What makes you build a system around an amplifier?
Serious question. I almost always care about the room and speakers first, then build around that. However, this is not the only way to do things.
If you have ever insisted on keeping your amplifier, but were willing to change everything else around it, please let us know why. What made an amp so outstanding in your mind that it was worth making it your center piece. Imaging? slam?
Be specific about the amp and speakers or other gear that you shuffled through.
"At the other end of the range, the speaker is pretty low impedance (1.5 to 3 ohms depending on the position of the Brilliance control) which will cause most solid state amps to be too bright and nothing for it but to turn down the Brilliance control and deal."
That is, if it’s a low impedance speaker, an underpowered (or maybe not enough current) solid state amp will sound brighter?
Yes it is true, but the answer to your concluding question is ’no’. The more the powerhouse amp, the worse this problem becomes:
The comment is regarding a Sound Lab ESL, which is about 30 ohms in the bass and has the impedances stated above at about 20KHz. Like many ESLs, the impedance curve goes from high impedance in the low frequencies to low impedance in the highs, covering a range of about 10:1. If you put a solid state amp on that, it will be bass shy and way too bright, due to the amp likely acting as a voltage source (IOW, can double power as impedance is cut in half). For this reason, you can see that ESLs are generally incompatible with solid state without special measures being taken.
Its important to understand that the impedance curve of an ESL is not also a map of its efficiency (they are quite unlike a box speaker in this regard). They tend to have the same efficiency from lows to highs. Their impedance curve is based on a capacitor which is the basis of their operating principle.
I agree that it is really hard to actually audition gear at all, much less audition the gear in one's own system. But, it pays to at least hear a few pieces to become familiar with differences in sound between types of amps so that one can at least filter some of the comments on this and other forums. To me, just relying on popular opinion can easily lead one astray. Like anyone else who has heard enough stuff to form an opinion, I prefer certain sounds over others. But, even though I may not like certain types of amps, as a class, I still can appreciate what others see in them and I would hardly think they are terrible sounding. But, some of the most hyped gear, I cannot even begin to understand what anyone actually finds good about the sound so, at least for me, popular opinion has little merit. It helps to have heard enough gear so that one can at least know which people who post on these fora share similar likes and dislikes and which ones are reliable in the advice they give.
wolf, Agreed. So often I read posts by members admonishing other members that they must listen before buying, but for the majority of us, it just isn't possible for a variety of reasons, so we just read what we can and hope that our sixth sense is operational. I have made about as many mistakes that way as good calls, but it is really nice when it works out well.
Unless you're a reviewer who listens to different piles of gear for months to form an opinion, I think most people luck into the synergy of a good system since they're not likely to be able to audition several amps in their own listening environment to see what makes the magic for them. I read about Dennis Had's "Inspire" gear for a while and enjoyed a Youtube interview with him before randomly finding one of his SEP amps for sale. I had no idea how it would sound with my current gear (as with any new component) but was astonished with the damn thing immediately…it just sounds right, or at least more right to my ears than any amp I'd listened to previously. Clarity (from 12 watts per side), tonal accuracy, etc., but mostly it keeps me stuck in my listening spot longer…the ultimate test I think. Luck is often created by action, but in audio there's so much hype and nonsense around what, in the end, wind up as personal preferences that it's great thing when something works for you.
Um, not sure what speaker / control he is talking about but yes, speakers which have low bass impedance tend to sound limp / gutless unless driven by a beefy amp, which often implies SS.
Notice all the caveats you haters before you come at me!
I had a pair of Sophia 845s which were the best amplifiers I'd heard after hearing quite a lot. I was powering a pair of Tannoy's and the combination was quite good indeed. Then I tried a pair of altec 604's which are 16 ohms. I prefer those over the Tannoy's. Then I had the good fortune to get to audition a pair of atmosphere him 60 mono blocks and prefer those over the Sophia's, in part I believe due to the fact that my speakers are 16 ohms. I found the atmospheres just sounded better than the Sophia's, again I believe due to the fact that I have the perfect matching speaker. They were more transparent and more musical across the board. Now I would look for speakers to match those amplifiers if I were ever to make any changes. I would also love the chance to audition a David Berning amplifier against the atmospheres.
What what make me to build a system around what I thought to be an excellent amplifier ?, speaker choice . If you felt your amplifier drove your previous speakers optimally I would look into staying with that brand of speakers and try their top end models or research what other brands of speakers that are driven optimally with your amplifier, it’s all about a happy marriage between the two .
"At the other end of the range, the speaker is pretty low impedance (1.5 to 3 ohms depending on the position of the Brilliance control) which will cause most solid state amps to be too bright and nothing for it but to turn down the Brilliance control and deal."
That is, if it's a low impedance speaker, an underpowered (or maybe not enough current) solid state amp will sound brighter?
erik, I'm just getting back to you to try to give a better answer to your interesting question. After 43 years, I am still very attached to my Mac 2105. I originally bought it because I was told it was the best there was by a person I trusted, and I had the money. After I got to know it, I started to become attached for different reasons. I had a chance to compare it over time to Marantz receivers my friends owned, then an Apt Holman amp, and then an Adcom, and finally Quicksilver monos. Before I go any further, I want to say that at the present time, I rotate it with an 8 watt Audio Note Kits 300b integrated and a 40 watt class A Cayin 265i solid state integrated which I love for different reasons. Returning to the Mac, what I learned from the comparisons with other amps, and they were not analytical comparisons, was that by chance, I had bought an amp that really suited me from the get go. What made it a keeper was it's powerful , if somewhat dark character which always seemed to present music in the way that felt right to me, and I could hear that character no matter which speakers I used. I do view amplifiers like people...each has its own personality, its weak and strong points; and some you just fall in love with despite technical imperfections. I believe that an amplifier is the emotional heart of my system. Preamplifiers are very important too of course, but for me the amplifier is the emotional center. I use the other amplifiers I mentioned when I feel like a change, or when I will be listening to music that plays to their particular strengths. The Cayin for instance has incredible PRAT. I never really believed in that term until I bought this amp. It's amazing.
Anyway, the Mac is like a trusted friend, and even though it sees a lot less play time these days, I will always keep it and know that whenever I use it, I won't be disappointed.
My search actually ended a while back as a result of owning a Plinius SA-102 amplifier, upgraded/modified by Vince Galbo. This amp hits all of my audiologic buttons, and then some. Nice to, at least, have the amp search resolved.
If you want it all, air, dynamics, tinkling of glasses in a small club look no further than Nina Simone’s first album, Little Girl Blue. Don’t Smoke in Bed, Mood Indigo, etc. That's what I'm talking about!
"Moreover, image and ’air’ can be quite delusional/artificial properties. Just go to a good concert hall and listen to a symphonic concert. Imaging there is usually far less precise than what you hear at home from your audio gear."
>>>>>This is easy. Just disregard the illusional, delusional, artificial image and air. Only worry about the actual image and air in the room at that time. See, that's not so hard, is it? Put another way, it is what it is.
No matter how much you have in the end you would have had even more if you had started off with more. - Old audiophile axiom
With few exceptions, acoustics are typically terrible at live events. Concert halls are typically poor acoustically, especially if they have been built in the last 100 years.
:) I have about 8,000 LPs and not one is Nina Simone, so yes...
Many tube amps do not have a decently flat frequency response under real
loads (just look at the Stereophile graphs - they are often horrible).
Often their response is tweeked to appeal to the subjective audiophile
who thinks his hearing can beat any audio analyzer from the likes of
Audio Precision or DScope.
This statement is not accurate. Most tube amps are intended to act as voltage sources and so do quite well on such tests. But many tube amps are not intended to be voltage sources out of intention- and of course part of that is they are not intended to be used with speakers that expect that amp to be a voltage source. The 'tweaked' statement in the post is entirely false. This is a topic worthy of its own thread.
The difference does pose the question what the aim is of good audio
equipement: the (impossible) recreation of a live event, given the
physical limitations, or something else.
The best model I've come up with to describe how a two channel system works is to imagine that the room and its stereo is a sort of time travel machine ala Dr. Who, that will allow your room to be 'grafted' in the performance space of the original event. For this reason you cannot hear what is around you, but you can hear what is in front of you just as if your room was hovering in space in front of the musical event.
Seat maybe, acoustics never. The difference does pose the question what the aim is of good audio equipement: the (impossible) recreation of a live event, given the physical limitations, or something else.
Moreover, image and ’air’ can be quite delusional/artificial properties. Just go to a good concert hall and listen to a symphonic concert. Imaging there is usually far less precise than what you hear at home from your audio gear.
I would hope that at home, we have a much better seat and acoustics.
Many tube amps do not have a decently flat frequency response under real loads (just look at the Stereophile graphs - they are often horrible). Often their response is tweeked to appeal to the subjective audiophile who thinks his hearing can beat any audio analyzer from the likes of Audio Precision or DScope. Moreover, image and ’air’ can be quite delusional/artificial properties. Just go to a good concert hall and listen to a symphonic concert. Imaging there is usually far less precise than what you hear at home from your audio gear.
Really good question! I’m afraid I don’t know of strong research in this area, so I can only guess that in some ways, a good amp does not ruin:
Crosstalk
Phase
Amplitude
Channel matching
It may be some amplifiers actually change one or more of these values from the ideal. It has been shown that dips in the 2.4kHz range in speakers can enhance the perceived imaging, so perhaps a very colorful amplifier also plays around in the frequency and time domain.Or perhaps interactions with certain speakers pushes something in the frequency or time domain around just enough. :)
It may be something quite counter-intuitive, like for instance, rolling off the top octave. I don't know enough about imaging science, but I find the idea of Head Related Transfer Functions fascinating, and wonder how they apply to tube electronics.
Hopefully some one will jump in and tell me where the state of the art research is!
bdp24, I can't say what the "cause" was for the "grainy" sound. The factory rep was proudly describing the preamp/power amp combination driving those speakers. He did say that he thought the speakers were "unforgiving". I have found some DACs produce a somewhat "dry" sound, but IMO the speakers sounded "grainy" too reproducing vinyl as well as digital.
Erik: People who do surveys for a living know how difficult they are because the way you ask the question often shapes the answer given. First, I think it is unlikely that a significant number of people start over from scratch when putting together audio systems so, the either/ or question may not apply. More likely, they build on what they have - upgrading what they perceive to be the weakest link. I don’t upgrade often but I have cycled between amps and speaker upgrades an equal number of times. I upgraded my speakers this year. Before I did that, I sent an email to the amplifier manufacturer asking whether my old amp could drive a 4Ohm load. They said yes but if they had said no, I would have restricted my search to 8Ohm speakers.
I was building a new music room that I wanted to share with my family.
I wanted an amp that would not heat up the room so that the others in my family would hang out with me. I previously had an OTL amp which sounded excellent but turned my room into a sauna. To make a long story short, I have no regrets. I am now using SET amps (Coincident Frankensteins). I was fortunate to find speakers later on that work very well with the Frankensteins. My wife will sit with me and listen to music now. In fact, she has been regularly asking to listen to music together. It's been a plus for our relationship.
I did it once. The Cary 300B pure class A SET amp was the reason, as with others here. Bought when Denis Had was still running things. Paired with ProAc Response 2.5s. Dennis H was reliably reported to voice his amps with ProAcs back then. The Cary came before the speakers.
Hi gdhal, You heard distinct differences amongst the 3 amplifiers you auditioned. That’s been my experience as well and so it seems with some other contributors to this thread. Some people seem to feel that if an amplifier measures well and has presumed sufficient power then there isn’t much difference that they offer.
To each their own and just confirms that people do hear and interpret in various ways. I happened to find amplifiers are uniquely individual as are speakers or really any audio product. DACS, cartridges, preamplifiers all have a sonic trait or character.
In reality we strive to blend and match all the links and components of our systems to achieve that coveted synergy. Numerous ways to get there. As has been stated by a number of posters on this thread, the amplifier for some of us is the system’s soul. For others this isn’t the case. Divergence of opinions are understood 😊. Charles
Lots of interesting perspectives here, but would really love to know what it was about a particular amplifier that seduced you.
Dealer recommendation. At the time I was in a market for an amp, I didn't have the good fortune of knowing much about this site, let alone using it. The reality is there are hundreds of great brands at all different price points. I needed to start somewhere and what better place than the closets "high end" audio store? While the particular dealer I used carrier many brands, only three were on display for auditioning purposes. A McIntosh MA5200, Krell Vanguard, and Musical Fidelity M6si. I listened to them all and felt (and still feel) the MF blew the other away. Upon understanding it was half (or thereabouts) the MSRP of the others, it was a no-brainer. What specifically did/do I like about it? Succinctly, its neutral sounding muscular signature. Might there be something "better" at its price point? Perhaps, but it is likely I will never know.
Lots of interesting perspectives here, but would really love to know what it was about a particular amplifier that seduced you. Imaging? Relaxed presentation? Bass juiciness? Best presentation of Nina Simone you ever heard?
What amps and what unique qualities of these amps has made you forsake all others?
I look at a audio system as just that a system its the sum of its parts. If you want a certain amplifier type the obvious answer is to select matching loudspeakers if you have a type of loudspeaker that you enjoy you match the amplifier design to it.
Amps are personal (in my opinion) and I think it is perfectly fine to build a system around one. Sure preamps and speakers are very important but an amp is the soul of the system. Of course so are fuses, power cords and isolation lol ;)
ejr1953---Are you sure the speakers weren't merely reproducing the grainy sound of the amplifier driving them? I have found "grain" to be more a product of electronics than speakers.
Last night I attended a local audio event and auditioned a pair of fairly expensive speakers from a well-respected manufacturer, which sounded really "grainy" and not at all pleasing to my ears. So......I think I'd most agree with those who would select the speakers and work back from them.
Great discussion with some really nice points made.
What I've found is, rather than anchor on a specific amp or speaker per se...for me it's turned into a particular sound-style and experience that I've "anchored" on. Seems like others above are suggesting the same experience for them.
Of course this is a total personal preference thing....but I personally have found to be drawn to the high-efficiency, low-wattage tube amp combo. On a relative basis, that style of combo seems to draw me emotionally into the music more (in top cases WAY more) than what I consider the even more ballsy (not necessarily more dynamic), close-to-ruler-flat-curve, multi-driver, multi-way crossed-over, 93 db and down speakers driven by ultra dead quiet, big wattage, total-control-of-the-situation amps (both SS and tubed). Both styles can sound phenomenal, and often the latter systems are equally or more expensive than the former, so I think I'm fairly comparing like-quality and like-costing systems as I've drawn my own personal conclusions for what I'm craving and prefer. And to be very clear, I've heard a number of super expensive high-efficiency/low-power amp combos that do NOT produce the emotional sound I crave, so there is absolutely still a "search" needed to determine what moves one the most, even within a particular design approach. And this may be controversial, but I will say cost does play in here--in some cases a lot. That's not to say that there are not some lower-cost sleepers (I own a few), but my most expensive stuff almost linearly produces more emotional sound than the more moderately (yet still costly) gear, when I truly want to sit inside rarified air.
I have been moved deeply by systems that involved Classic Audio Reproductions, Zu, Altec classic horns, and Auditorium 23 speakers, combined with Atma-Sphere OTL, Thoress 845 SET monos, Audion 300B Golden Dreams, and Melody 845 integrateds. I have bought and kept many of these combos, and in a few cases they are on a short list for future purchase. Will I keep it all? I don't know, but for me I'm nearing points of emotional well-being in audio that I don't think I'd reached in previous years/previous systems. I will be shocked if I'm tempted away from top-end SET, PSET, and OTL amps driving very high-efficiency speakers, although the combos and brands may continue evolve.
In summary, I think I've anchored on the "sound" I want to try to achieve, more so than a particular piece of gear or two, for what that's worth to the discussion.
For me it was my first SET amp. It made my solid state amps sound grainy and etched by comparison. It's kind of like how I never noticed crossovers until I got a single driver setup. Nowadays, unless the crossover point is below around 1.5hz, I hear the problems with crossed over drivers.
Back to the SET. There was a loss in slam, but this is a bedroom system so I don't play a lot of slammin' in your face kind of music there. The sound stage became deeper and wider and improvements in timbre & decay added up to a more musical presentation as opposed to analytical. Midrange magic with no fatigue.
Me too Erik. If I still lived in the Bay Area (Cupertino for twenty years), I would go to Modjeski's new operation in Berkeley/Oakland (after being in Santa Barbara for decades), where Roger demoes the speakers.
maplegrovemusic---Modjeski is one of those guys who doesn't put a lot of effort into his company's website, and the speakers aren't mentioned or listed there. If you do a Google search for Music Reference, however, the first listing will be for Music Reference / Ram Labs. Click on the sub-listing of "Complete Price List", and you will see the speakers at the bottom of the list. $12,000/pr, including the integral 8" dynamic subs. I don't know whether or not that includes the direct-drive amps, but I suspect not.
While the regular Music Reference site lists only the RM-10 and RM-200 amps, the complete list has all kinds of other amps---2.5w, 5w, and 10w triodes, a couple of OTL's, 45 based amps, and some passive pre's. Roger is a very interesting, creative designer with a vast knowledge of tubes. Very over-looked by the rather cliquish high end, for some reason. Maybe for the same reason the Eminent Technology LFT-8b speaker is---not expensive enough!
Speaking of the ET's, VPI's Harry Weisfeld is of the opinion that the LFT-8b has the best midrange of any speaker he has ever heard. I don't know about that---the original Quad is hard to beat. But it plays louder, goes lower, and is easier to drive than the Quad. It's a nominal 8 ohm load, but if you bi-amp them the magnetic-planar panel (similar to that of the Maggies, but push-pull, not single-ended, a huge advantage) is an 11 ohm load, and mostly resistive. A great speaker for the Atma-Sphere M60!
I get the idea of building around an amp, but that is only something I came to after going through several. Solid state years ago, through a variety of tube gear (modded heathkits, modded Dynacos, Fischer, McIntosh) to Naim and finally to Devialet. In part because I love the way the Devialet sounds, and also because I realize, or I found, that you can change speakers all you want, but the quality of the power and control often gives the results one is looking for in changing other components. I also, now, feel that way about digital sources and cables.
I find the Music Reference idea ingenious! :) Why use a coupling cap and transformer, when driving an ESL with tubes? Drive them directly, and let the ESL become the coupling cap.
@willemj , I agree with you in regard to the Quad ESL57.
Though some never find one, I think acquiring a transcendental product anchors one's system. I've always thought the loudspeaker the most likely candidate. But in the past generation, I find the number of unique and more interesting loudspeakers have declined to the degree that much more of a chance exists today for a power amplifier to serve that role.
I've owned quite a lot of amplifiers. The Jadis DA60 comes closest to an amplifier I would build a system around. Fortunately, it also mates beautifully with a wider range of loudspeakers than most. Charles has long touted his 300B based amplifier becoming that for him, and found his happiness there, and many others have shared their stories.
But in the end, for me, it's the Quad ESL57 that so far outclasses any other component I've encountered, loudspeaker or amp, that it will serve as the foundation of my system for as long as I can see
Generally speaking, the amp/speaker interface is a very important part of the game. OTLs in general like to see higher impedances (although the speaker impedance curve doesn’t have to be flat), and the same is often true of SETs.
First Watt solid state amps are also best used with speakers of more than 4 ohms. They don’t make a lot of power either, so you do best with them if you have an easier speaker to drive- 95 db or more.
I don’t agree that all ’well-designed’ amplifiers sound the same- far from it. A lot depends on the goal of the designer! For example, our amps are very wide bandwidth and low distortion, but they don’t use feedback, and that is with intention. This was to avoid the distortion caused by the feedback system itself, and the result of that was that we have to be quite selective about what speakers to use with the amps. But the upside is as far as we can tell, this allows us to get a lot closer to the music itself.
I’m pretty sure that if you talk to an SET designer, you will find that they say something quite similar, and if you read Nelson Pass’s articles about the First Watt amps, you will see the same thing espoused. I’m not saying that there is only one way and its our way, what I **am** saying is that making an amp that is a perfect voltage source is not the only way and that there are advantages to avoiding that approach.
This means that you can’t just buy a speaker and expect that any amp will work with it. In fact, the idea of the amp being a voltage source for flat bandwidth (which I call the Voltage Paradigm) really only works with box speakers where the impedance curve is also a map of the speaker’s efficiency. There are a number of speaker technologies that don’t fit that model and as a result, don’t work with that kind of amplification.
There are a fair number of people who find the Atma-Sphere OTL's so much better than transformer-coupled amps (more transparent, better bass, more extended high end, "faster") that they are willing to find a speaker that will work well with them, in spite of the limitations OTL's impose. Maggie owners use the Anti Cable Autoformer to raise the impedance of their 4 ohm load to help match them with A-S amps . I complete understand and agree with that approach, at least in the case of Atma-Sphere.
There will be no brow beating, but the point of this thread was to focus in on amps which are so unique and special that listeners want to keep them above everything else.
I worry that if we let the thread spread out into whether that is the right approach or not, we won’t get to hear about these exceptional experiences and the mainstream approaches will crowd out this set of ideas, which are definitely "off the beaten track." That is the point. :)
For me for instance, I am reading a lot of amplifier brands I do not normally read about. If we get stuck with mainstream products, we may never get the chance to hear these truly rare and boutique amps.
There is some logic to first starting with finding the speaker that you really like, and then finding an amp that works well with that speaker. The demands of certain types of speakers might rule out certain amps (e.g., low efficiency speakers ruling out SETs; speakers that dip very low in impedance might rule out high output impedance amps).
However, things are not necessarily that simple. Some of the most obviously different and great sounding gear that I've heard were amps. Some amps are so much better than run of the mill types that it makes it worthwhile finding speakers that work with such amps rather than the other way around. One such amp I heard is a custom-built OTL, that is quite astonishing sounding with many speakers, but, I thought not quite so great sounding with a very low efficiency, low-impedance speaker. The other great amps I've heard include a pushpull 252 amp and a pushpull 300b amp; both of which sort of demand high-efficiency speakers.
The amps I own, are not slouches either: an Audio Note Kageki (parallel single-ended) and a Western Electric 133 (pushpull 349). Again, both require high-efficiency speakers. Both amps are of high enough quality to justify finding speakers that will play nice with them.
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.
