NOSValves 299A and 299B owners opinions please !

[NOSValves]

Simple question and I would appreciate a honest answer

Are your amps to bright sounding on your klipsch speakers ?? If you want to further explain the sound that is fine but please answer this question.

Thanks a bunch

Craig

[greg928gts]

299A - No, not too bright on my Cornwalls. I would describe it as soft and full sounding until the volume is turned up past 5, then it gets a little strained. This amp is a little small for Cornwalls IMO. Just a little, it's a headroom issue.

Greg

[NOSValves]

Greg have you tried it on Khorns yet ? Geez at 5 or 12:00 your blasting pretty good though aren't you ? I would think near 100dB

Craig

[Piranha]

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

On 1/14/2004 9:36:01 PM NOSValves wrote:

Simple question and I would appreciate a honest answer

Are your amps to bright sounding on your klipsch speakers ?? If you want to further explain the sound that is fine but please answer this question.

Thanks a bunch

Craig----------------

Craig,

I believe that you might get a more honest and reliable answer from someone that owns both a 299C or D and a 299A or B. That way they have a point of reference to go on. That's my opinion anyways. What are your thoughts on that?

I imagine any one of the Scott integrateds is going to sound good to you if one is all you have. That being said, I am not in a position to say which sounds better since I only have the 299D. I will say this, my NOSValves 299D sounds excellent! I cannot wait to get my 272 back.

Yeah OK, I am REALLY, really anxious to get my Mark III's and MAD Ultra 4A SE back.

[greg928gts]

When I first got it I tried it on the Khorns, but I really didn't leave it there long enough to fully evaluate it. In fact, I'm still evaluating it on the Cornwalls, but I've put in quite a few hours with it now and I think I've got a pretty good handle on it.

I don't use the loudness switch except only when I've got it on for background music. But when I sit down to enjoy the full impact of a cd, no loudness switch. I have the bass up just a tad.

Yes, I'm sure it's pretty loud. Like I said, it's pretty much a headroom issue. I think it would sound better if it was a 30 watt amp and I was putting 15 into the speakers. Right now I'm putting 15 watts in and there's really no headroom. Know what I mean?

I'm lovin it though! More bass impact than my main system downstairs, even with no wall behind me.

Greg

[NOSValves]

Greg,

Your a man after my own heart here !! You really do like to rock

Craig

[NOSValves]

Craig,

I believe that you might get a more honest and reliable answer from someone that owns both a 299C or D and a 299A or B. That way they have a point of reference to go on. That's my opinion anyways. What are your thoughts on that?

I imagine any one of the Scott integrateds is going to sound good to you if one is all you have. That being said, I am not in a position to say which sounds better since I only have the 299D. I will say this, my NOSValves 299D sounds excellent! I cannot wait to get my 272 back.

Yeah OK, I am REALLY, really anxious to get my Mark III's and MAD Ultra 4A SE back.

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

Not really I'm not asking about 299C and D's . I just want to know if they think there amps are bright. Nothing more nothing less. Just there opinion.

[ChrisK]

I have a NV 299(A MkII) in my main system and a 299B in the "Queue" at his shop right now. Too bright is definitely NOT one of the terms I would use to describe the sound of the 299(A MkII) through my Cornwalls. The Scott replaced a Cary 300B based integrated amp that would NEVER have been described by ANYONE as bright and while there are a couple things I miss about the Cary, the Scott is NOT "brighter". In fact, with it's better bass and more power, the Scott has more control than the Cary had. I will agree with the poster above, both amps could use a tad more headroom (although the Scott has more than the Cary). The 299B will eventually reside in my second system as I am currently shopping for a power amp(s). Next week I'm going to hear a pair of 845 based SET monoblocs built by Cyrus Brenneman along with his new KT-100 (I believe) based integrated. The 845 SET amps are supposed to be fabulous. Did anyone here them at CES powering Dr. Edgars "Titan" system? I got sick, couldn't make it and haven't talked to the Doc since he returned.

Chris

[Piranha]

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

On 1/14/2004 10:22:22 PM NOSValves wrote:

Craig,

I believe that you might get a more honest and reliable answer from someone that owns both a 299C or D and a 299A or B. That way they have a point of reference to go on. That's my opinion anyways. What are your thoughts on that?

I imagine any one of the Scott integrateds is going to sound good to you if one is all you have. That being said, I am not in a position to say which sounds better since I only have the 299D. I will say this, my NOSValves 299D sounds excellent! I cannot wait to get my 272 back.

Yeah OK, I am REALLY, really anxious to get my Mark III's and MAD Ultra 4A SE back.

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

Not really I'm not asking about 299C and D's . I just want to know if they think there amps are bright. Nothing more nothing less. Just there opinion.

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

It was just a thought

[blindman]

I listen to rock, classical, country, and jazz via 1979 era La Scala speakers (AA crossovers). My listening room is 20' x 30' with three La Scalas on one of the 20' walls.

I have a Scott 299b.

I bought it out of curiosity after reading about its virtues on this forum. The capacitors had already been replaced with new ones by the seller. As far as I know, the work was not done by NOSValves.

My turntable (VPI HW-19jr)is played through the Scott, since it has a phono section. I do not feel that the sound is too bright, nor is it too harsh. I rarely turn the volume past 3. The tone controls are always left in the neutral positions.

I also ordered and built two of the last Moondog kits offered before Ron Welborne discontinued them.

My cd player (AH! Njoe Tjoeb 4000)is played through the Moondogs with no preamp. The Njoe Tjoeb has a volume control, and 3.25 watts is more than sufficient. I measure 110 db when the volume control is at 3 out of 16.

Both systems perform admirably! The Moondogs fill up the space more fully and have a deeper and wider soundstage. But the Scott really makes those lp's come alive. If some people find it too bright, I rejoice in hearing the cymbals sound like they are in the room with me.

I thoroughly enjoy inviting people over (and I always encourage visitors to bring their favorite recordings) to hear their favorite songs the way they've never heard them on their car radio!!! And let's face it, that's where a lot of music is heard, during the daily commute.

I wish I earned a commission on the amplifiers and speakers that have been sold after these "demos".

For the sake of comparision, I also have on hand; three Mac 60's, a Mac 1900, a Dynaco Pat-4 and ST-120 (that I built in 1974), a Harmon Kardon 430, and an Eico HF-85 and HF-87. I also bought 3 Eico HF-81's off of ebay, but all three arrived Dead-On-Arrival. Some day I'll rebuild one of them and try to learn why Kelly likes them so much.

Which do I like the best? Refer back to the ones that I have currently hooked up...

[NOSValves]

No Ryan you missing the point completely ! I truly think the people that you hear these comments from and even yourself listen to the Scott 299A/B's on much less efficient speakers then members of this forum. So they end up pushing the amp past there useable power then the Highs become congested and distorted ! You say you have these 110dB speakers which I have no clue where you come up with there effiencency but your opinion of the 299A/B was formed long before you ever had those speakers. The last thing I would ever call 299A/B is bright. I think all the Scott amps sound great in there own way ! Its funny that when someone posted they had a warehouse full of like new Scott amps you asked for a 299B on the Scott forum just a few short weeks back Heh.

I truly wished you would of just refrained from posting in this thread and just let the replies come in you may of learned valuable lesson. You are very wrong here my friend.

I started out with a 222C and switched to a 299A and never looked back ! Acurate beautifull detailed sound with good balance top to bottom is how I would describe. The 299B is very similar with the more bass control.

Craig

[NOSValves]

Blindman,

Great post !! This isn't even a NOSValves cuctomer LOL !!

This would be my favorite part

"Both systems perform admirably! The Moondogs fill up the space more fully and have a deeper and wider soundstage. But the Scott really makes those lp's come alive. If some people find it too bright, I rejoice in hearing the cymbals sound like they are in the room with me."

[Audio Flynn]

from Mexico...

the cymbal reference is very important I think.

I do not own a 299

But

nearfild marching band cymbal crashes or rock band cymbal crashes are intense.

Most other recordings limit the dynamic range by compressors so car stereos and boom boxes are not distorted by transients.

yes I am in Mexico

My friend has a new DSL access to the internet.

[arfz28]

Scott 299a mk2 and 84 k-horns. I mostly listen too 70s and 80s classic rock, and yes some of those recordings really do suck so I use tone controls, always have always will, would not be without them.When listening to cds, almost always I have the 299a treble control turned down 1 notch and the bass controll turned up a little more than 1 notch, loudness switch in the off position ,I find this too my best liking, especally if I really start cranking it up.If I leave the tone controls set in the flat position its not bad either, its just that at higher volume levels the upper midrange and treble on the k-horns stands out a little more than I like, its more of the nature of the k-horns than the 299 amplifier, and I am talking of having the 299 turned up to half way I am not stressing the amp. When using my vintage sansui G-7700 and sansui 8080 I have too turn the treble down 2 notches at higher volumes, and I leave the bass up 1 notch too.The scott has a way better upper end than either one of the sansui receivers.When listening to albums I leave the treble control flat and bass up just a tade on the 299, sounds great. I wouldnt be saprized if I got a real good cd player that I would probable be setting that treble control more to the flat position. Mabe a little rope calk would be too my liking too.

I havent had any other tube amp hooked to my k-horns so I have nothing else to compare it too.I bet if I had a scott 299c, 299d, 222c, or 222d I would be doing the same thing with the tone controls.

I am not disapointed at all with my scott 299a I love it, untill I can afford an upgrade say too a set of MK3s, I am going to keep it.

If I ever run across a deal on a scott 299c or a scott 222c I might just get one and see for myself if they sound better than the scott 299a. Well thats my 2 cents worth.

[sheltie dave]

Craig and Ryan,

were all of the Scotts designed to pass the white noise frequency response (or whatever they did back in the day)from 20 - 20khz +-3 dB at rated power? I have seen some tube amps from the old days that had active equalization that would ramp down the lower frequencies so the higher would be powered adequately until no more juice was available. Just wondering...

[tillmbil]

I have the NOsvalves 299d rebuild, and play it through Herseys with a cheap 5 disc Yamaha cd player. I hate the loud switch ti just muddies the sound. I have the bass and treble turned a few clicks beyond level. Actually I beleive they are at 3/4 turn. The sound is by no means bright and the bass is OK but needs a little more so I have a subwoofer hooked to the center channel.

I usually listen to it at 10-11:00 o'clock, it is in the garage, and on the weekends while I putts around it is set to 1:00 o'clock or higher. Doesn't distort, it just seems to create a fuller sound without becoming to shrill or fatigueing.

[mobile homeless]

Why not email this question to all your clients with 299 rebuilds? You surely have a list in your address book This is quickly becoming a NOSValves business place. I thought the posting of your new amp was fine and liked seeing progress; indeed, I have posted amp pics in the past from Jeff. But the continued questions relating to business regarding pricing and now a call to all your customers to comment on their amps etc seems a bit much. This is a fine line to tread and now it's getting near the edge in my view. Just my opinion.

kh

[mark1101]

Craig,

When my 299 came back from your rebuild, the first thing I noticed, and I posted this, was that it was like I got a new set of tweeters. The top end really came alive. But after many hours now, the bottom end has opened up as well.

I would not say my 299 is too bright, but it has excellent top end.

That being said it is definitely brighter than the 222 you rebuilt with all the same components. But I just think the 2 amps have their own sound characteristic differences, which I completely enjoy. The 222 and the LaScalas are awesome together.

I agree with everyone else, that I wish both had more balls.

But I am totally satisfied with both, and can accomplish just about everything I need to right now. More power would be the added bonus.

Recently, you have probably seen my posts refer to a new equalizer, a DBX 1215. Well I also have a DBX 1231 that I use on the 299 system. I actually bring the top end up just a hair on the EQ (10K-15K raneg sliders). So, the 299 is not too bright for me.

I am picking up a SONY scd-222es Saturday, and my scd-555es will be delivered in another week or so. I got them both for a song from Hi-Fi Buys because they were demo units. These units were at other stores and my local one obtained them. We canvased the leftovers at all the Hi-Fi Buys stores in the southeast to see what was available as "open box." Way cheaper than Ebay, and a big surprise to me.

Once I audition them, I can provide additional comments on the brightness.

[ssh]

No, & I do listen to other tubes & SS daily.

SSH

[sheltie dave]

Kelly,

I do not speak for Klipsch. Looking through the equipment footers, many of us have benefitted from services provided by Craig, Ryan, Jeff, Erik, Alan, Al K, Dean, Greg, and the host of other cottage sideliners that do piecemeal work. While they might be hawking their services to some extent, it has been of great service. Due to their stellar efforts, I have purchased four additional sets of Klipsch speakers, so let them have their run.

Craig often does not know exactly how to phrase some questions or statements so they are generic rather than a call-and-response situation. This is not a slam. People have talents in different areas.

The root question is whether there is a design difference between the 299a and b vs the 299c and d, in terms of base response. Craig seems to rebuild his Scotts to facilitate base, while Ryan seems to rebuild using close to stock replacements. Ryan and Craig differ on what they believe to be a performance design.

Is it due to differing tubes, more headroom, or an equalization issue? Or is there even a difference? For an adequate response, Craig was correct to ask this question on the Klipsch forum rather than the Scott forum. The speakers used must be Klipsch for obvious reasons.

Getting feedback from Klipsch owners who have these amps will allow others to reference some of the "hows and whys." I think, Craig and Ryan would be prolific posters, like you, even if they were not in the tube plumbing business. Fascination for this stuff runs deep, as evidenced by the number of posters and their frequency on the threads for Jeff's and Craig's latest products. Don't worry, be happy!