Sound difference between SET & SEP

Can anyone describe the differences between these two topologies ? I have read that SEP is supposed to be a high power version of SET . Does the circuit change affect the sound ? If so how ?

Thank You
Hi...I apologize for asking this..but what is SET and SEP?

I've red about them both, but don't know what they mean.

Thank you in advance.

Single Ended Triode )45, 2A3, 300b type tubes, among many others)
Single Ended Pentode (EL84, EL34, KT88 type tubes, among many others)
Same topology = SE.
Different type of tube = T or P.

SEP = more power? Yes and No. Depends on the tube. A SEP using an el84 will have less power than SET using a 300b.

Each tube (T or P) will have it's own flavor.
Different brands of the same tube will have their own tone. Same type of amp but from different manufacturers will have its own sound due to power supplies, transformers, etc.

I like the SE approach with a 300b triode being my favorite but I have preferred a couple of PP amps using el34's and el84's to a SE amp using a KT88. My current "work in progress" is a PP 300b, theory being, I get the 300b triode tone but more power for speakers that could benefit from it. So far, so good.
Hey guys , I am sorry for this post . I had emailed Audiogon and asked them not to post it as I had worded it incorrectly . I guess they didn't get the memo !

What I really wanted to know was the difference in sound between a single ended circuit and a single end parallel circuit (SEP). I have read where some don't like the parallel circuit as well and did not understand why .

Thank you
The preferred acronym for what your referred to as "single-ended parallel" is PSET, "parallel single ended." SEP usually is intended to mean "single-ended pentode." Of course this convention collides when SET, usually intended as "single-ended triode" is instead used to refer to "single-ended tetrode."

There's nothing wrong with a well-designed and executed PSET circuit. You need precise matching of components in the circuit to maintain the incisiveness and purity of a simple SET implementation of the same tube, but these are matters of execution that *may be* expensive.

A poorly-executed PSET circuit will introduce some blurring of the sound spatiality and some subtle smear in transient definition, compared to the same design in a simpler SET implementation using one tube of the same choice. A poorly-executed PSET circuit using 300Bs can also fail to manage the rising deep bass distortion of that tube. On the other hand, my Audion Golden Dream PSET 300B monoblocks clearly outperform the same company's excellent SET 300B monoblocks that are one step down in their line, within the power limits of the lower-output amps, including delivering the best deep bass I've heard from a single ended amp using the 300B tube. If you don't like PSET compared to SET, you just haven't heard the parallel instance executed to a sufficiently high standard.

Thanks for the clarification .
Can you speak to the ability of the Golden Dream to handle larger drivers , 10" and 12", at low volume ?

Thank you.

My PSET 300B amps output 24w. They pair well with both my Zu Definitions (2x10.4") and Zu Druids (1x10.4") at any volume level from threshold of listening to max attainable volume before clipping. There is no special problem relating to low volume levels, larger drivers or a combination of the two. If you have such a problem with a PSET or SET amp, it's probably with a crossover-based speaker wherein low volume musicality may be robbed by the passive crossover, its inefficiency and its phase nonlinearities.