tube amp matching

[jess28]

I was wondering if anybody might have some suggestions on tube amp , wattage needed , price ,etc to go with my rf 63.

Due to money situation im selling my receiver and gfa 555

when moneys not so tight i will be back on the market for some new equipment,and always heard klipsch and tubes are the perfect match.

im sure my budget will be some what tight but i would like to do it right , my set up now gives me great imaging , dynamics, and sound quality but i would like my speakers to sound a little warmer.

[quadklipsh]

i was wondering this morning about how 555 sounds with reference klipsch????

my local hifi store keeper informed me that he was selling GFA 555.

i was very interested but at Rs.30000, i wonder if its worth the jump.

whats your experience about this amp.

is it not soft sounding,laid back yet powerful .???

[quadklipsh]

i was very interested but at Rs.30000, i wonder if its worth the jump

ah yes thats around $300.bucks

[jess28]

I love it. Its really killing me to sell it. I had originally had my 63s hooked to a onkyo 807 I thought they sounded wonderfull then I got the 555 and I couldnt believe the difference.The speakers just opened up, the imaging and depth i got from the 555 blew my mind. The bass is tight, and it gave my speakers a very clean sound.You close your eyes and your in the studio with the band.Before i got the 555 and the 63s, I had the 82s and they are quite warm for klipsch , but just arent as refined as my 63s really nice speakers though I still love them.Some ppl told me when i got the 555 that they would make the 63s harsh or bright this is not the case in my experience.

The only reason im thinking about a tube is I liked the warmth from the 82s and was hoping I could get it with a tube, but If i lose everything else it wont be worth it.

You will not the get the sound quality you get from the 555 with any other $300 amp period . I would see if the dealer will let you test drive it for a week.

[quadklipsh]

will it rival some old school power amps like Quad 303 ,comparing the background silence?

[ssh]

Scott 299 might be a good start.

SSH

[jess28]

I havent any experience with the quad . Check out this review from stereophile.

Adcom GFA-555 power amplifier

By Anthony H. Cordesman Various • Posted: Apr 6, 1995 • Published: Apr 6, 1985

I am reluctant to call any given transistor power amplifier a "best buy" or "breakthrough." From my talks with designers and other audiophiles, it is clear that the state of the art in power amplifiers is about to change. From where I stand, the Adcom GFA-555 is the first sample of this new wave. It is so clearly superior to past amplifiers in the low- to mid-priced range—not to mention most amplifiers two to three times its pric—that I can unhesitatingly recommend it for even the most demanding high end system.

The GFA-555 does everything well, and most things exceptionally well. It provides superb, well-controlled bass with far better speaker load tolerance than most amps. Its midrange and treble are remarkably low in coloration. There is no hint of hardness, and none of the loss of inner detail common to transistor amplifiers.

With the exception of the Krells, I have never heard a more detailed, natural, and extended upper four octaves in a transistor amp. The Adcom may even be a legitimate rival to the Krell; it's brighter and more dynamic; and somewhat more open. And, like the Krell, it gives the impression, on really good material, that the amplifier simply isn't there. Nor is the Adcom romantic or sweet, like New York Audio's new Moscodes. Rather, it offers natural upper-octave detail that the latter miss. Other amplifiers have similar upper-octave performance, but I unhesitatingly recommend the Mcom over the very stiff competition from Tandberg and Threshold.

The Adcom's soundstage is sufficiently superior that even those who claim all power amplifiers sound alike might hear the difference. It comes very close to the better tube power amplifiers in providing detailed, stable, realistic imaging with natural depth. It is not an Audio Research D-250, but is extraordinarily holographic—I suspect almost embarrassingly so. This kind of soundstage has previously cost at least $2000.

I am also highly impressed with this amplifier's dynamics. Once again, it is not going to survive a one-on-one with the Audio Research D-250 or Conrad-Johnson Premier Fives, but it rivals any transistor power amplifier in its power class that I have heard—including high-powered receivers or amps with trick power supplies—at any price. It provides these dynamics into virtually any load without bloat, restriction of sound, or change in timbre. For all the nonsense published by most manufacturers about driving complex loads, this amplifier actually delivers.

The Adcom does not lose sweetness and detail as its power goes up. I am normally leery of transistor amplifiers rated much above 100 watts; they too often blur detail and harmonic information, and this sonic price tag is far more costly than the added power is worth. This does not happen with the Adcom unless the distortion lights are blinking, and they only blink when the amp is delivering well over its rated 200 watts per channel (8 ohms) or 325 watts (4 ohms). By comparison, once-outstanding high power amplifiers like the Hafler DH-500 now sound annoyingly veiled.

With a minor dealer modification, you can even drive 1 ohm loads like the Scintilla. I can't measure whether the Adcom delivers its rated 800 watts per channel into 2 ohms, or 20 amps peak, but I can tell you that it does a superb job of driving this superb speaker. Anything in its price range (or even close) generally changes timbre and degenerates when driving the Scintilla at 1 ohm.

I'm going to have to say a few words about its technology before I give Adcom a swelled head. You'll be happy to note that the manufacturer claims for the GFA-555 a simple gain path, a 700VA toroidal transformer, a well-regulated high current power supply, new ultra-stable bias circuitry, direct coupling, no current limiting, and no output inductor. More substantively, its harmonic shape mixes suitable yinyang while avoiding the curse of pyramidology. This, of course, means that it weighs 34 pounds, has simple rack-mount black styling, pilot lights, warning lights (to indicate distortion levels above 1%), and measures exactly 7 5/16" by 12¼" by 19".

More pragmatically, the technical specifications are significant in that they represent reasonable bandwidth (4Hz-150kHz), damping factor (150-200), gain (27dB), and noise (-106 dB). Of these only the noise specification is outstanding. No attempt is made to beat distortion records: 0.09% THD at rated power into 8 ohms, and 0.25% into 4. I have heard so many power amplifiers with infinitely (well, an order of magnitude) better specifications sound so much worse; this may be the amplifier whose sound could convince Stereo Review, High Fidelity, etc. that their present measurements are virtually worthless.

I suspect that the Adcom is going to force many designers in the $1000-$1500 range to either make radical improvements in their products over the next six months, or look at the possibility of retiring from competition. This is a "must" amplifier to audition before you spring for anything close in price. If the Adcom is simply the first of a whole wave of good amplifiers, it will help revitalize the high end for the average audiophile, and force most manufacturers into more reasonable pricing. Now, Adcom, if you can only come up with a preamp as good!—Anthony H. Cordesman

hope this helps, jess