Which Amp to buy? The most frequently asked question on this site. READ THIS!!

[MisterB]

On a side note, the have you tried leaning your speakers back by about 1/2inch(or more if need be?) relative to their front and see if you feel a warmer roll off. Reference this from your ideal listening position. Raise the font couplers a bit if you need height to achieve the relative rear tilt backwards and try this. Also best done when you are on included solid couplers over the rubber feet.

If the above worked a bit you can also very slightly face them both outward by about.. yes you guessed it not more than 1/2 inch .. just ESL things!

Thanks for the suggestion! I do know how much slight adjustments can change the sound dramatically. I've spent a lot of time adjusting toe-in as well as distance from front wall. I was going to play around with the rake angle next, but more so to tilt them forward to get them similar to the straight vertical orientation of the Renaissance. Had not considered tipping them slightly farther back. I will give that a try as well. Keep us updated on your Mac demos. Interested to hear your impressions on the combination.

 

[MisterB]

I agree with Mr. B. I have and all tube system with a MC1502 with Autoformers. The mids are fast, highly detailed but definitely lean to the cooler side. That is the Mac sound for me. I like it a lot it but it is a completely different flavor from my previous system with SL3's, and VTL MB 250 (225 watts triode). That was a rich, lush, 3D midrange and as tubey as it gets. Conrad Johnson also gets high marks for a magical midrange.
Mr. B-I would suggest trying a different brand like the CJ or VTL . I believe the sound you describe -very accurately - is how the newer Mac's are generally voiced. Trust your ears

I think you're spot on with your description of the McIntosh sound. What I think I'm hearing in my mind, is the McIntosh tube amp sound, which I'm thinking would give just that slightly more hint of warmness to the mids than what I'm hearing with a tube preamp and solid state amp in my MA352. I know I like the McIntosh/Martin Logan combo. I've heard it many times and it always captured my attention. Of course it's always been with the super high-end stuff - tube mono blocks, full tube pre, playing through a pair of ML Renaissance. Trying to see how close I can come to that on my more modest budget.

The MA352 and ML Impressions combo I listened to at my dealer is what sold me on both. The MA 352 is probably the most revealing piece of equipment I've ever owned, and I don't want to lose that aspect. So that is leading me to stay with Mac, but look at tube preamp and tube amp separates.

I'd love to hear more about your experience with the 1502 as that is the amp I'm currently looking at.

 

[Robert D]

What are the most affordable quality tube amps on the market these days? I have zero experience. Are there good quality amps that have the power to drive Prodigy speakers and keep the cost of having stereo power below $5000 new?

 

[Lightloopy]

I think you're spot on with your description of the McIntosh sound. What I think I'm hearing in my mind, is the McIntosh tube amp sound, which I'm thinking would give just that slightly more hint of warmness to the mids than what I'm hearing with a tube preamp and solid state amp in my MA352. I know I like the McIntosh/Martin Logan combo. I've heard it many times and it always captured my attention. Of course it's always been with the super high-end stuff - tube mono blocks, full tube pre, playing through a pair of ML Renaissance. Trying to see how close I can come to that on my more modest budget.

The MA352 and ML Impressions combo I listened to at my dealer is what sold me on both. The MA 352 is probably the most revealing piece of equipment I've ever owned, and I don't want to lose that aspect. So that is leading me to stay with Mac, but look at tube preamp and tube amp separates.

I'd love to hear more about your experience with the 1502 as that is the amp I'm currently looking at.

I am currently using the ML Impressions and 1502 and very happy with the combination. . I like the big soundstage, detailed, but not fatiguing, and tight controlled bass. Big change going from my CJ Premier 16 to a Backert Labs Pream also. I'm hearing drums , rim shots and percussion much more clearly-definitely more cowbell. I have learned there are passionate followers of the CJ sound( which has also evolved) and likewise for the Mac gear. I think if you are looking for midrange warmth you need to look at the CJ stuff. The 1502 leans to the cooler Mac sound.

I hope to borrow my old VTL's in the summer for a comparison. They make by buddy's room too hot...

Welcome to PM me and have a listen if in the Delaware region.

 

[Lightloopy]

What are the most affordable quality tube amps on the market these days? I have zero experience. Are there good quality amps that have the power to drive Prodigy speakers and keep the cost of having stereo power below $5000 new?

I had SL3's and I believe, your Prodigy's likewise need prodigious power to properly sing. Unfortunately -the minute you start looking at 120 watts and up prices shoot through the roof. You might consider a tube pre and a powerful SS amp. Many members, including myself, have used this combo. Pass, CJ, Parasound come to mind but if you search the amp thread you will get a lot of information

 

[MisterB]

I am currently using the ML Impressions and 1502 and very happy with the combination. . I like the big soundstage, detailed, but not fatiguing, and tight controlled bass. Big change going from my CJ Premier 16 to a Backert Labs Pream also. I'm hearing drums , rim shots and percussion much more clearly-definitely more cowbell. I have learned there are passionate followers of the CJ sound( which has also evolved) and likewise for the Mac gear. I think if you are looking for midrange warmth you need to look at the CJ stuff. The 1502 leans to the cooler Mac sound.

I hope to borrow my old VTL's in the summer for a comparison. They make by buddy's room too hot...

Welcome to PM me and have a listen if in the Delaware region.

Thanks for the info and offer. Unfortunately I am way out here in Illinois. I think I’m probably using “warm” in a very loose sense. What I really mean is closer to the way you described it - not fatiguing. I associate fatiguing with being bright, bordering on harsh. So in my crazy mind, I associate lack of brightness and harshness as being warmer in comparison.

Today my dealer loaned me an MC152 to A/B with my MA352 integrated so that I could get a feel for the difference between the direct coupled amp in the 352 and a Mac amp with autoformers. It is a pretty noticeable difference, with the 152 being very close in sound to what I am striving for. The 152 is more detailed than the 352, with a wider, taller soundstage, smoother mids, and better overall separation of individual instruments. At this point I’m thinking the MA352 is not going to be a keeper.

 

[Lightloopy]

Thanks for the info and offer. Unfortunately I am way out here in Illinois. I think I’m probably using “warm” in a very loose sense. What I really mean is closer to the way you described it - not fatiguing. I associate fatiguing with being bright, bordering on harsh. So in my crazy mind, I associate lack of brightness and harshness as being warmer in comparison.

Today my dealer loaned me an MC152 to A/B with my MA352 integrated so that I could get a feel for the difference between the direct coupled amp in the 352 and a Mac amp with autoformers. It is a pretty noticeable difference, with the 152 being very close in sound to what I am striving for. The 152 is more detailed than the 352, with a wider, taller soundstage, smoother mids, and better overall separation of individual instruments. At this point I’m thinking the MA352 is not going to be a keeper.

Great to have that option to try it out. Good luck and let us know how things turn out

 

[Robert D]

I had SL3's and I believe, your Prodigy's likewise need prodigious power to properly sing. Unfortunately -the minute you start looking at 120 watts and up prices shoot through the roof. You might consider a tube pre and a powerful SS amp. Many members, including myself, have used this combo. Pass, CJ, Parasound come to mind but if you search the amp thread you will get a lot of information

Ok. So using a tube preamp can lend a different sound too?

My Aragon 2 channel amp sounds great, but ive always been curious about tubes.

 

[Lightloopy]

It's an important part of the chain. It'd be fun to try a source to a quality tube premp to the Aragon without all the AV processing gear and see what you think.
The strengths of the ML's is that they reveal component differences in not a subtle way.

 

[JLasher22443]

What are the most affordable quality tube amps on the market these days? I have zero experience. Are there good quality amps that have the power to drive Prodigy speakers and keep the cost of having stereo power below $5000 new?

Hey Robert I can tell you from experience that Tubes at lower output still rock the sh!t out of Martin Logan's. I myself was shocked when I demoed the Audio Research REF 160S which is only putting out 140watts. In comparison to my MC452; my thoughts were yah right it won't be better. Boy was I wrong. Just the improvement in Bass was shocking. It was like I turned off ARC on the speakers and all hell broke loose but for the better. My projector screen was vibrating on the wall. Now this was of course after I had already switched to the REF 6SE Preamp so maybe the synergy was better but either way it kicked the crap out of my MC452. It was much smoother sounding and more realistic. Really sounded like the music was being played in the room naturally instead of a recording being played at me from the speakers.

So if possibly I'd recommend you demo their gear. If you have $5k to spend on an Integrated Amp I bet that the New Audio Research I50 will shock you. Also I believe that BDH55 has the Reference 80S and said he was shocked that how great the 70watt per channel sounded on his 15A's.

 

[Ishaansuri]

Thanks for the suggestion! I do know how much slight adjustments can change the sound dramatically. I've spent a lot of time adjusting toe-in as well as distance from front wall. I was going to play around with the rake angle next, but more so to tilt them forward to get them similar to the straight vertical orientation of the Renaissance. Had not considered tipping them slightly farther back. I will give that a try as well. Keep us updated on your Mac demos. Interested to hear your impressions on the combination.

I shall keep you updated! I did too tilt them forward and back as well to find a comfortable spot. I guess it all depends on where they may be sitting for you at the moment. If they need alignment you may hear brighter highs when standing up at your ideal listening position as compared to sitting down. So I suppose do try either way. Look forward to hearing when you try the new tubes and amp.

I wrote into MC USA via the website yesterday and they have recommended the MC462 for this series.

 

[Lurch]

Currently running my Summits with am MFA Baby Reference passive pre & Nord One UP SE NC500Ms rev C and Sonic Imagery OpAmps (Hypex & 400/8, 700/4, 550/2). The sound is fast, clean and detailed with e tended frequencies at both ends, I may also get a set of Sparko OpAmps (less detailed but warmer) so I can roll the flavour. Have also tried them with a Gato 250S, wasn't to my liking as a, bit to cold and clinical to my ears, Class D is very much about the implementation and the way each manufacturer does the input boards. I now swap between my Nords and Icon Audio MB845SEs valve monos (90wpc) depending on my mood.

 

[audioxcel]

Hey Robert I can tell you from experience that Tubes at lower output still rock the sh!t out of Martin Logan's. I myself was shocked when I demoed the Audio Research REF 160S which is only putting out 140watts. In comparison to my MC452; my thoughts were yah right it won't be better. Boy was I wrong. Just the improvement in Bass was shocking. It was like I turned off ARC on the speakers and all hell broke loose but for the better. My projector screen was vibrating on the wall. Now this was of course after I had already switched to the REF 6SE Preamp so maybe the synergy was better but either way it kicked the crap out of my MC452. It was much smoother sounding and more realistic. Really sounded like the music was being played in the room naturally instead of a recording being played at me from the speakers.

So if possibly I'd recommend you demo their gear. If you have $5k to spend on an Integrated Amp I bet that the New Audio Research I50 will shock you. Also I believe that BDH55 has the Reference 80S and said he was shocked that how great the 70watt per channel sounded on his 15A's.

I used an ARC Classic 60 (60W) with KT88 tubes for 20 years with my Sequels. I bought a solid state Mark Levinson No. 23.5 (200W) and did a comparison over a two month period. The ARC held it's own against the ML in volume and every parameter except for the very deepest low end tightness. The ARC had an edge in the midrange. I sold the ML. All music has midrange content but only some has 20Hz bass. Besides that, the ARC wasn't deficient in the bass it just was slightly less "tight" below about 30Hz. I now use an even older ARC D-70 MK-II (70W) which I find a bit more warm than the CL-60 which is a hybrid design and sounds more like a solid state amp than the D-70 MKII.

Besides, Sequels don't really go down to 20Hz well. I judiciously (low level) use a Mirage bipolar sub to support the deep base.

 

[BDH55]

Hey Robert I can tell you from experience that Tubes at lower output still rock the sh!t out of Martin Logan's. I myself was shocked when I demoed the Audio Research REF 160S which is only putting out 140watts. In comparison to my MC452; my thoughts were yah right it won't be better. Boy was I wrong. Just the improvement in Bass was shocking. It was like I turned off ARC on the speakers and all hell broke loose but for the better. My projector screen was vibrating on the wall. Now this was of course after I had already switched to the REF 6SE Preamp so maybe the synergy was better but either way it kicked the crap out of my MC452. It was much smoother sounding and more realistic. Really sounded like the music was being played in the room naturally instead of a recording being played at me from the speakers.

So if possibly I'd recommend you demo their gear. If you have $5k to spend on an Integrated Amp I bet that the New Audio Research I50 will shock you. Also I believe that BDH55 has the Reference 80S and said he was shocked that how great the 70watt per channel sounded on his 15A's.

I agree 100%, other than clarifying my amp model. I bought the predecessor to the REF 80S... the REF 75SE which was being closed out at an attractive price. I 'think' they are similar amps but never did a direct comparison. Off the top of my head I think some of the main differences are the REF 80S has the cool ghost meters, and also has auto-bias, as opposed to manual bias on my REF 75 SE.

I was concerned about whether a 75 wpc tube amp would really be able to drive my ESL 15's, but every time I fire it up I am completely amazed. I can easily get to a volume where I don't want to turn it up any further, and watching my meters, they are rarely more than a third of the way up! While I just love my REF 75 SE for listening to my two channel system, I still rely on my Para JC-1's to run the front channels in my surround system (both sharing the same ESL 15's). I've got no doubt that a tube amp could certainly run the front channels (or all channels) in a home theater, but since a good amount of usage of my system is watching news, sports., etc., I just hate to burn tube hours on that stuff. Of course this leaves me with the problem of having to swap speaker cables behind my 15's any time I want to change from two channel to home theater which isn't exactly convenient. I just don't think I will be able to give up the tubes in my two channel system.....

 

[Lightloopy]

I think one thing to keep in mind is that the early speakers respond/ need big watts and reserves to play right. The later ML's with powered subs like the 11, 13 and 15 seem to be much more efficient and less demanding. The SL3 and CLS II reveal significant differences between my MFA D75 and the VTL's MB250's. The 11A's are much more forgiving and play nice with both( but always better with the big amps). I used a CJ MF2500, and Classe Cam 350's before I moved to tubes.
Also remember tube watts are not the same as SS watts- and no, I can't explain why. There are smarter folk here who can.

 

[BDH55]

Also remember tube watts are not the same as SS watts- and no, I can't explain why. There are smarter folk here who can.

I found that out when moving from 800 wpc SS mono blocks to a 75 wpc stereo amplifier! Now, if I can just find that person who can explain tube watts vs solid state watts to a non-engineer who thought a watt was a watt was a watt. This really has my curiosity up and now I'm planning to play around with a pair of even lower powered full Class A (8 wpc) amps...

 

[ttocs]

Well, yes, watts be watts. I don't know enough about this and have struggled to learn the why of it all with no definite conclusion as yet.

We all have heard that not many watts are used in most general listening. My contention is that it's the dynamics in great amp designs that makes the most difference. How quickly a circuit can react with little distortion, if distortion does occur that becomes audible - how sharp vs smooth it is.

Maybe it has something to do with tubes being high voltage circuits? Maybe exchanging Volts for Amperage is easier in tube amps, if that's the goal? Solid State amps need lots of reserve, not so much with tube amps, so is this relative to the working voltage of the circuits?

I have an enquiring mind. I want to know.

 

[Robert D]

WIth tube amps, how common is it to have to replace tubes? Wondering what the typical life is on them. I guess its in hours? Is it considered a normal wear and tear type of thing, thats part of maintenance or should they last for many many years?

 

[ttocs]

When I entered the tube amp arena, I considered that tubes would be expendable items needing replacement.

My KT88 tubes have around 1500 hours on them, so lots of life in them. I went with KT120 tubes just because I like them better. There's probably around 2000 hours on the KT120 now. I'm guessing they'll go 4000-5000 hours, maybe more?

The KT120 set of eight was about $320, which is still the current price. Let's say a set of tubes will go about three years, that's about $100 per year.

 

[Lightloopy]

It's not so much the tube but how the amp is designed around the tube that will be one of the factors in tube life. Some run like Formula1 engines and others scoot along like a Subaru for many years. All part of the fun