Infinity and tube amp
- Thread starter mbeigh
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Mmike
Analog Addiction
I don't own any large Infinities however I have a small pair of 4003's and with 80 watts of tube power they sound much better than on any of my Ss gear. I imagine they will sound better with tubes only because it works that way for me!
-Mike
-Mike
beemer
Vintage Graduate
LOL.
Sore subject here. It's a fact that Arnie Nudell voiced the big dog Infinity product with tubes, and yes, they DO sound better with tubes.
There's lots of current topics here about the trials and tribulations of getting the big dogs to sing......makes for interesting reading to say the least, and a few good laughs. :yes:
Facts is Facts. Some would rather urinate up a rope than try a tube amp, but hey.......they'll never know.....
Best,
Paul :thmbsp:
Sore subject here. It's a fact that Arnie Nudell voiced the big dog Infinity product with tubes, and yes, they DO sound better with tubes.
There's lots of current topics here about the trials and tribulations of getting the big dogs to sing......makes for interesting reading to say the least, and a few good laughs. :yes:
Facts is Facts. Some would rather urinate up a rope than try a tube amp, but hey.......they'll never know.....
Best,
Paul :thmbsp:
I have my system, which consists of RS-IIb's,Threshold S-500 amp,Mac Mc 275V tube amp,Quicksilver Remote Linestage preamp,Roksan Caspian cdp, DBX-223 active x-over and the 2b's never sounded better than with the tubes on top.A old friend of mine who was apart owner of a store that sold the big old vintage Infinity's said that tubes just "open up" the topend of speakers.To me the tubes just seem to make the performance infront of you "real", it just sounds right!I think thats what he was getting at.
Also after taking some advise from another AKer "Beemer" I bought the Mac and was running it on it's own for awhile.That was very good but finally picked up the DBX and things are really singing now!I tried other highend ss amps on the 2b's including the Thresh and the tubes, to me are whats right for the topend.I can't see myself going back to ss on the topend.If you can try it, you'll most likely be quite impressed.
Randy
Also after taking some advise from another AKer "Beemer" I bought the Mac and was running it on it's own for awhile.That was very good but finally picked up the DBX and things are really singing now!I tried other highend ss amps on the 2b's including the Thresh and the tubes, to me are whats right for the topend.I can't see myself going back to ss on the topend.If you can try it, you'll most likely be quite impressed.
Randy
beemer
Vintage Graduate
Kappa 9's!
Lets see.....one semit, 2 Emits, one polydome K, one polygraph K per side.
75-100 watts/channel should light them up. Issue you will have to address as well is crossing over and level-matching the system. I have found the Dbx 223 to have a clean sound, minimal circuit path and enough flexibility to get the job done. Here's a link to more info:
http://www.dbxpro.com/223/223.php
Big Infinities + Open Mind = Musical Satisfaction :yes:
Do a google search for "Millersound". Bill at Millersound may shed more light on what may optimize 9 Kappa than I. I have extensive experience with RSIIb, RSIb, IRS-Gamma/IRS-Delta/IRS-Beta.....not anywhere near as much with 9 Kappa.
Regardless.....good luck and enjoy the ride!
Best,
Paul :thmbsp:
VintInfinity
Tactophonic
I wonder if Dave at the stereo shop would let me audition a tube amp so I can test on my Kappas to report back.
beemer
Vintage Graduate
If he did you would still need a decent active xover for best benefit. By simply adding a second amp, you still send full-range signal to both high and low side of the speaker. Active xover benefit is that the pair of amps only see the signal needed......the bass amp sees bass signal up to the crossover point, the high side amp sees only HF signal. This drastically increases the available headroom of the amps. Also the need to level match the amps....in other words, the input sensitivity of the two chosen amps may be quite different, thus requiring an increase or decrease of volume in order to match level and have the speaker sound correct. The Dbx 223 I like to use has a global input level for each channel, as well as separate output levels for each stereo channel, both LF and HF.
The issue here is following the crossover slope of the passive xovers in the speaker itself. Knowing the designed slope, be it 6, 12, 18db per octave, or Butterworth slope......and the proper crossover point......800Hz, 1200Hz, and so forth.
It can be a bit of work to dial it all in, however the benefits are worth the effort.
In the case of the IRS series (Delta/Gamma/Beta) there really isn't much outside choice besides the Infinity boxes as there are "servo" woofer controls which are actually accelerometers mounted in the cone of one woofer in each speaker, also called the "control" woofer. I have always felt that Infinity could have taken the IRS servo box just a little further, as it passes the high side through without any signal change, the Delta/Gamma/Beta all rely on the passive HF crossover in the speaker itself to remove and dissipate the full-range signal to the HF side. The Infinity servo box level matches by controlling the output of the bass amp only. the accelerometers report back to the crossover by an additional set of wires that connect to a second set of plugs on the back of the speaker. there is circuitry in the box which measures the incoming signal to the actual woofer movement and corrects it internally. Thus the Beta and Gamma with the box actually have an improved, tighter and lower bass range than without the box.
LOL! I hope I did not scare you off the idea, as a little work can yield some incredible results!
Best,
Paul :thmbsp:
beemer
Vintage Graduate
I hear ya. the Dbx 223 can be had new online for less than $200. Decent toob amp(s) can be pricey. LOL it took a lot of convincing before I was able to acquire my McIntosh MC2000. "SWMBO" was not real pleased with me. :nono:
Quicksilver makes some well respected toob monoblocks, as do Conrad-Johnson and BAT (Balanced Audio Technology) and there is always McIntosh. The McIntosh MC275 series IV and V can be had used for good prices, and retain value for investment well.
Don't fret if you can't try toobs tomorrow. I ran solid state on big Infinities for years and was happy....however those who knew more than I kept telling me to try tube amps on top, and I knew that the designers voiced the speakers with tubes. Back then a friend and I both had RSIb's......mine on SS top and bottom, his with SS on the bottom and toobs up top. One listen to his setup made a believer of me.
The best all SS I've had on the Betas was a configuration consisting of Levinson 33's on the woofers and Levinson 33H on the high side. However a much less expensive McIntosh MC275 Series IV kicked the 33H to the curb on the Beta application. Nothing wrong with SS, however once you hear it right...........:thmbsp: It's all in system matching. The Pipedream Reference 18's in the big room here now LOVE the 33H. however the amps are driving 72 tweeters and 36 mids, all cones and silk domes....not tube-friendly Infinity planar drivers.
Best,
Paul :thmbsp:
bharper
tube junkie...
I'm driving the infinity 4.5's tops with two highly modified webster wsa230's (over 200rms) monoblocks and love the sound. Previous solid state was hafler 500, sae a502, and neither really worked well on the top.
Bottom end is a modified phase linear 400.
Websters were 4 x 8417 and rated at 200rms, 230 peak watts. Now has 4 x EI kt90's, solen coupling caps, 2350mfd of capacitance for the plates hv (2 x 4700mfd 350vdc caps in series) with step start so it will not suck the rectifiers out the power cord on startup. These were modded about 5 years ago when you could get EI kt90's under $200 a quad, and ended up with less than $400 total in each amp ready to go. Doubt could have purchased that much tube power for under $3-4k commercially. That was just not in the budget.
IMHO emim's and emit's really need tube power to shine.
Brian
Bottom end is a modified phase linear 400.
Websters were 4 x 8417 and rated at 200rms, 230 peak watts. Now has 4 x EI kt90's, solen coupling caps, 2350mfd of capacitance for the plates hv (2 x 4700mfd 350vdc caps in series) with step start so it will not suck the rectifiers out the power cord on startup. These were modded about 5 years ago when you could get EI kt90's under $200 a quad, and ended up with less than $400 total in each amp ready to go. Doubt could have purchased that much tube power for under $3-4k commercially. That was just not in the budget.
IMHO emim's and emit's really need tube power to shine.
Brian
beemer
Vintage Graduate
Hello Brian:
Sounds like you did well with the Webster's.....
Funny you mention a modified Phase Linear 400. I have a PL 400, and mine was modded by a Yale professor who did these on the side to make them more suitable for driving Acoustats. The mod consists of 6 BIG Mallory caps in a nicely built cage off the back of the amp. Since I have had this I have run into one other guy on the net who had one modded by this same Yale Professor. LOL you shut it down, and she plays on for better than 3 minutes!
I'm not a PL fan, however this amp is interesting to say the least, and it doesn't sound bad!
Best,
Paul :thmbsp:
VintInfinity
Tactophonic
I know it helps a ton, but I don't think it is necessary completely on the Kappa 9's... the woofers crossover to the mid-bass at 90hz, so there isn't too much signal that is being wasted... I already run two SS amps passively, sounds great. It was a big step up from one amp.
Since I can't afford a tube amp or the crossover, it's just a pipedream for now. Eventually I'd like to have both, but for a tube amp test, passive would probably be fine.
I wish I had some Gammas with a servo box. :thmbsp:
bharper
tube junkie...
Hey Beemer....
Sounds nice on your 400... Mine I just went to mj15024 outputs and some nasty nec drivers, and removed the four transistors from the driver board that are responsible for the fold back current limiting. The fold back circuit is known to manage to turn one side on while the other side is conducting under heavy load, and helps a bunch on blowing up your amp. With that removed, peak power is increased, with one source claiming up to about a 900 watt peak into 2 ohms. Not sure it will do that much, but does a good job on the 4.5's at 2 ohms. Running two 4 ohm infinity beta 12's in parallel in each 4.5. The original watkins were in pretty poor shape, the previous owner covered them in clay, which killed the surrounds, and who knows what else. Would have taken a lifetime to get all the dang clay off.
Brian
Sounds nice on your 400... Mine I just went to mj15024 outputs and some nasty nec drivers, and removed the four transistors from the driver board that are responsible for the fold back current limiting. The fold back circuit is known to manage to turn one side on while the other side is conducting under heavy load, and helps a bunch on blowing up your amp. With that removed, peak power is increased, with one source claiming up to about a 900 watt peak into 2 ohms. Not sure it will do that much, but does a good job on the 4.5's at 2 ohms. Running two 4 ohm infinity beta 12's in parallel in each 4.5. The original watkins were in pretty poor shape, the previous owner covered them in clay, which killed the surrounds, and who knows what else. Would have taken a lifetime to get all the dang clay off.
Brian
I now have my RSIIIas running through an Anthem Pre-1 tube preamp. Really rounded off the highs, but found the bass lacking. Hooked up an equalizer to boost the lower end. AAAAHHHHH! Now I find them to be closer to what I wanted. I am using a Hafler DH-200 amp until my Adcom GFA-555 gets back from the shop. Am interested in seeing the difference between the two amps.
So far, I am very happy with this incursion of tubes into my system.
So far, I am very happy with this incursion of tubes into my system.
siramazing
AK Member
I have an Audio Research LS-15 preamp and VTL 450MB's on my RS-1B's, and a Bryston-4B on the woofer towers. I have a gain mismatch between the 450's and the Bryston which I have tried to address by using a Marchand crossover instead of the original Infinity crossover and it works pretty well except I miss the servo on the woofer towers. The bass is so much better with the servos in the system. I have had no problems with the VTL's on top except for the gain mismatch. I blow fuses on the mid emim, but have had no problems with the emim's themselves. The tubes on top are way better than having a SS amp on top.
Bill
Bill