|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
32.212.12.192
In Reply to: RE: Beg to differ posted by unclestu on July 25, 2015 at 14:46:58
I won't get into the sweet sound debate, which is subjective, but the Heathkit UA2 monoblock was a very fine EL84 amp, more conservatively designed and operated, did not have the problems that the ST-35 had, and did not require extensive redesign/rebuild. I known that Dave O'Brien, who conducted the McIntosh clinics, had a high opinion of the UA1 and 2, and had a chart of it in his book as an example of an excellent competitor's amp.
I don't recall doing it back in the day -- probably because I wasn't much impressed with the ST-35 -- but I would be confident putting a pair of stock UA2s up against whatever has been done with the ST-35.
Follow Ups:
Yes ! UA-1 and UA-2 were fine performers...very favorable reports noted through the years. Original Quad ESL owners loved the UA amps.
I imagine a Dyna ST-35 built with twin power trannies, as in dual mono, with more conservative B+ HV operating points (i.e. choke input filters), independent bias for each channel, plus beefy power supply cap banks could be even more favorable...
nt
The Dyna SCA-35 had a lot of issues with heat. The ST-35 was a different animal. Same outputs but with a 7247 input, whereas the SCA 35 had a 7199.
The ST-35 ran hot, baked, cracked and warped circuit boards and burned up output tubes. There are several accounts to that effect right here.
The arguments seem to be that, if you do A, B, C and/or D, the ST-35 can be a good amp. My point is that Dynaco did not do that and the amp, as designed and built, had serious problems. If you were selling stereo equipment responsibly you would not have recommended it, and I didn't.
Worked on several St-35's. two were bench amps for a repair shop and on all day 6 days a week:
No burned boards.....
You're not differing. I said cracked and warped, not burned, circuit boards, and there is other testimony to that right here. I said burned with reference to the output tubes.
Our bench amp was an MC225. No problems there.
If you run tubes as hot as Dyna did with the ST-35, the circuit boards of that time were a poor choice, as experience with the SC-35 has shown. I think that was the main reason for my indifference to the Dyna at the time. However good it may have sounded, it was not going to be reliable. When you sell the things, that is important.
During my time in the business, when it came to kits, I spoke well of Heath basic amps, confidently sold EICO kit amps, integrated amps, tuners and preamps, and sold the occasional Dyna to those who insisted on it. My own gear was Mac.
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: