Engineering vs. Tube Rolling.

[Deleted]

There is a very interesting discussion at the attached link.
The author's view is basically similar to my own, regarding Solid State amplification.
SandyK

www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=bf27a8c33a40623d7f659e48ee502e7f&postid=1520544#post1520544

[insanitybeard]

Alex, many good points made there. I'm no expert, for the most part I just enjoy some intimacy with my music and appreciate having a setup which gives me a decent and expansive sound when I do listen. It's such a subjective topic! It's like the cd/vinyl and analogue/digital debate. Technology "advances", but it seems not always for the better, I was reading the CD history thread earlier and that's a classic case. And then there's the argument of what's a "better" or more acccurate sound technically may not be as engaging or enjoyable to a listener......... you are far more knowledgeable on this subject than me, and the stuff I've said here has no doubt been said countless times before. Forgive my ramblings, sometimes I get myself tied in knots with the whole x is better than y thing. I doubt sometimes my hearing is good enough to detect the difference!

[rickcr42]

www.soundstage.com/noisy04.htm

funny how 'tube rolling" is somehow looked down on yet it is usually the same crowd having no problem with op-amp "rolling' or capacitor "rolling" ,discrete transistor "rolling" or hell even resistor "rolling".

It is also my personal experience most who go to great lengths to crap on anything not inline with their already pre-conceived notions of what is right in audio usually go to the opinion of others to make THEIR point rather than do an honest head to head trial.Reading abourt how something sounds never tells you anything other than what the writer of the piece wants to convince you of so will scew the results or flat out dismiss evidence on grounds of prejudice and no more.

I personally use what works in the particular situation so may go from triodes to solid state or even hybrids and will use anything from DC coupling to transformers to couipling caps without losing ANY sleep while some will have such tunnel vision they will many times destroy any chance a circuit has to sound good in a single minded goal to NOT try any other way (for instance the lengths some go to to avoid a coupling cap even IF the simple circuit with cap sounds miles ahead of the other on SQ merit)

Audio snobbery works not only in price class but it is obvious in topology choices as well which is fine with me because i will continue to pursue music in my home and not killer specs just to prove a point thatno one can hear anyway

rickamundo out

[Deleted]

It is also my personal experience most who go to great lengths to crap on anything not inline with their already pre-conceived notions of what is right in audio usually go to the opinion of others to make THEIR point rather than do an honest head to head trial.Reading abourt how something sounds never tells you anything other than what the writer of the piece wants to convince you of so will scew the results or flat out dismiss evidence on grounds of prejudice and no more.

Rick
I only posted the link to stimulate discussion. Just as in the vinyl vs. CD discussion, there are good valid points on both sides.
Part of me, is wishing that I hadn't disposed of my old turntable !With Audio, there is never a clearly defined path to follow that which will always give the best results. I thought the technical arguments presented by both sides may have been of interest to people like yourself, who have vastly more recent hands on experience with valves than I have, and in the case of members who are also members of DiyAudio, perhaps contribute to the debate.
Alex

[rickcr42]

the "valve" is an amplifying device just like any other but being very expensive to to use correctly plus is about as inefficient as an audio technology can be there was and still is a search for a replacement that will be cheaper to build,cheaper to use,generate less heat and use less power in the kilowatt/hour sense and why first we had the transistor,then the monolithics and now mostly switching supplies and digital amps at the mainstream consumer level.

Like with other such things that are a tad expensive to implement,to purchase and to keep running in optimum condition (such as a car with a pure kill power gas sucking V8 rat engine) many would rather accept lesser performance if it means an equal or greater cost savings or is less hassle to keep and use and has NOTHING to do with ultimate Sq or we would all be listening to well designed triode gear or pure class-a solid state driving large cabinet full range speakers systems leaving the rest for table radios and boom boxes.

again.economics is driving the middle of the market not quality.You look to the "ULTRA" high end and you see what ?

a good 85-95% inhabited by analog sources and tube based electronics driving highly accurate and highly efficient full range "speakers as furniture" cabinets.

you can't FAKE real power though we try using extremely compresed recordings giving the appearance of volume and dynamic range then we drive very inefficient loudspeakers having highly complex crossovers (mostly) and having woofers FAR too small to move any actual air so they need to jam in a bass hump for the everpopular "psychoacoustic" bass and who will then show all manner of charts stating why this SOUNDS good and why any other method does not it being ancient technology and this cutting edge but you know what ?

more than one person has walked away muttering to themselves (with the occasional I AM AN IDIOT heard 0 once they have actually HEARD a well set up tube based system 'cause bubba,these are not your grandfathers tube amps,not by a damn sight are they.

Modern materials and outlaws who seek perfection have taken what was once considered "yeah it sounds nice and all,warm and fuzzy aint gonna kill anyone" to SOTA levels that only the rarest and most expensive sand electronics can tough and even then it becomes more of a ying/yang thing with the choices where you like your music and those usually SS winning in plumbing the depths though mating both VT & SS comes damn close) and overall linearity to system "bloom" where everyying just sounds so damn NATURAL you can't imagine ever going back to technically accurate on paper-a thing that rarely if ever transfers over into sonic quality.

So it is not that i like tube gear just because but that i have come BACK to it because it has been improved to the point at the upper levels where it supercededs the very technology that it was superceded by.

called "finishing"' a technology rather than always dashing off to the next new thing that by its very newness can NOT be competitive head to head but that if enough effort over time is placed on may come close.

Give me triodes driving a BIG horn loaded box and a TRUE subwoofer,one that has a passband of say 18hz-40Hz and driven with enough juice to not compress the peaks (something like 350 watts just for an octave ) and having an all analog front end using quality software and that is properly set-up and THEN maintained and i would die today a happy man........listening as i went and likely smiling

Cheers bo

rick out

[dotnet]

I agree. Valves/tubes do sound more natural to me as well, especially in output stages. The total amount of distortions maybe (is!) higher than those you get from a good solid state amp, but they're the nicer kind. The correct set of harmonics, not what bipolar transistors tend to produce.

I believe we perceive this as more pleasant since distortions that happen to sound in the world around us (when sound gets diffracted around obstacles, or reflected, for example) are of the same kind. Even though they are distortions at the end of the day they seem to enhance the sound, because they make what comes out of the loudspeaker sound more familiar and "right".

Just my humble opinion.

Cheers
Steffen.

[rickcr42]

well there are distortions and there are distortions

the deal is some types just rub us the wrong way so even in tiny amounts will sound bad while others do no harmonic butchering so even in what could be considered large amounts do not take away from the music.

recently,can't remember where,I read an article where tests were done that certain types of distortion could not even be heard at the 10% level ( ) while others at a below one percentage were readily recognized by the listeners who had no clue what they were hearing so a valid test.

It has also been proven over the years that the rush to get distortion levels down to the vanishing point ON PAPER have and do produce some of the worst sounding audio gear known to humans an event that a lab rat or a spec whore just can't live with because if they can't measure it and make it do what they want then it just is not there and so MUST be someone's over imagination at work even when they too have heard the very same thing.

The figures MUST equate to the sound quality right ?


The history of audio is full of "improvements" that are in fact a step back but because those commited to the technlogy can not accept the break between what the paperwork says and what they hear they either refuse to even accept the facts OR set out to design a whole new generation of test equipment to find out what went wrong the present gear not telling them,then upon finding what they tHINK is the problem publish in all the audio journals about their "new' discovery,a new and before unknown form of distortion that they will in fact name thus receiving fame through being a screwup who never even had the sense to use the best set of test gear ever invented : the Human Ears

[dotnet]

Yes, enjoyable music reproduction is the product of good engineering *and* an understanding of psychoacoustics. The latter is far less developed than the former, hence we concentrate on perfecting the engineering side of things (which is not wrong or bad in itself). However, by perfecting in areas we do understand we may ruin things in areas we don't.

BTW, I'd love to know how much distortion is added when sound gets reflected around the ear and down the ear canal.

Cheers
Steffen.

[rickcr42]

BTW, I'd love to know how much distortion is added when sound gets reflected around the ear and down the ear canal.

no you don't man.That kind of knowing is dangerous

[rickcr42]

just as a conversation piece :

Ever notice that if you play an identical recording on two different systems or even two idenitcal systems but in different rooms the two will sound totally different and that notwithstanding this difference we STILL can identift immediately who the artist is if we are familiar with that persons work.

for instance.Take a Cd of "Animals" (that one's for you mikester ),play it on every system in your house including portables then take it outside and play it in the car.

Now is there ANY doubt in your mind who the artist is ? Is any single one of your systems so bad you can't even recognize and identift voices ?

I think not so that leaves us with the fact that no two systems ANYWHERE (including headphone based unless you are an identical twin with identical head size and ear size ) will sound 100% alike yet we are supposed to be held to a standard of what is quality heard on someone elses system in their preferred setting according to what THEY think is correct tonally !

How lame is that ?

looking for some form of "accuracy" in a world and medium that is anything but once it leaves the world of electronic testing and into the world of LISTENING is pointless if you can not 100% accurately duplicate what another person will be hearing (surgery is involved also )

Ad to that many systems are chosen solely on data sheets and not inter-system synergy and it is a wonder we don't mostly run from the room screaming in pain but the truth is we do not and even a bottom feeder system is listenable if the music itself is good.

So why bother at all ?

Because what separates the good from the bad and the great from the good is in the details (NOT detail but THE details) and that is the gear that fills in the blanks,the missing parts like ambience,low level LIFE instead of just "yup.it is there",that adds in the stuff between the stuff the lesser systems have no shot at retreiving then reproducing.

If you find you MUST turn your system up louder than you may really have wanted to because it sounds lifeless and "artificial" when played low then yoyr system flat out can not resolve low level detail because i gotta tell you even the soft parts of a performance are PART of the performance and if recorded should be reproduced with equal fidelity as the loud parts and that without pissing off the neighbors



...of course that goes to music with an actual dynamic range not the overcompressed crap they pass off as music these days which ifwe are lucky has a range of 50dB meaining loud or soft,all the same damn thing.

BORING

[Deleted]

I agree. Valves/tubes do sound more natural to me as well, especially in output stages. The total amount of distortions maybe (is!) higher than those you get from a good solid state amp, but they're the nicer kind. The correct set of harmonics, not what bipolar transistors tend to produce.

Steffen
You obviously haven't heard a decent solid state Class A amplifier
Hopefully, one day not too far away, Leo will compare his 15W/Ch. Class A amplifier with a pile of valve amplifiers at his local meeting.
What you 2 valve lovers need to achknowledge, is that both valve amplifiers AND solid state amplifiers ,are both capable of further improvement.

Alex

[leo]

Yes, should be interesting, almost all of them are silicon haters too
Must admit though some of the weird and wonderful looking valve creations with their insane voltages do sound bloody good though.
Some are just impractical for everyday use, especially if you have kids or things like cats ever seen National lampoons Christmas

[Deleted]

Must admit though some of the weird and wonderful looking valve creations with their insane voltages do sound bloody good though.

Leo
I bet that the overall cost of the very best ones are MANY times more than the cost of building yours! Not to say , MANY times more bulky, and I imagine, in many cases NOT lounge room candidates for anyone but a single or divorced male ?

Alex

[leo]

Jun 13, 2008 22:14:02 GMT @sandyk said:

Must admit though some of the weird and wonderful looking valve creations with their insane voltages do sound bloody good though.

Leo
I bet that the overall cost of the very best ones are MANY times more than the cost of building yours! Not to say , MANY times more bulky, and I imagine, in many cases NOT lounge room candidates for anyone but a single or divorced male ?

Alex

Damn right mate!
Some of those valves alone are hugely expensive and rare as rocking horse shit! not good when they finally need replacing

[Deleted]

Steffen
If you are ever in the vicinity of Ryde (Sydney) you are welcome to judge for yourself if there really is a gap between the performance of both technologies.You would need to rely on memory for the performance of a good valve amplifier, though.

Alex

[leo]

After hearing lots of valve amps I was only VERY impressed with a few of them, 90% sounded poor to my ears.
Whatever floats your boat I guess, most was just super sweet midrange even into high efficiency horns, worked nice with some music but fell short with anything complex, just IMO of course


None of those SET amps would be really suitable for my speakers anyway, I've got a set a set of mullard EL34's and GEC KT88's boxed up under the bed sat next to my PP valve amp gathering dust, its been a while since I've used it

[dotnet]

Jun 13, 2008 21:39:54 GMT @sandyk said:

You obviously haven't heard a decent solid state Class A amplifier

Hah, I own a decent solid state class A amplifier

What you 2 valve lovers need to achknowledge, is that both valve amplifiers AND solid state amplifiers ,are both capable of further improvement.

No problem acknowledging that! I was just trying to rationalise why tube amps, measuring worse in many cases, can actually sound better. This is what perplexes most people. I'm not saying there aren't any good solid state amps. Of course, a really good solid state amp avoids bipolars in the first place and uses FETs...


Cheers
Steffen.

[Deleted]

Of course, a really good solid state amp avoids bipolars in the first place and uses FETs...

Steffen
With all due respects, BULLSHIT ! ;D
Alex

[pagan]

Jun 14, 2008 4:47:52 GMT @sandyk said:

Of course, a really good solid state amp avoids bipolars in the first place and uses FETs...

Steffen
With all due respects, BULLSHIT ! ;D
Alex

Alex
I gather that you disagree

allan

[Deleted]

Allan
Did I see any FETS in your 20W Class A Power Amplifier, or your 100W/Ch Class AB ? Perhaps I missed them?
Alex


Steffen
Just in case you think I am knocking FETS without trying them, have a look at the attached link, from post 17 onwards.
I also built the AEM6000 240W /Ch. design by David Tilbrook.
Alex

www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=103649&perpage=25&highlight=&pagenumber=1

[pagan]

Alex
I could put some in there if you want

allan

[Deleted]

Allan
email sent re your 20W/Ch. Class A.
Alex

[rowuk]

Jun 13, 2008 16:51:26 GMT dotnet said:

Yes, enjoyable music reproduction is the product of good engineering *and* an understanding of psychoacoustics. The latter is far less developed than the former, hence we concentrate on perfecting the engineering side of things (which is not wrong or bad in itself). However, by perfecting in areas we do understand we may ruin things in areas we don't.

BTW, I'd love to know how much distortion is added when sound gets reflected around the ear and down the ear canal.

Cheers
Steffen.

If we use Paul Klipschs definition of distortion "audible frequencies not in the original sonic event", there is no added distortion through the ear canal.

As our reference for audio IS our ears and our sound perception is the synergy between face/head/ear shape and the remaining quality of our ear drums as well as the analytical power of our brain, any theoretical distortion in that system is insignificant as it is present for "real" and recorded music.

One interesting fact is that our ability to perceive imaging is proportional to the recording meeting the expectations of the brain. If I take a high quality recording and during playback add or subtract some range of frequencies, the image quality gets worse. THAT is why properly set up speakers image better - the frequency response is more even.