2. amps-preamps
  3. 1159934683

Tube amp for rock? Newb Questions

Ive been plowing though the posts here and thought this seems like a place I could find some more help.

Anyway, I listen to rock about 80% of the time. Anything from very heavy metal to 80s rock. Some blues, some softer rock, and Pink Floyd, I dont mind jazz or big band or female vocalists, but im off point....mostly rock. My room is about 12X22.

Im upgrading a very mainstream set of components that ive just sort of lived with for years:
Yamaha CDC 905 Changer
JVC 518VBK AV Reciever
Kenwood JL-680 3-Way, 12"main, 92db, 70w, Circa 1989 Speakers

Going to a hi-fi shop of any kind is just not realistic on a regular basis(very remote) so im leaning heavily on the forums and reviews online to gauge a direction.

So far ive tried a Cambridge Azur 340A and now currently demoing a 540A (both along with a set of AudioQuest ICs). Honestly the ICs made a huge leap with my original setup..I was impressed. Anyway, the CA amps are very musical, more imaged and more detailed. However my initial impression is these are not rock amps. Negatives are the guitars are now more "in the back" so to speak, more harshness/treble/brightness, and also a more general laid back sense, almost like the corners of big rock and roll hits are rounded off if that makes sense.

Am I on track that these amps arent rock amps? Or is it possible the speakers are now more exposed for their faults? Ditto the CD player?

To take this further, I feel whats most associated with "rock" or "heavy metal" are punch, power, volume and bass. I agree....to a point. Ill take killer midrange over heavy bass, and what good are punch, power and volume without feel, subtleties and tone?

As a side note, ive been playing guitar for 20+ years, when talking guitar amps, IMO there is nothing to discuss, tube is FAR superior to SS. I particularly like EL84 juiced amps, smooth, warm amd sweet. Is there a correlation with tube audio?

I dont want to start the "what to upgrade first" debate, ive read all the many many opinions....:) Im open to speakers or source, but right now looking at amps(with my system im thinking just pick one and get started...bad idea?)

I know some feel SS is the way to go for a rock amp, but currently im assuming based on my experiences so far and guitar tastes im going to like tube amps. I certainly could be wrong.

I like the talk about the Manley Stingray. Ive read everything every search engine will find about it and talked to Manley as well as some dealers. Any opinions on it for my wants/need? What about the Prologue 2 or the Jolidas? Are then in the same ball park as the Stingray or are we talking a step down?

For speakers ive looked at and considering(based on $$) the Athena F2.2s, Paradigm Espirits, and most others in this price range, but also found some Dali Towers that are slightly more(may get a chance to hear them in a couple of weeks). Based on my future plans/$/listening habits, any recommendations?

I hope tihs is semi-clear, I appreciate any thoughts, Thanks!
zamdrang
zamdrang OP
33 posts
 
Thanks for the advice At. No..they didnt inspire which does tell me something, but what other than I didnt like them? Would the Stingray rock with a different speaker? Would the Dalis sound better with more power?....lots of variables.
How do you know if an amp is no-feedback design? Something thats published or a certain number on the spec sheet? Is the Stingray?
Im still learning tech stuff, but I was suprised that the dealer touted the Dali Towers so highly, 89db 4ohm speakers. Spec wise...from what I read....they didnt sound like the ideal load for the Stingray.(being a novice..what did I know...u know?)

I would agree if its good for rock it should just be good, but my experience so far would not lead to believe the reverse it true (good for jazz, vocals etc..being good for rock). But maybe your talking an entirely different price point??
So anyway, thanks for the advice, any recommendations?
atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
11,967 posts
 
Hi Zamdrang, I'll put it this way:

If you are investing in a tube amplifier, any tube amplifier, that investment dollar will be best served by a speaker that is at least 8 ohms rather than 4, all other things being equal. Sixteen ohms can often be a revelation.

Four ohms became common with the advent of the transistor, before that 16 ohms was common. A lot of tube amps have 4 ohm capabilities, but in 99 and 44/100ths percent of the time, the 4 ohm operation is compromised by lack of bandwidth, lower power and higher distortion (read:lack of transparency) than operation at higher impedances.

Tube amplifier power is also harder to make; there is a direct benefit from speaker efficiency. Even 3 db more will mean that you amp need make only half the power for the same sound pressure.

As an example the Coincident will be easier to drive and play louder; it might actually sound better than the Dali not because it actually is (and I don't know if it is or isn't) but simply because it is intended for tube operation and the amp can now perform that much better.

You might want to read this paper:

http://www.atma-sphere.com/papers/paradigm_paper2.html

It will help you understand a lot of the controversy that exists between tubes/transistors objectivist/subjectivist and the like.
swampwalker's avatar
swampwalker
5,138 posts
 
jb- Can I come? Sounds like a good time!
zamdrang OP
33 posts
 
I just picked up a Rotel 1062, yes a "downgrade" as I keep being told. But we'll see what it does with my Dalis.
pubul57
3,712 posts
 
The Stingray/Dali combination sound like a very poor one and I suspect both pieces are quite good when matched with appropriate equipment. Atmasphere's explanation states the problem clearly. Tube amps need different types of speakers than SS to work right and the Dali sounds like it would probably work better than the Stingray, although the Stingray is proably the better amp with the "right" speaker. If you like the Dali, stick with SS at your price point.
More to discover