Inefficient Speakers.... Let's talk Tube Power!

Funky54

Super Member
I love my big dinasour inefficient speakers. They sound great. I can't leave well enough alone though. Of course I'm looking for the next step in audio bliss. It's time I start talking Tube Power. I wanna use my inefficient 86db monsters. I wanna go Tube. I need suggestions and knowledge.

If you wanna talk about terminology like sensitivity vs inefficient... you should go start a thread somewhere else.

If you (even if your right) wanna talk about small watts and 90db and up efficient speakers… you should go start a thread somewhere else.

Currently I'm verticly bi-amped with two Carver C-500 amps. So at like 3ohm on the woofer and 3 ohm on the mids and tweets, I'm pulling something like 800 plus Change watts a side. It's manly to say that... but I wanna go Tube.

So what's myth and truth? If I were to go to two 100 watt mon blocks like VTL, Rouge or Antique Audio Labs.. would that be enough? Would I have even better sound maybe going with two stereo 50-60 watt per channel tube amps and verticly bi-amping again? Are higher quality 35-50 watt mono blocks really more powerful than inexpensive 100 watt monoblocks? There's lots of opinions out there… who has big obnoxious inefficient speakers and loving them for all their man card carrying lore? Let's hear your journey. Let's hear your triumphs, let's quietly hear of your tears and deep sorrow from paths that crushed your Audio dreams. Spill it.
 
I've got a better idea. You want to experience that "tube sound" ... get a tube integrated amp for the high frequency drivers and keep your Carver on the woofers (horizontal bi-amp).

On the tube integrated, turn the bass control full OFF and you'll have plenty of headroom. You can read more about this concept here:

http://audiokarma.org/forums/index....d-power-receivers-and-integrated-amps.771788/

Regards,
Jerry
I tried that with 1x Carver horizontal and my EL34 powered SE 9wpc amp. I messed the the gain as best as possible for just a quick look see. In truth it didn't really sound any different. My little chifi SE amp does have that gorgeous tube sound with other speakers. I get a good taste as is with my open baffle mids and tweets, but it doesn't do the "forward" sound stage with just that little amp on the top. Again my top (mids & Tweet) collectively pull about three ohms. The drivers are not connected anywhere in the path. There are three separate filter inside the cabinet tied to each of the three speaker posts.

GjpwCcU.jpg
 
Last edited:
I am facing that dilemma too. I have some Magnepan MG 20's. I like tubes but only have small wattage tube receivers at the moment. The Maggies are inefficient so to really make them come alive you need some current. Getting lots of current in a tube amp requires lots of tubes, usually push/pull parallel output stages. More current requires lots of transformer iron for output and B+ transformers. I think you get the idea, lots of money. I think this is why so many people are looking for tube amps that come out of old organs or juke boxes. Trying to get something worthwhile on the cheap. I have seen on eBay some very nice looking Chinese tube equipment but have not heard much on if they are any good or if they just look good.

I think a SS amp for the low end would be your best choice since that is where almost all the current is. Mids/High freqs don't really need much push as the cone/diaphragm doesn't have to move much to produce the desired results. I would suggest cutting off the low freqs to the tube amp at a suitable place in the spectrum and let the SS amp do the heavy lifting.
 
If it's any help I've heard some .7's with a rouge syphix. It sounds great. I took one of my Carver C-500 amps over to where the .7's where. The extra Watts did stiffen the bass. It lost some of the beautiful top end though. So. I guess I'm saying more power/watts will help your bottom.
 
You can always spring for a pair of the ARC 600 or I think they make a pair of 700 watt Reference amps. I see them all the time for sale on Audiogon.
 
You can always spring for a pair of the ARC 600 or I think they make a pair of 700 watt Reference amps. I see them all the time for sale on Audiogon.
I of course googled your recommendation… At a mere $125,000 for a pair of those fine amps, I'm sure it's a steel. I'll probably buy a few spares just in case.
 
Have you considered using a good tube preamplifier to get the "tube magic" and keeping the amplification situation you already have? :)
 
You have to make a decision. Stay with transistors, get different speakers, or buy new speakers and tube amps. All are going to cost money. Your speakers can't be that good or you wouldn't want to change amps. Most of the time unless you have big money going back to tubes is a step backwards. Lower signal to noise, much higher distortion, less linearity, easily influenced by the load impedance of the speaker, and much higher operating costs per hour. That all said some tube amps are very special. Mcintosh 3500's, 275's MKV and later come to mind. Both will set you big money. Audio Research makes a few models of interest but they are easily the cost of Mac amps if not higher. Conrad Johnson, Cary and some other brands including Dynaco and Citation never made amps that met their published specs.

Mcintosh's first and second generation SS amps are known for how they sound similar to or at least approximately the same as their tube cousins. I would choose the MC 2200 without meters. You can save big money that way. Some times you can find similar sounding MC 2500's used in commercial service for a steal. Remember Mac SS amps normally put out 30% more power continuously than rated with out clipping.
 
By all means, try tubes. Don't expect them to replicate your 800W per side solid-state experience.

Instead, be prepared to listen differently.
 
I tried that with 1x Carver horizontal and my EL34 powered SE 9wpc amp. I messed the the gain as best as possible for just a quick look see. In truth it didn't really sound any different. My little chifi SE amp does have that gorgeous tube sound with other speakers. I get a good taste as is with my open baffle mids and tweets, but it doesn't do the "forward" sound stage with just that little amp on the top. Again my top (mids & Tweet) collectively pull about three ohms. The drivers are not connected anywhere in the path. There are three separate filter inside the cabinet tied to each of the three speaker posts.

Funky, your drawing shows a vertical bi-amp, yet your description talks about your Carver amp in a horizontal mode.

Now, my recommendation was for the Carver to power the woofers only with your tube amp powering all (both left and right) high frequency drivers. This should set up should provide the "best of both worlds". That is, the warm tube sound in the upper octaves while the Carver is pounding out the bass line.

Of course, it depends upon the xover point on your speakers as to how much work the tube amp has to do. In my bi-amp I have a low power ss amp on the mids/tweeters and I can shut the bass control full OFF with no impact whatsoever on the resulting sound. This little "tweak" does, however, give me more headroom on the type of music I enjoy.

Regards,
Jerry
 
Funky, your drawing shows a vertical bi-amp, yet your description talks about your Carver amp in a horizontal mode.

Now, my recommendation was for the Carver to power the woofers only with your tube amp powering all (both left and right) high frequency drivers. This should set up should provide the "best of both worlds". That is, the warm tube sound in the upper octaves while the Carver is pounding out the bass line.

Of course, it depends upon the xover point on your speakers as to how much work the tube amp has to do. In my bi-amp I have a low power ss amp on the mids/tweeters and I can shut the bass control full OFF with no impact whatsoever on the resulting sound. This little "tweak" does, however, give me more headroom on the type of music I enjoy.

Regards,
Jerry
Yes. I am currently verticle. And Yes, I got your meaning to change this to Horizontal. I have tried that with little improvement, however the amp on top was only a 8-9 watt per channel and the Carver on the bottom was only one and not two.. so the woofers shared a power supply. I will likely try two Carvers.. now per woofer and a more powerful tube on top to see..

That drawing isn't really accurate to my system in that my mids and tweets are open baffle and not in the enclosure. I made that drawing in a Bi-amp battle with the science guys who like religiously say that bi-amping is "fools". As fanatics foaming at the mouth to defend their lab coat opinion they never could read or study the drawing to see what I was talking about. The rage and and absolute need to be right clouded their minds.... I wonder if their speakers are connected with coat hangers to prove it can be done lol.
 
...

That drawing isn't really accurate to my system in that my mids and tweets are open baffle and not in the enclosure. I made that drawing in a Bi-amp battle with the science guys who like religiously say that bi-amping is "fools". As fanatics foaming at the mouth to defend their lab coat opinion they never could read or study the drawing to see what I was talking about. The rage and and absolute need to be right clouded their minds.... I wonder if their speakers are connected with coat hangers to prove it can be done lol.

Biamping with isn't foolish, but your drawing appears to represent sending full range signals though the speaker's crossover parts which is sometimes referred to as "Fool's Biamping".

It's an important distinction to recognize the effect of having active or passive frequency splits before the amps vs. sending full range signals though the speaker crossovers.

I'm sure my post will anger you but it's really important to understand the difference because it explains why you are hearing what you did (or perhaps more importantly, why you did not) in your previous endeavours.

Onplane is trying to guide you here, and that's good because he seems to have more patience than I. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom