|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.131.105.61
In Reply to: Sound posted by Chris O on March 11, 2007 at 18:04:49:
They were also a design by Lynn Olsen,http://www.nutshellhifi.com/Ariel.html
They are a reasonably easy load for any amplifier, especially when you take the bass out. I believe the specs are somewhere around 89-91 dB. They are really designed for tube amps, as Lynn attests to.
I have selected the ME2's due to my room size: 11' x 9' x 80"H. I may move them someday into a larger room, but that's what I have to deal with for now. I plan on crossing over with passive 80Hz 6dB point at the input to the amp, and use a powered subwoofer.
As I listen to anything from classical to oldies to modern, I have read an almost universal recommendation that PP would be the best choice. I really enjoy good midbass (100-300Hz). Currently run a triode strapped EL34.
I am sure I will get resounding disagreement, but I am of the philosophy that a good amp should be relatively immune to load. Yes, I understand matching damping factor to a speaker's mechanics is important, but I don't plan on building a new amp everytime I try out a new set of speakers. DHT's have good plate Z, and PP should be able to drive what I give them.
I guess my point in more watts is that I don't want to pursue the 3W SE path (at least until I hear a system that blows my mind - anyone near Milwaukee, WI?)
Follow Ups:
and I don't understand, considering your budget, why you would settle for the kind of [audio] compromises you contemplate here.A very good DHT amp can be built with 3C24 driving a GM70 or 845. A 45 driving 845 makes a good amp too...and you can avoid cap coupling. BUT you still need good HIGH EFFICIENCY speakers to get everything this amp can do. Cogent is an extremely good place to start....and end, but there are others too.
Would you use a RS turntable or a WalMart CDP in your system?
I don't think Lynn's amps sound any better than stuff like Rogue. Maybe a slight improvement, but just as squished, constrained and sterile. IMO.
As for the Ariels, I would suggest you adapt and build them with PHY KM30, Fertin or equal drivers. Nothing less than 99db efficient.
I believe if Lynn was to design these speakers today, he would use better midbass drivers.
Something like 845? Even singles will get you up to 25 good watts of (IMHO) better sound than PP all things being equal and will drive whatever you through at 'em. Or you could parallel and yes, even push them into A2 on peaks for all the power you'll ever need. 845's are particularly good in the frequency range you like and they aren't the only big DHTs.
Is this not a problem, as I increase the size of the OPT gap I limit the frequency performance?In addition, I understand the cost of a huge SET to be somewhat logarithmic with respect to output power? How is the midbass of a SET this large?
so it can be large even in a lower powered SET. In any case it only affects inductance and therefore very LF response which is compensated to some degree by the designer.In terms of cost SET is simpler so there should be an overall saving ... simpler gain stage(s) with no phase splitter, the PS is similar and perhaps simpler since there is no dramatic current swing but the OP tranny may be more expensive.
Mid bass and mids are excellent with the latter definitely more three dimensional than PP IMO.
Consider that a speaker with 89dB sensitivity will require 128 watts to play as loudly as a 101dB sensitive speaker furnished with just 8 watts. The efficient speaker sips music from the linear surface of a power amplifier. The 89dB sensitive speaker is a sloppy drunk. Going to more efficient speakers will open up a new world of very favorable possibilities for you.Rgs, JLH
Your post cheers me up - until now, I've been blaming myself ;)My speakers are Yamaha NS8390 8 ohm, 3-way, rated at 70w and 89dB sensitivity. They are OK in a small room with 15w, but any less power than that would not allow enough headroom for transients (I listen to orchestral music quite a lot). In a bigger room, I would prefer 50w.
JLHSorry to be devils advocate here but ...
I have yet to hear a high efficiency speaker
that does not drive me out of the room
because of the harsh/grating sound from them.
I do realize I have more sensitive ears than most.
I have heard about 12 different ones so far and they range
from midly annoying to run-from-the-room-screaming-in-pain.
I have not heard yours, of course, but I am saying
that hi-efficiency speakers don't appeal to everyone.
I am not a big fan of horns, if that's what it takes to get +100 dB efficiency. I absolutely love the soft dome tweeter, which is what is used in the ME2.
Once you are familiar with the sound of a good dome or ribbon tweeter, there is no compomise on that. And those domes could be prety efficient, 95 dB.
It has reasonably flat frequency response, and can be powered by any amp you come up with. Even a preamp might drive it. And one guy who owns an Avalon traded it in after hearing this thing. I can hardly wait to get it.I got the horn bug. When you find yourself to be a horny, nothing else will do. The hair trigger dynamics, the lack of compression, the low distortion, and in this case excellent imaging.
I am getting the BD-Design Orphean coaxial 2-way horn loaded compression drive speaker system, plus SS-powered direct radiators for the bass (the weak link).
I used to own Avalons myself, then ProAcs and my own 3-way design. Finally I got into horns and will not be looking back. I just want better horns.
But I can see why some prefer a more docile sound. I used to be like that. Horns can be docile, if you use a proper SET amp, and don't play too loud. And passive EQ for a bad FR can be constructed as well if you're a designer type guy. I do that sort of thing all the time. I make the horns work for me. It might take a little more coaxing, but it's worth it.
aaa
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: