Comment about SS and Tubes


For the people who have followed by two and only two posts: you know I have all Cary Audio: SLP-05 pre and 805AE mains. I also have the 200.2. I had never used the 200.2 until recently. Front end are Totem Winds and Totem Mani 2 - alternating depending on my mood.

In my first post, several pro SS people recommended I boost my power and go SS. That got me to thinking???

I hefted that big old 200.2 up to my music room and hooked it up to the Balanced outputs of the SLP-05. Kept the RCA outputs going to the 805’s.

I listen to JAZZ so I don’t necessarily need loud. But sometimes I want loud.

Power is good. After a few albums and a bit of streaming I do concede, Power is good. I didn’t realize how good my speakers were until I pushed them. Bass I never knew. And the whole spectrum was astonishing.

On some albums I like the subtle refinement of the tubes. They are awesome to hear. But I am a convert. I do like the watts. My Cary Audio 200.2 is going to get broken in finally,

128x128cinqcepages

      The guys at Dahlquist designed the DQ-LP1 crossover, to mate a sub to their DQ-10 speakers.

       Being that their weren't a whole lot of self-powered subwoofers, back in the day; that little unit got a lot of application.

       I used one (variously upgraded) in my own systems, in concert with the 10" TL subs I built to go with my first pair of planars (Acoustat Mod III), for well over two decades.

       Looks like the JL crossover would be a good one, consistent with the quality of the rest of the OP's system.

       This article was of particular interest to me, as I've been using a TacT 2.2X for quite some time:

            https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/the-jl-audio-cr-1-analog-vs-tact-digital-crossover.19361/

         Roger Sanders was a youngster, when he wrote this article, for Speaker Builder (damn, I feel old):

               https://sanderssoundsystems.com/downloads/speaker_builder_dec_1980_an_electrostatic_speaker_system_Part%20III.pdf

          About that good old Dahlquist DQ-LP1, that I wish I still owned:

           https://sites.google.com/site/mpbarney/home/dahlquist-dq-lp1

 

@cinqcepages Wrote:

And I am super curious about bi-amping. As like SUPER

Actively bi-amping gives a reduction of intermodulation distortion. That said, active bi-amping horizontally, as I do, will give additional advantage from the elimination of lossy inductances in the LF portion of a conventional passive dividing network, and the result may be a significantly better amplifier damping factor, as seen by the LF driver. Active bi-amping is sometimes hard to implement, and the user is often left to his own devices. It should not be undertaken without first asking the manufacturer’s advice. IMO: Active bi-amping is two notches above a passive crossover. See articles below: Mike 😎

https://sound-au.com/biamp-vs-passive.htm

https://www.passlabs.com/legacy_products/xvr-1

I remember reading a long long time ago where an amp designer said his design was not just about the power at hand and being played but it was about the power on reserve to handle the demand when needed. He’s said the best test was the sound of cutting scissors snapping shut. It is a high volume very fast action that called for instant reserve power to reproduce the sound just right. Yes power is always nice but their is many many ways to incorporate it.

@sgreg1    I agree about power in reserve.   The best (and possibly only) way to get it is to go Class A.

I don't have any recordings of scissors snapping shut.  Is there a test disc incorporating this?  Recorded using Telefunken U47?