minn_male42 Posted December 28, 2003 Author Share Posted December 28, 2003 neo, on at least three separate occasions, when a relative newcomer to the forum asked about amplification choices for his new klipsch speakers.... i offered the new digital amp technology.... mentioning several different brands..... on all three occassions... i was attacked for even suggesting that any option other tubes was ok.... it got personal... name calling, etc..... now, when i have what i consider a valid point..... (SET amps are not perfect).... and i back it up with a specific musical example.... not theory... not generalities... a specific case.... first dave decides i am attacking SET owners and making them feel bad about their amps.... i'm waiting for more... it will come...it always does.... but, as i said, if i convince one person to realize that SET amps do have a serious limitation if you ever want to turn it up.... or more exactly.... want to listen to this truly amazing recording of the 1812 overture on sacd.... then the thread has worked my amp is not perfect.... but it will do what i want it too for a very reasonable cost..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted December 28, 2003 Author Share Posted December 28, 2003 paul, it happens everytime if you criticise their technology Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 ---------------- On 12/28/2003 10:59:10 PM minn_male42 wrote: on at least three separate occasions, when a relative newcomer to the forum asked about amplification choices for his new klipsch speakers.... i offered the new digital amp technology.... mentioning several different brands..... on all three occassions... i was attacked for even suggesting that any option other tubes was ok.... it got personal... name calling, etc..... ---------------- This is true. And I believe that the most negative posts about digital amps were from people who never had heard them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted December 28, 2003 Author Share Posted December 28, 2003 dave, the carver i use is from carver professional... it is a two channel amp based upon digital technology from tripath... they do not offer multichannel amps.... my carver professional ZR1000 at 225 watts per channel into 8 ohms goes for about $700 my ultimate amp system might consist of two ZR1000's and one ZR500 (this one will bridge to 300 watts for the center channel) http://www.carverpro.com/2003/products/zramps.html and the amp is based upon the tripath chip http://www.tripath.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 ---------------- On 12/28/2003 11:00:48 PM minn_male42 wrote: paul, it happens everytime if you criticise their technology ---------------- Maybe in the past, but personal attacks are no longer tolerated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo33 Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 "I've noticed that you are responding to criticisms of amplifiers with personal criticisms, bordering on personal attacks." Paul, would you kindly point out how did I "attack" you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie dave Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Paul, take a look at the topic heading - "SET and 1812." If Russ wants to describe a great listening experience, fire it up as "Carver xxx amp and 1812." We don't need to declaim on the shortcomings of SET! There is nothing to be gained by rehashing arguements that cause Hatfield/McCoy hatred over silly paradigms that one side ignores, and the other side pounds on with a bung plug. NEITHER side wins, no one is convinced of anything, and outside of a few reasoned posts, nothing civil is bantered. If I was less than civil, it is because Russ knowingly chooses to skirt the boundary in his very first post of fanning banked flames. Occum's razor is out, and I parsed that Russ wants contention and unproductive arguement yet again. Russ sells audio equipment every day for a living, and certainly he can do better than create a topic that engenders ill will. As a reasoned man, Paul, you have to concede this point, even as your personal stance and knowledge of physics plants you across the fence from the SET brigade. Let's not argue about what SET cannot do; declaim what we gain from the equipment we do have Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 ---------------- On 12/28/2003 11:14:44 PM neo33 wrote: Paul, would you kindly point out how did I "attack" you? ---------------- What about: ****In the PP camp, there are believers and there are FANATICS! Hey Paul, your ears aint mean NOTHING! and ALL SET people are deaf since they aint got your ears! LOL. PS. This post is not an attack. I am simply acknowledging 1 zillion SET people are wrong and they have hearing problems. ONLY Paul is right since he got a pair of GOLDEN ears.**** And the posts where you say it's BORING and OLD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted December 28, 2003 Author Share Posted December 28, 2003 i wish someone else on this forum had pointed out the shortcomings of SET.... i almost made a big financial mistake for my type of listening... in all of the posts here about SET... i have yet to read in a short one paragraph presentation why SET is limited... are newcomers to this forum just supposed to figure it out that SET amps won't play loud????.... from reading many of the threads gushing about "my new SET amp"... you would think that these amps are perfect..... its a good thing that i read more than one forum.... and as i pointed out....when i bothered to participate in those threads...the responses soon got ugly.... and as for being an audio salseman.... i am not trying to sell anybody anything.... i sell commercial/professional audio.... and i don't get paid enough to sell on my own time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie dave Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Neo, y'all drive me crazy sometimes, too! I'm firmly in the PP higher power camp, but I would love to have a quiet room with a primo SET system to enjoy some beautiful chamber and symphonic music. The mantra is paradigm. Paul loves to load his cathedral room, Russ loves his digital high powered, you dig detail and emotive listening, I drag my ears through a lot of art-prog rock. Personally, I get pretty chuffed at how great the Klipsch sound Solid state. Quicksilvers. Dynaco. Krell. Panasonic tube console. Sivertone clock radio. It don't matter(except the Crown.) It sounds great! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 ---------------- On 12/28/2003 11:18:20 PM sheltie dave wrote: As a reasoned man, Paul, you have to concede this point, even as your personal stance and knowledge of physics plants you across the fence from the SET brigade. ---------------- Anyone should be able to realize, even without a physics course, that it takes a certain amount of watts to render a convincing presentation of a large scale work. I've brought this up probably about a hundred times, and it has been responded to with a relevant reply only once. That was, that *some* low-watt SET amps actually have some extra watts in reserve. I don't know this for a fact, but assuming it is true, it at least acknowledges that 2.5W isn't enough for everything, or there'd be no need to design a circuit so that the amp has reserve power. Not a week goes by here that an innocent newbie is not given advice to go low-watt SET because of its magic. I object to that and will continue to object to it. I don't expect to change a devoted SET owner's mind. Now I could ignore the whole issue, and say it's no skin off my nose, but I prefer to address what I consider reckless advice. I really don't see how Russ could have phrased anything any better in his first post. He loves this SACD and feels sad that SET people can't know the joy that he is experiencing with it. I find few things in music more irritating than listening to what should be a dynamic symphony with the volume turned down way too low. What is the point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 ---------------- On 12/28/2003 11:39:17 PM sheltie dave wrote: Paul loves to load his cathedral room ---------------- That I do! But I was firmly anti-low watt long before I moved. I know that most people don't have this many cubic feet of air to load, so I don't use my room as the standard. Russ, you mean you missed my 300 posts anti-low watt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted December 28, 2003 Author Share Posted December 28, 2003 "Russ, you mean you missed my 300 posts anti-low watt?" paul, i saw some of them.... but honestly...when i saw what type of thread it was... i've been consciously avoiding those discussions as much as i can..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo33 Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Paul, how you equate the usage of words in a couple of my posts to an "attack" on you is beyond me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kev313 Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 I would like to hear more about digital amplification (and less about set vs. pp or other higher power options). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie dave Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 Paul, I love to load my listening room, tho right now I've been more successful with speakers than high volume listening Russ, I'm sorry I made the comment about Depends. It was inappropriate and of poor taste. I lashed out because I did not enjoy visiting the forum in the two weeks leading up to the holidays, and this thread looked distinctly like a harbinger of threads past. My comment was in very poor taste and I will expunge it. As with all posts, we need to be sensitive of areas that have produced contention in the past, lest history repeat itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wardsweb Posted December 28, 2003 Share Posted December 28, 2003 If I may say a few things. I believe (emphasis on I) there is no true ultimate amp that does all things well. Conversly not all amps are bad. I own solid state, SET and push pull tube amps. I presently have seven different systems in my house. I don't push any as nirvana. I do believe that you must take many factors into consideration. Not the least of which would be matching your amp to your speakers. I have speakers that can produce 110dB with 5 watts. For reference, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health states you can only listen to sounds at 110dB for one minute and 29 seconds before causing hearing loss. I also have speakers that I run with 2200 watts. Each is aimed at a specific use. I have over 3000 watts with inefficient speakers for home theater and 3 watts with 104dB efficient horns for just listening to audio. So, singling out any portion of a system does not give an accurate representation of it's capabilites. There are a lot of pros and cons to every system, you must adjust each to achieve your desired effect. Audio is a passion for me, dare I say obession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minn_male42 Posted December 29, 2003 Author Share Posted December 29, 2003 kev, basically, within a few years.... just about all amplifiers will be based upon a digital chip....IMHO... (except for the tube holdouts) these chips are switching amplifiers that operate at 700 mhz or higher..... they are extremely efficient (little or no heat), they are very low cost (in quantity a 100 watt stereo chip is about $3 each), and if implemented properly they can sound very good..... sony, panasonic, h/k, and denon are now producing receivers based upon these chips.... bel canto, TacT, Solar hi-fi, and carver professional are producing amps based on this technology..... do a search on audiocircle and audio asylum and you will find a ton of information..... my carver pro amp is based on the tripath chip... http://www.tripath.com/ for the record.... my carver professional ZR1000 produces 225 watts @ 8ohm of extremely clean sound at all levels.... and absolutely no hiss or background noise with my Klipsch KLF-30's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMcGoo Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 I had hoped that this thread would take a positive turn, but suspected that it would not. Hope springs eternal! I believe that music reproduction on the amp side is primarily about transient response and various forms of distortion. In another thread on this forum, one technically inclined poster put up a picture of a musical transient on an scope. The transient was 15 times higher than the average of the music. I suspect that the 1812 transients could easily exceed 15 times. I beleive that it is appropriate to point out that some types of amplifiers cannot reproduce trasnsients accurately (without clipping), even if the amp usually sounds good to its owner. Many folks on the forum strive for a live sound and use both solid state and tube amplification in an effeort to achieve that live sound. It's too bad we cannot leave it there. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwm Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 ---------------- On 12/28/2003 9:17:58 PM minn_male42 wrote: paul, i have access to a goldline spl120..... a digital handheld meter that is used mainly by sound contractors to prove that their system installs meet the required db levels.... this unit retails for slightly over $300..... http://gold-line.com/spl120.htm we will see what it reads on the cannons.... http://forums.klipsch.com/idealbb/images/smilies/1.gif"> ---------------- A good SLM, but 150ms rise time is too slow and those meters are not true Impulse meters. Its amazing how high a short duration peak e.g. carpenter's hammering etc. can go and of course gun shots can hit levels in microseconds that would instantly deafen one were they sustained. If you take a good average level of your 1812 recording you could possibly extrapolate the cannon levels, perhaps the Telarc engineers could tell you what kind/level of compression was used for the "big guns". I do agree though the low power amps would clip very quickly and as far as the "sonic signature" of the SETs, I would avoid no win discussions/arguments as there is nothing to be gained--the SETS I've heard sound sweet but for some material there is insufficient headroom for short duration peaks if the listening is at "live" music levels. I'll have to look for that recording........ 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.