Damping Factor of amps

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#104
DF96 said:
Talking of valves for guitar amps, and valves for audio reproduction, as though they are related issues is a category error. A common category error, but a category error nonetheless. The circuits are only superficially similar; one is designed (deliberately or by accident) to distort, the other to not distort.
Click to expand...
DF96, it's not weather one distorts more than the other it's what happens when they distort. tubes produce even order harmonics which add to the sweetness of the sound. transistors typically produce odd order harmonic distortion which are dissonants which tend to disrupt the soind but where this started was... i was asking if DF is so important then why do tube amps typically sound better than solid state ones do????
 
#105
wadest said:
northstar, i'm an engineer but i'm also a musician. what you say is very true. 65 to 70% of all guitar amplifiers sold today are still tube. I have also done alot of studio work and most studios are using tube preamps for mics and most other devices. theres also a big market for recording studios to buy tube conditioners to run all mastering through. I know engineers that have resurected old reel to reel tape machines and run digital tracks through them to warm up the tracks. do you notice anything in common with musicians and recording engineers, i do.
Click to expand...

Hi Wade,

I'm also a musician (non-pro; guitars, flutes, harmonicas, ...) and I did some of my own recordings in the past; open-reel-tapes, digital CDs, and have a tube amp for my electric guitar. ...Pick-ups for my acoustic ones, for my flutes, various microphones, ...I jammed with several great musicians, I had various equipment to amplify live bands and to record them...I've been there done that and dat...

Some musicians (Neil Young, Jack White, Willie Nelson, ...) like vinyls, and tubes. But they also like digital hi-res music. ...Neil now in particular (Meridian MLP, Blu-ray Audio, Pono, ...).
And many guitar players love their tube amps the most (John Fogerty from C.C.R., etc., etc., etc.).

So yes, I have great respect for people who love their sound to sound the way they love to sound.
 
#110
northstar, i to play flute. i also play sax, drums and aer heavy into vocals. you say niel young likes digital but i'm not sure thats a valid point. i and most of the musicians i know refer to niel your as niel thumbs young because he sounds lkike he's only playing with his thumbs. you know... dah, dah ,dah, dah, dah, dah in monotone..
 
#113
wadest said:
northstar, i to play flute. i also play sax, drums and aer heavy into vocals. you say niel young likes digital but i'm not sure thats a valid point. i and most of the musicians i know refer to niel your as niel thumbs young because he sounds lkike he's only playing with his thumbs. you know... dah, dah ,dah, dah, dah, dah in monotone..
Click to expand...

I'm going to ask Neil's take on damping factor. :deer:

* I play Alto steel traversiere (silver) flute and Clarinet among all the other flutes made of various material.
 
Last edited:
#115
For myself I feel that tubes give me an affordable shot at fidelity.
IMO fidelity is somewhat subjective.

By fidelity I mean, does it sound realistic or not, does it engage me, does it invoke memories or raw emotions? Shortcomings set aside.

IMO tubes seem to have great "imaging" or "dimension" seemingly without much coaxing.

I never seem to get the same sense of atmosphere with a solid state kit.
To myself, they always sound like a "stereo", which can be nice and articulate sounding, but I always know I'm listening to music produced through a "stereo system".

Solid state has too much colouration (think beige or grey) for my tastes.
They are like subtle sound effects units.
Try as they may, they just can't shake that transistor radio in your shirt pocket tone. It's still there, just with moar bass and wee THD.

I apologize for my non-technical descriptions, but there doesn't seem to be any technical description for this and surely goes beyond the scope of just harmonics etc.

I still hold reservations for the off chance I might have a chance to fly my unicorn over to Pass-land to hear a really good SS kit, but for all practical intents and purposes tubes are where its at for me to achieve that sense of fidelity.
 
#117
SNR said:
For myself I feel that tubes give me an affordable shot at fidelity.
IMO fidelity is somewhat subjective.

By fidelity I mean, does it sound realistic or not, does it engage me, does it invoke memories or raw emotions? Shortcomings set aside.

IMO tubes seem to have great "imaging" or "dimension" seemingly without much coaxing.

I never seem to get the same sense of atmosphere with a solid state kit.
To myself, they always sound like a "stereo", which can be nice and articulate sounding, but I always know I'm listening to music produced through a "stereo system".

Solid state has too much colouration (think beige or grey) for my tastes.
They are like subtle sound effects units.
Try as they may, they just can't shake that transistor radio in your shirt pocket tone. It's still there, just with moar bass and wee THD.

I apologize for my non-technical descriptions, but there doesn't seem to be any technical description for this and surely goes beyond the scope of just harmonics etc.

I still hold reservations for the off chance I might have a chance to fly my unicorn over to Pass-land to hear a really good SS kit, but for all practical intents and purposes tubes are where its at for me to achieve that sense of fidelity.
Click to expand...
SNR, Ditto!!

actually i agree with you. i'm telling you it's the harmonics produced in the harmonic distortion. tubes are even order which reenforces the fundamental tone. transistors are odd order or dissonants which destroy the natural resonance.. I did extensive research on this in the AES journals.
 
#120
MOER said:
Interesting where WOODY gets his facts from?
Most speakers now are designed to be run with an amp with a damping factor around 100 or greater and just won't preform as expected with an amp with a damping factor that's much less than 100.

What WOODY does not know that the damping factor of an amplifier is almost a useless specification in the real world

The amplifier can have a DF of 10,000 and one single fact I guess which eludes WOODY is that the DCR of the voice coil of the speaker is in series with the speaker circuit.

So the Zo of the amplifier is 0.0008 ohms, great. Now add in the resistances of all connections from amplifier's PCB through the speaker circuit and back to the PCB. Let's be generous and say this is 0.001 ohms.

So far Woody understands this.

Now add in the DCR of the say 4 ohm speaker, typically about 3.2 ohms

Now add the 3.2+0.001 + 0.0008 = 3.2018 ohms!

DF is defined as load impedance divided by Zo. But the effective Zo is 3.2018 ohms.

DF therefore is 4/3.2108 = 1.249.

The late Julian Hersch wrote a paper on this very subject.

I would like to know form WOODY what designs are implemented into "modern" speakers that makes them ONLY perform well with amplifiers with a DF of >100?
Click to expand...
Why did you add the DC impedance of the speaker to Zo? I think you're the one who doesn't understand how damping factor works mate...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom