edwinr Posted July 10, 2004 Share Posted July 10, 2004 ---------------- On 7/7/2004 9:52:22 AM Erik Mandaville wrote: Hi, Edwin: I just spent 45 mins. writing a response to your interest in SET and other types of amplifiers, and hit 'submit.' The computer had some sort of electronic cough, and then I got an error message. My post vanished! Anyway. I also have speakers similar to your Loth X. Mine are Lowther PM2As in rear-laoded horns. The essential part of my message was to encourage you to have fun with this, and listen to both types of amps if you are able. The search is the fun part, and there is no reason to lock yourself into either an SET or PP prison. I enjoy both types of amps in my system, but use them for different kinds of music. I also recently built 1.5 watt amps for two forum members, and was amazed at how powerful that small amount of power sounded with our Klipschorns. It just depends on what you like...... Have fun! Erik ---------------- Thanks Eric. Sorry I didn't respond earlier. I've been having major problems getting on line and accessing certain threads. Just to clarify, I don't own any Loth-X speakers. But I have auditioned them when I decided to go horn...if you know what I mean. In fact considering Loth-X Polaris was the major factor in my choosing to go Klipschorn. The Loth-X was....NICE! But only suitable for small rooms. The Klipschorn did everything the Loth-X Polaris could do but louder, with similar dynamics and with better bass response. When you take pricing into consideration, the Klipschorn won hands down. And you're right. Owning Klipsch speakers, particularly the Heritage line, gives us the opportunity to consider any amplifier based on sound quality alone, not "...it sounds nice, but does it have enough power to drive my speakers?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo33 Posted July 11, 2004 Author Share Posted July 11, 2004 "Acid Rock? LOL, Neo -- you're the only "trip" around here!" What? You haven't had a "trip" before, Deano? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Mandaville Posted July 11, 2004 Share Posted July 11, 2004 Hi, Edwin: Oh, I must have misread your post concerning the Loth-X speakers. It's true that we were pretty amazed upon hearing the Klipschorns for the first time in our home. Crossoverless Lowthers in horns are incredibly fast and open-sounding speakers, and they have a sense of immediacy and presence that in my opinion comes close to that of the Klipschorn. However, there is just so much a single driver + midrange whizzer can do, and Lowthers, unless installed in really big horn enclosures, just do not have the kind of bass response the Klipschorn provides with such ease. The most suitable amplifier to use with the big corner horns is something that in my opinion really deserves some research. The extreme efficiency of Klipschorns and its smaller siblings enables the use of lower power amplification, but whether that is the best route to take is maybe something that you can decide after listening to different kinds of amplifiers. The subject of high v.s. low power amplification has in the past brought out some pretty strong opinions (on both sides)on this forum. My feeling is that both have advantages and disadvantages. I own and use both PP and SET amps, and that for me helps reduce the worry about which is better. I have also recently built a couple of low-power OTL (output transformerless) amplifier kits, and have very much enjoyed the freshly-cleaned window-like view they provide into whatever music is playing. That said, I have also experienced the strong grip and control that higher power amplification has on bass response. So. Good luck, Edwin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
middlecreekguy Posted July 11, 2004 Share Posted July 11, 2004 ---------------- On 7/7/2004 11:21:39 AM mdeneen wrote: If you listen to a SET and a PP, and you prefer the SET then you are simply preferring the distortion signature of that over the other, and perhaps you are willing to sacrifice some power to get that difference. I frankly don't see what the fuss is about. The issue in general has become so irrational I am mostly uninterested in the debate. I AM very interested in the amps, but not the religion surrounding them. I just really could care less. mdeneen ---------------- Very well put. I`m new to this game, but.... that totally sums up my thoughts. IMHO everyone has a preference which is based on the room their system is in, the music they listen to and what speakers they are using. It`s not about what`s best. What is "best for you" is the question. It`s like arguing which Beatles album is the best. There is no right or wrong. But IMO the best Beatles album is.......................that`s another thread folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt1stcav Posted July 11, 2004 Share Posted July 11, 2004 Ditto (to what Greg just said). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo33 Posted July 11, 2004 Author Share Posted July 11, 2004 "If you listen to a SET and a PP, and you prefer the SET then you are simply preferring the distortion signature of that over the other, and perhaps you are willing to sacrifice some power to get that difference. I frankly don't see what the fuss is about. The issue in general has become so irrational I am mostly uninterested in the debate. I AM very interested in the amps, but not the religion surrounding them. I just really could care less." If you don't mind 3rd order harmonics distortion to reach "reasonable" volume level, then by all mean enjoy your PP amps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted July 11, 2004 Share Posted July 11, 2004 If you don't mind 3rd order harmonics distortion to reach "reasonable" volume level, then by all mean enjoy your PP amps. Yup when people make redicules statements like you just did above then this subject does really get old. Tell us NEO exactly what does 3rd order harmonic distortion sound like ? Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshnich Posted July 11, 2004 Share Posted July 11, 2004 I must love 3rd order whatever because I love my PP. BTW I might like SET as well but I have never heard one. Nontheless I would suggest that with either its not a religion. If you are a tad obsessed with this subject you should consider some sort of therapy. In the great scheme of things this is about as important as which socks to wear. Josh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosypup Posted July 12, 2004 Share Posted July 12, 2004 p=p can have magic too. I heard it with one amp. But the type of magic is different from the sets I have. Sets, the right ones, have the abilty to "involve" the listener much more than p-p. Anyone in the ny metro area is welcome to listen and see what they think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisK Posted July 12, 2004 Share Posted July 12, 2004 PP or SET.... I've had both and believe the source material, speakers and room acoustics have more due to with the final sound than either architecture has. Provided the circuit designs are executed well, it's kinda like Blonde or Brunette. Chris PS In the big picture, I don't even think it's as important as sock selection. Maybe it's closer to fold or wad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fini Posted July 12, 2004 Share Posted July 12, 2004 I once heard Roy Rogers' OTL (A-E-HOO) in a movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchist Posted July 12, 2004 Share Posted July 12, 2004 Let's not forget 'vintage' which is more rewarding on a cool and financial factor, 'new' which is more rewarding on a "i don't need to worry if this will burn the house down" factor, and 'steady state' which is more rewarding on a 'mine has more watts or is bigger than yours' factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dzapper Posted July 12, 2004 Share Posted July 12, 2004 PP is all wet SET is inflexably rigid OTL is out to lunch. I guess that means we all have to embrace digital!!! Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted July 12, 2004 Share Posted July 12, 2004 ---------------- On 7/12/2004 8:20:05 AM mdeneen wrote: I think everyone can agree that SET is emotionally involving, while OTL is clearly psychologically motivating and that leaves Push-Pull which is obviously physically stimulating. Consult your daily bio-rhythm chart before plugging in your amp. mdeneen ---------------- Mark, I was wondering if you'd say more about the OTL being psychologically motivating. I followed your posts on the difference between SET and PP distortion, which I found interesting, even if my understanding of the technology and terms is marginal. In another post, I think you were responding to Erik Mandaville's comment on euphonics. I'm not sure of the difference between psychoacoustics and euphonics. Is euphonics the emotional part, such as euphoric? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daddy Dee Posted July 12, 2004 Share Posted July 12, 2004 Mark, makes sense. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dodger Posted July 12, 2004 Share Posted July 12, 2004 ---------------- On 7/12/2004 10:09:58 AM mdeneen wrote: Dee--- I was just being sarcastic - maybe even sardonic. I believe whatever "involvement" is there is there of YOUR choosing. As for euphonics and psychoacoustics, the former is the art of making pleasing sound, and the latter is the actual scientific study of the perception of sound. Jimi Hendrix was a practitioner of using distortion euphonically, Fletcher-Munson explained a few aspects of psychoacoustics. mdeneen ---------------- Hello: This makes excellent sense Mark. To add, as Hendrix was more into circular stereo effects, the psychoacoustic factor may play a larger role - bringing us full circle so to speak to individual choice. No matter how many respond or how many words are posted - as fact or as fancy - it comes to what we own or what we wish to own. Simplistic as that sounds we can Post all facts supporting each side, we own what we own and may at some point change. We change as budgets allow and as our auditory system responds to the Type and also the brand that we hear as pleasing and accurate. Using guitarists as examples do you like Segovia, Hendrix, Clapton or Joe Walsh? When it comes down to it, it's all choice, all relative. No-one is right, no-one is wrong if you enjoy the listening experience. dodger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted July 12, 2004 Share Posted July 12, 2004 There will always be some people who believe what they want to believe, refusing to let troublesome facts and evidence to the contrary stand in their way. Take these guys for instance: http://www.flat-earth.org/ http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublonskopf/Flatearthsociety.htm Why should audio be any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neo33 Posted July 12, 2004 Author Share Posted July 12, 2004 What does the earth being flat or round have anything to do with audio? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwinr Posted July 13, 2004 Share Posted July 13, 2004 ---------------- On 7/11/2004 9:12:19 PM NOSValves wrote: If you don't mind 3rd order harmonics distortion to reach "reasonable" volume level, then by all mean enjoy your PP amps. Yup when people make redicules statements like you just did above then this subject does really get old. Tell us NEO exactly what does 3rd order harmonic distortion sound like ? Craig ---------------- 3rd order harmonic distortion? What does it sound like? That's a good question. I understood even order distortion components give a 'sweetness to the sound' whilst uneven order distortion sounds unpleasent to the ear. Class A/B solid state amplification is more inclined to exhibit 3rd order harmonic distortion - that's why manufacturers employ negative feedback to reduce it. Apparently excess use of negative feedback has a negative influence on sound. From my understanding, a SET 300B working in class A requires little if any negative feedback because it exhibits virtually no 3rd order harmonic distortion when working in it's comfort zone. Is this why SET exhibits an almost liquid midband? Some would argue this is at the expense of the bass and treble extremes - throwing the midband to the fore to appreciative listeners. On the other hand many British studio type loudspeakers of the 70's and 80's exhibited the traditional BBC mid band presence dip. Despite this so called dip, speakers such as the BBC LS 3/5a and the Spendor BC1 were reknown for their ability to project a palpable midband. The one common theme between both SET amps and BBC style speaker designs is the very low 3rd harmonic distortion specification in the very important midband region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrot Posted July 13, 2004 Share Posted July 13, 2004 I liked the original Rogers LS3/5a when I heard it in a brief audition, but its specs were ridiculous: 83dB sensitivity, so forget about low-power amps, you die-hards. But they were only safe to play at a maximum of 95dB, which they were able to reach, I guess, with their top power handling of 25W. They changed the speaker's set-up in the 1980s so that it can accept more power, and they have had a matching subwoofer available since the 90s, so things have probably changed a lot for the better. Want to read something ridiculous? This is J. Gordon Holt in Stereophile 3/77: "Maximum safe output level is around 95dB SPL (sound pressure level) at a listening distance of up to 15', which is about as loud as a symphonic crescendo from 10' behind the conductor. This is with full-range program material; the limiting factor on power input is the "woofer" (because of its bass boost), so when the speakers are used with a subwoofer (crossing at 60 to 80Hz), they are capable of a clean 100 to 105dB, which is enough to give any masochist a most gratifying case of permanent ear damage." Maybe this "100dB causes permanent ear damage" bunk is scare tactics or rationalization for using inefficient audiophile speakers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts