SETs vs old SS � Listening experiments

[JBryan]

SET12 said: "A great 300B can do wonders harmonicly but its crude next to a 2A3, The 2A3 is crude next to a 45, The KR2A3 is close to a 45 though. And a 45 is crude next to the Western Electric 205D which can deliever just a watt!"

Crude?!... A bit harsh don't ya think? I guess there are folks who argue over Shiraz, Syrah and Petite Syrah which are essentially the same grape grown in different soil, that would compare one as "crude" to another but I'd be hard-pressed to make that distinction with the triodes you mention.

Besides, isn't it enough that the SS/PP/SET "discussions" on this forum cause so much derisiveness and rancor with no end in sight? Do we really need to start dividing the ranks of the SET contingent here and wouldn't that just feed the cycle and make things more um... segmented. In the future, please try to focus your attacks on the P/P hoard and know that the SS menace may be just over the horizon.

Just having fun, Bryan

[Allan Songer]

I guess there are folks who argue over Shiraz, Syrah and Petite Syrah which are essentially the same grape grown in different soil . . .

Syrah and Shiraz are indeed the same. Petite Syrah is actually a genetic cross between Syrah and Peloursin and has quite a different character . . .

[JBryan]

I guess there are folks who argue over Shiraz, Syrah and Petite Syrah which are essentially the same grape grown in different soil . . .

 

Syrah and Shiraz are indeed the same.  Petite Syrah is actually a genetic cross between Syrah and Peloursin and has quite a different character . . .

 

 

Thanks Allan - I stand corrected. Its always good to learn something around here. -Bryan

[coda]

" 90dB with 10% distortion is as hard or harder on your hearing as 100db clean, smooth and balanced.

Craig

That sounds like bunk to me. While I agree that 90db with 10% distortion is far more ANNOYING and likely to have you RUNNING for the volume control or maybe even have you running out of the room, there is no way it will cause more physical DAMAGE than 100 db with no distortion.

good article, reading page 6

http://www.moultonlabs.com/more/about_loudness/P5/

[NOSValves]

If its not more damaging then why are you running for the VC or out of the room?? It's not just annoying it is PAINFULL in my experience! Where I come from body pain usually equals damage. Look at it this way a tweeter can easily take its rated power with clean signal of its rated power do the same with distortion and what happens??? Your ears are susecptable to the same damage from distortion as the driver producing the sound.

Craig

[Parrot]

SET12 said: "A great 300B can do wonders harmonicly but its crude next to a 2A3, The 2A3 is crude next to a 45, The KR2A3 is close to a 45 though. And a 45 is crude next to the Western Electric 205D which can deliever just a watt!" Crude?!... A bit harsh don't ya think? I guess there are folks who argue over Shiraz, Syrah and Petite Syrah which are essentially the same grape grown in different soil, that would compare one as "crude" to another but I'd be hard-pressed to make that distinction with the triodes you mention. Besides, isn't it enough that the SS/PP/SET "discussions" on this forum cause so much derisiveness and rancor with no end in sight? Do we really need to start dividing the ranks of the SET contingent here and wouldn't that just feed the cycle and make things more um... segmented. In the future, please try to focus your attacks on the P/P hoard and know that the SS menace may be just over the horizon. Just having fun, Bryan

Yes, it is very important and welcome to have SET fans fighting among themselves.

There was a true-blue SET guy who used to post here. He was very particular about his SET. He posted this back in 2004:

Dean, if I was the only person that felt this way, I would begin to wonder, but it's pretty common from a lot of people. And I would say this even in comparison with a good 300B SET amp, over the 211 or 845. Then again, I havent heard the 845/211 tube in years. I have heard higher power SET amplfifiers on more than a few occasions, the last being a high power 6C33B parallel SET that was VERY clear and open, but again, lacked some of the distinctive qualities that I have heard with the low power SET, which is an amazing delicacy, directness, and intimacy that words seem to fail in bringing about the mental picture (besides, I have found the higher power SET less emotionally involving - no numbers here). This place doesnt put much credance in text used to decribe sonics anyway but if I said one was a 45.6 and the other a 73.2, somehow "science" would be evoked with "real" numbers to give it measurable validity.

It is the same thing I tried to tell you over a year ago when I said if going high power SET, I would as soon get a quality push pull amp. To me, the great qualities that distinguish SET from PP seem to reside in this low watt option. This is just my experience over the last 14 years of exposure to this topology (admittedly with big gaps at times).

Going with this theory, I would SWOON over the 45, right? Well, this is REALLY getting into the flea power area and speaker, music, and room get even more critical. I really wonder if the 45 would do it on the Cornwalls. I tend to think the 2A3 is at the bottom to achieve results from most of my collection (via the CW that is...not a Khorn).

kh

ps- Edmond, dont forget that Dean had the Apollos at one time.

[Mike Lindsey]

ahhh, mobile homeless... I do miss the lad. He's primarily responsible for getting me into tubes.

Mike

[LarryC]

I have heard higher power SET amplfifiers on more than a few occasions, the last being a high power 6C33B parallel SET that was VERY clear and open, but again, lacked some of the distinctive qualities that I have heard with the low power SET, which is an amazing delicacy, directness, and intimacy that words seem to fail in bringing about the mental picture (besides, I have found the higher power SET less emotionally involving - no numbers here).

kh

The above comment applies to my 6C33B parallel SET amps (Joules), and, while I feel they are outstanding for the positive reasons he cited, I do think Kelly nailed it.

lc

[SET12]

Thanks! That is good Parrot!

But as he said he hadn't heard a 845 or 211 in years! It would take 4 or 5 845's or 211's to eqaul an 833 in dynamic conductance this is my next project! I certainly wouldn't call a 2A3 the bottom! the 6C33's that I have heard have not trip my trigger by any means.

I appreciate his opinion but I guess the more here about SET's on this forum the more I believe that many are poorly designed. I am glad that many are enjoyed though! Reguardless of design! I think one of the best designed high power SET's is the Cary 805 equiped with the 211 tube I haven't heard a Cary equiped with the 845 that I liked yet!

Again design is everything! If you want something extoridinary you have to design extoridinary!

SET12

[Deang]

I don't think the tube has as much to do with final sound as the circuit that's behind it. For example, I've owned several PP amps that use KT-88's -- QUAD Forties, Quicksilver, and now the VRD's -- and none of these amps sound even remotely similiar to one another.

Someone asked earlier what I ran in front of the Wright's, I'm sorry, but I really don't remember. Paul, how about you -- do you remember?

The 18wpc Welborne Apollos were some of the best sounding amps I ever heard -- the Wrights didn't even come close.

[jazman]

Bruce -- I would like to think something like the Moondogs are in a different class then the Wrights, I hope so. What I found so disappointing about the Wrights was that at the volume levels I expected them to excel at, there was not a single thing in the sound that corresponded to the way 2A3 is usually described, i.e. "see through quality", "a sense of immediacy", etc.

As far as 3 watts in general goes, the fact that there are only three watts should tell someone that it's not the topology to choose if one enjoys live level listening, or even moderate levels where the music is complex and dynamic.

Jazzman -- someone who has three watts telling someone that listens with high powered solid state and serious horns that they don't understand "SET AND dynamics" is one of the funnier things I've read around here lately. I think you would have to agree that these things are relative -- I don't think a pair of Moondogs would sound very dynamic at 95dB and up compared to a Crown Macrotech.

Dean,

It seems you still confuse LOUD with DYNAMIC. With a pair of Khorns, it takes only one watt to get 104db. That takes care of the loud.

I HAVE a 100w/ch SS amp that can put out 95db and not peak 10 watts. So does that mean it's more dynamic? What your point with the Crown? Because someone uses high powered solid state, they then automaticlly understand SET, (single ended triode) and dynamics? I don't think so! Your statement is one of the funnier things I've read lately. "SOSFTSOPDD"

"There Must be a (Serious) problem when any system (or component) has to play "louder than life" to sound "natural" and "alive"."

These are some of many reasons I suggested oldbuckster use an internet search engine, not the Klipsch forum, to get a better prospective on amps of all kinds. Just too much mis-information and crap shoveled here by some if SET is discussed. I get no cut of anything anyone chooses to purchase, so I don't care what anyone spends their money on. It is however important that they get information from other sources where LOUD, is not confused with DYNAMIC.

Klipsch out.

[Parrot]

Dean,

You had a Peach in your system at that time, if I recall correctly, so that could have been in front of the Wrights. I don't remember for sure.

Jazman,

I'm sure Dean knows the difference between loud and dynamic.

When we were listening to his borrowed Wrights, when an incredible peak came along on the CD that I brought, that was supposed to go up, oh, 20dB, it went up, oh 2dB instead. The Wrights just don't have the right stuff.

I hope everyone here, including you Jazman, would agree with me that there are some things that are objectively, factually better. For instance, it is better to have an amp that is not clipping.

If you just go by someone's personal opinion on what he finds most pleasing to his ears, that is a different matter. Then if someone happens to like a mushy and compressed sound, so be it. This someone can love mushy and compressed sound and consider it better. But the "better" really just means he likes it better. Objectively, it is absolutely not better--it is clipping.

Someone may love the Wrights to death but the objective facts say that when they are called upon to deliver a huge sound, they sound like a wet noodle.

[jazman]

Dean,

You had a Peach in your system at that time, if I recall correctly, so that could have been in front of the Wrights. I don't remember for sure.

Jazman,

I'm sure Dean knows the difference between loud and dynamic.

When we were listening to his borrowed Wrights, when an incredible peak came along on the CD that I brought, that was supposed to go up, oh, 20dB, it went up, oh 2dB instead. The Wrights just don't have the right stuff.

I hope everyone here, including you Jazman, would agree with me that there are some things that are objectively, factually better. For instance, it is better to have an amp that is not clipping.

If you just go by someone's personal opinion on what he finds most pleasing to his ears, that is a different matter. Then if someone happens to like a mushy and compressed sound, so be it. This someone can love mushy and compressed sound and consider it better. But the "better" really just means he likes it better. Objectively, it is absolutely not better--it is clipping.

Someone may love the Wrights to death but the objective facts say that when they are called upon to deliver a huge sound, they sound like a wet noodle.

SOSFTSOPDD. Same old sh!t from the same old people different day!

Objective facts? One audition, with one amp, and you're brimming with objective facts? I think George Wright will now build the 2A3's with higher end components than was once not his practice which should make a difference. Tube selection also matters, but you have never demonstrated "objective facts". It's always amazed me that your cadre, out of many reviews of 2A3, 300B, and 45 SET amps posted on the internet by people with more exposure to more systems than any of your cadre, can speak of SET amps with appreciation for their sonic characteristics, while your only attempts are to be as negative as possible. One must conclude you're the only ones who understand dynamics.

SOSFTSOPDD!

Klipsch out.

[Cut-Throat]

Going with this theory, I would SWOON over the 45, right? Well, this is REALLY getting into the flea power area and speaker, music, and room get even more critical. I really wonder if the 45 would do it on the Cornwalls. I tend to think the 2A3 is at the bottom to achieve results from most of my collection (via the CW that is...not a Khorn).

kh

ps- Edmond, dont forget that Dean had the Apollos at one time.

Kelly was probably correct on the Cornwalls not tolerating a

45 amp. You really need the efficiency of a Klipschorn or Belle to enjoy a 45

amp.

Jazzman - Check your inbox for a message!

[oldbuckster]

So, a SET amp must have Khorns or Belles to operate correctly, High Efficiency is all that will work with SET? So are you limited as to the speakers you can use............doesn't make much sense to me to limit one's options with power source............Would SET power my H2's? Seems like, and correct me if I'm wrong,(yeah right) SET is really more for the TECHNICAL type guy, one needs to like the technical point of view in order to use and enjoy their equipment, make adjustments, learn and know tubes, bias everything, warm up and cool down,............................Maybe SET is more than this old guy wants to do to listen to music.......................Bring on the Yamaha......or..the Pioneer......something, anything............SETs vs. old SS- Listening experiments......OK??....where are they......

[Erik Mandaville]

I'm not going to get stuck in the mud of the high vs low power debate (regardless of output device), but want to mention I just had a pair of Wright 2A3 amps here that sounded very ill when they first arrived. Secondary output taps were not matched; one filter choke was badly scorched and had to be replaced (see picture), dropping resistors in the power supply showing signs of gross overheating; one filter cap completely fried; and other signs of damage. Somewhere along the line someone had messed up, possibly inserting the output tube into its 4-pin socket incorrectly. The barrier strips for the OPT tap connections were both cracked and badly damaged -- and were also replaced with brand new ones.

This amplifier uses the same driver tube as the Moondog (6SN7) , and of course uses the same output tube. The rectifier is a 5Y3 as opposed to the Moondogs stock GZ37, or the 5AR4 (which I refuse to use on vintage tubes -- just my own personal preference, which IMO pushes the operating points for those antiques.) 5Y3s, as used by the Wrights, are on the other hand a better choice. I believe Sovtek also makes an inderectly heated 5Y3.

All this said, I have heard several pair of Moondog monoblocks, including factory-built-ultimate upgrade versions. IMO, the Wright is very much on par with the Moondog, and although they have a sort of 'faster' transient speed or FR (to me), that is a characteristic I particularly care for -- more so than the Moondogs (which BTW also really only need a single 6SN7). The Moondogs are also good amps, but I liked the Wrights more, including their more humble, utilitarian package.

There are a number of reasons some might not find them a good match, including the type or order of crossover network, source components, and so forth. I also never evaluate an amp without confirming proper functioning of its tube compliment, and people have sent me tube components that were barely alive.

The Wrights are fine sounding SET amps -- to me.

Erik

[Erik Mandaville]

Forgot the picture of the burned choke (hard to say when this may have happened......) The clipped lead ends used to belong to the cathode bias resistor, which was also changed and relocated to the side of the chassis, away from other parts.

[Duke Spinner]

[bULLSHIT!! Really displays how little you know about SET AND dynamics.

Klipsch out.

I tried runing SET for my Midrange....

the amp couldn't Hack it ....at ALL...in any way, Shape , Form, or fashion

hell, a turn on thump woulda made the amp clip....[]

sometimes, when i get the urge to give'r diesel....

a 100w Crown on the mid's will clip, had to go 200w, i do run a 6L6 amp most times for midrange

Dynamic's ...?/

I don't perform professionally , anymore

but I've had years of standing next to a drum kit

my whole system is set up w/ dynamics as the Goal ...

that's why the K-2 on the bottom end

listening to recordings of live music, it routinely produces 50dB+++ dynamic range...

THWACK.......!

that's what a snare should sound like

snare on SET...

thwick

[Erik Mandaville]

I have reading to do, but these great little amps deserve some defense! In this shot, the filter choke had been replaced, and the bias resistor is in its new position on the side of the chassis.

On the top side, there is a much larger JJ filter capacitor that replaced the former blue one that comes stock with the amp.

Such low impedance coupling as used by this amplifier does not always need or require a hum balance circuit for the 2A3s AC filaments, however I found it to be a benefit, and added a hum balance control in a pre-existing hole in the back of the chassis.

This is the very pair of which Dean spoke so affectionately a few lines above. They surely didn't sound rolled-off to me; quite the contrary, actually.

[Parrot]

The Wrights are fine sounding SET amps -- to me.

I said something relevant to this comment just 5 hours ago:

If you just go by someone's personal opinion on what he finds most pleasing to his ears, that is a different matter. Then if someone happens to like a mushy and compressed sound, so be it. This someone can love mushy and compressed sound and consider it better. But the "better" really just means he likes it better. Objectively, it is absolutely not better--it is clipping.

Someone may love the Wrights to death but the objective facts say that when they are called upon to deliver a huge sound, they sound like a wet noodle.

When subjectivity rules, anything goes.

The notion getting trudged out here again, SOS as jazman puts it, is that the only thing that matters is how it sounds to you, there is no wrong or right answer, just feel good about yourself and your amp, et cetera et cetera. Excuse me for a second, I have to go to the bathroom to vomit after reading this amplifier political correctness. . .

Okay, I'm back and feel much better.

Is a Bose Wave Radio just as good as a system with Klipschorns because you can find someone who likes it? Maybe Bose is better because it sells more than Klipschorns? All opinions are equally valid, aren't they?

No, the truth is that an opinion on audio equipment is worth only as much as the credence of the person making the evaluation.