SY said:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Suberb!
7N7
kevinkr said:
So, no reason for playing with different toobs.
By the way, I am an Engineer, and I learned how to optimize designs by multiple parameters, when different parameters have different weights (priorities). Now I hear more and more often the term "Over-Engineered". What does it mean? Contains less mistakes than supposed to be? Or under-priced? Or... what?
By "over engineer" I meant a tendency to use circuit designs of extreme complexity using many parts when in many instances a much simpler circuit would perform the function as well. (At least from the end user's perspective.) And at the other extreme I am not talking about engineering to a specific cost point either.
Like you I engineer for a living, and complexity has its price both in terms of reliability and cost, you have to weigh small measurable gains in performance against the possibility of having a less reliable design.
I also feel (perhaps wrongly, but that is my pov) that the excessive complexity gets in the way of audibly if not measurably better sound.
Like you I engineer for a living, and complexity has its price both in terms of reliability and cost, you have to weigh small measurable gains in performance against the possibility of having a less reliable design.
I also feel (perhaps wrongly, but that is my pov) that the excessive complexity gets in the way of audibly if not measurably better sound.
have a propensity to make things more complicated then necessary. It's almost as if they prefer to do things the hard way. Let's hope you're not one of them.
Oooooh you guys can be nasty ......
The only advantage I could find in NOS tubes was that they were more reliable regarding characteristics and sometimes life. Especially the Russians can be pretty free with numbering, and some of the innards look decidedly flimsy compared to NOS. These days there is often not enough experience to really guarantee a reputation, as in the hey-days of tubes.
Soundwise .... I am not into sound of tubes. I have read about experiments by guitar folks, where it was found that different makes did sound different. One person took the trouble to measure anode current and try to relate it to different sound. For one type of tube he found current (in-circuit) to span a factor of >2! No wonder the sound varied .... If one mentions a tube, one presumes the specs to be within +/- 10% of the book value, otherwise you have a different tube.
It might be informative to also measure current (or say voltage in RC stages) to make sure that the above is not the case, before pronouncing "my XYZs sounded crappy".
The only advantage I could find in NOS tubes was that they were more reliable regarding characteristics and sometimes life. Especially the Russians can be pretty free with numbering, and some of the innards look decidedly flimsy compared to NOS. These days there is often not enough experience to really guarantee a reputation, as in the hey-days of tubes.
Soundwise .... I am not into sound of tubes. I have read about experiments by guitar folks, where it was found that different makes did sound different. One person took the trouble to measure anode current and try to relate it to different sound. For one type of tube he found current (in-circuit) to span a factor of >2! No wonder the sound varied .... If one mentions a tube, one presumes the specs to be within +/- 10% of the book value, otherwise you have a different tube.
It might be informative to also measure current (or say voltage in RC stages) to make sure that the above is not the case, before pronouncing "my XYZs sounded crappy".
Maybe a classic example of overengineering is what happened to Fender guitar amps after CBS bought them in the mid sixties.
As I heard the story, Fender tried different circuits and had his musician buddies play the amps; based on their impressions, he made changes to the circuitry. Once he got the sound the way he wanted, he went into production.
Fender got a bad throat infection in the mid sixties and thought he was gonna die, so he took care of all his earthly affairs by selling his businesses. The amp division went to CBS, whose engineers took a look at these horribly inefficient circuits and set about 'improving' them. The rest is history: the quality of sound of Fender amps deteriorated, and now 'pre-CBS' Fender amps command a premium price.
Fortunately Leo Fender survived for another couple of decades and went on to Music Man and G & L, but the reputation of Fender amps took a hit that took a long time to overcome.
As I heard the story, Fender tried different circuits and had his musician buddies play the amps; based on their impressions, he made changes to the circuitry. Once he got the sound the way he wanted, he went into production.
Fender got a bad throat infection in the mid sixties and thought he was gonna die, so he took care of all his earthly affairs by selling his businesses. The amp division went to CBS, whose engineers took a look at these horribly inefficient circuits and set about 'improving' them. The rest is history: the quality of sound of Fender amps deteriorated, and now 'pre-CBS' Fender amps command a premium price.
Fortunately Leo Fender survived for another couple of decades and went on to Music Man and G & L, but the reputation of Fender amps took a hit that took a long time to overcome.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.