Amp shootout.....Tenor 75wi verses Berning ZH270


in a recent thread there was much discusion of the above 2 amps, whether the Berning was indeed an OTL, and which one might be better.

i have no opinion as to whether the Berning is an OTL. but today a Berning ZH270 owner brought his amp over to compare to my pair of Tenor 75wi's. my system is OTL friendly, with easy to drive speakers, so the Berning's acknowledged advantage in driving difficult loads was neutralized.

these amps have very similar power, the Tenor is 75 watts into 8 ohms, the Berning is 70 watts into 8 ohms. otherwise it is not really a fair comparison....the Tenors are $19900 a pair, the Berning $4500, the Tenors weigh 70 pounds each, the Berning weighs about 10 pounds.....it seems like Goliath verses David. the result is somewhat closer than that.

we played three different discs and each of 3 people listened to their disc in the sweetspot. the Berning owner felt that the Tenor had a more dimentional sound, deeper soundstage but felt the Berning was equal in bass extension and detail retreival. the independent listener felt the Berning was excellent for the money but not in the league of the Tenor in any paramter. my perception was similar to the independent listner; that the Berning, at $4500, is amazing in it's top to bottom excellence, dynamics and musicality.....but....does not do things like the Tenor. the sense of space, detail in the soundstage, texture and microdynamics of the Tenor are at a whole different level.....and they better be for $15000 more.

like the Berning owners, i am a shameless Tenor lover and consider the Tenors better than any other amp i have heard at any price, assuming a reasonably easy load to drive.

the Berning is more like a $8k to $10k amplifier.....and Berning owners should be justifiably proud of their amps.

i did think the Berning had slightly more bass slam than the Tenor, but with much less bass articulation and extension than the Tenor.

we spent the rest of the enjoyable afternoon listening to some great vinyl......an enjoyable time had by all.
mikelavigne
Maybe Mr. Kamm could tell is what other equipment he was using in his comparison.

Who Mr. Kamm? Mr. Kwann answer you!

My speaker is Fischer & Fischer SL1000. It 88db sensitive an better in every way then Kharma 1d. It use better mid driver (seas excel) better tweeter (esotar) an much faster 210 mm Langhub-Tieftöner bass drivers. In Europe consider much better and cose many more dollar then Kharma 1d which is not great speaker. If you like Kharma chance are you not get hear very many great speaker.
I owned the Lamm Ml-1's and now own the Tenors (75wi) both great amps but for me the Tenors are a step ahead of the Lamms in transparency, musicality and overall refinement.....I simply feel more connected to the music with the Tenors. I have used Kharma 1's and Audio Physic Avanti III's in my listening. I have a Burmester 979/980 front end and used the lamm l-1 linestage, Thor TPA 30 and placette passive.
I now use the placette into the Tenors.
Kevin: Mike of course is correct. The Tenor 75 watt amplifiers are $20K, and the 15 watt monos are $15K. What seakers did you compared the amps on?

I have listened to both and while the Lamm ML1's and ML2's are wonderful, the Tenor's go a step further in almost all areas. If I did not have a speaker that was right for an OTL, I would not hesitate in buying the Lamm's.
Alan, just out of curiousity, did you compare the prototype monoblock Bernings to a pair of strapped 270's? Power output would be about the same. Maybe that couldn't be done because of other design considerations. I ask because I am toying with the idea of getting another Berning and strapping them. I seem to remember seeing a comment in a post a while ago to the effect that strapping a pair of 270's resulted in sigificant improvment in the sound over a single 270, (maybe that's a foregone conclusion).
We need an OTL (definitional issues aside) convention!

John
Mr Kamm/Kwann-Thank you for your most excellent posts. It's always helpful to have the ludicrous and obtuse juxtaposed to cogency for contrast.