Thanks Morricab...good to know. I have heard the Ypsilon monos with YG Anat Ref IIs many years ago and was very impressed with the sound, though i admit i could not tell what component was doing what since it was all new to me. What is a Single Ended Transistor, by the way? I think i get a Single Ended Triode-based system. Sorry - not a techie, so thanks for a dumbed-down explanation. Most curious.
Speaker Oasis...Bionor
- Thread starter ALF
- Start date
Very good observation. This is the malaise of using less than optimal gear - waiting for all the circuitry and aspects of the system to fully stabilise from a cold start, or extended shutdown. My solution, 30 years ago, was running everything 24/7 - the SS power amp had high bias, so the power bill suffered
; but the reward was a higher quality than most people were getting .It's always an engineering issue, and luckily progress has been made: nowadays standard components don't need as much prodding as once was the case to give a sufficient quality - the ideal would be that a system reaches optimum in every area after, say, 5 minutes from a dead cold start - I haven't created or heard a system that is this capable, yet ...
I heard the Pathos TT with Analysis Amphi. The guy loved that amp, and I thought the mids and tone were very liquid and involving. Another guy in the UK moved from valve SETs to First Watt SIT, mainly for SS convenience, but he loves them
I have heard the Ypsilon Aelius in 2 Vivid G1 systems and 1 Sounlab Ultimates. They had great tone and bloom and soundstage, but there was a struggle going on in some lower registers. In one Vivd system (Joel's) I was able to isolate that to the amp by comparing to bridged Luxman M800 which I preferred on all fronts. Ypsilon were more neutral though, and Luxman tone was a bit richer. Joel marginally prefers the Ypsilons, so YMMV.
I love their preamp. But it is single ended only, though they give a transformer thing to connect to balanced power amp. The pre can be run as both a passive or an active pre. The Audio mag in Germany that rated NAT transmitter as 1, rated the Aelius as 10. They rated the Octave HP 700 as the best pre, above the Ypsilon. I haven't heard the Octave.
My NAT would have done well with that speaker. THe TT might work because the impedance is quite flat.
Hi David,
Have you tried a Single ended hybrid? It is a rather interesting design. My NAT had a precision to the sound that most SETs don't have but it had a very similar tonality to a good SET...once fully on song. It also had a drier more SS bass...that could be good or bad depending on the speaker. THe funny thing is that is seems that they have to be just as big or bigger than an actual SET. The Ypsilon monos are over 100KG each, my NAT was 70Kg and even the Pathos TT is over 40Kg. In the end I preferred a true SET but not for all things and once the big NAT was warmed up it had an almost psychedleic soundstage and loosened up nearly to what a good SET does. Still that wait....forever...
I am not at all surprised. I was one of the first people I know of to use SET with Planars. Back in about 2002 I paired my Caliper Signatures for a while with Cary CAD-572se monos. 20 watts but it was fine for most listening levels. Actually a very good sounding amp. Later with KR in 2006 I reviewed Kronzilla monos and later owned the KR VA350i that I used for years on my electrostats.
Octave gets a boost in the German magazines because it is a long standing German company. It has a very analytical sound and gets a bit "glassy" when pushed. My friend had the MRE130 monos with super Blackboxes and the VAC 30/30 (refurbished) MkII just simply killed them on a pair of Thiel CS3.7s despite the rather large power difference (I think 120 watts vs. around 30 watts). It was no contest and the MRE130s were quite highly regarded. Now my friend has moved beyond the VAC to the realm of SET...never to return...
The 211 based ones are great too. I'd plump for Transmitters, though.
Both combos sound really nice. Not much in the way of bite and true dynamics, though it isn't too bad in that area. If you want "exciting", look elsewhere I think.
I couldn't cope with that. Calipers are harder to drive than Duettas. You must like it quiet, Brad. You really must!
I demoed my NAT once with a ribbon hybrid from Relco. The model was their big Sinus 1 model. The ribbon was about 1.7 meters long and was loaded into a kind of waveguide...very interesting. The woofer was a simply Focal 8 inch driver in a vented box that worked quite well as the xover was about 250Hz...I think the waveguide helped the lower mids so that there wasn't this usual thinness you hear with BG drivers crossed too low. Once warm the sound was VERY inviting and having 100 watts on tap meant that there was never any strain even when we got pretty loud. That was perhaps the best demo with that amp and it was clear the NAT liked the Relco load better than my horns. If I had gone back to ribbons (this was before I got the horns) I might have kept the NAT as it was probably tough to do much better without spending a fortune. Later with the horns, the sound was a bit over controlled for too long.
I couldn't cope with that. Calipers are harder to drive than Duettas. You must like it quiet, Brad. You really must!
Peaks in the high 90s are possible with such a system no problem. Sure it won't do 110db with hair on fire but in a normal room over 100db is WAY too loud.
The Analysis are not exciting like Apogees, more laid back and polite. NATs will be more polite than bite. Analysis reacts well to more power, and the 120w Transmitter sounded better than the 70w one - which made it thin sounding (in the same set up and room), so I assume the Magma will be much better because of the 170w alone, quality of the amp aside.
You realize that by dropping the power in the Transmitter from 120w to 70w that it is changing the whole operation of the amplifier not just reducing the power? The operating points of the amp have changed and along with that the distortion character of the amp.
Hi different amps. He had the Transmitter and the 70w SE2Se (or whichever the model is)
I understand David, but that does not describe the differences in sonic terms. Could you or morricab be a little more specific? Are the differences consistent throughout the frequency range? What about audible artifacts, control of the drivers, noise level, etc? Say the First Watt SIT amps versus a typical SET 3-10 watt amp, or a larger Pass single ended Class A versus a larger SET?
Peter, I think answering that question in words does not make sense. You can read it, but unless you hear it you won't know. Think if some has not heard a TT, and asks you, what is the difference between digital and TT? You cannot exactly describe it in words of better this, better that, more tone, etc. That verbose difference can also be between two digital players. Or two TTs. Best is to actually listen. It is a worthwhile experience. I think everyone should listen to different types of speakers, sources, and amps.
Similar threads
