KEL84 v KT88

[Bonky]

Despite my being very pleased with my KEL84 I'm always wondering whether I should have bought the KT88. My speakers are very efficient so have no trouble driving them to normal listening levels, but can anyone describe the subjective and objective differences between the two amps please?

(I'm asking partly as I'm considering making some IPL Acoustics transmission-line speakers).

Thanks.

[Cycleallday]

I first got to listen to them both when Peter was running WD and he described them as having a similar sound but but the KT88 having more muscle and drive. That is essentially what I heard.

After having a KT88 based amp for many years I replaced it recently with a KEL84 and find it just as detailed and enjoyable to listen to but with just a little more polite sound.

I changed because my (Quad)) based KT88 was exchanged for a Naim Atom and I bought the Kel84 on a whim as I have a soft spot for valves and needed a small amp for another room.

If I had a choice again I would pick the KEL84 and pocket the difference in price as the music enjoyment is not impacted enough to bother me.

Mel

[Bonky]

Thanks for that; appreciated.

[bob orbell]

Hi Bonky, yes I agree with Mel, but, the WA88 is almost totally silent compared to to the KEL which dose have a small, but to me, annoying hum. BOB

[Phil Y]

I never had any hum problems with my KEL84, it was dead quiet. Unless you mean mechanical transformer noise BOB but that was cured by mounting the mains transformer on rubber grommets.

As to sound, I have a KaT88 so not the same, but assuming it is not hugely dissimilar to the current amp, I found it to have a crisper, cleaner sort of sound than the KEL84. My 84' was warmer in the midrange, more mellifluous. The more important difference (to me) was the bass, the 88' definitely having a deeper, more muscular bass and also more general "wallop" when required.
Although I consider the KaT88 to be a better amp, whether it was worthwhile upgrading would depend more on musical taste and the speakers being used I would say.

Phil.

[bob orbell]

Hi Phil, I have listened to quite a few KEL's, KAT and KIT 6550's and all but none had a small amount of hum, I put it down to the ECF 80's, I had a KEL that I salvaged from the skip at WD, yes, it was very good and musical, but as I have said, a small amount of hum, my WD WA88 is very quite, and I think that it is down to the better front end. BOB I stand corrected, said the man in orthopaedic shoes.

[Bonky]

Thanks everyone; much appreciated.

I was wondering if the KT88s would be better at handling transmission line speakers better than the KEL84s. (The IPL speakers I've got my eyes on are of lower efficiency that my present LivingVoice ones).

I know that Bob isn't too keen...


Thanks

Richard.


See: https://iplacoustics.co.uk/S2TLK%20Ribbon.htm

[Richard]

Hi All, yes agreed with everyone so far.


I've owned Kit88 and WD88 and had a couple of Kel84 here for a listen over the years into previous Pro9TL transmission line speakers. Kel84 is a little more polite, the 88's have more grunt if volume is your thing. All drove those large 84dB/W TLs fine up to high levels in a largish room.


A benefit of TLs is the control/damping the cabinet puts on the bass drive units making for excellent bass from most amps in most rooms. I'd say if you fancy the IPLs go for them as KEL84 shouldn't be a problem but why not drop IPL a line

[Phil Y]

Ah, Richard beat me to it but I agree.

By all means speak to IPL but unless you listen at nightclub volume I'm sure the combination will be fine. Don't complicate the issue by changing 2 things at once. If you fancy the IPLs then get them and have a good listen. If you decided that they are keepers, then and only then, will you be in a position to asses whether they might benefit from the more powerful amp.

Phil.

[Bonky]

Thanks everyone...all duly noted!

Best Wishes,

Richard.