2. speakers
  3. 1429587251

High value, high efficiency speakers for SET amps

Hi, Gang,
I know that some of what I want to discuss here has been dealt with in other threads, some of them quite old, but I wanted to see if any of you fine, knowledgable folks are willing to help update and consolidate some of this info in a more current thread.
I am currently running my new Audio Note Kit 1 300B SET amp with a pair of Reference 3A De Capo speakers. I think it's a fine pairing and I am really enjoying what the 300B SET experience brings to the table in terms of musicality and emotional connection.
Still the De Capo, while supposedly an easy load due to its crossover-less design (only 1 cap on the tweeter with the mid-woofer directly coupled to the amp), is "only" rated at 92 db efficient, and based on the most recent Canadian NRC specs, that rating may be optimistic.
So, I am toying with the idea of trying a pair of more efficient, deliberately SET-friendly speakers in my rig, something that might also play lower and with greater dynamic swing than the De Capo's. Note that the De Capo's have served me well and I am very fond of them, but I can't help but wonder if my lovely Kit 1 would shine even better coupled to a VERY easy to drive speaker.
Devore and Audio Note are obvious options - the O/96 looks really tasty. Unfortunately, both of those choices are out of my budget, which I'm thinking maxes out (for real) at around $1500. I am willing to consider used equipment.
Tekton Lore 2.0: This is the speaker that Eric Alexander of Tekton has recommended when we've spoken on the phone, based upon my medium-small listening room and amp. I've read the epic "Lore vs. Zu" thread elsewhere in this forum, and clearly Tekton has its enthusiastic fans here. What I wonder is whether the Lore 2.0 has the refinement of the De Capo in terms of resolution, sweet high end and imaging. Audiogon'er Mikirob has pointed me to the many rave reviews of Tekton's speakers and I'm definitely interested.
I've corresponded with the Sonist folks (who are super nice) but their really high-efficiency, nearly-full-range floor stander is out of my budget.
Then there's the "vintage" route, going after some used JBL's or other high-efficiency "classics" from the 80's (or '70's). I am not inclined to go in this direction, but mention it because it's been suggested to me.
And then there's Omega. I spoke to Louis some time ago and he recommended his 7XRS hemp cone model. But I know all the raps on single driver designs and I'm cautious, although I would like to hear from any of you who own or have owned Omega's.
I'm in no rush to make a switch but I am very interested in your thoughts. Thanks, folks!
rebbi
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 
Rebbi,
I can relate to your transition as my own experience was near identical. My former amplifier was push pull and very high quality . It was 100 watt in ultralinear and switchable to 60 watt triode and used 6550 or KT88s. In absolute terms this amp has more bass weight and impact , however the gap was narrower than I expected. The SET bass in terms of texture, tone and bloom is more realistic. Impact is definitely enough for my needs. In all other parameters of music reproduction the SET is superior and in all the ways you have pointed out so clearly. Once I got the SET, returning to the PP amp it sounds mechanical and lacks the natural fluidity flow of the 300b
SET. As you noted with your D. Krall example, my SET has superior resolution, transparency and clarity/articulation.
Charles,
rebbi OP
1,326 posts
 
Charles,
One thing I forgot to mention in the Diana Krall example.
After the instrumental introduction to the title track, "When I Look in Your Eyes," Diana enters, singing. She is singing very softly, her mouth is apparently very, very close to the microphone and she is at the lower limits of her vocal range. I always thought that her pitch sounded somewhat wobbly on those opening notes but with the Kit 1, you can hear just how wobbly her pitch is at that moment. It's kind of an odd example, but it did make me smile and does say something about the resolution and musicality of that amplifier. :-)
brownsfan
1,508 posts
 
Rebbi, if you recall, I also drove the deCapos with my 500 WPC solid state Cary monoblocks and found the 8WPC Frankensteins drove them better. One of the other posters commented that the deCapos are unusually sensitive to amp/speaker synergy. That is consistent with my experience. I think you are right, well designed 300B SETs may be the pinnacle for that particular speaker. It has been a rewarding experience watching you work your way through this process. This hobby is a place where engineering, physics, biology, and psychology all meet. No wonder it such a meandering path.
rebbi OP
1,326 posts
 
Brownsfan,
I suppose it makes some sense, at least intuitively, that the De Capo's would be particularly sensitive to amplifier topology, since the main driver is coupled directly to the amplifier signal. I'm sure there's more to it than that, but, based upon your experiences, my experiences and the fact that Reference 3A recommends one of the Antique Sound Lab 300 B SET amps, there really is some "magic" with that speaker and this kind of amplifier.
So it makes me think that when looking for a speaker for this kind of amp, it makes some sense to look at brands that are not only high-efficiency and flat impedance, but also otherwise designed with single ended operation in mind. Again, I don't know the physics and engineering of this, but there must be other factors involved in designing a speaker specifically to be "SET friendly."
Almarg, feel free to chime in here. :-)
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 
Brownsfan (Bill),
It's very interesting to note that you, Rebbi, Rob and the speaker's builder cite the terrific results of 300b or SEP with the De Capo. This in spite of the warnings that the speakers demand more power. Well your Cary and Rebbi's Manley met that criteria yet were found to be inferior sounding. Again proving nothing takes the place of actually listening. Bill you mentioned psychology and for some it is a significant barrier to acceptance.
Charles,
More to discover