Why not more on 845 SETs?

Beats me. I have a pair of 845 SET monoblocks, designed and built by a friend, that will drive my Gallo Reference 3s to really stentorian volume levels. They replaced 140 wpc Conrad Johnson Premier 12s in my system because they simply blew away the CJs, which are certainly not bad amps. Dave

Whoa there. Some of us like the sound of 845 SETs better than the 300Bs. In my case in a three-way comparison in my system between the CJ 12s, a modern SET 300B stereo amp, and the 845 SETs, the 845 was the clear SONIC winner. I know, YMMV and all that, but I've never heard a 300B amp -- not yet anyway -- that can compete with my amps. And certainly not a PP version.

The new 845B and 845M (I haven't heard these yet) tubes from SuperTNT are rewriting the book on what can be expected from new-production versions of these tubes. The 845Bs are $150/pr. There is absolutely no reason to invest in NOS 845s, IMHO. And even the best current production 845s are dirt cheap compared to 300Bs.

Springbok, I got mine via the website but haven't been there lately. Don't think they have any distributors. Sorry I can't help.

Twl, you seem to be writing off the use of SET amps with "conventional" speakers and I think this is needlessly restrictive. This is, or was, certainly the conventional wisdom and helped keep me from enjoying SETs for a long time. Then I discovered that certain speakers, despite their moderate sensitivity levels , were extremely SET friendly. Examples of such speakers from my personal experience are the ProAc Response 2, Response 3, Gallo Nucleus Ultimate, and Gallo Reference 3 (my current speakers). How can you tell which conventional speakers are going to be "SET friendly?" Well, you can start with something in the 88db sensitivity area whose impedance rarely or never dips below 8 ohms and whose crossover networks are very simple, but mostly you have to listen and see (or rather, hear). I'm sure glad I did. Dave