60 watt Rogue Tubes for Vandersteen 3A Signatures

"but for sheer dynamic power, tubes seem better to me."

I'm not sure about dynamic but I do believe a 100 watt tube amp sounds louder than a 100 watt ss amp. I still don't believe 60 watts, tube or ss, is enough to get the best from the 3As.

Wendell

Perhaps into higher impedance loads most tube amps might seem more powerful, into lower impedance loads ss might seem more powerful. According to Stereophile's measurements of the speaker in question, the impedance drops to 2.8 Ohms and the sensitivity was measured at 85 dB/W/M. That drop happens in the bass region, where a bigger cone needs to be moved. Perhaps with speakers like some 'stats the argument might be reversed.

According to Stereophile's measurements of the speaker in question, the impedance drops to 2.8 Ohms and the sensitivity was measured at 85 dB/W/M.
Unsound (System | Threads | Answers)

That's significantly different than Vandersteen's stated specifications.

6 ohm nominal with a 2.8 ohm minimum does not make for a tube friendly speaker, IMO. I'd stay away from tubes for this speaker based on these measurements.

"stay away from tubes for this speaker"

Agreed. With the exception of the Jadis Defy 7 I never heard a tube amp bring out the strengths of the 3A better than quality solidstate.

Wendell

With the exception of the Jadis Defy 7 I never heard a tube amp bring out the strengths of the 3A better than quality solidstate.

Wendell
Narrod (Threads | Answers)

Thanks for that info, Wendell. SS has certainly been the recommended topology for as long as I can recall. When I saw the manufacturer's specs of 6 ohm nominal/4 ohm minimum, I thought perhaps they were candidates for tube amplification. Admittedly, I got lazy and didn't read the Stereophile measurements section...something I'm always hitting home to others...so I'm guilty of some hypocrisy here.