Are Harmon Kardon Amps High Grade?

[Kegger]

Jon and Buzzk pretty much have the CIT II covered, it is an excellent amp with
killer specs and wide frequency response, it is not a "tubey" sounding amp at all
some may call it clinical or sterile sounding compared to many other tube amps, I
myself do prefer a little more "life" in my amps then what the Deuce provides, but
it doesn't mean the amp is not a great amp and that some may absolutely love it.

It is one of those to each there own things when it comes to this amp.

The CIT V is similar but yes a little sweeter sounding, but is very similar.

 

[BuzzK]

I'll have to say that I was the most surprised to discover that such a highly regarded piece didn't meet my expectations. Especially with the unusually flat frequency response and other great specs.

But then, how many SS amps have been manufactured with great test specs, high damping factor, etc. that simply aren't "musical"? The ear doth not live by specs alone . . .

I have a set of very rare Freed iron (the same folks who made the Citation transformers) that was designed for 6L6 / EL34 / etc. at 6.6K. I currently have it configured for a simple 6L6 amp, and plan to totally redo it for 6CA7 / EL34. I must say that iron sounds really good with the lower power glass.

One friend redesigned the Citation II with 6FQ7 / 6CG7 and EL34s for output, and he says that it is a vast improvement as far as the ever-elusive "musicality" of the amp is concerned. I haven't heard it, so I can't weigh in.

I have very high respect for Jim McShane and his work, and I am sure he'd disagree with me close to 100%.

;-)

 

[Keith C]

Well, I disagree with BuzzK, so I'll provide some counterpoint.

I think it comes down to taste -- out of all the tube amps I own, the Citation II has the lowest measurable distortion and the lowest audible distortion. On the bench, the performance is impeccable. Other amps might have more "life", and while that might appeal to some, that "life" sounds an awful lot like distortion to me, and quickly becomes grating. My Citation I, II, and III have been stored now for 2.5 years while I've been living in Utah, and I can tell you that nothing has sounded quite right since giving them up. I can hardly wait to get them back in my system.
.

I absolutely agree. An honest amp is going to be called boring and uninteresting by people who like their burgers with ketchup-or for Stones fans, their shepherd's pie with HP sauce. In other words they are accustomed to the sonic modification and like it.

HK Citation are first rate.

 

[Keith C]

I'll have to say that I was the most surprised to discover that such a highly regarded piece didn't meet my expectations. Especially with the unusually flat frequency response and other great specs.

But then, how many SS amps have been manufactured with great test specs, high damping factor, etc. that simply aren't "musical"? The ear doth not live by specs alone . . .

I have a set of very rare Freed iron (the same folks who made the Citation transformers) that was designed for 6L6 / EL34 / etc. at 6.6K. I currently have it configured for a simple 6L6 amp, and plan to totally redo it for 6CA7 / EL34. I must say that iron sounds really good with the lower power glass.

One friend redesigned the Citation II with 6FQ7 / 6CG7 and EL34s for output, and he says that it is a vast improvement as far as the ever-elusive "musicality" of the amp is concerned. I haven't heard it, so I can't weigh in.

Some time ago I got a Mcintosh amp that had been modified by someone in a most unusual manner. The owner sold it to me because he had got another Mc amp also modified by this same guy. The owner went off at great length about its "musicality". After testing it and finding that we were getting 1.3% THD at 10K at 20 watts I unplugged it, pulled the tubes, opened it up, drained the caps, and cut out each and every part that wasn't stock, which was about all of them. I made it a point not to listen to it first.

My only regret was not having drawn a schematic, which I would have published as a bad example.

 

[BuzzK]

The science of psychoacoustics is a little bit like economics -- strong "camps" of believers, polar perspectives, and probably not much that everyone agrees on.

I'm well aware of the argument that "musicality" consists mostly of distortion and artifacts. I would ask then, why can two amps with essentially the same specs sound so different?

 

[Patrice B]

It's why I don't care about specs. I'm in the "musical" camp.

Just as an example, I like the sound of my Heathkit AA-100, this one having the reputation for being a bad-engineered amplifier.

Also, my Eico HF-81 have bad specs on channel separation (as per Studiophile reviews) but hey, it sounds so good I don't care!!

I trust my ears first. To each one his own taste.

 

[Keith C]

The science of psychoacoustics is a little bit like economics -- strong "camps" of believers, polar perspectives, and probably not much that everyone agrees on.

I'm well aware of the argument that "musicality" consists mostly of distortion and artifacts. I would ask then, why can two amps with essentially the same specs sound so different?

It's because the specs aren't very descriptive. The standard metrology and parameters we test audio for were developed from the late 1950s to the mid-1970s and codified by the Institute for High Fidelity. They made sense in the tube and early solid state era in that high performance on these tests correlated well with a set that was well engineered and used quality, read expensive, components-particularly output transformers in the case of tube amplifiers. When the late solid state era made what had been expensive to achieve trivial the metrology did not change.

Why don't we have better tests? Well, the sonar guys probably do but they are not talking. Even tube equipment made in the 1950s used on diesel boats is still classified in a lot of cases. As far as our industry goes they don't want it codified for a lot of reasons. There is no incentive to.

 

[rccc]

I have a modded and updated ST 70 which I have enjoyed very much and is quite "musical" but ever since I got my Cit II (McShane mods) up and running I rarely use it any more. I think to be fair you have to consider what speakers and pre amp are on either side of it. In my system the Cit has out performed every other amp Ive tried both SS and tubes but who knows in a different system. Right now Im using it with a restored (and McShaned) Cit I and a Doge 8 and it is spectacular with both.