Hey grannyring,
Really don't know why you need to defend class D amplifiers, in that I did not attack them in the first place. I clearly stated they do not produce sonicly what I'm looking for in my system based on my personal taste, not yours. I also did not , "classify all D amps" I mentioned the ones I have personal experience with, which are highly regarded, and still found them highly lacking in their performance for my ears.
Notice I'm not married to one technology, I use both SS and tube gear, but in either case there is an overall musicality I'm looking for that so far I don't get with D based amplifiers. Is there some D amplifier out there that might float my sonic boat, possibly, but I have not heard it yet. My list of other D amps is pretty extensive ( Rowland, Karma, Wired for Sound, Audio Research, Red Dragon) and yes I have heard the Lyngdorf that you rave about.
So, when you conclude my statement regarding my general dissatisfaction regarding D amplifiers is not a logical conclusion, I believe that your criticism is not valid. I don't error either in an all or nothing position or rule out in a rigid/fixed way that there is no D amplifier that exists that would ever satisfy my personal tastes. However, at this point I have not heard one that I would like to own or listen to compared to the other amplifiers I mentioned.
Your conclusion that some how I'm promoting, "class D system discrimation" on this thread is way off base and not grounded in the facts that I have shared in my posts. I have always shared my opinions bluntly, but have never attacked anyone on a personal basis or dogmatically stated that my tastes are right and others are wrong.
I don't know, maybe you own stock in the Lyngdorf company, that contributes to your strong passion in the support of their product. I'm not "invested" either for/against D amplification, just find other types of amplification much more what real music sounds like to me.
|
This is my final and respectful last response to this silly "concern" if I like or dislike D amplifiers or not.
Yes, in any type of amplification regardless if its SS, tube, hybrid, D, etc. there is the good, the bad, and the ugly. I have in ever post on this thread regarding amplifiers to use to drive the DI's/Ulf's shared up front my PERSONAL TASTE preferences in what I'm looking for in my system with these speakers. So far, in my experience I have not heard a D amplifier that gives me the timbres/tonality/color, overall liquidity, and the type of spatial dimensions that gives me the illusion of live music in my listening room. I find D amplifiers to be analytical and "Hi-Fi ish" like other gear that many listeners enjoy very much. It's just my personal taste and how I experience how different amplifiers present the sound of music. So, please just take my opinion with a grain of salt and use your own ear's to come to a conclusion that gives you what you are looking for in your system. |
Hey aniwolfe,
In my role as a professional reviewer I have had in-house for review numerous D amplifiers, way before/after the DI's/Ulf's that I returned to the company because I would have written less then a positive review on their product. It is my position that if my review is going to be negative that I inform the company and give them the choice to go forward or withdraw their product for review. Yes, I have had reviews that are less then stellar regarding the performance of certain pieces of gear, but if I can't even give one star in the rating system, I think its unkind/damaging to the designer/builder not to have a chance to withdraw their product.
Almost all the D amplifiers that I have had in-house for review were not solicited by me to begin with, but I was asked by the company if I was interested in reviewing their piece. So, the only public statements that I have made about D amplifiers has been on this thread in general terms, not being highly critical of any specific brand or model.
|
Hey Everybody,
I "mindfully" thought if I was going to post any comments on Nitrobob's experience with the DI's, and finally decided to share some assumptions regarding his reaction to them.
With respect to him:
1) Anybody who listens at 110 dB levels, or at average 100dB levels, at less then ten feet away is either deaf to begin with or has damaged their hearing to a serious level, indeed.
2) To have the DI's just a foot off the front wall and then played at these insane volume levels it makes sense to me that they surly could sound less then musical and harsh/edgy, and screw-up big time the beautiful highs and mid-range that these speakers are known to deliver.
3) Because of my assumptions stated above, this might not be PC or thought of as being "respectful" , but his experience has no merit or credibility regarding the performance of the DI's in any realistic fashion at all.
It's hard for me to believe that nobody had commented on how unhealthy it is to listen at these volume levels, regardless what his take is on the speakers. He has the prefect right to listen to any volume he wants to regardless of the dangers. However, the rest of us should make it clear the risks involved in doing so. |
Hey Charles,
Remember, common sense is often uncommon, and you are much more diplomatic then I chose to be regarding people's foolish behavior. I totally accept its his right to go deaf if he wants to.
His so-called reviewing process that people thanked him for was based on an assumption of volume levels that are dangerous/harmful to one's physical health and hearing. Regarding his take on the DI's I believe this analogy would be more applicable, it would be like a partially or totally blind person going to an art gallery and then writing a review of the art work. Yea, right! |
Hello Gentlemen,
The Stereo Times review on the DI's just went up with Clement Perry and our own dear Gon brother Micheal Wright coming to the conclusion that this speaker is an absolute "killer" based on its sonic performance. Clement made it product of the year, and Mike's part of the review is fascinating with his experience of comparing the DI's to his reference Wilson Sasha speakers. Great writing on both their parts and another set of ear's opening up to the DI's great performance and mind blowing cost to performance ratio. Well done! |
Hey aolprodj,
Wait a minute. You think that Clement's and Mike's review is better then my review on hometheaterreview.com. Shame on you!
That's stated as a satirical humorous response to cover my "hurt" feelings about your post.
Their review is terrific and Eric deserves the rave he received from them, indeed. |
Hey Gentlemen,
Just got Emails in the last 24 hours from two professional reviewers one owns KEF Blades II and the other Acoustic Zen Crescendos, both around 20K, that their new SI's are, "on another level completely" and can't believe Eric's selling this speaker at, "such an absurd low price".
|
Hey Tom,
My mistake I mean't SE's in my post. So far, with very few exceptions, the great majority of owners of speakers that retail for more then 20K have sold off their much more expensive speakers because they were totally out performed by either DI's/SE's that I personally know. The list is up to eight professional reviewers, who were stunned at what they were hearing, yet had the honesty to go with what their ears were hearing. |
Hey Gentlemen,
My review on the Pass Labs XA-25 amplifier went up today on hometheatereview.com. The review will give you all the details why it's my new reference on the Ulf's, if you are looking for a magical SS amplifier to drive your DI's/SE's you might want to consider Nelson's new masterpiece. |
Hey craig59,
As you know many amplifiers have XLR inputs, but really are not truly balanced designs. The beauty of the XA-25 is it's use of only two transistors per side and the tremendous power supple which drops tons of current when needed. So, I find no downside at all, and historically have never run XLR cables in my system even when I was using the XA-60.8's which are a true balanced circuit design. Less is really more can be heard in a great SET design and in Nelson's new simpler circuit. |
Hey Guys,
My review on Aric's Transcend Series KT 120 SE Amplifier just went up on hometheaterreview.com this morning. Hope you enjoy the review and it helps more listeners get interested in Aric's wonderful gear/designs. |
Just left Allan's (Aolprodj) home to listen to his new SE's and they and the total system sounded great. All the details and transparency you would want, along with that aliveness and dynamics that make the music come alive, yet still being musical without etch or analytical front edges of the notes at all.
Congrats to my friend on a killer system! |
Hello gentlemen,
My review on the Impact Monitor speakers just went up on hometheaterreview.com. I nick named them the "baby DI's" because Eric was able to take the performance of the larger sibling down to a stand mount for smaller acoustic spaces. It's a terrific speaker and its my new reference in my smaller system. Hope you enjoy the review. |
Hey Guys,
The Valvet V2 uses the same approach as the First Watt SIT 2, one transistor per side SET design. The First Watt SIT 2 uses VFET transistors that Nelson had built for him which are different devices then what are used to in Valvat V2. But, it makes complete sense to me why the German amplifier could be a wonderful sounding piece. I Emailed Jerry (10 Audio) to see if he had ever heard the XA-25, so he could compare the two, however he never got back to me.
I found the XA-25 to be the best sounding SS amplifier I have ever heard. It also is much more powerful, both in watts/current then the German amplifier. However, if you are looking for a SS SET design Nelson has just come out with the First Watt SIT 3 which still uses the SIT transistors with a different type of loading scheme which offers much more power, around 30 watts per channel I believe, and sells for 3K.
All of the above amplifiers would be beautiful partners with the DI's. I found that the Ulf's worked with lower power SET amps both tube and SS. However, the XA-25 was the match made in sonic heaven, my hunch way this is so is because it offers much more watts/current that the 21 driver big brother to the DI's needs to really perform at its best |
Hey recluse,
My reference SS amps, until the XA-25, were the XA-60.8 mono blocks. So, for all intent and proposes they would sound the same as the XA-30.8. The XA-25 does not sound like a series .8 amplifier for the details either read my review on hometheaterreview.com or Six Moons excellent review of the XA-25 directly compared to the XA-30.8 amplifier. |
Hey everybody,
The review on the Ulberht's by Ron Cook just went up on Stereo Times. He came to the same conclusions concerning the speaker's performance that I did and replaced his Wilson Audio Maxx 2's, I think they retailed right around 90K, to make them his new reference. |
Hey Gentlemen,
This week I'm getting AricAudio's new Push-Pull amplifier in for review. Since, Aric's SET amplifier, which I have already reviewed, was superlative, it will be very interesting to see how his new Push-Pull design will sound on the Tekton Speakers (Ulf's and Impact Monitors). I'll run it in Triode mode with EL-34's which will produce around 20 watts per channel. Aric believes he has gotten a lot of the SET magic in this amplifier, which of course offers almost double the power.
|
Hey Gentlemen,
Just spent about 8 hours listening to AricAudio's new push/pull amplifier. Based on what has been shared on this thread already regarding Aric's superlative and cost effective amplifiers and preamplifiers, he has another winner in this 20 watt, in Triode mode, single chassis design. His goal was to get the tonality/timbres and spatial qualities of a SET amplifier with much more power and bass control normally found in a P/P circuit. So, if you are looking for more powerful tube amplifier to drive your DI's, and yet have much of the musicality of a SET design, this amplifier could be for you. |
Hi mofojo,
As you know everything is influenced by "the law of diminishing returns", including our hobby. However, the SE's version of the DI's takes this great speaker to a higher degree of finesse and qualitatively does everything better then the standard model. I have spent hours with DI's, SE's, ULF's, and Impact monitors in my reviewing systems. They are all wonderful music makers. There are major internal changes, along with different more expensive transducers in the SE's. If you get to spend enough time with the SE's the DI's will sound slightly "rough around the edges" across the sonic spectrum. Not a revolution, but an evolution of what the remarkable DI's offer at their amazing price. |
Hey rubytuesday,
Congrats on your SE's! You are in for a real sonic treat this afternoon.
I'm glad that you mentioned Mike Kay of Audio Archon, he really is one of the great guys/vendors of high-end audio gear. He's extremely knowledgeable, honest, and only cares that his customers get what they want out of their systems to enjoy the music. |
Hey xenophon,
Congrats on your choice of the Mother Load preamplifier. Aric is a very talented designer/builder, besides being a good guy, who builds great performing high quality gear at very reasonable prices. After I reviewed his KT-88 SET amplifier I purchased it to use in my systems. Right now I have is new P/P single chassis amplifier in for review and its "killer" performer in that it offers the color/tonality and image density of a SET design , but offers twice the watts to be able to drive less sensitive speaker loads.
You have a lot of fun coming your way when you get to hear your new preamplifier in your system! |
Hey Patrick,
I reviewed the Impact Monitors for hometheaterreview.com, along with the DI's and Ulf's, and can tell you that the stand mounts do not lack for bass extension and power. If you don't have the space for the bigger brothers you will not be missing out at all regarding the power region/bass and get all the other virtues of the floor standers. |
Hey canibefrank,
I wrote a review on them for hometheaterreview.com, gave them five stars, nick-named them the "DI Jr's", and bought the review pair for my smaller system. If you want the details why go to my review and take a look. |
Hey Everybody,
Just wanted to share that Allan and I just setup for Audio Arza his new pair of Ulf Be's this morning. In the past I have found that speaker designs that use Beryllium drivers often had an edge/ bite that I found annoying after listening to them over time. However, remember the Ulf Be's were right out of the crates, this speaker was smooth and had a liquidity in their tonal quality, but were producing great micro-details and clarity without sounding hyper-detailed or analytical.
So, congrats to Azra they sound great in his room and will only get better as they break-in and to Eric who has creatively designed another world class reference speaker that's as good as anything on the market regardless of price. |
Hey werther,
It's too soon to tell, Azra's Ulf Be's have to break-in and his upstream gear is brand new, so therefore let's let him get some hours on the total rig.
My system with the Ulf's sits in a much larger acoustic space and is tuned to be beautiful tube based sound. Azra's system is now powered with the current reference level T&A integrated amplifier which is a terrific SS piece, but sounds different then my system. Remember, both versions of the ULf's and the DI's are conduits that purely let the upstream gear to present it's sonic voice. So, I'll give you more of an objective take on the Ulf Be's in the next couple of weeks and see what are the differences between them and the standard Ulf's that I can get a take on. |
Hey David,
Mr. Chavira's review is spot on regarding the performance of the Impact Monitor. The only caveat I would add on, based on my experience with reviewing them and purchasing them for my smaller system, is that you really have to use a reference level stand to get the I M's to shine to the level that they can provide, otherwise you decrease the over-all dynamics, transparency, and magical imaging of these "baby" DI's. |
Hey David,
Here's my take on take on the comparison between the standard Ulfberth speakers and the Ulfberth Be speakers. I went over to Ezra's house with five recordings I use to get my take on a piece of gear that I'm reviewing for my own pleasure or professionally. Both the T+A and the ULF Be's had been playing for close to 100 hours, which should be good enough time to burn-in to get a realistic take on the performance of speakers. I'm still amazed how well they image in spite of Ezra's relatively small acoustic space. However, the speakers still are five and a half feet off the front wall, two and a half feet off the side walls, with a slight toe-in and his listening chair is about eight to nine feet from the front of the speaker. I do get a deeper, higher, and wider sound-stage with my ULf's, but my acoustic space is vastly, in all dimensions, larger then Ezra's space.
1) On my musical selections played at dB levels that I consider to be the "sweet spot" regarding dynamics and the size of the instruments stays at a realistic proportions I could not hear a difference between the two speakers.
2) Both Ulf's, along with the DI SE's, are complete pure conduits that put out exactly what you put into them. I did hear a difference in the sound of the system driving the ULF Be's. However, I don't believe the Ulf Be's were more revealing/transparent then the standard Ulf's.
3) Eric did share with me that the Be tweeter being a hard dome device compared to the Scanspeak silk soft dome tweeter will measure more perfectly flat at dB levels of 120 or more then the soft dome. However, I never listen to any music that loud, so theoretically the Ulf Be's would play more clearly at those hugh dB volume levels with less break-up/distortion.
4) I did not notice any differences in micro-details/transparency or a lowering of the noise floor.
5) I could not pick-up any significant differences in over all speed or dynamics between the Ulf/ULF Be's.
So, both are world reference level speakers. If there is any overall difference in performance, I could not tell between using the standard Ulf's in my system vs. the Ulf Be's in Ezra's system. The differences I heard would be attributed to the acoustic space and driving them with very different electronics upstream gear.
|
To my three Amigos-not Chevy Chase, Martin Short, Steve Martin- but Ezra, Allen, and Mike Wright.
Here's my response to your comments on the ULF Be's comparison to the standard ULF's:
1) All three of you have spent together, being very generous at estimating this number, maybe a total of four and a half hours listening to the ULF's in my system. I have spent hundreds of hours in front of them, along with using many different upstream components to drive them for reviewing purposes and to exactly tune my system to my personal taste. I think this vast experience, compared to your very brief exposure, would give me a more objective take on the differences between the two models then your cursorary experience.
2) Well, my "Golden Ear Amigos" when I went over to get a take on the Ulf Be's and compare an amplifier I have in for review to Ezra's T+A piece, I brought a pair of jumpers and my own speaker cables to use in this process and this revealed that the cables that were in the system were causing a severe malfunctioning in the imaging. When we played a Diane Krall number that has her dead in the middle sitting behind her piano, the system, with Ezra's speaker cables split her voice in two pieces that were plastered on the side walls with no middle image. Hum, when Ezra, Allen, and Mike came to the conclusion that there is a vast difference between the ULF models this was based on a fundamentally out of tune system when they did their listening to it. By the way, Ezra purchased my cables, gave him a great price, and I gave him as a gift the pair of jumpers, so now his system is in order.
3) Listening/hearing what a system or an individual component sounds like is a "subjective art" not an objective measure. Personal taste always is part of the "take" on how anyone experiences what they are "hearing". However, based on what I stated above, I think it's fair to state that my three Amigos are jumping to an arbitrary conclusion regarding that the Ulf Be's is a superior speaker compared to the standard Ulf's. They are MUCH more similar in their performance, and if they are different it's very subtle, indeed. Both speakers are beautiful music makers, if they were driven with the exact same upstream gear, in the same acoustic space I still believe they would be sonicly remarkably close together.
|
Hey David,
Thanks for putting up the review on Aric's new amplifier. He really builds beautiful sounding gear at such reasonable prices. This amplifier sounded great with the Tekton speakers. |
Hey Guys,
Just wanted to share that for the last 48 hours, did not sleep last night, I have been listening to the new Linear Tube Audio full featured, full size chassis, significant internal upgrades/modification to the ZOTL circuit preamplifier.
I knew Mark would not come out with a new linestage unless he and David Berning believed that it would be worth the effort. It is the most beautiful music making preamplifier I have ever had in my reference system! (I started a thread on amps/preamps forum to inform others that might not read this thread with a few more details.)
Because so many have the original Micro-ZOTL piece to drive their amps/DI's I highly recommend you consider this new version as a significant upgrade that will take your system to another level of beautiful music making.
My review for hometheaterreview. com will come out in the next couple of months with all the details. However, if you trust my ears at all you want to hear this piece in your system as soon as you can. |
Hey Guys,
My review on the Lab12 DAC1 SE has just gone up on hometheaterreview.com. The reason I'm sharing this on this thread is because when using this DAC to drive either the Ulf's or the DI monitors the result is superlative /beautiful music! This DAC is just like Tekton Speakers, not just good for the money, but crushes the performance vs. cost ratio and competes with anything on the market. I compared it with three other DACS that cost over 12K and it was at least on their level, if not better.
Take a look at the review for all the details and you might want to hear it in your system along with your DI's. |
Hey evolvist,
Thanks for the positive comment about my review. Regarding your opinion about having tubes in the analog stage of a DAC has been somewhat of a negative, that has not been my experience. I have had three DACS (Concert Fidelity, Line Magnetic,Canary) that were all terrific performers in my systems. I also always have a tube based preamplifier in my systems with either SS or tube based amplifiers and find no downside with having a tube based DAC as source.
To be quite frank, the Lampizator DACs, I have heard many of their different models, have never floated my sonic boat. I don't believe this has anything because they use tubes, just that the overall house sound is not something I found to be as good as I'm used to listening to. |
Hey Guys,
Over on the website STEREO TIMES their staff reviewer, Van Winkle, just posted a rave review on the Electron Speakers, he refers to them as Jr. DI's. He also shares the experiences of staff writers responses to the DI's, before he got the Electron's in for review. You might found this interesting reading, even though you already know by your own listening, what they all heard and went crazy over compared to their much more expensive reference speakers. |
Hey everybody,
Clement Perry of the website Stereo Times just posted an all out RAV regarding the Encore Speaker. Virtually, his total staff now use Tekton Design Speakers in their systems. They had owned much more expensive brands that got out performed by Eric's models. I have had the pleasure of reviewing/listening to DI's, DI SE's, DI monitors, and ULF's, they are all great! According to Mr. Perry, Eric has brought down most of the performance of the ULF's into the smaller and less costly Encore. I don't agree with his take on the difference between the DI's and the DI SE's, so were the Encore performance fits in compared to the DI SE's I'll have to assess when I hear a pair of Encores. |
To answer jones4music directly:
No, his patented design is unique and has nothing to do with Roger Russell's work or any past line array designs. That's way he waited until his patent was accepted before he started to build the DI's and the generation of speakers based on his break through design. |
Hello estuardo4,
Yes, the Perfect Set would be a great match with your amplifier. Eric's new speaker is quite terrific. I'm sure you would be very pleased with it in your system. |
Hey corelli,
You are still invited to stop by me on your way to the show. Just give me a call if you are interested. |
Hey Tom,
Just talked to Eric this week and the review pair of the Moab Speakers should be ready to ship by the end of next week. I'm looking forward to it and my reviews for Six Moon are posted almost immediately when I send them to Srajan. So, I'm ready to hear Eric's latest creation and write the review! |
Without being spiked the DI's over transparency and its tight bass extension are impaired dramatically. |
