AudioCircle
Other Stuff => Archived Manufacturer Circles => Aspen Amplifiers => Topic started by: LM on 2 Aug 2010, 03:25 am
-
I’ve been pretty quiet of late on this and the other forums I occasionally frequent, perhaps because one of the better things I have to do is listen to my Soraya 09 based system. Nevertheless, I have certainly enjoyed reading the enthusiastic comments on the new NAKSA and having heard it myself, it is a real pearler. However, at Hugh’s place I have also listened to a Maya and his demo Soraya 09 (which I own) a number of times now in direct comparison. I feel that the one thing currently missing from these forum threads is any comment on how they sound relatively because they are actually quite different beasts and each superb in its own right.
I don’t know how others do it but when listening to amps, I mentally think of a spectrum or linear scale based on the various sonic characteristics that I personally perceive. This generally has me placing amps with more of a soft, warm, mellifluous character on the left and amps with a more clinical, sharp, thin presentation and possibly even some glare and sibilance at the extreme, on the right. So for example I would normally place softer, less prominent base and richer midrange to the left and more focus, punch and extended highs to the right. No surprises then but I generally have tube amps to the left and SS amps to the right.
I must emphasise strongly at this point that what I’ve just described is not particularly scientific, however I’m comfortable that it incorporates my experience to date and serves my own comparison purposes quite well. I have only presented it here so that I can attempt to describe where I think the Aspen Amps fall relative to each other. Personal taste in such matters is everything and there is no right or wrong position on the scale but I guess I would tend to favour a balance in the middle.
So where on the scale do I hear the NAKSA, Maya and Soraya 09? All rather tend toward the middle actually as I would expect from Aspen but there are differences. Starting with the NAKSA first, uncharacteristically for an SS I see it clearly on the left of middle with huge warmth, musicality and engagement. However, it retains an unusually prominent and solid base for an amp to the left of my scale. Much more SS like. Its overall sonic balance is quite tube like and it is superbly engaging for voice and general presence. A touch forward perhaps but with great staging and is very immersive of the performance.
I own the Soraya 09 and love it for its clean precision, focus and huge detail. It is certainly a bit to the right of middle but very close to the middle nevertheless. It is neutral, accurate, fast, punchy and sometimes a little spooky in its clean separation of instruments and vocals, but stays completely clear of the thin, metallic and unengaging qualities of some SS amps. Beautifully extended treble detail and wonderfully correct mids but not quite the same absolute warmth of engagement of the NAKSA. I love it paired with my GK1 for that touch of valve warmth.
The Maya sounds remarkably like the Soraya in general first impression terms but I would place it just to the left of the Soraya and pretty much at the middle on my scale or perhaps just a touch to the right. Maybe it is simply the lack of Global Feedback but it has a small edge over the Soraya in terms of naturalness and refinement. It presents as a touch softer than the sheer precision of the Soraya but still uber clean and just as detailed, but in a slightly gentler way. Cymbals for example are slightly less prominent and base and mids are just a touch stronger. Not as warm or bold in the midrange as the NAKSA but I do find it thoroughly engaging to my taste. It is a wonderful flagship and probably just edges out the Soraya for my personal vote but the NAKSA for tube lovers at such an astonishingly low price is a corker. :thumb:
-
Great post, Lyn, thank you. :thankyou:
I like the left of center analogy, bit like me really. :lol: I think you hit the nail on the head.
Any more comments from Aspen owners? I think this will be a great thread.
Cheers,
Hugh
-
I second Hugh's statement...keep the comparisons coming.
I'm one of those unfortunate owners who has only ever heard my own 100N+.....apart from a short blast with a prototype LF100 at Hugh's place some time back. So I've no concept of what any of the new models bring to the table over the original AKSA's. And I can't imagine that I'm on my lonesome in this situation
LM...if you've heard the older AKSA models and have some memory of them then it'd be nice to add that into your observations too
-
Great post Lyn,
I feel you summed the Aspen range very well. Over the last few years I have had the LF100, origional Soraya and now the Maya11. From time to time Hugh rocks over with the latest prototype amp to give it a workout. It will continue to amaze me how Hugh squeezes that extra bit if quality out of a prototype whe he goes through the tweeking process. My ideal amp would be a Maya with the bass grunt of the Naksa. But I run BEN the bass extender so I have more than enough bass should I want it.
Back to listening to a new CD my wife has just purchased.
Cheers,
Laurie.
-
LM...if you've heard the older AKSA models and have some memory of them then it'd be nice to add that into your observations too
Seano,
Unfortunately it's been quite some time since I've seriously listened to any AKSA model so whilst I'd love to be able to comment, I'd better leave that up to anyone that owns or is very familiar with an older model and has now heard the new NAKSA. Nevertheless, I can say that I remember the AKSAs being somewhat to the left of my scale but I don't remember being impressed by the base depth and extension anywhere near as much as with the NAKSA. Beyond that, not much I can say. :?
-
Lyn,
Dead right. That's how I see it too. But the amp had a mid range and particularly a top end magic which was terrific on rock music, and this was the trademark sound which I've tried to capture ever since. However, only the NAKSA to this point has been more than a match, though the LF and Sorayas are very, very good, slightly to the right of center, more a sound leaning towards accuracy and soudfield depth.
Cheers,
Hugh
-
A very informative post LM/Lyn....thanks !! :thumb:
-
Lyn,
Dead right. That's how I see it too. But the amp had a mid range and particularly a top end magic which was terrific on rock music, and this was the trademark sound which I've tried to capture ever since. However, only the NAKSA to this point has been more than a match, though the LF and Sorayas are very, very good, slightly to the right of center, more a sound leaning towards accuracy and soudfield dept
Hugh
"top end magic which was terrific on rock music". That is what my current amp lacks. I hope the Maya can perform in this area.
-
Hi Kieran,
Yes, no question. A sense of intimacy, being there, is very evident, and completely natural too.
No disappointment there!
Cheers,
Hugh
-
For any that might wish to know where I think the new NAKSA 100 fits in the scale. :thumb:
I had the chance to listen to the NAKSA 100 at Hugh's this morning with some music that was quite familiar to me. What's more, Hugh swapped between it and the 09 Soraya, with which I am extremely well versed, a few times so I had a good reference point. I understand that 100 was pretty close to the production version though not the final power supply nor set in a case. As I said in the NAKSA thread, it has the same lovely 'SET like' tonality, solid base and rich mids of the NAKSA 70 but with greater overall drive and snap. It also has subtly increased refinement and treble extension; cymbals for example have a little more presence than with the 70. Not a lot but it's there. Optimising the power supply and encasing it won't do any harm to its final sound either though it's a very enjoyable and musical amp as is IMHO.
So where on the scale do I hear the NAKSA 100 compared to the NAKSA 70? As with the 70, I see the 100 clearly on the left of middle with its warmth, musicality and engagement. However, its greater grunt and the slightly expanded treble moves it a bit closer to the Maya and Soraya overall. It really does catch your attention and demands you to listen, enjoy and get involved. It still reminds me of a tube amp tonally though the base and grunt are very much SS characteristics. Not quite as incisive as the Maya or Soraya perhaps but a superb toe tapping musical performance that no one could fail to like and amazing value. :wink:
-
For any that might wish to know where I think the new NAKSA 100 fits in the scale. :thumb:
I had the chance to listen to the NAKSA 100 at Hugh's this morning with some music that was quite familiar to me. What's more, Hugh swapped between it and the 09 Soraya, with which I am extremely well versed, a few times so I had a good reference point. I understand that 100 was pretty close to the production version though not the final power supply nor set in a case. As I said in the NAKSA thread, it has the same lovely 'SET like' tonality, solid base and rich mids of the NAKSA 70 but with greater overall drive and snap. It also has subtly increased refinement and treble extension; cymbals for example have a little more presence than with the 70. Not a lot but it's there. Optimising the power supply and encasing it won't do any harm to its final sound either though it's a very enjoyable and musical amp as is IMHO.
So where on the scale do I hear the NAKSA 100 compared to the NAKSA 70? As with the 70, I see the 100 clearly on the left of middle with its warmth, musicality and engagement. However, its greater grunt and the slightly expanded treble moves it a bit closer to the Maya and Soraya overall. It really does catch your attention and demands you to listen, enjoy and get involved. It still reminds me of a tube amp tonally though the base and grunt are very much SS characteristics. Not quite as incisive as the Maya or Soraya perhaps but a superb toe tapping musical performance that no one could fail to like and amazing value. :wink:
Oh, good, was wondering how the three amps sounded versus each other. Now was this NAKSA was this with the upgraded caps, or the standard version? Not being familiar with the new line, are the other two complete builds, or kits too like the NAKSA? And prices would help. Thanks.
Ray
-
Hi Ray,
No, these were the standard version, not upgraded power supply caps.
Prices:
NAKSA 100 built/tested modules: $USD1420
Soraya CB205 (100W//8R) plug 'n play: $USD4800
Maya CB280 (150W//8R) plug 'n play: $USD6400
At present, the AUD is almost lineball with the USD.
Thanks for the inquiry.
Hugh
-
Hi Ray,
No, these were the standard version, not upgraded power supply caps.
Prices:
NAKSA 100 built/tested modules: $USD1420
Soraya CB205 (100W//8R) plug 'n play: $USD4800
Maya CB280 (150W//8R) plug 'n play: $USD6400
At present, the AUD is almost lineball with the USD.
Thanks for the inquiry.
Hugh
Hi Hugh,
Thanks for the info.
One thing I have noticed and I have to commend you if this is true is that all three of your Amplifiers sound different. "yeah, so, what's your point?" you ask. The differences are enough that each model can stand on its own merits. So as a manufacturer they might have some similarities, but your Naksa doesn't sound worse than the Maya. Now in times past, you might have manufacturers that made equipment that the flagship would sound the best, and the others in the line didn't sound as good. I hope this makes sense. Now, I don't know if that was your goal or not, but from what I read you did it. I would think logically, that the Maya almost three times as much as the Naksa would sound better. But as to that figure, I'll leave that to the reviewers. if anyone bought the Naksa, they would have nothing to be ashamed of, not at all.
Now, just gotta get a pre-amp to run them.
Ray Bronk
-
One thing I have noticed and I have to commend you if this is true is that all three of your Amplifiers sound different. "yeah, so, what's your point?" you ask. The differences are enough that each model can stand on its own merits. So as a manufacturer they might have some similarities, but your Naksa doesn't sound worse than the Maya. Now in times past, you might have manufacturers that made equipment that the flagship would sound the best, and the others in the line didn't sound as good. I hope this makes sense. Now, I don't know if that was your goal or not, but from what I read you did it. I would think logically, that the Maya almost three times as much as the Naksa would sound better. But as to that figure, I'll leave that to the reviewers. if anyone bought the Naksa, they would have nothing to be ashamed of, not at all.
Hi Ray, pretty much spot on IMHO. One must remember that the Maya and Soraya are fully built and that assembly plus case and transformers etc. account for a fair bit of the cost difference. And I may add, very well built at that.
The differences are subtle but definite (again IMO) and taste would come very much into it. I have a wide taste in music and to me the slightly higher detail and refinement levels of the Soraya really appeals to me for orchestral and complex music. But it's impossible not to smile when the NAKSA starts to bop along with Jazz or Vocals or similar. Each to me have subtly different strengths but no real weakness and I think that is something that Hugh can be highly commended for. :D
-
I agree with Ray. Buying an amp which can't be heard at home first is cumbersome. I bought the LF100, the NAKSA 70 and Vsonic speakers blind from the other side of the world. I personally did not prefer the sound of the Naksa 70 over the Lifeforce, while it was clear to me that NAKSA is a better amp on some aspects like bass. The question i asked myself is; could i have asked Hugh the right questions which saved me from buying another amp which i won't prefer over my present? hmm i think not. Though, i believe that there are some distinctive topology aspects who could help to make a (more) founded choice. For example the effects of different damping factor and feedback topology. A while ago i presented Hugh an idea to make a little guide about these aspects for the Aspen amp range, which properly can help future customers to choose their 'right' Aspen amp. I don't know if he has thought about that in the meantime? Hugh?
-
Hi Ray, pretty much spot on IMHO. One must remember that the Maya and Soraya are fully built and that assembly plus case and transformers etc. account for a fair bit of the cost difference. And I may add, very well built at that.
The differences are subtle but definite (again IMO) and taste would come very much into it. I have a wide taste in music and to me the slightly higher detail and refinement levels of the Soraya really appeals to me for orchestral and complex music. But it's impossible not to smile when the NAKSA starts to bop along with Jazz or Vocals or similar. Each to me have subtly different strengths but no real weakness and I think that is something that Hugh can be highly commended for. :D
Now, let me throw in a spoon to stir the mix. Now on the Naksa, if you put in the premium caps, i wonder ... upping the anty a bit.
Ray Bronk
-
Ray,
Makes no difference, but looks a bit more swish......
BTW, what Lyn said, he's my man!!
Hugh
-
I agree with Ray. Buying an amp which can't be heard at home first is cumbersome. I bought the LF100, the NAKSA 70 and Vsonic speakers blind from the other side of the world. I personally did not prefer the sound of the Naksa 70 over the Lifeforce, while it was clear to me that NAKSA is a better amp on some aspects like bass. The question i asked myself is; could i have asked Hugh the right questions which saved me from buying another amp which i won't prefer over my present? hmm i think not. Though, i believe that there are some distinctive topology aspects who could help to make a (more) founded choice. For example the effects of different damping factor and feedback topology. A while ago i presented Hugh an idea to make a little guide about these aspects for the Aspen amp range, which properly can help future customers to choose their 'right' Aspen amp. I don't know if he has thought about that in the meantime? Hugh?
Really? "I personally did not prefer the sound of the Naksa 70 over the Lifeforce," while that's not a bad thing in itself, why did you prefer the LF over the Naksa? hmmm, I don't know if this is worth persuing, but that would make me wonder if there is still some life left in the LifeForce amps. No pon intended.
Ray Bronk
-
Ray,
Makes no difference, but looks a bit more swish......
BTW, what Lyn said, he's my man!!
Hugh
"looks more swish?" Sorry what is swish?
I would think with the premium caps in there, there would be some sound difference, else no need for the better caps. So the sound would be yet a bit closer to the other amps? Ok, judgment call on a subjective topic, so shoot me. lol.
now, on a more practical item, so to get a feel for the cost issues involved here, so if you were to take the Naksa, put it in a case and Trafo, yada yada, what do you figure the price would be?
Now, if memmory served me right, in its description comparison, the Naksa leans to be more SS sounding, versus the other two amps? I presume you are using Bi-polar Transistors not FETS. So could this be a bias issue? I presume you've done your homework, so my question can be taken as out of ignorance of your designs.
Ray Bronk
Ray Bronk
-
Really? "I personally did not prefer the sound of the Naksa 70 over the Lifeforce," while that's not a bad thing in itself, why did you prefer the LF over the Naksa? hmmm, I don't know if this is worth persuing, but that would make me wonder if there is still some life left in the LifeForce amps. No pon intended.
Ray Bronk
my 2 cents;
Naksa 70; pop, rock, elektronic music, more complex dynamic music. (like classic)
LF100; vocal, jazz, easy listening, acoustic.
-
my 2 cents;
Naksa 70; pop, rock, elektronic music, more complex dynamic music. (like classic)
LF100; vocal, jazz, easy listening, acoustic.
Ok, I must be a bit dense. not sure what you are saying here. An amplifier should be in theory to be able to produce what the incoming signal is faithfully. So I'm not to sure what you are saying here.
Ray
-
Ray,
It is difficult to answer your points as you seem to regard the range entirely in commercial terms, perhaps not being aware of how the designs evolved over the years of R&D, and just what I was trying to achieve sonically.
I'm not even sure my description would satisfy you; you are a talkative fellow and will likely want a dialogue on the matter, something I'm reluctant to indulge because I see it as time intensive, something I'm short on. Furthermore, I see personal explanation in dangerous terms; you must realise my ideas and designs are ridiculed by many, and I can't be bothered justifying my position these days. Any wins are pyrrhic; the war continues regardless. My designs are what they are, of course, and that is the end of it. Unfortunately, I have not been sufficiently private to keep my name anonymous.
The AKSA came first. It was an attempt to properly tune a good commercial design originally penned in the fifties and sixties by Arthur Bailey and Harry C. Lin. While the intent was to produce a good kit with some commercial pretensions it was not designed to make me wealthy. I am semi-retired, have enjoyed a good career in the military, and I'm about as ambitious for high income as a garden snail. However, I must have hit a chord with buyers because the AKSA sold by the hundreds. It gave me confidence to continue my R&D, something I live for, and after a couple more years I produced the first Lifeforce. That was 2002.
Two issues arose. The first was the gargantuan email load kitset sales quickly imposed. At one point I answered around 50 emails a day, and this persisted for years, not months. To this day I service the AKSA still. I type quickly and I do enjoy people, but this was ridiculous. The second issue was the heavy workload; assembling 5-10 kits each week was a lot of work, prone to error, with QC inventory issues. I did employ people on a part time basis, but was never prepared to borrow and invest in such an unpredictable market. This strategy was subsequently vindicated when the GFC struck and most US sales all but dried up. So I decided to personally build complete modules, and sell them for customer installation into a case, modules tested and ready to run. I raised the price to reflect hand building and to move away from the bottom end of the market (which is deeply problematic, by the way). Predictably, sales diminished, not too much, but most of all I again had a life. My children were then in their teens, they needed their Mom and Dad, and God was in his heaven. The Lifeforce was very successful as it solved two of the primary issues of all SS amplifiers; the accurate extraction of the error signal at the front end and the perception of image depth. My design successes were building, and in 2006 I began to indulge more R&D, leading to the first Soraya, which was developed with strong input from Colin Brown in Vancouver.
The first Soraya, named after my eldest daughter (who is academically brilliant), was an innovative, original development of the original Lifeforce, and was a very good amp with strong engagement and outstanding image focus, depth and clarity. This became a full retail product, plug 'n play, but because of the much increased hardware (trafos, cases, terminations, etc) and the warranty and marketing costs, it was not cheap.
I would stress here that I was focussing entirely on subjective aspects of listening, rather than the traditional engineering notions of measurement. I felt that greater minds than mine had adopted the latter strategy, seemingly without always succeeding, and in my esimation the aspect of subjective design had been neglected. This conclusion never pleases purely technical designers, but it has certainly delighted lots of happy customers. There is no smugness in this; merely the observation that it has been a neglected design approach, particularly in the English speaking world. I say this because I know that in Italy, for example, there is enormous care given to the subjective issues - this from my occasional Italian customers. The luminous point I make here is that amps are for humans, not for test gear, and the perceptions and tastes vary considerably, rather like food and fashion. To this day, the connection between test results and subjective listening assessment remains tenuous at best, and utterly perplexing at worst.
The NAKSA was developed principally by me but with help from Romeo Tiu in Italy, Russ Bayliss in Melbourne, and Omar El Shacker in Jordan (thanks guys!!). The entire cycle took about eight months and focussed on an austerity model with outstanding subjective presentation for tough economic times. How was I to know that by this stage, having paid my dues, I was really starting to nail things and it would sound so good? As I write a NAKSA 100 is belting out the music at CES in Las Vegas, let us hope it does well! The NAKSA is probably the best generalist amp I have ever done; it's particularly good on pop, electronic, vocal and jazz, just as Hans has said, and it has class leading bass, midrange and stunning resolution.
The last amp I have developed, and Afterimage on this forum is my first US customer, is the Maya CB280. This too was developed with Colin in Canada, and is truly exceptional. It is more polished than the NAKSA, even the 100 (which Hans has not heard), and it is completely invisible in operation on almost any genre. One of my bat eared beta guys here in Melbourne, another Russell, is over the moon about the Maya; he says it is utterly transparent, completely natural and real in its presentation, with subliminally powerful engagement. He also loves the NAKSA 100 and in fact owns my prototype. These are just words and give little indication of the reality, of course; the lack of proper audition makes it so difficult to sell these products. But it's in a different class to the NAKSA, I can assure you, and this is no way reflects badly on the NAKSA, which is extraordinary.
Naturally the Maya is rather pricey. We live in a commoditized world where every product, right or wrong, is assessed on 'value' and pidgeon holed into a 'price bracket'. I have never enjoyed working for $5 an hour; so, with pride, and some resolve, I raise the price to give me reasonable return on my efforts, which have been, over the years, passionate and intensive.
Hope this helps you divine my mindset, Ray! :lol:
Cheers,
Hugh
-
Hugh,
Thanks for a thorough cliff notes version of the history and thought process. Very helpful to understand where you're coming from.
Just wondering, who is showing the NAKSA 100 at CES?
Tom
-
Ok, I must be a bit dense. not sure what you are saying here. An amplifier should be in theory to be able to produce what the incoming signal is faithfully. So I'm not to sure what you are saying here.
Ray
Another general view. Any amplifier interacts with acoustic/mechanical damping properties of drivers in a speaker. Speaker drivers have also different sensitivity. Speakers with lower sensivity (<98db) and weak acoustic damping plays better with a powerful amp with higher feedback control to keep the driver movement in control. But feedback control in an amplifier can have some serious disadvantages, like phase shift and distortion. Phase-shift destroys natural presentation and will sound more flat. (That's imo the main reason why random commercial amps mostly sound flat. They use a lot of feedback to make the amp suitable for any application) While i am not an amp designer, i suppose that it is very hard to choose and tune a feedback topology in a amp-circuit combining with low distortion. That's why making a good sounding amp can be a matter of a very long breath like Hugh said. I think the NAKSA topology stands for a save choice for a big bandwidth of speakers. It scores optimum on all aspects on most speakers and most music. The Lifeforce series are imo more speaker sensitive. On sensitive speakers they have a little more natural, maybe softer character, but less control as the NAKSA. It's just what is preferred and what kind of music and speaker are used. i didn't hear the MAYA280 (yet.. :cry:), but that amp seems to combine the NAKSA control with a utterly natural character if used on the right speaker and with exceptional quality of the source. There is always something to dream of.. :drool:
And Hugh if i am wrong plz quote!
-
The AKSA came first.
Nice summary of the evolution (from an AKSA owner) :thumb:
-
Ray,
It is difficult to answer your points as you seem to regard the range entirely in commercial terms, perhaps not being aware of how the designs evolved over the years of R&D, and just what I was trying to achieve sonically.
I'm not even sure my description would satisfy you; you are a talkative fellow and will likely want a dialogue on the matter, something I'm reluctant to indulge because I see it as time intensive, something I'm short on. Furthermore, I see personal explanation in dangerous terms; you must realise my ideas and designs are ridiculed by many, and I can't be bothered justifying my position these days. Any wins are pyrrhic; the war continues regardless. My designs are what they are, of course, and that is the end of it. Unfortunately, I have not been sufficiently private to keep my name anonymous.
Hi Hugh,
Well, it is most unfortunate that you took me at looking at your stuff from a commercial stance. I have throughout the years have read your philosophies on other forums, and what you had to say then and say now speak for itself in the three amps you produce. in no way, would I ever ridicule you for what you standfor. Each amp can stand unabashedly on its own merits, and owning the Naksa is nothing to be ashamed of. I'm not sure what specifically sparked your previous comments, maybe it was I wondered how close using the upgraded capse on the Naksa, how then would it stack up to the Soraya and Maya.
When I asked about if the Naksa was put in to a case and Trafo, I was merely wishing to get a feel for what it would have been if it was in a retail setting, like the other two amps are.
when the one gent had mentioned his preference for the LF, I was most curious as to why.
I have had the pleasure of being able to say for a short time, I hung around the likes of John Bindini in the late .70's and early .80's His stuff at the time was a bit novel in its approach. How about a SS amp using only Diodes, not a single transistor. It was a 10 wpc, and the bass was like nothing I've heard since. Don't ask me how he did it, I don't have a clue.
All I know Hugh I have the utmost respect for what you do and for the philosophies you represent. I amm sorry if I had stepped on toes. I was actualy quite satisfied with the comparison of the three amps.
Ray Bronk
-
Hybride,
I used to agree wholly on this, more feedback=better control, in theory, this is 100% correct, but as you note, not always better sound. The amount that seems to be needed is substantially less than many have tended to believe. Most amplifiers these days will have a DF of 80 minimum, upwards to even 500, but for most speakers 20 will easily suffice in the worst of cases. A lower DF seems to offer great control and music that springs to life with a hint of wetter bass, makes kick drums sound absolutely stunningly fabulous, makes the air being pushed from the front head even more audible and properly timed with the attack IMHO. Besides that, still looking for the ever elusive "one size fits all" amplifier ;), I can say though, that the Maya (150) in my case, the "baby" 280 is as close as ive been to a religious experience concerning Audio playback to this day.
Hugh,
Wow, I didnt realise it has been 5 years!!, lots o water under the bridge in that time, a couple life changes non audio related in the process too ;)..
Colin
-
Hi Ray,
You deserve credit for keeping this thread interesting, and you encouraged me to offer a detail explanation of my approach, something that was long due, so I thank you.
You did NOT step on my toes. Bloody hell, man, you'd know if you did - I would have ignored you! :thankyou:
I'm home alone at present; my daughter and wife are in Indonesia visiting family and I'm staying up late watching bad TV and eating plain, dull food, so my mood is a bit flatter than normal. Yesterday was 95F! I repeat, Ray, you didn't step on my toes.
Putting a NAKSA into a case is no big deal. Any TV repair man or amateur hobbyist can do it easy, and the instructions and pictures are all there. A bit of metal work is involved, particularly with the NAKSA 100 which has two heatsinks, but it's not difficult. The labor time would be around 3 hours for the 70 starting with a ready made case, and around 5 hours for the 100 starting with same. Par-metal, a company in NY state, can supply very nice enclosures, too. The only electrical connections are:
1. IEC power input and wires to switch and trafo (which may need extending depending on where you locate the trafo).
2. RCA inputs (plugs and lead is supplied)
3. Speaker outputs (again, supplied, but you will need binding posts).
4. LED indicator on front panel.
That's it!! The amps are all done, tested and ready to run. :thumb:
Hi Tom,
SoulSonics speakers..... a company from Slovenia.
Hi Hans,
The issue of feedback is interesting. The Lifeforce used only 16dB of global feedback, and does not have quite the same bass control as the NAKSA, which uses 31dB. The relationship between global feedback levels, damping factor and subjective speaker performance is extremely complex, dominated I suspect by psychoacoustic factors, so it's impossible to give hard and fast rules. The Maya uses zero global feedback, and I would say that while impact and slam is not to the NAKSA standard, it goes deeper, and offers a finer texture, whatever that means.... again, just words, you need to hear it. Colin and I have come to think in some wild and wacky ways about feedback; it is a wonderful tool, but it's easy to get it wrong. Lower DF seems to promote a better decay, which is suprisingly important to plausible sound. I think of feedback as sugar in the mix; you need just the right amount to make a good cake. And even then, tastes vary.... it's quite frustrating.
As a general comment, I'd say that amp design is NOT rocket science, but it is highly technical and for years it has been beset by preconceptions and philosophies which have promoted ideology over practicality. The classic examples are the fixation with global negative feedback, with very high damping factor, with very low distortion. These three premises have dominated the design cycle for fifty years, and need re-examination. The very appealing distortion reduction attributed to high loop gain is, to me at least, something of a chimera; it comes at a cost, largely because of psychoacoustic aspects which, while understood by CODEC engineers, have not filtered through to the analog cognoscenti of yore, hardly surprising, as Class D has becomie the love child of the latest generation.
Colin,
Five years..... yeah, it's been a while, hasn't it?
Still, it's been very, very productive for us both, and I'm grateful fate threw us together, thanks for all your hard work, mate,
Cheers,
Hugh
-
Hi Ray,
You deserve credit for keeping this thread interesting, and you encouraged me to offer a detail explanation of my approach, something that was long due, so I thank you.
You did NOT step on my toes. Bloody hell, man, you'd know if you did - I would have ignored you! :thankyou:
I'm home alone at present; my daughter and wife are in Indonesia visiting family and I'm staying up late watching bad TV and eating plain, dull food, so my mood is a bit flatter than normal. Yesterday was 95F! I repeat, Ray, you didn't step on my toes.
Hi Hugh,
Well, ok, glad I didn't step on toes. 95F, hopefully low humidity. Here in Tucson in the summers, 110F and above is common until the Monsoons come through, then the hummidity gets up there along with the heat. Yuck.
You are a true gentleman.
i've worked with Parmetal cases before. Good stuff.
Good glad to keep this thread interesting.
I'll probably end up with the Naksa 100 because frankly, don't know what speakers in the future I'd be getting. So over the objections of my wife, I'd get one. At least this time, building an amplifier won't be so damned complicated. I might have to ask you a few more questions than normal. That's only cause I can't see the pics. I'll try not to talk your ear off. lol.
Hmmm, so how much was the shipping for the Maya to the States?
On each of the three ampls, what about loading for a preamp? That could make some difference in sound, no? Do you specify any particular range of impedances like 200 Ohms, or 1200 ohms, ...
For future speakers, I'd guess I'd be looking at speakers with bass reflex or maybe the song towers which have a transmisionline ports. You don't see to many sealed boxes any more.
I'm done.
Ray Bronk
-
For future speakers, I'd guess I'd be looking at speakers with bass reflex or maybe the song towers which have a transmisionline ports. You don't see to many sealed boxes any more.
Hi Ray,
For my 2 cents worth, I have Vandersteen 3A Sigs from the US and they are driven wonderfully by my Soraya. Twice the price in Oz because of the shipping but great value and well worth a listen close to the manufacturer IMHO. Transmission line is certainly my cup of tea and the VSonics are also superb but I personally already had my Vandies when they came out and I take it that speaker kits would be impractical for you. Lots of second hand examples on Audiogon. :D
-
Hi Ray,
For my 2 cents worth, I have Vandersteen 3A Sigs from the US and they are driven wonderfully by my Soraya. Twice the price in Oz because of the shipping but great value and well worth a listen close to the manufacturer IMHO. Transmission line is certainly my cup of tea and the VSonics are also superb but I personally already had my Vandies when they came out and I take it that speaker kits would be impractical for you. Lots of second hand examples on Audiogon. :D
It's not that they are impractical to me, it's just I do not have any woodworking tools. yeah, i've heard the VSonics are supposed to be very good. Some of the stuff there in Australia are every bit as good as the stuff here in the States, but we don't have access to them, like you guys probably don't have access to some of our stuff either.
Right now, it's just a chore enough to keep food on the table and pay the bills. Alas, that's a different thread. No real moola for the hifi, at least for the moment.
Ray Bronk
-
Understood Ray. Even the economy Model 1 Vandies sound great (I have a set), particularly for their price. Hugh has heard them. Second hand Stateside would be about $500 or less if that is OK budget wise. Just a thought.
-
Understood Ray. Even the economy Model 1 Vandies sound great (I have a set), particularly for their price. Hugh has heard them. Second hand Stateside would be about $500 or less if that is OK budget wise. Just a thought.
Hi, Well, we are now offtopic, but my next purchase one of these day is an active preamp. There are several I'm looking at, but that's for another thread in another circle.
To bad, the VSonics are not availble Stateside.
I would think any of the amps in the 6 thousand dollar range would be pretty good, and hugh's amp Maya, is certainly no exception. It's right up there with the best of them.
Ray Bronk
-
Ray,
The VSonics are available in the US, you merely have to build your own enclosure, which is not too bad if you tak it to a cabinet maker who can build to simple instructions.
This would likely cost you around $500 a pair, depending on who you ask.
I'm confident that in Tucson you'd have some damn good cabinet makers!!
Shipping crossovers, filling and terminations/wire to you is not prohibitive. Quite a few OS buyers have the VSonics.
Hope this helps,
Hugh
-
Ray,
The VSonics are available in the US, you merely have to build your own enclosure, which is not too bad if you tak it to a cabinet maker who can build to simple instructions.
This would likely cost you around $500 a pair, depending on who you ask.
I'm confident that in Tucson you'd have some damn good cabinet makers!!
Shipping crossovers, filling and terminations/wire to you is not prohibitive. Quite a few OS buyers have the VSonics.
Hope this helps,
Hugh
Hi Hugh,
hmmm, sounds interesting. Can you PM me with the cost of the kit ETC. or is that all on your site? So you say $500 a pair for the cabinets plus parts. Now that I've totally derailed this thread, ... I wasn't trying to do that really Dad.
Ray Bronk
-
I've pretty much followed Hugh's journey while continuing to dabble in the hollow state world.
When I comes to audio amps, posters above have used the LEFT or RIGHT of Centre analogy to describe how an amp suits one's musical taste. There is a straight line from "a Musical Instrument in its own right" school (the far left if you like) through to "a piece of wire with gain" school (the far right). I'm unashamedly left of centre BUT cannot stand either the "sickly rich" bad single ended triode type sound of the far left (in my case a Chinese Music Angel 845) or indeed the "cold, sterile and boring" sound of the far right (in my case a 215W per channel 0.001% distortion top of the range ROTEL).
My ASPEN experience:
I started with an AKSA100 which was the first SS Amp I'd found in quite a while that I could actually bear to listen too. That was sold and replaced with an AKSA55 which I thought was a little better than its big brother. The AKSA55 was extensively modified quite a few times as the design eventually settled down to the AKSA55 Nivarna Plus (the "55N+"). The 55N+ is VERY tube like in its musical presentation.
When the Lifeforce came along I got one of those too. Frankly, (sorry Hugh) I never really liked the LifeForce and so skipped the update to LifeForceII and so may have missed something. The LifeForce was (in my view) much more accurate and much less "musical" than the 55N+. Too far to the right for my tastes.
Hugh then started on the Maya and having been one of Hugh's Beta Testers and design sounding boards, I managed to get a pair of Maya PCB's from him and I built a 55 Watt version of the Maya (1 pair of output transistors instead of 2 pairs). That gave me a "reference amplifier" to the right.
That was enough for a while, and then came the NAKSA so I bought a NAKSA70 too. It is quite tube like (left of centre) but with some SS muscle in the bottom end in particular.
So whats happened to all these amps.
1) Day to day I run an EL84 Ultralinear Push Pull Tube Amp (my own design, the "Baby Huey").
2) The AKSA55N+ is my reference amp against which all my tube amp designs are compared. This amp is a definite keeper, it gets swapped into the system regularly to make sure my latest tube amp design is on the right err..., that should be on the "correct", left track.
3) The LifeForce is now just of a couple of loaded PCB's in a parts bin.
4) The NAKSA70 went to a niece for Xmas. I have been building sound systems for each of the nieces (6 down and 1 to go). I bought a pair of small KEF speakers for the latest system and could never get them to sound right with the low damping factor tube amp I built for them - so Nicole ended up with the NAKS70 to drive the KEFs. (Plus she lives in Melbourne now, so If she ever has trouble with the amp I can send her to Hugh). I was a bit sorry to see it go but it went to a good home.
ASIDE: There is a lesson there - some speakers require particular characteristics from an amplifier to sound correct.
5) The Maya 55 (it may be the only one in existence) is my "right of centre" reference amp. I could probably be persuaded to part with this amp if offered enough of the "filthy lucre" but it would need to be quite a bit of "filthy lucre".
Strangely, (or perhaps not so strange), the one amp I will never part with is my AKSA55N+. It is truly lovely.
As for the 2 amps at the extremes, which I hated:
The Chinese Music Angel 845 blew up before I could get to it with a blunt instrument. It is being ratted for parts to build what I hope to be a GOOD 845 SET (I bought some expensive output transformers to suit).
The 215W per Channel 0.001% distortion ROTEL went to "shreader" type guitar player. He uses a Line6 POD DSP(Digital Signal Processing) preamplifier to get the guitar sound he wants and uses the ROTEL with the 2 channels bridged (>400W out) to boost the sound to ear bleedling levels. In other words its being used to reproduce distortion. I though that was poetic justice.
Cheers,
Ginger
-
I never really liked the LifeForce and so skipped the update to LifeForceII and so may have missed something. The LifeForce was (in my view) much more accurate and much less "musical" than the 55N+. Too far to the right for my tastes.
Hi Ginger,
A great summary that I can relate to and fills in some missing (to me) relationships to the AKSA 55N+. :D
As to the section I've quoted, I came in at the LifeForceII stage and yes I found it nicer, more rounded and musical than the original. IMHO, that improvement chain gained momentum as the II morphed into the original Soraya and now the latest Soraya which has pulled it back to the left till it is in broadly similar 'sounding' territory to the Maya. Not the same as previously discussed but way closer than the original LifeForce. I also suppose I'm taking something of a liberty with the morphing concept as the original and latest are totally different amp designs but the development family history was there nevertheless.
I love the Soraya as it is now specified (2010?) and don't feel any urgent compulsion to move to the Maya (though who knows) - whereas from any earlier LifeForce version, I simply couldn't have resisted. :duh:
-
I've pretty much followed Hugh's journey while continuing to dabble in the hollow state world.
When I comes to audio amps, posters above have used the LEFT or RIGHT of Centre analogy to describe how an amp suits one's musical taste. There is a straight line from "a Musical Instrument in its own right" school (the far left if you like) through to "a piece of wire with gain" school (the far right). I'm unashamedly left of centre BUT cannot stand either the "sickly rich" bad single ended triode type sound of the far left (in my case a Chinese Music Angel 845) or indeed the "cold, sterile and boring" sound of the far right (in my case a 215W per channel 0.001% distortion top of the range ROTEL).
My ASPEN experience:
I started with an AKSA100 which was the first SS Amp I'd found in quite a while that I could actually bear to listen too. That was sold and replaced with an AKSA55 which I thought was a little better than its big brother. The AKSA55 was extensively modified quite a few times as the design eventually settled down to the AKSA55 Nivarna Plus (the "55N+"). The 55N+ is VERY tube like in its musical presentation.
When the Lifeforce came along I got one of those too. Frankly, (sorry Hugh) I never really liked the LifeForce and so skipped the update to LifeForceII and so may have missed something. The LifeForce was (in my view) much more accurate and much less "musical" than the 55N+. Too far to the right for my tastes.
Hugh then started on the Maya and having been one of Hugh's Beta Testers and design sounding boards, I managed to get a pair of Maya PCB's from him and I built a 55 Watt version of the Maya (1 pair of output transistors instead of 2 pairs). That gave me a "reference amplifier" to the right.
That was enough for a while, and then came the NAKSA so I bought a NAKSA70 too. It is quite tube like (left of centre) but with some SS muscle in the bottom end in particular.
So whats happened to all these amps.
1) Day to day I run an EL84 Ultralinear Push Pull Tube Amp (my own design, the "Baby Huey").
2) The AKSA55N+ is my reference amp against which all my tube amp designs are compared. This amp is a definite keeper, it gets swapped into the system regularly to make sure my latest tube amp design is on the right err..., that should be on the "correct", left track.
3) The LifeForce is now just of a couple of loaded PCB's in a parts bin.
4) The NAKSA70 went to a niece for Xmas. I have been building sound systems for each of the nieces (6 down and 1 to go). I bought a pair of small KEF speakers for the latest system and could never get them to sound right with the low damping factor tube amp I built for them - so Nicole ended up with the NAKS70 to drive the KEFs. (Plus she lives in Melbourne now, so If she ever has trouble with the amp I can send her to Hugh). I was a bit sorry to see it go but it went to a good home.
ASIDE: There is a lesson there - some speakers require particular characteristics from an amplifier to sound correct.
5) The Maya 55 (it may be the only one in existence) is my "right of centre" reference amp. I could probably be persuaded to part with this amp if offered enough of the "filthy lucre" but it would need to be quite a bit of "filthy lucre".
Strangely, (or perhaps not so strange), the one amp I will never part with is my AKSA55N+. It is truly lovely.
As for the 2 amps at the extremes, which I hated:
The Chinese Music Angel 845 blew up before I could get to it with a blunt instrument. It is being ratted for parts to build what I hope to be a GOOD 845 SET (I bought some expensive output transformers to suit).
The 215W per Channel 0.001% distortion ROTEL went to "shreader" type guitar player. He uses a Line6 POD DSP(Digital Signal Processing) preamplifier to get the guitar sound he wants and uses the ROTEL with the 2 channels bridged (>400W out) to boost the sound to ear bleedling levels. In other words its being used to reproduce distortion. I though that was poetic justice.
Cheers,
Ginger
Hi Ginger,
Well, it does show that oldies but goodies aren't necessarily dead goodies. It also just goes to show that there are different strokes for different folks. If I have understood his views correctly Stan who was with PS Audio, built some excellent preamps when in the .80's and now, has always felt that the lower powered equipment has always sounded better. That's in reference to your Aksa 55. Just reminising for a moment, when I had the occasion to hear one of John Bedini's beta products of an amplifier built completely using only diodes, no transistors in the circuit at all. It was about 10 watts, and the bass it produced it's something I have never heard since. That was back in the early .80's. My involvement with audio these days is on forums like this one. So it was with some fascination that I read your audio journey. It's always good to hear someone else's perspective.
Ray Bronk
-
Hi Ray,
Yes, I think I agree, particularly on the personal preference issue, tastes vary a lot!
Thanks Ginger,
I agree entirely about the spectrum from 'musical instrument' to 'straight wire with gain'. I have found audiophile taste lie somewhere along this line, no question.
My thoughts are that the AKSA, while very good sounding, can't match the NAKSA for resolution, but of course some may not necessarily want resolution; some like a photograph, others like a painting. Your (early ) Maya was a 'straight wire with gain' style of amp, but the appeal of these types of amps is, I find, limited to technical types, who tend to buy on specification and belief rather than what 'pleases' the ear, in fact that is usually rejected. It's a very complex field, I always say that people talk reds but drink whites!
Ginger, Lyn, thanks for your thoughts, much appreciated.
Hugh
-
There is a straight line from "a Musical Instrument in its own right" school (the far left if you like) through to "a piece of wire with gain" school (the far right). Cheers,
Ginger
Hm,
I don't know about this left-right defined line as posted, especially since I don't see any difference between the left and right points as defined. To state that the sound of "a musical instrument in it's own right" is anything different than just making it louder is incorrect IMO. The musical instrument sound does not need any of the artifacts that generally get added in audio playback. But it seems to me that people who only listen to audio playback generally like a bit of "enhancement" in their audio playback, as it "sounds good" in their listening rooms. I might add that the sound of a musical instrument as played through a venue sound system is likely to be slightly different from the sound of just an instrument in an acoustic space like a concert hall.
The sound of a musical instrument, just louder, seems to me to be more of the "piece of wire with gain" point, with nothing added to the frequency spectrum of the sound other than loudness. One could call this "accurate", for lack of a better term. The other side of the line could thusly be called "inaccurate", but that is too prejuducial. So maybe we could call it something like "enhanced musical sound", or some such thing, since something gets added to the frequency spectrum of the musical instrument sound.
Now, as for the Aspen amps
Well the Aksas had some second harmonic distortion added to the frequency spectrum at output, very "tube" like, but there was no amplifiying in the low voltage crossover region, not very tubelike. Put that where you will in the line, maybe somewhere in the middle.
Then there are the Life Forces, and their subsequencet Soraya modification versions with no second harmonic distortion in the profile, but with amplifying in the low voltage crossover regions. Are we still in the middle somewhere?
Now there is the Naksa, with a wee bit of second harmonic, and accuracy and resolution above that of the Life Forces. This seems to me to be a little to the right of the Aksa/LF area.
It's all in the art of the design.
-
I believe that, in the end, a straight wire with gain should be satisfying. I analyzed for many years what is causing 'musicality' in sound reproduction. Went from 300B to class D, from TDA1543NOS to Sabre32dac, from turntable to sd-card streaming, From Redbook to SACD, from mini monitors to 4way speaker systems. What lessons did i learn? In every standard commercial set of equipment, whatever the price, an average of only 12 bits will reach your ears. The source information which we need for the 'foot tapping experience' is lost in the chain. To compensate we get lost in the 'hifi fiction'; up- and oversampling, dithering, resampling, tubes, harmonics, noise, cables etc. And there are more variables like acoustic environment, mechanical resonances of speakers and mass inertia of drivers. That's what is making it all so damn difficult to choose components like 'the right amp' It's pretty personal. Last years my goal was to get more of the lost bits to my ears. The further i get in this journey, the more i realized that a straight approach, 'a wire with gain' is the way to get there.
-
Are we still in the middle somewhere?
Sigh! I guess I was always likely to open a bit of a can of worms with my own 'left-right' terminology as I spelled out my thoughts when I opened this thread as I wasn't attempting to define an absolute measurement spectrum, just to give some words to show how I heard the slightly different characteristics of the various Aspen models. :D I hope discussions on 'definitions' don't side track the observations at any stage. :wink:
Just to re-emphasise if I didn't make it clear at the start, I personally believe all of Hugh's amps are firmly in the 'middle' of the spectrum of great amp sonics and accuracy :thumb: in that they are neither too warm or wooly (my left) or sharp or thin or steely (my right) as some out there are. :no_hear: In fact if 'my' scale was to be 100 units wide, my mindset in my original post would have been that perhaps one, or at the most two, units separating the Maya from the Soraya and with the latest spec Soraya, only one and yes, the original LifeForce may have been a few more units to the right but I would have had it any day over some of the perfectly measuring screechers I've heard in the past. OK I'm exaggerating wildly - or perhaps not. :duh:
-
Strangely, (or perhaps not so strange), the one amp I will never part with is my AKSA55N+. It is truly lovely.
Me too! So maybe I'm not so crazy after all.
BTW, good detailed post Ginger.