Ive been plowing though the posts here and thought this seems like a place I could find some more help.
Anyway, I listen to rock about 80% of the time. Anything from very heavy metal to 80s rock. Some blues, some softer rock, and Pink Floyd, I dont mind jazz or big band or female vocalists, but im off point....mostly rock. My room is about 12X22.
Im upgrading a very mainstream set of components that ive just sort of lived with for years: Yamaha CDC 905 Changer JVC 518VBK AV Reciever Kenwood JL-680 3-Way, 12"main, 92db, 70w, Circa 1989 Speakers
Going to a hi-fi shop of any kind is just not realistic on a regular basis(very remote) so im leaning heavily on the forums and reviews online to gauge a direction.
So far ive tried a Cambridge Azur 340A and now currently demoing a 540A (both along with a set of AudioQuest ICs). Honestly the ICs made a huge leap with my original setup..I was impressed. Anyway, the CA amps are very musical, more imaged and more detailed. However my initial impression is these are not rock amps. Negatives are the guitars are now more "in the back" so to speak, more harshness/treble/brightness, and also a more general laid back sense, almost like the corners of big rock and roll hits are rounded off if that makes sense.
Am I on track that these amps arent rock amps? Or is it possible the speakers are now more exposed for their faults? Ditto the CD player?
To take this further, I feel whats most associated with "rock" or "heavy metal" are punch, power, volume and bass. I agree....to a point. Ill take killer midrange over heavy bass, and what good are punch, power and volume without feel, subtleties and tone?
As a side note, ive been playing guitar for 20+ years, when talking guitar amps, IMO there is nothing to discuss, tube is FAR superior to SS. I particularly like EL84 juiced amps, smooth, warm amd sweet. Is there a correlation with tube audio?
I dont want to start the "what to upgrade first" debate, ive read all the many many opinions....:) Im open to speakers or source, but right now looking at amps(with my system im thinking just pick one and get started...bad idea?)
I know some feel SS is the way to go for a rock amp, but currently im assuming based on my experiences so far and guitar tastes im going to like tube amps. I certainly could be wrong.
I like the talk about the Manley Stingray. Ive read everything every search engine will find about it and talked to Manley as well as some dealers. Any opinions on it for my wants/need? What about the Prologue 2 or the Jolidas? Are then in the same ball park as the Stingray or are we talking a step down?
For speakers ive looked at and considering(based on $$) the Athena F2.2s, Paradigm Espirits, and most others in this price range, but also found some Dali Towers that are slightly more(may get a chance to hear them in a couple of weeks). Based on my future plans/$/listening habits, any recommendations?
I hope tihs is semi-clear, I appreciate any thoughts, Thanks!
I revisited this old thread I started 10 years ago to refresh my memory on the great advice I got here. If any of you are your still lurking here...thank you! I still have the Mcintosh 6900, Apollo and Dali Royal Towers. About 2.5 years ago I moved to the Bay Area, housing what it is I didn't have space for my system and put it in storage. So since 2014 I have been using computer monitors for my musical fix.
I recently moved to another part of CA...where I could live in something other than a shoe box.... and was able to get my system setup again. After 2.5 years of not hearing my stereo... or any good stereo for that matter.... firing it up was amazing! It is interesting to see my comments from the very beginning and see the comparison to my opinion of my system today. Long story short... my problem on this quest was just as sogood51 and others pointed out at the time... I made the wrong speaker choice.
If anyone happens to read this thread due to starting a similar journey, and intent on a tube amp for rock, heed the advice here... speaker choice is critical.
What a great thread. I too have been searching for a great rock system and the collective wisdom on this thread is more informative than pretty much everything else I've read. Zamdrang what's the latest assessment of the MA6900 and did you ever try other speakers? Would love to get and update in 2010.
Zamdrang I am happy it worked out. I could go on about why and how you came to your conclusion, however we all have to take some experimental risks in this hobby
Now if you want to work toward the ultimate level
Upgraded speaker crossovers
And room acoustics
Both will reduce your distortion and frequency balance issues especially with heavy rock at high levels, your equipment will out run your room and saturate your crossovers probably well before your ears or gear gives up.
If your perfectly happy enjoy and just leave it all alone, there is no end and always another level!
Well..Undertow was right...hindsight is fun huh? I ended up selling the Stingray and the Rotel. I happened on a great deal on a brand new Mac 6900. Ive owned it for a year, and have to say im MUCH closer to what im after, speakers are still my wink link, but the Mac sings with whatever I throw at it. As somoene else mentioned it doesnt seem as picky as the other gear ive owned. Just big, warm, smooth sound, not the last word in resolution I suppose...but with my recordings thats not what I want. I want listenability and it delivers.
To be fair to the Stingray I think with the right speaker pairing I might have never parted with it. If if if...:)
I also upgraded to an Apollo. Compared to my old Yamaha....just more of everything is how i'd describe it. Very nice.
Oh and upgraded my ICs to Audioquest Jaguars.
Im much happier then I was in 06 when I orginally posted, just wanted to update in case someone was starting down the road I did and had the same question(s)...maybe this will help...:)
Ive heard the same on foriegn recordings. Wish I could remember the link, bascially had listed in order of quality....something like German, Japanese, American etc. Not sure if there is anything to it. Maybe someone else here will chime in.
I agree about musical enjoyment rather than obsessing over ideal recordings. I have a lot of stuff that is pretty rough. Thats why I like tone/eq controls.
There is no one best place . It is often just a crap shoot ! I am refering to all types of music here . I have some "remastered" CD's that are just as bad , or worse , than the originals ! And I have some that are actually better . You just have to try them out . I try to purchase in the used market when ever possible so as not to loose too much on resale if the quality is not there . Some claim foriegn produced ones are better , at times . Probably the best thing to do is what you are doing now . Just move over to the music forum .
For what it is worth... I have had better success with adjusting my equipment . Using an all tube setup with the proper speakers has put me closer to the "listenable " goal that I seek for these lessor quality recordings . It is , for me , part of the synergy process . Some call this coloration and others would scoff at anything that isn't "true" to the performance . But for me it is about musical enjoyment . I am by no means a purist or a tweaker . Just my 2 cents .
So where is a good place to get CDs that are recorded well. I would love to be able to listen to Aerosmith without getting disgusted and switching to another CD.
I had the LP on hand too, along with a few other metal faves. The system we had in the room had no upper limits as far as sound pressures were concerned :) although the bass was best up close, which was odd. Every room has its issues...
I heard a pair of Supratek Monduese KT88s at 100watts RMS driving some rebuilt Gale 401s[one of the alltime great rock speakers].Stevie Ray Vaughan never sounded better.
I was quoting some reps in the rooms...not me. I dont agree either. I had some very nice sounding cds with me which I was told were thin, overly compressed, etc etc. One dude(me)with some cds...trying to tell a guy with a room full of hi end gear that his equipment wasnt cutting it....well u know.... Wont name names...but it happened more than once.
+1 for Paranoid. My reference cd for years has been Iced Earth Horror Show. Metal with violins, organs, female vocals and much more. Its all over the place. I probably have yet to hear it as it was intended...but im still searching....:)
BTW...Ralph is it? I wandered in your room at the 06 show, had I known your appreciation of Sabbath....i'd have stayed longer...:)
I really don't agree that metal is in general badly recorded! Despite being a manufacturer, and despite audiophiles generally using light jazz with female vocals, the fact of the matter is that metal faces its own set of issues in the recording- ones that are only solved by proper technique.
A good pressing of Black Sabbath's second album will bring most high end audio systems to their knees in seconds. The recording is spectacular.
Zambrang, If you found a good combo then trust your own ears. I like the TAD, Vandy combo as the Vandys are not overly bright and soundstage wide and deep so the music from better rock recordings spreads out. However, one of my favorite bands is Aerosmith and I have a tough time hearing their music spread out. Their recordings are very compressed. I have found Fleetwood Mac, Mellancamp and Eagles CDs a bit more pleasing to listen to. The thing with the Manleys is that tubes can change the flavor quite a bit but, that can cost $$$$.
Agisthos....ive come to believe your right on hi-fi gear and trust your advice. I did have some metal cds with me at the Rocky Mountain Audio show last year, and the few rooms that obliged me...once I got past the rolled eyes and how "horribly recorded metal cds are" ...well...you said it. I guess the metal hi-fi contingent is small one.
The Rotel/Dalis is a different matter altogether. Its very upfront in presentation, I can see why some may call it bright...but its not harsh. The Dalis are warmish and laid back...so maybe ive stumbled on a great match. Its got power and punch and never sounds as if its straining to keep up. The rhythymic quality is great, it gets your foot tapping and head bobbing, it feels like things are where they are supposed to be if that makes sense. Its very snappy and punchy. The Manley was sluggish by comparsion.
What surprises me is that the Rotel with its more dynamic presentation still retains a smooth and lush quality with the mellower passages of metal, its not the Manley with mellow stuff...less depth....but ill take the trade off anyday.
Im really impressed and much closer to where I want to be. Best of all...NO fatigue...I was up all night...cd after cd...it rocks.
Thanks A....good to hear others know where im coming from.
Zamdrang, your problem is that from your first post you had your heart set on getting the Manley and the Dali equipment, and every suggestion from the other members was ignored.
I went through the exact same thing as you a few years ago and here is what I found.
Almost 90% of all high end gear is voiced with audiophile recorded light jazz. Ask it to play 'Something Wicked This Way Comes' (I like Iced Earth too) or even just an average contemporary radio song and you will find even $50,000 systems being brought to their knees.
Buying equipment without audition is extremely difficult. when it comes to rock doubly so. If you think you can read an online/magazine review and actually get a feel for how a componant sounds with rock you will be disapointed. Even when reviewers say this amp is good for rock, they usually give one Led Zepplin album a quick listen to cover all the bases, proclaim 'this amp can do anything' and then go back to their Norah Jones and Miles Davis cd's.
You must get out there with your cd's and actually audition some gear.
Having said that I have heard that the new Macintosh solid state amps are good for rock, and I know a Metallica fiend who swears by Klispch speakers.
The Rotel has arrived. First impression...this thing rocks. Snappy is a good word, forward, very clear, but not overly bright.
Only tried it with my Kenwoods (they are closer to the front door..:)) and id say its slightly less dimensional then the stingray, not as sweet on the soft stuff...but its got punch and power, and the bass thumps, the contour switch is very cool. For me...it betters the SR.
One peculiar thing: with my "better" audioquest ICs...its fatiguing. But with the cheap $2 ICs I got in a bargain bin at the local hardware store, its warmer and more lush....maybe they are just less transparent and hiding things...and thats the reason....but I didnt ever expect to prefer them.
We'll see how it goes with the Dalis....more to come...
I use the Classic Audio Reproductions T-3. The speaker is 8 ohms (newer versions are 16), goes from an honest 20Hz to about 40KHz, and is 97 db 1 watt/1 meter.
I can shake the building with our 60 watt amp. Check out:
http://www.atma-sphere.com/awards/bya/index.html
for a discography of bass reference recordings.
While having full bass extension, the speaker is also finely detailed, images beautifully and is easy to set up. With 60 watts, its almost impossible to clip the amp in my room (17'x22', 9' ceiling).
The difference between 89 db and 97 db is 8 db; that means to do the same thing on an 89 db speaker will take about 400 watts. Many amps, especially ones with feedback and operating in some mode other than class A, will strain at higher power levels. To get punch out of them without strain (harshness) you need efficiency. To get the distortion down (which enhances transparency/detail) you need to keep the speaker impedance up as the amp will make less distortion.
I agree, the focus needs to be on the speaker. Then get enough watts to drive that speaker - you don't necessarily need a lot of watts, depends on the speaker.
Zam -- to generalise the issue: when I want s/thing to rock, I mean (among other things) I want to hear and feel the staccato, the sudden, the hard & the soft sound (whichever the rock player intended) -- and of course some of the impact energy contained in bass & percussion. This stands for rock music. For rock you need the impact and the sudden acceleration & precise breaking (to use an automotive analogy).
In classical, restitution in harmonics, perceptibility and duration, and phase & timing (among other things) are absolutely necessary.
Having said that the applications (i.e. systems) MAY be different in both cases you ideally need ENERGY to emanate from the speakers.
To all intents and purposes, the most acoustic energy that can be had today will come from extremely sensitive speakers, i.e. ones that produce the most spl for each unit of power fed to them... Failing that, you have to choose very powerful amplification and spkrs using very robust drivers that can take power abuse (i.e. mostly pro) .
Flimsy, designer, hi-end stuff ain't going to do it (or will typically cost more than a house + swimming pool)
And a final point: in an attempt to play, say, 89-92dB speakers "louder" rather than at whispering level, the loud musical passage is very likely to produce distortion and eventually blow one of the anaemic mid-woofs used in many spkrs. Why? Because to get the impact of, say, Mr Pastorius' slamming his bass chord in full musical transcendence (worse still, take a BBC recording of J Hendrix) you may feed the drivers with a gazilion watts for a few milliseconds even more, and this will be recurring -- you're listening to music after all... They'll blow or if not, complain. Cheers
It seems the question is better asked as S"peakers for Rock", because any amp can rock if it is mated to the right speaker. I imagine that some Klipsch speakers will rock with almost any amp, even your Stingray. I think that all that rock bass energy is really above 60Hz, you don't really here the real low stuff, but you do feel it and it increase or better portrays the venue's space.
There is a pair of Altec 19's for sale at the audiocircle forum. My "rock" speakers are an older pair of VMPS Supertower/R's that I bought brand new...ten years ago.
Greg, interesting, particularly on sound levels. It certainly was not what i'd consider loud, and trying to make it "rock" only increased fatigue and distortion.
Dave, I have to smile at your post. Past all the technical this or that, my gut has told me the exact same thing....rock speakers, more power. Im guessing...just guessing...the Rotel will be a pit stop...we'll see.
Zambrand,Eagleman, & everyone else... This post has been great! I'm looking for the same thing. A tube amp, probably integrated, for rock. I am getting rid of my Classe CA-100s & CP-35, but keeping the Hales Concept 2s. I did pick up the Jolida JD1501RC and a pair of Totem Arros for a 2nd System and that combo is pretty good. But still looking for something else for my main system. I too liked what was written about the Stingray, and even talked to Albert @ Manley. He was quite up front and didn't think the Stingray would be a good match with the Hales. A local shop has the Valve Audio Predator (from South Africa, I think) and it was amazing with with tracks like 'Your Latest Trick', Dire Straits. But I didn't like what I heard with harder rock. So, I'm still interested in Rogue Audio Tempest II, or maybe Jolida 502b, or one of the others that have been mentioned in this post. Anyway, you guys keep writing, I'll keep reading, and if I find something that works I'll let you know - Thanks!
I still have my TAD 60 with Tung Sol 6550s and I just put some Amperex made in usa 12AU7s in. I listen to 99% rock and with the Vandys, (86DB I think) this has turned out to be a real nice combo for my ears. The TS and Amperex has changed the sound to be more up front with nice extention and punch. I played Dark Side of the Moon CD last week and heard dynamics that I have never heard before with the other combos. I do not have to push this amp very hard to get room filling punchy sound.
With tubes, I have come to realize that the particular tube flavor can influence the characteristics of the sound quite a bit. I have tried RCA cleartops and EH 6CA7s in this amp and did not feel the robust character that i am hearing now. If I were listening to classical or softer music, I believe that I would try a different tube flavor which might be a better fit. Atmosphere might disagree though as I am still a newbie at this.
Zamdrang, a quick look at published specs for the Stingray & Dalis reveals the following challenges:
*output impedance Stingray 20 /100 Hz: 2,8/2,6ohm resp. Quite high, given that... *Dali, "nominal" impedance (i.e. 1W/ at 1kHz???): 4 ohm
Further, * Stingray output power triode/linear modes= 20/40W resp. which gives you a maximum undistorted sound pressure level on paper of 99/102dB at one metre away fm the speakers. Minus 6dB for every doubling of distance so at 4m away (usual listening distance) the max would be ~87/90dB. That's loud but not that loud ESPECIALLY when you have a lot of low frequency content (which eats up power)...
An approximation of real world dynamics may be had through horn-loaded speakers... such speakers would typically mate well with tube-based amps.
As a side issue, the Stingray output impedance specs: 20Hz-2,8 / 100Hz-2,6 / 1kHz- 2,0 seem to indicate that the output transformers are optimised for higher frequencies rather than lower frequency interfacing with the speakers. Also the, the 5ohm "optimal speaker load" plus "damping factor: 10" is puzzling; it would make more sense if this read: "optimal speaker load: min. 5ohm". Manley is a serious company so, if I'm not missing something, we can assume it's their marketing copy that got mixed up -- certainly not their engineers dept!
Zamdrang, there is a lot of difference between tube amp designs. To get a more dynamic quality (often audiophiles *mean* 'distortion' when they use the word 'dynamic' so I am clarifying that point by insisting that I mean *actual* dynamics), the less feedback used, the less compression the amp will exhibit. The problem is that often distortion increases with decreased feedback, so to really work right the amp has to have low amounts of distortion *without* feedback.
This is possible, but it is unusual. Many tube amp manufacturers want to get their amps to work on the same speakers that transistors do, and so add larger amounts of feedback- this pushes them closer to transistor sound.
I feel that if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its probably a duck. What I mean is, if we are going to use tubes, let's embrace that and then see what is possible if we let go of trying to make a tube amp do what transistors do. The result is a different world.
BTW, check out Aesma Daeva (myspace.com/aesmadaeva)... a favorite of mine.
Appreciate the advice. Its really eating at me just "why" the combo didnt work for me, so that helps...but yet on paper (and ive read the "trust your ears not the specs" advice) it should be a good match. The Stingray is optimized for a 5 ohm load. The Dalis I have are a 4 Ohm, 89db with a very flat impedance(so I was told)
I went back and scoured the net for Stingray reviews and discussion(torturing myself I know..:) and it sounds absolutely perfect for what im looking for....talk about sellers remorse! Even found a review running a 4 ohm, 89db speaker which caught my eye.
Before letting it go and thinking heavily about my problem being a speaker match issue I did some experimenting using it to drive my old '89 era Kenwoods (8ohm, 92db, 140 watt, 12" 3-way floorstanders). Since the Dalis use a smaller driver(5") I was thinking the bass would be much better on the 12" Kenwoods. Though a little less refined it sounded much like it did with the Dalis. It was noticeably louder at a given volume setting but generally the same animal(probably no news to true audiophiles...but a revelation to me) And the punch you hear/read about...well I just didnt hear it, same as the with the Dalis.
It really didnt rock the Kenwoods any better then my old (much cheaper)JVC HT receiver. It was more layered and dimensional, sweeter, but I wouldnt say hugely more dynamic, and certainly not any punchier in the bass dept..actually less so. Crazy to me. My son and I sat for 2 hours with all our favorite metal cds....back and forth between it and the JVC, and in the end we both agreed it was better....but not THAT much better. That night it went on Agon.
(I want to emphasize this was with Metal cds..Megadeth, Iced Earth..to name a few. As I said above I LOVED the Stingray/Dalis with softer stuff, accoustic guitar, jazz, blues, and vocals...wow...really really impressive)
But its killing me to admit it didnt work, I really wanted to like the Stingray. Based on all that I read and heard...and still hear...I just know I must have been missing something...u know?
But anyway, enough crying in my beer..... Im sure the Stingray does things that the Rotel wont, ill post after ive had some time with it driving my Dalis and my Kenwoods.
The Stingray/Dali combination sound like a very poor one and I suspect both pieces are quite good when matched with appropriate equipment. Atmasphere's explanation states the problem clearly. Tube amps need different types of speakers than SS to work right and the Dali sounds like it would probably work better than the Stingray, although the Stingray is proably the better amp with the "right" speaker. If you like the Dali, stick with SS at your price point.
If you are investing in a tube amplifier, any tube amplifier, that investment dollar will be best served by a speaker that is at least 8 ohms rather than 4, all other things being equal. Sixteen ohms can often be a revelation.
Four ohms became common with the advent of the transistor, before that 16 ohms was common. A lot of tube amps have 4 ohm capabilities, but in 99 and 44/100ths percent of the time, the 4 ohm operation is compromised by lack of bandwidth, lower power and higher distortion (read:lack of transparency) than operation at higher impedances.
Tube amplifier power is also harder to make; there is a direct benefit from speaker efficiency. Even 3 db more will mean that you amp need make only half the power for the same sound pressure.
As an example the Coincident will be easier to drive and play louder; it might actually sound better than the Dali not because it actually is (and I don't know if it is or isn't) but simply because it is intended for tube operation and the amp can now perform that much better.
Thanks for the advice At. No..they didnt inspire which does tell me something, but what other than I didnt like them? Would the Stingray rock with a different speaker? Would the Dalis sound better with more power?....lots of variables. How do you know if an amp is no-feedback design? Something thats published or a certain number on the spec sheet? Is the Stingray? Im still learning tech stuff, but I was suprised that the dealer touted the Dali Towers so highly, 89db 4ohm speakers. Spec wise...from what I read....they didnt sound like the ideal load for the Stingray.(being a novice..what did I know...u know?)
I would agree if its good for rock it should just be good, but my experience so far would not lead to believe the reverse it true (good for jazz, vocals etc..being good for rock). But maybe your talking an entirely different price point?? So anyway, thanks for the advice, any recommendations?
Words of wisdom, Ralph, words of wisdom. I believe the same applies to loudspeakers that are genuinely high fidelity.
BTW, Ralph, my line arrays are due in by mid-November. I'll put your wisdom to the full test (via my M60s, of course), probably starting with "Get Yer Ya-Yas Out" and Jimi at Berkeley, 5/70!
Hi Zamdrang, if you want punch and dynamics without brightness, consider that you will have to work with an amplifier that is zero feedback. Amps with feedback have enhanced high order odd harmonics, which the ear uses as loudness cues. This works great for a guitar that has to 'cut through the mix', but lousy when you want to listen to a music gestalt. Zero feedback amplifiers come in all power levels, but I would also consider speakers that have higher efficiency. Three decibels is a small change in volume to our ears, but means that the amp has to make twice as much power. So if your speakers are high efficiency your amplifier will be easier to find.
I play in two bands (myspace.com/thunderboltpagoda and myspace.com/salubriousinvertebrae); I listen to a lot of material that would probably drive a lot of audiophiles out of the room... guilty pleasures, so to speak. IOW I want bass extension, impact, detail- you know- the good stuff.
I should also point out that an amp that is genuinely good for rock should also be good for anything else- amps don't really care what signal gets pumped through them and an amp that is genuinely high fidelity will be able to play anything you through at it. You have already found a few that don't inspire; that should tell you something...
To refresh this post. I ended up going with the Stingray and the Dali Royal towers, ive had them for a year now. Initially I was quite pleased, but over time found myself listening less and less, and each session being shorter and shorter (fatiguing) I like metal and rock, and just feel these arent the components for it, and/or the synergy is not right. The sound is beautiful with smoother softer passages, accoustics, blues and jazz...vocals are actually stunning...really impressive, but when the power chords kick in...its just isnt "there" if that makes sense. That rock guitar punch (mids?) that I crave isnt there and I just want to turn it down.
Ive still got the same CDP. Ive done lots of experimenting mixing it up with my old components and some different players. I just kept coming back to the Singray and/or the Dalis lacking. What do you guys think? Why does my old garage sell JVC receiver and Kenwoods sound 'almost' as good to me? Im still a newb...what am I missing?
(ive set this system up in every room of two different homes, room dynamics don't change what im missing)
Maybe you should try the Fisher-400 tube receiver. I listen to mainly classic rock type stuff and this has been my favorite "amp" so far. It maintains the peppiness inherent in good rock and roll while giving you some of that tubed midrange. It also smooths out some of the stridency in the albums that were not too well recorded.
I bi-amp. Tubes for the top and midrange and SS for the bass. I use a scott 208 for the upper and a Mc 2200 for the low. A mc 2100 would work also. I can adjust the Macs gain for any listening I want and run them from the scotts center channel.Mac cost around $500 and the Scott about $500 after rebuild.My speakers are AR 9 ($660)+ recap and surrounds. I am looking for a preamp and am auditioning a Precision Fidelity hybrid. Stay with your cables till you outgrown them. You cam buy new but you will get more miles out of the old.Your front end is another choice down the road.
Marco - BTW thanks for the Klipsch recommendation. I looked them up and im sure one of the two(Chorus or Forte) are the same speakers a buddy of mine had with a Adcom system back around '96 or so. This system was my first exposure to hi-fi. I got to listen to it daily..and yes..the speakers rocked....:)
"Dave - What would be considered "large floorstanders with big woofers"?"
15"...a pair of 12's...maybe even a pair of 10's
For instance...I have a pair of VMPS Supertowers with a 15" and 12".... rated at 91db, These things eat power even though the 91db rating may fool you into thinking you can get by with very little power, ie....a looks good on paper spec, but dosen't always work as well in the real world.
I grew up listening to Rock with SS equipment. Now I listen to Rock & Jazz about 50% each with tube equipment. I don't think I will ever go back. I have two systems that have been mentioned in this thread.
The first is a Single Ended Magnavox EL84 amp driving a pair of modified Klipsch Heresies. The modifications lower the tweeter and squawker 3db and flatten out the impedance curve. The speakers are on 12" stands and placed in the corner at a 45 degree angle. The room is 13' x13.5' and this system plays incredibly loud (louder than I need) and it's a four watt amp. But it also has great punch and dynamics. Imaging and sound staging are superb and most people can't pick out which speakers are actually playing (I have two pairs of speakers in the room). IMO the Heresies need a subwoofer because they don't put out enough bass for me. I would love to hear this system with a Stingray or an Almarro amp, though for the $130 I spent for the Magnavox I am not complaining.
The second system is based around the same Tube Audio Design amp and pre that Eagleman6722 uses. I use a pair of KEF C75 which sounds like the Heresies but have way more bass. These speakers are floor standers but are very small. In the pre I went the opposite way Eagleman went. I put in a pair of RCA black plate 12AU7s for a little less punch (it still has plenty). I use this system in triode mode so its only 30 watts per channel. In a 16' x 24' room it has no problem playing louder than I would ever want it to. It has all the punch and dynamics you would ever need for Rock music along with a beautiful midrange and gorgeous highs. Sound staging and imaging is superb.
The point is that you can definitely play rock music with tubes if you take the time to set it up right. Another advantage of tubes is you can listen for a long time at high volumes without any listener fatigue. For reference some of the rock bands I listen to are Rush, Zeppelin, The Grateful Dead, Floyd and Gov't Mule.
I listen almost exclusively to rock and started with speakers. (Vandersteen 2 CE sigs.) They are well balanced, maybe a little soft on the top but, never ever give me any listening fatigue. Then I went from B&K (OK but, not real warm) to a Sunfire preamp (hard sounding)to Counterpoint SA-3 (Liked the mids but the bass was too soft) to an Audio Research Sp9 MK2 (better especially with a pair of Amperex USN-CEPs. then I got the Tube Audio Design 150 preamp. Totally different league. I put a pair of Groove Tube 12 AX7s for more punch in this pre. On the power side I went from a B&k 4220 to a Mccormack DNA-1 unmodified which was warmer and a nice match for the vandy's. But, when i went to a Tube Audio Design 60 and put some Tung Sol 6550s in it, the punch and sound stage really opened up. This amp also takes two 12AU7s which I got some RCA clear tops and one 12AX7 which I settled on a Telefunken ribbed plate. For a CD player I went from an Adcom GCD-600 to a Eastern Electric which uses two 6922 tubes and I put the two Amperex USN-CEPs.
While I do not know if this is a dream system, I do know that it spreads out the music nicely, sounds balanced, does not give listening fatigue, and is not overly expensive. You can find reviews on the amp, preamp, and CD on the forum and Vandersteen is pretty well known to be a great value... The pre is not made anymore but, a similar unit that I have heard is made by Audio Mirror here in Houston. Check out his website.
Thanks for all the advice/tips, lots to think about. I do realize speakers will be key, so im keeping that in mind.
Boa - Ive come to agree with you. My initial budget is limited, initially my logic was to spread about 1k between amp and speakers. I dont think ill be happy with that scenario for long, it most likely will not improve on what I have(like i'd hoped). I chose amp first because my JVC has some issues. The source argument is convincing but I plan on upgrading everything eventually anyway.
Finding Audiogon really opened my eyes for used gear possibilities. Others had pointed at the Stingray, Ive seen them on Audigon @ just over 1k.
Along with the Stingray, Prologues and the Jolida 502B i've seen the Rogue Cronos used for around the same money, the remote volume and phono stage are appealing (Stingray has neither) I know reviews are just reviews, but two I skimmed just now sounded very positive overall, including rock.
Pauly - My guitar amp experience..and lots of it...really parallels with your thoughts. Through the years, ive read the reviews, heard all the talk, played the supposed latest and greatest....and never has SS compared to tube. Never. Its all about feel. Tubes move you SS doesnt. SS amplifies guitar sound, tube amps sing. Not to say I dont trust everyone's opinion....not at all, just my (comparable or not) experience
Marco - thanks for the insight. Im now trying to educate myself on more tech, push-pull, triode, pentode etc. Ive never delved as deep with guitar amplification. Though I have favorite tubes, which would be in order EL 84, EL34, and lastly KT88s and 6L6s, which I find a little harsh and less warm.
Dave - What would be considered "large floorstanders with big woofers"? Im going with floorstanders, most ive looked at are no bigger then 8" woofers. If I recall from Manley with the Stingray they concentrated on a new transformer design specifically for the lower registers.
To be more direct if I was (and I guess I am) trying to decide between the Stingray the Cronus or the Prologue 2, whats the best pick?
The Stingray and Cronus are double the cost(new) of the Prologue(or the Jolida 502B or Onix). Is the sonic improvement a step above?
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
