We're talking about amplifiers, devices to make an electrical signal larger. The responsibility for the quality of playing is the musician's, a totally different matter.
As it happens, most musicians are terrible at judging reproduced sound. I've known a lot of musicians, was one myself, and I can only think of two or three exceptions. But again, that's irrelevant to the question at hand. Lang Lang can probably detect subtleties in fingering and intonation that escape me, but he can no doubt hear those on a car radio.
As it happens, most musicians are terrible at judging reproduced sound. I've known a lot of musicians, was one myself, and I can only think of two or three exceptions. But again, that's irrelevant to the question at hand. Lang Lang can probably detect subtleties in fingering and intonation that escape me, but he can no doubt hear those on a car radio.
rubbish
this is where you're perspective is orientated from, limited to
for some people 'amps' are judged by their ability to convey 'music', that's what we listen to isn't it? or do we just listen to 'sound'?
Last edited:
The broader context is that most audio enthusiasts would wish for a system, rather than just amps, or speakers, that manages to create a believable illusion of real musicians creating ... music. So ultimately all setups are judged, at least unconsciously, on this basis - irrespective of looks, expense and measurements -- certainly this is what counts in the long term - whether there is a general level of satisfaction with what the audio gear is able to serve up ...
at the beginning of chain there is 'music' on a recording. At the end of the chain there is supposed to be 'music', recreated in your listening space. The gadgets in between are judged (by some) on their ability to convey the 'intent' of the recording.
All the text book, electrical engineering jargon is worthless. Unless someone has spent some proper time actually listening to/comparing both valve vs S.S amps, no one is qualified to pass judgement as far as I'm concerned.
All the text book, electrical engineering jargon is worthless. Unless someone has spent some proper time actually listening to/comparing both valve vs S.S amps, no one is qualified to pass judgement as far as I'm concerned.
Last edited:
An amp doesn't "convey music." It has no consciousness. It makes an electrical signal larger, more accurately or less accurately. It has no "idea" what the signal is.
It's odd that you think people here haven't. Or are you referring to people with no interest or experience in audio?
It's odd that you think people here haven't. Or are you referring to people with no interest or experience in audio?
OK, Pan-person, you have me mystified.😀
If you're using "know" in a metaphysical sense, I couldn't comment, I'm violently allergic to metaphysics. If you mean "know" in the sense of "experimentally verified," then as I said, yes, they often don't know.
If you're using "know" in a metaphysical sense, I couldn't comment, I'm violently allergic to metaphysics. If you mean "know" in the sense of "experimentally verified," then as I said, yes, they often don't know.
Do we believe some people can hear distortion of the non-linear kind ...? Well, I do ... I hear it all the time - most systems stink of it, 😀, especially when they're asked to push out higher volume levels ...
I get what you mean. It's overly simplistic amp workshop 'theory'.
The thread is about 'tube sound' not amp theory. As in, 'tube' sound being relative to 'S.S' sound, better or worse. Otherwise why not just refer to it as 'amp sound'.
So, can a S.S amp be voiced to sound like a valve amp and vice versa? To some extent yes, listen to amp A in isolation and all good. Listen to A vs B, can they ever be identical?
Can a S.S be made to match the gorgeous midrange and saturation you get from a valve amp. Can a valve amp ever match the slam and bass control of a S.S amp, regardless of power? To get that sweet midrange, you have to give up a some of the grip in the bass. The gorgeous midrange is a function of the loose bass, they're related like yin & yang.
The looseness or tightness, the simplicity vs complexity of a circuit etc. attributes certain strengths/weaknesses to the delivery/depth of perception of the music at any given instant. Should an amp always be tightfisted and rigid? Or is some musical instant better served by an amp being a bit looser and so on and vice versa.
The whole thing is so subjective, no one is qualified to judge, or owns the rule book to qualify whether someone imagines/or not they hear amp A convey music better than amp B - IMO
🙂
Last edited:
Nothing so mystical, oh SY-person. It's just that I read over and over that audiophiles "think they hear" such and such. That seems to imply that they don't hear it. Is that always the case? Aren't there any skilled listeners who can hear accurately?
The answer is - that an amplifier should be accurate. Trouble is, most aren't, in one way or another - a correctly working amplifier, and associated electronics, will give you both - when one finally hears a setup that does both at once, for the elements in the music that 'require' each attribute, you realise there is no yin or yang, at all, in the equation ...
So, in a specific instance of playback, where there are two musical components present - one that is "gorgeous midrange and saturation" and the other is "slam and bass control" -- hmmm, let's say a melodic phrase from a female jazz singer, combined with a couple of vicious kicks on the bass drum - then you should hear each correctly reproduced, layered on top of each other, clearly defined as being separate musical 'entities'.
Last edited:
IMO the midrange in valve amp is NEVER bettered/matched by the midrange in a S.S amp.
and the reason they can't ever be identical: is this pearl of wisdom from Hi-Q in post #48:
To my ears, the sound obtained by controlling electrons in a vacuum seems to be better than VS controlling them through a solid material.
and the reason they can't ever be identical: is this pearl of wisdom from Hi-Q in post #48:
To my ears, the sound obtained by controlling electrons in a vacuum seems to be better than VS controlling them through a solid material.
Last edited:
The "seems to be better" is that you hear less "disturbing" distortion via the valves - normally, 😉. Ignore the spec's claiming that the SS has miniscule distortion - this is hokum, either because it does add audible, irritating distortion; or, because it is not masking the objectionable distortion being generated elsewhere in the replay chain!
Only a fully clean replay chain demonstrates what's truly on the recording - which is, seemingly miraculously, quite marvellous in fact ...
Only a fully clean replay chain demonstrates what's truly on the recording - which is, seemingly miraculously, quite marvellous in fact ...
But isn't this what we want in any case? After all, how can a signal that's gone through a massive chain of solid state circuitry (said replay chain including recording/editing equipment) all of a sudden "sound better" when it's passed from the input socket to the speaker terminal of a tubed amp?
my problem with this type comments is that, it is not a universal truth, but rather the experience of the poster....
as there are thousands of possible amplifier speaker combinations out there, thousands upon millions of recorded music....etc, etc,
even the listening area has large possible variation scenarios...
yes, adding the phrase "to my ears" makes your posting more palatable...😉😀
The purpose of amplification IS simple. There's no magic going on here. Like Sy stated, an amp doesn't know what it's amplifying. It's just an electrical signal, with a limited frequency range I might add.
But that's the whole thing! 'Tube' sound IS about amp sound. Many people mistake a properly designed amp as 'tube sound' just because there's some glass put on top of it. How many times do you see some 'tube-buffer' with just a single (super linear) cathode follower that will never be overdriven surrounded by some SS components. People rave about it! Tube sound, warmth, clarity, and character are loose terms suddenly used to describe the sound, while the tube is doing jack! It looks very pretty though 😎, and that's what a lot of people 'hear'.
I believe many people can hear the difference between two amps in a blind test, but can they identify the tube amp vs the SS amp every single time...?
Wrong. You can't quantify these characteristic with just those variables. There's much more going on, which is purely technical.
The terms you use are empty. They are merely products of frequency response, THD, output impedance, etc. Off course you might prefer one system to another, even depending on the music being played, but you should also realize it's still an alteration and it might steer it away from what the artists (or more likely the studio engineer) intended.
I don't quite understand if with 'convey music' you actually mean the amp is altering the original signal to a degree which you find more pleasing for a given recording or not. If so, Lang lang might not be so pleased 😉
Last edited:
if you can't tell the difference between a Leak stereo 20 and the others then I wont be coming to you for advice. An extremely coloured amp (in a nice way).
Shoog
It sounded to me like an old 1970 SS amp and I thought I wonder why they don't have a better system. I didn't think it was a tube amp until I saw it under the counter. Reason because tube amps I know don't sound like that..😀. I wonder if this is what people think tube sound is?
It was a "perfect" untouched same tubes same caps same everything from the date of manufacture I think...LOL
The thing is you can tell the difference, between Good and not so good. But the first thought isn't yes that's a tube amp.
More like that needs putting in the rubbish skip..😀
I think an example of "Its tubes it must be good". Rather than "Tubes it could be good" but isn't at the moment!
Here is an interesting example, I borrowed a cheap tube amp to have a listen. My wife said, "that doesn't sound like tubes", have they just wired up the heaters?
So I pulled a tube and the amp stopped working. Put it back and it worked again. So good tubes bad circuit?
Its interesting because, I listened to quite a lot of equipment over some decades and at the start tube amps were very "Warm sounding" then in the mid 80's something seemed to happen and they started to sound more open. Perhaps it was the polypropylene cap! Perhaps it was different circuit design? (Power supply)
This was at about the same time that What HIFI/Maplin did their bit for the tube revival.
Regards
M. Gregg
It was a "perfect" untouched same tubes same caps same everything from the date of manufacture I think...LOL
The thing is you can tell the difference, between Good and not so good. But the first thought isn't yes that's a tube amp.
More like that needs putting in the rubbish skip..😀
I think an example of "Its tubes it must be good". Rather than "Tubes it could be good" but isn't at the moment!
Here is an interesting example, I borrowed a cheap tube amp to have a listen. My wife said, "that doesn't sound like tubes", have they just wired up the heaters?
So I pulled a tube and the amp stopped working. Put it back and it worked again. So good tubes bad circuit?
Its interesting because, I listened to quite a lot of equipment over some decades and at the start tube amps were very "Warm sounding" then in the mid 80's something seemed to happen and they started to sound more open. Perhaps it was the polypropylene cap! Perhaps it was different circuit design? (Power supply)
This was at about the same time that What HIFI/Maplin did their bit for the tube revival.
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
Yes and no. Even the most skilled listeners can easily fool themselves. They may be able to get things right more than others, but they are heir to exactly the same human brain problems as anyone else. They can't help it, they have human brains.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.