|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
173.67.8.174
Can someone recommend SET Monoblocks to drive Maggie 12s? I am looking for amp with great soundstaging capabilities with palpable well defined images. I am willing to spend up to $5,000.
Also are SET amps a subset of Class A amps? Or are all Class A amps SET?
Follow Ups:
I used an Accuphase A-30 with 17s, and it sounded good, but was not getting all the speakers had to offer. I replaced the amp with 400 w/ch, @ 4 ohms, Belles monoblocks, and the sound became much more dynamic, with good bass. Just before I sold the Maggies, and went back to Merlins (a personal favourite), I even listened to them with a 23w/ch push-pull Mactone MA300. The speakers reproduced the quality of sound that this amp is capable of, but certainly not to the extent that the Merlins do.
find a better match for them. Like a PP tube amplifier. While some SETs exist that can run difficult loads most do not and would struggle on maggies. I find the best match for SET amplifiers is loudspeakers that do not so cripple performance right from the start. The amp loudspeaker should be matched. Why limit your SET up. Or SET yourself up for failure, match the 2.
What makes you think a Maggie is a difficult load? It is one of the closest speakers out there to being like a resistor. An electrostatic speaker like a Soundlab...now that's a difficult load.
"What makes you think a Maggie is a difficult load? It is one of the closest speakers out there to being like a resistor."
Thanks for that, I was thinking that must be the case, at least for the panels themselves, but lacked actual knowledge.
I did try a pair once and liked their sound but only after I added a shunt resistor to clean up the highs. That usually means oddball phase angles are occurring but I didn't bother to sweep them since I couldn't get around them, they simply blocked too much of the gangway!
Regards, Rick
Owning a few pairs I found they sounded best with a good amount of power not the other way around.
Okay Morricab may not be reviewing anymore but he was and he's probably about as expert on panels as this forum gets on those speakers. If he tells you a SET can drive the ribbon it can.
How about Soundhounds in Victoria, British Columbia - who are a full service repair facility and can repair any panel and have been there since the early 1970s? See they carry big Meridian, Classe, Bryston, McIntosh, Sim Audio, Musical Fidelity, and Ayre. So many of these amps are what forumers blather on about "Maggies need 1000 watts" that gets regurgitated over and over by people who have never ever actually auditioned the stuff they rail against. How many for example heard the KR amp Morricab mentioned? How do you know until you do?
I went to CES and heard Magnepan with Bryston and it was at best "so-so" - the $30,000 amplifiers had the power to drive them I suppose but the result was uninspired (to put it nicely). I walk into Soundhounds and I see they have the 1.7 hooked up to an Audio Note SORO (18 watts Single Ended). Wow - for the first time I can hear why someone actually likes Magnepan (cause I sure didn't hear it the previous 20 years I heard them).
So why does this dealer waste all the extra electricity running the SORO with all the tubes on in class A (that wastes precious money on much higher electric bills not to mention tube life)? Because they can actually have a chance to sell them - and it doesn't make their ears bleed. Indeed, it's not a bad plug for the 18 watt amp either since it turns generally accepted myth on its ear. I heard this, the dealer selling it feels the same, Morricab has experienced it with, albeit a 30 watter but 30watts and 18 watts is 3db).
And Magnepan themselves right on their website not that they use a 40 watt RECEIVER.
Watts is not power supply. A quality power supply may in fact be needed to drive panels - but that's a very different thing that something that is rated for 300 watts at no specific frequency. One reason I suspect that many people find tube amps to sound like SS at 3-4 times the power is that you must use quality transformers in a "good" tube amp - which is not the case for SS to just get a high watt rating.
What perhaps has happened is that there are not a lot of good "cheap" SET or tube amplifiers and a poor power supply is going to have trouble.
But Magnepan does not present a vicious load - it's actually quite flat - one of the great things about them actually. So long as the amp has a four ohm tap (which the SORO has) then it's not going to have trouble driving them.
And isn't it about quality of sound over absolute max volume? The interesting thing with good SET amps is that I don't feel the need to crank it up to make things out clearly. SETs superior transient behaviour and "clarity" and "speed" allow the ear to hear what's on the recording - one doesn't need to crank it to try and get out from the MUD or to hear some semblance of the hall.
Interestingly the best I have ever heard from the B&W N801 was when Soundhounds was running it with an 11 Watt SET (Nuvista or Wyatech I forget which). Again a speaker that supposedly needs 1000 watts but never sounds very good - the 11 watter sounded really nice. Unfortunately, just not loud enough to justify the price - but maybe a more powerful (not necessarily more watts) SET would do the trick. Gaku-Ons at about 50 watts would do it. But then those prices don't justify a B&W.
RGA,
You make valid points, I don`t like the sound of many high power SS amps and feel a good built SET is superior in most cases when used with an appropriate speaker. Amp-speaker match is critical and some SETs won`t cut it with certain speaker load characteristics.I don`t doubt the examples you listed but in general most SET amplifiers are`nt an ideal match for maggies in most circumstances.
You make a valid point and then shoot yourself in the foot. Show me a speaker with a better impedance curve for a SET than a Maggie (ok Apogee but they aren't made anymore). Sure the sensitivity is somewhat low but with a line source you gain a bit back there. Also, electrostats don't work bad with SETs as long as there is no negative feedback.
Will they play as loud as a 500 watt Mcintosh? No, clearly not but so what if at a normal listening level the sound is so much better.
Morricab,
You and I don`t really disagree.Ideally SET amps work best with higher impedance/ sensitivity speakers(there`re always exceptions). I clearly stated that I believe certain SETs will work with maggies but others will struggle.There`s a wide range of performance and drive capability within the SET universe.My speaker is 14 ohm and 94db and simply soars with my 8 watt 300b SET,beautiful and effortless music.
Whatever SET sounds good with the maggie would sound better yet with a speaker like mine due to a more optimal load match/sensitivity.Would`nt you agree?
"Ideally SET amps work best with higher impedance/ sensitivity speakers(there`re always exceptions)."
I would make an exception to the first part of this sentence. I think it is more important that a SET see a FLAT impedance, which will minimize the frequency response errors that can be caused by having a high output impedance. If it is somewhat low doesn't matter so much because most tube amps have more than one tap to match better. Obviously a 1 ohm Apogee Scintilla would be a major problem, which I tried with the KR Audio VA350i. The friend with the Studio Grands and Centaur Majors ALSO has a pair of fully rebuilt Scintillas. Well, we got sound out but not much, no surprise.
I was friends with the late Allen Wright from Vacuumstate and he actually developed a tube amp designed SPECIFICALLY for driving Scintillas. He had a pair (as did his business partner Thomas) and they hated not being able to use their tube creations on those wonderful speakers. So, he did something about it. We tried it at my friend's and it definitely made the Scintillas sing. Think about it, a tube amp that put out over 100 watts into 1 ohm!!! It wasn't a SET but it was pretty good sounding. On the Studio Grand; however, the consensus of the listerners there that day (All Apogee or planar speaker owners) was that the KR made the best sound from the Studio Grands.
High sensitivity is only important, IMO, with non-planar speakers because good ribbon and electrostatic speakers work well at lower volumes due to lower mechanical resistances to motion. A typical box speaker needs a bigger kick just to make any sound, which is why most want to be played loud but a good ribbon or electrostat just goes down down down while maintaining the proper balance. Loud is not necessary for good clarity, tone and dynamic contrast.
"Whatever SET sounds good with the maggie would sound better yet with a speaker like mine due to a more optimal load match/sensitivity.Would`nt you agree?
"
Not necessarily. Many high sensitivity/high impedance speakers have serious frequency response and resonance/coloration issues. Very few are even remotely neutral. If I was going for a high sensitivity speaker to retire with I would either buy the Lansche Cubus or the Odeon No. 32. These are dream speakers...
Morricab,
There are higher impedance-sensitive speakers that are vey neutral and honest these days.Coincident,Horning,Ocellia,Tonian Lab,Sonist etc. that mate beautifully with SET amplifiers.They sound natural and offer realism not'hifi sound'. We both obviously appreciate good SET amps, we just have a different approach. I just believe a higher ohm load(that`s relatively flat) is ultimately more suited to these amps than lower ohm loads.Just my opinion that`s all.I`m sure we both will continue to enjoy our respective SET amplifiers very much.I use the Coincident Frankenstein MK II with Takatsuki-TA 300b tubes and it`s stunning!
Regards,
I am not saying that some of those high sensitivity speakers don't sound good...some sound very good; however, there are things a good planar speaker can do that they cannot and for many people's preferrence then a planar is a better choice. My point is that you CAN get stunning results from planars with lower power amps of the right design.
I have heard the Horning speakers and they are very good but if I was to go to that kind of speaker I would buy the Odeon No. 28 or 32. I have heard these with Einstein OTLs and it was one of the best sounds I have ever heard. I had for a while when I lived in a smallish flat in London a pair of Odeon's small bookshelf speakers, the Orfeo. It was a superb little speaker and of course mated will with my KR Audio VA350i. However, it doesn't have that special something I get from big planars.
I now have a pair of Genesis VI speakers and they do the planar-like thing but with an incredible bass foundation (given that it is fully active and servo-controlled it shoud be) and this probably has mostly to do with the fact that they are dipolar and use extremely good drivers of their own manufacture. They also work well with SET.
You dog!
One of the few speakers that can induce envy in Infinity owners...
Enjoy, Rick
Did I mention that I ALSO have a pair of Genesis III as well? Believe me when I tell you its a tossup which model is better despite the fact that the III is all passive. It goes easily to 25hz and having two dome midranges that go from 250Hz up to 4Khz gives a wide, uniform midrange and lower treble. That dome midrange is one of the least colored drivers I have ever (not) heard. So, even though the mids in the VI are very very good, I have to give the mids in the III the nod for being even more seemless. However; the IIIs are a pretty big speaker I must say.
It surprised me when I saw them for the first time in the flesh but the guy selling them had IRS Betas as well and so of course they looked small by comparison (that brought back memories of my IRS Beta days). I have to say that both Genesis speakers sound less colored than the IRS Beta. With the Beta, you get used to the coloration because its consistent from top to bottom but its there nonetheless. With the Genesis its not really there and the speakers disappear nicely.
"that brought back memories of my IRS Beta days"
The Betas were... Odd somehow. Every time I heard the IRS's I lusted for them but I've never in my life had a house remotely large enough to contain them (much to the relief of my pocket book). But the Betas were much more fittable and the debt wouldn't have been endless, however they just never sounded "right" to me. You'd think they would sound the same at moderate levels at least in the midrange but for me they didn't have IT. Every time I ran across them I tried my damnedest to like them but to no avail.
Today I still use Renaissance 90's and am happy to say that they don't sound like much. I think a lot of that is due to some unusually thoughtful design touches to minimize near-field refraction.
Regards, Rick
Well I agree. As much as the SORO made the 1.7 sound good - that is relative to how not so good they sounded before. But I think you're better off with a speaker like the one you mention. A speaker designed to "truly" show off what the amplifiers can do. And that isn't Magnepan IME.
Thanks for all for feedback.
Does anyone have an opinion on 805 SET amps? I red a stereophile review that used an 805 amp to drive Quads. If it can drive a quad, maggie 12s should be ok?
btw...i am already using 50 wpc six pacs to great affect.
do you mean the Cary 805 amps or amps that use the 805 tube?
If it is the Cary, they still call the model an 805 but they have been using an 845 and/or211 tube for a long time. Either way, I would recommend them for use with Maggies. I use them on my 3.6's from time to time.
There are reasons you can use an SET and reasons you can't. What I would want to know first off is...how loud are hoping to play "this" system?
That doesn't necessarily follow. Atma-Sphere M-60s can drive the original Quads but they don't work well with Maggies.
,
There are certain criteria which must be considered when matching system components.
SET amps and Magnepan speakers are not, never were, and never will be a good match.
You are getting all kinds of very bad advice a lot of which has nothing to do with SET amps. If you want to play around with SET amps get some high efficiency speakers. If you want to play around with Maggies get some powerful amps.
.
Well said.
"Far away across the field
The tolling of the iron bell
Calls the faithful to their knees
To hear the softly spoken magic spells."
Agree with bwb, SET can be very fine when used with appropriate speakers.The maggies don`t fit this criteria and will likely cause disappointment,this is`nt a good match.
wrong wrong wrong. Sure not all SETs need apply but there are some out there that I suspect you havent tried that will drive Maggies with ease. I was driving my Acoustats (a more difficult load in many ways) to quite high levels with my 30 watt KR Audio VA350i. It worked brilliantly and it also drove a pair of Apogee Studio Grands and the Centaur Major to moderately high levels in a large room (70 sqm.) The sound purity was exquisite and we were not listening only to simple music.
.
I and many others have tried tube amps of similar power and we all agree they were lacking. You are the first out of countless others who has described a low power amp that can drive this load with "ease." I suspect your requirements for acceptable sound may differ from the norm.
.
It is in-line with many of my friends. Only a few of them listen louder than I do on average.
FWIW, the guy with the Grands listens loud. I have heard them playing loud with a single pair of NAT SE2SE (rated 60 watts) and there were no audible dynamic limitations. We also played the same speakers with the CAT JL-2 and it sounded similar but ultimately not quite as good. He has reported to me that he drove them just fine with the SE1 as well (30 watts). Given my experience with the KR Audio VA350i and the Apogee Studio Grand and the Centaur Major, I believe him.
Also, this same person who has the Grands, what do you think he replaced in going with SET amps for his Grands??? 4 Krell KRS200 monoblocks, which were by many accounts the best amps that Krell made!!! He has also decided to bypass the built-in Krell tweeter amps so that he can use the NAT SE1s on the tweeters!!!! In his and my opinions the sound is a whole other universe better sounding. Not even close, the Krell setup (very expensive and powerful) sounded gray and mechanical with a bit of agression in the treble. The only place he has kept a Krell amp is with the subwoofers, which at the time I was there listening were not even being used (still under repair).
At my other friend's place with his Studio Grands (again full-range ribbons because he doesn't like the sound of the subs) in a room that is approximately 70 sqm. we were able to listen at moderate to moderately loud (95db peaks approximately) with no audible strain with my VA350i. In the same room, the Centaur Major was stunningly good (the ribbon on that speaker is really stellar).
In my own systems, I have driven to moderately loud (as defined above) levels with this amp on the following planar speakers:
Apogee Caliper Signature
Acoustat 1+1
Acoustat Spectra 2200
Acoustat Spectra 4400
STAX ELS-F81 (lower levels due to limitations of the speakers)
Not one of these speakers is particular easy (Calipers average about 3 ohms and Acoustats drop to 2 ohms in the bass and highs) to drive but I was able to reach close to 100db in my room at the listening position.
The Stax ELS-F81 will hit 98-100dB levels if you have the power. 30 watts is not even close. Try about 10 times or 300 watts to get the job done. With just 30 watts perhaps 85dB levels is all you will achieve before the amp starts to sound strained.
Edits: 09/11/12 09/12/12
Well, probably you are right but you have to remember that its sensitivity rating of like 78db was as an 8 ohm load. If you look at the impedance curve of the STAX you will see that it is MUCH higher than an 8 ohm load. Much. The bass starts at around 60 ohms and then peaks at around 500 ohms before dropping to 4 ohms at 20Khz. This means it is far easier for a tube amp to drive it (an OTL will be in heaven) than a SS amp of the same rating.
We used an number of high(ish) power SS amps to no avail. They universally made the speaker sound thin and lacking in dynamics with poor bass extension. No surprise as most SS amps are designed to push current not voltage and the STAX wants voltage.
The first time we heard the STAX sing was when we auditioned it (and this is why my friend bought it). It was hooked up to a pair of EAR 861s bridged to mono to give about 60 watts. Glorious sound!! My friend didn't have the budget for such expensive amps and went with the SS that he had. It didn't sound so good. Then we tried various other amps and the same mediocre/poor result.
THEN I had a big tube amp, the Golden Tube Audio SE100, which is a 100 watts of EL34 strapping tube ampage. This amp had a quite high source impedance (around 3-4 ohms) and was sounding too warm on most other speakers (I was driving my IRS Beta planar panels with it and it was ok in that context). We hooked it up to the STAXs and it was AMAZING! Bass went an octave (at least) deeper subjectively and everything became super holographic to the point on one recording make a virtual surround sound. Never heard that before or since. Instead of sounding overly warm it sounded extremely natural with great dynamics. We still weren't listening overly loud but with the STAX you don't need to in order to get full effect.
I also had really good results with the Vacuumstate DPA300B, which puts out only 18 watts. Played plenty loud enough and gave a similar holographic performance.
With my KR VA350i, the 4 ohm tap sounded like a slightly enhanced version of what we had been hearing with SS. Putting it on the 8 ohm tap changed things dramatically and we had awesome sound again. Perhaps it won't play as loud as the 100 watt Golden tube but it sounded just as good...of course this amp sounds dramatically better than the Golden Tube on just about every other speaker I have tried it on...including my Acoustats.
BTW, a very good SS amp for Acoustats is the BAT VK200. I bought one to try out and while not quite as good as the KR, it was respectably close and will of course play louder (but not nearly as much louder as you might think). My friend now has that amp and a pair of my Acoustats and it is a really good sounding system. I don't think he has tried it yet on the STAX but I don't think it will work that well...the impedance is just too high for the typically designed SS amp.
The Stax F-81 efficiency is 73dB/1w/1m. And you are correct this speaker will bring ANY solid state amp to its knees. Solid state is all wrong for this speaker and this would include the Stax DMA-X2. With solid state the speaker is flat, thin sounding with no bottom end.
When I first got my F-81 I was using a 65 watt tube amp. It sure sounded good with that kind of power but peaks were limited to about 90dB or so. It was not until I put 300 watts of tube power behind the speaker that they really started to sing.
Operating correctly and given enough power the Stax is one of the most impressive speakers I have ever heard. In many fundamentally important ways it is the best speaker I have ever heard regardless of cost or technology. I simply have never heard another speaker that can do what the Stax can do and every time I have demoed the speaker people are floored with their performance. Of course then they want to buy them. Sorry not for sale. Good luck finding a pair!!
The Stax will play loud given enough power, around 98-100db with 300 watts. It has legitimate bass, throws a massive soundstage and is 3-D holographic as any speaker I have ever heard. Add talk about sweet, pure and intimate!!! If one is using a transformer-coupled tube amp a 16 ohm tap is mandatory. Lower taps will not deliver the power and you are right back to the problems of ss amps. While the nominal impedance is 8 ohms in reality I consider the nominal impedance to be about 100 ohm. It does not drop below 100 ohm until you hit 800Hz. Stax was gilding the lilly with the nominal 8 ohm rating.
100 watts minimum of tube power IMO with 300 watts being the upper limit for power handling. The speaker was not properly fused from the factory and this can cause damage to the transformer. And the power rating on the RC network components was a joke. This will cause damage to the panel.
IMO the F-83 is even better. What I wouldn't give to have a pair of F-83! Maybe someday.
I kick myself every time I hear them for not buying them myself. I did have them at my place for a year "watching" them for my friend. A speaker that can do close to the same magic was the pair of Audiostatics I use to have but they suffered a bit of the "venetian blind" effect.
I have a couple pair of the AudioStatic ES-100 and have spent time with the ES-300 and it is another very nice stat. I would like to hear some of their modern offerings but that is impossible in N. America. Based on what I have heard with the AudioStatic I don't think they are really close to the magic of the Stax.
I tend to agree but if you can't have STAX then...at least its in the same ball park.
I actually came to love my Acoustat Spectra 2200s because they could play powerfully in a way other stats don't really do but of course they didn't have the delicacy of the STAX...
I never had the chance to hear the Spectra series. I am sure you know I am not a huge fan of the original Acoustat design. Not remotely close to the refinement or finesse of the Stax. Certainly a more powerful and muscular design versus the Stax and on balance the Acoustat will most likely fit a greater number of people and musical tastes.
If one is looking for the most transparent, resolving, refined, delicate, intimate type of sound and can live with the dynamic limitations/power requirements the Stax still reins supreme. Nothing is really close. I still shake my head in amazement every time I listen to them. A shame that more of these speakers were not produced.
.
I rest my case.
The use of lower powered tube amps, SETs in particular, working poorly with Maggiess is mainstream audio-phile knowledge. The exception is the opposite. It's pretty clear cut. Based on direct personal experience and much written experience.
Steve
"The use of lower powered tube amps, SETs in particular, working poorly with Maggiess is mainstream audio-phile knowledge"
Unfortunately it is also only conditionally correct. I am sure that there are many SETs that don't work well but many that do.
Let's look at the facts:
Impedance is nearly ideal for a SET as it is pretty flat and mostly resistive.
Sensitivity is somewhat lower than normal; however, it has the benefit of being a line source so the drop in SPL with distance is greatly reduced compared to a box point source speaker (particularly true for the larger Maggies, which should be even EASIER to drive than the smaller ones).
The bass has a pretty strong resonance that will likely help an amp that is perhaps a bit bass shy into a 4 ohm load. However, this is also the most likely area where a SET will fail with a Maggie if the distortion from the output transformer is too high in the bass it will make the Maggie sound bloated.
No offense, but I am quite sure that I have tried SET amps on more different types of planars than just about anyone on this forum. I also know that the ones which work are generally expensive because they have the proper iron on the output.
BTW, I also had a pair of Cary CAD572se monos that gave an honest 20 watts and they sounded fantastic on my Caliper signatures and on my Acoustat 1+1s.
I also had a friend with the Maggie 1.5qr and later the 1.6. We got fantastic sound from a pair of Audio Note (UK) P4SE monos that delivered about 18 watts from parallel 300Bs. Now that was in a small room and peaked in the lower 90s but it sounded the best I have heard Maggies sound. It was about the lower limit I would say powerwise.
... oxymoron :-)
BTW, I ran Gallo Reference 3s for eight years with a pair of SET monoblocks (845 driver tubes) and never felt I had too little power, although "everyone" claims these speakers need a whole lot more than 12 wpc.
if you throw enough money at anything, it's gonna work pretty darn well.
H.F.N.
Not cheap because they have very good iron, which costs money.
My pair of SET monoblocks, built by a friend, cost me something under $2500. Your point?
.
-Mainstream audiophiles.
-Honest politicians.
-Good weather.
-Bad weather.
-Cogent newsgroup posts.
But yours seems to ruin my run of things that I can have confidence in! Thanks, I think...
Rick
My experience with Maggies and medium powered tubes amps( not to mention SET's) was pleasant enough with small scale simple material, but beyond that....no go. They simply need power to show their potential and to play music of larger scale. What the OP is seeking can better be achieved with a good high powered solid state or P-P tube design.Even a good digital amp might be considered. A few inmates here have spoken quite highly of the Gilmore Raptor monos/ Magnepan combination.
.
The experiment has been performed many times and always the same results.
I tried 1.5s with a 40W PP amp and it sounded fine with some material at lower volume levels. If you search around you get similar reports over and over with various combinations of Maggies and lower powered tube amps, and nobody ever says it was a satisfactory long term solution.
.
I am using the mb 125 with my mg iiia speakers and they sound quite nice. I figure the 450 will kick serious butt.
"Man, that mouse is Awesome." - Kaemon (referring to Jerry, of Tom and Jerry fame)
A Butler TDB-2250 tube/MOSFET hybrid amp. Gobs of power (250 watts/ch., 2 ch.) and a wallet-friendly price of < $3k brand new.
-RW-
This is a great amp. I use their five channel in my home theater setup. This amp beat the 10,000.00 5 channel classe amp I had.
nt
I agree the Audio Mirror might be a good choice for you. It's a 45 watt parallel SET Monoblock. $4500 new, but can be found on Audiogon from the manufacturer as a demo pair for $3100. Absolutely no affiliation to the company.I only post this as I considered it for my ET-8b but ended up going with a diff tube design.
And yes, SETs will work with planars!
Edits: 09/07/12 09/07/12
Manufacturer claims closer to 50 watts, with peaks to 90.
I have no clue as to the accuracy of his claims, nor if they would work for you. I have them driving my 89db efficient speakers in a medium-sized room to satisfactory SPLs. And in my home they sound glorious. Beautiful looking as well. And under your budget.
Bear in mind that those Maggies only do 83dB/1W so he would need 4x as much power as you.
My ETs claim 83 dB and were able to go to above average listening levels in my room when I had the Audio Mirrors in-house. But to be fair, they are an 8 Ohm load where I think the maggie 12s are 4.
The Magneplanars run quite nice with nearly everything BUT the more power you have, the better they sound. This has nothing to do with volume, try 50W Stereo and you think it is ok, then you Try 100W and you will hear the improvement even with low listening level.
then 200W, then 200W mono, then 300W and so on... I always go for a Maggie-Demo but the best control I heard was with those newer Rowland mono amps (501 I think)...
They produce 83dBSPL at 1W (they state 86dB at 2.83V which is one Watt into 8Ohm or 2W into 4Ohm which these speakers are rated at).
Assuming a SET produces 4W before clipping you should not be listening at more than 77dBSPLrms, 74dB if you sit 2m away from them or 71dB at 4m. Any louder than that and you are mostly modulating distortion.
You could listen a bit louder if your musical taste is restricted to heavily compressed pop or rock though.
Its a SET but not mono and it will produce a true 25 watts with < 1% distortion and it sounds simply fantastic!!
Do NOT be fooled by the people here who will tell you it can't work or it won't work well. If the SET is a good one it will work and sound better than they knew Maggies could sound.
I have driven very difficult speakers with the KR and it has great bass to boot.
The other amp worth considering is the NAT SE1. A friend of mine has 6 NAT monoblocks driving his Apogee Grand speakers (yes the biggest baddest of all Apogees). He has 2 pairs of NAT SE2SE and 1 pair of NAT SE1. Before he got all the monos he has only a single pair of the NAT SE2SE driving the Grand full-range with an external crossover (the built-in electronics were undergoing repair) and it drove the HELL out of the Grands!!! He also at the same time had the CAT JL-2, which sounded good BUT he preferred the NAT and sold the CAT.
You might be able to find the KR or the NAT used for under $5K.
24 WPC
Hi,
You are looking at 100 - 200W. Even Push Pull Amp's are not common at this power levels, even less so at 5,000 USD for a pair of Mono's.
If you can take well meaning advise, look for a 2nd Hand CAT (Convergent Audio Technologies) poweramp, probably the stereo unit. You may just be able to fit your budget and you will have an Amp that has enough power (just about) and does much that SE Amplifiers do...
Ciao T
Sometimes I'd like to be the water
sometimes shallow, sometimes wild.
Born high in the mountains,
even the seas would be mine.
(Translated from the song "Aus der ferne" by City)
You may need something like parallel GM70s: 80-90 watts. But that would cost a lot more than your budget, if there even is a commercially available model. deHavilland makes monos with a single GM70 per channel. It puts out around 40-50W/channel and costs around 13K!
Observe, before you think
I drove MG12s with a 50-watt Push Pull in a 12' x 13' room and thought it was barely enough, and in the end not quite enough for me. So I would look at 211 amps (use the 211 output tube), or maybe Parallel SET amps that give more power.
All SET amps are class A, but not all class A are SET.
SET = Single ended triode, where the single ended part is one output tube per channel or multiple parallel output tubes per channle. Single ended is not push pull where the multiple output tubes are not parallel.
I guess I gotta ask - If you're not sure exactly what a SET amp is, how do you know you want one? I see SET and the speakers they are used with as a system. On the surface SET and Maggies don't intuitively go together.
Thanks for the feedback. I am looking at s SET amp because I have always heard about their soundstaging capabilities and want to try an amp that amplifies the wave in one piece. I hope it will maintain the recording's dimensionality and timing.
What about 805 amps?
btw...currently run six pacs.
And I suggest that "MG12s and SET" is an oxymoron! ;-))
Sure, SET amps can deliver great soundstaging. So can "standard" (push/pull) tube amps. So can my ss amps.
What my ss amps don't do - I'm willing to admit - is deliver the palpable, organic presentation that a good tube amp does ... but it has its own advantages! :-))
The reason I say the phrase " MG12s and SET " is an oxymoron is that:
* SETs are, typically flea-powered ... so you have to pay serious $$$ for, say, a 100w SET.
* yet MG12s are at the cheaper end of the Maggie family. (So you are unlikely to spend $50K on an amp for them.)
So my advice is - sure, try out a tube amp on them (as expensive as you can go to) but also try out some decent ss amps.
Or ... stick with the SET and buy some different speakers (horns).
Good luck,
Andy
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: