Using tube amp with electrostatic speakers.

Atmaphere wrote
"Some people like it, but in the real world there is no such thing as ’tight’ (thump but no body) bass. That’s an audiophile thing; but if you listen to real, live music you won’t be hearing ’tight’ bass."

+1 Tight bass sounds unnatural to my ears . Drum , bass guitar ... ect . I have never thought while listening to these instruments "man that is tight" complete opposite actually . "man that bass lingers" is what i hear .
Tight bass can be found with electronic music . And can be judged when listening to it .

We are devolving into semantics.

The alternative to "tight" in my mind is "flabby" or "boomy" which is what usually happens when your speakers go low enough in frequency to exacerbate room modes. +-20 dB peaks and valleys are quite real and detrimental to musical enjoyment.

However, a system that lacks those peaks and valleys, and is flat to 16Hz in the room is a marvelous thing indeed. :)

Best,


Erik

Dear Stewart, You wrote, "There's no analogizing......and I know they're different (that's why they're not both called electrostatic)"  Wrong!  Your magneplanars and even ribbon tweeters are electromagnetic, not electrostatic. In your speakers, the diaphragm is "wired"; the signal is conducted through wires glued to the diaphragm, which causes it to move back and forth in a magnetic field, much like any other traditional type dynamic speaker. In an ESL, a the diaphragm carries a very high voltage on its surface, and the signal is applied to the stators, stationary wires front and rear of the diaphragm, causing the diaphragm to move due to electrostatic forces. Therein lies the way in which ESLs are totally different.  Furthermore, ESLs, being electrostatic, do not produce a back EMF, as do electromagnetic speakers, so the whole idea of "damping factor", the reason some say that only SS amplifiers can provide "clean" ("tight") bass, goes out the window.  

LewM,

What part of "I know they're different" did you not catch?  At least you didn't write that I'm full of Baloney again.......Having said that, your explanation of the differences (the differences I acknowledged).....are spot on.

You and others seem to have taken my opinion and tweaked it to say that I say a SS amp is best with Electrostatic, or Magnetic planar for that matter.....It's not really SS versus Tube it's current...  Would a world class 150W tube amplifier sound better than it's identical but smaller stablemate say at 50W.......I guess some would say YES.....I say in most cases, the 150W would sound better.......When you get beyond that....solid state of course becomes prevalent.....I love tubes on electrostatics, and most of the electrostatics I've had, save for the Martin Logans were driven by tubes....but I never had the headroom or effortlessness I reference here.......In the case of the Magnepans I have now.......it's quite different......they simply WILL NOT SING without a couple of hundred watts......they'll make music, but they won't sing....
but when I feed them nearly 2KW into 4OHMS like I have on tap with the Brystons.....everything takes on an effortlessness that's hard to describe......

If one can bi-amp Maggies (or any other magnetic-planar speaker), solid state on bottom and tubes on top is a killer combo. It's the bass drivers that suck up all the current.