Steve williams
Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
I love these two cartridges as they seem to be polar opposites
The All Analog, All Lamm, PBN M2!5 System of JeffreyT
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
The Thelma album is super hot, and it’s hot with my SPU’s and vintage MM carts. I don’t hear any sibilance with the VDH, it’s a fantastic cartridge in every aspect.
It's been a long time since I've updated my system. There has been a lot of changes that I'll start sharing over the next few days:
1. New racks (Atacama Evoque Eco 60-40)
2. New turntable (Garrard 401 with PBN custom plinth)
3. New tonearms (additional SME 3012R and Groovemaster II)
4. Additional amp to complement my Lamm amps (First Watt SIT-3)
COVID 19 has cost me a lot of money!
1. New racks (Atacama Evoque Eco 60-40)
2. New turntable (Garrard 401 with PBN custom plinth)
3. New tonearms (additional SME 3012R and Groovemaster II)
4. Additional amp to complement my Lamm amps (First Watt SIT-3)
COVID 19 has cost me a lot of money!
Two weeks ago I purchased one of the last First Watt SIT-3’s and I have to say I’m quite impressed with the sound. With 30 watts into my 4 ohm speakers, there is plenty of drive, top end and bass coming out of my system. The SIT-3 does something quite special in the midrange, with some of the best texture I’ve had from my system ever. If you have the right speakers, this $4,000 amp is absolutely fantastic.
I also brought it over to my friend Jim’s house, no problem driving the Westminster.
I had a fun afternoon at Jeff's a couple of weeks ago, when KeithR and I visited to hear the Pass SIT-3.
My thoughts are highly conditional because I spend very little time listening to systems with solid-state amplifiers. I know I like the Gryphon Mephisto, and I probably personally would prefer the Gryphon Antileon Evo over the Mephisto.
My only recent experience with solid-state amplifiers has been at KeithR's as he has auditioned different transistor amplifiers on his YG Hailey 2s. Oh, I also heard solid-state McIntosh amplifiers on our mutual friend's Wilson XVX system.
But there's no getting around the fact that I do not have in my head the data points of experience with solid-state amplifiers in familiar systems that I have with tube amplifiers. Tube amplifiers are my thing. Solid-state amplifiers are not. But I try to go in open-eared. With all of those caveats in mind . . .
1) I think the SIT-3 may be the best sounding solid-state amplifier I've ever heard (as Jeff correctly says, provided you match it with a perfectly sympathetic speaker) with no direct comparison to any other solid-state amplifier.
2) I think the higher damping factor of the solid-state output stage controls Jeff's big 15" woofers better than his Lamms. I agree with Jeff that the low frequency reproduction is the best I have heard in Jeff's system.
3) What Keith described from the Pass as an SET-ish sound, I think I perceive as a familiar and attractive slight midrange emphasis. I find solid-state amps in general to sound neutral and flat, whereas I like the slight midrange-y emphasis of many tube amps.
4) I hear the Pass as having a flatter top end then the Lamms. In general, I prefer the slightly rolled off top end of tubes.
5) I feel the Pass is a touch dryer sounding than Jeff's Lamms. The slightly more liquid sounding way tube amps reproduce vocals is the main reason I love tube electronics.
6) I feel the Pass is a touch flatter sounding dimensionally than the Lamms. I think I hear slightly greater depth or spaciousness ("layering"?) with the Lamms.
7) Overall, sonically that Pass amplifier must be the biggest bargain for a solid-state amplifier in high-end audio. With some systems which are driven by high power, very neutral solid-state amplifiers (e.g., Soulution, Boulder) I feel like I walked into the wrong room. It just is not a sound I cotton to or want to acclimate to. This Pass did not sound alien to me the way solid-state amps often sound to me. No acclimation was needed. There was no brightness, no edginess, no fatigue after three hours.
8) I completely understand Jeff wanting to remove all issues of amp reliability and seriously considering staying permanently with the SIT-3 amplifier.
9) It was interesting to run right over to JimFord's and play all of the same tracks on his system that I played at Jeff's. I felt that at Jeff's on "Great Gate of Kiev" the Pass ran out of steam, and I feel that my replay of the same track at Jim's confirmed it. Jim's 200 watt push-pull triode Canary amps drove the Tannoys to greater and greater heights and volume with no change in sonic character whatsoever.
10) It is a very delicate and totally subjective set of compromises, but I, personally, would want to try to re-capture the slightly greater liquidity and depth of tubes by using a 100 or 150 watt VTL stereo or mono amp with EL-34, KT-88 or 6550C tubes, with adjustable damping factor, triode/tetrode switching and local factory support. Personally, I still like tubes on the PBN M2!5 Jeffrey T Special Edition's fantastic JBL waveguide driver.
Thank you, Jeff, for a very fun and educational afternoon!
My thoughts are highly conditional because I spend very little time listening to systems with solid-state amplifiers. I know I like the Gryphon Mephisto, and I probably personally would prefer the Gryphon Antileon Evo over the Mephisto.
My only recent experience with solid-state amplifiers has been at KeithR's as he has auditioned different transistor amplifiers on his YG Hailey 2s. Oh, I also heard solid-state McIntosh amplifiers on our mutual friend's Wilson XVX system.
But there's no getting around the fact that I do not have in my head the data points of experience with solid-state amplifiers in familiar systems that I have with tube amplifiers. Tube amplifiers are my thing. Solid-state amplifiers are not. But I try to go in open-eared. With all of those caveats in mind . . .
1) I think the SIT-3 may be the best sounding solid-state amplifier I've ever heard (as Jeff correctly says, provided you match it with a perfectly sympathetic speaker) with no direct comparison to any other solid-state amplifier.
2) I think the higher damping factor of the solid-state output stage controls Jeff's big 15" woofers better than his Lamms. I agree with Jeff that the low frequency reproduction is the best I have heard in Jeff's system.
3) What Keith described from the Pass as an SET-ish sound, I think I perceive as a familiar and attractive slight midrange emphasis. I find solid-state amps in general to sound neutral and flat, whereas I like the slight midrange-y emphasis of many tube amps.
4) I hear the Pass as having a flatter top end then the Lamms. In general, I prefer the slightly rolled off top end of tubes.
5) I feel the Pass is a touch dryer sounding than Jeff's Lamms. The slightly more liquid sounding way tube amps reproduce vocals is the main reason I love tube electronics.
6) I feel the Pass is a touch flatter sounding dimensionally than the Lamms. I think I hear slightly greater depth or spaciousness ("layering"?) with the Lamms.
7) Overall, sonically that Pass amplifier must be the biggest bargain for a solid-state amplifier in high-end audio. With some systems which are driven by high power, very neutral solid-state amplifiers (e.g., Soulution, Boulder) I feel like I walked into the wrong room. It just is not a sound I cotton to or want to acclimate to. This Pass did not sound alien to me the way solid-state amps often sound to me. No acclimation was needed. There was no brightness, no edginess, no fatigue after three hours.
8) I completely understand Jeff wanting to remove all issues of amp reliability and seriously considering staying permanently with the SIT-3 amplifier.
9) It was interesting to run right over to JimFord's and play all of the same tracks on his system that I played at Jeff's. I felt that at Jeff's on "Great Gate of Kiev" the Pass ran out of steam, and I feel that my replay of the same track at Jim's confirmed it. Jim's 200 watt push-pull triode Canary amps drove the Tannoys to greater and greater heights and volume with no change in sonic character whatsoever.
10) It is a very delicate and totally subjective set of compromises, but I, personally, would want to try to re-capture the slightly greater liquidity and depth of tubes by using a 100 or 150 watt VTL stereo or mono amp with EL-34, KT-88 or 6550C tubes, with adjustable damping factor, triode/tetrode switching and local factory support. Personally, I still like tubes on the PBN M2!5 Jeffrey T Special Edition's fantastic JBL waveguide driver.
Thank you, Jeff, for a very fun and educational afternoon!
Last edited:
Thx Ron for the detailed viewpoint.
I might add that a 30 watt transistor amp will not have the same dynamic headroom (perception wise) as a 30 watt SET. It has a lot to do with clipping effects and just instantaneous delivery capabilities (very good articles in Stereophile by Peter Van Willenswaard cover this topic). This could be why you perceived the limits on the Westminsters, whereas with a SET the onset of clipping might have gone unnoticed.
Possibly. But I am more comfortable placing my bet on the headroom afforded by 200 triode push-pull watts from Jim's Canary amps, for no clipping at all.
Last edited:
Beautiful setup Jeff ! The SIT3 is in good company.. Enjoy !
True, the headroom would be substantial but I am not convinced of the SQ of big push pull tube amps. I prefer the purity of a simpler design.
I’m breaking in a SIT3 amp... It is very similar to a SET sound, built from the midrange up.. The output devices are current gain, Transformers are used for the voltage gain, like tubes.. it has that SET characteristic presentation.. yet slightly different.. so far..
It will still have the harmonic distortion distribution of the transistors used and not a triode tube (or pentode) and this will be audible. It might be a very good sound but it is likely to remain...different.
The SIT’s will overload and distort just like tube triodes, with second order harmonics, actually they will distort less than tubes and have the same square wave as tubes. which is why they were developed.
Just like tubes, which were designed for audio from the start, The SIT transistor was designed just for audio. Generalizations to transistors do not apply to this design.. which was its intended goal.
I am sure they do not behave like triodes. There might be superficial similarities but that is all. I don’t generalize transistors. For example, bipolar and Mosfets have quite different transfer functions and will sound quite different but neither sounds like a triode... even when used single ended. The perceived dynamics for a given power are different too. Tubes tend to compress the signal before they go into hard clipping and can be used easily without feedback. Read the articles by Van Willenswaard in stereophile where he demonstrated this in practice.
Ron did not hear the SIT-3 on the Westies. He heard my system with the SET and then heard Jim’s with the 200 watt Canary’s.
I have not heard the SIT run out of headroom on my system and disagreed with Ron when he believed it was.
Ah ok, thx for clarifying Jeff. A SET of course can run out of headroom if people are playing loud and if the load of the speaker gets tough in a power region (like mid bass).
Similar threads
