Recommended Tube Amp for ML CLS I model


Happy holidays!

I've just acquired a pair of CLS I speakers with recent panel upgrade. I know this speaker is supposed to be tube friendly (higher impedance) and the easiest to drive of the CLS range. I am very familiar with the IIz model, but that has very different characteristics from what I understand.

I'm looking to pair a good tube amp with these speakers, to be driven by a Tact 2.2 Mini digital preamp that will be configured to send lower frequency signal to a REL sub and a time-aligned mid / upper signal to the CLS via a Tube amp. (I used a similar setup with an Accuphase DF-35 Digital dividing network and CLS IIz and REL - the Tact is a cheaper option if you just need to 2-way xover division). The digital discussion can take place in another thread.

For now, I am looking for a good tube amp to drive the CLS I model. Since the digitally split signal will be sans deep bass, low frequency performance is not a high priority. So far, I'm looking at ARC VT130SE and VT150 monos (both nice, but a lot of negative feedback used), Rogue Zeus (triode mode), ARC VT100, ARC VS115, Atma-Sphere OTL (with autoformer?), etc.

Any recommendations from those familiar with the original CLS?

TIA!
fdriver
Dover - are you referring to the Original CLS, II, IIa, or IIz? I know the IIa was a bear to drive, due to it's very low impedance. The original CLS actually had a very high impedance above 1000 Hz, I believe. This made it ideal for tube amps. The series II versions definitely favored SS amps.
HI,
I have the CLS IIA's. I don't think they are any easier or harder to drive than your original CLS's. They both need power and stability. I drive mine with an ARC D250 Mk2 Servo (250W/channel) tube power amp and the sound is magnificent. Originally, I drove them with a Levinson No. 23 power amp. It worked well but not as good as the D250. I also have biamped Kinergetics dual SW800 subwoofers. This is a wonderful combination.

A couple of hints. Do not expect deep bass from the CLS. They just won't do it. Good subs are the answer which will also improve the CLS's dynamic range. Next, the CLS are the most demanding speakers I have ever experienced of the up stream electronics. They are absolutely surgical in their ability to demonstrate flaws in the system. They require first rate preamps, power amps, cables, and everything else. These speakers will not tolerate short cuts. This quality is not a drawback. It's way all speakers should behave but most don't.

For these reasons I do not recommend CLS's as beginner speakers. It takes considerable experience, knowledge and financial commitment to get them to perform to their potential. Sure, you can just hook up your amp and the speakers will speak. But that is just the beginning.

People get drawn into the CLS's because they sound great at a relatively low price. But that is deceiving. To be really successful with them, you will need to buy expensive electronics. If you get it right, they are some of the finest speakers ever made. But you do have to get it right.

Sparky
Sparky,

I have a tonne of experience with the IIz model and was able to make it sing with everything from Gryphon to Innersound to battery-powered Rowlands.

For CLS I, though, it is clear that modestly powered tube amps should be ideal; unlike the II series.

But, yes, I agree that experience is important with any planar speaker.
12-27-10: Fdriver
Dover - are you referring to the Original CLS, II, IIa, or IIz?
Original CLS, but have also experience with CLS II. My caution would be that some valve amps work, some dont. For example VTL Compact 100's ( 100w ) couldn't drive them, yet a 20w Leak Stereo 20 could. My recommendation would be to audition before you buy if possible. FWIW I preferred the original CLS with upgraded panels ( original single transformer crossover ). The Quicksilvers produced the most transparent and wonderful soundstage despite Mike Sanders rolling his eyes when I told him what we were using with the Q's.
Well, I believe ones results with the CLS speakers will vary upon the type of listening one does. What drives ML's best in general has been beaten to death on previous threads about it. Do a search and you'll get the phone book of opinions.

Having owned the CLSiiz's, on my second pair now, my listening levels aren't demanding. I listen to acoustic jazz, and believe it or not I drove my iiz's to more than adequate levels for my modestly sized room with a 10 watt Class A SET 300B tube amp. The belief is these speakers require high current amps before they'll deliver the goods. That's not been my experience. I've used Plinius and Pass amps of modest power ranges with more than pleasing results.

I agree that it's foolish to expect a planar speaker of the CLS' magnitude to deliver high quality bass. That's not what the speaker was designed to do. Acoustic bass of natural tone and volume is the best one should expect from these speakers. But of course, being the jazz listener that I am that suits me just fine. Earshattering level listener's have far more demanding requirements of the speaker than do I. But I don't believe one has to spend countless or unnecessary thousands on attempting to acquire mega power amplification to gain a reasonable level of satisfying output from CLS's. Having owned a countless number of ML hybrid's the CLS's are the best of the lot as far as my ears are concerned and certainly worth whatever effort necessary to get them dialed in to your liking.

I highly second the poster who suggested tilting the speakers forward at a slight downward angle. I've got mine on a pair of Arcici stands at a slight downward angle which lines up perfectly with my ears at listening chair level. It doesn't get any better than this. Mine are mated to an SVS sub. Enjoy your new purchase!

Was that the walnut pair of CLS's recently observed on ad with brand new panels? Perhaps not, for I could swear those were advertised as CLSiiz's.