Valve power amps with solid tuneful bass?

I use a ARC CA50 integrated which is basically a VT50 with a volume control. I'd certainly recommend a VT50, or if you are feeling very flush a VT100 to anyone.

These are definately no warm and woolly archetypal valve amps. Just to annoy Tony, they sound rather like a refined version of a Belcanto digital amp to my ears. Obviously though, you would need to hear one to decide if it is for you.
 
Thanks Robbo
I have seen a few at reasonable price, i may try for a demo.
I dont need a per/integrated as i will be using a grounded grid pre.
 
you can get as many different sounds from a valve amp as you can solid state ones..

I dont hear anyone saying solid state amps all sound the same..

??
 
PeteH said:
Including the fundamental of the E (just below 21Hz), the first note the organ plays? You'd be doing well with 988s I think :)

To be honest it sounds like you're so happy with what you've got you maybe shouldn't bother changing anything, unless you want to look at a room correction system.
Click to expand...

Ok - I haven't measured the bass performance of the quads, but I know that the organ notes on that particular piece of music, in the coda after the climax of Saturn, are palpable, more felt than heard.... for sure big moving cone speakers or a subwoofer are going to make them more palpable - when I tried out with the sub the air was wobbling!

Anyway, you may be completely right that I will find I am happy with what I've got. I have a few things to try over the next few weeks but I am prepared to conclude that the Lavardin/Quad combo works best for me in my current room and budget space.

In the offing to try in near future: Graaf GM50, Bel Canto Evo2, PS Audio HCA2. Hopefully exposure to these will clarify things for me. Thanks for all the contributions so far, keep 'em coming. :)
 
alanbeeb said:
Ok - I haven't measured the bass performance of the quads, but I know that the organ notes on that particular piece of music, in the coda after the climax of Saturn, are palpable, more felt than heard....
Click to expand...

I know exactly the bit you're talking about. The organ pedal plays the main theme again (from the horn entry just after the beginning), very low and very slow. AFAIK, it starts on an E, fundamental around 21Hz, then moves up to an A, fundamental around 27Hz. Even on decent-sized speakers it often sounds like it's moving down because you only get the harmonic of the E at 42Hz, then the A at 27Hz - and on little speakers it sounds like it's moving up again because you only get the harmonic of the A at 54Hz.

In any of the above cases it's low enough to move your guts around some, but there's moving your guts and then there's bloody-hell-is-that-an-earthquake. :D
 
I've heard Paul Ranson's Quad ESL 63s with his Linn amplifier and enjoyed them very much. I didn't perceive any lack of bass, although another visitor who has Isobariks thought that they were bass-light. IMO, that just reflects the bass boost you get with Isobariks. OTOH it may be that I am used to bass-light speakers.
 
Paul Ranson said:
All amps, whatever their architecture, tend towards sounding the same as they get better.
Click to expand...


I disagree with this entirely.

I could give you a list of 3k+ amps that sound entirely different to each other, but dont see the point.

:) oh well
 
Paul Ranson said:
Quad IIs don't have enough go for ESL63s.
Click to expand...

Are they harder to drive than ESL57s then? (Honest question, I have no idea. I've certainly heard Quad IIs driving 57s with no problem at all.)

-- Ian
 
The 'peak volts before the speaker becomes a transmitter' is about 32 for the ELS57 and 40 for the ESL63. The ESL63 can go louder and needs more power to do so. I think you'd run a II hard into its limits with the 63.

As for 'harder to drive', probably the newer speaker is an easier load, it just accepts more power. The nominal 'efficiency' of both speakers is in the low 80s, so you do need to push them quite hard even when not being a hooligan.

Paul
 
So - went to dealer yesterday to pick up home demo items.... turns out he was mixed up in his amps, he doen't ahve the GRAAF GM50B anymore but the T+A V10, so I took it home anyway..... Its good! to say the least.

Its the first thing I've heard yet that's better than my Lavardin IT. Its an 80 watt valve integrated, everything microprocessor controlled to ensure smooth power up and down and correct bias on valves. Star trek in looks, lovely gunmetal grey finish, not a bad match for the Shanling CDP.

Sound is superb, dryer sounding than Valve amps reputed to be but incredibly liquid lovely treble and solid bass. If this had been around 3.5 yrs ago I'm sure I would have got it, not the Lavardin. Unfortunately now its too expensive (£4K) and I still don't wnt an integrated, despite it having all the goodies I wish the Lavardin had like a tape loop, remote control and a very good headphone stage.

Still want to try more things.... and still very tempted by the GRAAf 50/50 on ebay.
 
Alan,

valve amps cant possible sound better than the lavardin with the quads, remember, you are just clouding the picture with it ;)

Glad you like the T+A btw. Be sure to try some others as well before you buy!
 
I remember Ken Kessler really liked the T+A amplifier in a review.

If its 4k it really is in another price league though!

The kind of money you're looking at needs some serious demos, hope you resist the urge to buy too soon! (I do that a lot myself :S )

Chris
 
Its too expensive, but has given me ideas about what I'm looking for.... the dealer has lots of alternatives on offer, and has mentioned ARC VS55 as a possibility if its strictly a power amp I'm looking for. He reckons ARC stuff has only recently returned to how good it was 20 years ago.
 
Quad 989s

I've demoed 989's with a number of amps, both solid state and tube.

Quad's II-forty works excellently as you would expect as did a VS55 (both making the "low end" Krell integrated sound pedestrian). Not able to spare the cash or space for the Quads, I currently use Sony CD player directly into an Audion Sterling tube amp without a pre, powering a pair of 57s. This works brilliantly, but only plays at reasonable listening levels (the Audion puts out 12 watts). I can only imagine that you would achieve similar results with the later Quads and a suitably powerful tube amp.

Both of the above come up occassionally around the £1800-2000 mark (the Quad being sans the pre amp).

The 63s are capable of prodigious amounts of bass if set up properly. I've never found a sub-woofer which didn't grate as it kicked in.

I'd agree with the comment about the original Quad II's. They would run out of steam quickly with 63s.
 
PeteH said:
In any of the above cases it's low enough to move your guts around some, but there's moving your guts and then there's bloody-hell-is-that-an-earthquake. :D
Click to expand...
To tell the truth, I heard this piece twice live and in none of the case there was any feeling of earthquake. :rolleyes: Instead the sound of the organ blended into the sound of the other instruments.
I have the feeling that there is quite a big missunderstanding how low frequencies should 'sound' in live classical concerts.
I though have no problems if you like to have an earthquake at home. :D
 
I think the piece can be performed without an organ, given that not all concert halls have organs, unless they bring in an electronic one. I've seen it performed twice in halls without an organ and didn't miss it.... it may be that the organ part can be replaced by some combo of double-bass, contrabasson etc, but the effect is subtle, not a belly wobbling thing!
 

Latest posts

Back
Top