btw; if there is activity on this thread I can easily post from South Carolina, i'm told they have electricity, cell service, even the internet on Kiawah Island.
ying and yang--Lamm ML3 and darTZeel 458
- Thread starter Mike Lavigne
- Start date
btw; if there is activity on this thread I can easily post from South Carolina, i'm told they have electricity, cell service, even the internet on Kiawah Island.
btw; if there is activity on this thread I can easily post from South Carolina, i'm told they have electricity, cell service, even the internet on Kiawah Island.
Hope you get to swing a golf club while your there...
don't do golf at this point. but might take the camera(s) and find some birds maybe.
Christian, I heard the 450s on Magico S5s for several hours locally at a dealer (and of course on a more limited basis at the shows with Von Schweikert and Magico). I've also owned several Vac amplifiers (the Phi 200 and the famous $25k Phi Beta integrated).
Despite my want to like Vac, I usually find them more SS-like in nature but without the drive of SS. They also didn't flesh out the midrange or were as open as I prefer. On the S5s, I really was clamoring for bigger, tighter bass and the dealer wanted me to come back and hear on Soulution. On the Phi 200, honestly my McIntosh monoblocks sounded similar and didn't uses a score of tubes so I punted - even in the holography characteristic they were comparable. I think the Phi series may have been a weak spot for Vac as I've heard they are much better now - in particular the new 200s. I have not heard those amps isolated enough to tell.
But for Mike's system on a highly efficient speaker, I'd rather choose a simple PP amplifier than a mass tetrode one - it will likely be clearer and sound better. Note what Dev (WBF member) uses after he sold off his entire Vac Statement setup to mate with AGs (and its not SET).
I think one of the problems is people assume high power is automatically better and alot of that has to do with price - 100k huge tube monos have to sound better! In tube land, I have not found that to be the case at all. In fact, the opposite has been true. Iirc, Audio Research will tell you the 250s are more transparent than the 750s. I believe Priaptor posted that the GS150 was his favorite sound ARC amplifier vs the others. DaveyF I believe has said the Jadis 30s are better in his experience than higher Jadis amps.
In short, I'd find a set of KT150 monoblocks with as few tubes as possible that will drive the speaker.
Driving 500 miles after working all day just to pick a pair of big tube amplifiers? The Lamm's really managed to upset your stability
So, how far are we going w the multiple choice scenario? I mean Tang, Christian and Dave are all in for multiple tts, arms, carts, phonos.
The more the merrier, you can’t have enough, a different sound for every mood.
Now Mike is aiming to try and reconcile multiple amps, Darts and tubes if he can get the tube amps option to really suit him.
Again so that the music shines in different ways.
Who’s going to go the real extra mile and run multiple spkrs choices, maybe tubes and horns, SS and SOTA cones eg Mike’s EAs, and even a seperate uber high power SS like some vintage Krell monos from the 90s and restored Apogees?
The more the merrier, you can’t have enough, a different sound for every mood.
Now Mike is aiming to try and reconcile multiple amps, Darts and tubes if he can get the tube amps option to really suit him.
Again so that the music shines in different ways.
Who’s going to go the real extra mile and run multiple spkrs choices, maybe tubes and horns, SS and SOTA cones eg Mike’s EAs, and even a seperate uber high power SS like some vintage Krell monos from the 90s and restored Apogees?
I currently own the REF250's and owned REF750's for sometime in the past. IMHO what we many times call transparency is simply that the smaller scale of the smaller simplifier adapts better to the limitations of our systems. Besides heat and tube count the 750 had one issue - a longer warm-up compared to the 150 or 250. But sorry, IMHO it was not less transparent, although for some time I have thought and said so.
However the ARC 250 was more transparent than the older REF610T - this was a comparison that was often referred in audio forums.
BTW1, I hosted the GS150 and preferred the REF150SE and REF250. Each of us has his favorites.
BTW2 - transparency is a subjective notion that can carries different meanings - that usually lead to very long debates
. BTW3 - I am biased, the current winner in my system has 8 x KT120's or KT150's each ...
I for one will be most fascinated to learn your listening impressions of the Lamms versus the VACs.
We would need a donation website. Or I'll have to get 100 mil $ outa no-where
Steve Williams would manage the activity -- I volunteer for supervising the technical divisions -- all in a new built building.
Name choice ? Audio Reproduction Reference Lab (ARRL)
Keith raises and restates a very interesting and very significant question. It was precisely this question that I hope(d) to answer were I to have the opportunity to compare directly in my future system a high-power 833 SET to the JA200 Mk. II.
Hopefully Mike’s evaluation of the Lamms versus the VACs will help us answer this question (although obviously not the narrowest and cleanest question of the same exact amplifier circuit but at different tube counts and output levels as with ARC 250 SE versus ARC 750 SE).
Regarding switching speakers , i think in these kind of systems the speakers aint the Blocking factor , neither is the room and Amps .
The speakers Will Just grow with the changes , i personally think sources/ mediums are the Blocking factors .
But who said hifi was perfect
The speakers Will Just grow with the changes , i personally think sources/ mediums are the Blocking factors .
But who said hifi was perfect
Unfortunately we mostly comment on the tips of the icebergs. There is a lot more than tube count in amplifiers. YMHO you are going to compare a SET to a specific, very untypical push pull, nothing else.
Again IMHO Mike reports are great and I love reading and commenting them, but they raise much more questions than giving answers ...
Perhaps the XLF isn't as easy a load as folks think. Several people have mentioned this (Bonzo likes Dags on them for instance).
Carl Marchisotto has said the little Ref 75 is his favorite ARC amplifier. I believe Warren Geyl said something to that effect as well. There is definitely system dependence here though. I won't be surprised if the new Ref 160s are the best sounding ARC amps as they gain the monoblock benefit but use far fewer tubes. But we shall have to wait and see.
Dont forget music genre if somebody States he loves a 75 watt amp OR a smaller Set and he mainly listens to music that is easier for the speaker .
One gets a different impression then
One gets a different impression then
Mono block benefit is mainly in the powersupply , besides that i dont value the better channel separation idea as being true bonus .
The problem of amplifiers using many tubes can be strong mismatching of tubes. As long as you use close matched tubes - mandatory in ARC amplifiers - you just get a more powerful tube. Since long I match tubes in my amplifiers - even with the VTLs - 12 x 6550 each. It was not needed, but I felt is sounded better.
The XLF is an easy load - although not as easy as the old Grand Slamm. I could play them easily with the ARC REF150's or the Jadis Defy7. However when I try them with more powerful amplifiers scale and easiness increase. But as far as speakers can show this type of large scale I found that this happens with almost any speaker. Even Avantgarde Trios ...
+1
I keep banging on my analytical framework drum that musical preference drives the answer to many of these questions.
Ron, I think the only way you are going to be sure is to try a variety of amps in your system and pick the one that floats your boat. All else is purely conjecture.
Similar threads
