Tube Amp for Martin Logan SL3 3

I would advise against it. Mega buck tube amps can have both the current and voltage to drive the difficult loads of the SL3 (and other Martin Logan speakers), but at the 2k range I think your friend would be happier with solid state. One possiblity is to have tubes for the panels and solid state amp for the woofer. This eliminates the voltage demand that the woofers may need on the tube amp (driving the panels only). If your friend does do this they will need at least one of the amps with an adjustable input so they can match the levels. This can be tricky, particularly due to non-linearities of different amplifiers. I think what I'm getting at is--at 2k I wouldn't advise it. Probably not what they wanted to hear--but better than spending the money and being very disappointed.

I disagree with Abstract7 there are plenty of amps in the $2000 used price that can drive the logans. Sonic Frontiers Power 2 at 110watt is one of them. A good 100 watt 6550 tube amp has more then enough juice for Martin Logan. And Martin Logans always sound better with tubes. Other wise the sound is too solid state smooth which can get boring fast. I would advise to stay away from Levinson or Krell or with these speakers. They just sound too bright, another amp to also give a listen to is a used VT100MkII again this also has plenty of juice to properly control your speaker. As far as the 1.3ohm min thing, thats BS, you can drive a Martin Logan with a $400 receiver and it will play plenty loud enough, maybe not with quality, but it will drive them. The logans are very easy to drive in my opinion and in my room with a Sonic Frontier power 2 I can get peaks of 110 from my speakers. So goes to show you that 100 watt of tube power can drive anything.

I drive my SL3's with a pair of Classe' DR9's running in mono. Solid State reliability with a touch of tube sound....plenty of power (1,100 watts/2ohms) too!

ML's *love* tubes. In fact, this is the only way to open them up. There are lots of tube amps in the $2K range (used) that are up to the job. Anyone who tells you otherwise has either not owned ML's or hasn't compared tube amps and ss in their system. Case closed.

To clarify my previous post (I figured I would get some disagreement--but that's okay--I don't feel there really are any absolutes in audio (except don't run your Class A amplifier in a full bathtub). Anyway, I do own Martin Logan's, they are monoliths. I have friends that own Requests and SL3s. We all love the Martin Logan. My current set-up is ML monoliths with Levinson 20.0 on top and Krell KMA 160 on bottom. I have run mine on tube amps. It didn't work--not at all. Now in fairness--the panels of the monoliths are very difficult to drive--more so than the SL-3, and I wasn't using a megabuck high powered tube amp either. I have listened to Requests driven with very expensive tube amps--they sounded great!! I do love the sound of tubes with the panels if the tube amp is powerful enough to handle it. When we did this the bottom end did lose a bit of dynamics in the bass, but it was worth it to hear the panels with the tubes. As to the SL3--I have not heard tubes on the SL3--but I have heard it with Levinson 27, which also sounds fantastic--it is not bright at all (Krell probably would be, but series 20 Levinson is not bright at all). While I disagree with Bigcigarman's point about Levinson and Krell, I am intrigued by the Sonic Frontiers with SL3. Have you listened to this combination? If so this might be a very good recommendation.