Best SET amp design (>4 Watts)?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#81
Joe Roberts said:
Very briefly. this brand of social science is called behaviorism. It looks at external empirical signs and the mind (in this case) is a black box. The "datum point" is actually the listener raising his hand when he hears a difference. We cant look at mind so we look at behavior. Postwar objectivist fetish.

Since humans are involved, we know that all meaning and perception always depends on context. These studies do not recognize and control for all of the variables that compromise context. I''m talking about things like variability between listeners based on learning, physiology, psychological aspects, culture. Even which music is playing and where in the song the switch is made can have a huge, uncontrolled influence.

And the big one is how does the "test" situation affect perception and the phenomenology of the test "signals." Goals and methods are so different from casual listening. Things that don't matter in casual listening are apparent in concentrated test listening and vice versa. They are totally different ways of being and relating to musical sound.

On this point alone, modern human sciences would laugh DBT out of the room. Too many questionable assumptions are made and too many well-recognized issues go unaddressed.

In short, we end up with a test that has no validity or significance outside of the unique test situation and even that artificial constructed situation has not even been adequately characterized. There are loose variables flying around everywhere, which as you know, limits the "scientific" value of an experiment.

The research design is severely flawed and the underlying paradigm is not taken seriously in any of the human sciences anymore. This sort of research mainly lives on in audio testing and some primitive forms of social psychology, which is largely of the defunct Behavioralist bent mentioned above. Practitioners in these fields really must have a certain tunnel vision or else they can't do their work. They live in a North Korea of the mind, cut off from other ways of thinking and using 1958 tools.

If you have specific questions, PM me. Let's not pollute the thread any further because some people want to build amps.
Click to expand...
Which DBT of amps did you see flaws in? Who conducted and when? What specific aspect of it is flawed?
 
#82
Joe Roberts said:
Ever try to help a novice think about building amps and suddenly you find yourself in a Sarah Palin reality TV show?

Sorry, Evenharmonic.

_I_ am an expert! Or, at least, I can easily pass for one in this situation. I spent 15 years in the best schools in the world studying this material. And I have been in audio professionally for 30 years, most of them in highly public capacities . My work is well known to many on this forum.

I am not gonna defer to an electronics engineer or some random thug stooge from an audio forum on human research methodology, unless I can agree that the argument is well-founded or there is at least some reasonable degree of potential validity to the methods employed.

Now if somebody has not studied a particular subject, that is understandable and forgivable, but if they are being obnoxious, let's talk.



That's from Post 50. Tell us why anybody should believe you have any credibility on this subject? Did you learn all it all on audio forums? Or are you actually a closet social science scholar?

"Join AES" and "Google it"are not intellectually satisfying responses. This is the vile spew of untutored audio forum reptiles.

If you have a degree in philosophy of science from Cambridge University, I apologize.

I
Click to expand...
You can list all credentials you want online. I'm responding to the claims you actually posted on this forum.

BTW, are you going to apologize for accusing me of saying what I didn't say?
 
#84
Many Sound Practices articles are up for free (with some commentary) for educational purposes at my friend Peter Sikking's blog: (new adventures in) ultra‑fi

Have a look around. The stuff is getting old but I suppose there are a few useful tidbits for a beginner.

I actually know a lot more about philosophy of science and human research than tube amps, so you can take my audio writings with a grain of salt... but trust my social analysis and critique of this useless audioforum DBT BS.
 
#86
I remember really liking the editorials, and the Vinnie Gallo stuff. Loved his movies too, especially _Buffalo 66_, which is still about the darkest and strangest and sweetest movie ever.

But I hadn't ever seen the 845 curves before. Was an immediate goner.

Much thanks, as always,
Chris
 
Last edited:
#87
DBT that you have no experience with. That explains why you say what you say.
Click to expand...

Say, is there a bozo filter on this board? This guy is hopeless.

Hey Evenharmonic, ever hear of EDUCATION?


Google it.

I have encountered worse here on DiyA though...anybody remember David L (now Banned)? That dude was a trip.

I sure would have had a lot more comedy gold material for SP if audio forums existed at the time. Back then, Compuserve was still king. And rec.audio.tubes!
 
#90
One more point to tie things up with Evenharmonics.

If I say " Fires are hot" am I saying "Some fires are hot" or is the implication that I am saying "all fires are hot."

I think when you said "Amps that measure the same sound the same" you meant to say "All amps that measure the same sound the same.

If you were saying "Some amps that measure the same sound the same," there was really no point in saying that and that would not jive with the overall thrust of the strong arguments you were making. Indeedd that would have been pretty much agreeing with me.

Satisfied now?

Show me an amp that is not an effects box to a greater or lesser degree. The question is what is an acceptable degree, technically or subjectively.
 
#91
Joe Roberts said:
One more point to tie things up with Evenharmonics.

If I say " Fires are hot" am I saying "Some fires are hot" or is the implication that I am saying "all fires are hot."

I think when you said "Amps that measure the same sound the same" you meant to say "All amps that measure the same sound the same.

If you were saying "Some amps that measure the same sound the same," there was really no point in saying that and that would not jive with the overall thrust of the strong arguments you were making. Indeedd that would have been pretty much agreeing with me.

Satisfied now?

Show me an amp that is not an effects box to a greater or lesser degree. The question is what is an acceptable degree, technically or subjectively.
Click to expand...
I suspect that don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about, which is why I asked if you have any actual experience with level matched double blind test of amps.
 
#92
Joe Roberts said:
Double blind testing is totally flawed. I can go into it in enormous, encyclopedic detail but first let me know your educational level and qualifications to evaluate human research design.

I have two Ivy League degrees in this subject and did two PhD programs in relevant material and I can assure you that only rubes who do not understand the topic fully make strong claims about double-blind testing.
Click to expand...

Can you please explain your claim? Even just briefly? Perhaps just point out where the flaw is at a high level, such as just pointing out where any one of the following Wikipedia entries is incorrect? Of course I'm not suggesting Wikipedia is an academically rigorous source, just that it is a very good summary and so is good for a basis of discussion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_experiment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABX_test
 
#93
Moderators, please help. Can't one simply disallow references to DBT in threads not specifically dealing with the subject? Much unpleasantness flow from discussions that head down this road and a disproportionate amount of bullying seems to be allowed during these exchanges. It puts an enormous damper on one's entusiasm for the hobby to see discussions degrade in this way. A pedantry filter, maybe? (I typed that with some irony -- it's probably simply impossible to regulate this kind of thing.)
 
#94
JacquesToo said:
Moderators, please help. Can't one simply disallow references to DBT in threads not specifically dealing with the subject? Much unpleasantness flow from discussions that head down this road and a disproportionate amount of bullying seems to be allowed during these exchanges. It puts an enormous damper on one's entusiasm for the hobby to see discussions degrade in this way. A pedantry filter, maybe? (I typed that with some irony -- it's probably simply impossible to regulate this kind of thing.)
Click to expand...

If you don't want to discuss it, don't reply to the post. It will die out soon. Much, much better than arbitrary censorship. I for one would very much like to disallow any post with the word 'best' in it ;-)

Jan
 
#95
It might be best if one just ignore the other because no one is going to win.

I have built 3 Class A SS amps and they all sound different to some degree but all sound very good. This latest Class A SET I just built last week sounds so musical and so very, very, good. I certainty do not understand all the reasons why but I have become a Tubehead.
 
#96
Joe Roberts said:
Ever try to help a novice think about building amps and suddenly you find yourself in a Sarah Palin reality TV show?

Sorry, Evenharmonic.

_I_ am an expert! Or, at least, I can easily pass for one in this situation. I spent 15 years in the best schools in the world studying this material. And I have been in audio professionally for 30 years, most of them in highly public capacities . My work is well known to many on this forum.

I
Click to expand...

Shouting my "X" is bigger than yours, is not a valid argument. I am a bit disappointed hearing that from someone who is claiming he is a "scolar" of some sort. ;-)
 
#100
anybody remember David L (now Banned)?
Click to expand...

The same person who sold ESL panels and Handwound Transformers? At least I got one good pair of transformers from him before he started ripping people off.....

DBT, when used properly, is very good at determining that TWO (not a bunch at the same time) things sound (look, taste...) DIFFERENT. It can not determine which one is "better" since that is a matter of opinion. I worked with cell phone and two way radio audio for years. We used DBT, MOS score and a few proprietary test methods to determine "best" or "better".

I did several of my own DBT sessions with SET's. Forget "which amp is best" there isn't one. Everyone has their own definition, and like others, I have been looking for "best" for 20 years, and still haven't built it yet. In the process I have made several damn good amps!

I ran a DBT session several years ago with 4 or 5 very similar SE OPT's using the SAME amp (a TSE with 300B's), speakers, and test setup. Everything was controlled such that the OPT's were the only thing swapped. There were several listeners (7 or 8) that ran the gamut from "golden eared" to iPod lovers. The same three music passages were used, a female vocalist with piano, some dynamic jazz, and some rock with strong bass.

Testing was done two OPT's at a time, elimination style, with some random re-runs, for several iterations. Twice the same OPT's were tested against each other to verify that the results did average to 50/50 and twice the two top contenders were run against each other to verify similar results.

I don't have the results handy, but I remember the important stuff. There was a pair of high quality Electra Prints, a set of One Electrons, a set of Transcendars, a pair of Chinese Ebay scores, and another mid price brand. I believe we had a Hammond also.

To my ears the first three OPT's sound very similar (with the EP on top), but I wasn't a participant. When it was all done the results were somewhat as predicted (they scored the best), with one big surprise. The Electra Prints did get the most overall "best" votes, but someone consistently scored them "worst." Clearly there is some OPINION at work here.

Why am I discussing this? How did we go down the whole DBT rabbit hole? We did a similar test with output tubes, in the same amp. It was an SSE with KT88's. The result were essentially random.....there is no "best" only strong opinions of what's best. There are an awful lot of people who think that their wall shaking HT system is "best."

Note, with a few exceptions, ALL of these tubes measured roughly the same (power output, distortion profile, frequency response) in the same amp, yet I myself (with 60+ year old ears that have been to too many rock concerts) can hear the difference between some of them. Some (those with more peak emission capability) handle transients better.

If a group of people gathered in the same room with $50 K worth of HiFi equipment can't pick out a best tube or transformer, how can someone who doesn't know what you like musically tell you what amp to build.

There have been several votes for the 2A3, but they are my least favorite of the tubes in the range of 3 to 4 watts. WHY? I like dynamic music with a lot of transients. Rock, Jazz, Latin percussion and guitar. The 2A3 sounds sweet and lush with female vocalists, but it doesn't do metal. Does that make it bad for you?

No, but there are other options. If there is a way for you to listen to some SE tube amps on your music, and ideally your speakers, do it. Otherwise, as some have suggested, get the best OPT's for an SE amp that you are willing to spring for, and prepare for a long journey.

Some have suggested a set of 3K ohm OPT's, and they are the recommended load for 2A3's and 300B's. If you are going down the 2A3 road and aren't going to change course, go for it.

I (and others) prefer a 5K OPT. It works with the 45, which will give you the best 2 watts you will ever hear, (yeah, I used the "B" word), the 300B which will give you about 6 or 7 watts with a 5K load and be far more tolerant of speakers with wide impedance variations, the 6L6GC, EL34 and KT88 too. They will work good for the 2A3 as well, but you will lose a watt or so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom