2. amps-preamps
  3. 1018837399

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
allanbhaganinfo
121 posts
 
Sometimes presentation can be altered to taste or preference, this is a very big factor, so it's really hard to say, I bet, had they experimented with the feedback switch, there also would be several different opinions on which position sounded the best.

This is too much fun, let's all get together at mikelagvine place this summer :)
Allan
del
31 posts
 
Well, I went back and read the manual for the Berning. He says that the low feedback setting raises impedence and reduces speaker damping. To quote from the manual:"Speaker damping relates to the control that the amplifier has over the position of the speaker diaphragm. High damping has the effect of causing the speaker diaphagm to start and stop quickly, and its sonic attributes also show up most dramatically in the bass. High damping is likely to give a tighter, dryer, and more analytical sound and low damping is likely to give a more open and resonant sound."

We left the Berning on normal feedback, which is the low impedence high damping setting. That is probably the source of Mike's comment about the greater bass "slam" of the Berning - it was stopping that big 13" woofer in the Kharma's on a dime. Mike says the Kharma's are a flat 8 ohm load. In the specs, the manual says the output impedence of the amp is 1.8 ohms @ normal, 3.8 ohms @ medium, and 8.7 ohms at low feedback setting. Looks like we should have at least tried the low feedback setting, since that would come closest to matching the Kharma's load, and it would have softened the bass because of the lower damping. Oh well, guess we'll just have to revisit this another day.

By the way, I have never heard the Lamms, but I can say that the combination of the Tenors and the Kharmas and Mike's room treatment produces the best, truest, feel it in your gut bass I have ever experienced outside a live performance (and then only if you are in the real sweet spot in the auditorium). Maybe Mr. Kamm could tell is what other equipment he was using in his comparison.
allanbhaganinfo
121 posts
 
Go back :) it's killing me.
allanbhaganinfo
121 posts
 
The Mono blocks uses the same tubes as the 270, however the power supply is beefier and some other differences.
These amps were really design and built as direct drives, they were sent to Roger West at sound lab, who to my conclusion was amazed by there design and reliability, I think that is one reason for the 3 month stay at sound lab.

They are capable of 110 watts into 8 ohms but 5500V peak to peak, I'm directly driving a pair of Sound lab M3's with them, all 7lbs each :)
I can barely lift the back plates out of the Sound labs, then I put these little light units in behind, direct to stator and boy oh boy.

I rather not comment on the sound, you'll have a hard time believing it, I have a hard time believing it.

We did some comparisons with the 270 and it was certainly in the same family but the mono blocks had something really special going for it :)

I know most of you know the 270, although light, they are by no means empty, the same and more can be said about these Monos, David Berning must have very small fingers.

The technology in these amps are mind boggling, can't really be had anywhere else.
mikelavigne OP
2,199 posts
 
Kevin, if your friend has $15k Tenors, they are the 15 watt versions that you are comparing to your 90 watt Lamm ML1s. depending on the speakers you are using, your result is not too surprising.

the 15 watt versions are designed for the Lamhorns (100db efficient) made by Robert Lamare, one of the Tenor partners. a 15 watt OTL is a very wonderful amp, but has some real world limitations. i would also guess the 15 watt Tenors would shame your ML1s on the Lamhorns. everything is context.

i have heard the ML1s on the Kharma Grande Ceramique in the Lamm room at CES, and although very nice, sorry to say they are not close to the performance of the Tenor75Wi on the Kharma Exquisite 1Ds in my room.

your comments would sound ridiculous to any of the 20 or 25 audiophiles that have listened to the Tenors in my room. the most consistent perception is of the best bass extention and definition they have yet heard...... not wooley, loose, slam for slam's sake rock-concert bass.....but natural, articulate, bass that serves and integrates with the music.....extending flat to 25hz and with usable bass information below 20hz.

i have a friend that is the Musical Director and Conductor of a local regional orchestra. he will be recording an SACD this spring with FIM Recordings. when he was recently in my room he commented that it was the first time he had ever heard recorded bass sound "correct" as we were listening to his own recordings on my system.

we could both be right depending on context; maybe someday i'll have the ML1s or ML2s in my room to compare directly with the Tenors, but until then we'll all have to just try to compare what we have actually heard.
More to discover