So yes I know everyone in here is more interested in the DIY part but that's not my point!
I mean are you interested in true high fidelity? As in producing equipment that recreates the signal/recording exactly as the original no characteristics from the equipment in the sound?
The reason I ask is because of the complexity of some of the designs here when it can all be done with newer, lower distortion, simpler, smaller and for lower cost. I say this on the basis of the (IMO) fantastic 'Wire power amp', with such low distortion levels and high power why use anything else? Why do we keep using old technology? Why not look into refining class D?
I won't even get into tubes as that isn't high fidelity. But if we have two theoretical complete systems that have 0% distortion they MUST sound the same yes? Anything that deviates from the original signal is distortion so there is 0 deviation so sound the same. Amplifiers aren't going to hit that for a long time anyway! But if we have very low distortion amps why should they sound different even if they have completely different topologies? They shouldn't even if different order harmonics are emitted. At levels such as 0.001% I would go to say it's impossible for the human to hear any differences.
This is why I have focussed more on my loudspeaker research and design as there's far more to play with in my opinion as in they still have a lot further to go in terms of room for improvement compared to amps.
Personally I have been thinking and decided I want both true high fidelity with designs only proved by numbers not inaccurate, skewed subjective views and opinions. I also want that relaxing not so intensive tube stereo system with large drivers and boomy bass!
So what's your opinion? What are you looking for in your amp? The best that sounds to you or hi-fi?
Thanks
Boscoe
I mean are you interested in true high fidelity? As in producing equipment that recreates the signal/recording exactly as the original no characteristics from the equipment in the sound?
The reason I ask is because of the complexity of some of the designs here when it can all be done with newer, lower distortion, simpler, smaller and for lower cost. I say this on the basis of the (IMO) fantastic 'Wire power amp', with such low distortion levels and high power why use anything else? Why do we keep using old technology? Why not look into refining class D?
I won't even get into tubes as that isn't high fidelity. But if we have two theoretical complete systems that have 0% distortion they MUST sound the same yes? Anything that deviates from the original signal is distortion so there is 0 deviation so sound the same. Amplifiers aren't going to hit that for a long time anyway! But if we have very low distortion amps why should they sound different even if they have completely different topologies? They shouldn't even if different order harmonics are emitted. At levels such as 0.001% I would go to say it's impossible for the human to hear any differences.
This is why I have focussed more on my loudspeaker research and design as there's far more to play with in my opinion as in they still have a lot further to go in terms of room for improvement compared to amps.
Personally I have been thinking and decided I want both true high fidelity with designs only proved by numbers not inaccurate, skewed subjective views and opinions. I also want that relaxing not so intensive tube stereo system with large drivers and boomy bass!
So what's your opinion? What are you looking for in your amp? The best that sounds to you or hi-fi?
Thanks
Boscoe
If your talking about tubes and hifi I don't want it to go there, lets ignore to tubes from now on!?
This doesn't have to be a pointless argument it's what the poster makes of it. Can't people see past things and have a good discussion for once?
Why did you bring up the subject then? To say tubes have no place in hifi is just asking for it, even in an SS forum.
jeff
If your that bothered just leave it and not post useless comments in the thread?
I see the people of this forum so far are in capable of this.
Can we have the thread closed?
Sure close it.
I consider myself to be stubborn, I resisted tubes because of my age and the SS numbers.
I was wrong, you are wrong to not consider tubes as being hifi.
Tubes can be difficult to source parts, transformers etc I agree with you there. Keep in mind that all this tinkering with SS is using tubes gear for a benchmark.
To date, the best I have heard has been tubes driven.
I find it more work to get a good sound with SS vs tubes. Much easier to build tubes gear to sound nice.
I like my chip amp, liked all my Marantz gear, I'm probably going to like this Bryston 3B when it's done, but I LOVE the sound of tubes.
I consider myself to be stubborn, I resisted tubes because of my age and the SS numbers.
I was wrong, you are wrong to not consider tubes as being hifi.
Tubes can be difficult to source parts, transformers etc I agree with you there. Keep in mind that all this tinkering with SS is using tubes gear for a benchmark.
To date, the best I have heard has been tubes driven.
I find it more work to get a good sound with SS vs tubes. Much easier to build tubes gear to sound nice.
I like my chip amp, liked all my Marantz gear, I'm probably going to like this Bryston 3B when it's done, but I LOVE the sound of tubes.
Read any of my articles on my designs, look at the performance, then tell me how they are insufficiently accurate.
I don't think your talking about fidelity, more what you think sounds right. How do you know what sounds correct?
Can you link me to some?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.