"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote


**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.


OK. My suspicion was that, for cost effectiveness, the pre section
componentry and circuit might be common to most (if not all) of the
range....?

**Big mistake. Just listen to one of their HT recievers and compare it to
one of Denon's standalone tuners and you'll see what I mean. The standalone
tuners are very, very good indeed. Gone are the days when manufactuers used
common items in their products. In fact, check the back panel of your 655
and see where it is manufactured. I KNOW that the 1500 originates from
Japan. I also know that the previous model used the Alps 'Blue Velvet'
volume pot. And anyone who klnows these things, knows that they are a very
transparent, long lasting, well matched pot. Standard carbon pots are
something else entirely.



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 don't know about it being a *good* amp as such - I'm pleased with it and
it's doing what I bought it for well enough, but I wasn't expecting to get
the 'best amp in the world' for 200 ackers, believe it or not.....

**I believe that you will go out of your way to ensure that you never hear
something truly special, if it contains transistors.





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.


OK, perhaps you could point me in the right direction, I have had various
models of the following makes of SS amps (in no special order):

Denon

**From terrible to quite good.

Pioneer

**From terrible to passable.

Cambridge Audio

**Passable.

Sony

**From terrible to quite good.

Yamaha

**From terrible to passable.

Cyrus

**Urk.

Marantz

**From passable to quite good.

NAD

**Passable to quite good.

Quad

**Passable.

Rotel

**Passable to quite good.

Technics

**Urk (though some of their older models were nice..

JVC

**Puke.

Nikko

**Are they still around?

Musical Fidelity

**From shocking to passable.

Acoustic Solutions

**Never heard them.

Parasound

**From ordinary to passable.

Luxman

**Their new stuff? Dunno.



And also heard these:

Arcam

**From respectable to brilliant (their 'Ring DAC' equipped CD players are
breathtakingly good)

Roksan

**Not bad.

Meridian

**Good to very good.

Krell

**Weird sounding to quite good.



Probably plus a few others I don't remember in each case - and although I
loved each and every one of them (almost) at the time, I wasn't really
happy until I got my first valve amp. Best of that lot above? Possibly the
Meridian Pre/Power Monos, see on the floor in this pic:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/meridians.JPG


With a Quad pre/power combo that I heard recently (already forgotten the
'numbers') following very closely, otherwise there's bugger-all to choose
between most of them - they all do the job fairly well and I reckon it
comes down to what 'bells and whistles (and blue LEDs) you get for your
money at the end of the day.

(The truth is, you get a better bang for your buck with a Chinese valve
amp off eBay these days! ;-)

**Only in your delusion. I've seen/heard a few and they're simply terrible.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Trevor Wilson" wrote


OK. My suspicion was that, for cost effectiveness, the pre section
componentry and circuit might be common to most (if not all) of the
range....?

**Big mistake. Just listen to one of their HT recievers and compare it to
one of Denon's standalone tuners and you'll see what I mean. The
standalone tuners are very, very good indeed.


WTF has that got to do with it?


Gone are the days when manufactuers used
common items in their products.


I doubt it....


In fact, check the back panel of your 655
and see where it is manufactured. I KNOW that the 1500 originates from
Japan.


So what? You think the Chinese can't *manufacture* or summat??


I also know that the previous model used the Alps 'Blue Velvet'
volume pot. And anyone who klnows these things, knows that they are a very
transparent, long lasting, well matched pot. Standard carbon pots are
something else entirely.


Keep it real - I'm talking about a 200 quid amp here, not a 2,000 quid
amp...



**I believe that you will go out of your way to ensure that you never hear
something truly special, if it contains transistors.


I would (within reason) but you still haven't suggested one...??


OK, perhaps you could point me in the right direction, I have had various
models of the following makes of SS amps (in no special order):

Denon

**From terrible to quite good.


OK, I'll play! :-)

Let me guess - the one I've got comes under the 'terrible' category....???
:-)



Pioneer

**From terrible to passable.


My current one is a SA-510 - does just fine on the computer...



Cambridge Audio

**Passable.


Mine was a P50 back in the 70s (and an A1 Mk III a few years ago) - I liked
them.



Sony

**From terrible to quite good.


We have a Sony AV amp (cheap one) - can't fault it...


Yamaha

**From terrible to passable.


Not my favourites but the AV we had amp was OK....


Cyrus

**Urk.


Yes, I've never been impressed by them...


Marantz

**From passable to quite good.


Couldn't see what all the fuss was about - 6010 series or summat?



NAD

**Passable to quite good.


My youngest son has one and loves it - the matching CD player has got a
tricky tray (now ya sees me, now ya don't) but he lnows how to work it!!



Quad

**Passable.


Yes, other than the recent pre/power a guy brought here. That really was
quite nice and beautifully built.



Rotel

**Passable to quite good.


Yes, apart from the power amp I had (smallest in the power amp range - about
4 inches high) - the front panel used to pant along with the music!!



Technics

**Urk (though some of their older models were nice..


Love the amps, always disappointed by the boring sound after a while...



JVC

**Puke.


An old one (huge volume knob) - my nephew has had it for years now and still
loves it.



Nikko

**Are they still around?


Wrong section - s/b in the 'heard' section. It belonged to a girlfriend
years back and reminds me I've probably heard tins of Trios and other
similar amps from back then.



Musical Fidelity

**From shocking to passable.


Swim was in a Clarinet Quintet with Tony Michaelson, but I don't think even
that would persuade me to part with the sort of money his stuff costs. What
kills me with that bloke is he gazumps all his own 'world-beating, limited
edition' (overpriced) offerings with ones he claims to be 'much better'
usually about a year or so afterwards!!



Acoustic Solutions

**Never heard them.


Chainstore toys - I've recently bought one. Weedy (hence the Denon) but
*magic* VFM (59 quid with digital remote everything). Plenty good enough for
a small room, radio/CD use or someone on a budget who doesn't want a smeggy
old banger from eBay. (Actually, having said that, its own little Phono
Stage was/is surprisingly good - easily as good as a ProJect Phono Box or
NAD PP1, which would make the rest of the amp about 9 quid....)


Parasound

**From ordinary to passable.


Very ordinary but powerful.



Luxman

**Their new stuff? Dunno.


No, old one with a fabulous front panel but very bland sound......





And also heard these:

Arcam

**From respectable to brilliant (their 'Ring DAC' equipped CD players are
breathtakingly good)


Wouldn't know but what I heard didn't strike me as very good VFM...



Roksan

**Not bad.


Perfectly OK but not cheap....



Meridian

**Good to very good.

Krell

**Weird sounding to quite good.


Can't remember the sound now, I just remember being a tad underwhelmed!!
(Couldn't have been that good or I would have bought it at the time....)


(The truth is, you get a better bang for your buck with a Chinese valve
amp off eBay these days! ;-)

**Only in your delusion. I've seen/heard a few and they're simply
terrible.


Doesn't equate with my own experience - but then I'm only interested in the
*music* they make, not the components they've used. At the price, they are a
near-disposable item...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote


OK. My suspicion was that, for cost effectiveness, the pre section
componentry and circuit might be common to most (if not all) of the
range....?

**Big mistake. Just listen to one of their HT recievers and compare it to
one of Denon's standalone tuners and you'll see what I mean. The
standalone tuners are very, very good indeed.


WTF has that got to do with it?

**Well, everything. Japanese manufacturers tend to keep their premium
products distinct from their budget stuff, in terms of component choice and
topology.



Gone are the days when manufactuers used
common items in their products.


I doubt it....

**When examining two entirely different ranges of products, it is a fact.



In fact, check the back panel of your 655
and see where it is manufactured. I KNOW that the 1500 originates from
Japan.


So what? You think the Chinese can't *manufacture* or summat??

**They COULD, but they don't. Yet.



I also know that the previous model used the Alps 'Blue Velvet'
volume pot. And anyone who klnows these things, knows that they are a
very transparent, long lasting, well matched pot. Standard carbon pots
are something else entirely.


Keep it real - I'm talking about a 200 quid amp here, not a 2,000 quid
amp...

**Is the PMA1500AE 2k Squid? My point is that if you cared to listen to the
PMA1500AE, you may well be stunned at how good it is and you may well be
persuaded to dump all your notions of SS equipment.




**I believe that you will go out of your way to ensure that you never
hear something truly special, if it contains transistors.


I would (within reason) but you still haven't suggested one...??

**Haven't I? Are you paying attention?



OK, perhaps you could point me in the right direction, I have had
various models of the following makes of SS amps (in no special order):

Denon

**From terrible to quite good.


OK, I'll play! :-)

Let me guess - the one I've got comes under the 'terrible' category....???
:-)

**Nope. It ain't bad. It ain't great though.




Pioneer

**From terrible to passable.


My current one is a SA-510 - does just fine on the computer...



Cambridge Audio

**Passable.


Mine was a P50 back in the 70s (and an A1 Mk III a few years ago) - I
liked them.



Sony

**From terrible to quite good.


We have a Sony AV amp (cheap one) - can't fault it...


Yamaha

**From terrible to passable.


Not my favourites but the AV we had amp was OK....


Cyrus

**Urk.


Yes, I've never been impressed by them...


Marantz

**From passable to quite good.


Couldn't see what all the fuss was about - 6010 series or summat?



NAD

**Passable to quite good.


My youngest son has one and loves it - the matching CD player has got a
tricky tray (now ya sees me, now ya don't) but he lnows how to work it!!



Quad

**Passable.


Yes, other than the recent pre/power a guy brought here. That really was
quite nice and beautifully built.



Rotel

**Passable to quite good.


Yes, apart from the power amp I had (smallest in the power amp range -
about 4 inches high) - the front panel used to pant along with the music!!



Technics

**Urk (though some of their older models were nice..


Love the amps, always disappointed by the boring sound after a while...



JVC

**Puke.


An old one (huge volume knob) - my nephew has had it for years now and
still loves it.



Nikko

**Are they still around?


Wrong section - s/b in the 'heard' section. It belonged to a girlfriend
years back and reminds me I've probably heard tins of Trios and other
similar amps from back then.



Musical Fidelity

**From shocking to passable.


Swim was in a Clarinet Quintet with Tony Michaelson, but I don't think
even that would persuade me to part with the sort of money his stuff
costs. What kills me with that bloke is he gazumps all his own
'world-beating, limited edition' (overpriced) offerings with ones he
claims to be 'much better' usually about a year or so afterwards!!



Acoustic Solutions

**Never heard them.


Chainstore toys - I've recently bought one. Weedy (hence the Denon) but
*magic* VFM (59 quid with digital remote everything). Plenty good enough
for a small room, radio/CD use or someone on a budget who doesn't want a
smeggy old banger from eBay. (Actually, having said that, its own little
Phono Stage was/is surprisingly good - easily as good as a ProJect Phono
Box or NAD PP1, which would make the rest of the amp about 9 quid....)


Parasound

**From ordinary to passable.


Very ordinary but powerful.



Luxman

**Their new stuff? Dunno.


No, old one with a fabulous front panel but very bland sound......

**Yep.






And also heard these:

Arcam

**From respectable to brilliant (their 'Ring DAC' equipped CD players are
breathtakingly good)


Wouldn't know but what I heard didn't strike me as very good VFM...

**Their amps are quite respectable, IMO. And, as I stated before, their
'Ring DAC' equipped CD players are astonishingly good.




Roksan

**Not bad.


Perfectly OK but not cheap....



Meridian

**Good to very good.

Krell

**Weird sounding to quite good.


Can't remember the sound now, I just remember being a tad underwhelmed!!
(Couldn't have been that good or I would have bought it at the time....)


(The truth is, you get a better bang for your buck with a Chinese valve
amp off eBay these days! ;-)

**Only in your delusion. I've seen/heard a few and they're simply
terrible.


Doesn't equate with my own experience - but then I'm only interested in
the *music* they make, not the components they've used. At the price, they
are a near-disposable item...

**Here's a thought: Compare your cheap, Chinese amps with a known good
quality amp. Say, an Audio Research VT100. Then compare the VT100 to a high
quality SS amp. Let me know what you find. For me, I find the cheap Chinese
amps to sound like crap. They colour the sound to an unnacceptable degree.
Their build quality is nothing to write home about and their output
transformers (the single, most important part about any valve amp) are crap.
A cheap Rotel would nail them to the wall.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote


OK. My suspicion was that, for cost effectiveness, the pre section
componentry and circuit might be common to most (if not all) of the
range....?

**Big mistake. Just listen to one of their HT recievers and compare it
to one of Denon's standalone tuners and you'll see what I mean. The
standalone tuners are very, very good indeed.


WTF has that got to do with it?

**Well, everything. Japanese manufacturers tend to keep their premium
products distinct from their budget stuff, in terms of component choice
and topology.


I'd hardly call a 250 and a 500 quid amp 'premium products'....





Gone are the days when manufactuers used
common items in their products.


I doubt it....

**When examining two entirely different ranges of products, it is a fact.


I'm sure it is for *entirely different ranges of products*....

(????)





In fact, check the back panel of your 655
and see where it is manufactured. I KNOW that the 1500 originates from
Japan.


So what? You think the Chinese can't *manufacture* or summat??

**They COULD, but they don't. Yet.


That's Quad, NAD, Audiolab, Mission, Wharfedale, Rogers (et al) in the ****
then....


Keep it real - I'm talking about a 200 quid amp here, not a 2,000 quid
amp...

**Is the PMA1500AE 2k Squid? My point is that if you cared to listen to
the PMA1500AE, you may well be stunned at how good it is and you may well
be persuaded to dump all your notions of SS equipment.


For two pins (and 449 on the Net) it's almost tempting....

(Then I got another bloody amp in my spares cupboard, ain't I....??)

Wader minnit - *AE*...?? Not 1500R? What's the difference???

OK, forget that - I found a nice comparator on the Denon UK website. (the
2000AE goes 24 kg eh....??)





**I believe that you will go out of your way to ensure that you never
hear something truly special, if it contains transistors.


I would (within reason) but you still haven't suggested one...??

**Haven't I? Are you paying attention?


Sorry, what did you say....???

(I nodded off....)





OK, perhaps you could point me in the right direction, I have had
various models of the following makes of SS amps (in no special order):

Denon

**From terrible to quite good.


OK, I'll play! :-)

Let me guess - the one I've got comes under the 'terrible'
category....??? :-)

**Nope. It ain't bad. It ain't great though.


I think it's beezer - it fronts my triode power amps up a feck sight better
than the EAR Line Stage!!

(Another hole in another foot.....)

The 2A3 SET, driven by the Pre-Outs from the Denon, on my Jerichos (96 dB)
with the new Viston drivers (only 106 quid a side...) is a *terrifying*
combination - I haven't even *begun* to take it in yet and the bloody
drivers are only 3/4 days old yet!!

(Ask Phil here about 'flinching'....!! ;-)




Luxman

**Their new stuff? Dunno.


No, old one with a fabulous front panel but very bland sound......

**Yep.


Here it is:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/luxman.JPG


Not quite as nice as I remembered it and no remote - so no hard feelings....


**Here's a thought: Compare your cheap, Chinese amps with a known good
quality amp. Say, an Audio Research VT100. Then compare the VT100 to a
high quality SS amp. Let me know what you find.


You're talking like a **** - I wouldn't know where to begin to look for a
VT100 and I'm damned if I would chase after one!! I said 'within reason'...



For me, I find the cheap Chinese
amps to sound like crap. They colour the sound to an unnacceptable degree.
Their build quality is nothing to write home about and their output
transformers (the single, most important part about any valve amp) are
crap. A cheap Rotel would nail them to the wall.


It's the British Motorcycle Industry 'Jap Crap' mantra all over again, ain't
it...???

"Keith G" wrote


The 2A3 SET, driven by the Pre-Outs from the Denon, on my Jerichos (96 dB)
with the new Viston drivers (only 106 quid a side...) is a *terrifying*
combination - I haven't even *begun* to take it in yet and the bloody
drivers are only 3/4 days old yet!!


OK, that's *Visaton* and here's a pic of the boxes:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/visaton.JPG

Compare the (4") 'Datsun Grilles' with the B200 boxes for an idea of
size.....

;-)

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote


OK. My suspicion was that, for cost effectiveness, the pre section
componentry and circuit might be common to most (if not all) of the
range....?

**Big mistake. Just listen to one of their HT recievers and compare it
to one of Denon's standalone tuners and you'll see what I mean. The
standalone tuners are very, very good indeed.


WTF has that got to do with it?

**Well, everything. Japanese manufacturers tend to keep their premium
products distinct from their budget stuff, in terms of component choice
and topology.


I'd hardly call a 250 and a 500 quid amp 'premium products'....

**There's your problem. You equate price with quality.






Gone are the days when manufactuers used
common items in their products.


I doubt it....

**When examining two entirely different ranges of products, it is a fact.


I'm sure it is for *entirely different ranges of products*....

**Good. Now we're getting womewhere.


(????)





In fact, check the back panel of your 655
and see where it is manufactured. I KNOW that the 1500 originates from
Japan.


So what? You think the Chinese can't *manufacture* or summat??

**They COULD, but they don't. Yet.


That's Quad, NAD, Audiolab, Mission, Wharfedale, Rogers (et al) in the
**** then....

**Looks like.



Keep it real - I'm talking about a 200 quid amp here, not a 2,000 quid
amp...

**Is the PMA1500AE 2k Squid? My point is that if you cared to listen to
the PMA1500AE, you may well be stunned at how good it is and you may well
be persuaded to dump all your notions of SS equipment.


For two pins (and 449 on the Net) it's almost tempting....

(Then I got another bloody amp in my spares cupboard, ain't I....??)

Wader minnit - *AE*...?? Not 1500R? What's the difference???

**Dunno. I have yet to examine the 1500AE closely.


OK, forget that - I found a nice comparator on the Denon UK website. (the
2000AE goes 24 kg eh....??)





**I believe that you will go out of your way to ensure that you never
hear something truly special, if it contains transistors.


I would (within reason) but you still haven't suggested one...??

**Haven't I? Are you paying attention?


Sorry, what did you say....???

(I nodded off....)





OK, perhaps you could point me in the right direction, I have had
various models of the following makes of SS amps (in no special
order):

Denon

**From terrible to quite good.


OK, I'll play! :-)

Let me guess - the one I've got comes under the 'terrible'
category....??? :-)

**Nope. It ain't bad. It ain't great though.


I think it's beezer - it fronts my triode power amps up a feck sight
better than the EAR Line Stage!!

**Yeah, well, that would not be difficult. The 1500AE blows away the 655.


(Another hole in another foot.....)

The 2A3 SET, driven by the Pre-Outs from the Denon, on my Jerichos (96 dB)
with the new Viston drivers (only 106 quid a side...) is a *terrifying*
combination - I haven't even *begun* to take it in yet and the bloody
drivers are only 3/4 days old yet!!

(Ask Phil here about 'flinching'....!! ;-)




Luxman

**Their new stuff? Dunno.


No, old one with a fabulous front panel but very bland sound......

**Yep.


Here it is:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/luxman.JPG


Not quite as nice as I remembered it and no remote - so no hard
feelings....

**Jeez! You've got to be kidding! That thing is, what? 30 years old? You've
replaced every electrolytic cap in it, haven't you? If you haven't, it's
performance will be a long way off par. Even then, I'll betcha it is chocka
with crappy electrolytic coupling caps.



**Here's a thought: Compare your cheap, Chinese amps with a known good
quality amp. Say, an Audio Research VT100. Then compare the VT100 to a
high quality SS amp. Let me know what you find.


You're talking like a **** - I wouldn't know where to begin to look for a
VT100 and I'm damned if I would chase after one!! I said 'within
reason'...

**I'm talking like a sane person. The VT100 represents, aguably, the
pinnnacle of what is possible with a valve power amp. After you compare one
to your cheap Chinese amps, you can then make some logical deductions about
the quality (or lack thereof) of the comparison amp.





For me, I find the cheap Chinese
amps to sound like crap. They colour the sound to an unnacceptable
degree. Their build quality is nothing to write home about and their
output transformers (the single, most important part about any valve amp)
are crap. A cheap Rotel would nail them to the wall.


It's the British Motorcycle Industry 'Jap Crap' mantra all over again,
ain't it...???

**Nope. The BIG difference, was that the Japanese, almost from day one,
adopted the mantra: "We must build the best quality we can." A present,
China represents a huge, cheap labour force, which allows Western and
Japanese companies the capacity to produce existing designs at lower prices.
It will not always be so. China can and will produce superior quality
products at lower prices. However, all the cheap, Chinese amps I've seen,
lack decent quality output transformers. And it is the output transformer
which is pivotal to the quality of a valve amplifier. Frankly, I am
surprised that you bother arguing this point.

And again: It will not always be this way. I purchased some Chinese KT88s
some years ago. They were the worst (and I do mean, THE WORST) valves I have
ever purchased. Ever. Of the ones which did not fail instantly, the rest
enjoyed a very short life span. I tracked down some NOS, MOV KT88s (at huge
cost to the client), which are still in service today. Newer Chinese valves
are much better, but, IMO, the Russian valves are better still. The Chinese
will build decent valve amps, but they do not (IME, do so at present.
Purchasers would be much better putting their money towards a (say) Rotel
instead.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Trevor Wilson" wrote


I'd hardly call a 250 and a 500 quid amp 'premium products'....

**There's your problem. You equate price with quality.


You couldn't be more wrong - I've spent the last few years *deliberately*
trying to get the best sound I can out of what most people would regard as
*junk* and, if the reactions I've had here (even today) are anything to go
by, I've been fairly successful. Or, to put it another way, I've heard some
fairly expensive kit/setups that were crap by comparison...








Gone are the days when manufactuers used
common items in their products.


I doubt it....

**When examining two entirely different ranges of products, it is a
fact.


I'm sure it is for *entirely different ranges of products*....

**Good. Now we're getting womewhere.


Sadly, I don't think we are - my inference is/was that *similar* products
will, in fact share a degree of commonality in the design, topography and
components used. Moot point, so hardly worth further discussion.




(????)





In fact, check the back panel of your 655
and see where it is manufactured. I KNOW that the 1500 originates from
Japan.


So what? You think the Chinese can't *manufacture* or summat??

**They COULD, but they don't. Yet.


That's Quad, NAD, Audiolab, Mission, Wharfedale, Rogers (et al) in the
**** then....

**Looks like.



Keep it real - I'm talking about a 200 quid amp here, not a 2,000 quid
amp...

**Is the PMA1500AE 2k Squid? My point is that if you cared to listen to
the PMA1500AE, you may well be stunned at how good it is and you may
well be persuaded to dump all your notions of SS equipment.


For two pins (and 449 on the Net) it's almost tempting....

(Then I got another bloody amp in my spares cupboard, ain't I....??)

Wader minnit - *AE*...?? Not 1500R? What's the difference???

**Dunno. I have yet to examine the 1500AE closely.


OK, forget that - I found a nice comparator on the Denon UK website. (the
2000AE goes 24 kg eh....??)





**I believe that you will go out of your way to ensure that you never
hear something truly special, if it contains transistors.


I would (within reason) but you still haven't suggested one...??

**Haven't I? Are you paying attention?


Sorry, what did you say....???

(I nodded off....)





OK, perhaps you could point me in the right direction, I have had
various models of the following makes of SS amps (in no special
order):

Denon

**From terrible to quite good.


OK, I'll play! :-)

Let me guess - the one I've got comes under the 'terrible'
category....??? :-)

**Nope. It ain't bad. It ain't great though.


I think it's beezer - it fronts my triode power amps up a feck sight
better than the EAR Line Stage!!

**Yeah, well, that would not be difficult. The 1500AE blows away the 655.


I repeat, at *twice* the price I would expect it to!!



(Another hole in another foot.....)

The 2A3 SET, driven by the Pre-Outs from the Denon, on my Jerichos (96
dB) with the new Viston drivers (only 106 quid a side...) is a
*terrifying* combination - I haven't even *begun* to take it in yet and
the bloody drivers are only 3/4 days old yet!!

(Ask Phil here about 'flinching'....!! ;-)




Luxman

**Their new stuff? Dunno.


No, old one with a fabulous front panel but very bland sound......

**Yep.


Here it is:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/luxman.JPG


Not quite as nice as I remembered it and no remote - so no hard
feelings....

**Jeez! You've got to be kidding! That thing is, what? 30 years old?
You've replaced every electrolytic cap in it, haven't you? If you haven't,
it's performance will be a long way off par. Even then, I'll betcha it is
chocka with crappy electrolytic coupling caps.



Try to determine the 'past tense' in my references to that amp - I didn't
keep it very long. The local hifi shop blokey I mention elsewhere re. the
LPs phoned up and asked if I wanted to sell it - he had a London dealer who
wanted it. I took a nice little profit on it and let it go with a Luxman
tuner....





**Here's a thought: Compare your cheap, Chinese amps with a known good
quality amp. Say, an Audio Research VT100. Then compare the VT100 to a
high quality SS amp. Let me know what you find.


You're talking like a **** - I wouldn't know where to begin to look for a
VT100 and I'm damned if I would chase after one!! I said 'within
reason'...

**I'm talking like a sane person. The VT100 represents, aguably, the
pinnnacle of what is possible with a valve power amp. After you compare
one to your cheap Chinese amps, you can then make some logical deductions
about the quality (or lack thereof) of the comparison amp.


You still don't get it, do you? The Chinese amps have been a 'research'
project for me and I say they represent unbeatable VFM - I don't say they
the best amps you can get. A Chinky Cheapy is 300 quid + shipping, how much
is a VT100 - *twenty times* that price?? Even Andre Jute could see the
quality hike likely from a top name amp probably wouldn't be worth the price
difference for modest, domestic requirements!!

While I was Googling for the price I found this site:

http://www.one-electron.com/FC_Consumer.html

(Very interesting to the Valve Fettlers here. I should think...??)









For me, I find the cheap Chinese
amps to sound like crap. They colour the sound to an unnacceptable
degree. Their build quality is nothing to write home about and their
output transformers (the single, most important part about any valve
amp) are crap. A cheap Rotel would nail them to the wall.


It's the British Motorcycle Industry 'Jap Crap' mantra all over again,
ain't it...???

**Nope. The BIG difference, was that the Japanese, almost from day one,
adopted the mantra: "We must build the best quality we can." A present,
China represents a huge, cheap labour force, which allows Western and
Japanese companies the capacity to produce existing designs at lower
prices. It will not always be so. China can and will produce superior
quality products at lower prices. However, all the cheap, Chinese amps
I've seen, lack decent quality output transformers. And it is the output
transformer which is pivotal to the quality of a valve amplifier. Frankly,
I am surprised that you bother arguing this point.


I'm not arguing the point - you are. I'm fully aware of possible
shortcomings on cheap Chinese amps - so far, I haven't discovered anything
worse than a crappy volume pot and no reason to suspect the trannies are
defective (yet)...??



And again: It will not always be this way. I purchased some Chinese KT88s
some years ago. They were the worst (and I do mean, THE WORST) valves I
have ever purchased. Ever. Of the ones which did not fail instantly, the
rest enjoyed a very short life span. I tracked down some NOS, MOV KT88s
(at huge cost to the client), which are still in service today. Newer
Chinese valves are much better, but, IMO, the Russian valves are better
still. The Chinese will build decent valve amps, but they do not (IME, do
so at present. Purchasers would be much better putting their money towards
a (say) Rotel instead.


You got shares in Rotel or summat?

(Asitappens, I've had at least 3 Rotel amps....)

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote


I'd hardly call a 250 and a 500 quid amp 'premium products'....

**There's your problem. You equate price with quality.


You couldn't be more wrong - I've spent the last few years *deliberately*
trying to get the best sound I can out of what most people would regard as
*junk* and, if the reactions I've had here (even today) are anything to go
by, I've been fairly successful. Or, to put it another way, I've heard
some fairly expensive kit/setups that were crap by comparison...

**Kinda makes a mockery of your previous comments.









Gone are the days when manufactuers used
common items in their products.


I doubt it....

**When examining two entirely different ranges of products, it is a
fact.


I'm sure it is for *entirely different ranges of products*....

**Good. Now we're getting womewhere.


Sadly, I don't think we are - my inference is/was that *similar* products
will, in fact share a degree of commonality in the design, topography and
components used. Moot point, so hardly worth further discussion.

**The 655 and the 1500AE and NOT similar products. They could not be more
different. The 1500AE is a premium product, from Denon's premium range.





(????)





In fact, check the back panel of your 655
and see where it is manufactured. I KNOW that the 1500 originates
from Japan.


So what? You think the Chinese can't *manufacture* or summat??

**They COULD, but they don't. Yet.


That's Quad, NAD, Audiolab, Mission, Wharfedale, Rogers (et al) in the
**** then....

**Looks like.



Keep it real - I'm talking about a 200 quid amp here, not a 2,000 quid
amp...

**Is the PMA1500AE 2k Squid? My point is that if you cared to listen to
the PMA1500AE, you may well be stunned at how good it is and you may
well be persuaded to dump all your notions of SS equipment.


For two pins (and 449 on the Net) it's almost tempting....

(Then I got another bloody amp in my spares cupboard, ain't I....??)

Wader minnit - *AE*...?? Not 1500R? What's the difference???

**Dunno. I have yet to examine the 1500AE closely.


OK, forget that - I found a nice comparator on the Denon UK website.
(the 2000AE goes 24 kg eh....??)





**I believe that you will go out of your way to ensure that you never
hear something truly special, if it contains transistors.


I would (within reason) but you still haven't suggested one...??

**Haven't I? Are you paying attention?


Sorry, what did you say....???

(I nodded off....)





OK, perhaps you could point me in the right direction, I have had
various models of the following makes of SS amps (in no special
order):

Denon

**From terrible to quite good.


OK, I'll play! :-)

Let me guess - the one I've got comes under the 'terrible'
category....??? :-)

**Nope. It ain't bad. It ain't great though.


I think it's beezer - it fronts my triode power amps up a feck sight
better than the EAR Line Stage!!

**Yeah, well, that would not be difficult. The 1500AE blows away the 655.


I repeat, at *twice* the price I would expect it to!!



(Another hole in another foot.....)

The 2A3 SET, driven by the Pre-Outs from the Denon, on my Jerichos (96
dB) with the new Viston drivers (only 106 quid a side...) is a
*terrifying* combination - I haven't even *begun* to take it in yet and
the bloody drivers are only 3/4 days old yet!!

(Ask Phil here about 'flinching'....!! ;-)




Luxman

**Their new stuff? Dunno.


No, old one with a fabulous front panel but very bland sound......

**Yep.


Here it is:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/luxman.JPG


Not quite as nice as I remembered it and no remote - so no hard
feelings....

**Jeez! You've got to be kidding! That thing is, what? 30 years old?
You've replaced every electrolytic cap in it, haven't you? If you
haven't, it's performance will be a long way off par. Even then, I'll
betcha it is chocka with crappy electrolytic coupling caps.



Try to determine the 'past tense' in my references to that amp - I didn't
keep it very long. The local hifi shop blokey I mention elsewhere re. the
LPs phoned up and asked if I wanted to sell it - he had a London dealer
who wanted it. I took a nice little profit on it and let it go with a
Luxman tuner....

**Luxman has always been one of those mysterious Japanese brands, which has
a reputation far outstripping the reality. Kinda like those cheap, Chinese
valve amps. They're crap. They use crap parts (where it really counts). They
sound like crap. Yet people still imagine they're some kind of bargain.
Weird, huh?






**Here's a thought: Compare your cheap, Chinese amps with a known good
quality amp. Say, an Audio Research VT100. Then compare the VT100 to a
high quality SS amp. Let me know what you find.


You're talking like a **** - I wouldn't know where to begin to look for
a VT100 and I'm damned if I would chase after one!! I said 'within
reason'...

**I'm talking like a sane person. The VT100 represents, aguably, the
pinnnacle of what is possible with a valve power amp. After you compare
one to your cheap Chinese amps, you can then make some logical deductions
about the quality (or lack thereof) of the comparison amp.


You still don't get it, do you?

**On the contrary, I DO get it. You still miss the point though.

The Chinese amps have been a 'research'
project for me and I say they represent unbeatable VFM

**No, they do not. For the price of those things, one can buy a decent amp,
from (say) Rotel. Ironically, the Rotel is likely to be built in the same
country. The difference being, of course, that the Rotel actually sounds
good, is reliable and measures like a hi fi amp is supposed to.

- I don't say they
the best amps you can get.

**Er, of course not. They're the WORST amps you can get.

A Chinky Cheapy is 300 quid + shipping, how much
is a VT100 - *twenty times* that price??

**Dunno. Probably. The difference is that you can put the VT100 up against a
(say) 300 Squid Rotel and have a tough time picking the difference. Against
the cheap, Chinese amp, the difference is instantly audible. Does that tell
you anything? Do you think that the Rotel and the ARC are wrong, whilst the
cheap, Chinese amp is right?

Even Andre Jute could see the
quality hike likely from a top name amp probably wouldn't be worth the
price difference for modest, domestic requirements!!

**If Jute could manage to stop lying, he might be worth listening to.


While I was Googling for the price I found this site:

http://www.one-electron.com/FC_Consumer.html

(Very interesting to the Valve Fettlers here. I should think...??)









For me, I find the cheap Chinese
amps to sound like crap. They colour the sound to an unnacceptable
degree. Their build quality is nothing to write home about and their
output transformers (the single, most important part about any valve
amp) are crap. A cheap Rotel would nail them to the wall.


It's the British Motorcycle Industry 'Jap Crap' mantra all over again,
ain't it...???

**Nope. The BIG difference, was that the Japanese, almost from day one,
adopted the mantra: "We must build the best quality we can." A present,
China represents a huge, cheap labour force, which allows Western and
Japanese companies the capacity to produce existing designs at lower
prices. It will not always be so. China can and will produce superior
quality products at lower prices. However, all the cheap, Chinese amps
I've seen, lack decent quality output transformers. And it is the output
transformer which is pivotal to the quality of a valve amplifier.
Frankly, I am surprised that you bother arguing this point.


I'm not arguing the point - you are. I'm fully aware of possible
shortcomings on cheap Chinese amps - so far, I haven't discovered anything
worse than a crappy volume pot and no reason to suspect the trannies are
defective (yet)...??

**I never said that the Chinese amps used defective transformers. Just that
use crappy transformers. Look up the term: 'interleaving' as it relates to
output transformers and be prepared to learn. All the cheap, Chinese amps
I've seen do not use interleaving. A fatal and fundamental flaw.




And again: It will not always be this way. I purchased some Chinese KT88s
some years ago. They were the worst (and I do mean, THE WORST) valves I
have ever purchased. Ever. Of the ones which did not fail instantly, the
rest enjoyed a very short life span. I tracked down some NOS, MOV KT88s
(at huge cost to the client), which are still in service today. Newer
Chinese valves are much better, but, IMO, the Russian valves are better
still. The Chinese will build decent valve amps, but they do not (IME, do
so at present. Purchasers would be much better putting their money
towards a (say) Rotel instead.


You got shares in Rotel or summat?

**Nope. Rotel just build decent quality amps. That's all.


(Asitappens, I've had at least 3 Rotel amps....)

**Yep. They're decent products. Many models are also Chinese too.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com