Tubes Asylum

Questions about tubes and gear that glows. FAQ

Return to Tubes Asylum


Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Wavelength VS Art Audio

202.89.253.198

Posted on March 29, 1999 at 20:41:22
Velvet


 
I'm thinking of getting either the Wavelength Cardinal XS or the Art Audio Diavolo (out of tons of others) off course I would love to get the normal 300B for more fun in tube rolling but I've heard quite a bit of good things about the Art Audio (TAS, Alex of Hovland) so I would like to have some input about both before I make the decision. Off course I'm not limited to these two amps as any other suggestion would be helpful! Thanks!

My associate equipment (no, not the Blue Circles):
Altis Reference DAC (tube output, off course)
Hovland HP-100 preamp (not available yet, but I've pre-ordered)
Reference 3a Royal Master Control Series 1 w/ Foundation stand
Audio Note AN-Vz and AN-SPz IC and speaker cables

Happy listening!

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
Hard Decision!...but is it..., posted on March 29, 1999 at 22:04:38
Bryan F.


 
Let's look at the output tubes first. First of all the WE300B is suppose to be musical and more lush sounding when compaired to the more anilitical tubes like that of the VV300B or VV52BX. Both of which reside at the more anilitical end of the SET spectrum. Yet, they are also musical.

However when the WE300B is set into the socket of a Cardinal XS a weird thing happens. Bass and treble extension are excellent, and detail of the highest degree are present. Gordon somehow managed to find that anilitical side of the WE300B that I have heard from no other amplifier. Yet, it sounds unforced and is simply magical. Especially if used with as much silver wire as possible. Or other silver wired components that is.

Now I am living with the VV52BX as we speak. The amplifiers in which they reside(Welborne Apollo II's w/upgrades) remind me of the Cardinals and they don't. As they have the super detail and almost as well extended treble. However they boast a better low end and a higher dynamic level. The midranges are very similar.

Now the Diavolo is like the Cardinals in that it is detailed, has good treble extension. Again not as good as the Cardinal but very close. Expect better bass output from the Diavolo. But in the end both present music very differently. As even though one excels in one area over the other and vice versa both will feel well balanced but in their own sense.

The Diavolo will offer more power and work with most 88-89db or better speakers. Also the Diavolo is more dynamic. However the Cardinals have more finesse. Hmmm I seem to keep going back and forth. The point is both are different and the same. They both are on the anilitical side of the SET spectrum. They both aren't "stereotypical" SET's. As they both offer high resolution and both bass and treble extension. Also when compaired to other "stereotypical" SET's they do have some virtues of push-pulls to a certain degree and boast less drawbacks of again "stereotypical" SET's. However they are far from pp's. They are indeed SET's. They are the new breed. Breaking the mold.

My suggestion is a careful audition of both. As even though they are brothers of the same family. They are as different as brothers of the same family can be. Both allowing for a window into the music. Just a very different one.


 

Thanks! More info......, posted on March 29, 1999 at 23:11:05
Velvet


 
First of all, thanks for your speedy reply!

Since you've mentioned Welborne Lab I might as well say this... In fact I was also interested in their Laurel IIX Ultimate or the Apollo II but since quite a few people are against them (no body are against Wavelength somehow...) when I ask for opinion I kinda back off from them. I do hope having some opinion from any happy Welborne user like you! Also have you compared the Apollo II to the Wavelength Napoleon (that's what I original wanted to get..)?

The most important thing is, I'm in the SET hell where I can't have any audition on ALL of the above, (although I've listened to the Cardinal XS a year ago and have loved it) And besides, I'm going to the land of tubes (Japan) next month and work for a few months so I might be looking at some famous SET amps like the Yamamoto (anyone heard of it? hehe) there too!

P.S. I've just got a 50' RT Audio 12AU7(model forgotten) for my CJ and it sounds SOOOOOOO good...... more to come! :-)

Happy Listening!

 

Re: Wavelength VS Art Audio, posted on March 30, 1999 at 02:05:30
Hi there,

>>>>I'm thinking of getting either the Wavelength Cardinal XS or the Art Audio Diavolo (out of tons of others)<<<<

During my research for the Design of my own "Ultimate" 300B SE Amplifier I did also spend some serious time looking at what Art Audio and Gordon do.

From this look, I personally would feel that if the additional Power is not an issue the Cardinal is much preferable.

With only two stages (one a 6SL7 SRPP) and an excellent Powersupply based on high quality Film-Cap's, I almost copied it, deciding not to only after EXTREME deliberation (and because I thought I could better - deluded and megalomaniac Infdividual I am)....

The Art-Audio uses the classic Japanese "Ongaku" style Circuit, having a 6DJ8 SRPP Input, 12BH7 Voltage Amplifier and 12BH7 Cathode-follwer directly coupled to the output Valve. The signal has to negociate at least two capacitors more and two Valves more than in the Cardinal.

So, unless you need the additional power, I'm certain that the Cardinal will be the Amp to much better showcase the delicacy, the holographic soundstaging and so on, that SET's do so exteremely well....

As for the Power, I use DIY Copies of the Wilson Audio Watt/Puppies. I have the ability to adjust my own Amplifier to a wide range of Operating Points. I have tried everything from 450V//80mA down to 350V/65mA where I left it, because it sounded best.

The difference in maximum Power is notable (with 450V/80mA The Amp can produce 18W @ 10% THD) on the test-bench. In my own system, the percieved difference in available loudness was nearly zip....

BTW, I use Svetlana Output Valves, which sound great.

Later Thorsten

 

Re: Wavelength VS Art Audio, posted on March 30, 1999 at 04:40:12
Jack G


 
If you need the power, go for the Art Audio(tho several people have called it "dark"). The Wavelegnth is very detailed, but not analytical with WE300Bs. Again it only has 7-8 watts depending on output tubes. If you go with art audio or welborne, I believe that locks you into 1 choice of tubes(KR) where as the cardinals give you more options/flavors to choose from.
good luck,
Jack

 

Re: Thanks! More info......, posted on March 30, 1999 at 05:15:25
Bryan F.


 
I haven't heard the Wavelength Napoleon's I'm afraid. I wish that I could hear more Wavelegnths. One of the reasons why people like Wavelegnth is because Gordon is a genius. For not only his circuit designs but also he has helped design several tubes. Like some of the KR's and WE's I believe.

I haven't heard any bad things about Welborne. As it is hard to compare a $2000-3000 Laurel to a $5000-7500 Cardinal. I love my Apollo's. Some will not as for one main reason. That being they are 25 watts. Many go down in power. As once one has the thirst for cream they usually want more and more refined cream. Translating into lower and lower power ratings. As for me I need double digit power(my speakers dictate this being 89db). Well, not above 30 watts but I still wanted high refinement. The Apollos do just that. The design is of course is more complex than that of the Cardinal. On the other hand they sound damn good. Allowing one to obtain a lot of things that only lower powered and higher powered amplifiers are known for. As they boast a very very good low end. They are extremly dynamic. Still retain what I consider to be an almost perfect midrange but with less bloom than most 300B based amplifiers and a little less lush. Then again the midrange is still lush and warm and can bloom more depending on what active preamp you use.

Thorston stated that the Wavelegnth Cardinal's are better. Well, I don't know as the Cardinals are more refined. Offering a lot of SET magic. Also the Diavolo uses like he said, "the classic Japanese "Ongaku" style Circuit." Kind of like that of my Apollo's. IMHO the Cardianals are more of a best of the low powered SET's while designs like the Diavolo are best amplifier period type designs. Meaning that the Cardinals will leave you and will appeal to hard core SET fans wanting refined power. While the Diavolo's, Apollo's, and yes mighty KIR's will appeal to those looking for the best of both worlds. Which are amplifiers that are considered to offer more than just SET traits. Lot's of SET's are offering these.

Like Gizmo told me on 11/22/98, "I know nothing about the KR52, but will stand by this statement...there is a refinement/power continuum and you have to decide where you need to be...KR2A3 is too refined and not powerful enough for me, and I love the 300BXL."

The point is you also need to decide where you want to be. As while we will knit-pick which is best. Lower powered or higher powered, well below 32 watts that is. It is up to you to determine what is best for you. Doing so by looking at what both trade off.


 

A further thought, posted on March 30, 1999 at 05:46:42
Jack G


 
The cardinal XS has a better power supply than the regular cardinals. It has all silver wire, including the output trnasformer if I'm not mistaken. I'm told this gives it a hellovalot of dynamics, and makes it seem more powerfull than it is.
enjoy,
Jack

 

Page processed in 0.014 seconds.