"Keith G" wrote in message
...
"Trevor Wilson" wrote
**Sometimes, yes. But Keith was talking about an EIGHT WATT amp vs a 50
Watt amp. BIG difference. The reality is that the SPL difference between
two, otherwise identical, 100 Watt and 140 Watt amps will be barely
audible. The differences you refer to, with valve amps are mostly as
follows:
OK, to reduce the 'exaggeration' somewhat - the SET in question is
actually
rated at 10 watts (?) by the manufacturer - see the cut and paste from the
eBay auction on my webpage:
http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/bez/bezt3b-3.htm
....and it is certain that it blows the 30W amp away. The *impression* is
that it would blow the 50W amp away also, but I concede this is probably
unlikely and haven't made a direct comparison.
**I also think it unlikely.
It is not the *loudness* it is the *vastness* of the sound from
valves - subtle difference. But I posted here a while back that two
electricians working here respectively guessed my 2A3 SET (4 watts max) to
be 100 and 200 watts. OK, they weren't 'audiophiles' but they weren't
stupid, either...
**Few people can pick the output power ability of an amplifier,in unfamiliar
(or familiar) settings. As you are well aware, a few extra dB of speaker
efficiency can make things very different indeed.
It's not that difficult. The manufacturer needs to spend a little money
on
the design. IOW: In general terms, if the manufacturer has performed the
above and the consumer is willing to spend more money, a 100 Watt
transistor amp will sound just as loud as a 100 Watt valve amp. It's all
about money. Valve amp owners seem prepared to spend more on big valve
amps than they do on equivalent transistor amps. They then proclaim that
the transistor amp sounds worse, even though it was half the price.
Sheesh!
Reword that thus: "Valve amp owners seem prepared to spend more on big
valve amps than they do on equivalent transistor amps. They then proclaim
that the valve amp sounds better, even though it was double the price."
Presents less of a dilemma that way, doesn't it?
**Indeed, but that is the fact. Dollar for Dollar, a transistor can easily
wipe the floor with a valve amp, IF the manufacturer has paid attention to
my earlier comments. Most do not. The reality is this: Valve amps are
designed in specific ways, which are mostly to do with the expense and
limitation inherent to them. Transistor amps are (mostly) designed in
specific ways which relate to the low cost of the active devices themselves.
Imagine, for a moment, that a transistor amp maunfacturer decided to build
his product in such a way that he treated each amplification stage as though
is was very expensive to implement. You would have an amplifier which
combined the strengths of a valve amp (benign Voltage limiting, non-existent
current limiting, huge power supply and load insensitivity) with the obvious
strengths normally associated with a transistor amp ('perfect' frequency
response, inaudible distortion figures, lack of distortion producing output
transformers, etc). THEN you'd have an interseting product. Yes?
Now, you're the one to ask Trevor, so tell me...
Last night I do believe I got what I suspect* is going to be, yet again,
the best sound ever** by driving my 2A3 SET power amp with the Pre Outs
from the Denon - gives me the 'valve sound' but much bigger (due to the
preamplification, of course) with all mod cons like remote control &c. and
the facility to choose the Denon only on other speakers (2 pairs,
asitappens) for all day background sound and 'summer running'!
So, the question is: Do you think all the 'pre gubbins' - Phono Stage,
controls, knobs, switches, sockets &c. would likely be of equal quality to
the higher priced models you mentioned? (The Phono Stage does seem very
good - certainly good enough for 'background sound', but no comparison
with my valve PS yet...)
**Fair question. I have not (yet) opened up either of the two Denon amps in
question, so I can't comment on the topology, nor the quality of the pots
and switches, though it is reasonable to assume that Denon have probably
used an Alps 'Blue Velvet' or equivalent pot in the PMA1500AE and a cheap
carbon pot in the 655. I'll know soon enough, when they start appearing on
my bench for service. I have, however, performed some short listening tests
on both amps, using a Thoren turntable, with a couple of nice cartridges.
The PMA1500AE blew away the 655. The sound was far less hard on my ears with
the 1500, yet, surprisingly, more detailed. I readily admit that I was not
only comparing preamp sections, so the test was not as comprehensive as I
would like it to be. Ideally, I'd have them in my own system for a few days.
Having said that, the difference between the two amps is not subtle. I
sugest to you that if you think the 655 is a good amp, then you have not
heard very many REALLY good amps yet.
I really only wanted the top half of the amp for serious listening and
didn't need/want to pay for unnecessary beef. I'm also gambling that the
'pre' side of an amp like this is going to be effectively *invisible* and
I suspect/believe that this valve/SS hybrid combination will be better
than the other way round - I've tried a valve pre/SS power combo before
and it stinks! (Gives you the worst of both worlds!)
**I understand that you may not have a lot of experience in choosing a good
SS amp yet.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from
http://www.teranews.com