There has been a pair of 350P Klimax Crossovers on eBay a couple of times recently for only £3k. You could always sell your two KCT/Ds and buy four Tundras and a pair of crossovers...
I suspect that Fredrik might offer you a slight discount to buy four Tundras (or five if you want one for the office system too!) so it would probably only cost you about £6k to go fully aktiv with Tundras.
Lejonklou Tundra
Moderator: Staff
-
rowlandhills
- Very active member
- Posts: 582
- Joined: 2008-01-27 19:25
- Location: York, UK
I am aware of all these options. If I get two Tundra's for my office/kitchen, I will then get to really know how the Tundra stacks up versus Linn Klimax amps in my home rather than at a dealers.
The 350P Klimax crossovers are upgraded Artikulate crossovers, and are located in Hamburg which makes personal collection difficult. I do not think I would trust PayPal to to cover me if anything went wrong if I elected to have them sent to me.
The 350P Klimax crossovers are upgraded Artikulate crossovers, and are located in Hamburg which makes personal collection difficult. I do not think I would trust PayPal to to cover me if anything went wrong if I elected to have them sent to me.
rowlandhills wrote:There has been a pair of 350P Klimax Crossovers on eBay a couple of times recently for only £3k. You could always sell your two KCT/Ds and buy four Tundras and a pair of crossovers...
I suspect that Fredrik might offer you a slight discount to buy four Tundras (or five if you want one for the office system too!) so it would probably only cost you about £6k to go fully aktiv with Tundras.
-
Music Lover
- Very active member
- Posts: 1673
- Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
- Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil
You guys in UK are used having the worlds biggest second hand market of quality HIFI within a few hours drive.Flatcoat wrote:The 350P Klimax crossovers are upgraded Artikulate crossovers, and are located in Hamburg which makes personal collection difficult.
The rest of us are not that lucky.
Not directed to you, but I have stopped counting all complaints over "I have over an hour drive to my nearest retailer" posted on various UK based HIFI forum.
During 5 years I lived 2400km (a two leg flight travel) from a good dealer but that didn't stopped me buying, nor visiting him. Sometimes by car sometimes by air.
I bought a pair of 212s in UK after driving 2500km picking them up just to drive home the additional 2500km afterwards.
I didn't complain on the Net, no I was thrilled getting the speakers I was looking for.
And that's nothing compared with the challenges the guys "down under" have.
The Klimax filters are VERY rare and going to enhance the performance considerable! Get them and keep the speakers long time, spending upcoming years on enhancing the front end.
I bet 4*Tundra would be great with the Xovers/350s.
Good Luck!
It's all about musical understanding!
-
Rufus McDufus
- Active member
- Posts: 137
- Joined: 2012-04-28 07:56
Two Tundras & 1.1 update
Well I've had a marvellous couple of days spent at Chris Fuller's Hidden Systems in Hartley Wintney, initially to get my Tundra #006 updated to v1.1. We ended up spending rather longer there than intended and had some opportunities to listen to lots of gear that I haven't yet had the chance to have a good listen to. Chris has a really good set of facilities that really mirror a home environment a lot better than most sterile listening rooms that many dealers have and much closer to my home environment. And he makes very good coffee!
Anyhow, first off I got the chance to test Tundra 1.0 vs latest spec KCT. I found the KCT a little flat initially. The Tundra sounds better immediately. It seems to have a lot more top-end sparkle & responsiveness that really grabs you. Just a few seconds in I'm thinking 'this is better'.
But ... Chris very kindly let me borrow the KCT while he upgraded my Tundra (it was getting rather late by the time he actually got round to updating it!) so I spent 3 or 4 hours listening to the KCT at home the next day. Well, my opinion changed. It's very subtle but really very enjoyable musically. I also found myself hearing some details I'd not heard before. It's very comfortable to live with, a lot more 'Linn' I guess. It was maybe a tad on the muffled side with my setup - I missed that wonderful clarity & edge the Tundra has particularly with vocals. I did actually consider trading in the Tundra for a KCT - it's that close. On balance I very slightly prefer the Tundra 1.0 though for its clarity. I really could live with the KCT though.
Next up - Tundra 1.0 -> 1.1. We did some tests with Chris's upgraded Tundra vs my 1.0 one. I am a little slow to recognise improvements but my wife immediately could tell the 1.1 was better. Even more of that super-responsiveness/attack that you get, more clarity, even more realism. I've spent the day at home listening to my newly-upgraded Tundra. It really is something else. It's a significant update and an absolute must. For me this update takes the Tundra clearly ahead of the KCT.
Two Tundras. I've saved the best for last! I did hear 2 Tundras at WYSAH when Fredrik came to visit. I have to admit I was blown away by the difference between 1 & 2 Tundras. Colin & Fredrik were being professionally discreet about imparting their opinions though!
At Hidden Systems we listened to 2 Tundras (just one channel of each), and naturally 2x v1.1 Tundras of course. The difference is even greater than I remember. The sound is fuller & deeper. A good example track was Moby's 'The Sky Is Broken'. With 1 Tundra the drum figure at the start is crisp yet a little tinny. With 2 Tundras you can really hear the depth of the drum. It almost goes from being a shallow snare to something deeper and looser - and more realistic. I think it's a sampled drum kit but it sounds more real with 2 Tundras. We played a lot of other tracks too. My conclusion? If you're looking at price/performance, 2 Tundras is more than a twice-the-price update over one Tundra. I'm definitely looking to find the space on my shelves for a second Tundra. It is simply sensational. I'm not sure I can wait for monoblocs to (hopefully) appear, it is that good.
Now someone has to compare 2 Tundras vs Solos. I haven't compared Solos vs 1 Tundra and I have to admit I'd be surprised if Tundra (even 1.1) beats Solos like other people on here, but two Tundras is just something else and could well whup the Solo's ass!
PS - equipment used for the tests were ADS/1/D, LP12 SE, KK/1, 242s at Chris's and a few other bits for fun, plus my RDS, KK/1, AV speakers at home.
Anyhow, first off I got the chance to test Tundra 1.0 vs latest spec KCT. I found the KCT a little flat initially. The Tundra sounds better immediately. It seems to have a lot more top-end sparkle & responsiveness that really grabs you. Just a few seconds in I'm thinking 'this is better'.
But ... Chris very kindly let me borrow the KCT while he upgraded my Tundra (it was getting rather late by the time he actually got round to updating it!) so I spent 3 or 4 hours listening to the KCT at home the next day. Well, my opinion changed. It's very subtle but really very enjoyable musically. I also found myself hearing some details I'd not heard before. It's very comfortable to live with, a lot more 'Linn' I guess. It was maybe a tad on the muffled side with my setup - I missed that wonderful clarity & edge the Tundra has particularly with vocals. I did actually consider trading in the Tundra for a KCT - it's that close. On balance I very slightly prefer the Tundra 1.0 though for its clarity. I really could live with the KCT though.
Next up - Tundra 1.0 -> 1.1. We did some tests with Chris's upgraded Tundra vs my 1.0 one. I am a little slow to recognise improvements but my wife immediately could tell the 1.1 was better. Even more of that super-responsiveness/attack that you get, more clarity, even more realism. I've spent the day at home listening to my newly-upgraded Tundra. It really is something else. It's a significant update and an absolute must. For me this update takes the Tundra clearly ahead of the KCT.
Two Tundras. I've saved the best for last! I did hear 2 Tundras at WYSAH when Fredrik came to visit. I have to admit I was blown away by the difference between 1 & 2 Tundras. Colin & Fredrik were being professionally discreet about imparting their opinions though!
At Hidden Systems we listened to 2 Tundras (just one channel of each), and naturally 2x v1.1 Tundras of course. The difference is even greater than I remember. The sound is fuller & deeper. A good example track was Moby's 'The Sky Is Broken'. With 1 Tundra the drum figure at the start is crisp yet a little tinny. With 2 Tundras you can really hear the depth of the drum. It almost goes from being a shallow snare to something deeper and looser - and more realistic. I think it's a sampled drum kit but it sounds more real with 2 Tundras. We played a lot of other tracks too. My conclusion? If you're looking at price/performance, 2 Tundras is more than a twice-the-price update over one Tundra. I'm definitely looking to find the space on my shelves for a second Tundra. It is simply sensational. I'm not sure I can wait for monoblocs to (hopefully) appear, it is that good.
Now someone has to compare 2 Tundras vs Solos. I haven't compared Solos vs 1 Tundra and I have to admit I'd be surprised if Tundra (even 1.1) beats Solos like other people on here, but two Tundras is just something else and could well whup the Solo's ass!
PS - equipment used for the tests were ADS/1/D, LP12 SE, KK/1, 242s at Chris's and a few other bits for fun, plus my RDS, KK/1, AV speakers at home.
-
rowlandhills
- Very active member
- Posts: 582
- Joined: 2008-01-27 19:25
- Location: York, UK
This is a copy of a post I've just put on the Linn forum, but I thought people here might be interested too:
A few of us from the Linn forum (Gonzo, MnM, Bassato, TomBK and I) have met up a couple of times now at each other’s places, for some time chatting, some listening to each other’s HiFis, the odd dealer demo or two, and more to the point some good food and nice wine! The latest meeting was this weekend, with a trip down to the south coast of England, to spend some time with Gonzo and his system.
We decided to take the opportunity to listen to a few power amps, of which more later. The system we were basing the tests around is Gonzo’s usual system, so KDS/1 (KK for the duration of the tests, as this was being demo’d by Gonzo over the weekend to replace his usual direct connection) into a 3 month old KCT/D, quad-wired to a pair of Akurate 212s.
The power amps we tested were his previous 6100/D, the KCT, a Lejonklou Tundra (brought down by Anthony, who joined us for a few hours) and a pair of Bel Canto Ref 500M monoblocks (provided by MnM).
Obviously the bit we expected to be easy was the improvement from 6100 to KCT, but given the recent controversy around the performance of the Tundra, with opinions ranging from “almost as good as Solos” down to “beaten by a Majik 2100” this was going to be interesting…
We also were keen to try the Bel Cantos, as something completely different which is very well regarded in some parts but never really gets mentioned in Linn circles.
Demo tracks we used were Diana Krall’s “Narrow Daylight”, Monty Alexander’s “Night Mist Blues”, The Red Hot Chili Peppers’ “Snow (Hey Oh)” and The Chemical Brothers’ “Block Rockin Beats” which were repeated on all of the amps, along with various other tracks as we happened to feel like playing them, from Clapton to Zero Seven.
So, onto the first test, which was to move from the KCT which we’d been listening to as a baseline, over to the Tundra. We’d had very clear instructions that the power must be switched off while changing speaker cables and interconnects (pretty obvious really!), that we mustn’t open the casing as the fixings were torque optimised, that we should allow some time for warming up and that we should use the supplied mains lead only. The Tundra had been switched on for a couple of hours, but with nothing connected since we were already listening to the KCT and the 212s. We switched off the KCT, Tundra and KK, and moved the connectors (unbalanced Linn silvers) over to the Tundra, along with speaker cables (one half a pair of K400, professionally soldered with Linn Knekt bananas).
First impressions? The percussion seemed a little more in the background, especially while the amp was warming up. Presentation was a little more layered than the KCT, but the detail was all still there if you listened to it. There was one very odd effect where one channel seemed to fade out a couple of times, but this only happened in the first ten minutes or so, and might have been a fault or a warmup issue as we couldn’t repeat it. Overall, the amp was very good on vocals such as the Diana Krall and delicate pieces of music, possibly a little weaker on driving rock choruses and the Chemical Brothers track sounded too thin (although the vocals were superb) but that may also have been partly the speakers, as the rest of us are more used to floorstanders with more bass capability.
At this stage we noticed a slight imbalance and adjusted the speaker position very slightly, also moving a nearby cabinet further away from one speaker which resolved the issue.
Time to try the Bel Cantos. Instant view was that the bass was better here (we played Block Rockin’ Beats first this time) but the vocals seemed quieter, recessed, compared to the Tundra. The amp was characterised as much more “aggressive” but somehow less engaging than the Tundra or KCT on the Diana Krall, and indeed it was tempting to talk over it.
We put the Tundra back in to listen again, and felt that it had a much warmer sound, and was a lot more engaging on acoustic music in particular.
As Gonzo still had his old 6100/D, we wanted to see whether we agreed with comments made that in a comparison between Majik and Tundra “the Majik easily walked it”. We connected everything up and played the same few tracks. Consensus view was that the 6100 sounded a bit “thicker” than the other amps tried so far. Soon everyone was talking over the top, and several people took loo breaks! That said, it was still a very pleasant and musical amp, and felt like good value for money.
Now to put the KCT back in place, and see if it justifified its price tag (at £7100 RRP, this was the most expensive of the lot, up against the £2800 Tundra, the £4000 a pair Bel Cantos, and the £1575 (for a 2100) Majik amp). It was better on the first note, more refined, cleaner sound, with more distinct percussion and better bass. Overall clearly the best of the power amps, but at an appropriate price for it!
The last thing we tried was taking the KK out of the loop, the way that MnM normally runs the Bel Canto amps fed directly from his KDS/1 and experimenting with balanced and unbalanced connections. We found that the balanced connection had more clarity and was more engaging to listen to. There was more bass, and better timing, and overall it was clearly better than the unbalanced connection. Oddly, the Bel Cantos seemed better without the KK, whereas all of us agreed that the KK was a very worthwhile improvement over a direct connection between KDS/1 and KCT! Perhaps there was some kind of better synergy with the DS direct output?
The final conclusion around the Tundra was that it was clearly “a lot of amp for the money” and was a long way better than the 6100, but not as good as the KCT. It was tuneful and musical, and a lot of fun to listen to on the right tracks. We wanted to hear it again on a pair of speakers which are better with heavier music, perhaps 242s or 350s, but overall we felt that it was a very capable amp that certainly justifies an audition if you’re in the market for a power amp in the £2k to £5k range.
Compared to a second hand KCT I think that personal preference around sound presentation and visual style (the Tundra looks a lot cheaper than any Klimax unit, although not worse than a Majik, I’d say) could make the difference, so go and listen and see what you think.
Overall - Great job Fredrik!
A few of us from the Linn forum (Gonzo, MnM, Bassato, TomBK and I) have met up a couple of times now at each other’s places, for some time chatting, some listening to each other’s HiFis, the odd dealer demo or two, and more to the point some good food and nice wine! The latest meeting was this weekend, with a trip down to the south coast of England, to spend some time with Gonzo and his system.
We decided to take the opportunity to listen to a few power amps, of which more later. The system we were basing the tests around is Gonzo’s usual system, so KDS/1 (KK for the duration of the tests, as this was being demo’d by Gonzo over the weekend to replace his usual direct connection) into a 3 month old KCT/D, quad-wired to a pair of Akurate 212s.
The power amps we tested were his previous 6100/D, the KCT, a Lejonklou Tundra (brought down by Anthony, who joined us for a few hours) and a pair of Bel Canto Ref 500M monoblocks (provided by MnM).
Obviously the bit we expected to be easy was the improvement from 6100 to KCT, but given the recent controversy around the performance of the Tundra, with opinions ranging from “almost as good as Solos” down to “beaten by a Majik 2100” this was going to be interesting…
We also were keen to try the Bel Cantos, as something completely different which is very well regarded in some parts but never really gets mentioned in Linn circles.
Demo tracks we used were Diana Krall’s “Narrow Daylight”, Monty Alexander’s “Night Mist Blues”, The Red Hot Chili Peppers’ “Snow (Hey Oh)” and The Chemical Brothers’ “Block Rockin Beats” which were repeated on all of the amps, along with various other tracks as we happened to feel like playing them, from Clapton to Zero Seven.
So, onto the first test, which was to move from the KCT which we’d been listening to as a baseline, over to the Tundra. We’d had very clear instructions that the power must be switched off while changing speaker cables and interconnects (pretty obvious really!), that we mustn’t open the casing as the fixings were torque optimised, that we should allow some time for warming up and that we should use the supplied mains lead only. The Tundra had been switched on for a couple of hours, but with nothing connected since we were already listening to the KCT and the 212s. We switched off the KCT, Tundra and KK, and moved the connectors (unbalanced Linn silvers) over to the Tundra, along with speaker cables (one half a pair of K400, professionally soldered with Linn Knekt bananas).
First impressions? The percussion seemed a little more in the background, especially while the amp was warming up. Presentation was a little more layered than the KCT, but the detail was all still there if you listened to it. There was one very odd effect where one channel seemed to fade out a couple of times, but this only happened in the first ten minutes or so, and might have been a fault or a warmup issue as we couldn’t repeat it. Overall, the amp was very good on vocals such as the Diana Krall and delicate pieces of music, possibly a little weaker on driving rock choruses and the Chemical Brothers track sounded too thin (although the vocals were superb) but that may also have been partly the speakers, as the rest of us are more used to floorstanders with more bass capability.
At this stage we noticed a slight imbalance and adjusted the speaker position very slightly, also moving a nearby cabinet further away from one speaker which resolved the issue.
Time to try the Bel Cantos. Instant view was that the bass was better here (we played Block Rockin’ Beats first this time) but the vocals seemed quieter, recessed, compared to the Tundra. The amp was characterised as much more “aggressive” but somehow less engaging than the Tundra or KCT on the Diana Krall, and indeed it was tempting to talk over it.
We put the Tundra back in to listen again, and felt that it had a much warmer sound, and was a lot more engaging on acoustic music in particular.
As Gonzo still had his old 6100/D, we wanted to see whether we agreed with comments made that in a comparison between Majik and Tundra “the Majik easily walked it”. We connected everything up and played the same few tracks. Consensus view was that the 6100 sounded a bit “thicker” than the other amps tried so far. Soon everyone was talking over the top, and several people took loo breaks! That said, it was still a very pleasant and musical amp, and felt like good value for money.
Now to put the KCT back in place, and see if it justifified its price tag (at £7100 RRP, this was the most expensive of the lot, up against the £2800 Tundra, the £4000 a pair Bel Cantos, and the £1575 (for a 2100) Majik amp). It was better on the first note, more refined, cleaner sound, with more distinct percussion and better bass. Overall clearly the best of the power amps, but at an appropriate price for it!
The last thing we tried was taking the KK out of the loop, the way that MnM normally runs the Bel Canto amps fed directly from his KDS/1 and experimenting with balanced and unbalanced connections. We found that the balanced connection had more clarity and was more engaging to listen to. There was more bass, and better timing, and overall it was clearly better than the unbalanced connection. Oddly, the Bel Cantos seemed better without the KK, whereas all of us agreed that the KK was a very worthwhile improvement over a direct connection between KDS/1 and KCT! Perhaps there was some kind of better synergy with the DS direct output?
The final conclusion around the Tundra was that it was clearly “a lot of amp for the money” and was a long way better than the 6100, but not as good as the KCT. It was tuneful and musical, and a lot of fun to listen to on the right tracks. We wanted to hear it again on a pair of speakers which are better with heavier music, perhaps 242s or 350s, but overall we felt that it was a very capable amp that certainly justifies an audition if you’re in the market for a power amp in the £2k to £5k range.
Compared to a second hand KCT I think that personal preference around sound presentation and visual style (the Tundra looks a lot cheaper than any Klimax unit, although not worse than a Majik, I’d say) could make the difference, so go and listen and see what you think.
Overall - Great job Fredrik!
KRDSM, Tundra to 242s
Silvers, K400, Hutter rack
Silvers, K400, Hutter rack
-
Linncredible
- Active Member
- Posts: 70
- Joined: 2008-01-12 14:01
- Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Interesting that the 212s were quad wired & yet the Tundra still put in a good showing - I don't think Fredrik is a fan of multi wiring so would have been interesting to know if single wired 212s might've produced a different result, as might re-tune-dem'ing the speaker position for the different power amps, not just the Tundra. Of course, this would've made for a more involved comparison, and introduced more variables... Thanks Rowland for posting your findings.
One of the experiments was a single connection of k400 vs quad k20, so the Tundra was single wired.tokenbrit wrote:Interesting that the 212s were quad wired & yet the Tundra still put in a good showing - I don't think Fredrik is a fan of multi wiring so would have been interesting to know if single wired 212s might've produced a different result, as might re-tune-dem'ing the speaker position for the different power amps, not just the Tundra. Of course, this would've made for a more involved comparison, and introduced more variables... Thanks Rowland for posting your findings.
It was unaminous the singe k400 was far superior.
I think its also worth mentioning the Tundra, although putting in a great performance, does not give its best when being swapped with other amps.
On return it has been cotinuously running with 242s and sounds great.
-
rowlandhills
- Very active member
- Posts: 582
- Joined: 2008-01-27 19:25
- Location: York, UK
Indeed. Although we started the day with the quad wired K20 on the KCT, we used one half of a pair of K400 for all the rest of the amp comparisons. Anthony is now making up a pair of K400 which will be used going forward, biamping the 212s (one channel for the array, one for the bass).
As far as the Tundra version goes, I'd have to ask Anthony. I suspect 1.1 as it was his current demo model.
As far as the Tundra version goes, I'd have to ask Anthony. I suspect 1.1 as it was his current demo model.
KRDSM, Tundra to 242s
Silvers, K400, Hutter rack
Silvers, K400, Hutter rack
-
rowlandhills
- Very active member
- Posts: 582
- Joined: 2008-01-27 19:25
- Location: York, UK
On Saturday I took delivery of my Tundra (version 1.0). At my dealers I listened to both a single, and then two Tundras driving 242s. The rest of the system was current spec KK and KDS. The conclusion on two Tundras versus one was that it was marginally better, but not enough of a difference to warrant the extra cost. We then connected up some current Solos and I probably preferred even the single Tundra. The Solos were cold and the speakers were single wired so that maybe a reason that I was not blown away by them.
All the above was done at my dealers which is never the same as listening in your home to your own system. The Tundra is now installed in my main system replacing two current spec twins, and using with current spec KK/KDS/350P. It is sounding brilliant - everything you would want from your Linn HiFi. I have just compared it to one of my dynamik Twins and actually prefer the Tundra - it gives more 'life' to the system as the best way to describe it. This system is now the most enjoyable I have ever owned. Previous systems have included active Komris with four Twins, 350As and various other top Linn systems.
So the negatives - the Tundra is a 24 watt amp compared to the Twins 200 watts which means that to get the same listening volume, my KK is about 9 higher. I have played music with the KK at 85 with no sign of any stress from the Tundra, and that is very loud. The main negative is the appearance of the Tundra versus Klimax units. The Klimax range is in a different league and is the reason I will most likely stay with all Linn for my main system. This Tundra will eventually replace my non dynamik Twin in my office driving 212s, but for the time being I will just enjoy it with my 350s.
What the Tundra does represent is phenomenal value for money and is a very affordable alternative option in partnership with Linn electronics and speakers.
All the above was done at my dealers which is never the same as listening in your home to your own system. The Tundra is now installed in my main system replacing two current spec twins, and using with current spec KK/KDS/350P. It is sounding brilliant - everything you would want from your Linn HiFi. I have just compared it to one of my dynamik Twins and actually prefer the Tundra - it gives more 'life' to the system as the best way to describe it. This system is now the most enjoyable I have ever owned. Previous systems have included active Komris with four Twins, 350As and various other top Linn systems.
So the negatives - the Tundra is a 24 watt amp compared to the Twins 200 watts which means that to get the same listening volume, my KK is about 9 higher. I have played music with the KK at 85 with no sign of any stress from the Tundra, and that is very loud. The main negative is the appearance of the Tundra versus Klimax units. The Klimax range is in a different league and is the reason I will most likely stay with all Linn for my main system. This Tundra will eventually replace my non dynamik Twin in my office driving 212s, but for the time being I will just enjoy it with my 350s.
What the Tundra does represent is phenomenal value for money and is a very affordable alternative option in partnership with Linn electronics and speakers.
Interesting post Flatcoat and good to hear another music lover who puts the Tundra up with the Klimax amps (and a v1.0 at that). I did want to correct a couple of things in your post, however. The Tundra is 24 Watts continuous per channel at 8 Ohms, 20Hz to 20kHz at the rated distortion of less than .1% THD (as amps are supposed to be specified, at least in the US to meet FTC rules). The Chakra Twin is rated at 200 Watts into 4 Ohms - it is only rated 100 Watts into 8 Ohms and the ratings on the Linn data sheet do not state whether they are continuous and what the frequency range and distortion specs are for the rated power. As such it is really impossible to compare actual power even if these specs meant anything (since the specs are generally static and music is dynamic the specs don't really tell you how loud an amp will play).
More importantly, however, the difference in the volume setting you have to use has nothing to do with the power rating of the amp. It is caused by the amount of gain in the amplifier which is not tied to the output power (for instance all Linn amps have pretty much the same gain regardless of output power). The gain on a Chakra Twin is 28.6dB whereas the gain on the Tundra is 20.8dB. This means that you will have to turn up the Tundra close to 8dB for it to play at the same level. At that level it will be putting out the same actual musical power as the Twin at the 8dB lower level. In actual practice I have found, both by ear and using a dB meter, that the Tundra needs to be turned up 7.5dB to 8dB depending on which Klimax amp you are comparing it to in order to put out the same dB level from the speakers. So your about 9 higher is pretty close.
More importantly, however, the difference in the volume setting you have to use has nothing to do with the power rating of the amp. It is caused by the amount of gain in the amplifier which is not tied to the output power (for instance all Linn amps have pretty much the same gain regardless of output power). The gain on a Chakra Twin is 28.6dB whereas the gain on the Tundra is 20.8dB. This means that you will have to turn up the Tundra close to 8dB for it to play at the same level. At that level it will be putting out the same actual musical power as the Twin at the 8dB lower level. In actual practice I have found, both by ear and using a dB meter, that the Tundra needs to be turned up 7.5dB to 8dB depending on which Klimax amp you are comparing it to in order to put out the same dB level from the speakers. So your about 9 higher is pretty close.
Thanks for the clarification Thomas. One correction from me is that my amp is v1.1.
Another point to add:
Also, my dealer has pointed out that because of the gain differential with Linn amps, it would not be possible to use Tundras if I went active with Klimax xovers and my 350s as there is no way to adjust the gain on the bass drivers as they have there own amp built into the speakers.
Another point to add:
Also, my dealer has pointed out that because of the gain differential with Linn amps, it would not be possible to use Tundras if I went active with Klimax xovers and my 350s as there is no way to adjust the gain on the bass drivers as they have there own amp built into the speakers.
ThomasOK wrote:Interesting post Flatcoat and good to hear another music lover who puts the Tundra up with the Klimax amps (and a v1.0 at that). I did want to correct a couple of things in your post, however. The Tundra is 24 Watts continuous per channel at 8 Ohms, 20Hz to 20kHz at the rated distortion of less than .1% THD (as amps are supposed to be specified, at least in the US to meet FTC rules). The Chakra Twin is rated at 200 Watts into 4 Ohms - it is only rated 100 Watts into 8 Ohms and the ratings on the Linn data sheet do not state whether they are continuous and what the frequency range and distortion specs are for the rated power. As such it is really impossible to compare actual power even if these specs meant anything (since the specs are generally static and music is dynamic the specs don't really tell you how loud an amp will play).
More importantly, however, the difference in the volume setting you have to use has nothing to do with the power rating of the amp. It is caused by the amount of gain in the amplifier which is not tied to the output power (for instance all Linn amps have pretty much the same gain regardless of output power). The gain on a Chakra Twin is 28.6dB whereas the gain on the Tundra is 20.8dB. This means that you will have to turn up the Tundra close to 8dB for it to play at the same level. At that level it will be putting out the same actual musical power as the Twin at the 8dB lower level. In actual practice I have found, both by ear and using a dB meter, that the Tundra needs to be turned up 7.5dB to 8dB depending on which Klimax amp you are comparing it to in order to put out the same dB level from the speakers. So your about 9 higher is pretty close.
I have been using Tundra (s) in my main system (KDS1/KK1/350ps) for a couple weeks now and am absolutely astounded by how good it sounds. I have tried using 2 Tundras as well but found it to be only marginally better than using a single one.
Yesterday I connected some Ninkas I am selling for a friend to my main system - KDS1/KK1 and a single Tundra. The speakers were sitting unspiked on the floor in front of my 350ps so not exactly ideal ! Anyway, they sounded absolutely stunning even in comparison to the 350s. When you consider that the 350ps are worth about £12000 and the Ninkas £400, the latter are riddiculously good value for money. I used Ninkas a long time ago with CD12/5103/Solos and it was one of the better systems I have owned. So my respect for the Tundra is only going up and up when I hear a relatively cheap, admittedly high end system sound this good.
My plans for my 350's are to go active with 4 KCTDs and Klimax xovers but now feel that 4 Tundras instead will be the way to go instead. However, as previously posted this is not an option because of the gain differential with Linn amps, it would not be possible to use Tundras if I went active with Klimax xovers and my 350s as there is no way to adjust the gain on the bass drivers as they have there own amp built into the speakers. The same would apply to active Komris.
Using Tundras with other active Linn speakers like the 242s/Keltiks etc is no problem as there is no bass amp in the speakers.
Yesterday I connected some Ninkas I am selling for a friend to my main system - KDS1/KK1 and a single Tundra. The speakers were sitting unspiked on the floor in front of my 350ps so not exactly ideal ! Anyway, they sounded absolutely stunning even in comparison to the 350s. When you consider that the 350ps are worth about £12000 and the Ninkas £400, the latter are riddiculously good value for money. I used Ninkas a long time ago with CD12/5103/Solos and it was one of the better systems I have owned. So my respect for the Tundra is only going up and up when I hear a relatively cheap, admittedly high end system sound this good.
My plans for my 350's are to go active with 4 KCTDs and Klimax xovers but now feel that 4 Tundras instead will be the way to go instead. However, as previously posted this is not an option because of the gain differential with Linn amps, it would not be possible to use Tundras if I went active with Klimax xovers and my 350s as there is no way to adjust the gain on the bass drivers as they have there own amp built into the speakers. The same would apply to active Komris.
Using Tundras with other active Linn speakers like the 242s/Keltiks etc is no problem as there is no bass amp in the speakers.
-
rowlandhills
- Very active member
- Posts: 582
- Joined: 2008-01-27 19:25
- Location: York, UK
Does not that apply also when in passive configuration?Flatcoat wrote:I am not an expert but from what I understand there is not enough adjustment available.
rowlandhills wrote:How much level adjustment is there on the KXOs and on the bass for the 350s?
Can you adjust the bass down 4dB and the other channels up 4dB, for example?
Apparently not as the bass signal is sourced from the speaker cable. If there was a problem, 350s could only be used passively with Linn amps which is not the case.
hcl wrote:Does not that apply also when in passive configuration?Flatcoat wrote:I am not an expert but from what I understand there is not enough adjustment available.
rowlandhills wrote:How much level adjustment is there on the KXOs and on the bass for the 350s?
Can you adjust the bass down 4dB and the other channels up 4dB, for example?
Flatcoat, are you not tempted to just forget about aktiv and invest the funds elsewhere? Perhaps a Harmoni Mimer rack? Or perhaps your listening room could be improved? Seems an awful lot of money to invest for questionable results. Anthony's aktiv Klimax setup sounded great, but I can't say I really enjoyed it more than a couple of Solos or the Tundra. And he invested a lot of time getting the setup right.
Ofcourse. Thanks!Flatcoat wrote:Apparently not as the bass signal is sourced from the speaker cable. If there was a problem, 350s could only be used passively with Linn amps which is not the case.
hcl wrote:Does not that apply also when in passive configuration?Flatcoat wrote:I am not an expert but from what I understand there is not enough adjustment available.