Whats a nice mid bugdet tube amplifier?

[3dzapper]

I just use the analog outputs from my CD/DVD players to the "extra" input to the Scott integrated and straight into my ST-35 EL84 amp without a preamp. That way there are fewer added steps to add noise and/or distortion.

Rick

[Klipsch RF7]

BTW, how does this Scott AMP sound with DVD movies? Does it have the punch and clarity that the amps in my Rotel have for Dolby 2.0 surround processing?

I want to use my Rotel as the processor, so that i can use the better DAC's in the reciever instead of the ones in the cheap Sony 300 disc changer, also to get my Dolby 2.0 surround and Dolby Pro Logic 2 i need digital connections for the processing.

[NOSValves]

Georg Friedrich Hande,

The truth of the matter with cables that I have found is Basic cable design is better in almost all cases with tube gear. I plugged in some cables Dean sent me not long ago and I truly think he did this as a joke because they sounded just plain horrible. I replaced them with my home brew $12 a set jobs and I was back in audio bliss. With vintage tube gear the basic $20 to $30 intereconnect will do the job just fine.

Craig

PS I agree with many in this thread there are indeed many wonderful vintage tube amps out there not just Scott. I told this to him on the phone. I like Scott not just for the sound but the looks more then anything. There are great amps from Fisher, Dynaco, Heathkit, Pilot, Stromberg Calrson you name it. I've worked on many of these amps also !!! Look at my site does it only show Scott's ??

[NOSValves]

I listen to my setup for movies with tubes all the time rest assured you will like it !!

Oops better add or with any tube amp of comparable quality !!

[Dflip]

I have a Scott LK-72 that Craig rebuilt and sold to me two years ago and it works great. More than enough power with wonderful tube sound (35W). It easily surpasses my more expensive Acurus amp and preamp. Craig does very good work and his prices are reasonable.

If you want to go another vintage route, you could use an Eico HF-81. I believe it produces about 14W, not sure how that goes with the RF-3's, but it should do the trick if you do not want to break the apartment lease. Many here also speak well of this amp.

Both are vintage amps that are great value for the money. Forty to fifty year old caps should be replaced unless you want to risk having it go up in smoke. For the money, you would be very hard pressed to surpass it.

Just my humble opinion.

It would also be appropriate if some members here deposited some of their venom at the snake pit at their local zoo. All advice here is offered subject to their expertise, experience, you double checking on the appropriate websites, other forum members comments and what you already know.

I am just starting the Christmas break and I would appreciate more holiday cheer and a lot less Scrooge, bah humbug.

Don

[paul cbc]

Pirahna,

The Dynaco ST 70 is a stand alone power amp.-> not an integrated.

You would need a preamp or at least a variable output device.

Hope this helps,

paul

[Klipschfoot]

How about the hailed HF-81 for starters? Or a pair of HF-12s. You can even, with patience, land an original HF-85 and ST-70 for aout $500 (I did!). That way you can experiement with amps and preamps as money avails itself. If you are going to get into this stuff, you might as well allow room for flexibility. You can even hook up with a pair of Fisher, or other, EL-84 monos for around $500.

BTW, how does this Scott AMP sound with DVD movies? Does it have the punch and clarity that the amps in my Rotel have for Dolby 2.0 surround processing?

I want to use my Rotel as the processor, so that i can use the better DAC's in the reciever instead of the ones in the cheap Sony 300 disc changer, also to get my Dolby 2.0 surround i need digital connections for the processing.

Mr. Handel, are you jesting with us? Good job!

[mike stehr]

You might as well stick with you got.

Or build a seperate system for a tube amp.

It can be done, but combining vintage tube amplifiers with HT gear in HT configurations is a big cluster, IMO.

It can be done, but it will be out of your budget.

3D Zapper is going about it with the easiest route.

DVD straight into tube integrated.

[Klipsch RF7]

BTW, how does this Scott AMP sound with DVD movies? Does it have the punch and clarity that the amps in my Rotel have for Dolby 2.0 surround processing?

I want to use my Rotel as the processor, so that i can use the better DAC's in the reciever instead of the ones in the cheap Sony 300 disc changer, also to get my Dolby 2.0 surround i need digital connections for the processing.

Mr. Handel, are you jesting with us? Good job!

----------------

Im not talking about hooking the DVD to the Scott, What I meant is that if i use the Scott as my amp with the rotel doing the digital processing and so forth instead of hooking my speakers up to the speaker outputs on my reciever and using its amps. Does the SS amps in the reciever deliver more punch or will the Scott be better or worse is what i was wondering.

This is what i want to do, I want the tube sound for my 2 channel music but also if i pop in a movie i want good, crisp sound for the dolby soundtrack. my speaker configuration is only 2 speakers not the full 6 speaker surround.

I might just forego tubes and get a good SS amp like the Monarchy, i just dont know what to do at this point

[NOSValves]

I have it done in my livingroom with no problem what so ever ! Works like a charm. The Rotel just become a proccessing preamp no more no less. What is the big deal ?

Craig

[Klipsch RF7]

The Scott integrated amp is a push pull design im assuming and is it a pure class A amp? Or is it an A/B amp?

[neo33]

"Ignore the "Scott Bashers" in this forum! H.H. Scott was a wonderful engineer, very talented in the audio field. Anything tube which bears the name H.H. Scott

is of superior quality, nothing less. If you want a quality integrated amplifier, look no farther, H.H. Scott is your brand.

You have a list to choose from:

299

299B

299C

299D

200

200B

222

222B

222C

222D

LK48

LK48B

LK72

LK72B

LK30

340-B (receiver)

345 (receiver)

Any one of these above mentioned models will surely satisfy your needs. Each of these products have stood the test of time, and are highly musical as well as reliable! If you want detailed info on any one of them, post back and I'll give it to you."

Ryan, do you like to make contradictory statements? If memory serves me well, you said many weeks ago "Leave those pathetic 299B's alone and get yourself a real amp!"

[Tubinhard]

Talk about getting the cart in front of the horse.

First of all, Craig can restore, upgrade, or mod just about anything -- not just Scott. Eicos, Dynakits, Harmon Kardons, etc... the Scotts and Eicos are very nice options because they are integrated amps, and do not require a preamp. With that said, I will say that if one decides to go with a stand alone amp (not an integrated) -- I would NOT recommend running a tube amp with the preamp section of a solid state receiver. This is a complete waste of money. Again -- this is why the Scott and Eico integrateds are so popular. Yes, there are "better" amps -- but they are not integrated amps. At any rate -- the aforementioned integrateds offer incredible performance for the money.

Second, I agree with Colin, and defintely feel all of the information regarding a person's situation needs to be gathered before making ANY recommendation.

Third, the MIT products do NOT filter the signal. The passive network is in parallel with the signal, and not in series, or directly in the signal path. The MIT white papers are here:

http://www.mitcables.com/technology/power1.asp

http://www.mitcables.com/pdf/series2.pdf

Neo, Ryan fully explained that comment in acceptable fashion. You should spend more time critiquing your own posts.

[Klipsch RF7]

Ive been doing some reading and been finding out that these scott amps with there PP design are inferior to SET amps, and since i have effiecient Klipsch speakers then a SET amp is what i really want.

Here is an exerpt from a google groups thread that is very interesting and hits the nail on the head:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&threadm=4bvcbc%245b6%40news2.realtime.net&rnum=4&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26safe%3Doff%26q%3Dsingle%2Bended%2Btriode%2Bvs.%2Bpush%2Bpull%26sa%3DN%26tab%3Dwg

Beging Quote "Well, IMHO a good single ended amp sounds very musical, good depth, very balanced sound. You can sit and listen to it for hours without

fatigue. As I write this I am listening to my homebrew S.E. amp that

uses type 50's from the early 1930's. Once you hear an amp with any

of the classic triodes (300B's, 50's, ect) you will be spoiled

forever. I thought S.E. was just some crazy fad until I heard for

myself. Now I am a true believer.

Now for the downside. If you are a Megadeath fan and have a set of

Radio Shack speakers, forget S.E. My amp puts out about 3 Watts, and

most do less than 10. You need good speakers for any tube amp,

but they are a must with S.E.

I know I will make some people mad with this but, push-pull pentode

amps are boat anchors. Some of them are very pretty, but still boat

anchors. I have owned 'em all, Mac, Scott, Fisher. 20 years ago they

sounded 10 times better than the transistor junk that was on the

market. That was then and this is now." End quote.

[Klipschfoot]

Nobody "bashed" HH Scott. Aren't we being a little sensitive? NOSevalves provides a great service, but to throw you hat in to the Scott camp without considering alternatives is limiting, don't you think? My rig is dual so that I can play with other amps/preamps/speakers. It is, afterall, a hobby, isn't it?

[Tubinhard]

Without getting into another full blown discussion regarding the relative strengths and weaknesses of the various amplifier topologies, let me just say that you set a financial limit of $500. SET would definitely fit your musical tastes and habits, but this option is just more than you are willing to spend. You are looking at $900 on the used market, and that doesn't even include the cost of the preamp you would need. I suppose you could do the Paramours, but even those are beyond your reach right now.

Anyone? I'm bowing out now.

[brnt99]

I bought a Bez 2A3 SET amp off of Ebay and I am very happy with it.Paid 470.00 to have it delivered to my door.I did a little bit of tube rolling before I was completely satisfied but now I am in Hifi heaven. They sound great with my Cornwall 11's.Just another low priced option.

Brent

[Klipsch RF7]

I might have to increase my budget it looks like to about 1k to get a nice amp that i will be happy with i guess, but even then you guys are saying that a tube amp with a HT reciever as a preamp is not good. I really dont want to get rid of my Rotel either, i paid a grand for it and its really a nice reciever for my movies and music, but i wanted to get into this Tube sound that everyone is talking about.

[Klipsch RF7]

----------------

On 12/19/2003 11:37:27 PM brnt99 wrote:

I bought a Bez 2A3 SET amp off of Ebay and I am very happy with it.Paid 470.00 to have it delivered to my door.I did a little bit of tube rolling before I was completely satisfied but now I am in Hifi heaven. They sound great with my Cornwall 11's.Just another low priced option.

Brent

----------------

That seems like an great option, what all did you do to make it sound better? I might pick one up, its SET and Class A to boot. I think i might have found my amp:) How did it sound before your mods? and then afterwards?

I found two of them!!

Should i get the BEZ 300B or the BEZ 2A3?

Another one is the Single End FD422J( 2E22 ) Tubes Power Amp

[Guest Anonymous]

----------------

On 12/19/2003 11:27:40 PM Georg Friedrich Handel wrote:

Ive been doing some reading and been finding out that these scott amps with there PP design are inferior to SET amps, and since i have effiecient Klipsch speakers then a SET amp is what i really want.

Here is an exerpt from a google groups thread that is very interesting and hits the nail on the head:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&threadm=4bvcbc%245b6%40news2.realtime.net&rnum=4&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26safe%3Doff%26q%3Dsingle%2Bended%2Btriode%2Bvs.%2Bpush%2Bpull%26sa%3DN%26tab%3Dwg

Beging Quote "Well, IMHO a good single ended amp sounds very musical, good depth, very balanced sound. You can sit and listen to it for hours without

fatigue. As I write this I am listening to my homebrew S.E. amp that

uses type 50's from the early 1930's. Once you hear an amp with any

of the classic triodes (300B's, 50's, ect) you will be spoiled

forever. I thought S.E. was just some crazy fad until I heard for

myself. Now I am a true believer.

Now for the downside. If you are a Megadeath fan and have a set of

Radio Shack speakers, forget S.E. My amp puts out about 3 Watts, and

most do less than 10. You need good speakers for any tube amp,

but they are a must with S.E.

I know I will make some people mad with this but, push-pull pentode

amps are boat anchors. Some of them are very pretty, but still boat

anchors. I have owned 'em all, Mac, Scott, Fisher. 20 years ago they

sounded 10 times better than the transistor junk that was on the

market. That was then and this is now." End quote.

----------------

GFH,

500$$$ is not going to get you where you want to be, so spend the $$$$ and get what you really think you want. Hey how about getting some heritage klipch as well. May as well change your whole system to really get the best sound. Keep listening to the 2 channel guys who have TT's that cost more than your whole system tell you what to get for 500. forget about 500 and just add a zero

You are going to drive yourself crazy trying to get everything at once, how do I know, cause I am a frikin NUT who has been buying a ton of stuff, and not taking enough time to enjoy what I already have.

I suggest you get feedback from whatever sources you want to, but most importantly it's YourEars and only YourEars with Your Equipment and Your space that is going to matter. and for what You want, be prepared to spend $$$$$$ Which you posted only wanting to spend in yhe 500 range..

Ryan,

why don't you list the scott 233, or 272 in your list as they are said to be some of the rarest and best sounding of the scott amps(and I happen to own both)

2-channel guys, you came down on me for suggesting scott snd eico, I have not seen any other suggerstions from you for GFH, it seems to me that Craigs original suggestion of the NON SCOTT amp was a real good one and one that is found in his price range on both ebay, and audiogon cause I just checked.

why don't you inform GFH what it would really cost to do what he wnts and to get what he says he wants out of his system(as you all know he would really have to start from scratch IMO)

Smilin going on Holiday, needs a break don't piss me off LATERS