[lonewolfny42]

You might read this....one year ago... http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=77174.0

[DARTH AUDIO]

I should have thought ahead a bit ....  The next question which I am going to be asked is :  " What amps have you been considering so far " ?    Eastern Electric, Rogue, Ayon so far .....

I thought I had found my new amps when I started reading about The Eastern Electric M156 monoblocks ... ALL of the professional reviewers seem to all say these amps do NOT sound overly tubey, but more like great solid state with a tube like richness in the midrange ......  Then I read several customer reviews ... and to a fault, they ALL say they consider these amps to be on the warm and euphonic side ..... Damn ... foiled again with confusion.

BTW, I listen loud, and I listen to EVERY kind of music on 88db sensitive speakers .... so I am looking for POWER !!!

You don't need tube amps, you need a better SS amp. Trying to find a tube amp that sounds like SS isn't going to happen IMHO. You should look for a more "Liquid" SS amp. Try the  Electrocompaniet AW-180 or the Hegal H200.

[Downsize]

You don't need tube amps, you need a better SS amp. Trying to find a tube amp that sounds like SS isn't going to happen IMHO. You should look for a more "Liquid" SS amp. Try the  Electrocompaniet AW-180 or the Hegal H200.

LOL ... ignored due to too much alchol consumption .....  Many consider the DNA-500 the best solid state amp money can buy under $20 grand      My amp is certainly not the issue, but thanks...

[Downsize]

You might read this....one year ago... http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=77174.0

14 pages ???   

[Steve]

 

Tube preamps  can sound excellent, BUT, while more reliable than tubed power amps,   they are FAR too dependent on a "quiet" good sounding set of small signal tubes to perform at their best.  Modern small signal tubes are not very good,

Not trying to be a pain Freo,  but how do you know your FET preamplifier is accurate?? How do you know all (modern) tube preamps are inferior?? In general I am wondering how you came to your conclusions?

Cheers.

[Ericus Rex]

I own a Rogue Audio amp - the Stereo 90- and it worked wonders for my system.  I would certainly say those guys make tube amps without tube pitfalls.  The 150 monos should rock your world.  BTW, I've never had a problem with my Rogue stuff (got a Rogue pre too).  Some people make unreliable tube gear.  These guys don't.  But tubes themselves do occasionally fail.  The good thing about Rogue is all the tubes are individually bias-able so if you do have a power tube failure you don't necessarily have to shell out major dough on a matched quad.  You can get a single from the same manufacturer and ROCK ON!

[lonewolfny42]

14 pages ???   

Start around page 7 or 8...

Stick with the 500....

Borrow a good tube preamp....maybe Ryan or Chris (BPT) might have one you could try.

[Freo-1]

 
Not trying to be a pain Freo,  but how do you know your FET preamplifier is accurate?? When have you heard my preamplifiers and how do you know how they sound, that they are inferior?? In general I am wondering how you came to your conclusions?

Cheers.

Well, Check out the internet on the Threshold FET-10, and you will see for yourself.  It's been updated with new caps, and has 200VA power supply.  The unit has been checked with various test equipment to ensure performance.

One of my best mates is a very accomplished tech, who has both restored and made outstanding sounding audio preamps and amps.  I've owned a LOT of preamps, both tubed and solid state over the years, and have listened to a whole host of other preamps of all types at my buddy's house, where he performs his work. 

Please do not read too much into the comments.  It's common sense to state that tubed preamps will vary much more in performance, primarily due to the tubes used in them.   BTW, I also have a tubed preamp that tests, measures, and sounds excellent as well.

[werd]

I'm afriad this makes NO sense to me ....   Adding a preamp is unnecessary. It only adds more in the signal chain ... more wires ... more electronics ...   I have full control of the volume without using a preamp .... As far as that goes, if I wanted to, my EE DAC has a volume control on it .... Whay would I EVER want to add another ?

Hi

Its sounds more like you are looking for a general "change up" in what you have than just looking at your amps. Reading your responses and now knowing you are not using a dedicated preamp, i can tell the laptop isn't driving your system like the way you want. I use my laptop like this and it "Ok" but it would not compare to letting a preamp with a good volume control drive your DNA 500. Its what you want or at the very least something you should look at more seriousily. Remedy your midrange and find a nice tube preamp - or even an SS.

[Downsize]

Ok ... just talked to a tech friend of mine, and he made things clear ....  here is how he put it to me :

Adding a preamp is not going to necessarily add better sound just by adding the preamp ....  Why he says using the DAC as a preamp is a bad idea, is due to one thing only :  The high output impedence of the DAC creates an impedence mismatch with the amplifier, and using the DAC's volume control can only make that impedence mismatch worse ....

Now THIS explanation I understand 

He goes on to say what I really need as a volume control solution is an active buffer circuit ....  He mentions someone names Gary Dodd selling a tubed buffer kit even ....  He also mentions using a Lightspeed attenuator ....

Problem is : as far as I know, NONE of these offers a remote control .... which is A MUST for me.  So now, any further suggestions with this new information ?

[jtwrace]

Not true.  The Dodd Buffer has a remote control.

[Downsize]

Not true.  The Dodd Buffer has a remote control.

Thank you so much ... This just may be the ticket 

[jtwrace]

Thank you so much ... This just may be the ticket 

http://doddaudio.com/diy.aspx

[Steve]

Well, Check out the internet on the Threshold FET-10, and you will see for yourself.  It's been updated with new caps, and has 200VA power supply.  The unit has been checked with various test equipment to ensure performance.

Hi Freo,

How do we know the "new caps" make it more accurate, in absolute terms? I can see in one's particular system it sounds better, but that is not absolute terms. Unless the value of the caps (in uf) are changed, how does changing the caps affect the specifications? I think the answer is we agree that parts like caps sound different.

I agree the saying seems to be that a heavier power supply/transformer sounds better, but is that true, in class A operation/preamplifiers?

In fact a heavier power supply could make it sound worse because the parts favor a portion of the audio band, such as bass, mids, or highs, as examples. (It is true that class AB, B operation does require more voltage stability thus increased regulation.)

In preamplifiers (class A operation), the last thing I look at is the power supply rating/transformer size. Rather I look at the lack of reactance (minimizing/eliminating of chokes), how flat the response is of the power supply. (I bet you never heard that before from the rags etc.  )

A tube preamplifier can have the same specs as the SS, and will sound different. I Also agree with your assessment that different tubes of the same type sound different.

IMO, a review is not an accurate way of testing in absolute terms, but to the reviewer's own system and room acoustics.   

Please do not read too much into the comments.  It's common sense to state that tubed preamps will vary much more in performance, primarily due to the tubes used in them.   BTW, I also have a tubed preamp that tests, measures, and sounds excellent as well.

I find changing to NOS changes the sound, to often times a detriment, from absolute accuracy.

I think it is good to have dialogue that digs into the beef, so to speak.

Cheers Freo.

[Freo-1]

Hi Freo,

How do we know the "new caps" make it more accurate, in absolute terms? I can see in one's particular system it sounds better, but that is not absolute terms. Unless the value of the caps (in uf) are changed, how does changing the caps affect the specifications? I think the answer is we agree that parts like caps sound different.

I agree the saying seems to be that a heavier power supply/transformer sounds better, but is that true, in class A operation/preamplifiers?

In fact a heavier power supply could make it sound worse because the parts favor a portion of the audio band, such as bass, mids, or highs, as examples. (It is true that class AB, B operation does require more voltage stability thus increased regulation.)

In preamplifiers (class A operation), the last thing I look at is the power supply rating/transformer size. Rather I look at the lack of reactance (minimizing/eliminating of chokes), how flat the response is of the power supply. (I bet you never heard that before from the rags etc.  )

A tube preamplifier can have the same specs as the SS, and will sound different. I Also agree with your assessment that different tubes of the same type sound different.

IMO, a review is not an accurate way of testing in absolute terms, but to the reviewer's own system and room acoustics.   

I find changing to NOS changes the sound, to often times a detriment, from absolute accuracy.

I think it is good to have dialogue that digs into the beef, so to speak.

Cheers Freo.

Steve,

On the whole, I think we agree more than disagree.    Your points about reviews in general are well taken.  I have tried in the past to make similar points, and was taken to task by some over this matter. 

A couple points to consider:

Regarding the FET-10, I got my input primarily from the DIY website.  The likes of Nelson Pass, John Curl, (etc) weighed heavily into the decisions to how to restore/upgrade the unit.   John Curl had remarked on the improvement wrought from the FET-10 after upgrading the power supply.  So, that's were I went to obtain the information, and validated the results with testing and listening.

I readily admit to a bias against current production small signal tubes.  Your point about overall accuracy is well taken, which is why for most audio folks, paying a premium to have the tubes graded/rated makes some sense.   It's been my experience that properly graded NOS tubes will last a LOT longer than current production tubes.  My tube preamp, which has NOS tubes, measured out on the bench as one of the most accurate the local techs have ever seen on their test equipment   (which does not mean much, except to say that NOS tubes can provide accurate long lasting performance.   

Getting back to the OP's questions,  recommend he try out both tubed and FET based preamps, and see what he prefers.  I agree his amp is excellent as is.   I'm biased towards Nelson Pass units, but that is a personal preference.

 I would also highly recommend a Cambridge 840 CD/DAC setup for audition. 

[zybar]

LOL ... ignored due to too much alchol consumption .....  Many consider the DNA-500 the best solid state amp money can buy under $20 grand      My amp is certainly not the issue, but thanks...

I owned the DNA-500 and it is a darn fine amp, but nowhere near the best amp under $20k...not even close.

What you are describing in terms of wanting to add to your sound are the weak points of the DNA-500.

George

[roscoeiii]

I want to second George's earlier suggestion of an Atma-sphere amp. I went from having many iterations of Nelson Pass's First Watt amps and a Pass Aleph 30 to my Atma-sphere S-30. I too did not want to give up frequency extension or speed, and this is a real strength of an OTL tube design.

[Steve]

Steve,

On the whole, I think we agree more than disagree.    Your points about reviews in general are well taken.  I have tried in the past to make similar points, and was taken to task by some over this matter.

Yes Freo, I think we mostly agree, and your point of tube longevity is well taken. I am not sure what you mean about grading of tubes, but if it means someone has "evaluated" the sonic quality of brands, I have read such and have serious doubts concerning their conclusions, at least in absolute terms. If you meant something else, then I misunderstood you. 

I guess one of my main points is that it seems evaluations are made by simple measurements and/or simply testing in the evaluator's system, so the conclusions are not in absolute terms. There is a difference.

Anyway, if I am correct in understanding Downsize, his system may be just slightly sterile sounding, wants it a little more natural, but not

To this point, I have been turned off completely by  the syrupy, overly mellow, and colored sound of most tube amps.

Would I be correct Downsize?

By the way, I heard Downsize's description (quoted above) at the 2004 or 05 CES/The Show in abundance. Those rooms were vitual ghostrooms, so many agree with you Downsize.

Cheers.

[Downsize]

I owned the DNA-500 and it is a darn fine amp, but nowhere near the best amp under $20k...not even close.

What you are describing in terms of wanting to add to your sound are the weak points of the DNA-500.

George

Sorry that was YOUR experience in YOUR system sir ..... In most systems, those are the McCormack's strengths .... As far as solid state amps go, they are known for being MUCH more tube-like when it comes to presence ... Not sure what the rest of your system must have been doing wrong to prevent you realizing this.

[Downsize]

Yes Freo, I think we mostly agree, and your point of tube longevity is well taken. I am not sure what you mean about grading of tubes, but if it means someone has "evaluated" the sonic quality of brands, I have read such and have serious doubts concerning their conclusions, at least in absolute terms. If you meant something else, then I misunderstood you. 

I guess one of my main points is that it seems evaluations are made by simple measurements and/or simply testing in the evaluator's system, so the conclusions are not in absolute terms. There is a difference.

Anyway, if I am correct in understanding Downsize, his system may be just slightly sterile sounding, wants it a little more natural, but not
 

Would I be correct Downsize? IF so, I heard Downsize's description (quote above) at the 2004 or 05 CES/The Show in abundance.

Cheers.

Hi Steve .. The sound I have is not sterile in the least ... I'm probably suffering from a case of "upgradeitis" ....  The last thing anyone ever calls a DNA-500 is sterile.   I think my issue probably is an impedence issue between the DAC and amp.  I am currently looking into adding either a preamp, or an active buffer .... and am trying to find the strengths and weaknesses of those choices.  I do not need any gain ... I have almost 600 watts per channel, and my system gets crazy loud with the laptop's main volume set at 10 out of 100  !   So if I am correct, the buffer should be all I need .... but will it sound as good as a preamp instead ?  This is where I am now.