What Octal tubed preamp do you like?

Dmason · « **Reply #20 on:** 8 Apr 2006, 04:45 am »

Brad

Tell us what the A8 with PP EL84 is like. Inquiring minds wish to know. I love EL84 but havent heard any for a loooong time. I like your set up ALOT.

Brad · « **Reply #21 on:** 8 Apr 2006, 05:09 am »

The Scott 222 is actually off at HotGlass audio being rebuilt right now.
I really liked the sound of it with the A8's - great mids, smooth highs, and solid if not spectacular bass. I love the fact that there is no listening fatigue - something that is increasingly important as I get older.
The 222 has the original (I believe) Telefunken preamp tubes and a nice set of older 7189's in it.

I am using a Sharp All-in-one digital in the meantime.
It works well with the A8's but can sound a little harsh from time to time.
Bass from the A8's is a little better with the Sharp than with the Scott.

Just moved to a new house about a month ago and very eager to hear the Scott in my new room. It's 15x24x8.5. The 222 is due back in next week. Ryan at HotGlass also tuned/tweaked my 350a tuner. Can't wait to hear some vinyl as well - my phono stage was in the 222.....

I'll post some pics of the room and system when I get everything back and connected. I need some recommendations on room treatment - will ask in a separate post.

nodiak · « **Reply #22 on:** 8 Apr 2006, 05:22 am »

Brad, good to hear about the Scott 222, I've been very curious about that model as it has phono. Also it's another piece I know I heard in my childhood somewhere. I've only had the Decware Zen el84 amp, no idea if it (at only 2 watts) relates at all to the Scott. Also i knowthe B200's and can see that as a good combo.

I'm wondering if there are octal tubes that are transparent and have lots of detail. I think that option would be helpful for me in melding the big tone with some gear i may try. I get that octals are on the warmer end of the spectrum, just wondering if there is some adjustment the other way. Not trying to change what they are. Example: 6N8S Russian red-brown base - said on Mapletree site to have lots of air and detail. Any others someone knows of?
Don

GHM · « **Reply #23 on:** 8 Apr 2006, 12:03 pm »

Tungsol , Siemens and Sylvania might be worth a look.

chadh · « **Reply #24 on:** 8 Apr 2006, 12:09 pm »

Check out this thread on head-fi. I have no idea if it's accurate, but this is some guy's attempt to provide a comprehensive review of 6sn7 tubes and their variants.

http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=119638

Chad

Brad · « **Reply #25 on:** 8 Apr 2006, 03:28 pm »

Nodiak,

The Scott 222 is warmer than the Decware - but the Zen had better highs.
I had a couple of Zen Selects, but never when I had a pair of speakers that was optimized for them (brilliant planning on my part)
There was something very compelling about the Zen though - sometimes I would listen to discs 2 times through without being able to get up.

I would love to hear a CS-EX with the A8's, but I think long-term I'm sticking with the Scott. The mods done by HotGlass should retain the basic 222 sound, but improve the level of detail in the highs - and the bass.

I also had a Mapletree Ultra 4 - loved the line stage but didn't like the phono stage as much. Would also love to try a Mapletree 4SE with a Fi X or Wellbourne 45 DRD driving the A8's.

.....not churning through equipment like I used to -and enjoying the music more

nodiak · « **Reply #26 on:** 8 Apr 2006, 05:02 pm »

"...not churning through equipment like I used to -and enjoying the music more"
here, here. my arms are getting tired of churning.

-Richard- · « **Reply #27 on:** 8 Apr 2006, 11:38 pm »

Hi nodiak,

Unfortunately I cannot give a good recommendation for Albert's
Space Lab Tech QA-112...

Roger Modjeski opened the back of mine and tested it...some of the wiring
was Lionel Train wire...Roger identified it...and the wiring scheme looked rather
shoddy...

Worst of all was the fact that as gain was applied distortion went up exponentially...
the worst Roger ever measured...he keeps a record of the performance
of every pre and amp that crosses his lab bench...

This was an older model...perhaps 4 years old...so perhaps Albert has
developed and refined this model since then...still...I wouldn't take the risk...
there are too many good products out there...

Warm Regards -Richard-

nodiak · « **Reply #28 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 02:36 am »

Richard, good to hear your input. The QA-112 experience sounds bad, i have turned to other ideas since starting the thread anyway tho. Am keeping up on your speaker experiences. I'll be trying several ob combos soon and will report in as I do. Breaking in stock 8" Hemp drivers now, not sure about whizzers, very sure about awesome mid-bass through midrange TONE, will discuss in another thread soon.

Brad, I had same experience with Zen C of being captivated, unfortunately the Dec Radial 1.5's I had in a large room weren't efficient enough forZenC. If I'd had B200's then, maybe different story. Nice size room you got.

chadh, I couldn't work through all that, but will try again.

I've just started looking at Singlepower EQ Tubey and their headamps as pre's (thanks, GHM). Could lead somewhere very compatable with my gear.

Don

-Richard- · « **Reply #29 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 03:56 am »

Hi nodiak,

I am using Roger's new RM 245.1 Single Ended Triode amplifier...it generates
4 huge 45 tube watts...more than enough to run several speakers I had
hooked up in parallel...Omega's Bipoles, the B200's and the Silver Iris
Coaxial's...admittedly they were all in the 96db sensitivity range...attenuated
with a passive preamplifier...the Luminous...a straight wire with gain architecture...

I have no need of a "phat" preamp...a well exicuted 45 or 2A3 or 300B or 6EM7
tube will carry all the sonic information you could want...if your speakers are
set up for a lush resonant field...which is exactly what I am now experiencing
with a combination of the Omega Bipoles and the B200's in OB...each pair
biamped to create a perfect synergy together with a huge "blooming" sound field...

If you are thinking of getting the Hawthorne Silver Iris Coaxial's I would not be looking
for "phat" sounding preamps...the SIC's are mid-range weighted...very lush in
the mid-range...a "phat" preamp like the octals are said to be, might just push
those speakers even further into that kind of "phat" sonic presentation...which
you might find excessive...

We can go into this subject further if your wish...

Warm Regards -Richard-

nodiak · « **Reply #30 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 05:34 am »

Hi Richard, I've had the Hawthorne SI's for over two months, they're playing right now. The Hawthorne Augies I ordered should arrive early next week, then i can start trying them biamped with some smaller Fostex, and others, all in ob.
The SI's are my reference because they are dependable in their soundscape, a standard to compare others too. But not my ultimate - am seeking a little more tightness and dimension to everything (I'm tired and am failing at describing anything now, sorry). They are a relax on the patio in the sun type of speaker, easy breasy. I "could easily live with them" as we say, and I expect to keep them in case. But am going farther on with adventures into the jungle of sonic love...
I am sure Rogers amp would be out of this world. If I sold every thing for it I bet I would not be disappointed in that choice. But I am going to try many things over the next several months, because I need the experience. Rogers site is kept in my favorites, and I go there every so often.
I hope we continue to discuss our experiences Richard. I was noticing the other day that I hadn't seen a post from you lately, so it was good to hear you talk about your multispeaker equations. Inspiring.
As to too phat pre's - I'm being careful, especially after checking out ideas brought up in this thread and links offered. I'm using the upgraded MiniMax and at times it is lush and soft, and that's with 6x4 and 12au7's (but with SI's, maybe main factor). The Hemps will be cured soon, should bring out some ,uh, more dimension (when I fire them up...).
I want what I think is more weight, but not overdone heaviness. Need some attack as well. Trying to dial in a good choice for now, would sell MM if it gets bested. I may grab the Tubalizer for ~ $100 just because (could end up in the shop system with a gc amp and 10" tl's).
Take care, Don

BTW Richard, I have made a nice point to point 1st order crossover for the SI's. 14 ga air core inductor, good metalized poly caps, high quality wirewound resistors (all from North Creek Music). Cleaner, clearer, sharper and more open sound. The small gauge inductors, low end caps and sand cast resistors on a pcb hold those drivers back.

-Richard- · « **Reply #31 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 08:11 am »

Hi nodiak,

Wonderful ideas!!!!! You have exactly that spirit which will liberate you forever
from depending on any one speakers "sound" to bring you to the threshold
of musical delight...of entering another dimension of resurrected musical life...

Interesting what you did with the Silver Iris Coaxial's to bring them more to life...
very ingenious reworking of the fundamental sonics...which is exactly what they
need to shed some of their sonic weight...

The SIC's taught me that OB's can deliver a lush sonic tonality...a spacial resonance
that easily rivals horn speakers...

When I discovered, through the wonderful accidental convergence of the Omega
Super 3 Bipole's with the B200's in OB...both driven by incredibly s-m-o-o-t-h,
musical, Single Ended tube amps...I found what I have been looking for all these
years...but frankly never thought I would fully realize...

A kind of cosmic joke! It turns out that all of my preoccupations with audio
were entirely misdirected!

Or more to the point: that I really did not fully understand the potential that combining
2 different speaker designs could produce in terms of pure magic...each and
every day I am enthralled...Deb mentions to me 10 times-a-day how
incredible the music sounds...

We both cannot get over it! Impossible to fully explain...but you are on the right
path, nodiak...I know you are...you are going to find it...you have the perfect
kind of experimental approach and open mind...I am excited for you...

It turns out that all the speaker designers are working in the wrong areas...
due to conformity, marketing strategies, conditioning, lack of imagination,
and fixed ideas...what Deb and I are hearing is so rich in musical texture,
cascading tonal colors and intricacy of instrumental layers that everything
commercially available as a stand-alone formulae is forever obsolete...

Warm Regards -Richard-

nodiak · « **Reply #32 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 07:04 pm »

Just a note. Am currently giving SinglePower my full attention. Hope to communicate with Mikhail (sent emails, may call) about which design he offers that may work out for me.
Many tube choices - octals and 9 pin. Will be an educated guess.
Variable feedback control - tube tone adjustment. If transparent will be an aid to recording problems.
EQ Tubey - straight out signal tone control. Always used 'em when I had 'em, may be a reason for them.

Don

Dmason · « **Reply #33 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 07:31 pm »

I think tone controls are good. I am thinking about a future tube amp using a three way tone stack with great components. The benefits far outweigh the purported negatives. Phase issues? Never heard any. Hoo cares. If I have em, I use em. ..Found a guitar amp builder who loves nothing more than building nice single ended stereo amps for people who love what he is all about, and who become partners in the overall result. Mikhail is also one of those types.

The SinglePower PPX for 6SN7 was what originally blew my mind, when used with my Vinnie Teac 30, and powering the B200 in a pair of DarkStars I built. THAT was truly synergistic. It was also very cool with us that it was a system co-authored with Vinnie and Mikhail!

-Richard- · « **Reply #34 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 08:44 pm »

I recently auditioned the AV123 Rocket UWL-10 subwoofer...an ingenious little
sub with a built-in EQ that really works...it has the full regalia of complimentary
controls: gain, phase, EQ...

However compared to what my Single Ended Pentode can deliver driving the
B200's in Open Baffle by simply turning the bass tone control to 3 o'clock is
instructive...

The SEP can bring the B200 to its rated 40 Hz and lower with striking aplomb...
fast, coherent, articulate and musical...in comparison the ULW sub sounded
rather generic...just "sound"...filler...like the stuff used to extend hamburger used
in the fast food joints...

Tone controls in OB are essential...if one is looking for elegance of functionality...

Perhaps in box speakers which are "tuned" to maximize a drivers low frequencies,
tone controls do not function as well...that may be the nature of the artificial shaping
of the drivers potential that boxes inherently induce through ports
and baffle dimensions...

In that case tone controls may simply be exaggerating something that is
already exaggerated by design...creating a further distortion that may be
more obviously audible...this is merely a guess...

But in OB's that is not the case at all...the B200's respond to the well implemented
tone controls on my SEP as if it was a pure energy...it "loves" it...it responds
to the tone controls like Fred Astaire responds to a good pair of tap shoes...
it dances more ingeniously...

And that means that the dedicated subwoofer, dedicated amplifier and dedicated
active crossover that Roger used to get the B200's to fill-in the lower frequencies
are entirely obsolete...it is not needed at all...

The question I would ask Don...is whether the EQ Tuby's bass tone control
has enough "extension" to augment your OB drivers to reach to their
lower frequency potential...cleanly and with articulation...

If they can you will have a powerful ally in the ultimate elegant solution for
controlling OB drivers without all the fuss of ancillary hardware...

Please keep us informed...I am most interested in your research...

Warm Regards -Richard-

nodiak · « **Reply #35 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 09:15 pm »

Hi Richard,
I don't know what the results will be. But the next move is biamping using gainclones and tube pre (MiniMax as stated for now). Everything OB.
For bottom octaves will try Hawthorne Augie. The hope is to tailer it's output to be as gentle as possible, trying to avoid it booming in my small/medium size room. Using Marchand electronic xo, 24db/oct. Setting at 70hz first try. If successful then blending widerange in OB above that should be possible/probable. If Augie too much will hunt for other, maybe a 12" highish qtc. driver (w baffles maybe...) . The point is to work with rooms physics, avoid eq machine. Just my thing.
The tools of battle I have are a very small baffle with no side panels for the Augies, having them 6"+ off the floor, the 24db xo, and constructing a stand that attaches the Augies to the bottom plate and framing of sidewalls instead of letting them rest on the suspended joist floor (resonates just like a guitar soundboard, accidently by design).
From my experiences with the SI with their 41hz fs the Augies with 27hz fs should produce plenty of bass in this room. They aren't safe for HT tho as they only have 7.5 xmax, and 89db/1 watt rating. Which could be near perfecttho for the 20-25ish hz delivery I'm after.
Hope to have a set up in 1-2 weeks.
If the 2 way biamp doesn't work, I could see living with less bass and a simpler one amp set up. I am loving the midbass-mids of Hemptones. Would work on a speaker centered around them I think. Not against dual woofer - 2nd woofer with large gauge air core coil in parallel with main for mas bass. And a tweeter if whizzer doesn't breakin or take to modding or surgery and phase plugs.The treble would likely be the biggest area to work out.
Tone controls would be used system wide for best music effect, not necessarily as a speaker supplement.
Don

Dmason · « **Reply #36 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 09:17 pm »

Good point Richard; always thinking.

Finding out exactly what bandwidth the "bass" tone stack Mikhail uses, is, how it works, how much +-db etc, rated noise by mfr., all should be explored. I am as of now thinking more along the lines of ONE tone stack, a "bass" one, a very good component where shelving <100Hz. Thoughts?

This is an important consideration from several standpoints, not the least of which is pure economics. First, EQ with OB is essential. That is a fact. The best control of all would be done in digital, and has proven thus far to be my $2500 Rane Swiss Army Knife, the RPM. A rather sledgehammered solution. A simple and outstanding single, bass tone stack of +-12db < 100Hz would actually be mo betta, because it is ...less, in all the above considerations. I believe it might make the Hemp cone a potential OB contender

or even better yet drivers like the 8 inch Supravox RTF or bicone, with its mega Xmax could actually make quite alot of bass. Add use of acoustic/mechanical methods and ...Just thinking aloud...

nodiak · « **Reply #37 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 09:34 pm »

should mention I'm not closed off to the bass eq machines absolutely, could end up loving them if I can't get "there" with above method. I'm listening Richard and Dan.

lover.

Dmason · « **Reply #38 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 10:19 pm »

As long as you are listening. And thinking. It is a hobby which offers tremendous intellectual attraction to .....some.

As opposed to the Faculty and Dean of Applied Pedantics around here, the hawks who offer absolutely nothing other than swooping in from the top of their virtual telephone pole to attenuate, to "pierce" their "prey," with "clear thinking," audio "reality" from the perspective of "correctness," in choices. And you fuckers know who you are. Were it not for their prey, there would be no posts to divebomb, no threads to string between their telephone poles, no audience to which they could extoll their "wisdom." My mind sees them as antideluvian throwbacks to another simpler time, otherwise known as The Dark Ages. Back when their precious churches had a strangle hold on the written word, controlled basic literacy, summarily executed latent audiophiles, and wielded "faith" as a potentially lethal technology, all in the name of the biggest power grab in human history. You want more? Want religion? Learn to surf.

-Richard- · « **Reply #39 on:** 9 Apr 2006, 11:49 pm »

Ahhhh...lovely piece of writing that...delicious to bath in those jack hammer prose...
a virtual water-fall of wisdom from the high mountain streams...

They say that a skillful diamond cutter can tap the diamond in the right place
and the bloody thing splits apart with ease...

I believe we are seeing that hard diamond easily split apart right here in AudioCircle...
from the master diamond cutter DMason...

Warmest Regards -Richard-