AndyKubicki Posted August 12, 2002 Author Share Posted August 12, 2002 Everything that I have heard and read supports that SS is more accurate than tubes. I met the man who designed my preamp and spent some time at his shop a few years ago when I thought I had some noise coming from the preamp. He put it on the scope and there was NOTHING...not a bit of noise. That's when I got my first lesson about interconnects. He also offered to switch the faceplate as the one I bought had a rack mount on it which I did not need. Didn't charge me a dime! We talked for a while and he did say the reason he builds SS amps & preamps is because of the accuracy. That is NOT to say that tubes can't sound better. Steve Deckert of Decaware has some interesting things written about this on his site. If it is true, that SS is more accurate, then shouldn't it suffice to have a good source (like a cd player with a tube stage, etc), a good tube preamp, and an SS amp? Rick, I think that is the direction. Randy pointed me to the ART DIO. Though they were availabe on ebay for $99, I can't find one for less than $139 now. Even at that price, if it sounds as sweet as a lot of people are saying, it may be worth getting. I did pull out my old Crown IC 150 preamp, just to try it out. I hooked it up and did find the bass was stronger. It was not as bright, but at the same time, not as clear as the Audire. I was tempted to use it though, because it does have tone controls as well as a loudness switch. The pots and switches were noisy, so I tried to open her up to spray some cleaner. What a job!! That thing is built like a tank...but lightweight. Sadly, when I put it back together, the fuse holder fell apart, so I can't tell if I did any good. Maybe I shouldn't get a kit or do mods myself.... BTW, Randy, nice pics of yer system! What is the bass trap for? Does it actually "soak up" the bass? ------------------ Andy 79 Khorns Audire Difet 3 Preamp Adcom GFA 535 II NAD 4130 Tuner Marantz CD 63SE Pioneer DV 434 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted August 12, 2002 Share Posted August 12, 2002 I have both; a low-powered Class A solid-state stereo power amplifier which uses plentiful feedback to lower total harmonic distortion and improve bass control, and a flea-powered Class A tube monoblock pair which uses 2A3 tubes in a single-ended topology. One immediate difference lies in the articulation of the lower and mid-bass response. Solid-state (SS) amps take the polite tink sound of the 2A3 defined bass note and give it a more fully formed tunk sound. Of course, superlative amplifiers, like the massive silver block Pass X250, turn that tink into an almost tangible thunk. This also applies to the very highest frequencies also. SS amplifiers can also add more prolonged sizzle to cymbals. This high treble range definition adds to imaging and tonal balance. SS amplifiers seem to be especially useful under two conditions: One seems to be when the loudspeakers impedance curve has large and multiple peaks and angles. Some speakers impedance twists and turns like a So. California beach highway. B&Ws come to mind, because I know from first-hand experience how taut their mid-bass and how smooth their upper-bass can be, yet their curve has a few sharp peaks. The second condition is closely related to the first. SS amplifiers articulate better lower and mid-bass response when the impedance curve dips too low. Despite a nominal 8-ohm impedance rating, many audiophile loudspeakers have curves that dip down to 4-ohms, many even lower than that. When a loudspeaker digs down into the low 2-ohm range, SS amplifiers will deliver noticeably better bass definition than flea-powered tube amplifiers will. This low end control extends itself into the upper bass and improves the mid-range. I feel this is one reason why SS power in active mid or deep-bass woofers can add so much to music and movies. ------------------ Colin's Music System Cornwall 1s & Klipsch subs; lights out & tubes glowing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyKubicki Posted August 12, 2002 Author Share Posted August 12, 2002 Wow! Colon, you have been the first here to point out that there are some advantages to SS amps. Though I am not sure that you are implying that would work with Klipsch. The sense I got from reading about all the tube amps that many members on this forum are switching to, is that these amps work better with horns. When I first auditioned my Khorns in 78, I was shown (via an a/b test) the Belle and the La Scala as well. I was 26, no wife to stop me, and I had credit. I HAD TO HAVE THE KHORNS. And the main reason was (compared to the other two Klipsches) the beatiful bass response of the Khorns. I did not always live in a house that the Khorns could breath in, but I always kept them with the intent of someday giving them the room they deserve. If tube amps are lacking in the bass area, then I'm not sure I would be happy with one. But I did not get the impression that was the case with these amps. If anyone can compare that for me, I would appreciate it. I am somewhat happy with the bass the Adcom provides, though I think it could us a little help in the upper bass region. The only thing I can compare from casually listening to my Brother's system quite some time ago. I say casually because he had other people over and I could not really bring a reference CD or two, sit down and just listen. What I did hear was tought to describe, but the bass was clean...clear...you could almost count the cone vibrations. His system...Proceed amps and preamps, Martin Logans and a couple cones for the mid bass in separate cabinets with a sub. Anyway, I'm sure you all get the point. I love bass. But I would love to hear the other flavors that tubes offer. I also am a bit worried about noise...hum. I'm not sure how much to expect, say from the vintage Scott or Eico vs the new stuff. Perhaps this is why maybe a tube preamp/SS amp combo would work. ------------------ Andy 78 Khorns (20' apart!) Audire Difet 3 Preamp Adcom GFA 535 II NAD 4130 Tuner Marantz CD 63SE Pioneer DV 434 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Bey Posted August 13, 2002 Share Posted August 13, 2002 It's my humble opinion that khorns + tubes has no shortcomings. Not poor bass, not hum, absolutely no disqualifiers whatsoever. But Andy, you remind me of that Simon and Garfunkel song, where they say "A man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest". If you must have SS amps, then (as they say in the tennis shoe commericals) JUST DO IT. There are plenty here that will say you have made the right choice. Ultimately it's your decision, and it would be completely wrong to be swayed by what anyone here says. Words to live by. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazman Posted August 13, 2002 Share Posted August 13, 2002 Andy, Considering where you live, have you considered arranging to borrow a tube amp from one of the many audio establishments in SoCal for a weekend. Even if you have to drive a few miles to the audio store's loation, it would be worth hearing a tube amp on your Khorns, in your environment. I think it would give you a better point of reference. Klipsch out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyKubicki Posted August 14, 2002 Author Share Posted August 14, 2002 Jazzman, that is probably a good way to to it, but I need to be closer to being able to buy one before I ask to take home a demo. Actually, I just found a Dynaco ST 70, and I will be asking about it in a separate post. It's my humble opinion that khorns + tubes has no shortcomings. Not poor bass, not hum, absolutely no disqualifiers whatsoever. This is good to see, Randy, especially the bass and hum. I have not had nor heard a tube amp in many years and maybe I remembered my cheap Allied Radio reciever I had, which did have some shortcomings. If you must have SS amps, then (as they say in the tennis shoe commericals) JUST DO IT. There are plenty here that will say you have made the right choice. Ultimately it's your decision, and it would be completely wrong to be swayed by what anyone here says. Words to live by. I think you misunderstood me. I have no emotional ties to SS. Quite to the contrary, tubes offer a nostalgic return. I am trying to understand the multitude of what I've been reading the past few days and want to have a better understanding of the electronics of both. When I was younger, I thought I was going to become an electronics engineer, but things did not turn out like that so I am playing catch-up knowledgewise. If anything, SS scared me away...more complex than tubes, more difficult to work with. But I know there is a lot of electronic/audio wisdom and experience on this forum and what I read here is more important to me as a Klipsc owner, than what I read elswhere. I might take you up on your offer about the AA tweaks (did you say not to ditch 'em, right?) in the future...I have been trying to locate the ART DIO, as I believe it makes sense to better the output from the Pioneer rather than popping for a new CD or DVD...thanks for that tip! Sam Ash must have sold every one they had and when I called, they didn't even know if they will get more in. ------------------ Andy 78 Khorns (20' apart!) Audire Difet 3 Preamp Adcom GFA 535 II NAD 4130 Tuner Marantz CD 63SE Pioneer DV 434 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J M O N Posted August 15, 2002 Share Posted August 15, 2002 Tubes vs. Solid State? Even with my very limited experience with tubes in my system, I'll take tubes. My previous SS amp was from Jeff Rowland. The thing weighed in at 100 lbs., and as you may know, are among the most highly regarded SS amps available. It was better than the Threshold and Classe SS amps I previously owned. A couple years ago I decided to give this tube thing a try since everyone was talking about how great horns and tubes are together. So I picked up a used Audio Research VT-50. When I connected this amp to my system, I instantly knew it was better than anything else I had. It wasn't even warmed up, and it already sounded better than the Rowland. What about some of the so-called "negatives" with tube amps? Noise: none at all, just as quiet as the Rowland, even with efficient horns Bass: no noticeable lack at all, if not as good as the Rowland, it was very close. I don't have a problem vibrating walls with this tube amp. The biggest difference I immediately noticed was the "air" or dimensionality that it added (probably not a good description). The other was how smooth it sounded. The Rowland is a very, very smooth amp, but not as smooth as my tube amp. Of course this is my opinion and my taste, but I would suggest you go out and listen for yourself and decide what YOU prefer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted August 15, 2002 Share Posted August 15, 2002 Jmon---Of course it's always possible that the Rowland was NOT a good SS amp but a bad one, mind that it was designed to be sold to people with really bad speakers. Could be a much cheaper QSC, a SS amp meant to be used with horns and used by several hornies I know to excellent effect, is a much better amp. www.chicagohornspeakerclub.com This message has been edited by TBrennan on 08-15-2002 at 07:38 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyKubicki Posted August 15, 2002 Author Share Posted August 15, 2002 I appreciate all the input. I am getting the picture now...I won't worry about noise in tubes. I am committed to getting a tube amp, probably a vintage project to rebuild and have the fun tweaking myself (with helpful guidance from those who will be able and willing to give it). I will probably keep the Adcom for the hotter Southern California days, at least until I replace this old A/C system I have..course, that will eat up any play money that could go to my audio system. BTW..Randy, You said I should try a different speaker cable. I bought the Goertz because I did like what they had on the web page about them (I know...who doesn't like what's in a sales brochure). They did offer a 30 day money back, but they were an improvement and I kept them. I am having a buddy come over just to test the difference with his cable, which I think are Kimbecable. ------------------ Andy 78 Khorns (20' apart!) Audire Difet 3 Preamp Adcom GFA 535 II NAD 4130 Tuner Marantz CD 63SE Pioneer DV 434 This message has been edited by AndyKub on 08-15-2002 at 09:10 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazman Posted August 16, 2002 Share Posted August 16, 2002 Andy, quote: I need to be closer to being able to buy one before I ask to take home a demo Don't let the ability to buy stop you from demo-ing products. Allow yourself time to absorb the experience, form impressions and opinions. It will take some time, so go with the freebee's, use your SS in between demos as comparison. Why take on a project until you have some idea where you want to go and how deep? It's important to note that once you begin to upgrade amplification, you will find the need to upgrade other components because their shortcomings will be revealed. Kilpsch out. This message has been edited by jazman on 08-16-2002 at 05:09 AM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J M O N Posted August 20, 2002 Share Posted August 20, 2002 TB: You're right, that Rowland was never really operating within it's "optimum" operating range and maybe didn't sound as good as it ideally could have. But don't get me wrong, I didn't mean to imply that it didn't sound good. Quite the opposite in fact. It was afterall, the best sounding amp I had ever had in my system (at least to my ears). However, the tube amp took the good qualities the Rowland had (smoothness / liquidity) even further. So the tube amp won with me and the Rowland was the best of the SS amps I have owned. I do admit that my experience with amplifiers is not all-encompasing, and likely not as broad as yours. But until I hear something better, and I haven't, I'm still sold on tubes. I do like they way they sound, at least with my very limited experiences with them. I'm not familiar with the QSC. Is that a "pro" amp? A solid-state amp designed for horns -- hmmmm, I'd be interested in hearing it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted August 21, 2002 Share Posted August 21, 2002 JMON---Yeah, the QSCs are pro amps and very reasonabley priced. As pro amps that are most often used on horn type speakers, presumabley the designers listened over such speakers (if they listened at all that is). But they sound very good and have a reputation in pro circles for excellent reliability and sound. Look at them here www.partsexpress.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted August 21, 2002 Share Posted August 21, 2002 To the extent of my experience to date I am yet to find an SS amp that will stand comparison with a semi decent tube setup when driving Heritage speakers. My previous amplification, which was recommended by my local Klipsch dealer, was an Accuphase E211 SS integrated amp. Whilst the sound was good it was simply destroyed by what I have now and that is a simple push pull monoblock setup. FWIW I am driving these via a Decware ZTPRE. You mentioned the possibility of investigating a tube pre-amp so I would recommend testing this unit out if you get the chance. Its main claim to fame it seems (other than the very reasonable price) is its flexibility. High and low input selection, choice of output capacitors on board, and a choice of high or low bias settings. From what I have seen this allows the ZT to play with just about any setup going - out of the box. ------------------ My System: http://aca.gr/pop_maxg.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnysal Posted August 21, 2002 Share Posted August 21, 2002 hahahah SS versus tube...I love THIS battle...I hvae both (as most of us do) and listened to a wide variety of both. with my K-horns there is no doubt that my tube amps sound better than SS amps. Not to say there are not great SS amps out there. some Pass stuff sounds great (especially those class A only alephs), some Krell stuff, some McIntosh stuff, I am sure many, many sound good. BUT I remember that many, many tube desginers mention that they could get pretty much the same sound from either technology, that it is more expensive to get equivalent sound from tube equipment than it is from SS equipment. I quote an interveiw with Tim de Paravicini where lays out some thoughts on tubes versus SS for him... "The "warmth" in a lot of tube electronics is due to their dismal top end, the bad transformers they use, and the loading down of their high-impedance outputs. Because of the output transformer and the feedback used, many tube circuits have a partial bass instability that gives a bloated bass. Any warmth in the tube sound is a defect, but listeners don't want to know that. I don't have to use tubes in my designs; I only do it for marketing reasons. I've got an exact equivalent in solid state. I can make either type do the same job, and I have no preference. People can't pick which is which. And electrons have no memory of where they've been! The end result is what counts. Most transistor-circuit architecture was different from tube-circuit architecture, and that's what people were hearing, more than the device itself. The main advantage of tubes is that an average tube has more gain than an average transistor. Second, tubes don't have the enormous storage times of transistors, so they are very fast. Tubes go to 100 MHz without trying." I have heard basically the sam ething from most of the top amp desginers, some have dropped tubes altogether because they get the sound they want at the price they want from SS, or would prefer not to have to spend so much and pay some much attnetion to construction to get the sound they want form tubes, others continue to develop tube gear...seems a toss up to those who know (I certainly don't) so it comes down to listening for what sounds best in your individual system at a price level you can afford. (we have all heard THAT before) I say ignore whether its tube of SS, pick a price level, take into account your surrounding components and give both a whirl in listening tests, you can't lose that way. warm regards, tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyKubicki Posted August 21, 2002 Author Share Posted August 21, 2002 Tony, I think what you posted makes a lot of sense; I would rather have a better designed, better sounding amp, whether it's SS or tubes. From all I understand, if one has a budget like mine (low), you can probably get the most bang for the buck with tubes (in the case of high efficiency speakers). After my upgrade to the ALKs, I think I should pursue a better CD/DVD/SACD player. I also find myself spending huge amounts of time on Ebay and Audiogon looking at vintage tube equipment (I would LOVE to hear your Marantz) and think that if I get something like an ST70, something known for it's good transformers, I can pick it up within my small budget. I can also tweak it as budget permits. I can handle soldering and following schematics in point to point circuits...I don't feel as comfortable dealing with PC boards and SS. If I lived near someone who has a tube amp I would love to do an A/B comparison, but for now I don't know of anyone. I have an open mind to the matter, and will keep the amp that sounds better and that I can afford. ------------------ Andy 78 Khorns (20' apart!) Audire Difet 3 Preamp Adcom GFA 535 II NAD 4130 Tuner Marantz CD 63SE Pioneer DV 434 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug C Posted August 21, 2002 Share Posted August 21, 2002 Andy, I've had the Decware Zen for a couple of months now, my first experience with tubes. This seemed like an inexpensive way to get some tube sound. I set up a 2-channel only system in a spare bedroom (12'W, 16'L, 8'H). I have a Marantz CD17 connected directly to the Zen which is connected to a pair of Klipsch RF-5's. A Velodyne sub is connected via speaker level connections. In this room the little Zen can chug along at an honest 90-95db with the volume control at approximately 90% (Loud enough for 99% of my listening). Most of the time I listen in the 85db range. If I just want to beat myself silly then I go to my HT setup with 300 watts/channel. My HT system is used primairly for music listening so over the past 5 years most of my purchases have been slanted towards music. I have to say since purchasing the Zen I have listened to very little music on the HT system. The Zen Klipsch combo just has great detail and dynamics that keep me coming back for more. CD's that are boring on my HT system are a joy to listen to on the Zen/Klipsch combo. For me it's really nice to have two systems in the same house. Both sound great yet very different. If I could only keep one system I have to admit It would probably be the Zen/Klipsch combo which by the way cost a fraction of what I have in the HT system. Steve at Decware is very up-front about stating that the Zen was never designed to crank out ear bleeding volumes in larger rooms. I am however amazed at the volume levels that can be achieved when mated with high efficency speakers. Doug C. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbflash Posted August 21, 2002 Share Posted August 21, 2002 Andy, If your interested in the ART DIO check out this site if you have not already. He upgrades the Art's that are suppose to take them to another level. http://www.boldercables.com/ I was going to get the ART, but I bought a pair of Lascala's last week instead. I am using tubes and a Rega Planet 2000. I ordered ALK xovers last week. This is the best system I've ever had, until last night. My Rega died. I have had it for 1 year 21 days. The store I bought it from said bring it back no problems. We shall see. I pulled out my old CD player, an old Onkyo. What a difference. It sounds so digital now. I may just have to get use to it again, but if I were you I'd buy the best CD player/transport + Dac that you can afford. The Planet sounded good on both SS (Parasound) and tubes. I think the front end makes the most difference on a system. JMHO Danny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyKubicki Posted August 22, 2002 Author Share Posted August 22, 2002 It's funny, Doug. I was never attracted to the HT multi channel scene. Always thought I would rather spend same money on 2 channel and get better quality. I prefer a good audio CD to a DVD most of the time. Sounds like you're in for some good times in that bedroom. Danny, thanks for the Art info. I have not seen them for less than $159. But I was at Best Buy today and did make an experimental purchase of a Sony DVD/SACD player...that will be a new post here. ------------------ Andy 78 Khorns (20' apart!) Audire Difet 3 Preamp Adcom GFA 535 II NAD 4130 Tuner Marantz CD 63SE Pioneer DV 434 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunnysal Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 Andy, I personally feel that vintage tube stuff will be heaven with your k-horns! Scott, Leak, Eico, Dynaco...all that stuff can be found a low prices and if you like to solder well...than swapping some caps and resistors, et voila! audio nirvana. At this point, when price is a primary consideratio I feel vintage is the only way to go. The super low cost tube stuff out there new does not seem to have the same tube magic as the vintage stuff for the same price MHO, YMMV, etc., etc. BUT I am quite happy with my cheapo Dynaco MkIV monoblocks and Marantz 7T driving my k-horns. cost? after upgrading, about $1,200 for the pair. regards, tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted August 22, 2002 Share Posted August 22, 2002 20 feet apart is quite extreme. I have said it before, much to the chagrin of others, perhaps including PWK's ghost, but the soundstaging capabilities of a proper 2 channel setup just dont get the nut with speakers farther apart than your grandmother's cleavage... Klipschorn or not, this excessive long wall placement is quite problematic although I always get the PWK Worshipper coming from all sides. Still, some cant help this type of setup given their rooms. On another note, I would sell all your digital sources and get ONE very nice selection. With the sales of those units combined with some ducats from your pocketbook, you should be able to afford something that will do the rest of your chain some justice. As for amplification, the tube amp choices are vast with pricing to vary with the selection. Vintage offers the best sonics for the dollar but the notion of buying a potential headache weigh on some. I have had very good luck in this area and find that if you shop and educate yourself, you can eliminate a lot of the bad luck here. It's always a chance, however. I am listening to my EICO HF-81 right now, this after doing some typing to my 2A3 Moondogs in the main room. I still marvel at this little amp's ability to come so close to high pedigree offerings even surpassing a host of well known amps over 15 times the cost. Happen upon a good unit and you will be amazed. Still, there are many options and it can be a daunting task to wade through the tripe. The rewards are great, however. Avoid Best Buy and Circuit City in the future, unless there is a sale on Television.... kh ------------------ Phono Linn Sondek LP-12 Valhalla / Linn Basic Plus / Sumiko Blue Point CD Player Rega Planet Preamp Cary Audio SLP-70 w/Phono Modified Amplifier Welborne Labs 2A3 Moondog Monoblocks Cable DIYCable Superlative / Twisted Cross Connect Speaker 1977 Klipsch Cornwall I w/Alnico & Type B Crossover Links system one online / alternate components / Asylum Listing f>s> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.