|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.57.202.100
Has anyone done a meaningful comparison between these amps? I would think it would be a very interesting listening test.
Follow Ups:
I have a pair of Mid Monos and will say that they come up short *no where*. They have driven ZU Omens, B&W CDM-1's, Harbeth Monitor 30's, Merlin TSM mme's and Von Schweikert VR4jr's with ease and grace. They respond well to tube rolling... Just a great sounding amp. Support from the manufacturer has been stellar. Mike stands behind the amps and the configuration he ships them in.
Do I want to try the ST-70? H#LL YES!
Brian
at the same time. The Dyna has the same VTA input board and large can cap that Latino uses as well as Russian oil caps, that he recommends, triode switches, and generally high quality parts. It does not have the nice Latino stainless steel chassis, high capacity power transformer or brand new output transformers. It does have the cloth lead output transformers and the largest stacked of the original Dyna power transformers. Additionally the board was set up for low gain using 12AU7 or 12BH7 tubes, the stock Latino setup is the same board but set up for high gain using 12AT7 tubes. In this context high and low are misnomers as the low gain board actually has more gain than a stock ST-70 and the high gain has screamin' more gain than that.To cut to the chase, the Mini Mites smoked it in all of the audiophile approved ways. Much, much more extended on the bottom, with much better slam and quite a bit more extended on top, with clearly better dynamic contrasts. The only, and I mean only, place that the Dyna bettered the Mini-Mites was in the continuousness of the midrange and the ability to seperate midrange instruments.
I'm sure you know where this is going. Not being an audiophile, I kept the Dyna, though I imagine that most listeners would choose the Mini-Mites. It's nice to have two such marvelous choices around.
BTW, I have no idea how this translates to the full Latino rig vs. the Mid Monos, not being an audiophile and all.
Edits: 03/23/12
I can only say that the Latino's have in spades what you found lacking in your rebuilt ST70..... extension,slam,etc. In addition to superb midrange performance.
So are you saying that you compared your Latino to the Mini Mites or Mid Monos and did not find it lacking in those areas?
No, if you reread my statement above, you'll find no mention of Mini-Mites or Mid-Monos. All I'm saying is that the Latino amps do not lack dynamics, drive or extension. How do they compare directly to the Mid-Monos? Don't know, never directly compared them, but hopefully someday I will.
I have not made the comparison. However, given amps of comparable quality, I would always pick a monoblock over a stereo amp.
Hi,
I own a pair of the mid-mono's and agree that it is a a seriously good product period. It easily runs Quads 57's, Harbeth HL5's. Tried it with NOS 6lcgc's, el 34'2, GE 6550's. Gen. reissue kt 88. Works nicely with them all. Add some NOS driver tubes and you're set.
I'm running Mid-Monos with Genelux KT-77s, driving my Tannoy Canterburys.Not sure I've heard any amp close to their price that I've liked as much.
In fact, not sure I've heard many amps at any price that are enough better to justify their price.
Way more performance for the money than most, IMO. However, this is not a comparison to the Latino amps which I've not seen nor heard.
One thing that may or may not be important - Mike Sanders builds near bulletproof products and he has supported them and his clients for many years.
Best regards,
Jim Smith
Edits: 03/22/12
I own both the Latino's' and find them to be superb amplifiers. Both are switchable to triode. The ST70 gives up a little in power to the ST120, but has the option of using many different power tubes from 6L6 thru KT88. On this note, I've used the KT120 in the ST120 with good results as well.
Although I've never owned a Quicksilver amp, these ( V4's or 88's) probably would have been my first choice had funds permitted years ago. My friend had the Mid-Monos and wish he'd never sold them. I believe these can use a variety of output tubes as well, but might not be triode switchable. The ability to use different outputs trumps triode switching for me, but I'm sure others may disagree. Bottom line, I don't think you can go wrong with either. Both are strong reliable no frills designs. The Quickies will have an edge in resale on name recognition. Good luck...both are good choices.
Mick, thanks for the reply. I should mention i will be using spica TC's. I am currently running them with a rebuilt counterpoint sa20 amp. so, my concern with lower power is of course dynamics and headroom. the spicas are about 85 db efficient.
Are you running TC-60's ( the newer design) or the older TC-50's?
The newer TC-60's with a rear port need extra power, and, IIRC, the recommendation was 100 watts per channel in order to have better control over the bass.
The older TC-50's had a power recommendation of 50 watts, and indeed extra power for rock and roll could often blow the drivers.
YMMV
Stu
I think any of the amps mentioned will work just fine. I remember the Spica as being a speaker of finesse....as opposed to a headbanger. The ST120 running KT120's might give you a greater sense of ease with a bit more headroom. That said, the ST70 running KT88's can sound much stronger than its power rating and I'm sure the same can be said for the Mid Monos.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: