Tube Amp for Martin Logan Speakers


Hi, I love tube sound through my Martin Logan Aerius-i fronts and Cinema-i center. I currently have a Butler 5150 which is a hybrid, but it busted on me and would cost $700 to fix. I've had china stereo tube amps that were pretty good and gave true tube sound, but not enough drive for higher volumes. I live in condo, so not like I can blast music anyways but still. I got the Butler because I wanted 5 channel tube sound for home theatre (The piercing sound from my Denon 3801 receiver was not pleasant to my ears). It appears there are only three multi-channel tube amps around, from Mcintosh, Butler 5150, and Dared DV-6C. The latter two are hybrids, and the last one was one of the worst tube amps i've ever heard. I have no clue why 6Moons gave the Dared a 2010 award, but maybe it's because it produces only 65W.

So since multichannel tube amps are hard to come by, and they tend to be hybrid, I was thinking maybe it would be best to get three true tube monoblocks to power my fronts. Thing is I wonder if they will be underpowered for my speakers, and not sure which ones are decent for the price. Maybe China made ones would suffice, and they still go for pretty expensive price. I'm wondering if anybody knows of a decent powerful tube monoblock that is affordable, because I can't pay $3000 per block. or maybe best to just repair my Butler. Thing is, I'm not confident that it is reliable. The tubes are soldered in which is weird, and i've taken it to a couple repair guys who both said that the design is not good, because it's very tight inside and more susceptible to being fried from DC voltage areas. it's too sensitive.

Any suggestions for tube monoblocks, even if china made ones? the holy grail for me would be Mcintosh tube amp, but they are hard to come by. Thanks.

smurfmand70
Ralph, take a look at the impedance curve for the CLX, shown at the bottom of this page. Could it be that Tsushima1's negative experience with the Zero was the result of the speaker's extremely high impedance at low frequencies being multiplied 2 or 3 or 4 times, resulting in the tube amplifiers he used running essentially unloaded at low frequencies? Or, at best, running into impedances at low frequencies that were non-optimal for the output taps provided on the amplifiers?

Best regards,
-- Al
Hard to say Al, he's not said what phenomena he ran into with any specificity.

Paul Speltz is very supportive though and often has suggestions for how to sort things out should one run into problems.

A simple way to hear what negative effects they have, is to put them on an amp that has no problem driving a speaker.
Then you will hear what negative effects they have when they are in.

In my view they are interim fix, to allow an amp that has problems driving the speaker, to make it usable with that speaker. And I use the word "usable" lightly.

A owner is far better off getting the right amp for the speaker, or the right speaker for that amp to start with.

Cheers George
An informative review from HiFi World there Al, however from my own in-room measurements 92 to 96 db peaks were demanding 120 to 140 Watts of the amplifier, therefore I must say that I am somewhat sceptical of the reviews 'more than adequate' power recommendation of 50 Watts!
Do what the maker recommends.

It'll all work. It's just a matter of how well. The maker should know best what works best. Once you've done that, then you are in a position to try something different and see how that works in comparison. You never quite know what will sound best to someone, however its much easier to determine what will perform best from a technical perspective. Optimal performance is usually the best place to start. Where one ends up after that might still be different, but at least you know you started out on the right road.

If you need an adaptor, impedance or otherwise in order to make things work well, you probably did not start out on the right road.