Ohm Walsh speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 6496 times.

trebejo

Someone was asking for an opinion on how the Ohm speakers might sound with a Van Alstine amp. Here's my impressions.

I've been listening to the Ohm 2000, which came in about three months ago. The amp driving them was a NAD c272, which did a decent job all around. It's really a pretty inoffensive amp, 150 watts, pretty clean. A little bottom-heavy, and perhaps a bit veiled in the upper frequencies. I liked the way it rumbled in those lower frequencies but I always suspected that such behavior was a tad improper.

Just to be complete, the rest of the system is lossless files  -> squeezebox -> cambridge dacmagic -> promitheus TVC.

A couple of days ago a minor miracle took place, and someone was selling a used FV Ultra 550 within driving distance and at a more than reasonable price. Personal finances be damned (did I forget to mention that the Ohms were a bit pricey?), I just had to give this Van Alstine a chance in my living room.

Damn. DAMN. Forget that upper-frequency veil! I don't know if some kind of tonal neutrality is being violated here, but I don't give a damn. If a woman tells me that I'm the best looking man she's ever seen, I'm sure as the day is long that she's not being neutral but I don't give a damn! Same here. If I hear what I want to hear, well, hear hear!

So anyway, for the first time, I am hearing loudspeakers that can compete with my Stax headphones for conveying musical information. The Stax still win--they will always win, I'm sure, no matter who makes the loudspeakers or the amps--but there's a whole bunch of stuff now where it's a tie.

I think it's easier to talk about the recordings that have been "rescued". Fleetwood Mac's "Tusk" is a problematic little CD (I don't remember this problem back when it was only available as a vinyl LP btw). Well, this amp has rescued it. It's still sounds flawed, badly mastered-mixed-whatevered--specially on the Lindsey Buckingham songs--but not enough to take away the music anymore.

10,000 Maniacs' "Our Time in Eden" has a bass drum that annoys the hell out of me, and I'm always trying to listen past it to the rest which I like so much. The AVA amp makes this problem almost as tolerable as the Stax, which is to say, almost unnoticeable. There is probably some spec that explains this feature, but I don't know what it is. If I was forced to bet my last dollar on what that spec should be, I'd pick something with the word "slew" in it. I'm not holding my breath to read about it here either, but hope springs eternal...

Now onto the recordings that never needed rescuing. Strauss' Also Sprach Zarathustra (von Karajan 1984) sounds pretty good. It's a bit scary, I fear that I'm about to blow up the speakers even as my arithmetic tells me that I'm feeding less than 0.7v into the amp--which should never blow up anything--but the occasional sustained bass (e.g. organ and orchestra at the end of the opening movement, the famous C-G-C trumpet solo used in the movie "2001") reminds me of airplane landing strips. Unfortunately. some musical details are hard to hear but I blame either the recording or the conductor (ok, the recording) which has buried some musical lines compared to some other versions that I've heard (e.g. a brilliant bit of Straussian counterpoint is pointless when we don't hear the French horn--for Pete's sake, a FRENCH HORN!). Nonetheless, for sheer thermal impact, this combination of amp-speaker-recording is hard to beat.

The first movement of Beethoven's 7th has one heck of a nuanced audiophile tour--really, not bad stuff considering it was written by a deaf dude--and the last two or three minutes have a large dynamic and tonal range, including a stint by the double bass bunch that finally, finally sounded as it reads on the score. (btw the Stax manage to play these notes, quite accurately, so I think that the myth regarding low-frequency performance of headphones can be challenged. Of course we still feel bass notes with our thorax as much as our eardrums and that's where headphones must fall short).

Oh, and then there's "The Lemon Song" from Led Zeppelin II. Anybody with a working pair of ears can appreciate what Mr. Plant, Mr. Page and Mr. Bonham are doing on this track, which makes it a bit of a challenge to grant Mr. Jones the same courtesy. Thanks to the Stax, I had finally figured out what was there--it's damn fine bass work--and now I can hear all the notes and their inflections out of the loudspeakers. There is a little transition in this song where Jones basicallly runs up the neck as Page dives into a magnificent little solo and it's really a very nice way for one musician to introduce the other--well, I'd first noticed this with the Stax and now I'm finally hearing it on the loudspeaker without having to squint my ears.

So to sum up, I like it. The Ohm soundstage is magnificent--it's not some cheap party trick like the Bose, it literally fills the room with music, which is similar to what an orchestra does. The tonal balance seemed to be missing something in the upper frequencies but Mr. Van Alstine took care of that! The low frequencies are excellent, simultaneously tight, relaxed and deep.

The amp is like one of those gossipy fellows that is so properly raised that he never betrays any essential confidences, even as he wittily lets you know the story behind everyone in the room. Full exposure for all, discomfort for none. Oh yes, and he's got 250 watts in his wallet if you need some cab fare to get you home.

So then, as my piggy bank swells up again in a few months or so, I'll have to figure out a way to give Mr. Van Alstine some cash for some new stuff, just for decency's sake. It will take an act of Congress to replace my TVC, so the dacmagic may have to walk the plank by then.

PS: I have read some comments from time to time complaining about the build quality of these amps. I think they look fantastic, in a man's man kinda way (e.g. Steve McQueen). Anybody that complains about this amp in that way sounds to me like someone that complains about Marilyn Monroe being a bit fat.

PPS: I'd love to have some xlr inputs feeding a balanced something or other, of course--but the last time I brought this up, Mr. Van Alstine made it quite clear that if I wanted either his amp or his respect, then I should desist from this little aspiration. Can't have everything! So I'll just take the good sounds and let the rest go by and by...
« Last Edit: 2 Dec 2009, 09:48 am by trebejo »

martyo

Re: Ohm speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #1 on: 30 Nov 2009, 12:12 pm »
Welcome, nice write-up, and happy listening. :thumb:

Brett Buck

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 393
Re: Ohm speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #2 on: 30 Nov 2009, 05:09 pm »
PS: I have read some comments from time to time complaining about the build quality of these amps. I think they look fantastic, in a man's man kinda way (e.g. Steve McQueen). Anybody that complains about this amp in that way sounds to me like someone that complains about Marilyn Monroe being a bit fat.

   Good review - it really does play bass far out of proportion to the size, does it not? That's what surprised me. The "veiled" high frequencies are almost certainly a function of the old amp - my Walsh 100's have no issue with that with any amp I tried.

     I have heard others complain about the appearance of the amps, but this is just nonsense as far as I can tell. It looks fine to me - as you say, manly man stuff, only pansies need inch-thick hogged-out faceplates. It ain't a fashion show.  But I have never heard anyone complain about the build quality - I have looked inside both the preamp and power amp and the workmanship is of the highest order. I have seen the inside of any number of aerospace-quality products (be most magnificent and applicable to this situation being a Minuteman missile guidance computer - old enough to be built with discrete parts on circuit boards just like most audio components, and a work of art) and the quality and attention to detail is beyond criticism.

    Brett

robinje

Re: Ohm speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #3 on: 30 Nov 2009, 05:25 pm »
Nice review...  thanks for contributing your thoughts.   :thumb:

strat95

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 147
Re: Ohm speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #4 on: 1 Dec 2009, 05:47 am »
Yes, nice review.

Just curious, now that you have heard the AVA Ultra 550 in your system, are you curious to know what things would sound like with an AVA Ultra preamp and DAC?

TV

trebejo

Re: Ohm speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #5 on: 1 Dec 2009, 07:57 am »
If you like Karajan's ASZ try the 1974 recording (DG Originals). I seem to remember liking it better than the 80s one. DG recordings are muddy more often than not, though.

Yes, I've heard that version as well. I should do a critical comparison one of these days.

I think my favorite may be the one I was "raised on", Zubin Mehta from the 1970's, but that's probably just a bit of laziness. All lines were clear, but that bass was not there like I hear it today! Yes, I had a much worse stereo back then (and it was vinyl, wherever that may take us).

btw as long as we're Straussing, the Karajan versions of Don Quixote are very interesting, imho. The second version with Rostropovich has, well, Rostropovich. The third version about a decade later (Karajan was thoroughly revisiting Strauss then) is very well recorded for my taste, and Rostropovich's substitute (Meneses) does a fine, soulful job. I think I prefer the 3rd version over the 2nd! However I have not heard the first Karajan version with Fournier, so I probably should be doing more listening and less typing.  :oops:

Anyway, I suppose one should always make an effort to hear Karajan's version of Strauss, since there is a personal link there.

Yes, nice review.

Just curious, now that you have heard the AVA Ultra 550 in your system, are you curious to know what things would sound like with an AVA Ultra preamp and DAC?

TV

Well, I'll always be curious!

I don't expect to hear an improvement by replacing the TVC. I am pretty much sold on the concept by now, a passive preamp that is not relying on resistors to do the job. Seems like a pretty lossless way to do things, and that's what I want my preamp to do. I heart this TVC (it has no power cord!  8)) and about the only curiosity I have left is whether there would be much of an improvement if I upgraded to the $1400 version.

My biggest worry has been that I have to turn the volume knob too far, which is not the way that TVCs like to go since that raises their output impedance. But my new amp has a megohm input impedance, so what the heck.    :D  :D

Nonetheless, I try to be a fair man and if somebody knocked on my door with an ava pre under their arm and insisted on the ol' blind a/b, I would happily take part in it.

The Dacmagic is a different matter. For one thing, it remains the sole mass-produced piece on my audio chain now (well, not counting the squeezebox), and I would not doubt one bit that there is room for improvement there and that Mr. Van Alstine would say something positively bracing if I suggested otherwise. However, we are talking about an extra little stack of Franklins to get from one to the other! So, basically, I wait until enough of said Franklins pile up that I will not miss a few them and then I'll go dac shopping, probably stopping at avahifi first and probably getting one there (it's got a 30-day return policy after all).

Basically, I'm ok with the dacmagic, it does not sonically offend me (yet). Someday it might, and at that point I'll have to ponder whether to stick with SS or to try the tubed dac. I admit to some prejudices against the tubes, but I also admit that the two little glowey guys sitting in my 550 amp are my friends.  :thumb:

trebejo

Re: Ohm speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #6 on: 1 Dec 2009, 08:25 pm »
Let me just say, I'm listening to "Ripple" through my new-used 550 amp and darn it, it finally sounds as good as it did when I first heard it through my stax headphones.

Jerry, we miss ya.  :cry:

Hmm, so this avowedly "modest" DAC is driving your amp via the extra capacitive load of the passive switch box in between.  I would think that with a passive preamp you would need a really high quality source with plenty of current drive ability (among other things) to get the best results.

Well, the dacmagic specs ( :icon_twisted:) well in that sense, with < 50ohm output impedance, 2.1v rca / 4.2v xlr.

The new speakers were already putting such a bulge on the budget that I had to cut back on all the other components, so as long as performance was acceptable, the $400 price tag (new) was hard to pass up.

I'm sure it has some issue somewhere, but I'd be surprised if it was that kind of stuff. I think it probably gets the first 90-95% of things right, but of course that remaining bit of excellence is worth searching for, and Van Alstine's DAC is probably getting there. That's why it's my next stop on this audio journey.

Quote
Passive preamps are 'lossless' in theory, but what you gain with them is additional capacitance which can do certain things to the signal.  It requires the right pairing of source and amp.  Switching to an active pre could well improve matters provided the pre didn't add appreciable distortion; or, switching to a better DAC could do the trick just as well. I think you're certainly right to try that route first.

My conclusion is that if you line up the source and the amp properly, then a tvc can work well; if you don't, it might be a little bit sucky. A good active preamp is a safer, more flexible choice. Based on my 550 experience If I ever decide that I have to activate at that stage, a Van Alstine will be the first one I audition.

I just don't think I'll ever make that decision... btw I think your comment about the capacitance of the passive would better apply to resistor-based passives such as the Placette. TVCs work differently from them. They have no capacitors and no resistors, other than what is contained in the wires--but you know that we're not supposed to talk about wiring too much on this forum.  :wink:

btw I have really short rca cables coming out of the TVC into the 550 (50 cm), precisely for that reason. But when I tried longer cables (1.5 m) it was OK too.

Theoretically, the TVC's biggest problem is that it likes to attenuate (once again, the exact opposite of the vast majority of volume knobs out there, including the Van Alstine, I suppose). Attenuation leads to better sound. So if the gain from the amp is not high, you end up losing some of the best that the TVC has to offer as you raise that volume knob past two o'clock... I don't know if that necessarily leads to something bad, or simply to the tearful loss of something excellent, but at least you can count on the TVC being pretty quiet.

The reason it likes to attenuate is that it behaves as an impedance step-down device: the more it attenuates, the more that it lowers its output impedance. However, even at zero attenuation (i.e. volume knob at maximum), its output impedance matches the DAC's output impedance. But if you attenuate by, say, 20 db, then you lower the output impedance by 99%. Yep, an output impedance of 100 ohms at the dac becomes 1 ohm at the TVC.

Much of the above concerns might be moot in my situation, because the amp has such a high input impedance (courtesy of the little tubes) that the DAC is just not driving much of a load. So even though I'm only attenuating by 10 db (say), that leads to a step down of output impedance by a mere 90%... into a one-megohm tube in the amp. That should be OK.

I suspect that the biggest problem with a TVC is some kind of behind-the-scenes industrial production problem. It probably requires some careful hands-on attention that is antithetical with mass production. There are issues with tonal balance that require some pretty careful selection of the cores, for example. Having emailed back and forth with Nicholas at Promitheus, I felt like he'd done his physics homework enough to give him a shot, and I think he did alright.

In case you're wondering, this is how I tested the TVC. First I listened to my Stax with the dacmagic plugged straight into the stax amp (which comes with a volume knob). Then I put the TVC between the dac and the amp, maxed out the amp's volume knob and used the TVC for volume control. I couldn't tell the difference between the two scenarios (using the usual Beethoven's 7th test), and if a pair of electrostatic headphones cannot resolve the difference to my (tin) ears, I figure that the preamp is OK.

WGH

Re: Ohm speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #7 on: 1 Dec 2009, 09:52 pm »
My conclusion is that if you line up the source and the amp properly, then a tvc can work well; if you don't, it might be a little bit sucky. A good active preamp is a safer, more flexible choice. Based on my 550 experience If I ever decide that I have to activate at that stage, a Van Alstine will be the first one I audition.

A few years ago Frank had some thoughts about active vs. passive pre-amps:

Adding the Transcendance 7 to system w/out a preamp

Wayne

stereocilia

Re: Ohm speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #8 on: 2 Dec 2009, 01:08 am »
Nice write-up!  I liked the part about "250 Watts in his wallet for cab fare."

I like the build quality, too.  OTOH I just preemtively put new tubes in mine after a couple years which required attention to no fewer than 26 screws.  They are all happily un-belligerent screws, but still: 26!  If it was, like, 25 screws I could understand, but 26?  Geez Louise.

avahifi

Re: Ohm Walsh speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #9 on: 2 Dec 2009, 02:31 pm »
You removed four too many screws!  The ones at each bottom corner on the sides  do not hold the cover down.  Anyway our design assures you that the cover will never accidently come flying off.   :)

Note that each generation of new product here uses fewer cover screws.  The new Ultravalve amplifier uses only two to hold the bottom on.

We are making progress.

Regards,

Frank

jtwrace

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 11415
  • www.theintellectualpeoplepodcast.com
    • TIPP YouTube Channel
Re: Ohm Walsh speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #10 on: 2 Dec 2009, 02:36 pm »
our design assures you that the cover will never accidently come flying off.   :)
Regards,

Frank

I thought this was so no one can attempt to replace the IEC / power cord.   :nono:

 :lol: :lol: :lol:

turkey

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1888
Re: Ohm Walsh speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #11 on: 2 Dec 2009, 03:00 pm »
our design assures you that the cover will never accidently come flying off.   :)
Regards,

Frank

I thought this was so no one can attempt to replace the IEC / power cord.   :nono:

 :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, most of the people who would want to install an IEC socket so they could use a $600 power cord aren't capable of using a screwdriver. :)



jtwrace

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 11415
  • www.theintellectualpeoplepodcast.com
    • TIPP YouTube Channel
Re: Ohm Walsh speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #12 on: 2 Dec 2009, 03:05 pm »
our design assures you that the cover will never accidently come flying off.   :)
Regards,

Frank

I thought this was so no one can attempt to replace the IEC / power cord.   :nono:

 :lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, most of the people who would want to install an IEC socket so they could use a $600 power cord aren't capable of using a screwdriver. :)

That's funny!

stereocilia

Re: Ohm Walsh speakers with Fet Valve Ultra 550, a review
« Reply #13 on: 2 Dec 2009, 05:35 pm »
You removed four too many screws!  The ones at each bottom corner on the sides  do not hold the cover down.  Anyway our design assures you that the cover will never accidently come flying off.   :)

Note that each generation of new product here uses fewer cover screws.  The new Ultravalve amplifier uses only two to hold the bottom on.

We are making progress.

Regards,

Frank
:thumb:  Just don't eliminate so many screws that you can no longer claim tornado-proofness.  Thats a big selling point.