An interesting article on what transformers bring to the mix and why those studios which can afford them still use them;
Jeff Rowland Design Group - Line-level Transformers in High-End Audio
Shoog
Jeff Rowland Design Group - Line-level Transformers in High-End Audio
Shoog
I think it's quite obvious that intelligent builders who have put a lot of time and work into their systems resent you calling their cherished creations "effects boxes". This is your term, and if you persist in using it people will - surprise surprise - continue to be angry with you!
Nobody on this thread has called linear amplification boring - that's also your rephrasing of the situation. There have been a number of well considered arguments suggesting different priorities and solutions, and I really think it's time to drop all this "effects box" kind of talk. As a moderator you should know it's inflammatory.
I think the discussion should be creative !
We all like different things and thats alright !
My ears are getting older and i have to trust my measuring equipment more and more.
And the human ear isn´t a very linear device to start with.
I´m open to new ideas and come here to learn and sometimes share my little knowledge.
This is a quite amazing forum with all flawors of people from professional manufacturers to ultra green starters.
To keep the tone gentle and share the knowledge to the less skilled in educating way will let us grow and enjoy the hobby.
There will always be a lot of hifi wodoo and some company can even make a living out of it so no reason for getting rewed up about it.
To state ones opinion in a polite way and let the non beleavers stick to their religion is the way to go if you ask me.
Long post of topic 😱
We all like different things and thats alright !
My ears are getting older and i have to trust my measuring equipment more and more.
And the human ear isn´t a very linear device to start with.
I´m open to new ideas and come here to learn and sometimes share my little knowledge.
This is a quite amazing forum with all flawors of people from professional manufacturers to ultra green starters.
To keep the tone gentle and share the knowledge to the less skilled in educating way will let us grow and enjoy the hobby.
There will always be a lot of hifi wodoo and some company can even make a living out of it so no reason for getting rewed up about it.
To state ones opinion in a polite way and let the non beleavers stick to their religion is the way to go if you ask me.
Long post of topic 😱
Did I say 20 years?
Well, quite close, you refer to an article published in
Ok let's read it, maybe what he says was cutting edge technology way back then.
Oh, what do I find?:
So HE needs to refer to *sixties* 😱 recordings to make his point?
Two possible reasons for that:Shoog said:
1. Some recording studios are not interested in reproduction, but achieving a particular sound.
2. Transformers are very good at handling balanced lines, which studios use to reduce interference in their necessarily long lines. The excellent CMRR of a good transformer outweighs limited bandwidth and core distortion in that particular application.
Most valve amp fans would love to get rid of the OPT. It is big, heavy and expensive, has limited bandwidth (with an HF resonance just above the audio band) and it adds some distortion. Until someone develops good 5k speakers or 12V power valves we are stuck with it.
If it audibly changes the signal (other than amplitude), it's an effects box, whether you find it disturbing to realize this or not. It's not my definition, it's a common one in the music and studio world.
Good professional input transformers are capable of responses between 0.5hz and 180khz as described in the linked to article, so bandwidth is not the issue unless you are a dog.
Good toroidal OT are capable of similar responses if you are prepared to work with their limitations (DC intolerance). Even relatively poor Toroidals offer responses between 10hz and 60khz without issues.
I agree long line driving, noise and hum rejection are the main advantage offered in studio applications.
However I maintain that I believe many valve amp users are preferring the sound of their transformers and that is a matter of taste.
Shoog
No, I'm sorry I don't accept this at all. The term is perjorative the way you are using it, and you are deliberately stirring up and demeaning the DIY community on this forum by your continued use of such insulting language. How dare you - as a moderator - say it's "disturbing for me to realise I built an effects box" as if I'm some kind of cretin who doesn't know what he is doing. I've really had enough of this snide kind of intellectual arrogance and I think it's high time you stepped back and re-thought the effects of your language. I've been wanting to point this out for quite some time, if the truth be known. I see you're quite unrepentant, and in your own words you're not in any way "disturbed enough to realise it".
There is nobody on this forum whose system is 100% faithful to the signal inputted to it. We all have built "effects boxes" if you insist on using this tacky terminology. So why victimise and divide our community by suggesting that some elite theorists, such as you consider yourself to be, have some kind of monopoly on proper amplification while the rest are back in the audio dark ages.
Last edited:
You can claim that "domesticated feline" is a horrible insult to people who raise cats, but it's still an accurate description for "cat." If you are emotionally attached to the idea that electronic devices which audibly alter the signal must on no account be called "effects boxes" or "effects units," you are free to not use that terminology.
My apologies to Merlin for what I think is a proper splitting of an infinitive.
My apologies to Merlin for what I think is a proper splitting of an infinitive.
You talk of splitting infinitives and completely ignore how people respond to your language, when you have already stated that people on this thread are "angry". So why not stop making people feel angry? I'm starting to find your responses quite unbelievable.
Do cool it, Mr Evans!
Only you seem to be upset yet you claim to speak for many! Who are these other enraged folks?
You may like to consider that Mr A cannot MAKE Mrs B angry! B might find A's behavior provokes her to feeling angry, but it is HER feeling.
I am sorry you do not seem to like others disagreeing with you.
Only you seem to be upset yet you claim to speak for many! Who are these other enraged folks?
You may like to consider that Mr A cannot MAKE Mrs B angry! B might find A's behavior provokes her to feeling angry, but it is HER feeling.
I am sorry you do not seem to like others disagreeing with you.
I personally think there is a significant amount of disrespect been expressed here. If people could admit that they make choices which please their tastes (and we don't all like engineering wires with gain - that imagined place in heaven) we could all move on.
May I re ask that question which the objectivists are so pointedly ignoring - why valves and not opamps when one clearly beats the other in measured response.
Shoog
May I re ask that question which the objectivists are so pointedly ignoring - why valves and not opamps when one clearly beats the other in measured response.
Shoog
Hello Cliff - am I right to use that name (I did consider Bardfast...)?
I'm a very mild-mannered person and it's very unusual for me to lose my rag. You can check all my other posts and I'm sure you'll find them all full of sweetness and light, careless bonhomie and the aroma of freshly mown hay. No - it's not others disagreeing with me, that happens to all of us all the time. Something just snapped inside me. I've just spent all weekend building an audio project, I'm tired, and having a moderator tell me I'm building effects boxes after hours of calculations and measurements is more than I can take. I really think that a moderator should show some responsibility for ensuring that this community is peaceful and happy, not just justify any and all statements in engineering terms. Steering an audio community towards peace and light requires a human touch as well as a voltmeter.
Anyway if I've offended you I apologise. It's very unusual for me to stir things up like this. This touched a raw nerve.
I'm a very mild-mannered person and it's very unusual for me to lose my rag. You can check all my other posts and I'm sure you'll find them all full of sweetness and light, careless bonhomie and the aroma of freshly mown hay. No - it's not others disagreeing with me, that happens to all of us all the time. Something just snapped inside me. I've just spent all weekend building an audio project, I'm tired, and having a moderator tell me I'm building effects boxes after hours of calculations and measurements is more than I can take. I really think that a moderator should show some responsibility for ensuring that this community is peaceful and happy, not just justify any and all statements in engineering terms. Steering an audio community towards peace and light requires a human touch as well as a voltmeter.
Anyway if I've offended you I apologise. It's very unusual for me to stir things up like this. This touched a raw nerve.
SY will speak for himself, but he is NOT a moderator in this thread, so remove that from your argument. Check the rules.
I was not offended so nothing to apologise for! 😀😀 I doubt that others were, either.
I was not offended so nothing to apologise for! 😀😀 I doubt that others were, either.
Last edited:
I don't see the "effects box" language as being disrespectful; more like a gentle and good-natured "tweaking of the tail" to stir up a bit of lively debate.
Speaking as an objectivist myself, I don't think that the valves vs opamps question has been ignored; in a sense, this is surely precisely what has been addressed by the "effects box" discussion? Namely, that a valve amplifier may typically impart, for a variety of reasons, some particular tonal qualities that are absent in a "ideal" amplifier whose output voltage is simply an exact but magnified copy of its input voltage. Maybe we could call that "distortion," since technically that is what it is, but again, some people may find that a pejorative term.
But it is surely rather illogical to maintain at one and the same time that valve amplifiers impart a special tonal quality to the sound, and yet also to assert that this is not a "special effect" caused by the nature of the beast.
And again, I would emphasise that there is absolutely nothing wrong with preferring the tonal qualities imparted by the valve amplifier; music is supposed to provide enjoyment, after all. But it surely doesn't hurt to recognise that this may, in fact, be being achieved by "distorting" the signal in particular euphonic ways.
Chris
Oh - sorry. In that case I misunderstood. It just says "SY - moderator" so I took it literally at face value. In the light of what you are telling me I withdraw all the previous comments about SY being a moderator, and apologise unconditionally. I really had no idea.
I'll just have to go back to disagreeing with him, so business as usual and we can carry on with our usual nonchalant cameraderie in a universe of unconditional positive regard. I do, though, agree with Shoog about a "significant amount of disrespect" but all that needs is a pair of virtual duelling pistols between a pair of virtual gentlemen, hopefully with a pair of virtual fair maidens shedding tears into virtual handkerchiefs......
Sorry, SY, for my error. Do you want to delete any posts that refer to you as a moderator? If you do that's fine with me, go ahead.
Andy
Last edited:
There is a derogatory tone in the use of "effects box" to describe what other people have achieved in their quest.
I am more than willing to admit that each and every one of us is on a quest to achieve many things, and almost all of our efforts will sound slightly different. Good, I like that and I think it is honest and an upfront reflection of the fact that the "wire with gain", even if it were achievable, isn't necessarily desirable.
I have heard examples of the result of the "wire with gain" approach, and dull was the only word which sprang to the rooms lips. I don't want dull and I don't think many people here do either.
Shoog
I am more than willing to admit that each and every one of us is on a quest to achieve many things, and almost all of our efforts will sound slightly different. Good, I like that and I think it is honest and an upfront reflection of the fact that the "wire with gain", even if it were achievable, isn't necessarily desirable.
I have heard examples of the result of the "wire with gain" approach, and dull was the only word which sprang to the rooms lips. I don't want dull and I don't think many people here do either.
Shoog
Last edited:
Then you must admit that the Red Light District is an effects box then? Compared to a transistor amp of relatively minor competence and expense, it can only be described so, if we're going on empirical numbers alone. That is not to say it doesn't sound better though.
You mean your use of "to not"? Urg, no. Saying 'to not' is the most ugly and egregious way to ruin your prose. Notting is not a thing you can do. He is free not to do so. Doing is something you can do. Really, don't do it. Pleeaaase.
To an extent, yes. To my ears, I cannot distinguish it from a good solid state amp at matched levels (NB: I use it from 110Hz up with a 4th order highpass), so for me it's not an effects box, but someone with sharper hearing might be able to discern the 0.0x% distortion (principally 3rd order). I doubt it, but it's certainly possible.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.