View Full Version : Tube vs SS for Tannoy Prestige Dual Concentric speakers
Folks,
Lately I have become an avid fan of Tannoy speakers. However I am not yet sure whether to stick to an SS amp or go with tubes. I listen to a wide variety of music including Michael Jackson, Mozart, Metallica, Fleetwood Mac. My room is about 200 sqft and I use the Turnberry SE speakers. I have an opportunity to buy a Zanden Model 6000 amplifier which is rated at 90 watts. Sometimes these tube vs SS watts seems very confusing. On a good SS amp 90 watts would have been more than enough for my tastes but with a tube push-pull amp I am left wondering especially because the damping factor is always on the lower side. It will be quite helpful to get some opinions here about this issue amp matching especially with Tannoys.
Welll I have owned Tans since '72. I've tried all manner of Amps on them.
From cheap junk SS Dynacos & Arcams to a Meshplate Se45.
Current Firstwatt Amp is 'honestly' a whole New world of sounds.
Likely one could do better (always ;-) but Most assuredly one Can do a helluvalot worse.
Firstwatt has a whole 25 w 'claimed'.
Frankly by 2/3rds on the Pot I'm fearing for the Drivers' integrity.
Normal listening on Tannoys is in the 1 to 3 watt range.. true!
Hi Danilo,
Thats quite interesting. I have been myself eyeing at the F6 for some time now but I have not been able to pull the trigger because in the past I have heard the Tannoys with various amps:
Naim Nait 5i (50 watts)
ATC P1 (150 watts)
Leben CS600 (30 watts)
Mcintosh MC275 current model (75 watts)
Wavac EC-300B (10 watts SET)
Tenor OTL75 (75 watts OTL)
Crayon Audio CIA-1 (90 watts)
Pass XA30.8 (30 watts rated but almost 90 watts as measured by Stereophile)
Of all these amps the Naim, ATC, Crayon and Pass were the only ones which did a satisfactory job of presenting the full dynamics and bass punch of the Tannoys without much strain. I could hear the Naim and ATC even harden or muddy when I go nicely loud. So I am trying to gather how a 25 watt F6 would sound all that effortless ? Or is the older Monitor Gold a lot easier load than the new Tannoy ? Seriously I have read people commenting their 100 watters to be inadequate with the big Tannoys though at the same time people use flea-watt tube amps to hear that magical midrange from the Tannoys. Tannoy themselves mention in their manual to use a good 100 watt amp with their speakers. Now all this adds up to a lot of data and some confusion. Really a 25 watt F6 can do big band and Symphony orchestra all out ?
First watt amps are the closest and even better than many tube amps but the only worry is it is only 25 watts
Ali Tait
06-06-2016, 05:24
A GM70 PP would get you around 80w.
I had a pair of Turnberry Ses and they were remarkably amp-fussy; way more so that vintage Tannoys. I found that they most definitely required and amp with decent DF = low output impedance. 40wpc PP minimum valve. Forget Se amps, they're just not suitable for the Turnberrys as most have way too high an output impedance. Just about any SS amp of 50wpc upwards will be more than sufficient but they generally sound best I found witha decent PP valve amp. By the way, DF need not be low with a good PP amp. Check out the Radford STA25. With an output impedance of just 0.18 Ohms, it grips the bass almost as well as any SS amp. In fact I'll stick my neck out here and say save yourself a lot of time and trouble and speak to Will at Radford Revival. His new STA25's are one of the very best amplifiers I've heard up front of Tannoys.
Being from Singapore it would be too much of a blind buy to get a Radford re-issue without ever listening to it. Has anyone heard the Zanden 8120 ?
True Pani, but equally, there is plenty of documented evidence from very happy owners of STA25s on the 'net which can attest to the match between Tannoys and the STA25 and I speak from experience having heard the match, not from hearsay. The STA also benefits from high residual value and is as good a valve amp as you'll find anywhere worldwide for your needs. Closer to home you may also wish to audition one of the Luxman Class A SS amps. I used a 505au for a while with mine and it was good...not as good as the Radford tried, but good. Quad Elite also very good indeed, as is the 909 partnered with suitable pre.
Antinchip
06-06-2016, 09:50
I have been using Turnberry SE's with ss Avondale M130 monoblocks pushing out about 80w I think. Sounds good but as a valve novice I have recently bought a used Croft Series 7 integrated for comparison on a whim. I was quite surprised to find that Croft seemed to bring more life and realism to the music. There seems to be more of everything. Perhaps a better match for the Turnberry's. I seem to recall seeing some mention of this on the forum's/fora previously. Now contemplating a change to 7 or 7R monos.
Cheers
Anthony
True Pani, but equally, there is plenty of documented evidence from very happy owners of STA25s on the 'net which can attest to the match between Tannoys and the STA25 and I speak from experience having heard the match, not from hearsay. The STA also benefits from high residual value and is as good a valve amp as you'll find anywhere worldwide for your needs. Closer to home you may also wish to audition one of the Luxman Class A SS amps. I used a 505au for a while with mine and it was good...not as good as the Radford tried, but good. Quad Elite also very good indeed, as is the 909 partnered with suitable pre.
I was considering a Quad 909 or Quad II forty. How do you compare them against the Radford ?
I have been using Turnberry SE's with ss Avondale M130 monoblocks pushing out about 80w I think. Sounds good but as a valve novice I have recently bought a used Croft Series 7 integrated for comparison on a whim. I was quite surprised to find that Croft seemed to bring more life and realism to the music. There seems to be more of everything. Perhaps a better match for the Turnberry's. I seem to recall seeing some mention of this on the forum's/fora previously. Now contemplating a change to 7 or 7R monos.
Cheers
Anthony
Yes thats why this whole debate about tube vs SS. While tube is always preferable but it should not be at the cost of listening to just smooth Jazz and vocals. At the same time there are tube amps like the Octave V80 which can rock out all night but they sound drier than many SS amps so there is no point getting into that territory either. It is about finding that balance.
Tubes aren't always preferable, they're a nuisance. :P
LFD amps don't sound like "solid state", nor do they sound like "tubes".
You can get tube amps that sound like typical solid state, and solid state amps that sound like typical tube amplification - it's all in the implementation.
Antinchip
06-06-2016, 10:59
Thanks Pani, that does seem to be the typical debate. All I can say is that in my own circumstances the Croft seems to handle a wide range of genres well with a presentation that I seem to prefer to the Avondales. My musical taste is mainly rock but anything from Agnes Obel and Jennifer Warnes to Ayreon and Metallica has sounded pretty darn'fine so far.
Cheers
Anthony
walpurgis
06-06-2016, 11:06
tube is always preferable
That's a strange thing to say.
I was considering a Quad 909 or Quad II forty. How do you compare them against the Radford ?
I wouldn't have Quad II fortys. They aren't a patch on the STA 25 for drive and not as nicely screwed together either. The Quad 909 is a good match. Croft has been mentioned but my own experience of driving Turnberry Se with 7R was that there was too much bass "boom"...way too bass heavy and really quite coloured sounding so not recommended by me. Others' opinion may of course differ. The 7 series also benefit from an earth lift circuit if not being used with the matching pre-amps.
Radford every time. I can't think of a better amp other perhaps than the Emille that I currently use with my own RFC Canterbury speakers (Tannoy drive units) but that at over twice the price doesn't make quite as much sense as the STA 25.
Valves or SS....sound-wise where both are competently designed and made there ought to be no difference in sound. If you hear any colouration from either, then that points towards distortion. What you can say about valves is that distortion can be more euphonic being even order when pushed on a bit, whereas a poorly specified SS design might "harden up" in sound. Competently designed, in a blind test you really oughtn't be able to tell much of a difference.
STA 25 is the one amp I would love to try in my system.
STA 25 is the one amp I would love to try in my system.
What speakers are you using at the mo' Neil?
I'm looking to go active on my preamp stage, and have started some of the design and specification for a new preamp which I'll be commissioning Radfords to build (I'm too busy with speakers so would never get round to doing it!!). The main circuit will be based upon their latest preamp design with a few modifications such as twin pot controls which I favour, and all new casework which I'll sort out for it. I will probably pair it with an STA 25. I love the Emille Ki-40L (one of the very best valve amps I've owned or heard) but the Radford's an itch I have yet to scratch in my own system. I tried one not so long ago with the Raptor speakers and it was an excellent match. Also reviewed an STA25 built by the guys a few years back when Horning's were in the system and it was also very good then.
Wakefield Turntables
06-06-2016, 17:35
Guess which combo I used for a long time (STA25 + Radford pre) I still own them. I would personally go for Croft pre & Radford power if you can find them.
Paul, am using Royd RR3s and have a pair of Sorcerers upstairs. I think the Sorcerers would be a riot with them, but the RR3s are below 84db and really soak up the power to wake up - easy to drive but need the watts.
Guess which combo I used for a long time (STA25 + Radford pre) I still own them. I would personally go for Croft pre & Radford power if you can find them.
Yes, not a coincidence how these amps pop up a lot from people who have listened to a lot of other gear. :)
Paul, am using Royd RR3s and have a pair of Sorcerers upstairs. I think the Sorcerers would be a riot with them, but the RR3s are below 84db and really soak up the power to wake up - easy to drive but need the watts.
That would be a riot! I think it would be a very entertaining match Neil. The STA would drive the RR3s better than you might imagine as they're not an especially difficult load (Nominal 8 Ohm) and were not designed for particularly high power handling anyway even though they're not the most sensitive of loads. I was happily driving some JR149s of similar sensitivity with the similarly specified Emille and it drove them plenty load enough.
Guess which combo I used for a long time (STA25 + Radford pre) I still own them. I would personally go for Croft pre & Radford power if you can find them.
Just wait until you've heard the new Radford preamp Andy...it's a cracker....Tom (Montesquieu) has one and I'm sure can attest to it's abilities. I tried it here and was plenty impressed.
tannoy man
07-06-2016, 14:28
I had a pair of Turnberry Ses and they were remarkably amp-fussy; way more so that vintage Tannoys. I found that they most definitely required and amp with decent DF = low output impedance. 40wpc PP minimum valve. Forget Se amps, they're just not suitable for the Turnberrys as most have way too high an output impedance. Just about any SS amp of 50wpc upwards will be more than sufficient but they generally sound best I found witha decent PP valve amp. By the way, DF need not be low with a good PP amp. Check out the Radford STA25. With an output impedance of just 0.18 Ohms, it grips the bass almost as well as any SS amp. In fact I'll stick my neck out here and say save yourself a lot of time and trouble and speak to Will at Radford Revival. His new STA25's are one of the very best amplifiers I've heard up front of Tannoys.
Superb sdvice
Wakefield Turntables
07-06-2016, 15:57
Just wait until you've heard the new Radford preamp Andy...it's a cracker....Tom (Montesquieu) has one and I'm sure can attest to it's abilities. I tried it here and was plenty impressed.
Paul,
well ive just had my croft epoch super modded by Nick and still haven't heard it yet!! My dream setup would be a couple of STA100 monoblocks with the croft preamp. :fingers:
This forum kicks ass for real world advice.
This forum kicks ass for real world advice.
Agruable that.. Ossified opinion is an other viewpoint ;)
Ossified? Not sure what you're getting at there... :scratch:
Marco.
anubisgrau
09-06-2016, 11:29
has anyone ever tried berning stuff with tannoy DCs?
from my rather limited experience the best i've heard tannoys with was a bespoke 6C33C SET amps with rather unique power stage solution to avoid issues with impossible matching of anodes in these tubes, also supreme filtering all over and a plenty of iron - 13 trannies or chokes altogether.
i would be curious to try this kron 300BXLS amp from the classifieds, i would expect an iron grip in the bass (what tannoys really need) plus midrange smoothness.
has anyone ever tried berning stuff with tannoy DCs?
from my rather limited experience the best i've heard tannoys with was a bespoke 6C33C SET amps with rather unique power stage solution to avoid issues with impossible matching of anodes in these tubes, also supreme filtering all over and a plenty of iron - 13 trannies or chokes altogether.
i would be curious to try this kron 300BXLS amp from the classifieds, i would expect an iron grip in the bass (what tannoys really need) plus midrange smoothness.
Interesting comment and yes, I've heard Berning amps with Tannoys. They were average sounding at best, and surprisingly, a little forward sounding. The fact remains though that you cannot have it both ways with SET amps. They were designed originally to drive really high efficiency horns, (and I mean horns rather than large diameter pistonic drivers) where higher output impedance is simply not an issue, and this they do admirably.
It simply isn't possible to achieve an "iron grip" in the bass of Tannoy DCs without sufficient damping factor, and this really does rule out most SE amps for that reason. Where Tannoys are concerned, without exception, I have never, ever come across any SE amp that can adequately control Tannoy DC drivers. SE amps do provide low bass, but that should not be confused with controlled bass. Some will sound better than others. I've had an EAR SE amp which was pretty good in many areas, but bass was not it's strength. Push-pull every single time. It's the only valve configuration which has the potential for low output impedance, if you overlook OTL valve amps (and personally, I would overlook them on reliability grounds if for no other reason).
Firebottle
09-06-2016, 12:59
OTLs have problems of high output impedance as well, depending on valve choice and number of output valves :)
I've been using the Apart Champ One class G/H amp on my Apogees for the last 3 days or so.
It has a solid state/tube switch, which simply alters the damping factor.
I am extremely familiar with these speakers and can easily hear changes when valves are rolled.
However, I cannot hear any difference when I move this switch. Really curious. Will RTFM again today but I am sure I am doing the right thing.
Perplexed and surprised.
Sitting here listening to various Dub Spencer and Trance Hill tracks, since they do bass. Various albums. All great stuff IMHO.
Tube mode = damping factor > 10. SS mode = damping factor > 100.
There's no doubt that switching between the modes is right on the limits of hearing thresholds. Seriously hard to detect, but for my money there's a little more solidity at the expense of freedom and a sort of mildy gluey effect in the higher damping factor i.e. I think I fractionally prefer the lower DF tube mode with this music.
Bass appears to be fractionally "freer" in tube mode, possibly slightly lighter, and also more diffuse.
There is far less difference between these modes than between an amp that can deliver satisfactory power against one that can't.
Just thought some might be interested to know the practical effects of DF, at least in one application.
BTW the Apart Champ is a fab amp. Really enjoying it. Super stupid value at £200. Not hyping here but honestly that is the best value for money I have ever attained on an amp. Ridiculous VFM. When made, I believe they were £700.
BTW the DF of my Accuphase monos is 50. Well judged? It would appear so.
Now back to the Tannoys...
Being a planar design, I doubt if your Apogee ribbon speakers have much mass to damp. That is why you hear little difference.
I can't hear one iota of difference with the Mark & Daniel Sapphires (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiyl8zH0pvNAhXmA8AKHbhoCBEQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.6moons.com%2Faudioreviews%2Fm arkdaniel4%2Ftopazsapphire.html&usg=AFQjCNGZGHNqFOqJjdr-QtXTiIjYagoNtQ)- which do. Mind you, they don't go low. Around 45 Hz. Still exceptionally marginal with the Aps, which drop to 21 Hz +/- 0DB as measured by me in-room. Low mass, but very high surface area.
I've just weighed a bass panel ribbon - and the answer is - 46g. So not super-light. Way more than a mylar ESL equivalent of similar surface area I'd guess, but with far more force per unit area. Maybe more than the M&Ds low surface area high excursion unit's cone - which I can't weigh.
If the M&Ds cone weighed much more than 5-10g I'd be surprised though it has to fight the rubber surround too.
I thought damping factor had to be below 10 to make any difference at all?
I think the number is 100. Hence the settings available on the amp.
Jerry has one too. Be good to see what be thinks. Might PM him.
Arkless Electronics
10-06-2016, 12:57
Much depends on what you are damping.... DF's above 15 - 20 can be said to be largely academic as the actual degree of damping would go up only maybe a % or two if it then went from 20 to infinite. The resistance of the voice coil is the major problem as it acts as if in series with the motor unit and limits the possible damping effect on the motor itself.. In the case of panels they have a much lower mechanical impedance to the air load and so are vastly better damped anyway. Horn loading of a moving coil driver acts as an acoustic transformer to give a better match... this gives them their much greater efficiency but also allows much greater mechanical damping from the air on the driver. Ribbons in Apogee @ 1 Ohm can be much better damped electrically... if it wasn't for the lack of Ampere Turns from it having in effect just one length of conductor rather than a coil in the magnetic gap... but will be better damped by the air than a conventional driver.
Much depends on what you are damping.... DF's above 15 - 20 can be said to be largely academic as the actual degree of damping would go up only maybe a % or two if it then went from 20 to infinite. The resistance of the voice coil is the major problem as it acts as if in series with the motor unit and limits the possible damping effect on the motor itself.. In the case of panels they have a much lower mechanical impedance to the air load and so are vastly better damped anyway. Horn loading of a moving coil driver acts as an acoustic transformer to give a better match... this gives them their much greater efficiency but also allows much greater mechanical damping from the air on the driver. Ribbons in Apogee @ 1 Ohm can be much better damped electrically... if it wasn't for the lack of Ampere Turns from it having in effect just one length of conductor rather than a coil in the magnetic gap... but will be better damped by the air than a conventional driver.
Exactly so Jez. A large planar design like the Apogees has a massively greater coupling area with the air and less travel than many pistonic speakers. Voicecoil resistance is the issue, and where bass frequencies are concerned, the voicecoil impedance approaches it's DC impedance, which for many nominally rated 8 Ohm driver units is closer to 6 ohms. Given that DF = (Loudspeaker impedance at any given frequency)/(sum of amplifier output impedance, cable and crossover losses), then you can see that for even a 6 Ohm load, which isn't especially low, it only takes an output impedance plus other losses totalling an ohm or so to really spoil the party. Most SS amps and some valve amps like Radfords have vanishingly small output impedance so what becomes more critical are the crossover and cabling losses.
Quoted DF's of 100 or more are pretty meaningless as well, unless one knows the total impedance upstream of the voicecoil. You can have a SS amp with, say, a 0.01 Ohm output impedance but connect that to a 4th order crossover and you can easily raise that total figure to above 1 ohm or more, so the reality is that the DF isn't massively better than an average PP valve amp which might have a 1 to 2 Ohm output impedance, depending on design (Radfords really are the exception at well under an Ohm).
Where Tannoys are concerned, there is a world of difference in bass control and timbre and indeed in linearity of response across the spectrum using an SE amp compared with SS or PP valve amps. The FR tends to notably swing with impedance of the voicecoil when DF drops much below 7 or 8. Since most SE's output impedance is 4 ohms or more, you can see that a DF of just 1.6 to 2 isn't going to cut the mustard. The proof of the pudding is in the testing and listening.
Arkless Electronics
10-06-2016, 17:08
Radford are indeed one of the best valve amps technically and on measurements. They are one of the few valve amps with truly adequate DF, along with some EAR amps. The Mullard 520 design also has good DF for a valve amp if done right.
A SS amp will easily beat any of the above for DF though. DF's in the 1000's are possible, if irrelevant. Some SS amps, notably Naim, put a resistor at the output which in the case of most Naim amps means a maximum DF of 16 with a 4 Ohm speaker.....
Post 48 of this thread (http://www.superbestaudiofriends.org/index.php?threads/request-study-of-damping-factor-and-planar-magnetic-headphones.1379/page-3) shows the practical effect of changes in amp DF on planar magnetic headphones.
Good post and goes a very long way towards explaining why I heard close to zilsch difference I reckon.
This seems a good post too, found on an Apogee forum from years ago.
"With planar loudspeakers, the mass of the drivers are equally as important as the mass of cone drivers, but that is just one small part of a larger equation that holds the siginificance. Along with the mass of the drivers comes the strength of the field or the magnets that becomes the damping factor to the planar speaker.
When you place even the most ideal acoustic suspension dynamic speaker into a real room you change the frequency response of the whole design dramatically so all of the 'perfect' calculations are thrown off. But whether you change for the betterment of sound or worse, you're not stopping the back wave. You are simply damping the drivers' movement both outward and inward at a known pace to control how hard they work. With a planar speaker, you're not controlling the damping with air. The air offers a known quantity of resistance but you're not loading an enclosure to use air in this manner. Rather, you're controlling the field where the panel resides, or the level of magnetism for a ribbon, etc.
This is similar to changing gear ratios in a car. Should you have a standard gear box, this is like multiple taps on your amplifiers' output transformers. Changing the ratios will also offer an effect similar to changing the apparent volume of a dynamic enclosure, or increasing or decreasing the voltage of a field or the Oersted flux of the magnets you use in a ribbon design."
BTW I did PM Jerry. Mind you, I asked him about it before and not much interest was shown.
Radford are indeed one of the best valve amps technically and on measurements. ...
And one of the best sounding valve amps too. What a coincidence!
Radford Revival
22-06-2016, 11:57
;)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.