jt1stcav Posted July 7, 2004 Share Posted July 7, 2004 Like Mark, Erik, and others have said...I really don't care whether it's SET, SEP, PP, SS, A, AB, XYZ, or from 1.5 watts to 300 watts; if it sounds good to you, then that's all that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie dave Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 Erik, thanks for addressing one of the larger caveats of the SET circus. It is really difficult to maneuver around the bass elephant, which is one of my cardinal virtues in building a stereo system. I would love to have a system designed around a good monoblocs SET pair, but in order to have it be a fully integrated all purpose system, I would need to biamp, and with biamping I also would want to add an SVS subwoofer. Everything gets real complicated real fast if I try to go SET, so for now(and until I get the to spec greatroom built,) I will be a PP guy. The other rich irony is working with tube bass vs SS bass on Khorns, Belles, or La Scalas. As good as I can get, bass response with KT88s, KT66s and EL34s is not quite as good as the bass from even my HK 430, as measured with some very high quality SPL gear, with both sets of amps set to parallel SPL output levels. The plain fact is most bass arguments are rendered moot by the very fact that the Khorns are starting to roll off significantly in the region where SET amps are not up to snuff anyway. Juggling paradigms and compromises gets to be fairly interesting in itself, and is a major reason why passions run so high. I love reading about the hows and whys of the physics behind our hobby and passion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosypup Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 I can tell, very easily, a big difference between sets and other types of amplification. And I really understand the idea of "magic". I first had vintage amplifiers, lots of them. Then I had some more recent tube p-p amplifiers, and I had an otl. The set is way better. I think one problem is that when someone hears a "set" they could be listening to anything. There is such variety of sets, and many of them are little or nothing special. But I guess one issue here is how well a low powered set will do with a klipsch when you could be hitting them with more power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skonopa Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 ---------------- On 7/7/2004 12:29:11 AM AK-4 wrote: I still think music types and listening habits dictate the proper choice. What's "best" is what works best with your music and listening preferences. For me, its very uncomplicated. It needs to move some air. It need to scoot pretty good without upsetting the inner ear. It needs to be clean . It needs to be open . It needs to pound . It needs to shake , rattle , and roll . In short, it needs to load up the room and sound pleasing. The truth is, I listen primarily to highly compressed Rock and Metal, and I'm just not concerned with 75% of the stuff audiophiles fret over. My system is built to do the one thing I enjoy most -- JAM. ---------------- Exactly! That is how I see it. Yeah, the system that I have may seem "inferior" (RF-7s driven by a SS B&K amp) to all those on here packing K-horns with tube amplification. However, it does exactly what I want and produces the sound that I desired, especially for the music I like to listen to. Just like you, I listen mostly to the rock and metal, and I am not ashamed to admit that I listen to rock and metal. It is what I prefer to listen to. I am not trying to "impress" anybody with "refined" tastes in music and frankly, I really don't care. Most of that "refined" stuff bores me anyway - I'd rather play it hard and play it loud, and by-golly, my system delivers that in spades! I had so much fun "head-bangin'" to that Iron Maiden album that Griff put on during the Friday night gathering in Indy! I ended up buying that same album so I can crank it up on my own system! It was truly a pleasure to meet you in Indy last month, and I hope the oppurtunity comes up again. I may also be talking to you about a cross-over upgrade in the somewhat near future. Unfortunatly the money pool for audio upgrades is pretty much dried up for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LarryC Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 ---------------- On 7/8/2004 8:34:23 AM rosypup wrote: ...I had some more recent tube p-p amplifiers, and I had an otl. The set is way better. ---------------- Which OTL did you have? The comparison with SET is interesting.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Painful Reality Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 ---------------- On 7/8/2004 8:34:23 AM rosypup wrote: ... and I had an otl. The set is way better. I think one problem is that when someone hears a "set" they could be listening to anything. There is such variety of sets, and many of them are little or nothing special. ---------------- I hope you realise the irony in this. There is also more than one OTL. Actually each OTL have extremely different topology, be it a Futterman inspired design, a Circlotron, a differential balanced (à la AtmaSphere) amongst other. Each OTL sounds extremely different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosypup Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 I have fourier pantheres. Fourier is reported to have reliability problems but no one disputes the quality of the sound. I got it from someone who has an original futterman and that is sitting on the side also to his sets. Otls might hit klipschs' well. I haven't tried it. Because klipsch has a little edge and bite to them, and otl's don't. Otls have an incredibly clear sound, articulate but nice and easy too. Otl's sound great, but... I had realized after six months of adjacent room comparisons with a particular set, that output transformers, with otls lack, gives the sound more depth, emotion, and engagement. Otl's sound very good without the output transformer, but an output transformer is really the heart of good sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Painful Reality Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 I think one problem is that when someone hears a "OTL" they could be listening to anything. There is such variety of OTLs, and many of them are little or nothing special. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 "...but an output transformer is really the heart of good sound." I'm not sure, but my feeling is that designers of OTL amplifiers might not agree with that viewpoint. I agree, though, that the quality of output transformers, for the kind of amps that need them, is very important. Erik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosypup Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 I'm pretty sure about this. But at any opportunity I get in the future, I will check it out. There's alway room for learning and seeing things from a different angle. I'm sure there may be a good application for otl. But from my perspective, I'm not too interested anymore. Not when I have sets that sound as good as I can practically imagine an amp to sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Less is more. (part of the time)... This adage is particularily true in audio when precision and delicacy is required. For heavy metal and hard rock (and let's not forget the HT crowd), then less is not good enough. But then delicacy and precision takes a very back seat (hell, it takes a hike) to pulse-pounding and ear-flattening bass. It all boils down to what-you-listen-to. Not which topology is "best"... I have often read reviews where the reviewer refers to speakers having "good rythym" and "good for rock" or "good for classical" on the other hand, implying that they may not be capable of rocking down the house, etc. I always figured that a good speaker would handle each with aplumb. Klipchorns do (IMO). So why should amps be any different?! Well, it's the same issue there, too. Choose the tool appropriate for the job. DM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo33 Posted July 9, 2004 Author Share Posted July 9, 2004 "Less is more. (part of the time)... This adage is particularily true in audio when precision and delicacy is required." Certain individuals do not care for the details. All they can think of is - it rocks LOUD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skonopa Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 ---------------- On 7/9/2004 4:50:52 PM neo33 wrote: Certain individuals do not care for the details. All they can think of is - it rocks LOUD! ---------------- $#!+ Yeah! Play it hard! Play it loud! In seriousness, yes, I'll admit that I do like to 'let'em rip' most of the time, but I've put on classical and some jazz on my system, and I thought it sounded quite well, even the bass. It was very clean and articulate, at least that was how it sounded to me. It sure as heck impressed me, even after listening to other systems. I do agree certain individuals do not care for the details (after all, look at all the sales of cheap, crappy sounding, boom-boxes and the like), but this individual does (I know this is not directed at me personally, but I wanted to comment on it). Otherwise, why would I spend the money and take the time that I did to get what I got now. I could've made it simple and just got Bose, as it would've served the purpose adequatly enough. I wanted something that can really crank when I want it to, but at the same time, be able to play with the clarity and detail that some music demands. In my opinion, what I got now delivers and does so very nicely, regardless of what people's opinions may be regarding the RF-7s and solid-state amplification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBrennan Posted July 10, 2004 Share Posted July 10, 2004 Joe Stalin once said "Quantity has a quality all it's own". Hard to argue with the results the Red Army got with that philosophey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted July 10, 2004 Share Posted July 10, 2004 ---------------- On 7/9/2004 9:48:54 AM rosypup wrote: . Otls have an incredibly clear sound, articulate but nice and easy too. Otl's sound great, but... I had realized after six months of adjacent room comparisons with a particular set, that output transformers, with otls lack, gives the sound more depth, emotion, and engagement. Otl's sound very good without the output transformer, but an output transformer is really the heart of good sound. ---------------- I'm not enough of a technical person to understand what impact the output transformer has on sound, or why an OTL could sound good without one. Reading some of the technical folks explanations in lay terms of the necessity of having a good output transformer, makes sense to me... such as the limitations of an HF-81 with barely adequate iron. Also, making sense are the observations contained in this thread that speaking generally of SET or OTL has its limitations.... since their are fine and poor examples of both. One fine example of OTL is Bruce Rozenblit's SE OTL. I've been listening to one for a couple of weeks now and thanks to Erik Mandaville who built this little rascal. Bruce tells me it's the best amp he's ever designed and I can well believe it. It sounds fabulous, even at 1.5 wpc. It drives Khorns nicely. I did realize it was up against it's limits when I asked it to drive a LaScala center in addition to the Khorns, but didn't ask it to do that very long. That was a little too much to ask. Erik and Wolfram have posted some months ago about the SE OTL and I find that their descriptions of the amp and the sound ring true to me. I've been driving them so far with the Sunfire tube preamp and am looking forward to driving them with the Peach. The Peach made the Wright 2A3's sing in a way the the Sunfire didn't. I want to get the Peach in my system before posting more about the SE OTL's. Also, currently have the Wrights out on loan and am looking forward to an A/B of the Wrights and the SE OTL. Of course, The Wrights weighing in at 3.5 wpc may not be quite fair! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Garrison Posted July 10, 2004 Share Posted July 10, 2004 TBrennen, Isn't that sort of paraphrasing Bose's marketing philosophy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheltie dave Posted July 10, 2004 Share Posted July 10, 2004 Neo, if certain people do not care for the details, the why do they own Klipsch speakers, and in many cases the BEST Klipsch speakers? I get more detail outta my HK 630 and Khorns than friends hear on $10 to $30 grand systems, and yet all the disparaging comments directed at PP somehow fall short of SS based systems. Fact o' the matter is most of us would not be talking 'bout SET and PP if we didn't FIRST own Klipsch. The speakers are the primary link to hearing outstanding sound, so time to pony up and get some Khorns! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted July 10, 2004 Share Posted July 10, 2004 Dave, That is a point well taken. I can only imagine the chagrin of someone with a 10 - 30K "esoteric" system trying to get over the astonishing comparative value of a buddy's $1300 used Khorns driven by a receiver that didn't hurt $100. Add to that the insult of such good sound coming from garden variety interconnects and lampcord for speaker wire! It's almost too much to bear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo33 Posted July 10, 2004 Author Share Posted July 10, 2004 "Neo, if certain people do not care for the details, the why do they own Klipsch speakers, and in many cases the BEST Klipsch speakers? I get more detail outta my HK 630 and Khorns than friends hear on $10 to $30 grand systems, and yet all the disparaging comments directed at PP somehow fall short of SS based systems. Fact o' the matter is most of us would not be talking 'bout SET and PP if we didn't FIRST own Klipsch." It's a given that people who post in this thread owned Klipsch speakers. That doesn't necessitate the idea that they're going after the details. Do you care much about the delicacy of instruments being used in the music when you listen to high volume acid rock? I know some people listen to Britney Spear and 50 cents on their Klipsch speakers and they call that music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 10, 2004 Share Posted July 10, 2004 Acid Rock? LOL, Neo -- you're the only "trip" around here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts