![]() Transformer coupled so it could drive low-Z cans as well.įrom the preference of sound, I do think they’re similar. Rolling in a good 274B tube could further improve soundstage depth and overall detail. (The LF339 comes with Chinese NOS tubes that I’d definitely swap out immediately) Dual mono design may be good or bad to some but I won’t be bothered too much and I see it as a plus if the tubes are unbalanced. The LF339 is OTL so I would take it over the WA6 if I were listening exclusively to the High-Z Senns. However I would like the LF339 with a general warm and darker sound. Rolling in higher quality tubes could improve soundstage depth, detail and probably even out the frequency curve to suit your tastes. The Sophia Electric 274B tube available as an upgrade option for the WA6 however is good enough given the price, just depends on how much are you willing to spend on the rolling. More tubes to roll however the price of two higher quality NOS 6AS7 and 6J4P family of tubes prices are still lower than that of a single rare 274B rectifier tube used on the WA6. ![]() I’ve only tried the LF339 myself, although I might happen to just go for a spin on the WA6 when I get the chance down at the stores. has A-Bed them but from their description they’re probably similar in sound. I don’t think anyone can give you a straight answer since neither Mike or L. WA6 is (probably) somewhat cleaner sounding, but still very rich. The sound characteristics could be described as warm, lively with good deep bass. LF339 is a OTL amp design so it’s not as good for low Z gear. The LF339 is probably slightly more thicker than the WA6. One thing for sure that these are moderate paced amps good for Jazz, Classical and Audiophile vocal. the LF339 so he can’t give you a direct comparison. They’re both tuned very well for the high-Z HD650.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |