SAE's used to be the dealer's amp of preference for OHM speakers.
You can buy vintage OHMs used for not much, buy upgrades for any model still from OHM, or buy new refurbs or totally new speakers from OHM as well.
Just one option. Many others as well. Read up on what's out there first before deciding. |
Rockanroller-
the pre-amp, is the most important piece of the audio chain, as, it is the heart of any system. It should be of the best quality and build. Which brand/model interests you?
Happy Listening! |
I just purchased , used , a Sony ta 55e77s, and I have a Nikko Beta 20.
What would you suggest that is vintage, from 1985 through 200 that would be good.Thanks. |
R&R'er, those are not the model numbers you had indicated in your earlier post. Also, I can't find any indication that there ever was a Sony "ta 55e77s." Can you clarify, more precisely?
The comments in my previous post remain as stated regardless of whether the Nikko is a Beta 20 or a Beta II (Roman numeral "2"). However that may not be the case with respect to the Sony.
BTW, I had assumed in my previous post that when you referred to a "Sony TA77ESD" in your earlier post that you were actually referring to a "Sony TA-E77ESD."
Regards,
-- Al
|
Almarg,
here we go: SONY TA-E77ESD is my preamp working with the SAE 2101 amplifier.Sorry about that mistake.
I just bought another amp:Sony TA-E330ES for my office.
I probably will pair it with the Nikko Beta 20.
What bookshelf speakers would be a good choice? Thank you kindly.
|
I don't want to seem picayune, but it can be important to be precise about model numbers, in part so that others can research what you've got. So I believe a couple of corrections to your correction are called for:
SAE 2101 should be SAE 2401, as you stated earlier.
Sony TA-E330ES should be (I believe) Sony TA-N330ES.
I'm not particularly knowledgeable about bookshelf speakers, but among vintage speakers one brand I would suggest looking for is ADS, also referred to as a/d/s.
Good luck. Regards,
-- Al
|
The amps have specs that are likely not a lot different from high end amps.
The preamp however is a different matter- I would seriously look for a budget tube preamp for this setup- that would offer the most bang for the buck in terms of improvement in sound, if the tube preamp is in good working order. |
FWIW, I just bought and set up a pair of stand mount monitors from Music Direct (Wharfedale Dentons at half price ($500). I used a tube amp and they sound far beyond my expectations. They are well reviewed in the English mag's. Caveat - they are rear ported and won't sound too good backed up to a wall. |
It is often said that your amplifier is the engine of your system, and the preamp is the heart. Both are important and should work synergistically. I previously ran a Boulder 1060 amp with a heavily modded Ayon CD-5s as linestage and that combo worked very well. With that said, the Boulder had a bigger influence over the sound. Same deal with my previous Classe power amp. So i'd have to give more weight to the power amp, then pre. With pre/power combo's I generally prefer a ss power amp with a tubed linestage which gives you the option to roll the stock tubes with better matched NOS tubes (unless we're talking about Vitus, Soulution or Goldmund).
Another option to consider is a good integrated amp. There are some really nice integrateds out there which can be had at a bargain 2nd hand such as Hegel, Luxman, Modwright, Simaudio Moon Evo and Musical Fidelity, as well as tubed integrateds such as Vac & Leben. |
It's an easy experiment.
First try running without an amp.
Then try without a preamp
Which is more important will become perfectly clear. |
Overall, as far as this thread goes; I'm in agreement with Mapman. If I needed RIAA eqing, perhaps I might feel differently. |
I'll agree pre-amp is probably the most important tweak and if you are running a phono you need one.You also need a volume controll. ANd maybe a way to switch multiple input sources if you have those. A pre-amp is just one such device to serve those functions when needed. Other than that, its just a potentially expensive signal processor that is not very flexible compared to the alternatives.
These days, it pays to consider function, not form. A traditional preamp provides various functions that may be had equally well or better in other forms these days. |
The preamp is the air-traffic cotroller. The amps are a plane.
|
I think its a toss-up. Isn't it true that a really good amp will make just OK speakers sound their best... but really good speakers will never sound their best with an amp that's not up to the task? |
If you are seeking optimum performance it is not wise to over or under emphasize any component. |
Mofimadness...is absolutely correct. Amp/speaker interface is critical but the preamp is not without importance. The lower the speaker efficency or the more erratic the impedance curve, the more critical the amplifier choice. I find looking to upgrade a preamp more effective after getting amp/ speaker dialed in. PT |
"I'll agree pre-amp is probably the most important tweak and if you are running a phono you need one.You also need a volume controll. ANd maybe a way to switch multiple input sources if you have those. A pre-amp is just one such device to serve those functions when needed. Other than that, its just a potentially expensive signal processor that is not very flexible compared to the alternatives."
It's certainly a common view, but its probably one of the biggest reasons, if not the biggest, why a system will under perform. Most manufacturers will tell you that its much more difficult to build a high quality preamp, then an amp. Also, take into account that the weaker the signal, the more influenced it is by everything in its path. That's why I said in my first post that I would take at least 3k if I had 5k to spend on an amp and preamp, and use the bulk if it for a preamp. Its a more expensive and harder piece to get right. So, just to clarify my example, if I were to spend 3k on an preamp and 2k on an amp, I would be doing so in an attempt to have both pieces that are about equal in quality. And, as always, there can, and will be exceptions to this as to how things play out in different situations. I'm just using it as a general guideline.
"01-31-15: Raks
I think its a toss-up. Isn't it true that a really good amp will make just OK speakers sound their best... but really good speakers will never sound their best with an amp that's not up to the task?"
While its true that a well matched amp will go a long way in getting the most out of a pair of speakers, if you don't have a preamp that is equally good, and well matched to the other components, the system will sound like crap regardless. More important, though, is that most people don't realize that the preamp is the problem when they're system doesn't sound right. If you look through some of the posts on this site where members are asking for advice on cables, tubes and many other accessories or tweaks, its usually a good indicator that at least some of the problems are due to not having the right preamp. |
i will echo what Z says about speaker/amp. in my recent experience with Audio Physics Caldera II, the amp made the difference between marginal sound and great sound. Not even close. I am still relatively new to separates but that was an eye opener for me. |
While its true that a well matched amp will go a long way in getting the most out of a pair of speakers, if you don't have a preamp that is equally good, and well matched to the other components, the system will sound like crap regardless. More important, though, is that most people don't realize that the preamp is the problem when they're system doesn't sound right I see. I always thought it was the amp not driving the speakers properly, and that the amp was introducing its own set of colorations. But, audio is really a set of colorations anyway, imo. There's no such thing as truly neutral, imo. But that's another discussion for another time! |
"I see. I always thought it was the amp not driving the speakers properly, and that the amp was introducing its own set of colorations."
That's true, as well. But for the purposes of this discussion as to how important the preamp is, we're assuming the amp in question is getting the basics right. I can't speak for anyone else, but I made that qualification in my first post. It was actually the first thing I said.
"01-26-15: Zd542
Assuming your power amp has no trouble driving your speakers and it doesn't do anything really bad sonically, I would say that the preamp is easily more important."
So the basis for my discussion begins with an amp that is sufficient enough to get the basics right. Actually, now that we are looking at this again, all the components need to get the basics right. If you have a bad or mismatched component, it can ruin the sound of the whole system, regardless of how good the other components are. Sorry if there was any confusion on that point. Hopefully, my comments make a bit more sense now. |
Gentlemen, there have been lots of interesting responses, but may I point out the possibility, especially given the first sentence of the OP's initial post in the thread ("New in the field"), that the OP may not have presented his question as optimally as possible.
It seems to me that what he is really trying to determine, with respect to his main system (and in addition to the recent question about bookshelf speakers for a second system), is what can he do for $1500 to best upgrade the specific equipment he presently has.
It seems to me that many of the 70 responses posted so far, while of academic and theoretical interest, are too general in nature to be of any practical value in this specific case.
IMO. Regards,
-- Al
|
Al, would you prefer members simply tell the OP to buy x, y, z preamp or
power amp? No one outside the OP can possibly know what will work best
in his system, or what will give the best bang for his buck. Nothing short of
a home audition of a component is going to prove anything one way or the
other. All any member here can do is share there own view which should
atleast help steer the OP in the right direction. Then again, he might simply
find the many contributions of academic and theoretical interest only as you
postulated.. |
That's true, as well. But for the purposes of this discussion as to how important the preamp is, we're assuming the amp in question is getting the basics right. I can't speak for anyone else, but I made that qualification in my first post. It was actually the first thing I said. Ok, thanks for your reply. That's true, you made that clear from the get go. I was just relaying my thoughts and experiences. :D |
"If you are seeking optimum performance it is not wise to over or under emphasize any component."
+1 with Doug here. I'm of the "everything affects everything" school. |
I don't disagree with your overall point Al, but I think this thread may be of more use to the OP than you may think. If the OP wants to get into high end audio, he might as well see what it is first hand. We all disagree on issues, sometimes greatly. The reason for this is that we all have different tastes, there's a huge variety in equipment, huge differences in price, component matching is critical, and most importantly, the real possibility of spending a lot of money and failing. Audio is very hands on, and its not easy. Most new people don't realize, generally speaking, that as the price goes up, the more difficult it is to put a system together. That's very counter-intuitive to what the average person with little experience may think. Even if we are not directly answering the OP's question, hopefully he can read between the lines on some of this, and consider some issues that he may not have otherwise. How many times have we read posts where people with little experience go out and buy something expensive, and end up struggling with it because it wasn't a good choice? To the OP's credit, he has been responding, so if he's not clear on something, or has other questions, it looks like he won't have a problem raising an issue. |
Thanks, ZD. I see your points, and I agree. And my intention was not to demean any of the responses that have been provided.
My point, which I don't think is inconsistent with yours, is that there can be occasions when it is more helpful to answer a question that presumably should have been asked, rather than to focus too narrowly on the question that was asked. And focusing too narrowly on a question as presented may in fact steer the questioner in the wrong direction.
For example, in this case the preponderance of those answers that have directly focused on the original question, "what is most important: a great amplifier with a good preamplifier, or a good amp, with a great preamplifier," would pretty clearly steer the OP to direct most or all of his anticipated $1500 investment toward a new preamp. Yet quite conceivably the weak link in his system may be the speakers, as he now appears to be suspecting (in fact he has just started a new thread about a vintage speaker), or perhaps even the CD player.
I'll say also, adding to your point about the value of the thread, that I was remiss in not mentioning that more than a few respondents have in fact made some potentially valuable suggestions from a perspective that was specifically relevant to the OP's situation, yet did not focus too narrowly on the originally stated question. Including Atmasphere, Mesch, Swampwalker, Newbee, Jmcgrogan2, Minorl, Electroslacker, Mapman, and myself, among others.
So it has been a worthwhile thread in multiple respects.
Best regards,
-- Al
|
Here is the answer .what came first ? The chicken ? or the egg ? |
"02-01-15: Maplegrovemusic
Here is the answer .what came first ? The chicken ? or the egg ?"
Neither. Its a trick question. The cables came first. |
02-01-15: Maplegrovemusic
"Here is the answer.what came first?The chicken? or the egg?"
The rooster came first... ; ^) |
I've noticed that you can ask a question, sometimes specific, and get 10 different good answers or oppinions.
It sounds like Al was the only one to research the op's set up. Im too lazy to do that so I commend Al, lol.
I agree with Mofi, Al and Mapman.
Hey Al, how are his dac's? Im thinking that might be a useful upgrade around $300-$500 of the budget... |
B_limo, thank you kindly. Regarding DACs, as you may have seen the OP doesn't have a separate DAC per se. He has the built-in DAC function of his CDP, and a DAC function that is provided in his vintage Sony preamp. I had suggested earlier in the thread that it might be worthwhile to compare sonics between the CDP's analog outputs and connection of the CDP's digital output to the Sony's digital input via a digital cable.
Regarding the purchase of a separate DAC component in the price range you mentioned, it's hard to say. A concern I would have, though, is that whatever benefit that DAC may potentially be able to provide might be limited by some combination of the jitter, electrical noise, and impedance inaccuracy of the CDP's digital output. A lot of people here and elsewhere have reported that digital transports often seem to make more of a difference than DACs.
Best regards,
-- Al
|
In old vintage days we didn't even know what preamp was. The amplifier had both in one. When both components sound good as one, that's called a 'Bull's Eye' no matter how important/or not or cool/or not they both are. |
"A lot of people here and elsewhere have reported that digital transports often seem to make more of a difference than DACs."
In the words of the famous secret agent/audiophile Maxwell Smart:
" I find that hard to believe!"
Not that people report it, more so that it is in fact a true assertion.
I'm sure significant differences with sources to DAC are possible. So you never know. My experiences using various good quality (not necessarily expensive and in good working order)source devices with various DACs in recent years though are not consistent with that assertion though. FWIW. But hey, I am just one sample set. I'm sure it happens. |
Preamps tend to screw up a system's sound more so than amps (unless you have a really cheap non-hifi amplifier).
You simply can not build a great sounding system without a really nice preamp.
If you are building a system from scratch and only have so much money to spend, I would recommend spending the money on the preamp and make a good selection for an inexpensive yet good, sound amplifier & small speakers. You'll be much more satisfied with the results.
Or, just buy a nice Integrated amp and your problem is solved : ) |
Yup. if I was starting over from scratch and had 5K to spend
my 1st purchase would be the best 3K integrated I could find. |
Schubert, I have to agree with your general recommendation of an integrated solution. I started out with a Nakamichi Amplifier One which I loved. I owned that amp for 18 years before buying a Class Cap-2100 which was also fun. I now own a Vitus SIA-025 which is the best integrated amp i've owned & competes with high end seperates. I like the fact I was able to put the savings from 2 less high end cables & a set of iso feet into the rest of my system. |
Audiophiles love to make things complicated.
Integrated gear does the opposite and the technology has improved immensely over the years.
Don't forget the DAC these days when integrating. if you are old fashioned you might even want a phono front end integrated in still as well. |
Melbguyl, congratulations on your Vitus integrated amp purchase. I looked it up and it is a beauty along with excellent reviews. At a price tag of a mear $28,000, it should qualify as one of the best, if price dictates performance. Is it designed with a volume control on a power amp or is the preamp section active?
It may appear that John's earlier integrated amp recommendation as a resolution to the OP's situation, does have its merits. In fact I have recently gone with an integrated amp to simplify my system and although it doesn't cost nearly as much as the Vitus integrated, I like the way it sounds! Mine is the dual mono Onix (made in England) rated at 120 watts per channel, plenty of power for my current needs. No I have not sold off the separates but they have been gently stored in the closet for now. |
Hi Phd, thanks for your congrats. The SIA-025 is a lovely sounding Class A amp. It's a sizeable investment, though compared to many high end separates it's still a good value proposition imho & one of the most musical sounding ss amps i've heard (especially paired with a VA Signature Series cdp). Btw, I think the US price has gone up to $30k.
The SIA-025 uses a simplied relay-based volume control and balanced input buffer drawn from the SL-102 pre, whilst the output stage is drawn from the SM-010 mono's. So yes has an active preamp section.
The SIA-025 is surely one of the best integrated amps, though there are many other great ss and tube integrateds including the Burmester 909 Mk5, Soulution 530, Ypsilon Phaethon, Kondo Ongaku & on the more budget side, Vac Sigma 160iSE. I haven't heard of the Onix, but will read up on it when I have a moment! |
02-07-15: Phd
It may appear that John's earlier integrated amp recommendation as a resolution to the OP's situation, does have its merits. In fact I have recently gone with an integrated amp to simplify my system and although it doesn't cost nearly as much as the Vitus integrated, I like the way it sounds! Mine is the dual mono Onix (made in England) rated at 120 watts per channel, plenty of power for my current needs. 02-11-15: Melbguy1
The SIA-025 is surely one of the best integrated amps, though there are many other great ss and tube integrateds including the Burmester 909 Mk5, Soulution 530, Ypsilon Phaethon, Kondo Ongaku & on the more budget side, Vac Sigma 160iSE. I also have gone to an integrated amp, apparently on the super budget side, a VAC Sigma 160i. I'm very happy, and have sold off my separates. It makes life a lot simpler, and I now know I'd have to at least triple the expense to top it. Yes, integrated amps can be beaten, but one has to be ready to pay a LOT more money. |
02-11-15: Jmcgrogan2
I also have gone to an integrated amp, apparently on the super budget side, a VAC Sigma 160i. I'm very happy, and have sold off my separates. It makes life a lot simpler, and I now know I'd have to at least triple the expense to top it.
Yes, integrated amps can be beaten, but one has to be ready to pay a LOT more money. Jm, the Vac 160i could only be considered a "budget" alternative against something like a $73k Burmester or Kondo amp, or maybe $30k Vitus. In fact, your commments suggest it should be on par wit the Vitus...at under half its price! |
No David, I just find it amusing that a $16K integrated amp (VAC Sigma 160iSE) would be considered a budget component. I wonder how many other folks would consider a $16K integrated amp a budget component.
It all depends on your point of view I suppose. Some could call the $30K Vitus a budget component compared to the Kondo and Burmester! |
After reading some comments on amplifier, I really wonder what mechanical/electrical/audio miracles have been performed , knowing the fact that the laws of Physics are still the same as they were 20/30 years ago, metallurgy has not come up with new alloys, to justify the cost in ten of thousands of dollars. As Mr Carver demonstrated, by building an affordable amplifier, of which the sound could not be distinguished from an extremely expensive name amplifier that was being compared to(mid`s 70 )!
The fact also remains that the human auditory system is very limited in scope, unless your name was Beethoven, or Mile Davis,for example. Just wondering.....So if I was able to spend 5/6 grands on an amplifier, I would probably buy a Carver amp...I can already feel the wave of outrage from all the AUDIOPHILES coming at me....OHLALA! |
As Mr Carver demonstrated, by building an affordable amplifier, of which the sound could not be distinguished from an extremely expensive name amplifier that was being compared to (mid`s 70)! To clarify some points about that: What Carver did, actually in the early and mid-80's, was to tweak the "transfer function" (the relation between output and input) of one of his amplifiers to match the transfer function of the highly regarded Mark Levinson ML-2 solid state amplifier (as chronicled in "The Audio Critic"), and subsequently to tweak the transfer function of another of his amplifiers to match that of a well regarded Conrad Johnson tube amp (as chronicled in "Stereophile"). His demonstration consisted, in addition to some ABX testing, of providing the two amps with the same input signal, and showing that when the output of one was electronically subtracted from the output of the other, essentially nothing remained. More precisely, a null of greater than 70 db was obtained, at least in the ML-2 comparison. There were two major problems with all of that, however: 1)The tests showed, at best, that the two amps nulled against each other just with one specific speaker load, which was used in implementing his tweaks. 2)Credible anecdotal evidence subsequently emerged that he was not able to maintain anything remotely close to a 70 db null in production. Bob Carver essentially admitted this in an interview which appeared in "The Absolute Sound" about two or three years ago. Regards, -- Al |
"New in the field. I am wondering what is most important: a great amplifier with a good preamplifier, or a good amp, with a great preamplifier? Or should I look at a good amp with a great do certain brands make amplifier to go with preamplifier and receivers?
Thank you kindly.
Rockanroller"
You will never admit this to yourself, but your attitude will never let you succeed. Ever. You'll hear something that will sound good to you, but you will never let yourself enjoy it because you're committed to believe some crap test from the 70's that you probably didn't even read. Since when does Mr. Carver speak for the entire audio industry. And your vast knowledge of the human auditory system is no doubt, at the cutting edge of science.
Unfortunately, your attitude is becoming more common with people, almost on a daily basis. All the sudden you become an expert in a field because you read an article or 2. (I'm assuming you can read. I'll give you credit for that). But in the end, the only thing that you've proven is that you know how to make a fool out of yourself. In your first post, you claim to be new to audio. And now all of the sudden, you're at the cutting edge of what's possible. Sometimes I laugh at people when they try to pull this sort of thing, but in your case, I honestly can't. I feel like I would be making fun of a handicap person. I'm not kidding either. I really mean that.
"I can already feel the wave of outrage from all the AUDIOPHILES coming at me....OHLALA!"
So? Who cares anyway? If I were you, I would be more concerned with having some respect for myself. If you can't do that, you'll continue to lose. |
Zd542
I think that all the answers were great!
But you lost me with the respect "innuendos".
So sorry to have offended you.
Just so you know, most of the music I have listened to sound warmer on older equipment.
Here is an excerpt from Lincoln Gray, Ph.D., Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, James Madison University on neural auditory system:
The Range of Sounds to Which We Respond; Neural Tuning Curves
Our absolute threshold, the minimum level of sound that we can detect, is strongly dependent on frequency. At the level of pain, sound levels are about six orders of magnitude above the minimal audible threshold. Sound pressure level (SPL) is measured in decibels (dB). Decibels are a logarithmic scale, with each 6 dB increase indicating a doubling of intensity. The perceived loudness of a sound is related to its intensity. Sound frequencies are measured in Hertz (Hz), or cycles per second. Normally, we hear sounds as low as 20 Hz and as high as 20,000 Hz. The frequency of a sound is associated with its pitch. Hearing is best at about 3-4 kHz. Hearing sensitivity decreases at higher and lower frequencies, but more so at higher than lower frequencies. High-frequency hearing is typically lost as we age.
In conclusion, no I am not an expert,and I am cognizant of that fact, however, like you said, I read a lot. And thank you for humoring me as well.
Thank you for taking the time.
Respectfully,
Long live Rock and Roll!
Good bye. |
Almarg
thank you kindly for the "teaching moment" about Mr Carver.
Much appreciated.
Rockanroller. |
ZD- I'm always eager to listen to someone who is passionate and not afraid to express their opinion, but really the only thing that you've proven is that you know how to make a fool out of yourself You off your meds again ;-) Give the guy a break. We wring our hands about the shortage of new blood in this hobby and then someone new comes along and you $hit all over him. You're entitled to your opinion and even to express it honestly, but that was a little bit over the top (IMO). Rockanroller- There are no stupid questions. Lots for all of us to learn. Except ZD. And Bo. Steer clear of Bo. He'll have you spending $20K on cables for your $5K system. |
"You off your meds again ;-) Give the guy a break. We wring our hands about the shortage of new blood in this hobby and then someone new comes along and you $hit all over him. You're entitled to your opinion and even to express it honestly, but that was a little bit over the top (IMO)."
Normally, I would agree, but in this case I think my comment was justified. The OP starts the thread claiming to be new to audio and is looking for advice. Nothing wrong with that. That's what these threads are for. But if you read his last couple of posts, its clear that he wasn't being honest with us. He had his mind made up right from the start. All the sudden, he starts preaching about science and psychology, 2 topics that he clearly knows very little about as you can see from the ridiculous info he references. So, if he was honest with us right from the beginning, that's fine. He didn't do that, and I don't like being tricked. |
I didn't take it as trickery (meaning deliberate) at all. Just a guy who is reading and learning and listening and expanding his horizons and may go down a few wrong paths. I'm quite a cynic but I didn't read it that way. It can be hard to discern intent w/o facial and verbal cues; I could be wrong. Happened once or twice...since dinner ;-) |
