2. amps-preamps
  3. 1257069072

SET the best?

Is SET amplification where we should all end up? I keep reading posts where people tell of their journeys from plenty power to micro power, and how amazing SET amplification is 45 set 211 set 845 set otl, and usually, ....with the right speaker. I have yet to read of anyone who has gone the other direction from SET, to High watt beast class A amps or others.
If your speakers can be driven by minimal wattage, is this the most realistic, natural sound we can achieve? versus say, 86db sensitive speakers and a 1000w amp?
Is the end result solely based on speaker pairing? circuit? tubes?

I am in the process of changing my direction in my search for realistic sound, just because, and wondering if this really is the best direction to be going.
From what I have been reading I think it may be.

What do we get with SET? What do we give up?

What's you favorite color?
hanaleimike

Showing 12 responses by alexberger

alexberger
855 posts
 
Hi @atmasphere ,

Yes it is true. There are a few SET friendly speakers on the market.

But the hard to drive tower speakers like Wilson and Dynaudio will always sound compressed, and too loud at 95dB+ volume even with 1K watt amplifier.

I think a  low sensitive speakers fashion is a huge delusion of Hi-End market .

Regards,
Alex.


alexberger
855 posts
 
Low sensitive tower speakers + super powerful transistor amp = COMPRESSION!!!!!!!
Oppressive, tedious, non-natural sound.

Most of audiophiles have zero experience, with high sensitive speakers.
The reason is - all high sensitive speakers (excluding Klipsch) are not mainstream today.
When I first time (17 year ago) listened Lowther in Oris 150 horns with 2a3 SET monoblocks, I felt like a middle-age knight who saw a tank :-)
I understood that anything I heard before where toys (including Montana, Wilson Audio, Martin Logan, Dynaudio, Spendor, Focal,....).
alexberger
855 posts
 
All these manufacturers are very small compared to mainstream manufactures like:
Dynaudio, Focal, B&W, Kef, Monitor Audio, Elac....
alexberger
855 posts
 
IMHO,
SET are most transparent, best in texture and tone, most organic and musical.
They need sensitive speakers. But in any case, the sensitive speakers are MUST for any good, musical system.
SET sound quality depends a lot from parts quality: tubes, transformers, capacitors, resistors,... So a good SET can’t be cheap to built.
SET are best for acoustic music: classical, jazz, vocals.
If you listen electronic music, POP, rock - there are better options than SET amps.
I will never go back to transistor amplifiers and low/mid sensitivity speakers.
Regards,
Alex.
alexberger
855 posts
 

I'am agreed it is not good idea to use full range speakers in parallel with tweeter.

Tweeters shouldn't play anything below 10KHz.

That is the reason why most of famous producers like JBL, Harbeth, Tannoy use super tweeters with 3rd order high frequency filters.

When 2 driver play together in upper midrange up to 10KHz it leads to distortion, harsh sound, ruins soundstage, lack of smoothness and mask details.

 

Regards,

Alex

alexberger
855 posts
 

SET roll off highs ?

My SET has bandwidth -3db from 7 Hertz to 95K Hertz. 

alexberger
855 posts
 

For me looks very weird that someone who was SET fan suddenly became digital amplifier fan. I can't say that SET are better or worth than digital amplifiers. But they are so different. These amplifiers topologies work best for completely different music, completely different speakers and completely different people.

It is like after be sport car fan become big SUV cars fan. 

alexberger
855 posts
 

As ASIC chip designer I can add. For any chip production you need to produce millions of chips of this particular model. Otherwise you will lose a lot of money.
For example, companies like Chord who made FPGA based DACs use FPGA for their custom DSP algorithms. Thay do it not because FPGA is better than ASIC. It is opposite in ASIC is possible to get in many times higher performance.
But they do it because ASIC production need to produce millions ASIC chip.
Therefore nobody does produce a special chip for audio!

alexberger
855 posts
 

Hi @ron1264 ,

I'm not an expertise in Class D amplifiers.

But all of them digital and PWM are very different from SET.

For example, most of SET fans use high sensitive speakers like: horns or full range drivers. And they like these speakers not just because they don't need huge power amplifier - but because dynamics, texture, transparency advantage over mainstream low sensitive speakers.

I can't imagine any benefits from class D for high sensitivity speaker. 

About analogue chips for audio. Any small production parts "for audio" will cost crazy expensive. Look, for example , at prices for AN Kaisei electrolytic capacitors precising vs regular electrolytic capacitors.

alexberger
855 posts
 

I want to add vintage speakers to the list, like:

Altecs - VOT A5 A7, 19, Valencia, 604.

Old Tannoy - Silver, Red.

Old JBL L200.

Used full range: Lowther, Klangfilm, Telefunken.

 

New full range drivers like:

Audio Nirvana, Lowther, Fostex, AER, Voxativ.

 

I use myself Altec 604E. They can be driven easily even by 45 tube.

 

alexberger
855 posts
 

One of the first versions of Altec 604 from 40x.

 

alexberger
855 posts
 

Hi @mozartfan ,

845 tube needs ~10KOhm output transformer that has more narrow bandwidth compared to 3.5K transformer for 300B, 5K transformer for 45 or 2.5K transformer for 2A3 tube. 

So, if you have high sensitive speakers in a small room I don't see any reason for 845 amplifier. Not just because price.

More to discover