the entire point of tube vs silicon is controversial anyway.
i bet the dead engineers at phillips would turn in their graves if they just knew
i bet the engineers at philips would have started using them if those SS rectumfiers were available to them then....
A treasure finder then. That's another story. It feels good to find something undervalued and restore it to its original status. Raise it from the dirt so to speak. Now.... tell us about those underdogs.
I look for other uses that are better than original. As I said, I have no use for GZ34.
Check out the 6AX5GT. You will need 6 volts (and only 1.2 amps heater current) to run it, but it is otherwise every bit as good as a GZ34 (well, actually better if you have a look at the specs sheet).
I plugged 6AX5GT in fleabay and immediately saw a pair of NOS never used ones for $7. Doesn't that make you feel like buildinng somthing?
because there are suckers with lots of money that take them......probably the last pair on earth....
if i had lot's of money, i'd be a sucker too....
Well,
They can keep them for me...
OK difference with tube Vs SS I think so but ...I am sure that when it comes down to commercial sales if the modern Hexfred or schottky had been available they would have used them..
I like Hexfred diodes...Its nice to have tube rectification..Not a fan of half and half...soft start tube circuits great...Type of tube rectifier type<<<fit for purpose..GZ£$ <<if its cheap and works long term great...
I guess try to think like a manufacturer<<<is it good does it last...is the sound good<<use it..
Is it megga bucks..is it good..can i replace it with equal or better<<<use it..
Then is there going to be a supply of the part...or is it limited life fitment..<<give it a miss if its a part that has a limited life expectancy..redesign..
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
The question was about measuring the difference in sound that we can hear. Even $50 Behringer microphone can detect octave division smaller than what human can perceive with ears. Even a simple RTA graph can show the difference of sound when microphone is moved a quarter of an inch. Again, the measuring devices available now can measure far below human auditory threshold. Do you understand what that means?
Let me rephrase it for you to something more accurate.
To some extent, humans can perceive the measured sound. All audible sound to human can be measured and interpreted.
The discussion is getting silly now, you're evading my point. Of course a good micamp with a cheap mic can detect lower spl levels than most humans can. If this is all you have to say, why make all the fuzz?
It's not about SPL, treshold of hearing, graphical displays. It's just about plain hearing, distinguishing instruments or voices. That has to do with fasecohesion, intact harmonics and tone control, yes probably even harmonics play a role. Nothing fancy, just plain old 20th century technology. There's no machine to better humans for that purpose. As I tried to point out, it takes skill to make a good recording. Not everyone is able to achieve good results.
I look for other uses that are better than original. As I said, I have no use for GZ34.
Check out the 6AX5GT. You will need 6 volts (and only 1.2 amps heater current) to run it, but it is otherwise every bit as good as a GZ34 (well, actually better if you have a look at the specs sheet).
I plugged 6AX5GT in fleabay and immediately saw a pair of NOS never used ones for $7. Doesn't that make you feel like buildinng somthing?
Don't make them sound too good or very soon they will be selling for crazy amounts
I look for other uses that are better than original. As I said, I have no use for GZ34.
Check out the 6AX5GT. You will need 6 volts (and only 1.2 amps heater current) to run it, but it is otherwise every bit as good as a GZ34 (well, actually better if you have a look at the specs sheet).
I plugged 6AX5GT in fleabay and immediately saw a pair of NOS never used ones for $7. Doesn't that make you feel like buildinng somthing?
Good at $7 but one is limited to 10uF without increasing supply line resistance. GZ34 can work with 60uF. Still, as you say compared with the fantasy prices now demanded for 5AR4/GZ34 a sensible choice.
Paul
I'd say just the opposite.
Not so much insanity as allowing wishful thinking and mysticism to overrule one's sense of reality.
It depends on what's heard. To date, I'm unaware of ANY confirmed audible difference that's unmeasurable. Not one.
For example, let's take your example of a GZ34. IF (and that's a big if) one confirms that a perceptible change in sound occurs when changing tubes, then the next step is to trace down what's defective in the amp. I'd start by looking at the spectrum of the power supply output measured at the signal circuitry end with and without test signals and/or program to determine if the filter is improperly designed or constructed or if it's a grounding/layout issue.
If one is content that the sound changes with changing tubes but merely wants to determine what the actual output differences are, that's pretty easy using test tones or musical program excerpts by differencing the delivered signals to the speakers. That may be confounded by changing inaccuracies in the amp independent of the tube change, but the differences will still be there and measurable. If the electrical signal delivered to the speaker does not change, the sound does not change. No way around it without invoking fairies.
For example, let's take your example of a GZ34. IF (and that's a big if) one confirms that a perceptible change in sound occurs when changing tubes, then the next step is to trace down what's defective in the amp. I'd start by looking at the spectrum of the power supply output measured at the signal circuitry end with and without test signals and/or program to determine if the filter is improperly designed or constructed or if it's a grounding/layout issue.
If one is content that the sound changes with changing tubes but merely wants to determine what the actual output differences are, that's pretty easy using test tones or musical program excerpts by differencing the delivered signals to the speakers. That may be confounded by changing inaccuracies in the amp independent of the tube change, but the differences will still be there and measurable. If the electrical signal delivered to the speaker does not change, the sound does not change. No way around it without invoking fairies.
No, you are evading my question and trying to change the subject. You claimed that "to some extent audible differences are measurable" but you are wrong. To all extent, audible difference (to human) are measurable. You claimed that "But not all can be explained by measurement" but you are wrong again. All can be shown by measurement thus can be explained.
I'm with the measurers on this one; if something has changed ("a veil has been lifted" "darker silences". low-level detail &c., &c.) then there must be a reason.
It is not good enough to say :"Ah well this valve has a D getter" or "This one has a diamond on its bottom" or this one was made in Blackburn in 1962"
We are dealing with electrical currents here; if something changes then there has to be an electrical change, ergo it can be measured.
Paul
It is not good enough to say :"Ah well this valve has a D getter" or "This one has a diamond on its bottom" or this one was made in Blackburn in 1962"
We are dealing with electrical currents here; if something changes then there has to be an electrical change, ergo it can be measured.
Paul
Yes Paul, but that's too easily put. I agree on that but not every aspect of audio can be put into numbers, it's more complicated. It takes a physic to produce a simple model, like has been done by Thiele and Small around 1970 for the loudspeaker.
Halfwit (I don't point at anyone here) technicians making assumptions about knowing it all because something can't be seen on a 1968 Tektronix makes me puke. Sorry about that, I did not want to upset anyone with this opinion.
Halfwit (I don't point at anyone here) technicians making assumptions about knowing it all because something can't be seen on a 1968 Tektronix makes me puke. Sorry about that, I did not want to upset anyone with this opinion.
The word BEST involves interpretation and is subjective and I don't believe that's what he's arguing. Everything a human can hear is measurable. Every audible difference is also a measurable difference.
The same way every color, brightness, and contrast, I see in an image is measurable. It is up to the user to decide what is subjectively best for him or her in the application.
Methodically, I am in complete agreement with you. The ear is the ultimate to determine the result in subjective listening, at least I would.
I think at this point both sides are barking the wrong trees in this argument.
Time for some tea.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.