Neun Planeten - Solarsystem Tour Diese Website ist ein Überblick über die Geschichte, die Mythologie und die aktuelle wissenschaftliche Erkenntnis der Planeten, Monde und anderer Objekte in unserem Sonnensystem. Jede Seite hat unseren Text und NASAs Bilder, einige haben Töne und Filme, die meisten stellen Verweise auf zusätzliche verwandte Informationen. Bitte besuchen Sie unsere Astronomie-News-Sektion, die Neuigkeiten, Notizen und allgemeine Beobachtungen gibt. Wir haben auch eine interaktive Besichtigung des Sonnensystems (Lasten in einem neuen Fenster) Alle Planeten sind mit einem kleinen Teleskop oder Fernglas zu sehen und private Observatorien sind weiterhin nützlich Information. Aber die Möglichkeit, mit interplanetaren Raumfahrzeugen nah zu kommen, hat die Planetenwissenschaft revolutioniert. Sehr wenig von dieser Seite wäre ohne das Raumprogramm möglich gewesen. Trotzdem gibt es eine Menge, die man mit sehr bescheidenen Geräten oder sogar mit Ihren eigenen Augen sehen kann. Vergangenheit Generationen von Menschen fand Schönheit und ein Gefühl der Wunder in Erwägung der Nachthimmel. Die heutige wissenschaftliche Erkenntnis verstärkt und vertieft diese Erfahrung. Und du kannst es teilen, indem du einfach abends ausgeht und nach oben schaust. Die Sonne ist bei weitem das größte Objekt im Sonnensystem. Es enthält mehr als 99,8 der Gesamtmasse des Sonnensystems (Jupiter enthält die meisten übrigen). Es wird oft gesagt, dass die Sonne ein quadratischer Stern ist. Das ist wahr in dem Sinne, dass es viele andere ähnlich ist. Aber es gibt noch viele kleinere Sterne als größere, die Sonne ist in der Top 10 von Masse. Die mittlere Größe der Sterne in unserer Galaxie ist wahrscheinlich weniger als die Hälfte der Masse der Sonne. Jupiter ist das vierte hellste Objekt am Himmel (nach der Sonne, dem Mond und der Venus). Es ist seit prähistorischen Zeiten bekannt als ein helles, quellenloses Starquot. Aber im Jahre 1610, als Galileo zuerst ein Teleskop am Himmel zeigte, entdeckte er Jupiter39s vier große Monde Io. Europa Ganymed und Callisto (jetzt bekannt als die galiläischen Monde) und nahm ihre Bewegungen hin und her um Jupiter. In der römischen Mythologie ist Mercury der Gott des Handels, der Reise und der Diebstahl, der römische Gegenüber des griechischen Gottes Hermes, der Gesandte der Götter. Der Planet hat diesen Namen wahrscheinlich erhalten, weil er sich so schnell über den Himmel bewegt. Quecksilber ist seit mindestens der Zeit der Sumerer (3. Jahrtausend v. Chr.) Bekannt. Die IAU änderte die Definition von quotplanetquot, so dass Pluto nicht mehr qualifiziert. Es gibt offiziell nur acht Planeten in unserem Sonnensystem. Natürlich beeinflusst diese Änderung in der Terminologie nicht, was eigentlich da draußen ist. Am Ende ist es nicht so wichtig, wie wir die verschiedenen Objekte in unserem Sonnensystem klassifizieren. Wichtig ist, über ihre physische Natur und ihre Geschichten zu lernen. Planet Order von der Sonne Mercury, Venus, Erde, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus und Neptun Unser Wissen über unser Sonnensystem ist umfangreich, aber es ist noch lange nicht abgeschlossen. Einige der Welten sind noch nie in der Nähe fotografiert worden. Die Nine Planets ist ein Überblick über das, was wir heute kennen. Wir sind immer noch erforschend, noch viel mehr wird noch kommen: Wir werden nicht von der Erforschung aufhören, und das Ende aller unserer Erkundung wird sein, wo wir ankamen und den Platz zum ersten Mal kennen. - T. S. Eliot Andere Bildungsressourcen amp Anmerkungen Astronomiebild des Tages Eine vollständige Liste der Inhalte finden Sie hier. Für Informationen über Geographie besuchen Sie bitte Physische Geographie. Erstaunen Sie Ihre Augen mit Illusionen cna Klassen online Professionelle Astronomie Forschung Papier Schreiben Hilfe finden Sie bei AdvancedWriters. Solarsystem-Tour mit freundlicher Genehmigung von Solar System Scope Wenn Sie darüber nachdenken, auf unserem Planeten zu reisen, dann ist Europa ein großartiger Ort, um einige der schönsten Städte der Welt zu besuchen, aber achten Sie darauf, Ihre EHIC-Karte mitzunehmen. Allerdings, wenn Sie Lust haben, die USA zu besuchen, dann müssen Sie möglicherweise ein ESTA Visum beantragen, bevor Sie gehen. Stolzer Anhänger von Nine Planets, Daily Fantasy Cafe bietet eine der Top Fibuel TV Promo-Code in Fantasy-Fußball. Erfahren Sie, wie Sie Geld verdienen, indem Sie Binär-Trading-Software verwenden: Binary Option Robot Info Als fortlaufender Unterstützer von Nine Planets bietet Come2OrderDC einige der Top-Online-Gutscheine und Promo-Codes an. Besuchen Sie PromoCodeWatch für exklusive Studentenrabatte und jährliche Stipendienwettbewerbe. Check out RC Richter für eine tolle Auswahl auf dem besten rc Hubschrauber für Kinder Excel High School bietet eine regional akkreditierte High-School-Diplom-Programm für Erwachsene. Transfer zur Northgate Academy und Homeschool online. Vollständig akkreditiert und erschwinglich. Website-Design von seo los angeles Besuchen Sie My Kid Needs That für eine große Auswahl an Bildungs-Produkte einschließlich Wissenschaft und Astronomie Lernen basierte Spielzeug für Kinder. 1994 - 2015 Neun Planeten Ein Leitfaden für unser Sonnensystem und darüber hinaus. Für viele Jahre, wenn nicht Jahrzehnte, waren Leistungsverstärker eine der größten (Komponent) Enttäuschungen. Tatsächlich hatten sie noch ernstere Kompromisse als Vorverstärker. Zwar gab es viele gute Verstärker, wenige waren ausgezeichnet und noch weniger waren super. Wie für toll, hätte ich bis vor kurzem noch einen Verstärker benannt. Allerdings gibt es endlich ein paar Verstärker, die in den letzten Jahren vorgespielt wurden, die diese Auszeichnung verdient haben. STANDARDS UND BEDINGUNGEN Die Standards hier sind höher als andere, und deshalb finden Sie nur 2 oder 3 Verstärker in Klasse A, nicht die 50 oder mehr finden Sie in Stereophile. Denn die Größe, auch wenn sie lose definiert ist, ist bei jedem menschlichen Bestreben niemals so üblich. Ich würde diesen Abschnitt sorgfältiger lesen als jeder andere, denn es gibt mehr Bedingungen, Vorbehalte und Warnungen als in jeder anderen Komponentenkategorie. Die einzige gute Nachricht über Verstärker ist, dass fast alle der besten Modelle, die wir gehört haben, unter 10.000 sind. Dies ist die eine Kategorie, in der großes Geld selten Sie besser klingt, unabhängig davon, was du an anderer Stelle liest. In der Tat ist genau das Gegenteil fast immer wahr. Es gibt einen sehr guten Grund dafür. Die fehlenden Megabuck Verstärker Sie finden nicht einmal einen Megabuck (über 20.000), Super-Power-Verstärker hier aufgelistet, entweder Festkörper oder Röhre. Warum keiner von ihnen, unabhängig von ihrer Technik, Ausführung oder Reputation, kann sich der Klangqualität der guten Low-Power-Verstärker nähern. Die alle haben Signalwege, die viel zu komplex sind, um die Feinheiten und das Wesen der Musik zu bewahren, besonders akustisch, aber auch elektronisch. Sie übertreffen nur in der grausamen Kraft Dynamik, äußere Detail, Soundstage Größe und Low-End-Kontrolle mit Lautsprechern von minderwertigen Design. Mit diesen Verstärkern bezahlen Sie (viel) mehr für qualitativ hochwertige Sonics, und das ist ein Grund, warum Sie unweigerlich sie zum Verkauf zu einem Bruchteil ihres Verkaufspreises innerhalb von Monaten nach dem Verkauf sehen werden. Der andere Grund ist, dass die Hersteller Markup auf diese ultra teure Verstärker ist in der Regel viel höher als auf anderen Verstärkern. Warum die Hersteller und Händler haben erkannt, dass Prestige, basierend auf einem künstlich hohen Preis, ist viel wichtiger für die potenziellen Käufer dieser Komponenten als die tatsächliche klangliche Leistung. (Lautsprecherhersteller und - verteiler hatten die gleiche Lektion schon Jahre früher gelernt.) (Für mehr zum Thema: Die unvermeidlichen Klangprobleme von Komponenten mit übermäßiger Größe und Komplexität gehen Sie bitte auf Meine Audio-Philosophie.) LAUTSPRECHER-EMPFINDLICHKEIT UND IMPEDANZ-LADEN-WARUM BEIDE WIRD WICHTIG Ein Leser hat mir vor kurzem eine E-Mail geschickt, mit einer Frage, die andere Leser auch direkt oder indirekt gefragt oder abgeleitet haben. Hier ist es: Ich kann intuitiv begreifen, warum höhere Effizienz in einem Lautsprecher ein Plus wäre. Ich verstehe nicht, warum (mindestens 6 Ohm überall) obligatorisch ist, um Minimalismus zu erreichen. Warum würden Lautsprecher (93 db) mit niedrigeren Impedanzen und Erstbestellungskreuzungen grundlegende Prinzipien verletzen Meine Antwort - Die Lautsprecher-Impedanz (Last) ist fast so wichtig wie ihre Empfindlichkeit, vielleicht sogar noch mehr in einigen Fällen. Dies ist, weil ein Lautsprecher mit einer niedrigen Impedanz, auch wenn seine nur bei bestimmten Frequenzen, wird in der Regel dazu führen, dass ein Single-Ended-Trioden (SET) Verstärker entweder spürbar verzerren oder sogar vollständig Clip. Diese Verstärker haben selten die aktuellen Reserven für eine solche niederohmige Last erforderlich. Wenn das nicht schlimm genug war, auch wenn der Verstärker nicht verzerrt ist, wird sein Frequenzgang wie ein Gebirgszug mit einem Lautsprecher aussehen, der eine unterschiedliche Impedanz hat. Alle diese Probleme sind sehr hörbar, und sie sind, warum einige Audiophile fühlen, dass alle SET-Modelle für Narren oder für die (bildlich) taub sind. Ive hatte mehrfach Erfahrung mit diesem Problem bei mehreren Gelegenheiten. Mein erstklassiges Beispiel: Die Wilson WATTS sind ziemlich empfindlich im Vergleich zu den meisten anderen Rednern, aber sie haben dramatische Impedanz Dips bei bestimmten Frequenzen, so dass alle Single-Ended Amps, die ich hatte, auch diejenigen mit 20 Watt oder mehr Macht zu verzerren. Es war dieser Redner, mehr als jeder andere, das hat mir bewiesen, dass die Sensibilität nur die Hälfte der Lösung war. Ich wünschte, es wäre anders, aber es ist nicht. Ich habe meine eigenen benutzerdefinierten Crossover für meine WATTS gebaut. Es war die einzige Methode, um das Problem zu beseitigen. Ich glaube, eine leichte Lautsprecherbelastung, sowohl in der Empfindlichkeit als auch in der Impedanz, ist der Schlüssel zum Zusammenstellen eines wirklich großen Audiosystems, so dass alle ernsthaften Audiophilen dieses Problem eventuell anpacken müssen. Verstärker und Lautsprecher - Die grausame und unvermeidliche Wahl Es war eine myour Erfahrung, die in praktisch jedem Fall, wenn Sie vergleichen Verstärker mit Lautsprechern, die nicht benötigen riesige Mengen an Strom und Spannung, um sie zu fahren, die niedrigere angetriebene und einfachere Designs (von gleicher Bauqualität ) Wird überlegene Bedeutung spürbar natürlicher und weniger elektronisch klingen. Innerhalb dieser Verstärkerhierarchie werden dann die größten Festkörperverstärker das Schlimmste klingen (während sie die größte Lautsprechervielfalt haben), während die Low-Powered-SET-Verstärker am besten klingen (bei gleicher Kompatibilität). Warum die leistungsstärksten Verstärker fast immer die minimalste Schaltung haben, was den geringsten musikalischen Schaden verursacht. Dies bedeutet, dass es eine unverwechselbare allgemeine Formel oder Regel für all dies gibt: Die umgekehrte Beziehung zwischen den Verstärkern Lautsprecher-Laufwerk und seine inhärente Klangqualität. Mit anderen Worten: Je mehr Lautsprecher ein Verstärker fahren kann, ohne kompromittiert zu werden, desto komplizierter sind seine inhärenten Soniken, alles andere ist gleich. Der Klangpreis für größere Sprecherunterbringung ist eine größere Signalverschlechterung. Es ist so einfach. Analogie - es ist wie der Unterschied zwischen einem Geländewagen und einem Rennwagen. Sicher, man kann immer von jedem Punkt A zu jedem Punkt B mit dem Geländefahrzeug kommen, aber sein kein Wettbewerb, wenn die beiden Entwürfe auf einer glatten und geraden Autobahn konkurrieren. Ein WORT VON WARNUNG UND BERATUNG Ich habe vor kurzem einen deprimierenden Brief von einem Leser erhalten, der einen VTL Ultimate Vorverstärker gekauft hat, auf meinen Rat und Empfehlung, nur um zu sehen, dass es nach ein paar Monaten zerbricht, wobei die erforderlichen Reparaturen zu teuer sind, um wirtschaftlich zu sein Am wenigsten für diesen Leser, der in der Tube Elctronics Geschäft nicht weniger ist. Also Leser, bitte. Wenn Sie eine Audiokomponente kaufen, die verwendet wird. Vor allem eine ältere Röhreneinheit aus einer unbekannten Quelle, stellen Sie sicher, dass es einige vorherige Rückmeldung oder eine Ressource gibt, wenn es Probleme gibt. Entweder das, oder stellen Sie sicher, dass der Preis, den Sie zahlen, niedrig genug ist, um Ihnen zu erlauben, immer noch etwas zu verbringen, um es bis zur Top-Aktienleistung zu bringen. (Modifikationen können später kommen.) Idealerweise sollten Sie die Komponente in Ihrem eigenen System hören, und überprüfen Sie es persönlich, VOR dem Kauf. Glücklicherweise ist der Alptraum, den dieser verärgerte Leser erlebt hat, relativ selten, zumindest in unserer Audio-Welt, aber immer vorsichtig sein, bevor Sie Ihr Engagement machen. Dieser Vorverstärker ist in der Regel zuverlässig, also versuche ich nicht, ein Beispiel daraus zu machen, aber der Leser hat mir mitgeteilt, dass die (VTL) Fabrik keine Hilfe haben wird (mit Schaltplänen oder Stücklisten), also sei besonders vorsichtig damit. Coincident 211PP Drachen MK. II Mono Verstärker Ich fand endlich die Zeit und die Hilfe, die ich brauchte, um diese Verstärker richtig vorzuspielen (was ich schon seit einem Jahr hatte). Ive hörte sie auf den Monitoren und den Subwoofern des Coincident Pure Reference Extreme (PRE) (verdoppelt). Ich habe sogar gehört, einer von ihnen Mono (ein Kanal). Sie wurden später direkt mit den Coincident Frankenstein Amps auf den Monitoren und den originalen Drachenverstärkern auf den Subwoofern verglichen. Relevante Details - Dieses Paar Drachen wurde von vorherigen Parteien völlig zerbrochen, bevor ich sie erhielt (Shows und andere Rezensenten, einschließlich der späten Harry Pearson). Sie verwenden die Lager Psvane 211 Ausgangsrohre. Dies ist, was ich und mein Gastgeber. Beobachtet: Der Drache Mk. II ist ein hervorragender Verstärker. Es ist sowohl der feinste Push-Pull-Verstärker Ive gehört, von jeder Art und zu jedem Preis, sowie der feinste Verstärker in seinem Leistungsbereich (was wahrscheinlich überflüssig ist). Verglichen mit dem ursprünglichen Drachen, den ich jetzt seit mehr als 8 Jahren lebte. Der II ist sauberer und raffinierter klingender Klang im gesamten Frequenzbereich, plus er hat einen tiefen Klangboden. Der Bass ist ein wenig detaillierter und kontrollierter (wie ein eiserner Griff) als der ursprüngliche Drache. Gelegentlich hat es auch etwas mehr Einfluss. Noch wichtiger ist, dass das II mit den Frankenstein-Verstärkern zusammenhängt, die auf den Monitoren in einem Biamped-System spielen (was für mich entscheidend ist). Die Verbesserungen im Bass, in Isolation, scheinen vielleicht nicht viel zu sein, aber das ist einer jener willkommenen Anlässe, wo die Summe größer ist als die Teile. Es gibt noch andere Verbesserungen neben den reinen Sonaten, obwohl sie direkt verwandt sind. Die Mk. II ist leiser und kühler als der ursprüngliche Drache, vor allem weil es jetzt einen zweiten Power Transformator hat, zusammen mit anderen Fortschritten in der Stromversorgung als auch (die Details sind auf der Coincident Website, siehe Link unten). Dementsprechend ist das II größer als das Original, wenn auch viel eleganter im Aussehen mit seinen rostfreien Stahl verchromten Abdeckungen. Die beiden Ausgangsrohre laufen auch kühler, so dass ihr Leben nun verlängert wird. Kurz gesagt, die Mk. II ist in jeder möglichen Weise dem ursprünglichen Modell überlegen. Der Preis ging um 10. Das ist eigentlich weniger als die angesammelte Inflation über diesen Zeitraum (10.000 bis 11.000), und die Empfindlichkeit scheint um etwa 2 db oder so reduziert (was bedeutet, dass es einen Schaltungswechsel gab, obwohl die Röhrenkomplementierung genau gleich bleibt). Alle oben genannten Verbesserungen wurden ziemlich schnell gehört und sind ganz einfach, weshalb ich kein Interesse daran habe, längere Beschreibungen zu liefern. Was ich fühle, ist wichtiger, ob und wie diese Komponente die aktuelle Verstärkerlandschaft verändert. Ich habe diesen Gedanken gegeben, vor allem für die Besitzer der Pure Reference Extreme Lautsprecher, und unten ist mein Denken zu diesem Zeitpunkt. Der Drache oder der Frankenstein. Oder der Drache ist der nächste Ive gehört ein Push-Pull-Verstärker kommen, um die sonic Vorteile inhärent in einem wirklich guten SET-Verstärker, aber es ist noch nicht da. Und um brutal offen zu sein, noch wird es jemals sein, vor allem, weil ich nicht glaube, dass es technisch möglich für jeden Push-Pull-Verstärker, um dieses Niveau der Leistung zu erreichen. Wenn es möglich wäre, würden SET-Verstärker funktionell veraltet sein, weil sie außerhalb ihrer einzigartigen klanglichen Vorteile keine erlösenden Qualitäten mit Ausnahme für eine kleine Minderheit von Nostalgie haben. Das heißt, es ist offensichtlich, dass der Drache den Frankenstein über die überwiegende Mehrheit der Sprecher von Interesse für audiophile, aktuelle oder aus der Vergangenheit übertreffen wird. Die Bottom Line ist hier ganz einfach: Der Frankenstein ist ein Spezialverstärker, der für die wenigen Lautsprecher konzipiert ist, die sehr leicht zu fahren sind (sowohl bei Empfindlichkeit als auch bei Impedanz), während der Drache fast jeden Lautsprecher fahren kann. Das bringt uns dann zu einem Sprecher, den beide Verstärker fahren können, die Pure Reference Extreme, die auch sehr aufschlussreich ist, so dass es einfacher ist, irgendwelche Mängel der Quellen und Verstärkung zu beobachten, immer ein Bonus für jeden Kritiker. Tatsächlich habe ich dieses exaktes Problem vor vier Jahren im Jahr 2011 besprochen, und während der Drache jetzt verbessert wurde, hatte der Frankenstein etwas früher und um den gleichen Grad. Was das bedeutet, ist, dass die klangliche Leistungsbeziehung zwischen den beiden Verstärkern immer noch im Grunde die gleiche ist wie bei der ersten Veröffentlichung im Jahr 2007, und dann wird dann meine Perspektive und Ratschläge sein. Dementsprechend werde ich einfach noch einmal wiederholen, was ich vor vier Jahren über dieses Thema geschrieben habe, in fast den gleichen Worten wie damals: 1. Bei vollem Spiel sind die Frankenstein Verstärker immer noch vorzuziehen. meistens. Sie zeigen nur ihre Unzulänglichkeiten in einer offensichtlichen Weise auf die anspruchsvollsten Aufzeichnungen, die sehr hohe Bände und anspruchsvolle Bassnoten erfordern. Sie sind lebendiger und gegenwärtiger als die Drachen und die Harmonischen sind natürlicher. Der Frankenstein zeichnet sich durch Reinheit, Transparenz, Natürlichkeit, Ultra-Low-Sound-Boden und mangelnder elektronischer Charakter aus. Noch einfacher ist der Frankenstein ein Meister der Stimmen. 2. Die Dragon-Verstärker, während offensichtlich herausragende Performer, sind nur bei der Erreichung der ultimativen Lautstärke und in den Bassfrequenzen überlegen, obwohl die letztere Verbesserung in der Regel subtil ist und nur auf der Musik mit ernsthaften Bass-Herausforderungen offensichtlich ist. Noch einfacher ist der Drache ein Meister der Trommeln, wo die Kontrolle eine zusätzliche Anforderung ist. Am Ende, die Wahl zwischen den Verstärkern, vorausgesetzt, die Lautsprecher sind die PRE oder etwas ähnliches, kommt auf Qualität versus Menge. Wenn der Zuhörer die Drachen extra Macht für eine Vielzahl von Gründen ein ungewöhnlich großes Zimmer, hohe Hörniveaus und extra herausfordernde Musik, plus Seelenfrieden, dass die Verstärker wird nie aufgeben unter keinen Umständen, dann würde ich die Drachen bekommen. Ansonsten sind die Frankensteins zu bevorzugen. Es darf nicht vergessen werden, dass ich ein großes Zimmer habe und regelmäßig große Orchestermusik abspielen kann, und ich bevorzuge immer noch die Frankenstein Verstärker. Trotz dieser Analyse glaube ich, dass die Wahl zwischen den beiden Verstärkern, die beide im Vollbereich spielen, etwas willkürlich und oberflächlich ist, wenn nicht irreführend. Kurz gesagt, wenn das Endziel ist, die potenzielle Leistung des Pure Reference Extreme vollständig zu optimieren (hört es ganz am besten), dann ist die eigentliche Antwort Weder, denn es gibt eine dritte Möglichkeit (siehe unten) und in Meine erfahrene Meinung, es ist die beste Option, Zeitraum. Die richtige Antwort ist: Oder der beste Sound, den ich mit dem PRE gehört habe, ohne Zweifel. War, als sie bi-amplified waren. Mit den Frankensteins auf den Monitoren und den Drachen auf den Subwoofern. Für das Beste aus allen Welten, die leider mit einem Geldpreis kommen, müssen wir jetzt das Bi-Amping besprechen (was mehr Verbesserungen macht, als es sogar zu verdoppeln). Um die Dinge kristallklar zu machen, kann kein einziger Verstärker zu jedem Preis gleich sein, was Frankenstein und Dragon zusammen tun können, und das kann ich mit absoluter Zuversicht sagen, obwohl ich offensichtlich jeden Verstärker in der Welt gehört habe. Dies ist, weil niemand Verstärker, egal was seine Fähigkeiten, können die technischen Probleme im Zusammenhang mit der Wiedergabe der PRE Full-Range zu überwinden. Nur dedizierte Verstärker, unabhängig voneinander elektrisch, können diese Probleme vermeiden, was bedeutet, dass Bi-Amping eine Notwendigkeit ist, mit dem PRE (oder jedem anderen Lautsprecher mit ähnlichem Design) die höchstmögliche Leistung zu erzielen. Die klanglichen Vorteile von Bi-Amping, die auf dem PRE sehr leicht zu beobachten sind, hängen davon ab, welcher Verstärker ursprünglich im Vollbereich spielt. Wenn es der Frankenstein ist, mit dem Zusatz des Drachen nicht nur wird der Bass offensichtlich mehr Kraft, Gewicht und Wirkung haben, wird der Mittelton auch zu einem überraschenden Grad, mit extra Reinheit, Geschwindigkeit und sogar Headroom zu verbessern. Wenn der Drache der Starterverstärker ist, wird die Hinzufügung des Frankensteins den Headroom reduzieren, aber die verschiedenen Verbesserungen im Mittelbereich werden es mehr als ausgleichen. Der Bass bleibt grundsätzlich gleich. Weiterhin wird jeder theoretische Traumverstärker den PREs-Mittelbereich spürbar beeinträchtigen, wenn er gleichzeitig die Subwoofer gleichzeitig antreibt. Dieses technische Problem kann nicht beendet werden, was dieses Problem schließt. (Ein Vorbehalt und Ausnahme - Ein elektronischer Crossover-Puffer kann den Mittelton und den Bass des PRE noch mehr kompromittieren als mit einem einzigen Fullrange-Verstärker, den ich aus direkter Erfahrung gelernt habe.) Bisher konzentrierte ich mich nicht nur auf den Drachen und Frankenstein Weil sie beide aus Coincident kommen, aber auch weil sie ein sehr ähnliches Gesamtdesign teilen. In Wirklichkeit ist der Drache der engste Verstärker, der dem Frankenstein möglich ist, wenn es darum geht, rund 10 db mehr Leistung zu haben, so dass es der ideale Verstärker für die Subwoofer ist, wenn der Frankenstein an der Spitze benutzt wird. Trotzdem gibt es noch andere gute Entscheidungen für die Subs, und sie alle kosten weniger als der Drache Der ASL Hurricane, TutayAltec 1570, Canary CA-339 etc. (Check Classes BC der Referenzverstärker für andere Entscheidungen), aber keiner von Diese Amps werden dem Drachen für die Gesamtleistung und die Kohäsion gleich sein. Allerdings gibt es jetzt noch eine andere Option, und es kann für einige Zuhörer vorzuziehen sein als die FrankensteinDragon-Kombination und überraschend, es kommt eigentlich aus Coincident selbst. Die neueste Bi-Amp-Option Coincident ist vor kurzem mit einem neuen Verstärker namens Turbo herausgekommen. Das ist ein SET mit einem 845 Ausgangsrohr (28 Watt). Es ist ein Dual-Mono (integrierter) Verstärker auf einem (sehr schweren) Chassis. Es hat einige begeisterte Kritiken erhalten. Ich habe es selbst noch nicht gehört, aber auf der Grundlage seiner Gestaltung und Ausführung, die dem Drachen und dem Frankenstein sehr ähnlich sind, könnte es für viele Audiophile die beste Wahl sein, und es hat sogar einige Vorteile für sich selbst. Zuerst, wie gehst du am besten Bi-Amp mit dem Turbo Thats einfach: Du benutzt zwei von ihnen, mit einem Verstärker gewidmet einem Lautsprecher-Kanal. So würde ein Turbo den linken Lautsprecherkanal und den zweiten Turbo den rechten Lautsprecherkanal komplett betreiben. Jeder Turbos rechten oder linken Kanal würde dann entweder den Monitor oder den Subwoofer fahren. Diese Methode würde die Kabellängen minimieren und die Trennung maximieren. Wenn wir die FrankensteinDragon-Kombination mit zwei Turbos vergleichen, ist das mit einigen Spekulationen das, was passieren soll: 1. Der Turbo wird in der Lage sein, bei den meisten Musik spürbar lauter zu spielen, da er etwa 6 db mehr Headroom hat als der Frankenstein auf den Monitoren , Während die Drachen 4 db Headroom Vorteil auf den Subs wird selten zu hören. 2. Der Turbo wird kohärenter klingen, da genau der gleiche Verstärker sowohl den Monitor als auch den Subwoofer spielt. Es würde zwei Paare von Frankensteins oder Drachen nehmen, um sie hier zu gleichen, aber beide dieser Entscheidungen würden mit noch merklicheren Nachteilen kommen. 3. Der Frankenstein sollte noch einen leichten Vorteil gegenüber dem Turbo in seinen Stärken haben (oben erwähnt), aber es wird sehr subtil sein. 4. Der Drache sollte noch einen leichten Vorteil gegenüber dem Turbo in seinen Stärken haben (oben erwähnt), aber er wird auch sehr subtil (die meiste Zeit). Die Kompromisse sind also: Spürbar zusätzliche Headroom und verbesserte Kohäsion für den Turbo gegenüber einem sehr leichten Nachteil im Mittelbereich und gelegentlicher Kompromiss im Bassbereich im Vergleich zum FrankensteinDragon. Wenn das klingt wie zwei Turbos jetzt die bessere Wahl sein kann, wenn man nur die Sonics betrachtet, geschweige denn eine 5.000 Einsparungen (17.000 vs 12.000), auch ich bin nicht in der Lage, ein starkes Argument gegen diese Prämisse zu setzen, weshalb ich diese Option fühlte Musste erzogen werden, besonders zu diesem Zeitpunkt. Allerdings muss man sich auch daran erinnern, dass die Dragons-Fähigkeiten mit vielen weiteren Referenten kompatibel sind, weshalb sie in erster Linie mehr kosten, während sich diese Diskussion nur auf die Optimierung der Pure Reference Extremes konzentriert. Die Turbos haben auch einen weiteren finanziellen Vorteil, sie können zu einem Zeitpunkt gekauft werden, so dass es zwei 6.000 Investitionen statt einer 12.000 Investition. Weiterhin hat der Turbo einige Vergünstigungen, die manche vielleicht wichtig finden, nämlich eine Fernbedienung, die Folgendes beinhaltet: einen Wahlschalter, eine Stummschaltung, eine direkte Verbindungsumwandlung und eine Lautstärkeregelung. Es hat sogar einen Kopfhörerverstärker, der Weltklasse-Leistung nach einem Rezensenten hat. Eine letzte Option Schließlich, um alle Optionen offen zu halten, kann der Turbo entweder dem Frankenstein oder dem Drachen vorzuziehen sein, wenn er mit dem PRE verwendet wird, da er klangliche Vorteile gegenüber beiden hat. In der Tat, wenn Bi-Amping nicht für jemanden möglich war, und sie mussten nur einen Verstärker auf der PRE verwenden, würde ich wahrscheinlich mit dem Turbo über den Drachen oder den Frankenstein beraten. (Das wäre mir aber nicht persönlich möglich, wegen meines Raumaufbaus. Ich habe keinen Platz in meinem Hörraum, um einen einzigen Zweikanalverstärker zu positionieren.) Um alles zusammenzufassen, was oben diskutiert wurde, im einfachsten: 1. Der Drachen II ist eine sehr durchdachte Verbesserung des ursprünglichen Drachen, der bereits ein eigenartiger Verstärker war. Die II ist überlegen in der Leistung, Praktikabilität und Aussehen, die also deckt jede Basis denkbar, und es kostet nur 10 mehr. 2. Während der Drache eine weitaus größere Anzahl von Lautsprechern fahren kann, ist der Frankenstein SET Verstärker immer noch die bessere Wahl, die meisten der Zeit, auf Coincidents eigene Pure Reference Extreme (PRE) Lautsprecher (oder andere Lautsprecher ähnlich dem PRE). 3. Bi-Amping. Mit beiden Verstärkern, ist immer noch die einzige Methode, um die PREs-Fähigkeiten vollständig zu maximieren. Keiner Verstärker, um jeden Preis, kann ihre kombinierte Leistung aufgrund von inhärenten und unvermeidlichen technischen Faktoren gleich sein. 4. Mit dem neuen Turbo SET Verstärker kann der Frankenstein oder der Drache zum Fahren der PRE vorzuziehen sein. Weiterhin kann ein Paar Turbos auch die überlegene Wahl sein, wenn auch Bi-Amping, und diese Option kommt sogar mit einer erheblichen monetären Einsparungen (5.000). Das bringt mich up-to-date auf die Coincident Komponenten, die für mich relevant sind. Ich habe keine Pläne, irgendeine andere zusammenfallende Komponente zu diesem Zeitpunkt vorzuspielen. Allerdings beabsichtige ich, einige einfache Kondensatoränderungen am Frankenstein Verstärker vorzunehmen, die im Frühjahr 2015 irgendwann gemeldet werden. Wenn ein Leser noch mehr Details über die Frage der Auswahl eines Verstärkers für die Pure Reference Extreme verlangt, würde ich vorschlagen, mit Israel Blume in Verbindung zu treten. Der Designer-Besitzer von Coincident, der viele weitere Vergleiche gemacht hat, als ich habe. Siehe den Link unten. Coincident Speaker Technology COINCIDENT M300B FRANKENSTEIN MK II Das ist zweifellos der beste Verstärker, insgesamt habe ich je gehört. Drei meiner Mitarbeiter haben diesen Verstärker auch in meinem System gehört. Und stimme dieser Meinung und Bewertung zu. Seit meinem bisherigen Referenzverstärker hat die (hochmodifizierte) Golden Tube 300B (jetzt in Klasse B Obere) seit 1996 jede Herausforderung überlebt. Ich glaube, der Frankenstein muss zu diesem Zeitpunkt eine ausführliche und eingehende Prüfung von mir erhalten. Dementsprechend habe ich beschlossen, eine dedizierte Datei für diesen wichtigen Verstärker zu erstellen: THE COINCIDENT FRANKENSTEIN FILE. Diese Datei enthält alles, was ich je über den original TektronFrankenstein und den Coincident Frankenstein geschrieben habe, sowie alle Leserbriefe. COINCIDENT DRAGON 211PP VERSTÄRKER (URSPRÜNGLICHE VERSION) Hinweis - Es gibt eine aktualisierte Version dieses Verstärkers (siehe oben) jetzt verfügbar. Was unten steht, wurde 2007 verfasst. Ive hörte jetzt diese Verstärker lange genug, und in einer aufschlussreichen genug, um zu einer selbstbewussten Einschätzung über sie zu kommen: Dies ist der feinste Hochleistungsverstärker, den ich je gehört habe. Ive erwähnte bereits ihre hervorragende Basswiedergabe (siehe unten), und jetzt hörte ich sie auch auf dem Ars Acoustica Satellit. Ab ca. 100 Hz. Diese Hörsitzung (und andere) war wegen einer Komponentenfehlanpassung relativ kurz, wie nachfolgend erläutert wird, aber lang genug für unsere Zwecke. Insgesamt haben wir (meine Mitarbeiter und ich) eine Kombination von Stärken erlebt, die wir noch nie gehört haben. Diese Verstärker besitzen drei Bereiche von Vorrang, und einer von ihnen ist beispiellos in unserer Erfahrung: 1. Die dynamischen Kontraste, Verschiebungen und Intensität sind in einer Klasse für sich selbst. Es ist der erste Verstärker, den ich je gehört habe, der es einem guten dynamischen Lautsprecher ermöglicht, eine Intensität (Schreck-, Gänsehaut - und Schockfähigkeit) zu zeigen, die an einen guten Hornlautsprecher erinnert. Jeder andere Verstärker, den ich in meinem Leben gehört habe, ist bis zu einem gewissen Grad komprimiert, im Vergleich zum Drachen. Bestimmte Transienten klingt eigentlich wie ihre Schüsse aus einer Kanone. 2. Es hat eine riesige Klangbühne, vielleicht die größte Ive jemals gehört, aber Ive hörte nichts größer als es. 3. Es ist sehr sofort. Mehr als alle Hochleistungs-Röhrenverstärker, die ich je gehört habe, und nur mit den feinsten SET-Verstärkern oder seltenen Transistormodellen ausgestattet. Es ist auch sehr neutral, aber wenn Sie hoffen, dass es auch die feinsten Low-Powered-SET-Verstärker, wie die Coincident Frankenstein oder die Golden Tube 300B. In ihren einzigartigen Stärken von ultimativer Reinheit, Transparenz und einem ultra-tiefen Klangboden muss ich diese Hoffnung traurig schlagen. Gerade als es nur wenige Minuten (oder weniger) dachte, um die Drachen offensichtliche Stärken (oben) zu hören, gehen wir zurück zu den feinsten SET Amps, ich weiß schnell, dass es immer noch eine spürbare vergleichende Lücke mit der Drachen Reproduktion der subtilsten Elemente gibt Der Musik. Allerdings möchte ich meine Meinung und Perspektive klar machen: Der Drache wird besser klingen, auf einer größeren Vielfalt von Lautsprechern, als jeder andere Verstärker, den ich je gehört habe, oder Im noch bewusst zu dieser Zeit. Kein anderer Verstärker, den ich gehört habe, kann seine einzigartige Kombination aus echter dynamischer Kraft, Reinheit, Neutralität, Geschwindigkeit, Bildgröße, Natürlichkeit und Vollständigkeit im Durchschnitt (und schwierig) Lastlautsprecher gleichsetzen. Wenn jemand nach ihrem endgültigen Verstärker sucht, der eine hervorragende Vollstrecke, auf praktisch jedem Lautsprecher, jeder Art klingt, wäre die Drachen meine erste Wahl. Ich plane, endlich mehr ins Detail über die Leistung der Drachen zu gehen. Inzwischen habe ich schon ausführlich die Drachen auf meine Subwoofer gehört. Heres der Aufsatz schrieb ich über diese Erfahrungen. Ich finde es immer noch relevant. Januar 2007 Bassverstärker Essay Dies sind die besten Verstärker, die ich auf meinem Ars Acoustica System Max Subwoofer hatte. Ich kann nicht sagen, dass sie in jedem einzelnen Sonic-Parameter überlegen sind, aber sie sind definitiv die besten insgesamt. In den meisten Fällen würde eine so hohe Bassleistung auf einer einzigen Oktave (20 bis 40 Hz) verschwendet werden, aber in meinem Fall gehen die Subwoofer auf etwa 160 Hz. Das ist drei ganze Oktaven und damit sehr kritisch für die ultimative Sonik meines Systems. Während ich keine gegenwärtige Absicht habe, einen Verstärker als Referenz streng auf seine Bassfrequenzen zu bezeichnen (wenn auch vielleicht etwas, was in Zukunft weiter gedacht werden sollte), möchte ich diese Gelegenheit nutzen, um meine bisherigen Erfahrungen mit den Ars Subwoofers zu besprechen , and the most interesting amplifiers Ive used with them. This should be relevant to a wide audience of audiophiles, because it deals with bass reproduction in general. I also would like to post my thoughts and experiences on the utilization of subwoofers, which Ive now used in my various systems for almost 30 years . This will all be necessary to set the stage and to put things in perspective. Experiences with the Ars Acoustica System Max Subwoofer Ive had the Ars Acoustica speakers for almost 10 years now, and Ive tried countless amplifiers on them, on both the satellites and the subwoofers, and sometimes even one amplifier driving them full-range. This was easy and convenient for me, because I had my audio store in the same building in which I lived between 1996 to 2001 . At this time, Im only focusing on my most interesting experiences with the System Max subwoofers. The first amplifier I used on the Ars subs was the Parasound HCA-2200 one pair of them switched into mono operation. The Parasounds were superb bass amplifiers, especially for the money, though they couldnt operate into a really low impedance load in mono. Since the Ars is almost exactly 4 ohms . and very flat, this was not a problem. I had originally picked up the Parasounds for my previous woofer system, the Tympani IV bass panels (in heavy granite frames), which required huge power ( 500 watts minimum) and control, though they had no real response below 30 Hz . so they werent a true subwoofer. I also had the ultra-rare Concentric Speaker Super-subs (which I still have, and will discuss later). I was very happy with the Parasounds, but after a lot of experimenting with a number of amplifiers (now mainly forgotten), I eventually replaced them with a pair of Atma-sphere M-60 Mk. II OTL amplifiers. This was a surprise to me, considering the relatively low impedance of the Ars sub. The Atma-sphere didnt have nearly the power of the Parasounds of course, but they went just as low, were just as controlled, and they passed through more musical information in a natural manner. In effect, I traded some quantity for some quality . This brings us to around the year 2000 . Two more amplifiers, both of them using ( Direct Heated Triode ) tubes, then entered my audio life. The next amplifier I used, the Altec 1570B . with heavy modifications designed by Tom Tutay . ended up being my long-term choice ( 6 years ), though it was actually my second favorite. The Altec sounded very similar to the Atma-sphere, but it had more power. It was, in the end, in my room and system, a combination of the best qualities of both the Atma-sphere and the Parasound. Just when I thought I had found my final subwoofer amp, another contender arrived out of the blue (literally, since it was metallic blue). This was the Viva Aurora 572 amplifier, imported from Italy . which was also visually stunning. The Aurora was an expensive amplifier, the most expensive by far I had ever owned, but I was able to get a super deal on them. I was lucky, Viva was just then changing this model, converting it from the obsolete 572 output tube to an 845 output tube. I first played the amplifier in my store, comparing it to every serious amplifier I had, and could find. It didnt take long to appreciate its outstanding performance. In fact, it proved to be noticeably superior to all of the other amplifiers. It was especially impressive on the Coincident Super Eclipse . even startling highly critical listeners who had never liked that speaker in the past. After this encouraging experience, I decided to put it in my own system, which was the toughest and most revealing test I had, or knew. The Viva Aurora 572-My Final Toronto Fling I still remember one of my associates and I, plus a helpful and enthusiastic customer . bringing the Viva Aurora 572 amplifiers into my personal listening room. We were all excited, because we had just heard the Vivas easily outperform the finest amplifiers I had in the store. This time, we were going to compare it with my (highly modified) Golden Tube 300B amplifiers. The Golden Tube 300Bs only drove the satellites of the Ars Acoustica System Max . while the (modified) Altec 1570B amps drove the Ars subwoofers . It didnt take long to hook up the Vivas, and then warm them back up, while also resetting the subwoofer sensitivity. The Auroras sounded superb. We played a variety of music, all records, until we felt familiar enough with their sonics to go back to the Golden Tubes. The only surprise at that stage, for me anyway, was that the Vivas had only a very slight advantage during the loud passages. I was expecting something much more noticeable in that area. We then warmed up the Golden Tubes with different records, and after 30 minutes or so, we started playing the same records we had heard with the Vivas. We heard the differences almost immediately, and they were obvious to all of us. As good as the Vivas were, the Golden Tube amplifiers, in comparison, were in another sonic league. They were so natural and pure, while lacking any type of electronic signature, that it felt like nothing was even in the system to describe. In simple terms: It was almost as if they had an infinitely low sound-floor. We all had different reactions: I was disappointed, while my associate told me he wasnt surprised at the results, but had kept quiet to avoid influencing us. Meanwhile, the customer was so shocked by what he had heard, that he could hardly speak. He looked closely at the Golden Tube 300Bs, which appeared to be put together with spare parts in someones garage, and couldnt understand how it could perform at such a high level. I carefully explained the simplicity of the Golden Tubes circuit, and the modifications that had been made. Still, Im not sure I totally convinced him that it was all science. Then, wanting to complete the picture, I asked my two assistants to help me with one final experiment replacing the Altecs with the Vivas on the Ars subwoofers. The results: Paydirt The sonic differences between the Altecs and the Vivas were easily noticeable, though subtle at times. The Altec had a little more power and drive, while the Viva was more natural and pure, and also had a little more detail. However, most importantly to me, the Viva had a lower sound-floor. This, in turn, lowered the entire systems sound-floor. It was another quantity versus quality choice, and once again I chose quality. My system had never sounded so natural, and disappeared as well. Unfortunately, I only had this combination for a month or so. I soon left Toronto for Florida as planned. I felt that the Vivas were somewhat of a luxury at that precarious moment of my life, so I sold them to a lucky customer. Around 9 months later, now in Florida, the modified Altecs went back into my new system, and thats where theyve been for most of the last 4 years, until now. Enter the Dragons Ive had the Coincident Dragon amplifiers in my system for around a month now. I would have written my report earlier, considering its only bass frequencies being discussed here, but Ive also changed my turntable set-up ( VTF ), plus theres been some (final hurricane related) construction work on my house which caused even further delays. This is all in addition to the normal tube amplifier break-in process, since I received the pair virtually brand new. Lets start with a short physical description of the Dragon amplifier. Its a push-pull design, using (two) 211 DHT output tubes, with a 6EM7 input tube and a single 300B as a driver (there are no tube rectifiers). Im using a Svetlana 300B for now, and the 211s are NOS GE . Israel Blume . who created the basic design of the Dragon, claims that this output tube is critical to attain the amplifiers ultimate performance, though they are costly. It has an accessible volume control on the top plate. This amplifier is very well built, with an industrial, heavy-duty no-nonsense appearance. It is rated at around 80 watts per channel and weighs around 50 lbs . It requires absolutely no biasing . which is a serious advantage considering that the output tubes have 1,200 volts on their plates. There is one downside from the high voltage though, the amps do get quite hot, and are painful to touch after theyre on more than two hours or so. I looked inside, which I dont recommend to others, and can testify that I couldnt find even one modification opportunity. This is the first stock tube amplifier I have ever known where I could make such a claim. (Since this was written, I now think that the volume control can be improved.) Compared to the AltecTutay 1570B, the largest differences I heard, which anyone can hear, are as follows: 1. The Dragons are quite a bit less sensitive (maybe 6 dB or so), because it has fewer gain stages. 2. The Dragons reach noticeably deeper into the lowest bass frequencies (below 40 Hz) . 3. The Dragons are purer and have a lower sound-floor. The Dragons were also better in other areas, though to a more subtle degree control or tightness, mid-bass impact and drive, and superior retrieval of detail. I cant think of a single area where the Altecs exceeded the performance of the Dragons in the bass, though I dont want to give the impression that there was a night and day difference between them. The Altec 1570B is simply too good an amplifier to allow such an extreme expression to be used honestly. This made it extra difficult for me to balance the subwoofer with the satellites, since the subwoofers own balance was now different. I didnt hear this specific problem with the Altecs in my Toronto listening room, because the room itself rolled off the deepest bass frequencies. The only question still in my mind is something I have no chance of answering: How does the Dragons sound-floor compare to the Viva Aurora 572s I have a strong feeling that theyre very close, based on my similar gut reactions when first hearing both of them compared to the exact same amplifier. Still, 5 years is just too long to remember something subtle like this definitively. The only statement I can make with confidence is that theyre both in the same ballpark. The Coincident Dragon is as good as any other bass amplifier Ive ever used in every area of bass performance. This may not be relevant to the vast majority of audiophiles, but its still important to know, because were talking about 3 octaves of music. Whether having this level of bass performance is worth 9,000 is a personal choice, but I know nothing that equals it for less money. The main qualification of the above claim is the Ars Acoustica Subwoofer itself. Keep in mind that this is the only subwoofer Ive used so far with the Dragons, so a short description of the Ars Acoustica is in order. The Ars is the most revealing (sub)woofer Ive ever heard, overall, in this frequency range ( 20 to 150 Hz ). It is made out of a dead (casted) metapolymer cabinet, with three 8 woofers. It is natural, clean, highly detailed and has a very low sound-floor. However, other subwoofers Ive heard have greater weight and impact. Its load on the amplifier is slightly easier than average. Its sensitivity is around 92 dB1 watt, while its impedance is a low, though flat, 4 ohms. It will take time, and other audiophiles experiments, to learn how the Coincident Dragon deals with truly difficult loads, especially those speakers with really low and varying impedances. Finally, to be frank, I seriously looked for some good reason why the Dragon should NOT be in Class A. I couldnt find any. This search for a reason was partly because of the now unusual result Two separate amplifiers, from the same company, both being in Class A at the same time. This has never happened before. I realize it looks suspicious, especially since the owner of Coincident, Israel Blume . is a close friend of mine. However, if I didnt report and objectively evaluate what I (and three of my associates ) have heard, I would be doing both the readers of this website, and Blume, a disservice. Time will tell whether my judgement about this amplifier is correct, or not. VAICKR VV52B (MODIFIED) This is the second best amplifier, overall, Ive ever heard. Only the Coincident Frankenstein has proved to be superior. The Vaic, now discontinued, was an all-out attempt to create a state-of-the-art SET amplifier in the late 1990s. (I wish I heard it back then) Each mono amplifier weighs 65 lbs . and they cost 22,000 for a pair. As far as I know, it was built to Vaics specifications by Mastersound . located in Italy . Its appearance, all chrome, is stunning. Its performance, when it came out, was a breakthrough for (SET) amplifiers. The Vaic is outstanding in every sonic parameter naturalness, purity, transparency, speed, dynamics, imaging and the frequency extremes are not only there for once, but the deep bass has real power (see the Pure Reference essay). This assessment assumes that the Vaic will be matched to the right speaker, because, as a SET amplifier, it lacks feedback. It uses a VV52B DHT output tube, which is similar to a 300B . but it can handle far higher voltage and bias, so the power rating is over 20 watts per channel . Compared to the Coincident Frankenstein, the Vaic still sounds a little more electronic and its also slightly smeared and veiled. The (required) modifications are pretty straightforward Teflon coupling capacitors, film capacitor bypasses on the power supply caps, and improved internal wiring. These amplifiers are rather rare, but worth searching for. There may be a newer version of this amplifier by Ayon . but they cost 30,000 (8 years of inflation I guess). Further - For those sceptics who want to know what is the finest amplifier Ive ever heard, that also has no association whatsoever with Coincident (whose owner, Israel Blume . is a close friend of mine), the Vaic is that amplifier. In short, if the Frankenstein M300B did not exist, I would be now ( desperately ) searching for a pair of these Vaic amplifiers. VERY LOW (FLEA) POWER There are other amplifiers available with even less power (using 2A3, 45, 50 output tubes etc.) that are (supposedly) even more revealing and purer sounding. None of them are References at this time, because we are unaware of a single model that even equals the performance of the Coincident Frankenstein (let alone surpasses it). If such an extraordinary amplifier is ever discovered, it will be reported. However, dont also overlook the fact that only a tiny number of speakers can actually be driven by these amplifiers. That problem is irrelevant now, but its a serious and unavoidable issue that will have to be addressed by any prospective owneruser. WYETECH TOPAZ 211 MONOS (MODIFIED) I have not heard these amplifiers myself, at least that I can remember, but one of my associates had a thorough listening session with them. This associate has extensive experience with DHT and SET amplifiers, along with countless traditional designs, and has a highly revealing system. Here are his observations at the time, April 2006 . with some minor editing: The Wyetech Topaz 211 Mono amps are the finest sounding high powered SETs I have experienced. They have tremendous drive capability, excellent bass extension and punch and overall purity, while detail and transparency is very single-ended DHT like. They perform like big, pentode tube amps, in those amps area of strengths (dynamics, weight, etc.), yet possess the single-ended magic. Compared to the best SET 300Bs . or type 50 or 45 based amps, the Topaz yields a smidgen of purity, but it takes an exceptionally high resolution system for this to be noticeable. The Topaz is slightly more forgiving, with transients a tad rounded by comparison to small SETs. The compromise, in this area, is the smallest I have experienced in a high powered amp. The Wyetechs are superior to the Canary CA 339s in virtually in every respect. They are more transparent and more dynamic and gutsy. Build quality is state of the art. Each amp weighs in excess of 100 lbs . All wiring is point to point, the power supply uses only polypropylene caps etc. Output trannies are the superb Audionotes . To achieve the performance I am describing, the amps must be modified . The Solen metalized polypropylene caps have to be replaced with V Caps or other top of the line caps. Solens new polypropylene film and foil caps are excellent. They sound superb and are very reasonably priced. Also, all the power supply caps must be bypassed with .01 mfd 1200 V film and foil caps. For any speaker requiring more than 20 watts, and yet 45 watts is sufficient, the Wyetechs are the amps to have. Nothing sounds as good amongst the competition, or is built as well. For those who are satisfied with 7 watts, the Topaz will be slightly, but somewhat, compromised. Even under these conditions, if a more forgiving sonic portrayal (by reducing some of the rough edges of poorly recorded material) is desired, the Topaz is the amp of choice. Personal Note - I trusted my associates experience and judgement enough to have originally placed this amplifier in the Medium Power, Class A. Recent developments have now changed its relative status. The superb, and also less expensive, Canary CA 339 (which he also brought to my attention), is also still within this same list, which means it is still a Reference, but its no longer recognized as the best of its type. However. Caveat - A reader (within an hour of the original posting) informed me that the current version of these 211 mono amplifiers no longer have Audionote transformers, but are instead now using Bartolucci output transformers. We have NOT heard these latest models, so caution is advised at this time. Meanwhile, my associate . who owns and auditioned the amplifiers, also sent me a short clarifying note concerning this issue: Mine are the older model with the Audionotes. Wyetech switched to the Bartolucci because Audionote ceased production of the output trannies. I have heard from a few sources that the Bartolucci is inferior. (I) just read an old Vacuum Tube Valley report ( Issue 9-1998 ), where a comparison of output transformers with 211 tubes was conducted. The Audionotes received a rave review, while the Bartolucci was found to be noticeably rolled off in the highs, with a colored, albeit pleasing, sound overall. Latest Update - I just received this update from my same trusted associate . This entry focuses on the 211 output tubes . Here it is, with some slight editing: A couple of days ago, I replaced the stock Valve Art 211s with NOS GE VT-4C (211) Manufacture date Aug 1944 . and the resultant improvement in sound staggered me. The leap in sonic performance was greater than any tube substitution I have made. As good as the Topaz was prior to the tube change, the GE 211s wrought a refinement to the sound that was simply not there before. The typical Chinese tube glassiness (apparent with the Valve Art 300Bs), was eliminated and replaced with a silky smoothness that I did not believe a 211 capable. Overall purity and transparency was enhanced, as well as a lowering of the noise floor. A stunning improvement to be sure. There is no question that I have not heard a single ended amp, with this power, sound as good. GOLDEN TUBE AUDIO 300B MONOS (HIGHLY MODIFIED) Important Note - This was written before the arrival of the (superior) Coincident M300B Frankenstein MKII The former audio manufacturer, Golden Tube . came out with (at least) three amplifiers using one 300B output tube per channel. Two of them were MONO. One of them, the original design, used a 6SL7 input tube. The result is an amplifier of between 8 to 10 watts in the midrange and upper bass, depending on the brand of the 300B used. The later mono version had the option, with a switch, of using a 12SL7 or a 6SL7. This model is also a Reference, but not when using the 12SL7. The third version was a stereo amplifier, which also had a different circuit, and didnt sound as good. It had some some good qualities, but it was not the equal of the two monos, and it is not in this class. The stock performance of the Golden Tube 300B is not equal to the superb Wavelength Cardinal . or even the much more powerful Wytech Topaz for that matter. Fortunately, the Golden Tube can be extensively modified. When that is accomplished, according to my associate who made direct comparisons in his own system, it will not only equal, but even exceed both the Cardinal and the Topaz amplifiers in purity, transparency, immediacy and naturalness. To describe its greatest, and most important strength in the fewest words and in the most direct and simplest terms: The Golden Tube 300B has the lowest sound-floor of any amplifier I have ever heard. Unfortunately, it cant come even remotely close to any normal amp in sheer power, bass extension, control and impact. It is still in this class only because of its (potential) state-of-the-art midrange and highs and its (relatively) very low price, 2,000 or less used . This means that it can exceed the performance of any amp Ive ever heard in a bi-amp situation, If extra power is Not required. Virtually the entire insides must be gutted and then replaced with the finest quality parts available. The entire procedure and the better tubes will cost another 1,000 . or more. Most important, it must be used with high sensitivity speakers (minimum 92db and preferably higher) with a benign (above 6 ohms) impedance. The size of the listening room may also become an important factor because of the limits of its power. The good news is: If you do find speakers that work with them, and I have . than virtually all other amplifiers will sound unsatisfying in comparison. This company is now, sadly, out of business, but the Reference designation stands. The Golden Tube requires either the KR 300BXLS output tubes to reach its full potential. I am planning to describe the modification of this amplifier, in detail, within a new section on Modifications to be posted in the future. It should also provide a blueprint and general overview for modifying other tube amplifiers. CAVEAT: In practical terms, this amplifier, and virtually all the other similar 300B designs of 7 or 8 watts, is an upper bass, midrange and tweeter amplifier only . Even then, it will still only work with certain, high-sensitivity and high-impedance designs. The only exception may be the Wavelength Cardinal, which has considerably lower measured bass response. This means, that with very few exceptions, another amplifier should be used for the frequencies below around 80 to 100 Hz. Reviewers, manufacturers and dealers who advise otherwise are doing a true disservice to audiophiles. Below are now posted two pictures, outside and internally, of my personal Golden Tube 300B amplifiers, taken just before they were sold, which should assist a modifier. CANARY AUDIO CA-339 300B PUSH-PULL PARALLEL MONO BLOCKS According to my associate . this amplifier combines this second greatest overall amount of purity, delicacy, control, weight and authority of any amplifier he has ever heard in his 30 year audio life (including the CAT JL-1 above). These are his own (anonymous) words, verbatim: The first amplifier that seems to do it all. The iron fist in a velvet glove. 50 watts of 300B sound. That is, all the finesse, purity, transparency and low level detail retrieval combined with weight, impact, explosive dynamics and incredible bass. This amp does everything at the highest levels of excellence, Beautifully built, ( 1 brushed aluminum face plate - finest trannies, choke filtered, Hovland caps, huge power supplies) and extremely reliable. Output Tubes 4 300Bs in a push-pull parallel configuration Input - one 6SN7 Driver one 6SN7 Rectifiers - pair of 5U4Gs On sensitive speakers, this amplifier sounds gutsier and more dynamic than the ASL Hurricane . and destroys it in every other parameter of performance. The CA-339 will successfully drive virtually all but the most insane speaker loads (i. e. Thiels . Martin Logans . Avalons etc). Might not equal a superb SE PX25 amp at its greatest strengths, or a SE 300B . but it comes frighteningly close. In all other areas, the CA-339 is an order of magnitude superior. 14,000 USpr aint cheap, but this is one of those rare instances in audio where it is actually worth it. Personal Note - I havent heard these amplifiers yet. Canary has another amplifier that is supposed to be even better the Reference One Mono Blocks . None of us has heard them. They also make a number of preamplifiers, which we havent heard. Unfortunately, they are all line-stages. No phono-stage is available according to their website (See Links File). It must be stressed that these amplifiers have only been auditioned, as described above, on easy loads, meaning both high-sensitivity (above 90 dB) and high-impedance (above 6 ohms). Speakers that are insensitive, andor with lowvarying impedances, may not be suitable. Further Notes - A reader has sent me three letters with his observations about them. I find his letters particularly relevant because he has other highly regarded amplifiers and he has compared them directly with the Canary. Here are his three letters, with only minor editing: Letter 1- June 21, 2004 I just saw an update on your web site about the Canary CA-339, and I thought Id get my oar in on the subject. Ive owned a pair of (Coincident) Total Victories for about a year. As my aspirations for my system have grown, Ive started looking for the perfect amps to drive them. So far Ive gone through a Sugden Au51P . a KR 18 BSI . a pair of Coincident MP300Bs . a pair of Wavelength Tritons and a pair of deHavilland Aries 854s . About two and a half weeks ago. I took delivery of a pair of CA-339s. I never imagined an amp could be so wonderful. Their sound is complete, in every sense of the word. They have complete frequency response, complete dynamics, complete resolution, complete tonality and complete soundstaging. Their sound is completely natural in every regard. In fact, one of the things Ive noticed about them is that the sound is so natural you dont even notice it, until you suddenly realize that what is making the music so breathtakingly real is the fact that the amps are doing everything right. The source is an Audio Note 4.1x Balanced Signature DAC . and Im currently using an Audion Premier two-box line stage. I have a CTC Blowtorch on order to replace the Audion, and I suspect that will tell the tale of the ultimate quality these amps are capable of. Anyway, at this point I completely agree with. (the posted) assessment of the Canary amps - they are a match made in heaven with the Total Victories. Letter 2- July 5, 2004 Im in the middle of re-tubing both the (deHavilland) 845s and the Canaries, and Ill provide more thorough impressions once all the tubes have arrived and settled in. Heres a preliminary look at where things sit right now: The Canary CA-339s have their factory stock ElectroHarmonix 300Bs . EH 5U4GBs and a set of black base RCA 6SN7GTBs . The deHavilland Aries 845Gs came with Russian 6AU5s, Russian 6SN7s, and Chinese 845s. In these configurations the Canaries were decisively superior in most regards to the 845 amps - better macro and micro dynamics, much better transparency, better frequency extension (especially in the bass), more precise imaging, a more open soundstage and more harmonic development. I have since retubed the 845s with RCA black base 6SN7GTBs and KR 845s . It is now a much closer contest, and for the right listener the 845 is now the better amp. The dynamics of the Aries are now close to the Canary, the imaging is almost as good, the frequency extension in the treble is as good while in the bass its not quite there yet. The soundstaging of the 845 is better than it was with the stock tubes, but still doesnt have the openness of the Canaries. In the area of harmonic development and density, however, the 845 amps are now decisively better than the Canaries. The sound is richer and fuller, with a very satisfying big tone. In addition, their sound is more relaxed. In comparison, the Canaries are revealed to have a slightly thinner tone, with a touch too much sparkle (verging on a bit of edge). At the moment Id characterize the 845 amps as music-lovers amps, while the Canaries are more audiophile amps. Theres no question that the Canaries produce more venue information, develop a more explicit image and have more balls. On the other hand, the Aries make listening to most classical, jazz and all folk music an unalloyed pleasure. With them I just sit down and sink into the music. This is all subject to change over then next two weeks, though. Ill be completely retubing the Canaries with Philips ECG 5U4GBs . RCA red base 5692s and KR 300BXLS . which should dramatically change their sound. In addition, the KR 845s in the Aries are still brand new, and probably need about another 48 hours to really start showing their chops. Ill let you know how things go. Letter 3- August 4, 2004 I have some more observations on the Canary CA-339 following two months of break in and extensive listening. I re-tubed them with KR 300BXLS power tubes and RCA 6SN7s . They love the KR tubes, and are now by a wide margin the best amps Ive heard on the Total Victories. They achieve this through a combination of exceptional dynamics, total clarity, complete tonal neutrality, and a full realization of both the tonal and spatial properties of the recordings. They are completely at the service of the music, whether it be rock, jazz, blues, folk, classical of any sort from solo instrumentals to full orchestra, or anything else. They do both intimacy and scale with equal conviction. They sound utterly effortless. They impart a sense of realism to the recreated soundspace that is just plain spooky. Ive compared them to my deHavilland Aries 845G . which I have retubed with KR 845s . To be blunt, there is no contest. While the 845 is a very pleasant amp, it is obvious at all times that is is imposing its signature on the music. In contrast, listening to the CA-339 amounts to simply listening to the music. While there are better amps out there for some applications, I cant imagine anything much better for use with the Total Victory or any other reasonably efficient, transparent speaker. My search for reference quality amplification is unequivocally over. Personal Notes - Unfortunately, the KR 300BXLS is an expensive tube, but it appears to be a requirement if the owner wants to maximize the performance of the Canary amps. Considering the retail cost of the Canarys themselves, and the build quality and increased longevity of the KR tubes, I feel the extra cost is still reasonable and well warranted in the long run for the improvement the reader describes. So far, it must be kept in mind that all the above accolades heaped on the Canary amps are by audiophiles who are using high-sensitivity speakers with a high impedance. Im still waiting to hear some observations by owners of other types of speakers. Based on the readers second paragraph of his third letter, which is what my associate also told me in almost the same exact words, I cant remember the last time Ive looked so forward to hearing an amplifier. Now Ill have to talk my associate into also getting those KR output tubes. Most Recent Canary CA-339 News - One of my associates has informed me that the Canarys require high quality 300B output tubes to reach the performance that has been described previously, and which enabled them to be one of only 3 amplifiers within Class A. The lowest performing 300B tubes which are recommended are the Electro Harmonix Gold Grids . An alternative 300B, the Valve Arts . also available from Canary, is NOT recommended. My associate informed me that the Valve Arts seriously compromised the performance of the CA-339. On a similar note, the stock Chinese 6SN7 s must also be changed to high quality NOS types, of which there are many choices. Without both of these tube optimizations, the CA-339 will not perform at the highest level, and is not a Reference. ( 205 ) Most recent communication (305)- Below is some important information concerning these amplifiers, from the horses mouth no less I read your latest posting on our CA-339 and wanted to address the 300B position. A few customers have emailed and called me asking whether or not we supply output tubes with our amplifiers. On our website it clearly states that we do not supply them but apparently a little confusion exists. For the record, all tubes (including output tubes) are supplied with our EL-34 based amps. With regard to the 300B amps, no output tubes are supplied and we neither recommend nor supply output tubes for any of our 300B amplifiers. As a convenience to our customers, we sell a number of 300B brands but do not endorse or recommend any of them. Bill Feil AudioFeil International Sound ProductsSound Solutions 716-400-6177 DaysEveningsWeekends audiofeil Personal Note - My associate highly recommends the Electro-Harmonix Gold Grids . especially for the money, while one reader . who has used a variety of 300Bs, feels that the KR300BXLS . which is much more expensive, is definitely superior to all the others hes heard, including the Gold Grids, and will elevate the amplifiers to a new performance level. Further - I received this letter from Bill Feil . owner of AudioFeil International . who is the Canary distributor in October 2005 . I feel this information will be important to the owners of these superb amplifiers. Theres very little editing: . I want to call attention to both you and owners of the Canary CA-339, a moderately inexpensive (vis a vis very expensive premium 300B tubes) way to kick up the performance of these amps. Having just brought another pair of them into my showroom, I decided to leave the stock Electro Harmonix 300B as is. However, I installed a pair of 1960 Mullard CV 378 rectifiers and a pair of 1952 Sylvania 6SN7WGT in each amp. For less money than a pair of KR 300Bs (these amps take 2 pair each keep in mind), the changes were breathtaking. Transients, soundstage, and articulation were noticeably improved. I thought your readers might be interested to know that, although these amps benefits from premium 300B tubes, these changes are a great cost effective compromise. WYTECH LABS TOPAZ (LATEST 572 MODEL ONLY) The Wytech is one of the finest overall amplifiers that we are aware of at this time. Its power rating appears modest ( 22 watts, 90 watts peak ), and it does not break any new sonic grounds, but the good news is that this amplifier can virtually equal most amplifiers we know of in most areas of music reproduction. To be specific: This means that it has much of the pure, natural, immediate and liquid qualities of the finest of the ultra low-power (under 10 watt) single-ended amplifiers, while still sounding as gutsy, dynamic, and controlled as many more powerfully rated amps. Despite the standard BS regularly written in audio magazines, exceedingly few other amplifier have ever been able to legitimately make this claim in the past. In short, this amplifier has excellent overall performance, especially at its price of 9,250 . direct from the manufacturer. It is exceptionally well built and it is also ultra-quiet during operation. Now for the negatives: 1. This amplifier uses 1150 volts on the plate to get all its power from just one output tube (the main reason for its purity), so this isnt the amplifier to play around and experiment with inside. Touching the wrong spot would be the final mistake of that persons life. 2. This amplifier is dual-mono, but on just one chassis. It is very large and bulky, weighs around 120 lbs. . looks industrial, and it is much more difficult to place (and hide) than mono amplifiers. (This is the reason that I was not able to use it in my own system.) 3. This amplifier will not sound as described with the many low-sensitivity and low-impedance speaker models that are on the current market. This is just one more good reason to avoid those frustrating and self-defeating designs. 4. These amplifiers are custom made, one at a time (by owner and designer Roger Hebert ), so there may be a waiting period for them. As far as Ive been told, only the earlier (and inferior) model, using 845 output tubes, was ever sold retail. 5. These amplifiers can be improved with better tubes, particularly the 6SN7 input tube and the 6BX7 driver tube. The 572 output tubes have no superior replacements at this time. MONOS - There are also Wytechs own mono amplifiers, the 572M . which are a unique single-ended design using two 572 output tubes and two output transformers per channel, to minimize inductance. They are 45 watts per channel and are 18,500 for a pair. None of us have heard them at this time. Other listeners, who have made the comparison, have reported mixed messages some of them preferring the monos, and others describing the only advantage being the increased power. Some have even mentioned that there was an actual sonic (along with the obvious theoretical) disadvantage caused by configuring the two output transformers in parallel or in series, depending on the speaker impedance. One of us has compared two of the stereo amplifiers to just one. Despite the fact that the two stereo amplifiers had the advantages of both biamping and total mono separation, there was virtually no sonic improvement. This means that the stereo version sounds the same as the mono versions of the same amplifier. That is quite an accomplishment. CAVEAT: There is actually more than one version of the Topaz amplifier from this company. The original Topaz used the 845211 output tube. That is the model to avoid. It was still excellent, but nothing special. I know, I heard it in my own system. For some inexplicable reason, the manufacturer decided not to change its model number when he changed its design. The current models only use the 572 output tube. This is the only model that is a Reference. Accordingly, it is safest to order a brand new amplifier and simply ignore any used models that come up for sale. This company also makes a budget amplifier called the Onyx . which also has decent sonics and good build quality, but it is also nothing special. FURTHER - I recently received news from a reader about two interesting components from Wyetech Labs, who have one of the finest audio track records in the last decade. One of them is new, while the other is an update of its most famous model. Heres the letter, with minor editing: Maybe you already know this, but there is a new amplifier from Wyetech Labs. It is the Sapphire 300B monoblocs, (Parallel) SET based on 300B tubes. Heres the link: Also, there is a new version. of the Topaz, the Topaz 211C . The 572 tubes have been replaced by a new brand of 211 tubes. Personal Observation - First Viva . and now Wyetech, has replaced its flagship model using 572 DHT tubes with a 211 DHT. I was under the impression that the 572 was the superior tube with more potential. So whats up Well, readers should be made aware that the Svetlana 572 tube is now DISCONTINUED, and the remaining stock is both drying up and now rising in price. I think these two manufacturers are simply reacting to the reality of what is practical to build today. ( 1205 ) VIVA AURORA 572 (USED ONLY) This amplifier is similar in design and competitive with the Topaz. It is made by the Italian manufacturer VIVA . The model is called the Aurora . It also uses a single 572 output tube, but these are all-out mono blocks . using in-house output transformers and they have the further advantage of using another 572 as the driver tube . Even more surprisingly, two more 572s are used as rectifiers . but that can be a mixed blessing. There are some downsides. The power supply is not as large and sophisticated, and the passive parts dont equal the quality of those within the Topaz. Both of those disadvantages can be addressed with various modifications, which should not be that difficult to do within such a large amplifier. These amps are custom made only, and cost 22,000 a pair . This means that they will probably never be a Reference new, because the price differential with the competing Topaz is just too large. A used pair, with modifications, is another matter, because these amplifiers sell for half-price or less on the second-hand market. Their cosmetics are stunning. VIVA now makes a very similar amplifier, using the more powerful, but usually less accurate and pure, 845 output tube. It is still called the Aurora, believe it or not. (Is there a fashionable trend to confuse potential purchasers) An associate and I heard this new 845 amplifier at the 2004 CES and were very impressed with it, so this model may be something to look into. Auditions - We auditioned the 572 Vivas a number of times with mixed results. I auditioned the Vivas (stock) on my (now former) store system (CD based and with Coincident Super Eclipses ) and on my own system (analog, and with the Ars Acoustica System Max ). On the store system . the sound was the best I ever heard with it, by far. Several customers, who were very familiar with that system, agreed with me. In fact, one of them, a very critical listener, said that it was the first time he had ever enjoyed the Super Eclipses. The sound was far superior, overall, than with the Manley Retros or the AltecTutay . It was incredibly natural and full bodied. It retrieved a considerable amount of musical information, which was almost always lost with other amplifiers. I, and every other person who heard this system, couldnt have been more impressed. However. I then put the Vivas in my own system. First on the subwoofer, where it didnt have the best impact I have had, but it was superior in the most important areas harmonic structure and the retrieval of low-level information ambience, decays, space etc. (The Vivas on the bottom, and the Golden Tubes on top, was the best sound I ever experienced at that time. Every person who heard this combination, agreed with me.) Next, I connected them to the main speakers, where it competed with the Golden Tube 300B mono amplifiers (above), which are highly modified. This time they didnt have the purity, immediacy, transparency and the ultra low sound-floor of the Golden Tubes (neither does any other amplifier I have ever heard). The Vivas had more of an electronic sound, though they still demonstrated their previously described strengths. I, and another of my associates, preferred the Golden Tubes. One of my customers then purchased the Viva amplifiers just before I moved to Florida. Another one of my associates had the same Viva amplifiers at his house and also compared them to the Altecs, the Manleys, the Golden Tubes and the Topaz. He preferred the Vivas to the Altecs and Manleys, just as we did and for the same reasons. He also preferred the Golden Tubes to the Vivas in the midrange and highs, again agreeing with my conclusions. As for the Topaz. He preferred the Topaz overall. He felt the Topaz equaled the Vivas in its strengths, but had more dynamic power and was also noticeably superior at the frequency extremes. He was so impressed, that he ended up purchasing the Topaz. I then heard his system with the Topaz, twice, but the sound was not as good, overall, as what I heard with the Vivas at my place, though I agreed with him that the Topaz had better frequency extremes and more dynamic power. (Two of my other associates agreed with my assessment of his system compared to the system in my store with the Vivas and Super Eclipse.) He explained that the problems we all heard were caused by his speakers (Coincident Victory and Total Victory) not being broken in yet. So this is my problem. If I take this associate at his word, where do I place the Viva Probably Class B . with a caveat that it is a Reference only at a used price, since the Topaz is much less expensive new, and it is better. However, what if he is wrong Because he couldnt hear the strengths of the Viva through his speakers, which were not yet broken-in, or for some other reason. Also, the Vivas have room for serious improvements, while the other Class A amplifiers do not. Additionally, the Vivas are noticeably superior to even the finest of the current Class B models. The Temporary Solution: I am going to place the Viva (used only) in Class B . I know they are at least worthy of that designation. They may be a Class A amplifier, but I would like some confirmation, based on a thorough audition. So far, they came in second to the Golden Tubes in my system, and, according to my trusted associate, second to the Topaz in his system. They will have to be superior, or at least comparable, to one of these two Kings in a serious shoot-out before they, or any other low to medium power amplifier, can join this very exclusive club. (See The Reference Policy within The Reference Components Introduction.) MANLEY 300B RETROSNEO-CLASSIC (Used or On Sale Only) The RetroNeo are superb, but do not have the ultimate transparency, naturalness and purity that the finest single-ended amplifiers possess like the Golden Tube (modified) or the Wavelength Cardinal . However, their bass reproduction is superior to those simpler designs and they will work with a larger variety of speakers. There are two requirements for optimization the speakers must be sensitive (90db or higher), and also have a benign impedance (minimum 6 ohms, preferably above 8 ohms). These are the amplifiers to consider if you still require more power than the 300B Single-Ended amplifiers (8 watts) can give you. Unfortunately, the Neos have a retail cost of 7,200 a pair, which is only 1,700 less than the superior Topaz. That is the reason why they are a Reference Used or On Sale only. The Topaz is still easily worth the extra 1,700, and more. (However, dont forget the Topazs problem with size and placement.) The Neos are mono, with two 300B output tubes per channel. They are very versatile: They can be switched from single-ended (12 watts) to push-pull (24 watts). They also have adjustable feedback, from 0 to 10db in 1db steps. They even have two inputs a standard RCA and the other balanced. They easily outperform all the Jadis single-ended designs that cost far more, and are even better than the Original (14,000) Topaz. I sold and lived with the Retros, though I havent heard the latest Neos myself, but one of my associates has, and in depth. The most serious competition for these amps are the most recent (and now final) version of the Coincident 300B mono blocks (please see below), which have almost the exact same design, cost far less, and, according to at least one reader, even outperform the Neos. (I obviously never made a direct comparison myself, but Ive been overall more impressed with the Coincident models than a highly modified pair of Retros. This was because they sounded closer to my Golden Tube 300B amps than the Manelys.) The Retros were the previous model, now discontinued, and are very similar in sound and design. They had a retail price of 5,500 a pair. They were not quite as well built, and their sonics are not the equal of the Neos, but they are very close. (In fact, I now understand that some listeners prefer the more immediate sonics of the Retros.) The Retros are still a Reference because of their overall performance and excellent value for the money. The Retro must be used with the KR 300BXLS output tube, or else the amplifier will have both reliability problems and less than optimum sonics. They are expensive, but worth it. There is also a bonus the Retro sounds its best with this tube. The newer Manley NEO design is not as hard on its output tubes, so virtually any 300B will work with it, but the KR is still an excellent choice because of its sonics. (703) ALTEC 1570WITH TUTAY MODIFICATION This vintage Altec is a fantastic amplifier. It could be the dream amplifier for many audiophiles. I didnt list it initially because of the many hurdles to get an optimized working pair, and the potential danger in using them. Lets discuss the sonics first, and then tackle the remaining issues. This amplifier, after it is fully modified, can compete with virtually any push-pull amplifier in the world. It uses only two 811A direct heated triode output tubes, but it can still generate over 150 watts per channel. It has a very high quality power supply with chokes, tube rectification, separate input and output supplies etc. The end result is a combination of tremendous power along with a lot, but not all, of the purity and transparency of the single-ended designs. Other high-power tube amplifiers, that use multiple output tubes (8, 12, 16, or 20 per channel-especially pentodes) to create their power, can not compete with this simpler (and much less expensive) design. As usual, it is at its best with high-impedance loads, but it can still sound excellent in normal impedance loads as well, though it is not a good match with very low impedances. Now for the inevitable hurdles: 1. The original Altec 1570 series of amplifiers were designed and built for commercial and industrial applications The U. S. military, sports stadiums, factories, auditoriums etc. They are very reliable of course, and are also downright ugly in appearance. There may have been many made 40 years ago, but now they are difficult to find. Their sonics, stock, are simply horrible. They sound dirty and have no bass. So they must also be modified . 2. There are very few people who can modify these amplifiers. The person who has, by far, the most experience, and has achieved the finest results weve heard, is Tom Tutay . a talented engineer who lives and works in Florida (Go to the Links section to contact him) . So after a pair of these are found in good condition, they must be sent to Tutay for his (very extensive) update. I dont know the most recent cost, and there are some options, but it will cost at least 3,000 . or more. Considering the enormous amount of work involved, this is a very fair price. The total cost, including the amplifiers themselves and all the shipping, will be in the 5,000 range, unless you can score on the Altecs. To put things in perspective, if such an amplifier were built in North America and marketed new in todays market, it would sell for a minimum of 10,000 and probably around 15,000 or more. 3. After all the above has been done, there is another important issue to ponder. The reason why these amplifiers can generate so much power with only two output tubes is simple there is more than 900 volts DC on the plates. This voltage itself comes from the rare, high voltage power transformer, which has somewhat louder than average mechanical noise. (The extra expense and difficulty in finding and utilizing very high voltage components is the primary reason why contemporary amplifier manufacturers havent just copied this design.) Unfortunately, there is a potential danger to this design. The 811A output tube receives this high voltage from an (easily accessible) cap on the top of the tube, and not from the usual, inaccessible tube pins within the chassis. This means that anyone (or anything) who removes this cap while the amplifier is on . or even off for a short period of time, and touches the internal metal part, can be electrocuted. I realize only a reckless fool or someone incredibly ignorant would do this, but I felt it should still be mentioned. The Altec came with a perforated, protective cover which made it impossible to reach the cap, but it may be missing, and some people may prefer not to use it because the 811A output tubes look cool when they are on and all lit up. This is highly unadvisable . My advice is to do whatever it takes to make these plate caps inaccessible to others a replacement cover, screen etc. Dont worry about ruining the appearance of this amplifier, it cant be made any worse than it already is (see pictures of the Altec below). Once that is done, this amplifier is as safe as any other tube amplifier, and very reliable. One final concern also deals with the Altecs very high voltage. A reader has informed me that an electronics designer warned him that the amplifier can emit high radiation levels. The designers advice to an Altec owner is simple: He will want to distance himself as much as possible from those amps. This advice is also applicable with any other electronic device using high voltages such as televisions, some older computer monitors and even typical tube amplifiers etc. so this information doesnt compromise the Altec 1570s Reference designation except in very highly unusual circumstances. Tom Tutay . the modification expert and engineer, also feels the amplifier is very safe. ( 20 or more of these Altec amplifiers were used in the Astrodome and they were on 24 hours a day. The engineers who worked in near proximity never had any problems with them.) Further (205)- A reader sent me some information and observations concerning these two very different amplifiers. Here they are, slightly edited Did you know the Altec 1570 is an ALL class B amplifier-) What a sweetheart. Wish I bought a pair years ago. The first time I heard them (was) on a pair of MBL 101s . I couldnt believe it. Also the CAT JL2 is definitely better than the JL1 with one reserve, the bass is better on the JL1. For the bass, you move up to the JL3. Personal Notes - I had no idea the Altecs could drive the MBLs. All I can add is, despite my best efforts, I havent found a better bass amp for my own system, at least so far. I do have a new contender in the works. If everything goes to plan, Ill compare them this Fall, after the Hurricane season. FURTHER (1105)- I received some important information from an associate concerning this excellent amplifier (which I still use myself as a subwoofer amp). According to my associate, Magnequest is now building an updated version of the Altecs output and interstage transformers. The output transformer is the real news, since it will be flat to 20 Hz . and will even have a 4 ohm tap. This is excellent news for people who will use the Altec with full-range speakers andor low impedance loads (like me). Ill post more information when I find it. I checked out Magnequests website myself, but I found nothing on these transformers. Finally, they are supposed to cost 200 each, which sounds reasonable to me. I dont know the cost of the interstage transformers, or any sonic or practical advantages they have over the originals. JANUARY 2006 UPDATE A reader just sent some information on how to further improve this already unique and excellent amplifier. It is simply a tube replacement . but this time its not just the brand of the tubes, but the actual model of the (output) tubes that are changed. Heres the letter with some editing: . the true copy of the ( Taylor ) 572b . made by the Chinese ( Penta Labs ), not Svetlana . are direct drop-ins for the 811A . The bottle is ST . and not straight walled like an 845211 transmitter triode. Tom Tutay said to use it and wrote this in his hand written manual which also gave the general history of the Altec amp along with upgrades, etc. Biasing the tube is easy and a direct drop in for the vintage 811A. All we know is that after all the tubes were dialed in, it was like going from a weak V-8 to a big V-12, with lots of head room or reserve just setting there. We liked the change for its bottom end and over all extension. Personal Notes - This may be really good news. I will verify all of this with Tom Tutay myself, and then try this modification on my own Altecs to see what results I get. I only use the Altecs with my systems woofers, but the improvements, especially in the entire bass frequency range, should still be easily noticeable if this reader is correct. Caution - Audiophiles who already own the Altecs should NOT simply replace their currrent tubes with the 572B. Be patient until you find out exactly which brand(s) of 572B isare recommended and the correct biasing for that tube. Were talking 900 volts here, so dont do anything until you know for certain that its safe. FEBRUARY 2006 UPDATE I recently asked Tom Tutay . the person most intimately familiar with this amplifier, about switching the output tubes from the stock 811A to the 572B . Tutay informed me that its no problem to make the switch the amplifier just has to be re-biased, as with every change of the output tubes. The actual bias, and everything else, remains the same. Tutay also informed me that he felt the amplifiers resulting sonics . with the 572B, were different, and not necesssarily better, depending on personal priorities. Still, considering the relative ease and small monetary investment involved, I feel the enthusiasts of this amplifier should try it out for themselves if possible. (But please, never go inside the 1570B unless you know what youre doing - The potentially lethal 900 volts remain on the plate.) MARCH 2006 UPDATE I received further information about the 572B output tubes for this amplifier, which can be replacements for the stock 811A . Here it is, with slight editing ( My Bold ): (I) wanted to respond about the current production 572b. There is an eBay tube seller that offers a year warranty . fully understanding they may be back-up tubes, and not be used imediately. Penta and all the rest only offer a 30 day warranty from the day of purchase. BTW, all the 572b tubes are made at one plant in China . but some sellers will take the time to burn them in and really test them because short-wave radios put a lot more current on the tube than audio use does. The eBay seller is: k5svc . and has a store with tons of parts and tubes for short wave radio people. His email address is: unclegeorgessurplusyahoo ANTIQUE SOUND LAB HURRICANE 200 DT (LATEST TRIODE MODEL) The Hurricane is a large, heavy (65 lbs) and powerful (200 watts per channel) mono power amplifier built in China. It uses 8 KT-88 and 3 6SN7 tubes per channel. It is a push-pull, ultralinear design with point-to-point wiring (no circuit boards), two power transformers (one push and one pull) and 0 NFB. The latest models use special oil and paper capacitors (more on this below). The biasing is very easy with a large LED readout. Amazingly, the price is 4,400 for the pair (Compare that price to equivalent models from Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, McIntosh, Jadis, VAC, Manley, VTL etc.) This amplifier has been extensively auditioned by the same associate who owned the rare and expensive CAT JL-1 mono blocks, now in Class A. A comparison of the two models was made on his own (very high resolution) system. The results are. The CAT still has some advantages, but my associate also claims that the Hurricane is close enough to be competitive, and it is only around 15th the cost of the CAT. He was impressed enough to purchase a pair. Paraphrasing his description of them: Tremendous dynamic range and control, huge and focused soundstage, along with a surprisingly natural and refined sound, especially considering its size and power. A breakthrough for the money. I have also heard them myself, on my associates system, and can now verify his above description. In addition, I was able to observe that it still obscures some inner, fine detail and loses other important musical (low-level) information, which is the strength of the finest single-ended designs Ive auditioned. Its sound-floor is also very low for a high-power tube amplifier, but its still higher than the best of the simpler designs. Three Different Models Since our initial Reference designation of this amplifier in May 2002 . and my later audition of them in September 2002 . another version came out with oil and paper coupling capacitors, which are made by the same factory that designs and manufactures the Hurricane. (There were a few other minor changes, but they are sonically insignificant.) My associate had a pair of this new model and has made extensive comparisons with the original amplifier. (The original version of the Hurricane used metallized MIT polypropylene capacitors. These are best described as utilitarian and are both the cheapest and worst performing caps within the entire MIT line-up. Their film and foil polypropylene and (top-of-the-line) polystyrene are both much superior. I know this for a fact, because I have more than a decade worth of experience with all of their capacitors, including within my own systems.) To my associates surprise, he much preferred the oil and paper capacitors, despite their generic reputation for normally being soft, weak at the extremes, blunted, veiled etc. He informed me that these new capacitors were either equal or noticeably superior in every area of music reproduction to the budget MIT equivalents. The overall improvements he heard are one of the reasons why this amplifier was originally moved up to this higher class (the other reason is that I was initially cautious because of our previously unsatisfactory experiences with some other components manufactured by this company). Meanwhile, The Absolute Sound (TAS) (Harry Pearson no less) gave this amplifier a rave review, calling it, in effect, the best amplifier in the world. They then went on to badmouth the new oil and paper caps. They are wrong on both counts. While this amplifier is most likely the best value for a high-power amplifier now available, which is why I listed it in the first place, it does not equal the better single-ended-triode designs in their important sonicmusical strengths. I know this for certain, because I compared this amplifier with a superb, but not state of the art, SET amplifier myself (the Coincident MP 300B - see below). My associate also felt that the Tenor 15 Wp was superior in its primary sonic strengths, and he now prefers the Antique Sound Labs own AQ1009 in overall performance (see below). Yes, this model has its own important sonic advantages over the best of the SETs, which just simply means that it is impossible for there to be a single best amplifier in the world (at least as of today). As for the capacitor issue, I trust my associates hearing and competence much more than I trust Harry (120 dB) Pearson. The fact that Pearson cant even easily hear the sonic downsides of the Hurricane is alone enough to seriously question his present hearing ability. Fortunately, the distributor and manufacturer appear to have solved this issue themselves. (See below) While I have a serious disagreement with Harry Pearson as to the Hurricanes ultimate merit, I do give HP (and TAS) credit for finally bringing recognition to this amplifier. Recognizing unknowns and little-guys may have been typical behavior 20 years ago, but that is no longer the case today for the the major magazines. Further TAS Controversy - In the Reviewing the Reviewers file, within The Absolute Sound sub-file, please read the correspondence between myself and the late Randy Tomlinson for more information, opinions and experiences concerning this amplifier and compatible speakers etc. ( 304 ) My associate has now extensively auditioned the latest ( March 2003 ) version of the Hurricane. It has a Triode switch plus it uses new, multi-layer, paper and oil capacitors, which cost 20 times what the older MIT capacitors costs. He has informed me that (when its operating in triode ) this new Hurricane noticeably outperforms the two earlier versions. He claims it is superior in virtually every sonic parameter, including dynamic intensity, transparency and purity. These significant improvements are the reason why the Hurricane has, once again, moved up in these listings. However, it still does NOT equal the finest SET (or OTL) amplifiers in their greatest strengths. Of course, many, if not most, listeners may still prefer the Hurricanes own strengths. (In fact, a number of listeners preferred the Hurricane to the Wytech Topaz in a recent shootout, even though they acknowledged the Topazs superiority in its sonic upsides.) A few of my associates have had an opportunity to try out different output tubes. They prefer the Svetlana 6550C . The output tubes that come with the Hurricane, the Valve Art KT-88 . are warmer in character, which many listeners may prefer, but lack some detail, purity and transparency. Actually, changing the 6SN7 input tubes will probably make more of a difference. NOS tubes from the World War II era are preferable. Unfortunately they are expensive, 50 or more, but they last a long time. Bottom Line - Readers must demand only the latest model of the Hurricane, which includes the Triode switch and the latest multilayer oil and paper capacitors. Further Listening - In early June 2003 . I heard the absolute latest version, with the triode switch . for six straight hours, with a system, room and software (all LPs) that I am very familiar with. The results actually surprised me. To put this bluntly the more I (actually we) hear this amplifier, the less Im impressed with it. It is a breakthrough of sorts. For an amplifier using 8 power tubes per channel, 4 push and 4 pull, it has amazing performance, especially for the money . It is relatively clean, transparent, dynamic, neutral, big sounding and has excellent frequency extremes. It is competitive with, or better than, any other big amplifier I know, and at any price. The Hurricanes problems become evident when you begin to compare it with small amplifiers. It just doesnt have the immediacy, transparency, inner detail, purity and low sound-floor of the finest low and medium powered amplifiers Ive heard. This is easily noticeable to any experienced listener. Audiophiles who dont require the power of the Hurricane should seriously consider low-powered alternatives, but for all those many audiophiles who do need the power ( 50 watts or more), the Hurricane is the best amplifier news I can remember in my now long audio career. That is why it will remain in Upper Class B . Finally, the Hurricane sounds much better when its operating in the Triode mode. There is really no comparison. I write this only because I was told that some owners actually prefer listening in the standard Pentode model. This preference is a mystery to me, so its safe to say that I dont share much in common with these listeners. (703) Some Readers Weighs In Further - Here is a short note from a reader who owns a pair and who shared some of his recent experiences: Youre right, triode is the only way to listen to the Hurricanes. Also, it helps to substitute Sylvania 6SN7 GTBs for the Chinese tubes. I also tried RCA red base 5692s . but I didnt care for them. In the Hurricanes the sound became darker with less detail. I was surprised. One other note about the Hurricanes tubes. I found that changing to the Sylvanias sharpened up detail and definition enough to make up for the warmth of the KT-88s. I tried the Svetlana 6550Cs but found when used with the Sylvania 6SN7 GTBs, they made the midrange too forward, so much so that the vocals and instruments, such as tenor sax, seemed detached from the rest of the music. (In my system.) (903)Register With Us raquo Upload Your Products raquo Start Selling Buy Industrial Goods Online When it comes to shopping online for industrial products, there is no other place better than Tolexo. Whether you are looking for office supplies for your new setup or safety equipment for your workers or some hand tools for any type of DIY jobs any other type of industrial goods for your industry, Tolexo is just the place for you. We are the one stop shopping destination for electrical equipment. online shopping of industrial goods with access to more than 10,00,000 products. Prices influence the purchasing decisions of a buyer. For the very same reason, at Tolexo, we offer discounts from time to time. You can avail the offer and get heavy discounts on safety products. safety shoes. safety jackets. safety helmets. LED lights and various other products. In no time, Tolexo stands proudly as the largest B2B E-commerce company for industrial products in India. Buying industrial goods has never been this convenient cost effective. We source products from various national and international brands such as Bosch. stanley. Black Decker. Syska LED. Finolex, Allen Cooper, Bata, Karam, Taparia, Venus, Alpha, 3M, Flamingo, Acme, LG, Eveready, Safari, Cumi, Hatachi, Makita. GoodYear, Eastman, JCB, Jaguar, etc. We aim for complete customer satisfaction. Next Level Customer Experience We believe in achieving the highest level of customer satisfaction through a huge collection of products, interactive website mobile experience, timely delivery of household products and proactive customer care. We, at Tolexo, know the importance of your time and strive to deliver the products at the earliest at your doorstep. For your industrial products requirement, Tolexo is just the right platform to collaborate, without any hassles. Right from small office supplies for your office to security systems including CCTVs, you get to choose from 10,00,000 products available at Tolexo. Apart from office and industry supplies, Tolexo, also deals in many household products and equipment like, Gardening Equipment, plumbing tools, DIY tools, electrical accessories, cleaning products, etc. Extensive range of Office Supplies On Tolexo, you can buy adhesives online from these globally renowned brands and many other brands like, Jonson, Akfix, Wonder Tape, Dcgpac, 3M and many more at the best prices. With over a million SKUs, and over 28 categories to choose from, Tolexo is gearing up for the increasing demand in the Indian market place. We offer a wide assortment of medical supplies online in Medical which also includes Diagnostic Instruments, Medical Consumables, Physiotherapy and Rehab aids, Orthopedics, Rubber Products and Suction Units, Medical Clothing etc. Apart from these, Tolexo deals in 28 wide categories of products and over a million products which also includes, test and measurement equipment. Vacuum Cleaners, Trimmers, safety gloves, screwdrivers, hand tools, power tools, machine supply, machine tools, lock nut, electricals, plumbing tools, hand tools, Air Blowers, coach bolts, fans, paper cutters, safety gloves, screwdrivers, Bench Grinders, lubrication, hand tools, philips plug, screwdriver bits, test and measure tools, hardware, extension cords, fasteners, Power tools. air blowers, heat guns, angle grinders lubricants, Burnishers, lab supplies, Bosch Power Tools, indexable inserts, havells socket, pullers, pliers, power drills, hardware, garden tools, LED Lights, adhesives, pneumatic tools, abrasives, medical supplies, lag bolts, screwdriver bits, test and measure tools, hardware, fasteners, washers, screw drivers, Hand Tools. screw online, office supplies, car and bike accessories etc. Now you can buy medical supplies sitting at home, saving your money, time and energy and with a 100 guarantee of genuine products. Moreover, we assure you with a timely dispatch of your order. In case of dissatisfaction because of defect, 15-day money back guarantee. Hence, big industrial and business houses trust us for their bulk buying with respect to business supplies. Where else would you get maximum surety at minimum prices 2017 Tolexo. All Rights Reserved.
Ausübung von Aktienoptionen Ausübung einer Aktienoption bedeutet den Erwerb der emittenten Stammaktien zu dem von der Option festgelegten Preis (Zuschusspreis), unabhängig vom Aktienkurs zum Zeitpunkt der Ausübung der Option. Weitere Informationen finden Sie unter Lageroptionen. Tipp: Ausübung Ihrer Aktienoptionen ist eine anspruchsvolle und manchmal komplizierte Transaktion. Die steuerlichen Implikationen können stark variieren ndash achten Sie darauf, einen Steuerberater zu konsultieren, bevor Sie Ihre Aktienoptionen ausüben. Wenn Sie glauben, dass der Aktienkurs im Laufe der Zeit steigt, können Sie die langfristige Beschaffenheit der Option nutzen und darauf warten, dass Sie die Möglichkeit haben, die Aktienoptionen auszuüben Üben sie aus, bis der Marktpreis des Emittentenbestandes Ihren Stipendienpreis übersteigt und Sie fühlen, dass Sie bereit sind, Ihre Aktienoptionen auszuüben. Denken Sie daran, dass die Aktienoptionen nach einer gewissen Zeit ablaufen. Aktienoptionen haben kein...
Comments
Post a Comment