Ya, give him a break you guys, I've experienced the exact opposite with expensive mundorf caps, going from big solid bass, depth, detail etc, to mush after 20-30 hrs. Yet they sounded fantastic with time in a different position. I had a friend hear it too, but I bet it was nearly immeasurable.
Also you guys who spout changes in operating points as being the culprit, well, with my amp I've experienced greater tonal differences with part changes than with subtle bias point changes. Then there's burn in all over the place, it's not always good, but this guy likes what he heard and wanted to share that with us. For that I'm thankful. Maybe it's his first experiment on the subject and was wowed, something I could tell a number of you have never paid enough attention too to experience and that makes me sad for you. It kinda makes me think this hobby (or profession) is more of a mental masturbation than an appreciation of the sound or music.
I wager anyone here who doesn't believe in this to try before he posts.
Also if you go back 10yrs there's all sorts arguing that there's no difference in parts that a resistor is a resistor and a cap is a cap and the sound quality is all based on the circuit and operating points. Where are those guys now, attempting to discredit this guy even hearing any change at all?
ob·jec·tive
əbˈjektiv/Submit
adjective
1.
(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
And so what he used a wrong word, or did he? Maybe he meant subjective and wrote objective, or maybe he was trying to be objective, what are you guys now, grammar nazi's too?
It's a fact that the OP thought he heard something change, and I bet he did, good for him to use his ears to listen to music and not his tools.
Last edited:
Why don't you go back and actually read what I wrote, and do it with comprehension this time?
"Miles, if you can remember changes from slight adjustments in seating position, then why couldn't the OP remember slight cap changes, does he not have special powers like you? Is he crazy?"
Nonsense. In the OP, he mentions "100 hours ago", how long is that? It's over four days. I doubt he stayed awake, doing nothing but sit there and listen for four continuous days. Over the course of weeks or even months, he isn't gonna recall accurately how that amp sounded that long ago. It's not the same as making a tweak and recalling how it sounded a few minutes ago.
(I laughed because actually moving your seating position does have an affect on sound, yet he calls it magical.)
I wrote no such damn thing. Reading comprehension: try it some time, you just might like it.
"I also have a hard time believing that passive components do not have an effect on performance".
When they do, it's something that can be measured objectively: Sound of Capacitors. That's something completely different from extravagant claims made in audiophool-speak for parts that cost $$$$ whereas Mouser or Digikey sells the same thing for a tenth of the price.
Yes, nearly immeasurable, yet night-n-day difference concerning the bass response... come on dude, who are you kidding...
You're confused if you think keeping to objectivity is somehow irreconcilable with enjoying music. I enjoy it with every fiber in my being, yet don't fool myself to believe there's some immeasurable voodoo that dictates the quality of my amp.
I have, and by keeping with facts and having been set straight on some misguidance some time ago is exactly the reason why I react to these empty claims.
Ah ok, so you didn't even read the OP's post properly. He used BOTH subjective and objective. No hiccup there. And be careful with using the word Nazi. Not cool man.
Wrong. There's no way to tell if it's a fact the OP actually heard a change'. That's the whole point.
Last edited:
Over the course of three years I can tell if something sounds mushy or tight and magical, because one is mushy (bad) and the other is tight and magical (good).
It's like, I bet most people can remember the texture of porridge, and don't need to immediately A/B it with an apple to see if they where right.
Or perhaps like how chili starts to taste better after a couple days, it just takes time for it to settle in.
Or wine, can take years, how do they know the taste has even changed, I've never experienced this, but apparently it's common knowledge.
I like old cheese.
It's like, I bet most people can remember the texture of porridge, and don't need to immediately A/B it with an apple to see if they where right.
Or perhaps like how chili starts to taste better after a couple days, it just takes time for it to settle in.
Or wine, can take years, how do they know the taste has even changed, I've never experienced this, but apparently it's common knowledge.
I like old cheese.
I don't doubt your ability to distinguish crap from good. But you seem to be under the impressions you can detect differences in audio reproduction that no measuring device can. That's just foolish.
All easilly explained by simple scientific processes or measurable differences.
No reason to be sarcastic. Just give me some factual proof to back up your claims.
OK, it was measurable, I just didn't measure it. So what would I measure to see if I have a large sound-stage, and see if I have enough detail?
No, there's a scientific explanation for that voodoo. Perhaps you would need a very large magnet and some extremely sensitive equipment to measure the diamagnetic effects the current is having on the copper and vice versa over time but... whatever man. Miles Prower just posted reference to "the Sound of Capacitors" and there is mention of a hysteresis effect and he attributes that to the sound difference and so is this due to magnetics? Like how an inductor uses magnetism to store charge... Magnetism in materials can change over time, this is only one suggestion of many I listed in a previous post.
By your definition and everyone elses, his times where at least objective. And I can only assume he tried to approach it with an objective mind.
Read it again and look for the key word you glossed over. However, again my opinion is I bet he heard a change.
Also I was wondering where on the mouser site the pio caps are, or the ones with silver and gold? Monocrystaline wire, do they have that, what about naked resistors they might have those.
You give me factual proof, my argument is that the equipment necessary in many cases is not readily available, and very expensive. Instead (us commoners) have to rely on our ears which are super analogue tools, with (how many microvilli does each ear have?) sooo many individual measurement devices tied to the most powerful computer known to our universe (brain), and so we can measure the changes through sound. We just can't do it numerically.
Ha! Sounds alot more like prom night than a Lafayette tube amp.😀
I can honestly say that some nights when I have free time I sit down and listen to the same SET I have had for years and it sounds fantastic.
Other nights it sounds completely different; somehow lacking life and richness. Now the only thing that has changed is the passage of time, I have altered nothing in the amp.
I am more convinced that my mood, my state of mind, and atmospheric changes have more to do with the sound of my amp than to whether or not I have a carbon comp here or a adamantium cap there...
I am not sayin that components dont matter; I am only commenting on my personal experience that the human factor is FAR more variable and fickle than some passive components.
After all, humans are ACTIVE components😀
Change "some" to "any" and I'll agree with you.
Separation and crosstalk. Or do a true ears-only test.
edit: And frequency response, hat-tip to funk
Well that didn't take much convincing 🙄
Sound stage first off all is a very subjective term and could mean a number of things to any number of people, but if I had to take a guess at what you're subscribing, it could be speaker placement, channel separation, slightly scooped mid, proper recording, treated listening room. Take your pick.
And change the reproductive quality of an amp from mediocre to fantastic or vice-versa?? No way.
I bet he thought he heard a change. Big difference.
They don't with very good reason. Although they carry silvered Mica if that floats your boat.
Edit: And b.t.w., CalrityCap TC series are just metallized polypropylene film. Nothing fancy.
Last edited:
This was hardly any kind of a scientific listening test.
No set environment description.
Was the burn-in a continuous burn-in or start/stop?
Was the listening test done at the same time of the day each time or was it done once in the morning when he had rested eardrums or again in the afternoon after all day noise?
Did the burn-in affect the tubes? Was the unit warmed-up for an hour at each listening?
Was the line voltage set with a variac or was it different by 5 volts from test to test which would have an impact on the B+?
Same source music? Perfect volume level calibration?
Lots of missing science, too many factors not set to give this any real credibility and not even considering the component physical science. Going from "mid-fi" sound to "through the roof" takes a huge swing in the frequency response curve. That could easily be documented with before and after scope shots. Some folks just need to believe for their own sake in the "magic." They need to justify their own vested "investment" that after all is done, may seem foolish with enough reflection and experience. They just can't admit it.
No set environment description.
Was the burn-in a continuous burn-in or start/stop?
Was the listening test done at the same time of the day each time or was it done once in the morning when he had rested eardrums or again in the afternoon after all day noise?
Did the burn-in affect the tubes? Was the unit warmed-up for an hour at each listening?
Was the line voltage set with a variac or was it different by 5 volts from test to test which would have an impact on the B+?
Same source music? Perfect volume level calibration?
Lots of missing science, too many factors not set to give this any real credibility and not even considering the component physical science. Going from "mid-fi" sound to "through the roof" takes a huge swing in the frequency response curve. That could easily be documented with before and after scope shots. Some folks just need to believe for their own sake in the "magic." They need to justify their own vested "investment" that after all is done, may seem foolish with enough reflection and experience. They just can't admit it.
Provided a constant current and voltage is provided, and bias point maintained, all other measurable and adjustable factors maintained, in a perfect tube burning in experiment...
What is changing when a tube burns in? What is the measurable change?
What is changing when a tube burns in? What is the measurable change?
Ok two things,
how is that measured in sound?
And let's say that grid leak resistor compensates for that and the heater supply also compensates, then there is no change in sound?
how is that measured in sound?
And let's say that grid leak resistor compensates for that and the heater supply also compensates, then there is no change in sound?
I'm sorry but I'm out, I just don't subscribe to the theory that everything can be measured with bench-top tools. There's way to many variables to factor in. I mean any musician knows that even humidity effects sound quality, but who's measured that? And why bother, it's an effect that's there it's subjective and it changes as it also does with the age of the instrument. What about environmental electromagnetic field anomalies and air pressure, I guess you'd need a pressure controlled shielded and humidity controlled environment to start with, before you could even begin the experiment.
My opinion is, no matter how wrong, is that sometimes you just got to trust your ears, mostly because most of us don't have the time, money and resources to do a proper scientific experiment. If someone has the time, money and resources I implore you to study the burn in effect scientifically. Do it on Caps, resistors, cables, speakers, tubes, transformers/inductors, solder joints etc...
My opinion is, no matter how wrong, is that sometimes you just got to trust your ears, mostly because most of us don't have the time, money and resources to do a proper scientific experiment. If someone has the time, money and resources I implore you to study the burn in effect scientifically. Do it on Caps, resistors, cables, speakers, tubes, transformers/inductors, solder joints etc...
In order:
Gain, distortion, and noise.
That doesn't work without greatly altering the function of the circuit.
Fortunately, it doesn't take long for tubes to stabilize, which takes you to the beginning of the long, slow decline into senescence.😀
Scutterflux,
These factors a very easy to measure. Electronic test equipment is more sensitive than human hearing. Think about power factor to understand this. It takes a doubling of power to raise the output volume by 3dB. That is a huge difference on a scope or meter but is just a small volume increase to the ear. 1dB is nothing in volume increase to the ear but the voltage change is very easily sensed with instruments. So to say that you just have to have faith or rely on your ears to hear the quality change is just WRONG.
If the highs, mids, low frequencies are audibly sensed as different, then those waves are very easily seen on a scope as different. There is nothing you can hear that you cannot measure. If it's measurable then a scientific report can say the frequency response on the highs flattened, dropped or went ballistic and that's why it sounds different. But if it doesn't change significantly to a piece of test equipment, it won't be audible.
What variables then??
And we're not measuring ecto plasma or super symmetry here. There's nothing magical or elusive about audio reproduction.
I am a musician and yes I know humidity can alter the instrument's tone. The wood resonates different, necks change shape and the way your fingers interact with the strings changes as well. All resulting in an altered harmonic content. Purely objective. Yet, the changes are subtle and the fundamental character of the instrument (bass in my case) is maintained.
Ears are very good measuring instruments, but I recently read a post here on DiyAudio (by Sy I.I.R.C.??) somewhere nailing it: It's the part in between that's flawed to make an objective assessment.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.