SET the best?

OK 6 watt SET 250 tube with PURE COLBALT output tansformers.
Tiny but packa  super punch and very expensive trans.'
Wayyy more than enough power, Close to the  Defy's slam.
Defy and EL 34 amps, both max on SPL at say 930 on the linestage vol pot. SET 6 watt, 10:30 maxed out.
You might say thats only a  1 hour dif..
But its better than nothing.
I really want the freedom on vol control, which I don't have with PP amplification..
I should say, SET and PP power are  very close and musical image is close.
I have to recant some of my superlatives on SETs are superior to PP amplification..
I  bet  these 6 watt colbalt trans amps can drive even the big Sound lab, big magnepan, bif martin Logan's with  flair and finesse.
But of course not a  happy match.

WE really need to clean up, clear up the many misunderstandings, mis info surrounding SET amplification.

I feel these SET amps are the superior amplication and see no need for PP designed amps..
 Also,
Not sure if pure colbalt trans  are needed, as its actually too much power from the output transformers. 
But not sure, its possible low quality trans lack the slam  the colbalts deliver. 
SET amps  require 20 minutes to warm up for max output. 
As I just learned......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5cPEjgAVo8

I mean at 8 oclock, the SPL would be over whleming.

SETs generate up to 10%THD at full power. If you have a lower powered SET on a speaker of insufficient efficiency, the result will be a lot of distortion, which the ear translates as 'loudness'.

But if you use a sound pressure level meter, you see the truth of the situation.

SETs have just as much if not more bass SLAM as any PP amp. 

This is demonstrably false. SETs have a lot of trouble making bass because of limitations in the output transformer. If you really want to get the bass right, to prevent phase shift (since you have no feedback in most SETs) you have to have full power bandwidth to 1/10th of the lowest frequency to be reproduced (20Hz). That means you need bandwidth to 2Hz and SETs simply can't do that.

For that matter **most** PP amps can't either, but they get a lot closer. There are class A triode tube amps that do have full power to 2Hz FWIW.

I have yet to find a better amp than my Wavac EC300b. Anyone who has listened to a good high efficiency speaker driven by a good SET, lest they are Harvey Wallbanger won’t go back to anything else. That said, I‘d love to listen to the AGD Audion class-d amps. There might be a revolution in the making…

Should probably mention we had a Bel Canto SET power amp here at Chuxpona.    
    
https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/9675   

It was being driven by I forget what preamp so hard to judge inner detail but what we heard was terrific and with 37 SET watts the thing was a beast! Really looking forward to getting it back in here for Chuctoberfest, hopefully with a much better preamp to be able to better judge just how good it really is. But I was excited to hear and my first SET experience was no let down, that is for sure.

I mean at 8 oclock, the SPL would be over whleming.

SETs generate up to 10%THD at full power. If you have a lower powered SET on a speaker of insufficient efficiency, the result will be a lot of distortion, which the ear translates as 'loudness'.

But if you use a sound pressure level meter, you see the truth of the situation.

SETs have just as much if not more bass SLAM as any PP amp.

This is demonstrably false. SETs have a lot of trouble making bass because of limitations in the output transformer

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I will admit I am spaeking in generaliztions

The 92db WBers were screaming at above say 11 oclock on some recordings. maybe ina  larger room , might have better results.
But as i selectively only listen low/mid vol, never ever high,,SET's at say 10 oclock on the linestage pot is top SPL for my near field listening enviornment.

The SET made just as much solid bass as the KT88 and EL34.

Perhaps on a  low eff/lower sens big box speaker,, yeah , PP are the preferable.

But lets not underestimate what a  SET is capabale of
Especially when we have solid COLBALT  out put trans in the mix, 
These powerful trans, are not cheap, I should add.
Tech says something like $1G each.. which if true, makes these SETs one very special amp.
But again it was too much power than I need/want.
More /better control on linestage vol pot vs the PP amps, but just by a tad margin.
Its the only SET I;'ve heard, and my opinion is this based on this SET.
PP and SET's are very close in sound, Its not like SETs are sooo much better.
I don't believe this at all.
But givena  choice, I'd rather have my music flowing through, a very cool looking 845 tube vs a  basic kt88/el34 POWER tube.
You get more finesse, something superior froma  SET tube.
Miniscule nuance, but certainly the better choice. 
If we blind test low vol, it would be a  lucky guess if a  PP vs SET is on the speaker.

Overall SET's take the Cigar. 
My tech who designs and retails both,  enjoys both designs.
I'm a  either/or kind of guy, as you can tell.
Only 1 can take the prize home.
Again, we are talking nuances, but also I like the  fact SETs seems  to have less curent, power push, and so I gain more control on linestage vol pot.

Again to point out, perahps the Voxativ/AER 's allow even more power w/o breakup in higher SPL's. 

I don't need high SPL, so the DavidLouis works perfectly fine at say 80db SPL.

To me thats loud. 

SETs may not have all the power of  say a  Jadis JA200 mono blocks,, but they are not wimpy on  slam either,
SET fans are less interested in power  , more(by a  slim margin= nuances) about finesse, details, dynamics, 
SETs vs PP, sound is not that far apart on most higher sens speakers.