Hello Mapman,
My comments about realistic piano sound was in response to your mentioning 2nd order harmonics vs "accurate reproduction. The SET sounds more like a live piano than other amplifiers I’ve used in my system. I believe it is due to the ability to capture and preserve the nuances and subtle musical cues that are so important. The resonance of the soundboard and vibration of the strings etc. This level of information heightens the sense of presence and the benefit is a more convincing presentation.
It isn’t a case of the SS not sounding good, but rather it couldn’t fool you to the same extent as the SET in presenting believable presence. As a consequence the SET was superior of distinguishing both the players (Monk,Peterson,Ellington or Evans). This also applies to brand differences (Yamaha, Fazioli,Bosendorfer or Steinway). Even less apparent nuances are more clearly contrasted.
This ability to finely discriminate is consistent with all instruments in my listening experiences. I’ve come to realize that perhaps the greatest strength of good SET is its admirable way with the micro,ultra subtle but very necessary details. That it does this in such a natural manner is what’s so impressive. It doesn’t resort to a sterile or analytical character in order to present this beautiful inner detail.
Mapman,
You should give the Atma-Sphere S 30 serious consideration as a lower power and smaller OTL alternative (if you prefer OTL rather than SET).. Surely a good match with your speakers. Either direction, good luck.
Charles,
My comments about realistic piano sound was in response to your mentioning 2nd order harmonics vs "accurate reproduction. The SET sounds more like a live piano than other amplifiers I’ve used in my system. I believe it is due to the ability to capture and preserve the nuances and subtle musical cues that are so important. The resonance of the soundboard and vibration of the strings etc. This level of information heightens the sense of presence and the benefit is a more convincing presentation.
It isn’t a case of the SS not sounding good, but rather it couldn’t fool you to the same extent as the SET in presenting believable presence. As a consequence the SET was superior of distinguishing both the players (Monk,Peterson,Ellington or Evans). This also applies to brand differences (Yamaha, Fazioli,Bosendorfer or Steinway). Even less apparent nuances are more clearly contrasted.
This ability to finely discriminate is consistent with all instruments in my listening experiences. I’ve come to realize that perhaps the greatest strength of good SET is its admirable way with the micro,ultra subtle but very necessary details. That it does this in such a natural manner is what’s so impressive. It doesn’t resort to a sterile or analytical character in order to present this beautiful inner detail.
Mapman,
You should give the Atma-Sphere S 30 serious consideration as a lower power and smaller OTL alternative (if you prefer OTL rather than SET).. Surely a good match with your speakers. Either direction, good luck.
Charles,