I should explain the cryptic title: do all you die hard tube fans go tube all the way through the chain, e.g. tube RIAA or tube DAC all the way to OPT? Or is there a point where, just as many concede that silicon is better for power supplies or CCS's that the front end/low level stuff is "better" left to silicon (I know "better"is no absolute). I have read many opinions on the former issue but none on the latter.
And I ask this for practical reasons for myself. I am building myself a full audio chain and love the idea of it being balanced throughout and tube throughout, but the complexity of tackling a balanced tube RIAA preamp and a balanced tube DAC frighten me. I'm pretty sure I must choose to build either an SE tube preamp or a balanced SS preamp, and similarly for the DAC. What do you recommend or what do you have preference for?
And I ask this for practical reasons for myself. I am building myself a full audio chain and love the idea of it being balanced throughout and tube throughout, but the complexity of tackling a balanced tube RIAA preamp and a balanced tube DAC frighten me. I'm pretty sure I must choose to build either an SE tube preamp or a balanced SS preamp, and similarly for the DAC. What do you recommend or what do you have preference for?
RIAA is easy. For balanced, just make two identical networks and run diff amps fore and aft.
Hmm, if the signals are 180ø out of phase, the phase shifts in the network should just rotate around the circle and not cause any unusual common-mode cancellation, no?
As for a DAC, someone look at the digital standard (SPID/F? or whatever it is) and see how hard it would be to decode.
Depending on how many logic chips you want to use, I doubt it'll end up much worse than that all-tube clock.
Tim
Hmm, if the signals are 180ø out of phase, the phase shifts in the network should just rotate around the circle and not cause any unusual common-mode cancellation, no?
As for a DAC, someone look at the digital standard (SPID/F? or whatever it is) and see how hard it would be to decode.
Depending on how many logic chips you want to use, I doubt it'll end up much worse than that all-tube clock.
Tim
GIven a forced choice i would rather leave the hi level 'stuff' to silicon, somehow i find the silicon signature more objectionable at the millivolt/microvolt levels. It is all, of course, very relative - i have a reasonably musical all-SS system which doesn't , surprisingly, annoy the hell out of me. Otoh, even a little silicon in my all-tube system has the ability to stick like a sore thumb. The final result is very much a question of mix and match. And not an easy mix to match right.
A sensible man would keep silent, - but - here goes (my opinion only). You can get perfectly good results with either vacuum or sand in audio. Sand is more difficult to design well, and the construction is different. I like tubes because a) I understand them, b) they are rugged enough not to need special care in handling, and c) the glow of their filaments transports me to a simpler time, and soothes my soul. Regards, Bill.
leadbelly said:
So you are in the "go tube AND balanced" camp I see
Well I was just suggesting a solution for you... but now that you've dragged me into it, I KISS.
I don't really care, so I listen to 128k MP3's on my computer (and am proud of *enjoying* what you would be led to believe is the worst media ever!) and send that through my tube preamp and monoblocks (Frankenhouse and Hept'AU7).
Balanced specifically has no purpose in a home system, maybe for a generally large system like a club, church or PA system in general.
It does make PP easier, but then again, you have all those extra stages that *could* be rolled together into just one or two stages. And you get into trouble when you have someone who prefers SE output.....
I don't have his book, but balanced, like stereo, can easily get unweildy very quickly. Come to think of it, if you're going to do stereo RIAA, you need essentially four channels!
If you just want balanced for transmission, the KISS way would be to use one DAC and split it at the output, but...
Tim
Hi leadbelly,
I have both and enjoy both. I even have hybrid amps. I've heard terrible noises coming from all technologies. I don't think you can easily, blindly go with one or the other.
So design with what you know you can do your best with. I must say there are places where sand is king. Agreeing with SY, current sources are one of those things. I'll throw in rectifiers 'cause I use good regulators. Sand again.
There is no reason at all to go balanced. Your cable runs aren't long enough to warrant it. Your system noise goes up by 1.414 in theory because you doubled your noise sources, no they won't cancel. So here I agree with Sch3mat1c. Just build it.
-Chris
I have both and enjoy both. I even have hybrid amps. I've heard terrible noises coming from all technologies. I don't think you can easily, blindly go with one or the other.
So design with what you know you can do your best with. I must say there are places where sand is king. Agreeing with SY, current sources are one of those things. I'll throw in rectifiers 'cause I use good regulators. Sand again.
There is no reason at all to go balanced. Your cable runs aren't long enough to warrant it. Your system noise goes up by 1.414 in theory because you doubled your noise sources, no they won't cancel. So here I agree with Sch3mat1c. Just build it.
-Chris
anatech said:
Hi Chris.
It's true that I did have a question as to which direction I should head off in, but I was genuinely interested to see if there were any interesting technical arguments on the subject that I had missed. I don't really have a strong preference either way, the biggest reason I've started on tubes is to learn something new. I built my first chipamp 20 years ago and there's is a point where you have to move on out of boredom. As for what I will likely do, I haven't made up my mind yet. A big balanced phono pre is out of the question, I don't have that much vinyl to warrant it. I have enough parts bin parts for an SE phono pre, so that's looking interesting. I have cheap Edcor transformers, a 4 deck ALPS switch, and parts for a JFET balanced line stage, and am not sure I know how I want to put that all together. Maybe the only way is through hindsight
My preference, based on building a lot of amps, is for tubes for the signal path, and sand for the supporting elements, most of the time. I also prefer differential tube stages over SE.
However the lower active in my cascode hybrid RIAA front ends is sand and it's superb. I'm also quite liking the newer digital amps for power; not as good as the best tube stuff ime, but good enough much of the time.
However the lower active in my cascode hybrid RIAA front ends is sand and it's superb. I'm also quite liking the newer digital amps for power; not as good as the best tube stuff ime, but good enough much of the time.
leadbelly said:
Allen Wright's balanced phono stage is elegantly simple (power supply is quite a bit more complex). A phono cartridge is inherently a balanced device.... A balanced phono stage with balanced wiring in the tone-arm gives BIG advantages, and is the only way to properly select absolute phase for each track. The phono stage is probably the place where the most benefit can be had from a balanced stage...
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
(you can ignore the stuff after the selector switch -- most of the stuff after is to drive the cable to your power amp... just put your power amp in the same box... ie phono, diff stage, PP output stage.)
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.