push pull, you name it and we've heard them collectively. Those of us who've chosen SET did so willingly, enthusiastically and with both eyes open. This has been a good discussion.
Charles,