Hi,
If you did not notice, I was being ironic.
Both Wavebourne and myself are big on Tubes (and we know that of each other - as for me, read my Sig!).
However this "what is fidelity" stuff was mainly in response to to the moronic debunker type's assertions above as to what is "High Fidelity" and he especially noted that the only reason people bought tube amp's because they where NOT "High Fidelity".
So, seeing a Tube Amp in Wavebourne's "recreation of the real" I could not help but using Irony. People from former Eastern Block (like He and Me) are especially big on Irony, as it was often the only way could say something meaningful without falling foul of the secret police. Seems it is needed again in these forums as well...
Ciao T
If you did not notice, I was being ironic.
Both Wavebourne and myself are big on Tubes (and we know that of each other - as for me, read my Sig!).
However this "what is fidelity" stuff was mainly in response to to the moronic debunker type's assertions above as to what is "High Fidelity" and he especially noted that the only reason people bought tube amp's because they where NOT "High Fidelity".
So, seeing a Tube Amp in Wavebourne's "recreation of the real" I could not help but using Irony. People from former Eastern Block (like He and Me) are especially big on Irony, as it was often the only way could say something meaningful without falling foul of the secret police. Seems it is needed again in these forums as well...
Ciao T
Hi,
Fairly dry studio recordings playing in a live room with the musician's also in the same room when they are playing can work quite well too...
If recordings are made with fairly close positioning of directional Mikes, they tend to be fairly dry anyway... So this also allows for the recording to be made in the same room as the playback and give realism.
Far-field placement of the Microphones (e.g. Decca Style or ORTF) are less suited to such an experiment, even if it makes actually for recordings that are subjectively more "realistic" if done right.
Ciao T
Fairly dry studio recordings playing in a live room with the musician's also in the same room when they are playing can work quite well too...
If recordings are made with fairly close positioning of directional Mikes, they tend to be fairly dry anyway... So this also allows for the recording to be made in the same room as the playback and give realism.
Far-field placement of the Microphones (e.g. Decca Style or ORTF) are less suited to such an experiment, even if it makes actually for recordings that are subjectively more "realistic" if done right.
Ciao T
Hi,
This principle is well known as the "missing fundamental Effect".
It is often exploited by HK Audiophiles who, due to living in tiny Flats have a tendency to tether small monitors (of the BBC LS3/5 style) with no bass and low efficiency to moderate power SE Amplifiers and high gain tube amp's.
The soft clipping tends to compress extreme peaks and in the small rooms you do not notice the SPL Limits much, anyway, playing very loud annoys the neighbours with the think walls...
The high distortion at LF of the output stage loaded by the typically low primary inductance of the output transformer produced a lot of harmonics from the Bass fundamentals neither Amp nor Speaker can reproduce, yet due to the "missing fundamental" effect it seems subjectively that the LF is much more extended and low reaching than the neighbours would normally stand for.
Is such a system HiFi? No. To me, using really good recordings it sounds compressed and dynamically challenged and the Bass lacks impact, however in the given constraints it is a very inspired use of "problems" to get surprisingly good results...
Try playing a pair of big full range speakers in the same room and at the same midrange SPL and the Neighbours pull your fuses out within 10 minutes, if you really annoyed them I hear they will actually hide them...
Ciao T
This principle is well known as the "missing fundamental Effect".
It is often exploited by HK Audiophiles who, due to living in tiny Flats have a tendency to tether small monitors (of the BBC LS3/5 style) with no bass and low efficiency to moderate power SE Amplifiers and high gain tube amp's.
The soft clipping tends to compress extreme peaks and in the small rooms you do not notice the SPL Limits much, anyway, playing very loud annoys the neighbours with the think walls...
The high distortion at LF of the output stage loaded by the typically low primary inductance of the output transformer produced a lot of harmonics from the Bass fundamentals neither Amp nor Speaker can reproduce, yet due to the "missing fundamental" effect it seems subjectively that the LF is much more extended and low reaching than the neighbours would normally stand for.
Is such a system HiFi? No. To me, using really good recordings it sounds compressed and dynamically challenged and the Bass lacks impact, however in the given constraints it is a very inspired use of "problems" to get surprisingly good results...
Try playing a pair of big full range speakers in the same room and at the same midrange SPL and the Neighbours pull your fuses out within 10 minutes, if you really annoyed them I hear they will actually hide them...
Ciao T
Hi,
The Speakers are also reasonably directional. And the distance to the audience quite large in both cases... I should know, I designed the system and took the picture... ;-)
It really worked surprisingly well, then again a single solo clarinette is perhaps not much of an achievement.
Ciao T
The Speakers are also reasonably directional. And the distance to the audience quite large in both cases... I should know, I designed the system and took the picture... ;-)
It really worked surprisingly well, then again a single solo clarinette is perhaps not much of an achievement.
Ciao T
This is a good point, but it is a half of the story: for realistic reproduction phase shift on lows due to time constants of coupling capacitances, inductances, speakers is mode damaging than transformer core saturation.
Core saturation works like a guillotine instead of headache pills.
Sorry, irony dosnt come across very well in print. But I still think we disagree. Most tube amps are not HI-FI if your definition of it is signal out =signal in x gain. Most tube amps colour the sound more than SS amps. (output transformer). And its audible, or people would not prefer them. Every day I read this forum my belief that people dont want "wire with gain" grows. People love tube amps even though the distortion is much higher A $250k tube amp with 1% distortion "sounds unbelievably good" while Hi-Fi is "sterile,cold,uninvolving" and accurate and distortion free. You cant have it both ways.
And for the umpteenth time, Just because "you" think an amp sounds better, more realistic, blah blah blah dose not mean it is more accurate. People love there distortions, recording engineers have known and used this fact for 40 years.
Exactly because presence of harmonics in recognition of sounds is not the same as their waveforms. Phase relationship matters as well. Also, the 3'rd harmonic of 41 Hz is of 123 Hz frequency; it is absent in spectrum of sound with 82 Hz fundamental. Uneven low order harmonics is exactly what saturated transformer adds. Add 123 Hz to 82 Hz, and no doubt you will imagine 41 Hz sound.
Last edited:
Hi,
I am suggesting that this definition you put forward is not actually based on what is needed, on evidence of requirement, but on what can be done.
It is easy to illustrate that several percent THD are inaudible at reasonable SPL's which would well below clipping (see Geddes et al). If this is proven by serious, scientific DB Testing, where does it leave signal out = signal in x gain as requirement?
This a highly illogical and highly unscientific statement.
First, it is easily demonstrated that as long as we are away from clipping levels most tube amplifiers have low enough distortion and wide enough bandwidth as not produce audible degradation.
And claiming the output transformer is the problem merely illustrates an appalling lack of understanding basic electrics and/or an excessive believe in advertising slogans.
The second failing occurs in the conclusions "People would not like tube amp's if they did not colour the sound more than SS Amp's".
It is a conclusion not only not supported by science, it is also deeply illogical, more a reverse application of prejudice to explain (away) observed facts driving the conclusion and not being logically derived from observable facts.
What can be supported from facts at this point is that (some) people prefer tube amps even though the differences in classic metrics in many of these cases do not support audible differences to the solid state options. This then further suggests that either the preference is completely irrational or that it is caused by differences in a metric not covered by classic specifications, but notable by human perception, whatever that may be.
My experience and various personal tests suggest to my personal satisfaction (but not to the levels one should have attained for publications in peer reviewed journals) that the second case is true. I am further supported in that position by a small set of academic research, including Mr. Ackermans extensive Double Blind Test (see also Stereophile "God is in the Nuances for details of the test).
However, I do not claim to have universally applicable, reliable evidence.
Sounds like religion to me. I have no use for that sort of hogwash. But please feel free to hold any beliefs you wish to entertain. Just do not mistake belief for facts.
Of course, other than a transformer (which incidentally CAN have much lower levels of THD and Noise than most solid state active circuits or indeed certain types of low cost resistors or indeed many types of capacitors) there is no such thing as a "wire with gain" anyway, the the point you make is moot and merely self serving.
So, your speakers have 0.01% Distortion, right?
No. They have the usual 0.3 - 1% HD at 1W input in the mid-band and somewhere between 3 to several 100% (this at LF, where distortion products have more level than the fundamental) at rated power, together with several dB compression.
Now where does this leave a tube Amp with an amount of "X" distortion?
If the distortion is much lower than the speaker (not as THD, but for each HD order and for each IMD product) the speakers distortion will mask that of the Amplifier.
If the distortion is comparable with the speaker it may either raise or lower the distortion at the listening position, depening on phase/polarity.
Actually YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
As long as you employ high distortion Speakers; debating amplifier distortion, at least in the context of simple and basic HD/IMD is meaningless.
At least until speakers start approaching such low levels of HD/IMD as most Tube amplifiers, which they currently do not, such debate merely illustrates a complete lack of knowledge of how audio systems operate and work.
Accuracy in amplifier is way overrated, when taken in a system context.
You can debate the impact of amplifier accuracy driving test signals into 8 Ohm loads on a test bench. If you wish the impact of Amplifier accuracy in a HiFi System including speakers you must consider the context.
Otherwise picking bones about a few percent points HD in an amplifier will seem like offering your Brother to help him remove a tiny splinter from his eye, while have a bleedin big tree sticking out of yours...
So I wish you would quite your tiresome and uniformed blathering and instead actually get wise to some of the basic facts of the matter, but I shall not hold my breath.
Ciao T
I am suggesting that this definition you put forward is not actually based on what is needed, on evidence of requirement, but on what can be done.
It is easy to illustrate that several percent THD are inaudible at reasonable SPL's which would well below clipping (see Geddes et al). If this is proven by serious, scientific DB Testing, where does it leave signal out = signal in x gain as requirement?
This a highly illogical and highly unscientific statement.
First, it is easily demonstrated that as long as we are away from clipping levels most tube amplifiers have low enough distortion and wide enough bandwidth as not produce audible degradation.
And claiming the output transformer is the problem merely illustrates an appalling lack of understanding basic electrics and/or an excessive believe in advertising slogans.
The second failing occurs in the conclusions "People would not like tube amp's if they did not colour the sound more than SS Amp's".
It is a conclusion not only not supported by science, it is also deeply illogical, more a reverse application of prejudice to explain (away) observed facts driving the conclusion and not being logically derived from observable facts.
What can be supported from facts at this point is that (some) people prefer tube amps even though the differences in classic metrics in many of these cases do not support audible differences to the solid state options. This then further suggests that either the preference is completely irrational or that it is caused by differences in a metric not covered by classic specifications, but notable by human perception, whatever that may be.
My experience and various personal tests suggest to my personal satisfaction (but not to the levels one should have attained for publications in peer reviewed journals) that the second case is true. I am further supported in that position by a small set of academic research, including Mr. Ackermans extensive Double Blind Test (see also Stereophile "God is in the Nuances for details of the test).
However, I do not claim to have universally applicable, reliable evidence.
Sounds like religion to me. I have no use for that sort of hogwash. But please feel free to hold any beliefs you wish to entertain. Just do not mistake belief for facts.
Of course, other than a transformer (which incidentally CAN have much lower levels of THD and Noise than most solid state active circuits or indeed certain types of low cost resistors or indeed many types of capacitors) there is no such thing as a "wire with gain" anyway, the the point you make is moot and merely self serving.
So, your speakers have 0.01% Distortion, right?
No. They have the usual 0.3 - 1% HD at 1W input in the mid-band and somewhere between 3 to several 100% (this at LF, where distortion products have more level than the fundamental) at rated power, together with several dB compression.
Now where does this leave a tube Amp with an amount of "X" distortion?
If the distortion is much lower than the speaker (not as THD, but for each HD order and for each IMD product) the speakers distortion will mask that of the Amplifier.
If the distortion is comparable with the speaker it may either raise or lower the distortion at the listening position, depening on phase/polarity.
Actually YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
As long as you employ high distortion Speakers; debating amplifier distortion, at least in the context of simple and basic HD/IMD is meaningless.
At least until speakers start approaching such low levels of HD/IMD as most Tube amplifiers, which they currently do not, such debate merely illustrates a complete lack of knowledge of how audio systems operate and work.
Accuracy in amplifier is way overrated, when taken in a system context.
You can debate the impact of amplifier accuracy driving test signals into 8 Ohm loads on a test bench. If you wish the impact of Amplifier accuracy in a HiFi System including speakers you must consider the context.
Otherwise picking bones about a few percent points HD in an amplifier will seem like offering your Brother to help him remove a tiny splinter from his eye, while have a bleedin big tree sticking out of yours...
So I wish you would quite your tiresome and uniformed blathering and instead actually get wise to some of the basic facts of the matter, but I shall not hold my breath.
Ciao T
Hi,
The overtone spectrum of a guitar at the normal "a" is radically different to that of a Bass at the ow "e". If you do not even know that, please do some researxh into musical instruments, music and human perception.
You may wish to peruse Wikipedia on the subject of the Missing Fundamental, for starters.
Ciao T
The overtone spectrum of a guitar at the normal "a" is radically different to that of a Bass at the ow "e". If you do not even know that, please do some researxh into musical instruments, music and human perception.
You may wish to peruse Wikipedia on the subject of the Missing Fundamental, for starters.
Ciao T
Hi,
Please define "low distortion". Low compared exactly to what?
And please justify why to use the comparison standards you suggest, on a basis that will at least have some basic grounding in scientific fact, not in myth and pseudo-religious belief.
Ciao T
Please define "low distortion". Low compared exactly to what?
And please justify why to use the comparison standards you suggest, on a basis that will at least have some basic grounding in scientific fact, not in myth and pseudo-religious belief.
Ciao T
So how can you hear the diff between tube and SS amps?
Or its distortions caused by the transformers and tube circuits. Rupert Neve said his mixing consoles from the 70's were highly coveted (still) because of the custom made transformers on every I/O in the desk.
Heres a fact: 1% distortion
Wheres your facts?
1% of which order, and on which power? It is very significant. Look, I even don't ask why 1, not 0.9, nor 1.1
It is much more than total HD on power before clipping, obtained by measurement on a steady sine tone.
Are you kidding? Did you check references he suggested?
Last edited:
Too categorical
I have participated in recording sessions with them and then later auditioned the masters on my system. This way, it is perhaps a little more possible to assess the overall fidelity of the system, and of individual components within the system.
In my experience, I have found very few SS amps that convey the emotional content as found in the original performance, while I have found more than a few tube amps, which despite adding some "roundness" and "warmth" and "liquidity" were still able to render that emotional content.
On the whole, I have found that the best examples of each type did manage to connect emotionally without excessive coloration. But the fact remains that out of about 10 amps that would make my short list, 6 of them are tube type, 1 is tube/mosfet hybrid, 2 are Tripath ClassD and one is a full-on clone of one of Nelson Pass' amps (which one? F5 maybe?) with super-matched components and caps, etc.
Like you, I find most tube amps to be colored, overly warm, overly liquid, etc. Conversely, I have also heard tube amps that also sounded "sterile,cold, un-involving". But the best of the breed can be utterly transparent, true to the emotional content AND very uncolored.
But, just because I've heard more tube amps do it right, I for one would not go about saying all SS amps sound dry, analytical, sterile, and so on, as I have heard at least two shining examples (the Pass clone and the Virtue Sensation) that get it very close to the "real"thing, and are better than all but two of the tube amps I've heard.
Of the "top 10", some measure with extremely low distortion, some not so much. But what's interesting is that the distortion on the most "real" sounding units is very low at the very low power output, suggesting that Nelson Pass is very much correct and the distortion profile at low power is much more important than what happens at 1W and above.
So now:
I'm curious to find out if you have the chance to listen to a lot of live, un-amplified acoustic music. If you want to be better be able to determine analytically what comes closest to the real thing, then it's almost mandatory to compare to the real thing only. If you do, try the following experiment:
Use recordings of live, un-amplified performances, where you yourself have been present and have clear memory of how it sounded and how it felt to you emotionally. Then while the memory is still "fresh", try the different amps in your system.
If you do this, and you still hold the same opinion about all tubes, I'd be surprised... or maybe not. It could be a matter of preference.
At that point....De gustibus non est disputandum.
Your statement seems rather categorical, and for the most part I find it not to be the case. My reference is LIVE, acoustic, un-amplified music. I regularly listen to local artists who play a variety of instruments.
I have participated in recording sessions with them and then later auditioned the masters on my system. This way, it is perhaps a little more possible to assess the overall fidelity of the system, and of individual components within the system.
In my experience, I have found very few SS amps that convey the emotional content as found in the original performance, while I have found more than a few tube amps, which despite adding some "roundness" and "warmth" and "liquidity" were still able to render that emotional content.
On the whole, I have found that the best examples of each type did manage to connect emotionally without excessive coloration. But the fact remains that out of about 10 amps that would make my short list, 6 of them are tube type, 1 is tube/mosfet hybrid, 2 are Tripath ClassD and one is a full-on clone of one of Nelson Pass' amps (which one? F5 maybe?) with super-matched components and caps, etc.
Like you, I find most tube amps to be colored, overly warm, overly liquid, etc. Conversely, I have also heard tube amps that also sounded "sterile,cold, un-involving". But the best of the breed can be utterly transparent, true to the emotional content AND very uncolored.
But, just because I've heard more tube amps do it right, I for one would not go about saying all SS amps sound dry, analytical, sterile, and so on, as I have heard at least two shining examples (the Pass clone and the Virtue Sensation) that get it very close to the "real"thing, and are better than all but two of the tube amps I've heard.
Of the "top 10", some measure with extremely low distortion, some not so much. But what's interesting is that the distortion on the most "real" sounding units is very low at the very low power output, suggesting that Nelson Pass is very much correct and the distortion profile at low power is much more important than what happens at 1W and above.
So now:
I'm curious to find out if you have the chance to listen to a lot of live, un-amplified acoustic music. If you want to be better be able to determine analytically what comes closest to the real thing, then it's almost mandatory to compare to the real thing only. If you do, try the following experiment:
Use recordings of live, un-amplified performances, where you yourself have been present and have clear memory of how it sounded and how it felt to you emotionally. Then while the memory is still "fresh", try the different amps in your system.
If you do this, and you still hold the same opinion about all tubes, I'd be surprised... or maybe not. It could be a matter of preference.
At that point....De gustibus non est disputandum.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.