|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
206.188.229.200
I think that the resident experts (I use this term with the utmost respect) on this forum have made it abundantly clear that while the Sherwood S-5000 may be very good, it is not in the same league as the vaunted Harmon Kardon Citation II.
This begs the question; How does the Deuce compare in terms of sonics to modern offerings from Carver, Decware, McIntosh, BAT, Jadis, Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, Ayon, and many more. I say in terms of sonics because there is no way the Citation II comes close with its fit & finish (except Jeff's). Let's face it; It was designed with the sex appeal of a torque wrench.
The modern amps pictured, while not exactly the same surely would be close enough for comparison as they are medium large push/pull tube designs.
One would surmise that while the HK Citation II was/is a great amp, that technology and innovation have caught up with and surpassed it, if only by 5 to 10%.
Just curious........
Meat; It's the right thing to do. Romans 14:2
Follow Ups:
Can you run it without a preamp in passive?
If not what preamp is typically used?
Just curious if that would also drive up the cost to have one?
charles
As long as all your sources are "line" level, a passive control center is fine working into a "Deuce". Unlike many other amps, the I/P impedance is high enough to allow comfortable use of 50 Kohm controls.
If you go passive, keep the cables between control center and amp short and LOW capacitance. Unshielded, braided, construction yields the lowest capacitance.
Obviously, LP playback requires a phono preamp.
Eli D.
Of course. The cit I pre has been reissued by VAS for only $7k. HW called it one of the finest preamps he ever heard
For $7k it better sound good, clean my yard and massage my prostate!It's numbers like that, that I have to start agreeing with my wife. You're making me start a bad president.
Edits: 12/09/14
Mentioned it because of the doubters who seem to feel that a II is not worth restoring
Hegeman was an interesting designer, ahead of his time in many ways
Just use a nice integrated amp like the S5000 or others, picking based on your power requirements. You will get 70-75% of the sound of the separates and only spend under $1000, fully rebuilt, fully tubed, and you will enjoy your music and spend your money elsewhere. Chasing that last 25% is very expensive. The little integrated amps are very musical.
Yes, you can run the II with a passive pre. I have a little one with an Alps volume pot in it that doesn't sound bad at all. That said, when I hook up a Citation I, or one of my two custom built 6SN7 based line stages it sounds much better to my ears. But my little passive is just for testing. I suppose if I put together one with a really good volume pot, or better yet a great attenuator it would be better. I am happy with my active line stages though....
I tend to prefer a preamp, but I also like to have tone controls and must have phono preamp. I would think it would be hard to go wrong with a vintage HK preamp. Eve Joe "R" liked them!
Dave
I built a 76 tube line stage. The 76 tube is very linear. A few main amps sounded a little more dynamic with the line-stage. Of course, a preamp of low quality would not outperform a passive input.
I have read about those but I don't think I am ready for a ground up build yet (and I do mean yet!).
Dave
I see we are on to another thread along the same lines....
1. No one ever said the Citation II was the best amp in the world. Just that it is a really good amp.
2. If you can solder you can rebuild one for about $700-725 in parts and you may have to spend money on tubes, that would run $250-300 for all of them.
3. If you paid $1000 for a core - you can get them for less if you watch, you will have roughly a $2000 amp. If you have to pay someone to rebuild it then you will be spending $1200-1400 more unless you find a friend. It really takes 35 hours if you rebuild the whole thing and test it. You certainly don't have to do that. You can just recap it and you will have a nice amp. If you do the whole thing it will be better.
So you will end up with an amp that costs somewhere between $2000 and $3400 or so. When I get a core for a reasonable price and fully rebuild it, repaint the transformers, install modern 5-way gold plated speaker terminals (usually Superior Electric ones), and add a really nice power cord (Belden 16 gauge, shielded), and a CCS you get a killer amp that costs about $3300 out the door with new everything. You can certainly do all of this yourself for less.
At $3400 you have a choice of some really nice amps. If you want a really pretty case, then sure, find a Mac, or a Jadis, or the Bob Carver amp. More power to you. I would read the history of the reliability of Phase Linear and some other companies though. All of these amps will be really nice amps. Which one you will prefer will depend on many things. The Citation will probably be the most neutral sounding of the bunch. That may, or may not be your cup of tea. That doesn't mean it is better or worse than others. That is just the best way to describe the sound. It is incredibly detailed without ever being bright. Some people prefer a warmer sounding amp. Macs for example, sound a bit warmer. It depends on your taste and your system. But what most of us are saying is that the Citation II will hold its own against any amp. Sure, if you want to spend $10,000+ I would hope you get a better amp. At $2000-3500 all you will get is a different amp, not a better one. It may be an amp you like more. That's great. It is all a matter of taste. But, yes, the Citation II, when properly rebuilt, will not be embarrased by any amp at any sane price. Sure, if you have incredibly inefficient speakers in a large room and 65 watts is not enough, then you are not going to be happy with a Citation II, even if it can do 150 watt peaks. It isn't a 400 watt SS amp. But, as was mentioned in the previous thread, there are some classic amps that have stood the test of time because they are really good. A Citation II is one of them. So is a Marantz 8B, and others people can list. A Citation II deserves to be on that list. That's all.
Don;
How would you rank the deuce's baby brother the Citation V, in the pantheon of great vintage amps?
Could you characterize its sound?
Thanks.
Meat; It's the right thing to do. Romans 14:2
I happen to have one of DSL's Citation V. It is a real good sounding amp and with my 26 tube preamp it is even better(the preamp being part of the sound).
With that said, I never heard a stock V so I can't compare it to anything except what I am hearing now.
Sorry! I meant DLS!
Not sure I want to start another craze:) The V is a great amp. It is about my favorite of the more conventional tube amps and will do about 53-54 watts/ch after being rebuilt properly with the McShane kits. Jim and I have worked out the CCS tail for that one as well. We also have a way to convert the two input tubes to regulated DC filament. These changes along with the power supply upgrade bring the amp into a pretty special class. They image superbly.
I would say that if the imaging on a properly rebuilt Citation V with all the tweaks is a 10, then a Citation II is a 9.5-9.7. That said, the Citation V simply does not have the detail or just plain effortless sound that the II has. At the risk of igniting another thread.... In my system I can hear subtle details and shadings with a Citation II that I have yet to hear from any other amp. I love the Citation V, but it cannot quite do that. A citation V will smoke an ST-70 though, to my ears. Again, you asked for my opinion, so take it as just that. The rest of the amps all sound just a bit veiled to me compared to the citation II. I think Samra and a few others will agree with my take on the Citation II. Mike has every piece of tube gear known to mankind, or at least has had them roll through his house. He uses Citation II amps in his main setup. Others of course will disagree as it should be. The V is among the best of the rest, especially given the price difference. But you have to do some things like add an overall bias adjustment pot so you can dial the whole supply up or down to match a quad of tubes. I do the same in the S5000. They were built to a price point. For a few dollars you can add some features that make them better from a biasing perspective. No, I am not saying the V is quite in the class of the II or the 8B or some of the best Macs or (insert your favorite holy grail amp here) you get it. Just that it is a fantastic amp when rebuilt and tweaked and can be done for far less money than some of the others. You put a good preamp in front of it and don't ask it to drive 2 ohm speakers and you will be very happy, and 50+ watts of 6L6 power sounds very, very good.
Can you give insight as to the type and where to get the Superior Electric binding posts. Thank you in advance
I use the BP-30 posts as I recall. Look on ebay and you may find some older style ones for a good price. The newer ones are available from the usual sources like Allied, but are pricey.
Here is a modern listing :
http://www.newark.com/superior-electric/bp30r/binding-post-30a-8-32-stud-red/dp/35F3006
If you look on ebay you can find surplus ones for $5 or less a piece, but you may need to buy more than you want, and it is hard to buy black and red. Sometimes I use white for the ground with two reds on a channel for 4 and 8 ohm taps. I can buy many so it is ok because I know I will always use them eventually. That allows a good price. The Chinese copies are not as good of course, but for speaker terminals on an amp they are just fine. That is your call. I cut a bunch glass epoxy board plates that are the same size as the originals. Then I mark and drill a pair, taped together. You can mount three posts and it will barely fit. Then just make a terminal for the 16 ohm tap/feedback look connection inside the amp. You may have to nip a little of the inside backing plate on one post with a grinder to keep it from hitting the screw, but not much and it is inside the amp so not visible. It all works well. I attach the transformer leads to the terminals with crimp ring terminals. I solder the leads to the terminals after crimping to make sure they have a great connection to the ring terminal. There are little tricks to making it all work well, but I have worked it out after doing literally dozens of amps that way...
Hi,
I am probably going to differ on the "deuce" induldgence to some extent as built in this forum.
I personally find the amp a little hard and grainy probably a function of my preference for electrostatic speakers( fully updated Quad ESLs,USA Monitors and Beveridge Model IIIs) and bias against push-pull 6550s. That said, updated + the price of the core I don't think you can beat it for price/performance in today's market place. I mean where can you get a meaningful USA made designed amp for $2500 with the iron ,power and the quality of the Citation II?
I have a fully restored Citation II done up to Level II mods with parts provided by Jim McShane ( I have not heard or experienced Jim's latest thinking on his most recent mods).That unit was stripped down to the core chromed and relabled and rebuilt from the ground up keeping just the high power resistors which were fine. Jim is a wonderful resource for the Citation community and the Tube "nuts" in general. I am a delighted customer and have purchased parts and tubes from Jim over the years. We should be extremely grateful to Jim's commitment and dedication to the community and the Citation line up in particular- really!
I just don't cotton to the Citation II sonic signature. I think there are better amps (to me) out there in the vintage realm- Admittedly at lower power. Most certainly there are modern amps that are far more interesting at higher prices.
What are my references?- well the electrostatic speakers above + Dyna audio C4's, Wyetech 211 Topaz, Berning Zotl, Futterman H3, Marantz 2,5,8b + a 3 chassis 100+lb phono stage and more. ( BTW the Mc225 is killer if you can live within its power limitiations) I've owned and sold Sherwoods and Fishers although I love the Sherwood S3000 mono FM receiver.. real nice.
Food for thought YMMV and all that...!
If you want to read the other side to the argument, do a search on "Citation" authored by Joe Rosen. Be forewarned, his views are very controversial and he doesn't hold back. It is an interesting read. I personally have no opinion on the subject since I have never heard a Citation amplifier or preamp.
Dave
Hi,
I am not trying to defend or attack any amp, nor do I have any agenda, but I have read most of Joe Rosen's stuff and over the past 5 years I have heard many of the pieces on his list. When I first started reading I thought he knew what he was talking about. After making my way through a number of pieces that he commented on I would politely say that I disagree with the great majority of what he wrote. I sometimes wonder if he and I listened to the same gear.... We shall leave it at that.
cheers,
Don
Hi there,
I have actually met Joe and we have listed to systems together including mine. He actually does know what he is talking about and I can understand how someone could form an opinion on Joe's musings based on his colourful posts. I believe there are reasons for his perspective and his delivery of his perspective that include audiophile experience and other factors.
You've kind of got to cut throught the internet showmanship before you can pass judgement... which is difficult or impossible based on the fact that few , if any inmates, have ever had the opportunity to meet him.
I am text book educated in EE and Joe could certainly show me a thing or two. I am not a desinger but Joe actually could be .
Anyway, I don't particularly agree with his posts about spontaneous combustion of the Citation II but can see how someone could arrive at at his conclusion or opinions based on construction techniques and front end and final stage circuit design and parameters for the Citation II. It is a matter of taste and implementation driving a sonic result that you may or may not like.
At the end of the day if the Citation is the best amp you've ever experienced then you will be happy.. if you have had experience with numerous other amps and arrive at another conclusion then that too is valid and adds to your overall impressions as you develop opinions of character and how amplifiers contribute to the room-speaker interface.
Thanks.
I have no doubt that Joe knows a lot. He loves to push buttons with his language. But I rebuilt a number of things he talked about for various customers and listened to them and formed completely different opinions. I really don't care whether he likes what I like that is fine. But he panned a number of things I thought were pretty good. Cannot even remember models anymore, been too long. I just dimissed his rants after I found otherwise a few times.
As for the clarity of the Citation II, well that is pretty much what everyone thinks. You may or may not like that sound. That is also a perfectly valid point of view.
I did not describe the sound of the Citation as exhibiting clarity
but I did imply that we have different opinions.
I would also be surprised if you cared or preferred what Rosen or anyone else exactly cared for. We all have our biases.
I don't believe I inferred that we should believe him at face value rather that he does have experiences that would lead him to a specific opinion on his sonic bias. Real world experience is what matters in the context of many systems and exposure to as much hardware as possible.
I think we are saying the same thing with regard to preference.
Cheers.
Hi
No, the post below described it as clarity so I was responding to two at once. Yes, I agree that everyone has their taste. I just got a little tired of the Rosen rants. His style got a little tedious. What bothered me about it was that he panned a lot of very good amps and then some newbie might read his stuff and dismiss some really good pieces based on Joe trashing them. A citation II is just one example. Anyway, different strokes as they say.
cheers,
Don
IMO he blew it on the VM series of amps with the PP 6AQ5. An incredible amp? Are you kidding me? With the best tubes and coupling caps it is mediocre at best.
As for the Citation II I heard, it was completely rebuilt with different than factory stock coupling capacitors. Never heard a factory stock Citation II thus perhaps that clarity I heard was from the new parts & select tubes. The audio iron was performing.
You will never hear a "stock" Cit II amp. The youngest one in the world will be about 50 years old in 2015, so if the original parts are still in it they are shot anyway. As soon as you replace the 50 year old parts the amp isn't stock anymore.
On the coupling caps - because they are all inside multiple feedback loops once you get to a certain level of cap performance that's all you need to do.
I have never met Joe face to face, but we have exchanged emails, and he can be a lot nicer one-on-one, although he did send me some rants, which actually I appreciated. He and I do disagree on a lot of equipment, but I don't have a problem with that, even when he gets "passionate". My options are base on years of listening, including years of selling audio, where I was listing to equipment all day. I also played the piano and clarinet, my sister played the piano and violin, and my mother played the piano. My father raised me on classical music, and I have been attending concerts since I was a child. I know what real instruments sound like. I know what a lot of equipment sounds like. I am confident about what I like, so it does not bother me if people disagree with me. If anything, I enjoy being challenged, as long as it remains civil. This is one of the things I love about the Asylum!
With Joe. I do pay attention to his criticisms and see if I can hear the problems that he talks about, and see if it bothers me as much (usually not!). However, I tend to pay more attention to what he likes. He was spot on with Quad ESL speakers, B&O cartridges, Dynaco tube amps and Spendor BC-1's (which I own, partly because of his recommendation), to name a few. I strongly suspect he is right about Marantz tube gear, but unfortunately, I have never heard any of it.
I debated with myself, whether I should mention him, but I thought that the original poster wanted a balance of opinions. I was trying to do that. I did not want to stir up a hornet's nest and meant no disrespect to anyone's opposing opinion here, which I do respect. I hope no disrespect was taken.
Dave
Hi Dave,
You are a complete gentleman and no offense whatsoever taken. I just wanted to point out that I disagree with Joe on the sound of a number of pieces.
As an aside, I know you mentioned Quad ESL speakers. I have customer who has a Citation I/II pair that I rebuilt for him who listens to it through a pair of totally restored Quad ESL 57 speakers. He absolutely loves the combination. Either with his DAC or the turntable through the phono section of the Citation I. He said that a fellow came out from the local high end stereo dealer to install his tonearm and then they played it through the above system and the tech was absolutely floored by the sound. He was used to selling some pretty high end modern equipment, but had never heard properly functioning vintage tube gear. As usual, not saying a Citation I/II is the be all end all, but if clearly competes favorably with very expensive modern gear. I am sure the perfectly functioning pair of Quads had something to do with that too!
cheers,
Don
Hi Don,
- I just wanted to point out that I disagree with Joe on the sound of a number of pieces.
Me too! Remember what he thought about an LP12? I have one and I love it! And don't get me started on idler drives! I have a Rek-O-Kut ... I think with Joe, if he didn't love something, he hated it. There was no middle ground. He is not the only person I know like that. He was also averse to anything that was very popular. Still, he also had some excellent insights.
Having worked with Quads (ESL 63's), I have to say that anything that sounds good through them is good! They give no quarter!
Dave
I heard a rebuilt Citation II and it was the most crystal clear amp I ever heard and apparently devoid of any coloration. A relaxed yet dynamic amplifier. I have not heard any recent amps on the posters list, but have heard the Bob Latino ST-120 with upgrades.
One thing about the revealing nature of the Citation II, when you feed it a poor recording with garbage in it, the amp faithfully reproduces all the signal. A poor recording that may be tolerable with some other amps, Will have you reaching for the kill switch with the Citation, but it is not the fault of the amp.
First one has to define better. Some may listen to a rebuilt Citation II then listen to another modern tube amp and prefer the modern amp, and some vice versa. But if comparing what an amplifier feeds into a fine pair of speakers and doing live vs recorded music testing, ie faithful reproduction, then the Citation II is a difficult if not impossible act to follow. And we are just talking about replacing old parts with modern parts, increasing capacitor values in the power supply and minor power supply and ground changes tweaks that help extract greater performance of the amplifer circuit without any changes to the actual amplifier circuit. The Citation II was designed by Stewart Hegeman a genius which any field of endevor counts itself lucky if one comes along once in several generations. Does this mean everyone should like the amp, no! we don't all like the same food, clothes, cars, and ect. The Citation is just about faithful reproduction, some like a little more or less in their music.
I own two Duces. One in being packed for Don to rebuild this week. My "good" Duce is in fairly good working order. I did a McShane basic rebuild. And it sounds good.
I had a ARC VS60 in my system for a few weeks and liked it very much. There are new "used" amps reasonably priced that are very pleasing. As good as a Duce with a full rebuild? Maybe.
One new amp that I think would better the Duce is the deHavilland Audio KE-50A. $10K new. Every time we go to RMAF I think it has best of show.
I sold Kara a Fisher 50a many years ago. ;^)
In my opinion(mine only probably) you are more than correct in your assumptions but that doesn't take away from the fact that a Mcshane modded, Samra modded. Sachs modded, or for that matter, any modded piece of gear that one would think is improved upon is the same as the original. If it is better by changing parts values(as in some RIAA circuits) or adding capacitance where it wasn't before, then it isn't the same. If you change parts values it isn't the same even if it makes it better. Making something better than original takes the originality of it and changes it. Changing parts to the original values because of age or just plain not doing its job is keeping the original integrity of the gear amd making it operate the way it was intended.
Just because it still says Dynaco, HK, Marantz on the chassis doesn't make it so but it is easier to say something of the past is modded so many think it is the original but better
Like a vintage vehicle. If you upgraded the electrical, motor, interior, or whatever else you can think of, is it really the same as original or is it better? Probably better but not original.
Just my thoughts!
With all that said HK Deuce is really good but is it the end of the road? Only the listener can decide. It has a whole new life because of these people that can take a good sounding whatever and make it sound better.
As long as the circuit isn't changed then adding capacitance, changing parts quality is sort of upgrading not truly modifying as in some Dynaco mods where the actual circuit topology is changed and the amp is not really a Dynaco any more. And how would you listen to a 'stock' Citation today. You have to upgrade tons of parts to replace parts that have badly deteriorated.
Hegeman's design violates many modern "rules". IIRC, he uses triple nestled feed back loops. Modern designs go for zero FB designs. My guess is given parts variance of the time and being a kit with variable construction, it made for guaranteed performance
When MFA stripped off their OT. They built 120 monoblocks with them.
As long as the parts being changed goes back to the original value all is good. Adding UF's and resistor changes of different values does change the way the operation of the unit is which is different from stock. How much? Will it sound better? Maybe!
Consider teflon's and many other plastics were not available when the cit II was developed. No 6N wire either. 1% resisters, fat chance.
A citation circuit is still very viable when parts are simply upgraded. In fact the vast majority of tube designs are very old. Strange how many desire NOS tubes, too.
Yeah we got FR type solid state rectifiers. S/S regulators, but many still embrace the older tube technology (ever look at a Grommes 260 or Altec 340?)
Few remember early MFA amps.They first cannabilized Altec/Ampex OT. Then W6 then Citation II. Made pickings scarce...
With audio, I am generally wary of that.
Dave
When you hear a "Deuce" in good repair, you'll know. :> D Sound wise, the H/K Cit. 2 has no betters and damned few equals.
Pretty to look at does nothing for sound. The quality of the magnetics used is key to good results. The "iron" in a "Deuce" is among the very best ever. Frank McIntosh's unity coupled stuff is about the only challenger.
Eli D.
I would add the OT from the Heath W 6--certainly the equal of the HK OT.
Even. Better IMHO
Eli;
Are you saying that tube amplifier designers have essentially gained nothing in the past 55 years with push/pull tube amps regarding sound quality? Have you listened to quite a few of the newer amps mentioned in the OP? I have only heard a couple of them, and never in my listening room.
I'm curious because I have recently acquired a HK Citation II.
It is a decent looking stock unit with after market tubes - nothing special.
In order to get it "McShaned" as you guys say, I will probably have to spend $800 to $1100????? Then I will need to strip the chassis, do body work if needed, prime, paint, decals, clear coat, etc...... Who knows what the final outlay will be?
I am starting to wonder if it's worth the time and money IF there is equal to the deuce for anywhere near the money. It may seem superficial, but when I get North of a certain dollar amount it is no longer enough that a piece of gear sound great; It has to look great as well.
I love the look of Bob Carver's tube gear.
Meat; It's the right thing to do. Romans 14:2
What is the power output of a duce that has been restored with all of the McShane/Samra mods?
A typical fully modified unit will put out about 65 watts RMS per channels vs about 60 RMS stock. That's really an inconsequential difference. What does change is the peak power - stock the Deuce was rated at 130 watts per channel peak, after our work they do well over 150 watts per channel. The full power bandwidth is from about 15 Hz to about 40 KHz.
The THD at 60 watts per channel is around .2%, stock was .5%. At 1 watt the "McShaned" units produce about .03% THD.
I think I answered your question, but if not post what areas I missed!
Thanks for that information Jim.
I don't believe a modified deuce is any more powerful than a stock unit - 60 wpc.
Four KT88's are four KT88's.
Meat; It's the right thing to do. Romans 14:2
"Four KT88's are four KT88's."
But the voltage and current supplied to them and the conditions under which they operate can vary!
Thanks Jim for making restoration of the HK so much more simpler.While I initially bemoaned the rise in prices, it really was no worse than when MFA was recycling those transformers. I realize now it simply extends great tube sound to a much wider audience.
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: