Comments on Profile Post by rlow

I say that only based on having tubes in the preamp or input/voltage gain stages (hybrid). Never had an all tube amp before. I really like the mix of tube pre/v-gain and solid state power amp for the bass/impact.

Completely agree. I don't know if I can go back.

First Watt amp + R2R source can emulate the coloration fairly well in a pinch but a nice tube circuit in the chain definitely brings some much-welcomed liquidity

Hybrid speaker amp? I would love to find a good one ($2-$4k). The ones I know of are class D tube hybrids which are shamelessly overpriced.

NOS R2R source seem to tame that issue for me. I find very little difference between my tube head amp vs ss headamp

Edit: I prefer tube amps though, but I dont find my micro ican unbearable at all

I thought tubes were a PITA and not worth it until Donald had me audition his Starlett. Now the only regularly used amps in my house that isn't tubes is my Aegir and Jot R.

@nishan99 I was referring to both speaker and headphone setups. However if you’re looking for a hybrid integrated speaker amp, take a look for Vincent amplifiers, or Balanced Audio Technology amps (I think they have a hybrid if I recall...). Neither are class D.

I have been listening to the DNA Starlett almost exclusively for the last two weeks or so. At first, I missed the "sheen" and transient speed of SS such as BW2 or even Asgard 3

However, llast couple of days I came to the conclusion that the sheen is just a bit of color, and the transient speed is more of a grain than anything else. Not that the Starlett is not "round" in some sense, it's just it is neither slow nor grainy. To sum up: the fidelityand "reality" of the sound is much higher I think

interesting experience @crenca. I kinda feel that SS is definitely "faster" or simply "tighter" in the bass vs tubes. and tubes gives better mids au naturel

Yet, the Starlett is more present in the bass than the Asgard 3 and BW2, and going from memory even the Jot. At my age I have nothing to say about the top octave, but the Starlett is more fidelitous from 30 to 10K IMO than any SS I have spent time with

But yea, the mids...massed strings through the Utopia or VC are, well more "real" than I have ever heard in my system. Cowboy Junkies (who for some reason don't have good studio recordings) sound really good and that is where the "roundness" comes into play, yet well recorded stuff is being colored I don't think...

@murphythecat not true at all. The EC Ultralinear is all tubes and has the tightest bass I've heard. In fact it also has no tube bloom; sounds like an uber SS.

I just put on "Doin it Right" 37hz for the drop. Starlett is hitting it harder (and not "bloomy") than the SS I mentioned above

Depends more on amp design. I agree that Starlett is a bit rounded and has tube bloom and wetness, but it’s not loosey-goosey or unrefined. The opposite; refined, nuanced, controlled, majestic, etc. Starlett's sound is more characteristic of well-designed, old school SET.

In my experience the perception of tightness in the bass is also tied to how the energy 10khz and above is rendered. The opposite is also true. Bass waves modulate high frequency waves after all. More D2 in the bass can also give a thicker texture too. Modded Super 7 kills my First Watt F7 in low end slam though.

more grain, presence, and complex distortion in the highs indicative of many SS designs give bass more 'crunch' with transients. I bet if you ran a low pass filter, perception of tightness and bass quality would change quite a bit.

"I bet if you ran a low pass filter, perception of tightness and bass quality would change quite a bit." I will have to try this soon - Starlett vs Asgard 3 nad/or Jot. Right now however I am enjoying the music too much to bother ;)