Does anyone care to ask an amplifier designer a technical question? My door is open.

@teo Some Ignorance is so manifold that it is used to commit to attacks so libelous and underhanded... that the person initiating is practically kicked off a given forum. So obvious to all, that there aren’t even words for it.And then that illiteracy and ignorance is paraded about as somehow being informed. That we can all be that dense. Jebus. What a horrific world that would be. So far gone that it can’t even be explained to a given person how far off base and wrongheaded a given comment might be.

I think im being called out but so poetically I can hardly be certain. I think Teo has a better future as Poet and Philosopher. 

His verse is  almost Shakespearian

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonnet_94

Bruce De Plama (Brians brother) often quoted the last of this. 

For sweetest things turn sourest by their deeds;
Lilies that fester smell far worse than weeds.

@mrdecibel Roger, this is a GREAT thread, thank you. I agree that all of the nasty comments and bickering should be kept out of this thread ( as well as all threads ). This thread is about learning, as I see it, and I am learning a great deal ( maybe understanding 1 % of it ) And yes, this thread has me thinking about trying tubes again in a power amp. : Going back to damping. In my early years, I owned several ss power amps, a few high powered. Two in particular, were an original Ampzilla, and a factory built Dynaco 400. Having many speakers at the time ( DQ10, AR 3, Klipsch Lascala, just to name a few ), the Dynaco had a bloated, slow, ill defined bass in comparison to the Ampzilla. Both were rated at 200 wpc into 8 ohms ( as I mentioned, these characteristic were also in all of the tube amps I had at the time ). Can you explain if these characteristics between the Amnpzilla and Dyna had anything to do with damping ? Thank you in advance. Enjoy ! MrD

.

Thanks, the nasty comments and bickering are charateristics of the people who make the comments. I ignore most of them. When I look at the threads they get on I can hardly imagine what sort of person they are. I am happy to have little of them here. I guess every forum has its trolls. 

At to your sonic observations. Ampzilla was and is a great amp. I think Jim B designed the Dynaco also, but I am unsure. If you find a schematic I can likely tell. People should know that some designers art is easy to spot, just as an artist’s paintings or sculptures. Bongo Jim, as we called him, was a really great amp designer, great pianist and all round fun guy. I have a picture of him Bacsom King, Mike and Laura Elliott at a BBQ at my home in Santa Barbara many years ago. Ill try to find and post it.

 Sounds like you have had some bass issues. Both SS amps should have good damping, I know Zilla did. Tube amps with poor damping = bloated bass and other problems. Would love for you to hear the listening test we have going on right now with two identical amps except that one has been modified to have 4x damping and 1/4 x distortion. The bass difference, clairty and air on the QUAD 57 are quite apparent. We are doing some serious listening with a very tight setup.

Regarding the A/B testing, while we began last weekend Roger spent the better part of the week optimizing the set up, no easy task said he. He has now been inviting folks over to listen and I took another stab at it today. This time I brought some go to CDs that I like to use, simple music for the most part, trios and duos, but there are certain things I’ll be listening for. In some cases it’s not even the music, Edgar Meyer’s and Yo Yo Ma’s breathing, Keith Jarrett’s chirping and Gary Peacock’s fretting, The footsteps in Todd Garfinkle’s Jun, the resin on the bow, stuff like that. In other cases it’s the bass, piano, strings, cymbals and high hats.

My session lasted an hour or so and in addition to some unique experiences there were some consistencies across all the music. I originally commented in my notes that the bass produced by the un-modded amp sounded fat but pleasing. However, after more listening, and especially as the bass notes went lower, it was clearly bloated. Not to mention that while the individual bass notes during the solo on Keith Jarret’s version of When I Fall in Love on the modded amp were clearly defined, they were at times smeared on the un-modded amp. In addition, the cymbals and the high hats were slightly muted on the un-modded amp and I could hear a bit of hash as well.

A couple lessons I received in the process. If I didn’t get it before, and I thought I did, I now know for certain the effects a low output impedance amplifier has on a speaker and the resulting sound. In addition, while I can easily hear the effects of an amplifier that clips or has higher amounts of distortion, I think for the first time I could clearly hear the effects of low amounts of IMD as I A/B'ed the amps. Now Roger has invited a few folks from the SFAS to be part of the next group who will participate in the listening test. It will be interesting to hear others impressions and compare notes.

Damn, now I REALLY wish I still lived in San Jose!

@ramtubes

Roger, you wrote:

"The difference between Bill Johnson amps and the current products is night and day. I appreciate the simplicity but not so much the performance specs. However specs arent everything. We are finding out some very interesting things on some listening tests. Very hard to get a really good handle on an amp without an A/B and a reference."

Not sure what you feel is deficient with the ARC Ref 150SE specs.  If you care to elaborate, please do.

Also, have you ever bench tested the Ref 150 SE or Ref 6 linestage?  Further, have you ever A/B'd any current ARC models against other brands that you think highly about?

My speakers are pretty sensitive.  Rated at 92db.  I can play music (rock or classical) at ear-splitting levels without any apparent sonic congestion. Of course, I can't speak to distortion because I don't have the means or ability to measure those specs.

That said, maybe it really does not matter what I think.  There are a million threads where folks tout the attributes of their gear and so I guess everyone has their own favorites.  

In any case, I would like to know your reactions if you bench tested or critically listened to any *current" ARC gear.

Keep an eye peeled for my KT-150s.  I am also sending some old ARC winged C 6550s that I used on some older ARC amps (roughly 2000 hours on the tubes).  I would like to know if they have juice left in them.  Also, the 6550s might give you a clue about the tubes specs ARC used to match their tubes for purposes of matching my KT-150s.  The KT-150s are da*n expensive tubes.

Regards

BIF