The speaker/amplification wars continue


SET amplification vs PP amplification
High sens speakers vs ~`The INEFFICIENTS~~~
You might think this topic belongs over on amps room. Not at all. 
SET + High sens (91db-120db)
PP + Low sens = The Inefficients (below 91db)
Sunday I hope to get Richard Gray's 211 SET amp he builds in his shop.
This will be my 1st ever exp with SET amps, Not once have I heard a SET amp.
I know now what a  PP can do. 
I have various FR 91ish db speakers for testing.
Thinking it all over.
My only concern is classical music, Specifically full orchestra rocking N rolling. 
While listening to my Defy 7 6550, the orchestra is not separated, its all blended, like a  Louisiana Gumbo.
I'm guessing RG's 211 will bring  in details which a  PP amp just can't manage. 
I am not sure ,. just guessing here. Now all the YT vids on SET amps, have easy jazz, solo instruments, nothing complex whatsoever,. 
So obviously I will not test with my usual reference cds, Gatemouth Brown Gateswings, nor Sophie Milman. ,,well no actually we will start with Gatemouth, as his cd is high chaged with  thick stuff going on, Lets see ifa  211 can handle its business.
Next I will test the 211 witha  bunch of high quality classical, Rip Roaring full orchestra. 
Will tghe 211 pass with colors and separation and SLAM! or will the big bad boy go down in flames , all discobobulated and coughing its guts out.
Will post results. 
If SET wins, Defy is up on the auction block, actually ~buy now,/ships free~Going to takea hit on that one, as i have $1500 in upgrades, amp is from the early 2000'ish? . , amp hardly used, . Maybe 3-4 yrs  
mozartfan
@mozartfan While I am also a fan of easy to drive speakers, regardless of your conclusion I really should point something out. The Defy 7 is a rather large amplifier and a 211 SET is not. In a nutshell if you want to know how PP does against SET, to start with maybe both amps should be the same power!

Another way to look at this is if you really want to know the difference between the two, how about eliminate some variables, like make sure both amps in the comparison use the same output tubes at least.

If you want to know weaknesses of SETs here are a few:

1) Because SETs make about 10% distortion at full power, if you really want to hear what they can do the amp should be driving a speaker that is efficient enough that the amp **never** makes more than about 20% of full power. This prevents the higher ordered harmonics from becoming audible; if they become audible it will be perceived as 'dynamics'. IOW the 'dynamic' character of SETs is caused by distortion and nothing else.

2) Obviously the speaker choice must be done carefully as outlined above. The output impedance of any SET is fairly high and the amp does not act as a voltage source, so your speaker choices are limited.


3) The higher the power of the SET the more its bandwidth is limited by the output transformer. This is true of PP too, but isn't really a problem until you are making over about 100 watts, as opposed to about 6 or7 with an SET. This is why the lower powered SETs like the 45s are preferred, but a 45 can only make 0.75 watts!

4) One advantage of SETs is that as you decrease the power the distortion goes down to the point that its unmeasurable. Distortion obscures detail; this is the source of the 'inner detail' that read about in so many SET reviews. But this property isn't limited to SETs, there are a number of PP amplifier topologies that allow this as well. 


5) You'd think an SET would have the simplest signal path but that isn't always the case. There are amplifier designs that have only 1 gain stage; SETs have 2 or 3. In an SET distortion is compounded from one stage of gain to the next in the amplifier. If you have a PP design and in particular if that design is fully balanced from input to output, you can cancel even ordered harmonics in each stage as the signal progresses through the amp. This results in dramatically lower distortion (smoother sound with more detail) even if feedback is not used.

I've yet to see a situation where an SET could sound better than a PP amp **when the variables are more controlled**. Its very safe to say its an antiquated technology which has been sidelined by succeeding arts.





Thinking about the unmeasurable distortion and incredible inner detail attracts me to SET. But then there are all these limitations and problems. Oh well. They do have a nice set of desirable qualities, for those willing and able to put up with the rest. 
Stream of consciousness belongs in modernist novels (Joyce, Faulkner, etc.) not in audio discussion posts.
ith respect to tube types in pushpull amps, I tend to like 6L6, KT66, EL34, and EL84 tubes over the likes of 6550, KT88, KT120 and KT150 tubes.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Would have been nice had Jadis made the Defy to accept lower watt tubes, Richard always reminds me the Defy is a picky amp, and best not get experiemental..I had KT150's in the amp for a few days,, 
So yeah I'd like to try some KT66's, EL34's as  my plan is to add a  97 db FR speaker, running the Seas W18 87db as backup low end, 40-1500hz.
Someone here mentioned the lower watt EL34 would not make a dif in lowering output on the Defy, 
The Defy and 97 db  FR will just have to learn to get along with each other.
I will replace the  alps control on the Jadis DPL, at least I'll have a  better control on gain. The alps has 42 or 46 steps. 
Thinking about the unmeasurable distortion and incredible inner detail attracts me to SET. But then there are all these limitations and problems. Oh well. They do have a nice set of desirable qualities, for those willing and able to put up with the rest.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This pretty much sums up what has been going on in my musings into the SET amps.
For that glorious midrange and upper highs, which can bea  surreal experience, 
Most of my classical has passages that are demanding  in gritty hz overload levels, Like Schnittke's symphonies, Pettersson, Elliott Carter, many passges that R&R.  
Requiring a  circuit that can  respond and recover with ease.