Croft 7 on Proac Response 3 ?

[slaba]

Good morning or evening whichever,
I've impulsively traded my beloved KEF 104/2 and ARC SP6 preamp recently for ProAc Response 3 and an audible illusions Modulus 3a driven by an ARC VT60 tube amp, I like it but I'm missing something, not quite sure what, maybe the ECC83 of the SP6? also I usually don't use my tube power amp in the summer days and I'll soon be on the lookout for a summertime SS amplification. I have had the itch to try some Croft for awhile now (you guys have helped here) and a pre/power combo is within reach: Micro 25 (not basic not R) and Croft 7 both roughly 5 years old. Do you knowledgeable people think a Croft 7 and it's 45w is able to drive my R3 ? I'd have access to a Quad 606/2 Meridian 205 on loan as alternatives but the Croft itch is tenacious :)
Thanks for any input.

[ppat2]

Hi Mickael. A tough question at any time, can XX watts amp drive Y speakers. So many variables and can the amp drive the speakers is one question, but is it a good musical match I think is just as important.

i cannot answer your question directly but this review of the Response 3s might provide some clues.

i think you have to ask yourself what you are missing now. Is the sound too clinical, too bright, too dull, too bottom heavy, etc. What are the differences from now and then. I see the Response 3s are designed to be mass loaded in a bottom cavity in the speaker, and how that is done will greatly affect the sound.

i use an Air Tight tube amp at 36wpc to drive my Proac Response D Twos with no issue, plays louder (and crystal clear) than I care to listen and this is in a large 30 foot by 15 foot room with 9 foot ceilings.

The Response D Two have a 88.5db sensitivity, almost the same as the 3s. Of course not all watts are equal. My 150wpc NAD C375BEE could not drive my Proacs to the same levels as my Air Tight 36wpc, and the NAD does not even come close to the sound quality of my tube amp. Here is the Stereophile review with discussion on mass loading the 3s. A very good place to start if the speakers are not loaded. Without the right foundation no speaker can perform to its best.

https://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/991proac/index.html (https://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/991proac/index.html)

Paul

[Mike Reed]

The R3 is a lovely speaker, and an easy load as well. It doesn't need anything especially powerful to drive either. I had mine with Naim (135s), but went on to R3.5s and then R4s. All of them easy to drive (the R4 even with my little Cyrus One when the builders were in). They were developed by Stuart Tyler with A.R.C. amplification, and my Fours were very happy with E.A.R. valves which I now have.

I can't remember if these or the Sig's were rear ported, but if so, you do need a fair amount of space behind (2+ metres) and careful positioning (with tweeters in the centre). To me (who had KEF 104ABs donkey's years ago), there would be no comparison between the two speakers. Imaging etc. on the 3s is excellent.

[hifi_dave]

No problem. I've used Series 7 with R3 on a couple of occasions recently and back in the day, we regularly used the 21 wpc Series 3 OTL and Series 4, with great results.

[slaba]

Thanks for the reminder, the link and educative read on mass loading the R's Paul, had delayed looking at that and will get my screwdriver ready to explore the cavity. You're right there are many parameters and although I usually change just one thing at a time and let it sit in the system for awhile in order to assess the changes, this time I impulsively changed too many components at once with new cables, preamp, and speakers it makes comparison nearly impossible, it'a a whole new system !
In the whole it fits my huge room better (9m/6m/2-5m high) and I'm quite happy with the results so far, there's plenty of air around the speakers hopefully all it needs is a little fine tuning of the speakers load and position and maybe a little cable/tube rolling here and there.

Mike thanks for your input yep the 104AB are nice donkeys and my son is very happy with their their very vintage look and sound but the 104/2 share only 3 digits with the ABs and were a completely different speakers , I enjoyed them for years as my main listening taste is acoustic but the bottom end was just not there in my big under roof listening room, and with fast paced music they just lost it. The Proacs deliver the goods here, fuller sound which is what I was after, and I can't so far outpace them no matter what I throw at them. Pleasure is in research as the French say and the move to ProAcs has been a good one so far.

Dave : had been hoping for your advice here, and that is excellent news !
Seems I will soon have a lighter hifi purse. Had been thinking today that if I'm not completely satisfied with the croft combo on the ProAcs, they are also a perfect candidate to amplify my venerable BC1 in another room. Think I'll take the plunge and report my impressions

many thanks to all

[Jimbo]

The Croft 7 will drive the Proacs fine and will certainly be great with the BC1. I have heard a Croft 7 with proAc speakers and it was very good. The chap who had the combination traded up from some Naim amplification.

Not heard the Croft with BC1 but it will be great as they are easy to drive and are not far removed from my Spendor SP2's which I use with a Croft 7 myself.

[Mike Reed]

Oddly, I don't think I knew of the sand-filling facility in the R3s when I had them. They came from John Michell, who used them in the development of his Orbe. Maybe he'd filled them; I don't know. I didn't have them that long, though.

However, the first thing I did with my 3.5s was to put silver sand in the cavity and the speakers produced rock-solid bass. My friend still has his on the end of 552/500 and all the Naim bits, as he was so impressed by mine. They took over from my old Briks I'd sold himpreviously.

[slaba]

Took time to explore the proac cavities and found a very thin layer of sand in there, all pushed to one side of course after having them moved in here. So I added some more thin silver sand approx 3 kg each and it makes a world of difference ! Tighter deeper bass, overall focus and image seems better too. Meanwhile looks like I missed half of the Croft deal I was after, the hunt is still on for a summer amp ...

[walpurgis]

I personally do not like the idea of sand in speakers. Who's to say small particles will not get into the magnet gap and abrade the coil? And yes, finer particles can get through the usual cambric material of the speaker rear cone suspension.

[hifistokie123]

Hi Slaba

I am a relatively new member here too.I have over the last few months upgraded my amplification and Croft is what I went for.

I bought a phono unit first (about to take this to Glenn for upgrade to "R" spec )followed by a 25R line pre and 7R power amp from people on this forum.I doubt I will be swapping again,UNLESS I develope an "itch" for 7R monoblocks (I will try to resist).
I have a pair of Spendor A6 speakers and wondered what the paring might be like.I rang Spendor who were very helpful (thank you Rob) and was pleased to learn that no problems were to be expected.Fortunately that most certainly proved to be the case.

As I type I am listening to an old Joan Baez album via a quite lowly spec LP12,I have stopped twice to turn to my "sweet spot" and just listen.The voice of an angel presented on all levels in as fine a manner as these old ears have heard (I will not try any flowery language,bound to make a mess of it).It is the same with Mountain,Jennifer Warnes,Hawkwind,Jefferson Airplane etc. and a recent £1 buy in a charity shop Handel's "Messiah" x2 box set is ,well glorious.Now that is a fair range of music types I think and the Croft set up just loves it all.

I am no expert but I cannot see the Croft having a problem with your R3,s and that is the truth of it from me !

[slaba]

I personally do not like the idea of sand in speakers. Who's to say small particles will not get into the magnet gap and abrade the coil? And yes, finer particles can get through the usual cambric material of the speaker rear cone suspension.

Never liked the idea either, but I had to try since these are so big and heavy they are not moving any time soon. I also checked that I could suck it all out, it's not going to be a problem and the nearest coil is some 40cm higher up in the box so as long as it's not tilted 120° it looks safe. Now that it's done I have no regrets ;-)

[Mike Reed]

I personally do not like the idea of sand in speakers. Who's to say small particles will not get into the magnet gap and abrade the coil? And yes, finer particles can get through the usual cambric material of the speaker rear cone suspension.

I would imagine that Stuart Tyler's designs would try to obviate the problem of one coming into contact with the other. I don't recall a problem moving my 3.5s from Ramsgate to Norwich and again a year later. I guess I tried to be careful, and can't recall removing the sand before transit. I might have done, though, as it would have been shipped sideways. Makes a hell of a difference, as Mickael has found.

[slaba]

Hi Slaba

I bought a phono unit first (about to take this to Glenn for upgrade to "R" spec )followed by a 25R line pre and 7R power amp from people on this forum.I doubt I will be swapping again,UNLESS I develope an "itch" for 7R monoblocks (I will try to resist).
I have a pair of Spendor A6 speakers and wondered what the paring might be like.I rang Spendor who were very helpful (thank you Rob) and was pleased to learn that no problems were to be expected.Fortunately that most certainly proved to be the case.


thanks for your input Dave. If ever the itch scratches, don't resist, your Croft power amp would find a good home here ;-)