imperfectcircle25 Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 I will be upgrading to the RF-7's from the RF-3's soon and I was thinking of trying out a tube integrated amp in place of my SS Exposure XV. The Expposure is great with the Klipsch's warm laid back and punchy. But I would like to try tubes out for a change. I am a bit worried about the RF-7's dip down to 3ohms being a problem with a tube amp?? Will the RF-7's do ok with tubes?? Has anyone tried the Manley Labs Stingray with there RF-7's?? Or do you guys know of a better tube integrated for the RF-7's that I should check out?? Thanks frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 The RF7's work fine with tubes. The manley sting ray?? I seem to remember someone trying one of those with some Klipsch speaker and quickly selling it. But this was a very vague memory. Maybe there still here and will post. Its sure is a awesome looking amp but I'm not to fond of more tubes then required to get the job done designs. More tubes in the output equals more headaches and distortion. Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 One of our members who lives in Alaska has one as I recall. I thought he liked it a lot. Unfortunately, I don't remember his name. Marvel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imperfectcircle25 Posted May 8, 2005 Author Share Posted May 8, 2005 I dont see why it wouldnt work well. The Stingray is a very well regarded tube integrated. It is supposed to be one of the best around for rock music. Any other ideas on tube integrateds that would work well with the RF-7's mainly for rock n roll?? Was also considering amps from Rogue, VTL, Audiomat...ect I did use an 8watt SET 300b Cary amp at one time but it wasnt my cup of tea, it just wasnt puncy enough for my musical taste. i figure a slightly more powerful PP amp of 30-50 watts should do the job. Thanks frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 ---------------- On 5/8/2005 3:47:30 PM NOSValves wrote: Its sure is a awesome looking amp but I'm not to fond of more tubes then required to get the job done designs. More tubes in the output equals more headaches and distortion. Craig ---------------- Craig, Are you saying you would rather use two higher wattage output tubes per channel instead of four lower wattage? Say two 6550s instaed of the four EL84s per side? I am curious to know your reasoning. I understand it would be more work to bias the tubes, etc. but what else do you mean? And they are a cool looking amp. Marvel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 Looks like they come in around $1300 on the used market (www.audiogon.com). Looks like a lot of amp for the money. Might as well give it whirl and tell us what you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smuttynose Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 I see the one on audiogon, looks real nice. but who needs so much power? I am running my horns with the EICO HF-81 and can barely stay in the room with the level between 0 and 1, and it is a 14 WPC amp. I never realized what high efficiency speakers do with just a little power. How does the effieciency of RF-7's compare? If they are close, don't bother paying for 50 watts X 2, or even 25 X 2. I was considering a mac 240, but I think it would be overkill. But it is a really nice looking amp. For that kind of money would you rather have a blueberry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 If you're being "driven out of the room" with the attenuator set at so low a level, you should probably get the amp checked out. The effect you describe is a product of distortion - not clean power. I recommend at least 50 wpc with the RF-7's for Rock music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCturboT Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 The owners name of the Stingray in Alaska is Davmar if you want to contact him I know he likes it very much. I am the fomer owner of this Amplifier and I used it with my Cornwalls as well as my Klipschorns. It had all the nice features of a tube amp with the fast,tight bass of a Solid State-as a matter of fact it was the most Solid State sounding of the three tube amps I have owned (Scott LK-48 and Eico HF-81 being the others). I purchased it with the thought that my SS amp was nonrepairable and used it for about two months replacing the tubes with JJ/Tesla's which help smooth out the highs. It is one of the nicest looking pieces of audio equiptment out there and really is a fine amplifier. I say go for it....if you don't like it it is easily resellable so it's a no-brainer. Jeff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smuttynose Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 ---------------- On 5/8/2005 7:58:54 PM DeanG wrote: If you're being "driven out of the room" with the attenuator set at so low a level, you should probably get the amp checked out. The effect you describe is a product of distortion - not clean power. I recommend at least 50 wpc with the RF-7's for Rock music. ---------------- okay, so i exagerate a little. there is no distortion, i only meant to emphasis how little power they need to drive really big sound from them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leok Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 imperfectcircle25, I recommend using the 4 Ohm output from the amp, assuming it is available: better use of a tube amp's capabilities. As for power, I don't know how people use more than a few Watts of power with Klipsch speakers, but they seem to, or at least believe they do. Leo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 ---------------- On 5/8/2005 5:48:06 PM Marvel wrote: ---------------- On 5/8/2005 3:47:30 PM NOSValves wrote: Its sure is a awesome looking amp but I'm not to fond of more tubes then required to get the job done designs. More tubes in the output equals more headaches and distortion. Craig ---------------- Craig, Are you saying you would rather use two higher wattage output tubes per channel instead of four lower wattage? Say two 6550s instaed of the four EL84s per side? I am curious to know your reasoning. I understand it would be more work to bias the tubes, etc. but what else do you mean? And they are a cool looking amp. Marvel ---------------- Yes of course you have the just of it. More tubes more headaches. I bet the stingray doesn't have a bias control for all 8 EL84's and knowing current production tubes very lose tolerances I just don't like the idea. Every single tube produces a given amount of distortion the more tubes the more distortion then couple multiple tubes per channel testing off one another and its even worse. If it does have 8 different controls for all those tubes it wouldn't just be a hassle it would be a nightmare to bias it. Scoring 8 close tolerance NOS EL84 would be a nightmare also. To me its like this....your car isn't fast enough so do you put a second engine in it? Craig Edit I just looked at a picture of the amp and it looks like there is 4 bias controls per channel pretty cool. But like I said it seems like it would be a real pain to me if you wanted to keep the bias nice and tightly set with 8 of those beast to mess with some customers complain about having 2 per mono block. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dzapper Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 "Yes of course you have the just of it. More tubes more headaches. I bet the stingray doesn't have a bias control for all 8 EL84's and knowing current production tubes very lose tolerances I just don't like the idea. Every single tube produces a given amount of distortion the more tubes the more distortion then couple multiple tubes per channel testing off one another and its even worse. If it does have 8 different controls for all those tubes it wouldn't just be a hassle it would be a nightmare to bias it. Scoring 8 close tolerance NOS EL84 would be a nightmare also. To me its like this....your car isn't fast enough so do you put a second engine in it?" What a great arguement for the two tubes of a single ended amp! Uh-oh, I'm on somebody's do-do list. Rick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 No Rick I agree with a basic principle that a SE amplifier should be the cleanest sound if you can get enough headroom to fullfill your listening needs. The tubes that most SE amps use just don't provide that and then they refuse to add a little feedback to broaden its freqeuncy response and help stabilize the amplifier to boot. I agree with the principal but for me in the real world the principal just doesn't hold water. Craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 "...I agree with a basic principle that a SE amplifier should be the cleanest sound if you can get enough headroom..." The Apollos fell into that area, but Man, the cleaner it is the more of it I want, and so even 18 watts of SE didn't get it. Sure sounded good though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dzapper Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 I wuz just funnin ya Craig. I know your feelings. As long as your aim isn't to violate every noise ordinance known to man like ol Dean there, they can sound good. Soon, I'll have a pair of 50 watt PPs assembled to play with. Rick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 The last watt always sounds better than the first watt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 LMAO !! Dean your a fricken nut LOL !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3dzapper Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 ---------------- On 5/8/2005 11:53:54 PM DeanG wrote: The last watt always sounds better than the first watt. ---------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxg Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 Just to pick up on Craig's point - 8 output tubes with individual biasing is a total PITA. I know - I live with it. Of course in my case the adjustment is on the underside, the amp weights 60 lbs (without the power supply) and is housed hidden behind the TV (which weighs even more) to keep prying 3 year old's fingers out. In other words - I have to be seriously determined to adjust the thing to do it and that does not happen very often. On the plus side I have listened to the Manley on a number of ocasions and was fairly impressed. It was playing with some relatively low sensitivity speakers and it coped very well indeed. I guess adjustment would be easier than on mine and the unit is way cuter and easier to manoevre! 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.