Ayre V-Kxe and Thiel 2.4s

As Atkinson noted in his technical review of the CAV50, "On the test bench, the Conrad-Johnson CAV50 delivered a just-to-spec 53Wpc into 8 ohms (17.2dBW) for 1% distortion, midband. Loaded down to 4 ohms, it measured 78Wpc (15.9dBW) single-channel, showing a respectable load tolerance for a tube amplifier. The output rating fell 1dB with both channels driven (eg, to 16dBW, 40Wpc, at 1kHz). At low frequencies (20Hz) the amplifier clipped at 36W (15.6dBW) (which isn't bad), and raised 65W at this frequency into 4 ohms (15.1dBW). At the other end of the audio band, the amp delivered a true 56Wpc at 20kHz into 4 ohms at 1% THD, with 45W available into 8 ohms (16.5dBW). This is a good result, confirming low shunt losses in the output transformer." I have had audiophile friends both of the tube and solid state culture, listen to this system and they all are impressed by the results. I get decent bass response, not up the level of my Krell/Thiel CS6 system, but convincing enough, and the notes are felt as well as heard. Incredible midrange and high end. I think it's the power supply and the output trannies that make this amp a gem.

Apologies; it was Martin Colloms, not John Atkinson who made those measurements.

Bottom line is that more power does not necessarily translate into improved sound with the 2.4s. I failed to mention earlier that I have also owned Musical Fidelity's 250 wpc, Krell's 150 wpc and CJ CA200 185 wpc integrated amps with these same speakers and, by far, and to my ears, the CAV50 outperforms the other sonically with these same speakers. It simply provides that "ahhhh" factor much better than any of the others; I know I was hoping that either the CJ CA200 or the Krell integrated would be preffered, but such is not the case. What I also know is that the 2.4s are nowhere as diffcult to drive as Thiel's older models, such as my 6s, which I power with a Krell 400cx. The 2.4s are highly, and I emphasize, highly, revealing of the quality of the power feeding them.

With all due repect, and despite the included commentary in those test results, those measurements aren't exactly impressive; clipped at 36W (15.6dBW) ("isn't bad", really ?), and well below Thiels recommendation. If anything, perhaps it's the power supply and output trannies that make this amp perform so poorly on the bench?

Here is Stereophile's measurements of the the Thiel CS 2.4s:
http://www.stereophile.com/content/thiel-cs24-loudspeaker-measurements
I think it fair to say, that it doesn't appear to be that easy a load for a typical low powered tube amp.

Hi Unsound,
It would seem(once again) that actual performance and listening in one`s system is far more meaningful than speculation based on measurements. Steve has actually compared the CJ amp to'3' more powerful SS amplifiers and the CJ sounds better(is`nt that the point of audio gear). Regardless of what'should' be the result based on amp power and supposed speaker requirements. What is there to debate or question other than your own personal belief that the 50 watt tube CJ should`nt outperform the bigger SS amplifiers. Should steve disregard what he`s heard in his own system? Why question his real life results?