SDA's and tubes

analogluvr

So I've recently acquired a pair of SRS SDA 2's and so far I am liking the sound. I feel I really need to get them a quality a.m. to see what they can do. I had a sumo player us that sounded pretty decent but I blew it up. While I like the sound and see that the sound decent I do think they erred a little on the warm, powerFul and Rich end of the spectrum. I have always been more of a tube guy so I feel that if possible I need to try a higher power tube Amp. So I'm hoping that people can post amps and combos they feel they have had good success with. Also anybody know what impedance my speakers drop down to ?

MrBuhl

Tubes and SDA a match made in heaven. A few combos I have been particularly partial to:

Dodd MLP (Tube Pre) and McCormack DNA-1 (Solid State)

Audible Illusions Modulus 1 (Tube Pre) and McCormack DNA-1

Eastern Electric MiniMax (Tube Pre) and a custom Dodd Audio Dual Mono 50WPC Amp

Lots of folks have good luck with the tube pre / SS amp combo. But SDA's sound great with a variety of amps, I don't know about your SRS 2's by my modded 1c's drop as low as 2 with the updated Inductors Westmassguy made for me.

pitdogg2

Iirc yours are blade/blade so make darn sure its common ground or the negatives can be strapped regardless.

[Deleted User]

The only consideration about using vacuum tube amplifiers is that the output transformers become part of the SDA signal path and as such can slightly decrease the amount of SDA information heard. The other consideration is that some amplifiers, such as Audio Research, use the "4" ohm tab as the actual ground connection. So an 8 ohm SDA speaker would be connected between the "4" and "16" ohm taps.

heiney9

The best is to have a SS amp with a nice tube pre-amp.

H9

nooshinjohn

I have found that tube amps with a solid state Pre can also be a great way to go.

analogluvr

Right now the one I have my eye on is a VTL ST 150

analogluvr

And yes I already have a few tube preamp's. No solid-state in my stable. Do have one passive though. One tube preamp that is excellent with a few minor changes is the Bottlehead bee pre. You have to run it with vintage 6A3 tubes, not the 300b's as they are far too microphonic. I am talking among the best I've ever heard at any price, and I've heard a lot.

Faustin

I have been using a Rogue Cronus Magnum II with my modded SDA 1c's. Very happy with the combo. I also have had good sound with an Adcom 555 mated to a variety of tube pre's. Currently using the Adcom with a Bottlehead Quickie pre that I have done some upgrades to. Lots of bang for the buck with that Quickie. The Bee Pre intrigues me and hopefully some day I will get my ears on one .

analogluvr

I was worried with the Adcom that it would be a little too warm and Rich sounding it being MOSFETs. You don't find that to be the case? Because I do have adcom that is local and fairly reasonable

analogluvr

Can you describe the rogue? How much power and what tube

Faustin

I don't think the Adcom is too warm sounding. Definitely warmer with a tube pre vs an Adcom ss pre that I have. The Rogue is 100 wtts per channel. 4) KT 120 tubes, 3) 12au7 and 2) 12ax7. I also had a Yaqin MC-100 for a while. It was 30 watts / channel in triode mode and 60 watts / channel in ultralinear. Nice amp but in my humble opinion it did not allow the SDA's to open up. I also had a Jolida JD 1000 ( I think that was the model ). It was an older one. 100 watts a channel. Used 8 EL34 tubes. They provided a new set of tubes when I bought it. Listened to it for several weeks and really tried to like it, but it wasn't for me. I returned it and bought the Rogue. HUGE difference! Here are a couple of pics of the Rogue.

analogluvr

So I found out that I can strap the two negatives together on a pair of antique sound lab hurricanes so I am going to try a pair of those. I will report back on how well it works. For those of you that aren't aware they are 200 W pentode and 100 W triode

Dawgfish

I've used an Anthem Amp 1, Rogue Eighty Eight Magnum, and Primaluna Prologue 4 with my SRS 2s all with great effect. Various tube pres were used with these. My SRS 2s are the pin/blade version.

Those Antigue Sound Lab amps should sound phenomenal with the SRS 2s.

analogluvr

Yes I am hoping so. I wish mine were the pin blade version. I just can't believe how much power these things suck. I also can't believe how much bass they produce. I also can't believe how big they can sound.

analogluvr

I wonder if it's possible to buy the crossovers boards for the pin blade version and build them that way?

Schurkey

analogluvr wrote: »

I wonder if it's possible to buy the crossovers boards for the pin blade version and build them that way?

Sure. You're going to replace all eight midwoofers in the process.

You'd save the cabinets, the bassive radiators, the stuffing, the tweeters, and some of the wire harness. Terminal cups I suppose could be re-used, but Polk had double inputs on the SRS 2 pin-blade system, but only single inputs on the SRS 2 blade-blade.

analogluvr

Why would I have to replace the eight mid Woofers ?

Schurkey

analogluvr wrote: »

Why would I have to replace the eight mid Woofers ?

The Blade/blade version of the SDA SRS 2 is a large-cabinet version of the SDA 1B. The 1B and the SRS 2 B/B use eight MW6509 midwoofers, and a crossover that will not accept the isolation transformer, so there is no way to keep the SDA cable AND use an amplifier that doesn't have common-ground.

The SDA SRS 2 pin/blade is a large-cabinet version of the SDA 1C. The SRS 2 p/b and the 1C use entirely different midwoofers from the SRS 2 b/b and 1B.

You want the updated crossover? You also need the updated midwoofers--four MW6510, and four MW6511. Eight midwoofers in total.

pitdogg2

it would not be logical to go that route IMHO. Buy different speaker's it would be vastly cheaper.

Schurkey

EXCEPT for the common-ground requirement, the 1B and SRS 2 blade/blade are fantastic speakers.

Yes, I do look forward to--SOMEDAY--getting my SRS 2 pin/blades whipped into shape. I never dreamed it would take this long.

analogluvr

OK I picked up my friends hurricanes today and just tried them out only very briefly. The R a whole different ballgame then the Yamaha pro amp I was using. With the Yamaha things were sounding smooth and a bit lifeless with bad program material. Also the bass was a bit loose and sloppy. With well recorded stuff it was sounding good but a little lacking in detail still. Now it sounds very detailed and a lot better! People who say all amps sound the same should really hear this back to back! The crazy thing was the Yamaha was 750 W per channel and the hurricanes are only 200. Based on that the Yamaha should have tighter better bass but it was definitely not the case. I'm looking forward to getting some more impressions with a few more hours!
So far I have tried my sumo Polaris which was decent but also a bit smooth and rich. Better than the Yamaha also though.

pitdogg2

It's not really fair to compare "Pro Amps" to "Home Amps" they are made for two vastly different venue's. The wattage thing is also not really a good comparison, the Yamaha could be 750WPC and only 35 amps peak to peak current with a very low damping factor. Where the Hurricane's could be 200 WPC and 70 amps peak to peak current with a high damping factor.

People who say all amps sound the same will never EVER admit they do not because then their whole attitude to audio would have to completely change. Like the little kid that lied, back him into a corner his tune will not change no matter how much you prove to him he is wrong. He would then have to admit he lied and that for some they cannot ever do.

analogluvr

Now that I realize I can use monobloc amps with my blade blade version I'm not so keen to swap anymore