Highest Power SET Amplifier?

[JackD201]

Generally speaking, you don't want to drive a SET much beyond 20-30% of its rated power; however, I have experienced enough exceptions to this rule to say that it is more of a rule of thumb rather than an ironclad law.

I would avoid any SET for which measurements are available and that they show issues with bass distortion...this has ramifications throughout the whole frequency range and not just bass. Now if you are going to actively feed it only mid and higher frequencies then that requirement might be somewhat relaxed. However, I have found that even with sensitive, easy to drive speakers the top SETs with serious output iron triumph over those with weedy little output trannies. They have greater transparency, are more relaxed and will have a purer tonality.

IF you are going to push the SET hard then it really pays to look at the design and size of the power supply...if it is under strain that will likely increase distortion and lessen the sense of authority.

I have had good success with SETs and normal speakers but only from the likes of Aries Cerat, KR Audio, Ayon and NAT. I haven't had Lamm in house so it is hard for me to say what they do with normal speakers...although they don't really have a high powered model in the first place.

+1 on the iron. I had a beast of a 300B from China of all places. An ASL. It could drive speakers my other custom 300Bs with off the shelf Tangos, Tamuras and Lundahls couldn't. Likewise my cousin's ML2.1s drive speakers that they shouldn't have any right to do so with.

 

[ddk]

Yes, but I think that is a separate variable.

I thought the largest issue with distortion from SET amplifiers occurs when the amplifiers are tasked with reproducing the lowest frequencies? SETs' output is most distorted at the lowest frequencies.

You’re generalizing Ron, it all depends on which speaker and which SET, I have 18” subs that my 18 watt Lamms drive with ease. I know that the Lamm ML2 can drive speakers like Wilson X1 full range with easily to very high levels but can run out of steam with others of equal or less sensitivity still without distortion however you’ll lack ultimate dynamics but still have very musical results. I don’t know your speakers, the designer might be your best bet.

Thank you, Tang. My only pre-amp, now or in the future, is the Io Eclipse.

And I appreciate all the comments, gentlemen. But does anybody actually have an answer to the original opening post question?

You have a number of SETs with claimed high output wattage mentioned in this thread but to my knowledge they’re all non-linear beyond 20-30 Watts and distort badly if pushed at even much lower output levels. Given the rarity of your speakers I very much doubt anyone here can say with certainty what amps will or will work with them, then there’s the issue of sound quality there are plenty of high priced crap sounding SETs. Potential of a topology isn’t a guarantee of achievement.

You’re ignoring a very important problem even if you find a suitable SET for your speakers, how is it going to blend with the SS amps of your woofer towers? For sensitive ears and high resolution systems there’s audible mismatch between a highend SET & highend SS amp even at low bass frequencies your mentioned 200 cycles is already midrange using such dissimilar topologies the handoff from main to woofer towers will always be annoyingly obvious and patchy! For better or worse you’re locked in to similar SS amps for your main towers. Of course YMMV based on the resolution of the system and your sensitivities.

david

 

[morricab]

Is the NAT Audio Magma New SE still the highest output singled-ended triode amplifier?

Or has some other, newer product dethroned the Magma New SE?

A friend of mine had his NATs tested and they put out more than they were rated...not so uncommon for a Class AB PP amp but highly unusual for a SET. So, even if on paper someone came up with more powerful amp than new Magma in reality it might be significantly less powerful.

 

[morricab]

Agreed that is why I was running two stereo SETs on by earlier biamped system.

 

[Ron Resnick]

That is a very fair point, David.

But bi-amping with dissimilar amplifier topologies is very common with big Infinity/Genesis systems.

Flemming was fairly sanguine about me using the VTLs on the ribbon panels.

 

[ddk]

That is a very fair point, David.

But bi-amping with dissimilar amplifier topologies is very common with big Infinity/Genesis systems.

Flemming was fairly sanguine about me using the VTLs on the ribbon panels.

Well, you’ve read my opinion of those systems . Harry Pearson spent a lifetime promoting systems that never sounded right to keep people from moving on so they continue reading his dreck! Different amps and even more so topologies have very distinct qualities and sound and will remain sounding separate & different like mixing oil and water. One of the reasons why Dave Wilson doesn’t allow bi-amping/bi-wiring his speakers.

david

 

[Audiocrack]

David, with all due respect but your opinions are pretty radical. It is imho quite possible, although it requires a lot of work and a good ear, to combine solid state for bass towers and tubes for the midrange/highs towers in a seamless way.

 

[cjfrbw]

Looks like the crossover between the Pendragon bass towers and the ribbon segment is 250Hz, close to middle C, which surprises a bit. The ribbon/tweeter array is 89 db efficient, but the bass towers do most of the heavy lifting energy wise, so the ribbon/tweeter should not require massive amplification.

They seem to have a lot of adjustability built in, so you probably will find some point that will blend OK. I am always surprised that speaker elements in a multi way speaker can be entirely dissimilar topologies, but audiophiles have the "princess and the pea" sensibility about mixing amp types.

 

[ddk]

David, with all due respect but your opinions are pretty radical. It is imho quite possible, although it requires a lot of work and a good ear, to combine solid state for bass towers and tubes for the midrange/highs towers in a seamless way.

Not radical at all, tube & SS amps sound very different and have completely different damping qualities in the bass these are facts, is David Wilson a radical too?

If you want to put a lot of work and talk yourself into believing you have a seamless sound from two diverse amplifiers instead of simply using two same or similar amplifiers is your business but that doesn’t change reality. Often these forced marriages are tied together with very colored cables and power cords to make them appear seamless until you compare it to the same speaker with identical amps, good ears won’t be fooled.

david

PS- To clarify this is a debate on setup and not validity of a speaker type.

 

[Audiocrack]

Not radical at all, tube & SS amps sound very different and have completely different damping qualities in the bass these are facts, is David Wilson a radical too?

If you want to put a lot of work and talk yourself into believing you have a seamless sound from two diverse amplifiers instead of simply using two same or similar amplifiers is your business but that doesn’t change reality. Often these forced marriages are tied together with very colored cables and power cords to make them appear seamless until you compare it to the same speaker with identical amps, good ears won’t be fooled.

david

PS- To clarify this is a debate on setup and not validity of a speaker type.

Thanks for complimenting me with my good ears! And yes, I think you are a radical but that is fine of course.

 

[ddk]

Thanks for complimenting me with my good ears! And yes, I think you are a radical but that is fine of course.

david

 

[microstrip]

That is a very fair point, David.

But bi-amping with dissimilar amplifier topologies is very common with big Infinity/Genesis systems.

Flemming was fairly sanguine about me using the VTLs on the ribbon panels.

Gary Koh addressed this point several times - as far as I remember it was mainly possible because of the intrinsic characteristics of servo-drive bass system.

 

[Audiocrack]

Gary Koh addressed this point several times - as far as I remember it was mainly possible because of the intrinsic characteristics of servo-drive bass system.

We have been able to realize seamless integration of my servo driven Genesis 1.1 bass amps and my Kondo amps but it took a lot of time and effort, including a complete overhaul of the G 1.1. xovers using only Duelund silver caps.

 

[JackD201]

Gary Koh addressed this point several times - as far as I remember it was mainly possible because of the intrinsic characteristics of servo-drive bass system.

Where is Gary? I miss that dude! Didn't Gary actually have mid powered tube amps built specifically for the big G's? Yes he did!

 

[Barry]

You’re ignoring a very important problem even if you find a suitable SET for your speakers, how is it going to blend with the SS amps of your woofer towers? For sensitive ears and high resolution systems there’s audible mismatch between a highend SET & highend SS amp even at low bass frequencies your mentioned 200 cycles is already midrange using such dissimilar topologies the handoff from main to woofer towers will always be annoyingly obvious and patchy!

+1. I used different amps (a hybrid & SS) in a tri-amped system with a crossover around the same 200Hz frequency for a few years and could never achieve a coherent soundstage. Everything sounded annoyingly disjointed. Once I used two of the same amps, a coherent soundstage magically locked into place. A sub with a much lower frequency, 80Hz and a steep cutoff like 24 dB/octave might work, but that's the highest I would go.

I'd ask the speaker manufacturer what they like best. Good luck.

 

[spiritofmusic]

It’s been a real struggle integrating my 70W all-Class A 211 SETs w my Zu Class D sub amps, and that’s with a transition point just under 40Hz.
Any higher, and I’m not sure I’d have succeeded.

 

[ALF]

Well, you’ve read my opinion of those systems . Harry Pearson spent a lifetime promoting systems that never sounded right to keep people from moving on so they continue reading his dreck! Different amps and even more so topologies have very distinct qualities and sound and will remain sounding separate & different like mixing oil and water. One of the reasons why Dave Wilson doesn’t allow bi-amping/bi-wiring his speakers.

david

...Wilson's, that and not allowing biamping the transducers helps selling his subs .

Me, I'm like David, when hearing his 18" JBL subs, done, finished, complete...happy!

Cheers!!

ALF

 

[morricab]

Thanks for complimenting me with my good ears! And yes, I think you are a radical but that is fine of course.

I would say, with rare exception, that he is right.

 

[ddk]

Gary Koh addressed this point several times - as far as I remember it was mainly possible because of the intrinsic characteristics of servo-drive bass system.

Servos control movement of cones nothing to do with blending of electronics which is a question of choices in any multi-amp setup.
david

 

[Ron Resnick]

It seems like we are talking past each other here. As always, it is about one's sonic priorities and sonic sensitivities. Someone who is very sensitive to the sound of different amplifier topologies on a bi-amped speaker is going to prefer to use the same amplifier to drive both stages of each speaker.

For others the sonic gains from using different amplifier topologies to achieve the sonic priorities desired (e.g., sweeter, more "liquid" midrange) will outweigh any sonic detriment arising from dissimilar amplifier topologies.