High value, high efficiency speakers for SET amps

The key to good sound is all about low noise and distortion.

Agree with Ralph that a major difference and potential advantage of a set is that first watt or so and results will depend on how far you can make that go.

I'm loving learning from you folks. :-)

And remember Rebbi's Rule (TM): "A thread ain't a thread until it's hit 500 posts."

:-D

As Rob, Grannyring and I have mentioned previously, our typical listening volume is 75 to 85 db. At this level power required is less than 1 watt (actually fractions of 1 watt) for our speakkers. Distortion is miniscule, resolution/detail retrieval is superb benefitting tone and timbre. No need/desire to listen at louder levels(unless you just want to). Result=excellent sound with preservation of one's precious hearing ability.
Charles,

Keithr

I tried 3 SETs on my Zu Def IVs. First, an EAR859, then a Yamamoto 08, then a DejaVu 2a3.

I thought the EAR859 to be too sterile. The Yamamoto 08 (45 SET) and DejaVu 2a3 did not have enough oomph. (Caveat: I have very long speaker wire runs - under the floor to the other side of the room.) I am very happy with an Ancient Audio SET using Takatsuki 300b tubes and driven by an Ancient Audio CDP/preamp combination. (There were major differences among 300b tubes.) This combination can fill a large (45' x 22' x 16' high) volume - although the front third - 15' x 22' x 16' high with the speakers on the long wall - is the primary listening space. This is regardless of the music that I play to include full scale chorus and orchestra as well as classical rock. And it does so without sounding overly loud and never strained.

I have heard the SIT monos with the ZuDef IVs at a show, but I have not heard any 845 amp. I have also tried powerful solid state amps, but did not sense any increased output. I think that the built-in amp for the down-firing sub mitigates any weakness of low-power SETs.

A few comments.
I also listen at lower than typical volumes. I frequently have to fight with salon proprietors to turn it down when I audition new equipment. In my case, those lower volumes represent realistic volumes. Bach cantatas are seldom performed at 105 dB. So, Ralph, no worries! You did not confuse me by presenting the facts as dictated by physics and math. My Coincident Triumph Extreme II monitor pairing with the Coincident Franks is not a perfect in every respect set up, but it achieves my goals better than anything I have yet owned or auditioned. What I loose with reproduction of Mahler, I gain in reproduction of a Beethoven violin sonata.

Rob made an especially astute observation with respect to some of us having true timbre as the number 1 priority. Indeed, for me, if a piece is slightly amiss in this respect it is a non starter. I have quickly rejected very well reviewed equipment on this basis. I can make sacrifices in low frequency extension and dynamics, but not with timbre. I suspect this may also be something Rebbi values, based on his love for his new AN 300B.

In Rebbi's case, I am sympathetic to arguments for very high efficiency speakers. It may well be that given his musical tastes and listening volumes, he can't get what he seeks without getting into the 97-100 dB efficient range. His deCapos can certainly be bettered in that respect, and with a higher efficiency speaker he is likely to realize the improved dynamics he seeks. Also, it is my experience that the deCapos, for all their virtues, don't handle the lower octaves all that well. Both Rob and I noted issues with walking bass reproduction.

The problem is his budget. At $1500, there are going to be trade offs. If there were a $1500 speaker that did everything he wants, we would all own a pair. I would have thought something in the Tekton line might have been his best shot. His brief audition of one of the Lores was disappointing. My fear is that while he can probably find a deCapo replacement that betters their performance in one or two respects, he may find a decrease in what he calls refinement may not be an acceptable long term solution. He is not in a position to run experiments that are not cash neutral.

So Rebbi, sorry if I have spoken as if you are not in the room. I can still remember when cash flow was tight. My advice is to continue to audition everything that you can at minimal cost. Too bad you are so far away from Tennessee. I'd love for you to hear my Coincident TE IIs. The performance gap by comparison to the deCapos is startling. Be careful selling the deCapos to fund something that is a pure experiment. It is going to be easier to deoptimize in a cash neutral transaction.

If you had another $1000, i think you would have more options.

Meanwhile, enjoy what you have.