Of course its complex. But what is the point of telling someone they can't hear some specific percent distortion? It makes it sound like the speaker authoritatively knows what is and isn't audible, period. Its not the same type of thing as authoritatively understanding feedback theory. It read to me like an attempt to get someone to shut up and stop trying to understand things like how an amplifier that measures well can sound sterile and another one measuring similarly does not.
Blaming feedback theory is not the right answer of course, but not all implementations of theory are the same in practice. The questioner doesn't know what to blame. Saying you can't hear some specific low level of distortion looks to me like its born more out of exasperation with the discussion than anything else.
Blaming feedback theory is not the right answer of course, but not all implementations of theory are the same in practice. The questioner doesn't know what to blame. Saying you can't hear some specific low level of distortion looks to me like its born more out of exasperation with the discussion than anything else.
Last edited:
Yes adding a valve/tube preamp very often will improve imaging.The doubters then want to claim that is a product of distortion or non-linear response.Except that a good modern tube preamp will be both very linear and very low distortion.Some people have even suggested it is a product of microphonics. Which I guess could be at least partially true.But if is true why should we care ?As long as it gives better sound that is all that matters.
Hi Mark,
You asked simply to challenge another person knowing full well a definitive answer isn't possible without a set of completely controlled circumstances. Then it is valid for that one person or group of people. This doesn't further anyone's interests unless you simply want to challenge a person.
Hi jtgofish,
Several people have found the exact opposite it true. Stereo separation in tube product is typically less than solid state for one. I've measured and heard both types of products for decades. I believe you're saying you like the sound of tube product. That's fair, but trying to tie "imaging" into it is not valid. It's also factually incorrect.
LP records often have separation of 25 dB or less, great phono cartridges can reach 28 dB or so. FM broadcasts can be 35 dB typical, and maybe as high as 50 dB with some great tuners. Every technology of equipment can handle that, tube and solid state. So if those are your sources, the imaging depends on the source material. Those figures I mentioned are actual measured values in real equipment across decades.
You asked simply to challenge another person knowing full well a definitive answer isn't possible without a set of completely controlled circumstances. Then it is valid for that one person or group of people. This doesn't further anyone's interests unless you simply want to challenge a person.
Hi jtgofish,
Several people have found the exact opposite it true. Stereo separation in tube product is typically less than solid state for one. I've measured and heard both types of products for decades. I believe you're saying you like the sound of tube product. That's fair, but trying to tie "imaging" into it is not valid. It's also factually incorrect.
LP records often have separation of 25 dB or less, great phono cartridges can reach 28 dB or so. FM broadcasts can be 35 dB typical, and maybe as high as 50 dB with some great tuners. Every technology of equipment can handle that, tube and solid state. So if those are your sources, the imaging depends on the source material. Those figures I mentioned are actual measured values in real equipment across decades.
It's a good, but difficult to answer question, often I prefer the sound of a technically inferior (distorted?) source.
The most realistic voice I ever heard from a radio was from an old german tube stereo table-top radio, with the BBC Radio 4 announcer. My friend showed me because he knew it was spooky, and he was right - the announcer was there, in the room.
I even looked around for him, he was literally there, but invisible!!! The imaging here was good too 😀
But compared to 'properly designed' HiFi, this was a simple radio, built to a price. I think the Japanese also found something like this, for their small, esoteric HiFi gear, IIRC.
I think we have various possibilities, perhaps I missed some, these come to mind:
1. We can hear the tiny distortions, after all.
2. The distortions are not tiny, they just measure as tiny.
3. They are in the mind.
I tend to favour (2). I know everyone tells me I'm wrong about GNFB, but I prefer the sound of amplifiers with a more linear core.
Perhaps Lynn is right?
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/FindingCG.html
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/tinyamps.html
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/tinyhistory1.html
There's an interesting parallel dilemma in music, about auto-tune and pitch correction. Just like no one wants to sell an amplifier with 0.5% THD, no one wants to sing 'imperfectly' either now:
It's getting difficult to hear a real voice now. The remaster even pitch edited the Bee Gees, IIRC.
Perhaps the MP3 fad/effect, is an interesting object lesson here: that we don't hear sound in the same way was FFTs or other test gear does. Or perhaps we listen to the music, and that's easier with some 2nd harmonic (or whatever distortion!) in it, so the communication between musician and listener is better? Rather than with odd-order harmonics, multiplied by GNFB, that makes listening to the music more difficult, so we end up listening to the HiFi, or the distortion?
Which brings me to another issue, a musician once told me that 'Good music transcends the media', so perhaps some music sounds good anyway, and some music sounds better on certain types of gear, because that's what the musician mixed it to... I've heard a few tunes in the car that sounded very ordinary on a decent HiFi.
Often however I think that there's a priority order, artist, song, venue, mastering/pitch-editing, speakers, turntable/cart/DAC, amplifier - and sometimes an old tabletop radio wins 😀
Feedback has nothing to do with distortion except that in good designs, it reduces distortion. You like linear designs - don't we all. By the way, those measure with lower distortion. Either that or your equipment isn't measuring everything. I think this is the case for people who hear things THEIR EQUIPMENT doesn't show. Either that or they don't have equipment and are going on other measured results that don't show enough.
It's very simple. You need the equipment that can tell you the real story. If you don't have that much, you have no factual evidence to base anything on. I think this is where most subjective arguments are based. Not enough actual, real detailed knowledge. It makes sense from that standpoint.
It's very simple. You need the equipment that can tell you the real story. If you don't have that much, you have no factual evidence to base anything on. I think this is where most subjective arguments are based. Not enough actual, real detailed knowledge. It makes sense from that standpoint.
How about this? It is symmetry topology. LTP bootstrapped with resistor loading. VAS bootstrapped. Output 3EF with pre-driver and driver bootstrapped. Compensation is variation of two pole + chery compensation.
Attachments
I think you forgot to post the circuit diagram, without that, I don't know what 'this' is 🙂