Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Stereo Amplifier for M22ti

If I really get the bug to learn more about servicing the old tube amps, I might pair up an PSA-3X with an ST-70. However, I guess I'm taking a leap of faith that even an older amp like the SCA-80, though it used a technology that was new for the time, executed that tech well and thus performs better than much of the cheap stuff. I could be wrong though.

sushi, I let the old dynaco go to another bidder. I took your advice (seeming that I didn't have much of an argument) and looked for other reactions to the amp. Most people who were experienced with the dynaco tube amps seemed to not take a liking to their solid state offerings. Some even claimed that the solid state amps eventually killed the company. However, I'm guessing it had more to do with their later cost saving measures.

So, thank you for the heads-up.

Some day, I still wouldn't mind learning to rebuild an old ST70 and pair it with a bottlehead foreplay, but for now, I'm still on the lookout for a higher powered amp.

I was quite interested in the nOrh SE9 amp, rated at 9 watts per channel. However, I'm a bit worried about what options I have for speakers, as no offering from axiom would really work that well with such low wattage. Of course, the sound quality from such an amp would be top notch. However, although I was considering a pair of omega ts2 horns, I fear that they wouldn't accent the sort of music I listen to. Folk, Jazz, Rock and Roll, or even Blues would sound great on such a setup though.

I was recommended a pair of Paradigm Stuio 20's which are less efficient than axioms. And, I was also considering a pair of nOrh 6.1s.

Importantly, however, I'm still looking for a good amp. The harman kardon HK650 sounded like a wonderful option, but I don't believe they're being produced any more. Nowadays, HK makes a similarly priced stereo reciever. Is the sound quality comparable?

Here's the rest of my list:

Rega Brio - $400
www.rega.co.uk
38w RMS per channel into 8ohms
Sanken 150w output transistors

Cambridge Audio A500 - $400
www.cambridgeaudio.com
85w RMS per channel into 6 ohms

Marantz PM7000 - $400
www.marantz.com
95w RMS per channel into 8 ohms

Arcam Diva A65 - $500
www.arcam.co.uk
40w RMS per channel into 8 ohms

What would be the best choice? I would be interested in rotel or creek, but they seem a bit beyond my $400 price limit.

If you're willing to buy used, audiogon.com has some listings for Creek and Rotel integrated amps in that price range.

alazanto,

If this is your first purchase of a "serious" integrated amp, then I would avoid tubes altogether. Due to their low damping factors (high output impedances), most tube amps are far from neutral when driving real-world loudspeakers; the frequency response will partly follow the speaker's impedance curve, especially in the bass region. I believe that what people call "tube sound" comes, in part, from this, as well as from the non-linear components such as output transformers, plus the relatively shallow negative feedback used in most tube amps (because of their low open-loop gains). These also constitute what I had called the "fun factor" -- depending on your taste and amp/speaker/room matching, a tube amp could produce subjectively better sound than modern solidstate amps that tend to be completely flat and accurate in objective measurements. In other words, the technical inaccuracy exhibited by tube amps are, in general, subjectively quite benign, as many tube fans will attest.

That said, if I were you, I would still start with a plain-flat-and-accurate, good solidstate amp first. After all, you want to have a solid "reference" system first, right? Especially given that the virtue of the M22ti is its superb accuracy, I would first mate the speaker with a highly neutral, colorless amp.

Among the candidates you listed, I do not personally appreciate the fact that the Marantz has the minimun recommended speaker impedance of 8 ohms; although it will be fine with the M22's, I have to say that the amp might be less versatile than the British brands you listed. But you may or may not mind about this; other than that, the Marantz certainly has the highest rated power, which will never hurt.

Cheers!

Al, I certainly agree with sushi in regard to tube amps. To the extent that in some circumstances there is a "tube sound", that sound is less accurate. Apparently you're talking about a stereo-only system, but unless you're pretty sure that you're not going to want multi-channel in the future you should consider one of the fine home theater receivers which are available in that price area. Even if you're certain about stereo-only, there's no good reason to restrict your choices to those integrated amps. They have no better sound than high quality stereo receivers such as the Denon DRA-395 which you can find for about $250(or the HK you mentioned). Also, the AM-FM tuner included shouldn't be ignored.

In reply to:

---

Also, the AM-FM tuner included shouldn't be ignored.

---

Very true. I usually listen to my local classical station on the way back home after work (in case anybody cares, the station is wrr101.com - they broadcast on the net, too). If my favorite piece is on-air when I am arriving home, naturally I want to continue listening to the rest of the piece at home (one problem of classical music: pieces tend to be long! LOL). But I do not have a tuner in my main system! I usually end up turning on my clock radio (btw, mine is stereo at least! heh-heh) or my daughter's boombox...

So I know I need a tuner, but just have not been able to convince myself into buying a separate tuner just for that.

Well... I look forward to buying a multichannel receiver soon!

Cheers!

I was looking into the higher end, Harman Kardon stereo reciever. However, if there is a comprimise of quality by including a tuner, I would prefer not to go with it.

I might be interested in getting a satellite radio tuner some day, but the selection in the states seems poor yet.

I would like a radio tuner though, and if a Harman Kardon stereo reciever sounds as good as their old integrated amps (630, 650, 680) I would be very willing to buy one!!!

The Denon PMA-2000MkIV R seems like a very new, but interesting offering. However, I wonder how it sounds?

I should probably add that I'm not really interested in several channels because I'm not very interested in movies. I music, I'm reading anyway, that its more important to focus on the soundstage than the surround sound. However, if I were to get into movies, I would probably want to go with a good multi-channel system. My experience with dolby pro logic scarred me for life, however.

Hi Alz..
I drove a pair of M3tis with a 5 watt per channel SET Antique Sound Labs MG S1 15DT and can only say the combination sounded wonderful. I now use a pair of M50Ti-like Michaura M66s (2 x 6.5" drivers, titanium tweeter), a Vance Dickason Titanic amplified subwoofer and the combination is just terrific.

I have a HT/music system consisting of an Onkyo 797THX receiver, Klipsch KLF C7 center, a pair of M60 like Michaura M665s up front, a pair of M50 like Michaura M66s side surrounds and a pair of Mission 77ds bipole speakers in the back (driven by a humongous silver faced Kenwood KA9100 outboard amp), a pair of subs (Klipsch LF10 1640 watts and a Velodyne CHT100 through an Outlaw ICBM-1 bass manager) sourced by a Toshiba SD9200 DVD Audio player.

I love the sound of the high power solid state system, but for sweet music with terrific soundstaging the 5 wpc tube 2 channel system is simply wonderful and my favorite.

I sort of laugh when I hear folks put down tubes especially when they go slack jawed after actually hearing a well integrated system. My advice - go listen to a good SET tube system. The nOrh SE9s have been well reviewed and wouldn't have any problem at all driving any Axiom speaker from the M3Tis on up.

In reply to:

---

However, if there is a compromise of quality by including a tuner, I would prefer not to go with it.

---

There is absolutely no technical reason that an integrated tuner causes degradation of a receiver’s audio quality. Also, the cost of a digital tuner module (usually by OEM) is so tiny today that the necessary cost cutting in other places should be negligible for given price.

In reply to:

---

I should probably add that I'm not really interested in several channels because I'm not very interested in movies.

---

I do not know how long it will take for the multichannel audio formats (SACD, DVD-A etc) to get to their prime time, but they are coming. Even if you are not interested in movies, you might want to consider them…

In reply to:

---

My experience with dolby pro logic scarred me for life, however.

---

Was it Pro Logic II? I found that Pro Logic II is much better than the original Pro Logic; also setting the processor in the Music mode (as opposed to Movie mode) is very important when use it for music. My own brief experience with Pro Logic II (for classical music) was quite positive.

So, these are some of the reasons to consider a receiver as well. I concur with JohnK in that, in today’s market, traditional stereo integrated amps are increasingly marginalized into a small niche (or replaced by those inexpensive mini- or micro-systems). This means that you likely get much more bang for buck from more common, major-brand multichannel receivers. Although the final conclusion can only be drown by your own ears, there is no technical reason to assume that those mass-marketed products are inherently inferior in sound quality to more esoteric “audiophile” stereo amps within the same price range. That said, the psychology of “pride of ownership” is of course an entirely different issue.

Cheers!

the dynaco is a great amp. even at ebay prices they are a bargain. i have some norh se-9 arriving in april that i feel are a great match, although the st-70 is better. you will need a pre-amp with the dynaco though. the norh will perform well but the output will be limited due to it's 9 watts.

cheers,

george