SE-9 review here..

KKM · « **on:** 31 Jan 2003, 04:27 pm »

http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0203/norhse9.htm

wunderlast · « **Reply #1 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 09:05 pm »

Not very positive review. Doesn't sound like what I remember of the Se9.

Joe Schlabotnick · « **Reply #2 on:** 1 Feb 2003, 04:02 am »

I've read a number of reviews at Enjoy The Music, especially by Colin Flood. Can't help but notice a trend between the quality of the review and the advertising. Coincident? I think not.

jackman · « **Reply #3 on:** 1 Feb 2003, 04:12 am »

Wow, it really got slammed. Strange review, he seemed to be talking about other items instead of telling us what he didn't like about the SE9. Although my personal experience was different (I liked the SE9 with the little TS3's from Omega) I respect his feedback as a reviewer...unfortunately, I think this reviewer could have done a much better job enlightening everyone as to why this piece came up so short. It was more like a review of the Wave 8's

Just my .10...

Jman

wunderlast · « **Reply #4 on:** 1 Feb 2003, 05:17 am »

Want another view of the waves? Check this thread.
http://www.decware.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=Tubes&action=display&num=1033778968&start=63

nathanm · « **Reply #5 on:** 1 Feb 2003, 11:41 pm »

I don't mind at all wether or not he liked it or not, but from a writing standpoint it wasn't very well done. He seemed to refer to other products quite a bit too. Sure the SE-9 and Wave 8s are both "budget" tube amps, but one's a monoblock and the other's integrated. Not exactly the same thing.

Does Colin live in Death Valley? It gets "warm" he says!? You call that warm? Sheesh! HOT is definitely the word of choice!

It must be nice being a reviewer, getting to hear so much stuff for free. They have such a different frame of reference than the people buying the stuff. Well, me at least.

Bwanagreg · « **Reply #6 on:** 2 Feb 2003, 02:50 pm »

He really is a terrible writer. The so-called "rave" review he wrote of the TS-1 was confusing I thought. I had more than one person ask me if he liked them or not! That said, he was clear on where he fell regarding the SE-9.

wunderlast · « **Reply #7 on:** 2 Feb 2003, 04:54 pm »

Interesting. He gave the SE9 a "75" on fit and finish and gave the Waves a "90" on fit and finish. Ive seen both. The SE9 is heavy, chrome-plated, looks expensive. The wave 8 is lightweight and looks like an entry level kit product. It isn't bad it just looks like its price. The SE9 finish looks even better than the ASL Tulip which costs $1000.

I guess I don't understand the review.

nathanm · « **Reply #8 on:** 3 Feb 2003, 12:38 am »

Great point. I have both amps and the Waves are very chintzy looking in person. Very hollow too. Don't care too much for the slippery hard plastic feet either. The SE-9 is a little chrome tank in comparison! (yes, I'm aware it's not actually chrome-plated, but bear with me) The build quality, connectors and everything on the SE-9 is much better.

One thing I find interesting in amps is how long they keep playing after you turn them off. The SE-9 has a long smooth fadeout whereas the Wave 8s switch off almost instantly. I guess that would be a matter of capacitor, uh - capacity. I can't really comment on the sonic difference, my Waves are currently broken.

mbarnes · « **Reply #9 on:** 5 Feb 2003, 07:54 pm »

I was confused very much by the review. I could not pinpoint what the author didn't like about the sound. I could not understand how he could downgrade the fit and finish--particularly compared to an obviously less expensively constructed amplifier.

The review said the volume control felt like a cheap Radio Shack volume control. The volume control is an Alps volume control which is one of the best you will find in an integrated this price.

He said the Wave 8s were a lower price solution but he didn't explain that the Wave 8s were not an integrated amplifier and would need a preamplifier.

I have seen the TNT-Audio review that is coming out and the review is very favorable. I had hoped it would come out earlier and would help cancel out the Hear the Music review.

PJ · « **Reply #10 on:** 8 Feb 2003, 10:22 am »

I dont have a problem if the review is bad, but I agree with what Michael said..

What exactly did it do badly? What didnt he like?

There are so many products mentioned in that review that I found myself skipping paragraphs just to get back to the SE9.

mbarnes · « **Reply #11 on:** 10 Feb 2003, 05:11 pm »

We have sold over 200 SE 9s. All of the customers have told us how great it sounds and how much they love the amp. We have seen the review that is coming out in TNT (perhaps next week). The review is very positive.

I got a letter from the author of the review asking me for specific details. I wrote him we used an Alps volume control. This didn't stop him from saying it was like a Radio Shack volume control.

I went back and read the review trying to figure out what was being degraded. I couldn't find out what was specifically wrong. He only gave the build quality a 50 yet gives a lesser built unit a 90.

I have gone back and really listened hard to the SE 9. I think it is a very good sounding amplifier. I don't believe there is a better sounding integrated amplifeir for the price.

Nobody has ever put out a single ended integrated amplifier at this price. There were many ways we could have saved money. We could use lesser tubes, a lesser case, less expenisve transformers and even a lower quality volume control. Even our connectors and sockets are far higher quality than we would have to use if we wanted to build a low-cost tube amplifier.

nathanm · « **Reply #12 on:** 10 Feb 2003, 05:43 pm »

Although I agree the review was not the hottest, I think it may simply be a matter of expectations. Just like I expected the 6.6s to sound different than what heard, to the bewilderment of those who think otherwise; the reviewer of the SE-9 probably was expecting something totally different in his head as well. Hard to say.

But the bit about the Wave 8 having superior build quality to the SE-9 is B.S. That at least is a more objective measurement than what something sounds like. Puzzling.

It's just one review though, and the wise interested buyer would seek a second opinion anyway. Hell, if you've already sold 200 without the aid of reviews that seems pretty good to me!

wunderlast · « **Reply #13 on:** 16 Feb 2003, 08:51 pm »

Another review.
http://www.tnt-audio.com/ampli/norh_se9_e.html

JLM · « **Reply #14 on:** 17 Feb 2003, 01:38 am »

AH!! Now that's really more of what I expected to hear of the SE-9: less sophisticated than SET's and significantly more guts for less money with good build quality and value. With an ever increasing number of good, affordable high efficiency speakers available, the SE-9 is a very good starter tube integrated.

Thank you Richard George for a review that is readible, makes sense, and fits into my understanding of the audio universe.

Now for those of us who are cheap and never satisfied, let's start talking up the SE-18.

taketwo · « **Reply #15 on:** 17 Feb 2003, 03:34 am »

Quote from: JLM

Now for those of us who are cheap and never satisfied, let's start talking up the SE-18.

And the 300B version too!

mbarnes · « **Reply #16 on:** 18 Feb 2003, 07:42 pm »

I think that the TNT article makes sense and is more accurate. It points out the strengths, weaknesses and value of the SE 9. I hope more people read the TNT review. Not only because it is more favorable but because I think it is also more accurate.