Wikipedia article: Tube sound - Page 8 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Tubes / Valves

Tubes / Valves All about our sweet vacuum tubes :) Threads about Musical Instrument Amps of all kinds should be in the Instruments & Amps forum

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 25th September 2009, 01:45 PM   #71
diyAudio Member
 
Nikolas Ojala's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Arrow Not protecting

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavebourn View Post

A first, some proof is needed to justify that b**t called "Tube Sound Article" in Wikipedia you are trying to protect and promote.
Suppose that the article did not exist. So someone could write it. It could become anything. But anyway that happened in 2006. After that there were two possible ways: Either traverse the meaning of tube sound and purge the whole article or improve what there is.

I don't protect the article: I'd like to see improvement. Protecting means "hands off" not development. Also I do not defend the (annoying) editing style of Binksternet or other deletionists. But their existence and "contributions" (which means they delete what others write) in Wikipedia are reality. I have noticed that the only way to beat them is by superior quality in facts, references and grammar.
__________________
High-order harmonics are more offensive than low.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th September 2009, 06:18 PM   #72
wicked1 is offline wicked1  United States
diyAudio Member
 
wicked1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Midwest
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikolas Ojala View Post
I think that the greatest effort is needed for finding some mostly old and also few new (scientific) articles that justify your claims. Knowing things is not enough. You must also show the citation and where the article is.
Ive noticed a lot of sources for references on wikipedia aren't all that great either. So, someone just throw together a couple of websites stating what you think, then edit the wiki article, and reference your websites.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th November 2009, 01:36 PM   #73
diyAudio Member
 
Nikolas Ojala's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Sometimes the whole Wikipedia seems irritating. The article includes many wild and unsourced claims. However deletionists do not seem enthusiastic removing them. I wonder why.
__________________
High-order harmonics are more offensive than low.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th August 2010, 08:08 PM   #74
diyAudio Member
 
Nikolas Ojala's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Thumbs up That begun on 2001

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Koster View Post
That was on October 2001.

That was the first act of vandalism ;-)
Maybe he got an inspiration from the events that happened on previous month.

Things to do in the designing of an amplifier:
1) Avoid the worst kinds of distortions and interferences.
2) Accept the fact that your gadget will not be perfect.

Make such amplifier with tubes. There you have it: Tube sound.
__________________
High-order harmonics are more offensive than low.
  Reply With Quote
Old 25th August 2010, 08:11 PM   #75
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
Quote:
I tried to edit it a little bit, but my corrections were called vandalism and removed. No more attempts to help that crazy ignorant person from my side. Never ever.
__________________
The Devil is not so terrible as his math model is!
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th October 2012, 08:15 PM   #76
diyAudio Member
 
Nikolas Ojala's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
I must confess that I edited the Tube sound article by adding few lines about output impedance. I hope that my contribution improves the article.
__________________
High-order harmonics are more offensive than low.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th October 2012, 01:08 AM   #77
diyAudio Member
 
Wavebourn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Send a message via Skype™ to Wavebourn
Nothing improves the article except deleting it and writing instead something real.

The article is naked shame. Collection of all kinds of nonsense.
__________________
The Devil is not so terrible as his math model is!
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th October 2012, 02:05 AM   #78
ChrisA is offline ChrisA  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikolas Ojala View Post
I must confess that I edited the Tube sound article by adding few lines about output impedance. I hope that my contribution improves the article.
It is mostly fair. I would object if the article were filled with subjective descriptions of the sound. IT is not.

One thing I'd do is make an even larger distinction between tube instrument amplifiers and tube HiFi amps. With HiFi the difference is sound is subtle at best. But a tube amp used with a guitar is obvious even in my 20 year old truck's stock factory radio.

The reason is that all HiFi amps are designed with the goal of very low distortion so the differences between ANY two good HiFi amps is small. However guitar amps can run at well over 100% THD. Even a jazz player who has a clean sound might be running at 15% or so THD, if you were to measure it.

THis distinction between music production and music reproduction would be a minor point if it were not for the fact that the overwhelming majority of all tube amps made as musical instrument amplifiers that depend on driving tubes into distortion.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th October 2012, 02:11 AM   #79
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canberra, Australia
The article is significantly improved on the original tripe that was there, but it is still trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear.

The original tripe should never have been allowed to stand, it was little more than subjective opinion, and largely ill informed at that.

Heck, a Nelson Pass Zen amp with zero feedback doesn't sound like most SS amps either. Frankly it's a stupid article penned by someone who was of the opinion that tubes sounded wooly due to distortion...
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th October 2012, 02:34 AM   #80
ChrisA is offline ChrisA  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinia View Post
I hope that if someone contributes to the article that they include the effects of the magnetics in the signal path, not only in small signal but in overdriven sound as well (ie musical electrical instruments as a source). AFAIK There are documents on this from John Murphy.
Got a link? You can't really modify the Wiki without a good solid source to reference.

BTW, I'm skeptical because a guitar has no sound below about 80Hz (this would be the low open E string) A few amps might have overloadable transformers but I bet many would clip the signal before overloading the OPT.

If you have a link I'll read it.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wikipedia Article on "Tube Sound" sardonx Everything Else 6 19th August 2013 03:28 PM
Tube microphonics (article) tomchr Tubes / Valves 5 23rd August 2009 06:03 PM
Tube article in EDN FrankDIY Tubes / Valves 5 15th April 2003 10:58 PM
Old article on Stereophile and The Absolutr Sound A'af Swap Meet 0 23rd August 2002 02:17 PM
Tube article HarryHaller Tubes / Valves 13 5th April 2002 05:41 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:00 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2