[Tyson]

Some speakers require an amp with a lot of watts and a lot of current.  Speakers like Magnepan, Wilson, Focal, Raidho, etc...  That's because they have lower efficiency and difficult phase/impedance.  For these speakers you really do require an amp with a lot of grunt.

On the other hand, there are speakers that are high efficiency and relatively easy to drive.  These types of speakers are a lot more rare.  Think Klipsch Heritage, Spatial, Gedlee, Zu, etc... And you can very easily hook up a monster amp to these speakers and they will sound great.  BUT, the real beauty of these types of speakers is that you can also use much lower powered amps and they still sound great.  That's what I was trying to highlight in my original review on Page 1 of this thread, with hooking up things like a Type 45 amp, a 2a3 amp, a 300b amp, etc... These types of amps can ONLY be run on speakers like the X3's.  That's part of what makes these speakers so special, it opens up the world of low powered tube amps, which is simply not possible with low efficiency/difficult speakers.

I'd never have a Type 45 or a 2a3 as my 'only' amp.  Most speakers need more watts and grunt.  So I have my BA3 and my push-pull pentode amp.  I also have a pair of 200 watt Kismet monoblocks but they are off getting some upgrades done.  So if/when I have a speaker that needs grunt/drive, I am covered.  But with the X3's, you can see from the original post, the best amp from my collection was not the most powerful amp (40 watts), but was actually the lower powered 12 watt amp.  So even with tube amps, more power does not mean a better match to a particular speaker.

[Desertpilot]

Roger Sanders, designer of the Magtech amp, has a fascinating (to me) white paper on amplifiers, tube vs SS and power here: http://sanderssoundsystems.com/technical-white-papers/172-tubes-vs-transistors

This is indeed a fascinating article.  Thank you Al.

Tyson, sorry your thread is totally hijacked for the popular tube vs. SS conversation.

I am using a Parasound Halo A52+ SS amplifier.  I've been completely satisfied.  It offers 180 watts, all 5 channel driven, into 8 Ohms.  It is Class A for the first 10 watts.  For Al, per the white paper, the Parasound does have a protection circuit:  "Total Protection - Relays:  Each channel of the A 52+ has a high-quality protection relay with gold-plated contacts for long-term reliability."  I guess that means I suffer the distortion he mentioned.  I just don't know enough to draw a proper conclusion.  But, the Parasound line of amps has a solid reputation so I am going to remain satisfied.

Marcus

[DBT AUDIO]

#DBTAUDIO
I'm just gonna throw this out there for everyone that has watts on their mind.  Watts dont mean much at all, especially if you never use them.  It's current.  As is fast, linear, available current.  The Luxman has a BJT based 3 stage push pull circuit in class A and it will outperform a MOSFET based amp with over 3 times its wattage.  Theres so much more to amp design circuitry than watts.  It will also tame just about any speaker you hook it up with.  The 590ax2 is a first class integrated that will stand up to just about anything.  And you're hearing this from a tube guy.
Just FYI.

Wow, I’ve been looking to get feedback from folks that love tubes!  I am narrowing it down to the Luxman 590AXII or 509X.  I believe the 590AXII may have ended it’s lifecycle, per the Luxman America website.  Another AC member mentioned the same.  Thanks for the detailed information!

[genjamon]

+1 Tyson

And this is the implication of reading between the lines in my post.  With the X series, you can have it all with small wattage tubes - tone, detail, control, and holographic soundstage.  If you know you want to swim in the high efficiency speaker pond, you can play with a whole other world of electronics options.  But if you know you're good playing in the large watts SS amp pond, you can play around with a wide range of speakers if that's what you want to do.  Gotta know your priorities.

DBT - I'm not clear on your priorities yet.  It sounds like you recognize the strengths of the X series and want to play with those options, but also that you want to hedge against future speaker experiments.  As you can tell from Tyson's review, buying the X3's should probably be viewed as an investment you should live with for a while so that you can experiment and find the right amplification for your tastes.  That is, unless you already have your end-game electronics arrangement and are just looking for speakers to complement them for your tastes.  But that doesn't sound like your situation.  It might take you a few amps before you find the right one for you with these speakers. 

If I were you, I wouldn't be going with an expensive dealer-sourced Luxman with no good return options right off the bat.  No matter what kind of reviews you hear from people on forums, you can't really trust them since everyone's ears/brain/tastes are different, and people can have vastly different meanings for various phrases.  I've often been astounded at local get-togethers by the words other people use to describe the sound of various setups.  We can all be in the same room listening to the same thing, and I've heard descriptions that are 100% 180 degrees opposite of the words I would have used to describe the same sound.  Sometimes it's that people have a different meaning of the word(s) being used, and sometimes it's due to a different point of comparison in their mind (often being a sound they're used to in their own rig at home that is quite different than the sound of my rig).  Anyway, there's no way to control for those variations on audio forums, so the only way to know for sure is to hear it yourself in your own room with your music. 

The good news is the X series opens up an exciting and wide-ranging world of potential compatibilities to suit a wide range of tastes.  The bad news is that it might take you a while to find that just-right fit for your tastes.  I wouldn't expect to knock it out of the park right off the bat.

[Tyson]

And just to put some numbers to the wattage discussion.  I listen mostly around 75db average with 85db peaks, and 'loud' for me is 85db average with 95 db peaks. 

The X3's are 97db efficient.  That means it takes 1 watt to produce an SPL level of 97db at 1m.  You lose a bit of SPL by sitting further back than 1m, but then you gain some SPL back by using 2 speakers instead of 1.  So let's just say that I get 95db at my listening position with 1 watt of power.

So, if 'loud' for me is 85db average with 95db peaks, I never get higher than 1 watt of power used.  Even 'rocking" and 'loud'.  This is the nice thing about highly efficient speakers.  You can get very loud and have lots of headroom even with a few watts. 

[atmasphere]

#DBTAUDIO
I'm just gonna throw this out there for everyone that has watts on their mind.  Watts dont mean much at all, especially if you never use them.  It's current.  As is fast, linear, available current.  The Luxman has a BJT based 3 stage push pull circuit in class A and it will outperform a MOSFET based amp with over 3 times its wattage.  Theres so much more to amp design circuitry than watts.  It will also tame just about any speaker you hook it up with.  The 590ax2 is a first class integrated that will stand up to just about anything.  And you're hearing this from a tube guy.
Just FYI.

LOL! Current is not possible without watts; 1 Watt = 1 Amp times 1 Volt. To further complicate the confusion that exists around this topic, most loudspeakers are said to be 'voltage driven', which is to say that the amp can double power as impedance is cut in half. An amp that can put out a constant voltage regardless of load is said to be a 'voltage source' but to do that it has current available for the lower impedances.

But you can see that current is not a big issue with the Spatials. 30 watts is typically plenty of power and if you have 30 watts into 8 Ohms you get 1.9 Amps.   

However our little S-30 does a great job on this speaker (IIRC Clayton has one in his own system) and the S-30 has a pretty high output impedance. IOW it lacks 'current' since it is uncomfortable with low impedance loads. But Clayton designed his speakers to be easy to drive with tubes and in particular lower powered amps that employ no feedback. When a tube amp had no feedback, it behaves as a power source rather than a voltage source like most transistor amps (SETs act as Power sources too). For more on this topic see
http://www.atma-sphere.com/en/resources-paradigms-in-amplifier-design.html

We can see that the Spatial loudspeakers tend to be Power Paradigm devices, although they do fairly well working in both worlds. 

The reason tube amps seem to have more usable power is due to how they make distortion- when you push a tube amp hard, it starts to make higher ordered harmonics which the ear uses to sense sound pressure- and so it sounds louder. If you push it harder and harder, at some point it will make outright breakup distortion. Generally, solid state will simply break up when pushed too hard. So tubes will seem to have more grunt for the amount of power they make.

[DBT AUDIO]

This dialogue about tubes vs. SS and low wattage vs. high wattage amps with Spatial Audio speakers has generated some very good information. 

For clarity, I clearly understand that high efficiency speakers opens the door to a myriad of low powered amps.  My main objective is to determine if I prefer SS over tubes with my Spatials.  Period…. 

When I first took delivery of my X5s, I was using a PS Audio Stellar Gain Cell DAC (i.e., SS preamp/DAC combo) and PS Audio Stellar M700 mono blocks.  The X5s were so new and all over the place with the break-in period, I immediately decided to replace the PS Audio with my current PrimaLuna EVO 400 preamp and amp.  My auditory memory cannot recollect the sonic details of how the PS Audio compared to my current gear, but I know I like what I’m hearing much better.  I actually bought a PS Audio BHK Signature preamp.  It was decent, but I had a quality control issue with it and I sent it back for a refund.  Done…. However, the speakers were still breaking in and I made so many upgrades in a short amount of time, I can’t tell you what component or cable made the improvements in the chain.  I know better, but I did it anyway.

I have another PS Audio Stellar GCD in my second system with the matching Stellar S300 amp.  So, several months ago, I employed that PS Audio Stellar Gain Cell DAC with my PrimaLuna EVO 400 amp while my EVO 400 preamp was out of commission for a few days due to a bad rectifier tube.  I was using the preamp section only because I had my Holo Audio DAC in the chain.  The PS Audio Stellar GCD sounded decent after settling in on its sound character, but it was “almost” like night and day compared to the PrimaLuna preamp.  IMO, The PS Audio could not compete as it did not have the bloom and airiness of the EVO 400.  I could say more, but I will spare your time.  I couldn’t wait to get the EVO 400 back in the chain.  The entry level PS Audio Stellar GCD is probably not a fair comparison to the EVO 400, but that’s the SS I have in house to compare with tubes.

Then, I had a recent, in home, shootout between the LTA MicrozotL preamp and ZOTL Ultralinear+ amp vs. my PrimaLuna EVO 400 preamp and amp.  I loved the detail and the handling of vocals over the PrimaLuna, but it seemed like the PrimaLuna had more bloom and weightiness.  I’m hopping to find a preamp/power amp combo or maybe an integrated amp that offers the mix of the things I liked with both the LTA and PrimaLuna gear.  I’ve heard that Luxman was very detailed, but smooth and all the other flattering adjectives that audiophiles like to use.  So, I zeroed in on Luxman.  I got a feeling, I need to stick with tube gear, but I can’t confirm it until I audition a good SS preamp/amp or integrated with the X5s.

I have recently heard positive chatter about Atmasphere tube gear as well.  Lots of fun, but I just need lots of time and money.

Thanks all because your input has been great!

[Daryl Zero]

I have a Modwright KWH225i hybrid integrated, 225wpc with X5's no problem at all. It runs up to 25w class A so spends most if not all of its time there.
'

I thought you went with the LTA ultralinear integrated. 

I do have a question for you and the group. A lot of what everyone is discussing is the difference between a bunch of pretty good tube amps. Maybe I don't have the ear for it but it seems like the X5s and X3s sound pretty darn good with most speakers. Like Tyson, I don't listen at a high volume and while I went to a tube integrated and like the sound better than the SS (mostly as it is fuller and more of a musical gestalt), the speakers sound good even with low level amplifiers.

So it seems to me that a lot of you are chasing very small differences for a lot of money which I'm trying to wrap my head around.

I'd like to have an idea what you all are looking for and how much is it worth? 

[genjamon]

Detailed but smooth does not necessarily mean weighty, and in fact can often be a thinner rather than weightier/meatier/bloomier sound in SS amps.  IMO, smooth is one of the words with the least common meaning in all of audiophile jargon.     

[DBT AUDIO]

Detailed but smooth does not necessarily mean weighty, and in fact can often be a thinner rather than weightier/meatier/bloomier sound in SS amps.  IMO, smooth is one of the words with the least common meaning in all of audiophile jargon.     

I wasn’t implying that detailed + smooth resulted in weightiness.  The LTA was detailed, meaning it actually sounded a little thin, although I still liked other qualities it presented.  My PrimaLuna sounded like it had more weight & bloom.  I was explaining the difference I heard between the two brands and I would like to find one SS brand that has the mix of qualities I heard with the LTA and PrimaLuna.  The hifi reviewers and forum reviews I read about Luxman mentioned it was smooth.  I interpret that to mean the sound was not bright, analytical or fatiguing to their ears.  I could be wrong in their meaning of the word smooth?  I don’t like to use a bunch of Stereophile type of adjectives to avoid misunderstandings.  No big deal, it’s just a fun hobby for me.

[morganc]

I thought you went with the LTA ultralinear integrated. 

I do have a question for you and the group. A lot of what everyone is discussing is the difference between a bunch of pretty good tube amps. Maybe I don't have the ear for it but it seems like the X5s and X3s sound pretty darn good with most speakers. Like Tyson, I don't listen at a high volume and while I went to a tube integrated and like the sound better than the SS (mostly as it is fuller and more of a musical gestalt), the speakers sound good even with low level amplifiers.

So it seems to me that a lot of you are chasing very small differences for a lot of money which I'm trying to wrap my head around.

I'd like to have an idea what you all are looking for and how much is it worth?

Great point! Enjoy your system!

The best way to answer your question and open Pandora's box is to find someone near you who has their system dialed in and go take a listen.  That's how I learned so much.  It also led me to spending a lot more! 

As my friend today said, once you put something in your system and hear how great it is, you can't easily take it out!

[atmasphere]

Detailed but smooth does not necessarily mean weighty, and in fact can often be a thinner rather than weightier/meatier/bloomier sound in SS amps.  IMO, smooth is one of the words with the least common meaning in all of audiophile jargon.     

'Smooth' means a lack of harshness. 'Detailed' at the same time as 'smooth' implies a lack of audible distortion- a relaxed presentation that does not fatigue. Distortion obscures detail, but often audiophiles conflate 'brightness' and 'detailed' which IME is a mistake, since the presence of higher ordered harmonics caused by distortion will result in brightness and harshness.

 'Smooth' does not imply thinness  at all and you can have plenty of weight in a system that also sounds smooth. 

In a nutshell, smoother and more detailed is where you want to go- this will get you closer to the music since there is less distortion.

[DBT AUDIO]

'Smooth' means a lack of harshness. 'Detailed' at the same time as 'smooth' implies a lack of audible distortion- a relaxed presentation that does not fatigue. Distortion obscures detail, but often audiophiles conflate 'brightness' and 'detailed' which IME is a mistake, since the presence of higher ordered harmonics caused by distortion will result in brightness and harshness.

 'Smooth' does not imply thinness  at all and you can have plenty of weight in a system that also sounds smooth. 

In a nutshell, smoother and more detailed is where you want to go- this will get you closer to the music since there is less distortion.

Thank you!

[genjamon]

'Smooth' means a lack of harshness. 'Detailed' at the same time as 'smooth' implies a lack of audible distortion- a relaxed presentation that does not fatigue. Distortion obscures detail, but often audiophiles conflate 'brightness' and 'detailed' which IME is a mistake, since the presence of higher ordered harmonics caused by distortion will result in brightness and harshness.

 'Smooth' does not imply thinness  at all and you can have plenty of weight in a system that also sounds smooth. 

In a nutshell, smoother and more detailed is where you want to go- this will get you closer to the music since there is less distortion.

I don't personally disagree with any of this. 

But while you may call something smooth because it simply lacks harshness, which would apply to both thinner and weightier sounds that lack harshness, others might view any thinner sound as fatiguing over time and reserve the term smooth for music with more body that makes them feel at greater ease.  Or they might conflate smooth with a more expansive soundstage that makes them feel more relaxed about the sound - basically equating smooth with relaxed.  And in this context, I'm just saying that DBT, or anyone, should be wary about reading too much into any particular person's use of the term "smooth" without having a pretty good idea where that person is coming from with the term.

Here, DBT is looking for a blend of characteristics between his bloomy Primaluna tube amp and a thinner but detailed sounding LTA tube amp.  To me, the term smooth doesn't seem relevant to placing the sonic character of the Luxman along the spectrum of sound he's trying to calibrate, since the term could probably apply to both the Primaluna and the LTA. 

[SoCalWJS]

Some speakers require an amp with a lot of watts and a lot of current.  Speakers like Magnepan, Wilson, Focal, Raidho, etc...  That's because they have lower efficiency and difficult phase/impedance.  For these speakers you really do require an amp with a lot of grunt.

On the other hand, there are speakers that are high efficiency and relatively easy to drive.  These types of speakers are a lot more rare.  Think Klipsch Heritage, Spatial, Gedlee, Zu, etc... And you can very easily hook up a monster amp to these speakers and they will sound great.  BUT, the real beauty of these types of speakers is that you can also use much lower powered amps and they still sound great.  That's what I was trying to highlight in my original review on Page 1 of this thread, with hooking up things like a Type 45 amp, a 2a3 amp, a 300b amp, etc... These types of amps can ONLY be run on speakers like the X3's.  That's part of what makes these speakers so special, it opens up the world of low powered tube amps, which is simply not possible with low efficiency/difficult speakers.

I'd never have a Type 45 or a 2a3 as my 'only' amp.  Most speakers need more watts and grunt.  So I have my BA3 and my push-pull pentode amp.  I also have a pair of 200 watt Kismet monoblocks but they are off getting some upgrades done.  So if/when I have a speaker that needs grunt/drive, I am covered.  But with the X3's, you can see from the original post, the best amp from my collection was not the most powerful amp (40 watts), but was actually the lower powered 12 watt amp.  So even with tube amps, more power does not mean a better match to a particular speaker.

Short Thread Hijack:

So what are you having done to the Oddyssey's?

[atmasphere]

I don't personally disagree with any of this. 

But while you may call something smooth because it simply lacks harshness, which would apply to both thinner and weightier sounds that lack harshness, others might view any thinner sound as fatiguing over time and reserve the term smooth for music with more body that makes them feel at greater ease.  Or they might conflate smooth with a more expansive soundstage that makes them feel more relaxed about the sound - basically equating smooth with relaxed.  And in this context, I'm just saying that DBT, or anyone, should be wary about reading too much into any particular person's use of the term "smooth" without having a pretty good idea where that person is coming from with the term.

Here, DBT is looking for a blend of characteristics between his bloomy Primaluna tube amp and a thinner but detailed sounding LTA tube amp.  To me, the term smooth doesn't seem relevant to placing the sonic character of the Luxman along the spectrum of sound he's trying to calibrate, since the term could probably apply to both the Primaluna and the LTA.

If it is fatiguing, its not smooth- those two characteristics don't co-exist. A relaxed presentation that draws you in and keeps you there will also be smooth. I've really not seen 'smooth' used in any other way- such as in your example of an expansive soundstage, which IME may or may not exist while the system is otherwise smooth.

What you are looking for in an amplifier is that the higher orders are easily masked by the lower orders that the amp produces. In a speaker, you're looking for good off-axis response. In a room, you're looking to minimize early reflections (those less than about 10mS) which might be produced by side walls. This latter bit is why speakers with rear-firing information are usually at least 5 feet from the wall behind them.

[Tyson]

Short Thread Hijack:

So what are you having done to the Oddyssey's?

I bought them used and they had a slight mishap in shipping - one case was dented.  And they are black with silver faceplactes.  I wanted to get the case fixed and also change it from black/silver to all purple.  Then Klaus mentioned some better transformer and other recent power supply upgrades that were on the way but delayed due to Covid.  So I'm just having him keep my amps till that's available. 

[Tyson]

I wasn’t implying that detailed + smooth resulted in weightiness.  The LTA was detailed, meaning it actually sounded a little thin, although I still liked other qualities it presented.  My PrimaLuna sounded like it had more weight & bloom.  I was explaining the difference I heard between the two brands and I would like to find one SS brand that has the mix of qualities I heard with the LTA and PrimaLuna.  The hifi reviewers and forum reviews I read about Luxman mentioned it was smooth.  I interpret that to mean the sound was not bright, analytical or fatiguing to their ears.  I could be wrong in their meaning of the word smooth?  I don’t like to use a bunch of Stereophile type of adjectives to avoid misunderstandings.  No big deal, it’s just a fun hobby for me.

Check out Cary audio - their PP amps use octals as driver tubes and those tubes have 'big tone' in a way that the smaller driver tubes don't.  They also generally measure better (better curves).  You might ask 'if they are so good, why doesn't everyone use them", IME it's because the big octals can sometimes be more microphonic.  I personally haven't found this to be the case, but then again I'm just a user not a manufacturer.  But either way, the superior sound of something like a 6SN7 tube make it worth any additional fussiness. 

[genjamon]

Exciting!  As a Kismet stereo amp owner myself, I will look forward to future comments about how they sound relative to your other amps on your speakers.  And it might just help those who are coming at this from a SS amp background or area of interest as well.  Odyssey are certainly on the "smoother" end of the SS spectrum, whatever that means... 

[DBT AUDIO]

Check out Cary audio - their PP amps use octals as driver tubes and those tubes have 'big tone' in a way that the smaller driver tubes don't.  They also generally measure better (better curves).  You might ask 'if they are so good, why doesn't everyone use them", IME it's because the big octals can sometimes be more microphonic.  I personally haven't found this to be the case, but then again I'm just a user not a manufacturer.  But either way, the superior sound of something like a 6SN7 tube make it worth any additional fussiness.

I have heard of Cary, but I hadn’t researched their offerings.  I am on their website now checking them out. 

Thanks!