2. amps-preamps
  3. 163903-4976

Gave up my SET----looking for moderate to higher power replacement options

I recently sold my JAS Array 2.1, which is a SET using 805 and 300B producing 45w.  With NOS RCA 805 and Sophia Princess 300B's, this amp produced the best sound I've ever had.  I used it to drive the satellite section of a pair of DIY/Legacy Focus clones using Eton drivers.  I've ran several different solid state amps on the bass drivers.  The inner detail and palpability of images were fantastic.  Images were life-sized and, frequently, sounded as if the musicians were in the room with me (not much of an exaggeration--honestly!)  And despite the modest power rating, this amp had startling dynamics.  It was an exciting and very engaging listen but.....well, aside from the amp breaking down on a few occasions, the cost of tubes and the extreme heat the amp put out,  the amp did run out of power when I pushed it too hard.  

I've tried several other amps during my time with the JAS, typically as warm weather substitutes, and a few more since I sold it but I really am mostly disappointed.  Presently I have an Audiozone Amp1 running the satellite section and a Jaton AV5140 on the woofers.  I was biamping with the Jaton but wanted a bit more detail and transparency.  The Audiozone is better than the Jaton in this regard but still falls rather short of the standard set by the JAS  and also runs out of power occasionally and sounds just awful when it clips.  I have an Audio Alchemy DPA 1 and had the Wyred4Sound ST-500 when it first came out and neither are what I'm looking for in my main system.  The AA amp is better but still a far cry from the sonics of the SET JAS.  Do any of the Class D amps truly approach SET sonics?    I'm considering the Gamut D200 mk iii as well though these are hard to find.   Are there any Class D amps I should look in to?  I really need to keep it at $3000 or less and probably around $2000.  Please make recommendations based on actual experience, that is only on amps you've actually heard.  Thanks!
lcherepkai
rodge827's avatar
rodge827
621 posts
 
Check out the Digital Amplifier Company. I have had a number of his amps over the last few years, with the last being a 2-Cherry. They are powerful and clean without any of the negative characteristics attributed to digital amplifiers. The closest sound to SET in a SS amp I’ve ever come across on my 100db horns. There are many former SET guys who are now big DAC fans.

I sold the DAC amp since I was able to score an excellent pair of 300b monos that I had always wanted. Are the 300b amps better? I’ll just say that if I had the funds the DAC amps would still be around and some serious swapping would still be going on.

Reach out to Tommy at DAC he is a great guy to chat with and could make suggestions on which of his creations would suit you best. DAC also has a 30 day no frills return policy, you would only be responsible for shipping cost both ways.

https://www.cherryamp.com/
DAC Forum: https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?board=174

luisma31
516 posts
 
I wanted to experiment with SET amps as my only reference with modern tube amps are my Atmasphere MA-1s, tried the Dennis Had PSET amps and the venerable Almarro 318B, I know these are not the typical definition of SETs like the 300Bs and such, what I found was that even with my 95 dB sensitivity speakers the amps (as Ralph wisely explained) due to their 18W relatively low power were making distortion after 50 percent gain, tried differently tubes to gain every extra watt possible but really nothing to be done so I kept my Atmasphere and sold the amps. I'm sure the results with 100 plus dB sensitive speakers will be different and these amps are very good, both of them, the Dennis Had is really a tube rolling dream. Going back to my point, at least to my inexperienced ears without the reference set by the Atmasphere monos I wouldn't be able to recognize the distortion at higher levels made by the SETs.

Maybe one day I can get higher sensitivity speakers and try SET again but really having an Amp with the "elasticity" of powering a wide range of speakers is paramount to me.

Thank you Ralph for the education on this post, many will say and argue that you don't know what you're taking about and even like the OP said I had to get my glasses to understand maybe 60 percent of what you're saying (and I'm being generous to myself) what you are saying reflects my empirical results.



atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
11,960 posts
 
It does not sound like a set amp. Only set amps sound like set amps. Solid state amps are only going to be an approximation, but leave you lacking.
A push-pull tube amp with a single-ended input will exhibit a prominent 5th harmonic in addition to the 2nd and 3rd. Mathematically, this is the result of this type of amplifier having both a quadratic and cubic non-linearity. So it will tend to favor odd ordered harmonics to a certain degree, and higher ordered harmonics will fall off at a rate similar to that of an SET.


This reinforces the complaints that SET lovers often level at Push-pull amplifiers. Its nice to know that the math and measurements support what the subjective camp (SET lovers) is saying in this case.


However its important to understand that an entirely differential push-pull tube amplifier expresses a cubic non-linearity, which IME is even easier to listen to than SETs. I think this is the bit that the SET crowd misses and its not surprising because I’ve yet to see any designer of SETs talk about a quadratic non-linearity.


What is important here is that the subjective camp, theoretical mathematics and practical mathematics are in agreement about what we experience as audiophiles.


I don’t like to take sides on the objectivist/subjectivist debate. I see it as a bit ignorant; in particular when objectivists talk about ’being measurable’ they usually don’t have a clue about what to measure (although they are otherwise correct). As a result for the last 40-50 years they’ve been pushing amplifiers that have increasing distortion as frequency is increased and so sound bright and harsh, especially when driven to higher output levels (and this due to the simple fact that these amps employ feedback in insufficient amounts). That’s not objective IME; its simply expressing poor taste.
cal3713's avatar
cal3713
1,421 posts
 
@atmasphere No doubt.  If the human ear hears it different, then there somewhere (at some point in time) exists the ability to measure a difference.  The ASR style measurement folks want to claim that human hearing primarily responds to written words and visual bling.  Certainly these things matter, but not like actual differences in sound. 

It takes people like you to educate them in what to measure, but unfortunately many in that crowd seem to care more about mocking subjective perception than truly understanding sound reproduction and measuring the things that predict these subjective differences.  
cal3713's avatar
cal3713
1,421 posts
 
My dream post-academic career would be getting involved in such an effort, but unfortunately I haven't been able to figure out how to get in the door... "Hey bro, I'm a former top scientist in my field with research on the evolutionary function of music and world-leading expertise in measuring subjective perception" hasn't worked yet.
More to discover