Ski Bum
-
Posts
1136 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Ski Bum
-
-
I already thought about tube amps. I mentioned it to the NAD-guy and he said that tubes have also serious disadvantages. He said that tubes fade out like conventional light bulbs and that they should be replaced every 300 hrs. If this is correct they should be replaced at least once a year!
That's not exactly true. Some amps are easy on tubes, where driver tubes can last for years, even decades. Others push them to their limits and use them up faster. It all depends on the particular amp.
Something tells me that the biggest disadvantage from the perspective of the NAD salesman is that he has no chance for a commission.
-
Do you consider the damping factor as an important issue, as far as 'choosing an amp' is concerned?
Not really. Amps like the A21, A23, and even the NAD have such high damping factors that they all would have an iron grip.
Perhaps the low damping factor of the NAD (compared to the Parasound) can explain why bass performance was so poor on the Rf7 II's?
Maybe, but I suspect it's more due to the Parasound being the more powerful amp, able to better sustain power during demanding bass heavy passages than the NAD's 'powerdrive' trickery can muster. Keep in mind that the damping factor would have to be much, much lower than either of these to make a difference, and that in such a case, the amp with the lower damping factor would likely sound more boomy and bassy than the one with a high damping factor.
-
When a 2-channel power amp is mono bridged, the amp sees the speaker at half of its nominal impedance. The parasound site states that a single A23 can deliver a 45A peak current. Is it correct that when you bridge the A23, it can deliver 90A peak current to a single speaker?
I'm just looking for an amp which can deliver warm, rich, powerful and dynamic sound at low levels. If it can reach ear blistering levels, that's OK but that's certainly NOT my primary concern.
Assuming the amp has the ability to generate that current and dissipate the associated heat, then yes, you are correct. Keep in mind that speaker impedance is not constant, so that's just a guestimate. This will put more stress on the amp, a strong argument for simply choosing a more powerful amp to begin with.
You keep using terms like 'warm' and 'rich', which makes me think 'tubes'. Not necessarily trying to steer you that way, the A23 is an outstanding amplifier after all.
-
1) one A 21
2) two A23's: mono bridged
3) two A23's: one A23 for each speaker but bi-amped.
Can somebody give me some advice?
1) Entirely sufficient (unless your room is HUGE)
2) Even more sufficient, enough for a huge room. Do you really need that much power? Ok, too much is just enough when it comes to ss power, but on the other hand, a single A21 should reach ear blistering volumes before running out of steam.
3) Doesn't make sense; you're giving the highs way more power than needed. Due to the high crossover of the RF-7's, the amp driving the bottom inputs is doing all the work, and the money spent on the amp for the highs is an extravagance. I'm cheap, and given the marginal, perhaps imperceptible benefits of passive bi-amping, this one just seems like a stupid idea. If you need more output, get a more powerful amp, or follow suggestion number two.
-
dont they have better electronics in use ?
Nope. Some of the sweetest electronics to be found belong to members of this forum, e.g. all the Wrights, Moondogs, NOSvalves VRD's, all the crazy fully active Jubilees and other frankenstien systems, etc. There are some very serious systems on here. Some of them are probably much more cost effective than you would imagine, too.
Of course we also use speakers actually capable of conveying the dynamic range of a recording, and sensitive enough to be used with a ton more amps than your standard issue, low sensitivity, direct radiator speaker. It adds to the fun factor.
Fatiguing? Well, I listen to my forte's for hours a day and never get tired of the sound. Quite the opposite, in fact; I feel like I can't get enough music, I just want to keep listening.
One thing I've noticed is that other forums are full of folks beginning or in the middle of the whole audio-upgrade merry-go-round. Here, most seem to have been there, done that, and discovered that Klipsch are hard to beat. Folks here haven't lost sight of the music, and Klipsch (particularly Heritage) really connects you to it in a way that few speakers can.
-
Also check Blue Jeans Cable and Monoprice. Good cables, dressed up however you like them, at reasonable prices (no markup for unsubstantiated magical qualities).
-
I have never heard any of the SVS, I have the smaller version of the DTS-10 the spud and my vote would be the DTS-10.
Or the Tuba, to me the sound of the folded subs sounds like a better match for the folded horns, and they have plenty of output.
The 10's are sold out and discontinued. They still have the DTS-12's, the sealed version, for $599 on clearance. As with the Emos I suggested, it will take more than one to hang with the 'Scalas. I can't vouch for them personally, but it's the sort of thing I would seriously consider if I were in your shoes.
-
Ooo, I like Billy joe's suggestion, the Tuba would rule. Nothing like a horn loaded sub to match your 'Scalas.
As a budget suggestion, a pair (or three) of these would probably do you nicely:
http://emotiva.com/ultra_sub12.shtm
$499 each, shipped. Haven't heard them myself, but they are sealed (my personal preference), basic subs, and Emo has a rep for excellent value. I'm not sure you could do this well with diy kits for the price. Individually, one wouldn't keep up with the 'Scalas, but a trio of them probably would.
-
That gloss black will show every speck of dust. It will be a constant headache. You better sell them (to me, of course[
]). -
KG4's are OK. They were my first exposure, thanks to a roomate in college who had a pair. But the three-way Heritage are superior, and hold their value better should you re-sell them. If you buy unheard, Heritage is the safer gamble.
I bought some forte II on eBay for $450. They arrived in condition quite a bit worse than the description, and the seller reduced the price to $365. Still kind of high for them, but the sound had hooked me, so they stayed. I recently sold them for $325, which is more in line with their value given the cosmetic work they needed. The buyer (forum member here) seemed happy. So I paid $40 for two years of forte II sound, not unacceptable at all.
I found a mint pair of forte II on local craigslist listed for $500. The seller had listed them several times at that price with no takers, over the course of 6 months or so. They are literally showroom new looking. After very brief haggling, I happily paid $425, an excellent price for a truly minty pair.
So my advice is, be patient, and keep an eye on your local or regional Craigslist so you can inspect/listen before you buy, and avoid shipping costs. My second choice to a local sale would be to buy from a forum member, who are more knowledgable and appreciative of Klipsch product, and presumably more trustworthy than some anonymous eBayer simply looking to make a buck.
Those polk guys are just upset by how puny and gutless their speakers sound compared to our Klipsch.[
] Be patient, and good luck in your search. It will be worth it!
-
Cask05 - Do you remember how long between Before and After (i.e.: 1 hour, 100 hours, etc.)?
I think I saw that too...it was on the order of seconds for tweets and mids, to a few minutes for woofers. Way less time for 'break in' than some would lead you to believe.
-
Order a pair of Klipsch K53 Titanium Squaker Diaphragms as much improvement on the mids as replacing the tweets with Bob's titanium.
I have a pair of forte II with Bob's new networks, titanium tweets, and Klipsch K53 titanium midrange diaphragms and the results are beyond belief!
Klipsch customer service told me that the K-61 (stock) and K-53-Ti do not have matching specs, and is not simply a swappable part. Did you have Bob customize your crossover networks for the K-53 driver?
-
This little calculator comes pretty darn close to the actual spl measurements in my room/system. You can plug in your room size, speaker sensitivity, peak spl, and distance to speakers, and solve back for required amp power. Try it out:
http://myhometheater.homestead.com/splcalculator.html
I'm guessing it would do rock pretty darn well, but may have trouble with the Mahler and other bombastic, demanding material.
-
hmmm,
heard that kindda statement before too.
looks like you are in heaven .
what speakers do u have and the amp.? ski bumforte II, Decware SE84C+. Champaigne sound on a beer budget.
-
I don't use cans, nor have I used them with a tube amp, so take this for what it's worth (as a random wild-eyed guess). But could you have an impedance mis-match between that particular amp and your headphones?
I do use tube amps, and Klipsch speakers, so that it sounds like my whole room is wearing a giant pair of headphones; all the detail and enveloping scale, without the tether.
-
I wanted to up my listing experience with the K-Horns when all the time I could have done it with an amp??. This is life changing stuff. Please tell me I'm going to enjoy the mono blocks as well...BLISSSSSSSSS!!
--G--It's weird, isn't it? SS always leaves me with the impression that I'm listening to a recording being reproduced, regardless of how well the equipment doing it's job (objectively speaking, SS does a great job). Tube amps, on the other hand, make me feel like I'm listening to MUSIC. Tubes + Klipsch = [Y][
]36 years you've denied yourself this simple pleasure? Well, it's about time, and welcome back!
-
1) How would you identify your allowable budget versus time?
Well, that depends on finances, which are up and down. I'm hyper-frugal, so I would spend considerable time educating myself on what's out there, what would fit my taste, and represents true value. Unfortunately, the whole audio industry is plagued with lack of standards and unprovable marketing nonsense. It's almost as bad as woo-medicine, but without the deleterious effect on public health. A bit of research prior to purchase can save a ton of money.
2) Would you buy all used, all new, or a mix (including source material, audio input devices, amplifiers/processors, speakers including subs if any, cables, room treatment devices, architectural updates)? What would you buy used and what new?
See above...frugality means let others pay full retail; the true outstanding deals are in used gear, from Klipsch Heritage, to exotic amps or whatever else. I would buy new CD/DVD/Blue-ray player, as those have moving parts, as well as impending obsolescence due to changing formats, flexible connectivity (wifi), etc.
3) What would you be trying to achieve - i.e., as close to a realistic performance as you could afford, or "something that sounds good to play stuff that you used to listen to when you were young".
Trying to exactly replicate what was heard in the studio/venue is impossible, so I am not a stickler for 'accuracy' or some dogmatic engineering definition of fidelity to source. I like low distortion, highly resolved detail, and uncompressed dynamics, as live music sounds. But above all, I like good imaging, meaning speakers do the disappearing act well, leaving the music to be presented in an unfettered way. Think 'musicians in the room' effect. Although I have several different systems following quite divergent approaches, they all manage to get out of the way of the music to a great degree. Most time/effort of system setup should concern speakers and your listening room.
4) How much would you be willing to pay for visual attractiveness instead of performance (% cost of the component)? This includes tubes and non-audio devices.
A bit more. With WAF and my own compulsiveness, visual aesthetics go a long way. But I wouldn't buy a beautiful speaker unless it sounded beautiful as well. I just picked up some GORGEOUS oiled oak forte II's in flawless condition, at a very good price, if thats any indication.
5) How much would you buy-and-sell in order to achieve your ideal system goal(s)? Would you try to minimize this? Would you buy without first hearing the equipment? What components would that be?
Well, been doing the audio drug since I was a teenager. More buying than selling over the years, for which extended family is quite grateful as they get the hand-me-downs. As mentioned, I'm frugal, so it hasn't been too out of control. I wouldn't buy speakers without hearing them first, ditto for tube amps, but I would consider buying sources or conventional SS amps without hearing them.
6) How would you go about listening to the equipment before buying?
My most recent purchase were the pair of minty fortes; bought local on Craigslist, auditioned before purchase at sellers home. Next most recent purchase (several years ago) was a SET amp; auditioned at the manufacturer at their annual three day party where all their amps and speakers are available to play with (Decware does this every fall). Also, RMAF is a good place to hear product not otherwise accessible. I think the most important thing to listen to prior to purchase are speakers, preferably in your own home. And if you have a taste for distortion prone amps like SETs, they should be auditioned because unlike most SS, they all have their own idiosyncratic sonic personalities.
-
Here's a thorough article on the subject:
http://www.audioholics.com/education/amplifier-technology/impedance-selector-switch-1
-
Do you notice the typical out-of-phase diffused sound in any frequency band? Presumably the mids/highs rely on the passive crossover, which means it must have been modded to accomodate bi-ampimg, so double check that none of the individual drivers, particularly the mids, are wired out of phase.
-
Damned if I can figure it out. I can post an image from the net, but not from my own computer. WTF?!?!
-
5U4GB's have slightly different specs than 5U4G's (marginally higher B+ I think, but don't quote me), so double check that they will work with your gear.
The 5U4GB's were made for televisions, and are probably the most ubiquitous of the NOS tubes as a result, so they're inexpensive. I've been using NOS RCA 5U4GB's in a couple of my Decware amps for some time and have absolutely no complaints.
-
Hello eote-
I live in the front range right now. I ski the backcountry for the most part, but also hit the Boat on occasion, and I do have a 5 mountain pass, so Summit is wide open. Love the Boat. There's nothing quite like long aspen glades with deep pow. My only beef with the Boat is that it lacks proper steeps. For those, I hit the Basin, Crested Butte, or Silverton, or hike somewhere out of bounds. I almost got smushed in an avalanche on Cameron Pass a couple weeks ago. (Oh, the things we do for that snorkel deep pow.)
-
Check out www.quadmods.com. They have some tricks to reduce noise on the 909 and make it more suited to high efficiency, more revealing speakers.
I've always been curious about the Quad amps. I'm a bit of a SET fan, and am unsure if its the musical-instrument-like distortion I'm liking, or if its the class A things they do (complete absence of crossover distortion). The Quad amps supposedly have class A output with their current dumping, feed-forward circuit, thus should offer the clarity of SETs, but without the low power, bandwidth limitations, and high output impedance.
Please keep us posted on your experience with the 909.
-
What to expect? Better midrange than your RF62, much more resolving and detailed. Drier bass; they like corners more, and with proper placement dig very deep. Pure Heritage goodness, that bigger than life presentation. I expect your RF's to sit in silence for extended periods while you play with your new toys.
I paid $365 for some less than minty ones (prob 7/10 or so).
Presently using an old NAD amp, and it's making the forte's sing beautifully. They like plenty of juice.
]).
]
New amp(s) for RF7 MKII
in 2-Channel Home Audio
Posted
I'm part of the choir you're preaching to (except for the cables part [:|]). For the fortes I have about ~6 watts of SET juice on tap, and even that can get to ear-shattering levels. And I happen to own a C372 which I've also tried on the Klipsch, and frankly prefer the SETs by a wide margin. The NAD is used primarily to drive some inefficient M&K studio monitors (4 ohm, something like 85db/w/m), a far better use for that amp.
The Parasound amps that Joop is considering are biased for class A output for the first several watts. They DO sound good at low levels. Kinda pricey for this ski bum, but they are indeed excellent amplifiers. Joop wouldn't be making a mistake by getting one. I would agree that he likely would never need all the power of even that, and more power, i.e. bridged amps, is just overkill.
Isn't there some saying among those stricken with the audio gear addiction along the lines of "I spent all thay money to learn I didn't need to spend all that money to get great sound." Multiple bridged C275's or A23's would be an expensive lesson indeed.