|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.28.123.119
Dynaco A25 speakers were designed for tube equipment mid-late 60s like Dynaco PAS 3 and ST 70. They were a little earlier design than the...
Large Advent loudspeakers, which were designed for early 70s solid state equipment, and Kloss ads stressed how nicely they paired with a 20 wpc Solid State Sherwood S-7100A or Pioneer SX-525. I think some of the Advent ads even showed a 7100A. Of course, as budget receivers of the period go, the 7100 A was conservatively rated.
I recall some detailed posts by Bold Eagle discussing differences in damping factors between 60s tube separates and solid state receivers from the 1970s, and how the same speaker could not work equally well with either type of amplification, even if both were big-woofer 2-ways.
Am I wrong on all of this?
Now that you guys are getting 60s tube amplification running, the A-25 suddenly become the speaker to have.
David
Follow Ups:
To David, and all the rest.
The A25 and A25XL used a 10" woofer with no low pass filter - they just let it roll off naturally. The tweeter was then blended in with just a series R (switchable) and a series capacitor. The contemporary KLH 17 did something very similar; but used a cone tweeter with some compensation networks, although the basic crossover was still first order.
Years ago, I had a chance to compare the two on both SS and tube amps. The A25's had stronger bass and a warmer balance, and the KLH 17's had a better high end. However, the SS amps were not direct coupled; but had capacitively coupled output stages; so the source impedance was more like a tube amp at low frequencies. Although the A25's had more and seemingly deeper bass, the KLH 17's had tighter and more detailed bass.
When the Advents came out, I compared the KLH 17's to the Advents using a Pioneer SX990 receiver, also capacitively coupled. They sounded remarkably alike over most of the range; but if really low bass was present, the Advents were better and more extended thanks to a larger cabinet and a 1/2" larger woofer cone. The A25 has a true 10" cone, the KLH 17 was sold as a 10"; but the cone is more like a 9 or 9.5". The Advent 10" has a slightly larger cone than the A25. It's all about cone size, not the frame size.
I have not done a 1:1 comparison of the A25 or KLH 17 with Advents; but I have done a modern direct coupled SS amp Vs ST70 tube amp compare with the Advents. The SS amp sounded better balanced and more accurate, the ST70 sounded overblown to me. Kloss stated in his literature that the Advents were designed for use with moderate priced SS receivers. The KLH 17 is a 1962 design, so it was surely designed for use with moderately priced tube gear of that era. My take on the A25 is that it was designed for the Dynaco ST120 amp. It worked well with tubes; but you have to realize that the ST120 was capacitively coupled at the output and advertising notwithstanding, at lower frequencies, the damping factor was higher and more like a tube amp at lower frequencies.
Jerry
Hi Jerry,
Advents may have been designed for use with moderate priced SS receivers, but to my ears, the sound best with a lot of power. I like around 60 watts or more (or an amp with a lot of headroom, such a NAD).
Dave
Good point about the capacitor coupling, Jerry.
I own A25's and it is one of those rare speakers that sound great on both tube and transistor gear. As long as you give it enough power (my SCA-35 was not enough) it will reward you with great music.
Dave
It is one of those speakers that works well with tubes AND solid state. High powered AND low powered amps, basically anything you throw at it, it plays well.
But the magic of the A-25 rests almost entirely on the woofer. The 25F-EW's design was one that they just got right. But Seas still produce some of the finest drivers in the market even today.
charles
We are lucky that Seas is still carrying the torch!
Dave
Agreed. Mine sounded soft and underpowered with the SCA-35. The A25 speakers came along in the late Sixties and seemed to be for the transistor designs like the ST-120 and PAT-4/5.
But the best combo I've tried is the A-25 speakers with the QUAD 33/303, a tip I picked up on this board from Brian Levy. Extremely musical combo to my ears.
So did mine, but that is because the SCA-35 does not have enough power to drive A25's.
Dave
Any speaker with big changes in its impedance curve will cause the frequency response of an amp with low damping factor(almost every tube amp) to vary, sometimes a lot. The A25 has only one bass impedance rise(ported speakers have 2) and its magnitude is reduced because of the 'aperiodic' bass loading so it will affect low damping factor amps less than most speakers. So in that sense it's a good tube amp speaker. But that doesn't make it a poor solid state speaker at all.
I suspect that the A25 has a tighter Q than the Advent meaning it inherently has tighter bass(this is mainly saying what I said above in another way). But that's good for almost all amps. Perhaps the tighter bass of the A25 will sound a bit too lean for most listeners who are used to less damped bass. And if that's true I bet those listeners will prefer the Advents on solid state amps.
I'm guessing Kloss' recommendations and the Advent ads were probably tailored to the Advent target audience which was the milddle-of-the-road buyer at the time. I remember the first time I heard the large Advents and that was at the McIntosh dealer who was using a 2105/C-28 combo. They sounded amazing compared to the AR2ax/KLH 17's I was used to.
And yet despite the look on my face, you're still talking.
Edits: 12/09/14
IIRC the whole gist of the Kloss ads was that you could put together a fine sounding receiver and speakers for about $400. That counted $102 ea for the two utility (vinyl) large advents plus $200 for the Sherwood 7100A or Pioneer SX-525. The little Marantz (2230 ?)receiver was $249 at the time I think so that setup would have been $50 extra.
changer/turntable and cassette deck were extra. I think the cheapest Dual maybe a 1214? ran about $120 and would have been a common choice. http://www.dual-reference.com/tables/1214.htm
Finding a Dolby-equipped cassette deck for under $200 was the tricky part
...CD player was even tougher!
And yet despite the look on my face, you're still talking.
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: