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
atmasphere's avatar
atmasphere
11,667 posts
 
I use the Classic Audio Reproductions T-3. The speaker is 8 ohms (newer versions are 16), goes from an honest 20Hz to about 40KHz, and is 97 db 1 watt/1 meter.

I can shake the building with our 60 watt amp. Check out:

http://www.atma-sphere.com/awards/bya/index.html

for a discography of bass reference recordings.

While having full bass extension, the speaker is also finely detailed, images beautifully and is easy to set up. With 60 watts, its almost impossible to clip the amp in my room (17'x22', 9' ceiling).

The difference between 89 db and 97 db is 8 db; that means to do the same thing on an 89 db speaker will take about 400 watts. Many amps, especially ones with feedback and operating in some mode other than class A, will strain at higher power levels. To get punch out of them without strain (harshness) you need efficiency. To get the distortion down (which enhances transparency/detail) you need to keep the speaker impedance up as the amp will make less distortion.
zamdrang OP
33 posts
 
The Rotel has arrived. First impression...this thing rocks. Snappy is a good word, forward, very clear, but not overly bright.

Only tried it with my Kenwoods (they are closer to the front door..:)) and id say its slightly less dimensional then the stingray, not as sweet on the soft stuff...but its got punch and power, and the bass thumps, the contour switch is very cool. For me...it betters the SR.

One peculiar thing: with my "better" audioquest ICs...its fatiguing. But with the cheap $2 ICs I got in a bargain bin at the local hardware store, its warmer and more lush....maybe they are just less transparent and hiding things...and thats the reason....but I didnt ever expect to prefer them.

We'll see how it goes with the Dalis....more to come...
agisthos
465 posts
 
Zamdrang, your problem is that from your first post you had your heart set on getting the Manley and the Dali equipment, and every suggestion from the other members was ignored.

I went through the exact same thing as you a few years ago and here is what I found.

Almost 90% of all high end gear is voiced with audiophile recorded light jazz. Ask it to play 'Something Wicked This Way Comes' (I like Iced Earth too) or even just an average contemporary radio song and you will find even $50,000 systems being brought to their knees.

Buying equipment without audition is extremely difficult. when it comes to rock doubly so. If you think you can read an online/magazine review and actually get a feel for how a componant sounds with rock you will be disapointed. Even when reviewers say this amp is good for rock, they usually give one Led Zepplin album a quick listen to cover all the bases, proclaim 'this amp can do anything' and then go back to their Norah Jones and Miles Davis cd's.

You must get out there with your cd's and actually audition some gear.

Having said that I have heard that the new Macintosh solid state amps are good for rock, and I know a Metallica fiend who swears by Klispch speakers.
zamdrang OP
33 posts
 
Agisthos....ive come to believe your right on hi-fi gear and trust your advice. I did have some metal cds with me at the Rocky Mountain Audio show last year, and the few rooms that obliged me...once I got past the rolled eyes and how "horribly recorded metal cds are" ...well...you said it. I guess the metal hi-fi contingent is small one.

The Rotel/Dalis is a different matter altogether. Its very upfront in presentation, I can see why some may call it bright...but its not harsh. The Dalis are warmish and laid back...so maybe ive stumbled on a great match. Its got power and punch and never sounds as if its straining to keep up. The rhythymic quality is great, it gets your foot tapping and head bobbing, it feels like things are where they are supposed to be if that makes sense. Its very snappy and punchy. The Manley was sluggish by comparsion.

What surprises me is that the Rotel with its more dynamic presentation still retains a smooth and lush quality with the mellower passages of metal, its not the Manley with mellow stuff...less depth....but ill take the trade off anyday.

Im really impressed and much closer to where I want to be. Best of all...NO fatigue...I was up all night...cd after cd...it rocks.

Thanks A....good to hear others know where im coming from.
eagleman6722
217 posts
 
Zambrang, If you found a good combo then trust your own ears. I like the TAD, Vandy combo as the Vandys are not overly bright and soundstage wide and deep so the music from better rock recordings spreads out. However, one of my favorite bands is Aerosmith and I have a tough time hearing their music spread out. Their recordings are very compressed. I have found Fleetwood Mac, Mellancamp and Eagles CDs a bit more pleasing to listen to. The thing with the Manleys is that tubes can change the flavor quite a bit but, that can cost $$$$.

Eagleman
More to discover