Amp Questions - 1.2TLs

snow

beemer wrote: »

Agreed. Many "Pro" amps just plain do not sound good, however just as many do. My only issue here is I toss out something that sounds excellent as an option to folks here, yet speculation abounds, and not one other poster besides myself has heard the setup in question, yet many are ready to cut it down without even hearing it! Bahhh.

Paul

I would love to hear it Paul if I was closer I would stop by. I cant discount what your saying for a couple of reasons one is that you have owned bought and sold a hell of a lot of gear your not a newbie by any means. Secondly it's your ears if you say it sounds good to you I believe you.

The whole damping factor thing well I will leave that up to others to fight over.

Have you tried comparing your Levinson Krell or any other home audio amps with the QSC on these 1.2TL's? Something that has both plenty of wpc and high current.


I did hear a pro amp once that amazed me it was the Altec 9440A it sounded unlike any pro amp I had ever heard it was both musical and had lots of clarity. lt was made in 1975-76 I think at a cost of 3k? it was a statement piece that they took to the CES show and if I recall correctly won some awards.

Few home audio amps I have heard were as good to be honest IMHO.


Sometimes you find something that has a certain synergy that works with your gear better than the numbers and or logic would make likely, this may be the case here.



REGARDS SNOW

beemer

snow wrote: »

I would love to hear it Paul if I was closer I would stop by. I cant discount what your saying for a couple of reasons one is that you have owned bought and sold a hell of a lot of gear your not a newbie by any means. Secondly it's your ears if you say it sounds good to you I believe you.

The whole damping factor thing well I will leave that up to others to fight over.

Have you tried comparing your Levinson Krell or any other home audio amps with the QSC on these 1.2TL's? Something that has both plenty of wpc and high current.


I did hear a pro amp once that amazed me it was the Altec 9440A it sounded unlike any pro amp I had ever heard it was both musical and had lots of clarity. lt was made in 1975-76 I think at a cost of 3k? it was a statement piece that they took to the CES show and if I recall correctly won some awards.

Few home audio amps I have heard were as good to be honest IMHO.


Sometimes you find something that has a certain synergy that works with your gear better than the numbers and or logic would make likely, this may be the case here.



REGARDS SNOW

LOL the Altec 9440A.....I am fortunate in that I own a fully functional 9440A.
They are that good. Tough to find these days though. LOL there's 8-10 little bulbs that light up those big white meters!......and always one burning out!

In the house on the big system my Nearfield Acoustics (now called High Emotion Audio) Pipedreams are biamped with Levinson 33's and 33H monoblocks. Unfortunately until I find room and time to bring the 1.2tl's in they are living in my garage/workshop/mancave/crazy zone. I did power up my previous pair of 2.3tl's with the 33H's for a while, however I have never asked Levinson if these are common ground and thus never hooked up the SDA cable. I am not too into a possible expensive Levinson repair, plus the logistics of moving 33H with the crates and all....... The results with the 2.3tl's were most excellent, however without the cable, I won't say more 'cause part of the Polk magic was absent.

Best,

Paul

Systems

beemer wrote: »

My only issue here is I toss out something that sounds excellent as an option to folks here, yet speculation abounds, and not one other poster besides myself has heard the setup in question, yet many are ready to cut it down without even hearing it! Bahhh.

Paul

For my part I was in no way diminishing the setup or your impressions of it.I was merely making a point that IMO it's not an necessity for an amp to have a high damping factor for it to sound good.

beemer

GV#27 wrote: »

For my part I was in no way diminishing the setup or your impressions of it.I was merely making a point that IMO it's not an necessity for an amp to have a high damping factor for it to sound good.

No offense taken whatsoever GV#27! It's all good.

I have some difficulty dealing with speculation.......I will only offer advice based on what I have actually used and heard myself. IMHO there are many here that cannot or will not think outside the box, and it appears that I may have ruffled some of their feathers. So be it.

Looking at your equipment list I would sure like to hear your tri-amped 3 ways. It looks like you have put some time and considerable thought into your components and I'm willing to bet the results are spectacular.

If I can ever clear out my home office to set it up I have a pair of Genelec 1032A active speakers and a Genelec 1092A active subwoofer. Right now they are serving only as dust collectors......shame on me!

Best,

Paul

F1nut

beemer wrote: »

I have some difficulty dealing with speculation.......I will only offer advice based on what I have actually used and heard myself. IMHO there are many here that cannot or will not think outside the box, and it appears that I may have ruffled some of their feathers. So be it.

What speculation? Do you mean your speculation about damping factors? Or your speculation that your Mac amp won't sound good with the 1.2TL's because that's the only speculation I'm seeing here. Talk about not thinking outside the box. :rolleyes:

beemer

F1nut wrote: »

What speculation? Do you mean your speculation about damping factors? Or your speculation that your Mac amp won't sound good with the 1.2TL's because that's the only speculation I'm seeing here. Talk about not thinking outside the box. :rolleyes:

LOL. You appear to be the most upset, F1. :rolleyes: My MC2000 has a place currently, and it shall stay there. I have no need to use it on the 1.2tl's. It's already a known fact the big tl's respond best to high power SS, and that fact jives with my findings by listening. To me, use of an 130W/channel MC2000 tube amp on a speaker that responds best to high power SS would be a waste. When and if I do try it on the 1.2tl's, I'll be sure and post my listening impressions here for your review. Don't get me wrong, tube amps DO have their place, and for me an MC2000 on a pair of IRS-Beta panels is pure bliss. In the past I have ran tube amps on the same Beta panels from CJ, ARC, Quicksilver, and also some smaller McIntosh, such as an MC275 Series IV. My ears have been most pleased with the MC2000.

In the meantime, you and I will continue to disagree. Your world of audio and mine are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Fortunately this is the internet, and all who read this post and all others here can take it at face value. Use it or toss it in the weeds. I stand by my words as you stand by yours. Your use of the word speculation is false, as once again, I only comment on what I have used and actually heard. Have YOU heard a pair of 1.2tl's powered by a QSC PLX3402 F1? I have, and it sounds damn good.

Best,

Paul

F1nut

You appear to be the most upset, F1.

I don't know why you think that I'm upset, I'm not. Nor I do I know why you keep implying that I said your rig doesn't sound good because I never said that.

It's already a known fact the big tl's respond best to high power SS

That's complete BS. I know plenty of folks who run tube amps on big SDA's with excellent results.

Your use of the word speculation is false, as once again, I only comment on what I have used and actually heard.

That's funny because you freely admitted that you haven't used the Mac on the SDA's and since you haven't actually heard that combo any conclusion is pure speculation on your part. It's also pure speculation on your part that a high damping factor is important when in fact, myself and others have proven that it's not. A fact you continue to ignore.

heiney9

Beemer,

Running 1C's here with 30wpc and I'd bet compared to your "high powered" pro amp most would prefer the Aleph's sound. But, hey if you like the way the QSC sounds then good on you. But don't tell those of us who have tried numerous types of amps that damping factor or wpc is needed to run SDA's, because that's simply not true.

You are doing yourself a huge disservice by not running the SDA's with the MAC. I encourage you to try it sometime. You might actually prefer it.

H9

george daniel

I guess that it's a matter of taste,,some like it rare,others wll done,,I'm running my 1C's with a 40 watt tube amp,and imaging,resolution,soundstage,aside,,it' get's plenty loud for me.A 100 watt tuber on 2.3tl's,, well,,you just have to hear for yourself. I'll step aside and let you guys get back at it,,you really should try the Mac if you haven't.

Systems

beemer wrote: »

Looking at your equipment list I would sure like to hear your tri-amped 3 ways. It looks like you have put some time and considerable thought into your components and I'm willing to bet the results are spectacular.

Thanks ,probably not spectacular but it was fun building them and they have given me many hours of listening enjoyment.

If I can ever clear out my home office to set it up I have a pair of Genelec 1032A active speakers and a Genelec 1092A active subwoofer. Right now they are serving only as dust collectors......shame on me!

Collecting dust:eek:.Rumour has it Genelec produce some very good sounding active monitors.

beemer

F1nut wrote: »

I don't know why you think that I'm upset, I'm not. Nor I do I know why you keep implying that I said your rig doesn't sound good because I never said that.

LOL F1: You are as opinionated and animated about your likes and dislikes as I. However you did say that high damping factor was useless. Perhaps it is to you, and that's fine. My experiences are opposite. Thank God there are enough varied components out there to keep both of us happy.

That's complete BS. I know plenty of folks who run tube amps on big SDA's with excellent results.

No doubt. Please tell me where I said that no one should use tubes on Polks. Don't continue to twist my words. I prefer SS on Polks.

That's funny because you freely admitted that you haven't used the Mac on the SDA's and since you haven't actually heard that combo any conclusion is pure speculation on your part. It's also pure speculation on your part that a high damping factor is important when in fact, myself and others have proven that it's not. A fact you continue to ignore.

I never concluded anything about the MC2000 on the 1.2's. Read carefully. If and when I DO try it, I will be happy to tell my thoughts for your reading pleasure. In the meantime, the MC2000 shall stay where it is, happily powering IRS-Beta mid/tweeter panels.

You have stated that you do not believe high damping factor is relevant to you. You have not "proven" a thing. My comments are my preferences. To me, a high powered SS amp with a damping factor of 60, such as a PA7, VS a similar powered and rated SS amp with a damping factor of say 500+ makes an immediate and noticeable difference to me in quality of bass response. Proof is what I can hear, and I am able to hear a improvement to my liking with amps with high damping specs.

heiney9 wrote: »

Beemer,

Running 1C's here with 30wpc and I'd bet compared to your "high powered" pro amp most would prefer the Aleph's sound. But, hey if you like the way the QSC sounds then good on you. But don't tell those of us who have tried numerous types of amps that damping factor or wpc is needed to run SDA's, because that's simply not true.

You are doing yourself a huge disservice by not running the SDA's with the MAC. I encourage you to try it sometime. You might actually prefer it.

H9

Thanks H9. The Aleph is pure Class A. I will take you at your word. I post only MY listening impressions. If I recall correctly, the Aleph's damping factor is 200.....in which case it is a wash according to F1. "Too much damping factor".

Moving the MC2000 to try it on the Polks is a major endeavor here as either the Polks need go up a flight of stairs with 2 45 degree turns or the amp (big and heavy) need be brought down the same stairs. If I move it, I'll gladly post my listening impressions.

george daniel wrote: »

I guess that it's a matter of taste,,some like it rare,others wll done,,I'm running my 1C's with a 40 watt tube amp,and imaging,resolution,soundstage,aside,,it' get's plenty loud for me.A 100 watt tuber on 2.3tl's,, well,,you just have to hear for yourself. I'll step aside and let you guys get back at it,,you really should try the Mac if you haven't.

Exactly George. It is taste. I passed on my listening impressions and thoughts. You are happy with tubes, I have absolutely no problem with that.

I'm still waiting to hear of even ONE here beside myself that has tried a QSC PLX 3402 on 1.2tl's. That was my original comment that has now started an extremely animated thread. MY point once again:

1: I pass on only MY impressions with what I have actually heard.

2: My comments on damping factor apply to me and the results I have actually heard with speakers I own.

3: C'mon now. Has anyone heard a PLX3402 on 1.2tl's besides me. A direct question many here seem quite adept at sidestepping.

Best,

Paul

snow

beemer wrote: »

C'mon now. Has anyone heard a PLX3402 on 1.2tl's besides me.

Best,

Paul

It seems that perhaps a road show is in order there are many of us here with SDA's that would im certain if gaven a chance try it.

Or perhaps bring it with you to the next Polkfest and compare it to many other amps.



REGARDS SNOW

beemer

snow wrote: »

It seems that perhaps a road show is in order there are many of us here with SDA's that would im certain if gaven a chance try it.

Or perhaps bring it with you to the next Polkfest and compare it to many other amps.



REGARDS SNOW

You are a sensible guy Snow!

I'm in Massachusetts. ANY local Polkie is more than welcome here for a listen and some good beer.

I'm mostly at AK. We are having a fall fest in my neck of the woods. Here's a link to the thread:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=228446

All from this forum who would like to attend are more than welcome.

I work a full-time job and have a side business as a DJ. Most of my weekends are tied up. My chances of attending a Polkfest, as much as I would enjoy it, are slim to none.

Best,

Paul

F1nut

You can choose to continue ignoring the facts all you want, but it won't change the fact that you don't understand the subject matter.

beemer

F1nut wrote: »

You can choose to continue ignoring the facts all you want, but it won't change the fact that you don't understand the subject matter.

Compadre, I am a patient soul. Have YOU heard a QSC PLX 3402 on a pair of 1.2tl's? Answer a direct question.

You commented long ago that amps with a damping factor of 10 sound great. That's wonderful! If it works for you great. That dog's not in the hunt for me.

Your post previous:

All will work, but there are much better choices. Specs can help guide you, but they will not tell you what the amp sounds like or if it will have synergy with the rest of your gear. Pro amps, just forget about them.

So, let's "just forget" about pro amps. Thus according to you there is not one pro amp that may have synergy in this gentleman's, or anyone else's system for that matter. A closed mind is a wonderful thing to waste. :rolleyes:

Actually no, not spot on. There is such a thing as having too much damping and IMO, 500 is way too much. I had an amp at one time that boasted a damping factor of 1000. It sucked at controlling the drivers. Then there's things like tube amps with a damping factor of 10 that control drivers perfectly. It's really a spec with little value.

BTW, it's easy to better those Denon amps.

Key word in quote above is "IMO". "It's really a spec with little value" I'd like to know the amp with 1000 damping factor you didn't like.....I want to buy one and try it.

Once again, DIRECT QUESTION:

F1nut, have YOU heard a QSC PLX 3402 drive a pair of 1.2tl's?


Best,

Paul

F1nut

You STILL keep dancing around the subject matter. You proclaimed that an amp with a high damping factor was the cat's meow. Facts were presented to you that show otherwise. Whether or not I have heard your system is NOT the subject matter at hand. No one is disputing that you like the sound you hear, what I and others are disputing is the reason you feel it does sound better.

Why is it so hard for you to admit that you were wrong about the damping factor and it's role in audio reproduction?

beemer

F1nut wrote: »

You STILL keep dancing around the subject matter. You proclaimed that an amp with a high damping factor was the cat's meow. Facts were presented to you that show otherwise. Whether or not I have heard your system is NOT the subject matter at hand. No one is disputing that you like the sound you hear, what I and others are disputing is the reason you feel it does sound better.

Why is it so hard for you to admit that you were wrong about the damping factor and it's role in audio reproduction?

What facts besides your "IMO" have you presented? Your "IMO" blanket statement that we are to "forget about" Pro amps and your "IMO" that any amp with a damping factor over 500 was a waste? These are your words and your "IMO", not facts. To me a high damping factor amp IS the cat's meow in an application that needs it. That's my "IMO". Nothing "wrong" about it. :rolleyes: There is no tube amp I've ever auditioned here that stood the slightest chance on proper control of the woofers in my two main speakers in my home:

1) Infinity IRS-Beta. 8 12' woofers on servo control. Tubes are not optimum here. Arnie Nudell was very specific years ago about this. Nothing has changed over time. Mr. Nudell in his wisdom also powered the IRS numbered series with his own SS amps on the woofers. He went on to Genesis and powered the woofers on many of designs with SS as well.

2) Pipedreams Reference 18 Line arrays. 2 pair of 18" woofers in sealed cabs, in a push-pull configuration. Funny thing here.....Craig Oxford, owner of Nearfield Acoustics, now known as High Emotion Audio actually recommends QSC Powerlights for the woofers on the Pipedreams. One reason being the amps performance to cost ratio as well as the high damping factor to control the movement of the large 18" drivers. How would I know this? From some considerable time in conversation with him. conventional wisdom would say that a smaller bass driver will be faster and more tuneful than the 18" in the pipedreams, however a comment I hear regularly from folks who listen to them is how tight and tuneful the bass is, even from such large drivers. Surely the Levinson 33's and their high damping factor have no contribution here. Please recommend to me an amp to try with a damping factor of 10 on these speakers and I will be happy to do so, rather than just dismiss it out of hand. I'd be willing to bet a month's salary to the outcome of that test!

Forgive me if I put more creedence in Mr. Nudell and Mr. Oxford's recommendations than I do in your opinion of the usefulness of damping factor.

As to the Polks, I find once again in the larger speakers such as 2.3tl that I once owned AND the 1.2tl's I own now that I prefer woofer control that high DF provides as well.

At one time I had owned Apogee Divas and the DAX crossover. When I sold them a prospective buyer owned a pair of Ralph Karsten's wonderful Atmasphere OTL tube amps. I told him to bring them and we would try them on the Divas. This was Epic Fail. Great amps, wrong application. If I were like you I could say: "tube amps, forget about it". I'll keep my open mind thank you.


I see other folks post here that are enjoying tubes with their Polks. Fine. Facts they present are that they like sound of their tube amps with their Polks. No problem here with that. Nothing "wrong" about it either. The original poster asked for an amp recommendation. I gave him one that you can't swallow due to your proven bias against pro amps as shown in your own post. The only fact I recognize is that all our ears are different...and there are choices we can all make to optimize our listening enjoyment.

On the other hand, you dismiss all pro amps with a wave of your hand.....without hearing them. :rolleyes: I disagreed with your position in my initial post and now we have "facts" :rolleyes:

A closed mind is still a terrible thing to waste.

Best,

Paul

F1nut

I learned a long time ago that it's a waste of my time to argue with an idiot and I've wasted enough of my time on you already.

beemer

F1nut wrote: »

I learned a long time ago that it's a waste of my time to argue with an idiot and I've wasted enough of my time on you already.

Cool. Just remember, there is a place for high DF and negative feedback. It's just not at your place. I won't lower myself to name calling F1, you have a good day, and I will too.

Best,

Paul

motorstereo

Nice huh Paul; Offer a different line of thinking and get called a name for it. By the prez himself no less. I've watched this thread from the beginning and from the start I knew the prez was in over his head. No problem though; get soundly thrashed in a simple disagreement and resort to name calling. That's part of the reason I spend very little time here even though my polks are in fact my main speaker.
I'm also in the camp that believes in the high power and high df qsc's driving my 2.3s. I have a pair of 85 watt stromberg tube amps that I could try out on them but I'm sure it won't be as good as the sound I'm geting from my qsc. The more clean power you feed the big polks the better they sound in my experience. And having a high df to control all those drivers is certainly a welcome side benefit as well.
For the members that haven't met Paul I feel very lucky to have met and dealt with Beemer. He's a fine honest gentleman and he lives and breathes audio in all it's forms. He's certainly not limited to the polk speaker frenzy as some people here are.
You should be ashamed of yourself prez for the name calling.

F1nut

I've got nothing to be ashamed of and I'm far from being in over my head. If you, like he, want to remain ignorant to the facts about damping factors, that's your problem.

Two more added to the BOZO list.

beemer

motorstereo wrote: »

Nice huh Paul; Offer a different line of thinking and get called a name for it. By the prez himself no less. I've watched this thread from the beginning and from the start I knew the prez was in over his head. No problem though; get soundly thrashed in a simple disagreement and resort to name calling. That's part of the reason I spend very little time here even though my polks are in fact my main speaker.
I'm also in the camp that believes in the high power and high df qsc's driving my 2.3s. I have a pair of 85 watt stromberg tube amps that I could try out on them but I'm sure it won't be as good as the sound I'm geting from my qsc. The more clean power you feed the big polks the better they sound in my experience. And having a high df to control all those drivers is certainly a welcome side benefit as well.
For the members that haven't met Paul I feel very lucky to have met and dealt with Beemer. He's a fine honest gentleman and he lives and breathes audio in all it's forms. He's certainly not limited to the polk speaker frenzy as some people here are.
You should be ashamed of yourself prez for the name calling.

It's all good my friend. This is the internet and fortunately I learned long ago not to trouble my mind much with some of the folks who populate it.

Do me a favor if you could though.....If your Strombergs are close and easy to hook up to your Polks do it and let us know your listening impressions here.

Best,

Paul

F1nut

This message is hidden because beemer is on your BOZO list.

Ain't life grand!

BTW, I piss on pro amps.

beemer

Some little known facts about BOZO.

His real name is Frank Avruch and he hails from the Boston Area. He was a fixture on our local stations here in Massachusetts "WHDH and WCVB" for many years.

For anyone here who would like more info about this multitalented gentleman his website is:

http://www.bostonman.com/aboutfr1.html


Best,

Paul

F1nut

Get your education on.

http://www.audioholics.com/education/amplifier-technology/damping-factor-effects-on-system-response

You owe the forum and me an apology. Of course, I won't be able to read it, but whatever.

NJPOLKER

I am curious about PRO amps.

1) What were they designed to do?

2) Why are they called PRO amps?

NJPOLKER

Now I gotta get my read on too and I have a lot to do, Damn.

me_myself_I

F1nut wrote: »

Get your education on.

http://www.audioholics.com/education/amplifier-technology/damping-factor-effects-on-system-response

You owe the forum and me an apology. Of course, I won't be able to read it, but whatever.

I just looked at the article. And even though there is a diminishing return with low output resistance (high damping factor) amplifiers, there is no net negative effect.

In other words, high damping factor implies a more idea amplifier. Which is something that is taught to EE undergrads (infinitely low output impedance is desireable!)

However, some speaker systems have large swings in impedance which may alter the frequency response with low damping factor amplifiers. Maybe for the better or maybe for the worse. YMMV. I would not call speakers that are sensitive to different amplifiers an "ideal" design, but this is the world we live in.

motorstereo

beemer wrote: »

It's all good my friend. This is the internet and fortunately I learned long ago not to trouble my mind much with some of the folks who populate it.

Do me a favor if you could though.....If your Strombergs are close and easy to hook up to your Polks do it and let us know your listening impressions here.

Best,

Paul

Hi Paul; Glad to hear that mr namecaller's thoughts are meaningless to you as well.

When I first had my polks and before the recap I did in fact have my strombergs hooked up to the polks for a brief period. I was not impressed in the least and didn't give them a second chance after the recap. Maybe this winter when I get some free time I'll give it another shot as it's a major hassle to swap them out. I'm driving a pair of vintage infinitys Q3's with the strombergs right now and that's the best I've ever heard that pairing sound.

And to the prez and the comment about "pissing on pro amps". You're more than welcome to come over to my humble abode anytime and piss on my pro amps. I'll make sure and have them warmed up and running when you swing by and you can piss to your heart's content. 3 Packerville Rd. Plainfield Ct. awaits your arrival.
Another proud and honored member of the bozo club.

beemer

me_myself_I wrote: »

I just looked at the article. And even though there is a diminishing return with low output resistance (high damping factor) amplifiers, there is no net negative effect.

In other words, high damping factor implies a more idea amplifier. Which is something that is taught to EE undergrads (infinitely low output impedance is desireable!)

However, some speaker systems have large swings in impedance which may alter the frequency response with low damping factor amplifiers. Maybe for the better or maybe for the worse. YMMV. I would not call speakers that are sensitive to different amplifiers an "ideal" design, but this is the world we live in.

Correct. I can hear the effects of damping factor. They are quite obvious in my system. I can also hear the effects of swapping interconnect and speaker cable. To some that's blasphemy, my ears say different.

With my DJ rig, I would never consider tubes or low damping factor amps for the woofers. My JBL SR4718X and SR4719X cabinets and their drivers require woofer control....as do the Betas and Pipedreams in the main system.

Science and audiophilia are strange bedfellows. Some folks allude a jar of colored rocks placed stratigically make a difference they can hear.

According to science, all amps should sound the same regardless of whether they are tubed or solid state. Unfortunately science does not have all the answers, as most have heard......no two amps sound alike.

Best,

Paul