Tubes.....and the Jerks that use them.

[fancynapkin 10+ year member]

Dismissing tube amps as "higher distortion" and "colored" is a simplistic argument. And as such, it's frequently false.
When comparing two amps, there's a very useful test called "distortion spectrum test". Basically, it's NOT only HOW MUCH distortion, it's HOW MANY harmonics the distortion typically shows up in.

The human ear is very tolerant of low-order harmonics (ie, second, third, fourth harmonics)... but higher order harmonics (8th, 9th, 10th, and so on) can be heard/sensed in VERY SMALL quantities... and are usually regarded as a "harsh" or "gritty" sound.

While tube amps have more second and third harmonic distortion, the distortion spectrum goes VERY RAPIDLY to zero. It's rare to have significant higher harmonics present, at anything other than HARD CLIPPING. OTOH, there's LOTS of solid state amps (fortunately, not as much as it was, even 5 to 10 years ago) that exhibit SIGNIFICANT, AUDIBLE amounts of higher harmonics, EVEN AT LOW LISTENING LEVELS, due to non-linearities in the transistors themselves that CANNOT be completely corrected by feedback. Feedback is good at correcting lower harmonics (lower frequency, less bandwidth required by the feedback circuit) than they are at correcting higher harmonics (where the frequencies sometimes EXCEED the bandwidth that the feedback loop can correct, due to time delays in the return path).

As I mentioned, there ARE better semiconductors now... and REALLY GOOD solid state designs (high-end stuff, for the most part) can be VERY clean/transparent/smooth sounding. But MANY amp designs out there (especially on mid-priced stuff) are based on older technology... and still have some of the same problems...

So, don't fall into the trap of "it measures better, it MUST sound better". You've gotta be careful of WHAT they're measuring, and HOW they're measuring it!!

Regards,

Gordon.

I mean, there isn't really an argument, tube amps have more distortion than their solid state counter parts. There are reasons why tubes are obsolete.

Heres a good article thats sure to piss off a few: http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf

10 biggest lies in audio. yes, tube amps are listed.

Sound quality is obtained almost entirely quantitatively, its the ability to reproduce recordings accurately.

But some simply enjoy the sound of tubes more. There is more to a hifi system than having ruler flat response curves, people want to appreciate the music, and if that means inaccuracy, so be it.

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

That article is one of the biggest jokes around.

Sound quality is obtained almost entirely quantitatively,

So why can't I go to a SQ show and be judged exactly the same, every time, if I haven't changed a thing? By your logic, IASCA judges are incompetent nincompoops that shouldn't be allowed to step in people's cars, if SQ really is an absolute.

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

Want articles? Read these: //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

http://www.furious.com/perfect/vinyl49.html

http://www.furious.com/perfect/vinyl38.html

http://www.furious.com/perfect/vinyl52.html

I don't agree with him on his opinions on direct drive turntables, but those are worth the read.

 

[fancynapkin 10+ year member]

That article is one of the biggest jokes around.
So why can't I go to a SQ show and be judged exactly the same, every time, if I haven't changed a thing? By your logic, IASCA judges are incompetent nincompoops that shouldn't be allowed to step in people's cars, if SQ really is an absolute.

Did it make laugh at how much money you wasted on overpriced hifi equipment?

The IASCA isn't judging how accurate your stereo is, they are measuring how much it pleases the judges.

You can call it an "SQ show" all you want, but it doesnt make it so.

Someone once said, "the reproduction of music is not subjective, the appreciation of it is"

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

Did it make laugh at how much money you wasted on overpriced hifi equipment?

What tubed setup have you heard?

Because if you haven't...what basis do you have to make any sort of judgement about this sort of thing? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

Most people seem to misunderstand the applicability of an ABX test.
Even David Clark, the INVENTOR of the modern ABX test, had to admit to Gary Galo at the 1991 AES meeting, that an ABX test CANNOT rule out differences between equipment... only that the ABX can only CONFIRM a difference. In other words, there is NO WAY an ABX test can prove a negative result. These are FUNDAMENTAL LIMITATIONS of the ABX methodology.There are quite possibly differences that are beyond the scope of the limited test specifications. These limitations of ABX testing have been known in audio engineering circles, for at least the last 16 years.

Besides, the "apples to apples" test requirements fly in the face of reality anyhow. NOT ALL AMPS actually HAVE the same frequency response... and once you put an EQ in line with one amp to compensate for another, all bets are off anyway, due to the addition of the "sonic signature" of the EQ itserlf. And ,the difference between noise floor behaviour is not something to be IGNORED, but one of the PRIME REASONS people pick one amp design over another.

In addition, the "no clipping" requirements of the ABX test methodology mentioned above, fly in the face of VIRTUALLy ALL real-world music listening. Unless you have THOUSANDS of watts and/or VERY EFFICIENT speakers (ie, 95 dB sensitivity or higher, you WILL instantaneously clip MOST ANY amp on transients. Most "live" music (ie, recordings without excessive compression) have 30-40 dB "crest factor"... ie, if you're listening to an average of 80 dB, you have PEAKS of 110 dB or higher. It's not PERCIEVED to be that loud on average... because, the average level IS only around 80 dB. But, the AMP sees that 110 dB peak as 1000X the power demand, of the 80 dB nominal level... and voila, momentary clipping.

In short, one of the fundamental problems in modern society is the tendency to over-simplfy issues... which is bad enough when it's simply politics or day-to-day social behaviour. But when such over-simplification invades science, it's a bad day for science...

Regards,

Gordon.

http://forum.elitecaraudio.com/showthread.php?threadid=123226&pagenumber=1

 

[Beat_Dominator 5,000+ posts]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Squeak is alway good for that link.

 

[squeak9798 5,000+ posts]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif Squeak is alway good for that link.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[smd4life 5,000+ posts]

:fyi:skweek>everyone:fyi:

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

There aren't any contributing factors to the "sound" of an amplifier that are not comprehended in the classic amp measurements (enumerated above). If amps sound different, it's because of a significant, measureable difference in one of these categories.

I don't have any problem with that statement. So yes, you could theoretically take a SS amp and get something that sounds indistinguishable from a tube amp, if you could produce the harmonics in the same way. But would it be the same?

#1 they are classic and are more of an art form than other styles of amplifiers or equipment...
#3, I like projects, older tube amps make very cool and fun projects to restore and are a great conversation item

#4 the warm glow gives me a warm and fuzzy hahaha.

You still don't get that with shiny little black boxes //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[Beat_Dominator 5,000+ posts]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/inlove.gif.6846f78f06b405429ef3a00129788a2a.gif

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

Look what you've created, Evan...

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

[creyc 10+ year member]

What's with the not-so-subtle Corvette reference in this thread?

A $65,000 car that wins the LeMans in its class sounds like a pretty **** fine driving machine to me. Then again it may not have the "cool" points of its slower Aston Martin competition... :\

I dont understand you, Beat_Dominator.

 

[ballstothewall 10+ year member]

You still don't get that with shiny little black boxes //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Shiny BIG black boxes thank you. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

In a pounds-per-watt comparison...they're teeny //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif