In a recent review of a power amp the author preferred the sound when the PA was fronted by a PrimaLuna EVO 400, as it provided more of a tube quality. He attributed the "tube-sound" to the dual 5AR4's and not the three 12AXs/AUs, or whatever, per channel.
I'd think this veteran audiophile might have picked up some technical knowledge along the way, even without formal training. Wouldn't dual rectifiers contribute more to having less cross-talk between channels rather than a softer waveform envelope? Hell, even one 5AR4 would provide a pretty stiff PS for a preamp. As I'm not a technical expert myself, I'd be interested in an educated opinion from any AK members.
I'd think this veteran audiophile might have picked up some technical knowledge along the way, even without formal training. Wouldn't dual rectifiers contribute more to having less cross-talk between channels rather than a softer waveform envelope? Hell, even one 5AR4 would provide a pretty stiff PS for a preamp. As I'm not a technical expert myself, I'd be interested in an educated opinion from any AK members.
It is ridiculous to have two rectifiers, one per channel, but fro the same transformer. Also you need to duplicate the filtering. It seem to have no sense.
Apparently, the EVO 400 does have two "large" separate, potted, mu-metal shielded, toroids, plus Uuuge (Bernie-sized) chokes. Add to that: Swiss silver coated wire, Takman resistors ("more musical sounding") & even more yadda, yadda. Not bad for ONLY $4499, considering high-end prices. Hey, I wouldn't kick it out of bed.
My Sunn 200S bass amp is jealous; the pair of 6550s have to share one 5AR4. That's like sipping through a straw compared to the P-Luna.
My Sunn 200S bass amp is jealous; the pair of 6550s have to share one 5AR4. That's like sipping through a straw compared to the P-Luna.
Last edited:
I saw an advertisement for their equipment in recent years touting something like "we make real tube amplifiers because we used tube rectifiers".
This from their website:
"In the world of preamps, experts agree that tube rectification is the gold standard. It’s quieter than solid state rectification, dropping the noise floor. And it offers the most natural, textured, and vibrant presentation because the circuit is now pure tube. But because it is expensive to implement, you’ll only find it in the top of the line models typically costing $10,000 or more. Finding a preamp using one rectifier tube is sweet. PrimaLuna goes even further using two 5AR4 rectifier tubes in a dual-mono design to present your music with a three-dimensionality that will give you goosebumps."
Tube rectification is not the gold standard.
It's not quieter than solid state rectification (assuming we would spend the extra $2 on Schottky diodes).
It is not all that expensive to implement, often times there's a spare 5V winding on the available power transformers for such projects so you are talking about a tube and a socket.
I wonder why they don't use four tube rectifiers if two is so good? There are tons of really well loved vintage tube amps with solid state rectifiers.
This from their website:
"In the world of preamps, experts agree that tube rectification is the gold standard. It’s quieter than solid state rectification, dropping the noise floor. And it offers the most natural, textured, and vibrant presentation because the circuit is now pure tube. But because it is expensive to implement, you’ll only find it in the top of the line models typically costing $10,000 or more. Finding a preamp using one rectifier tube is sweet. PrimaLuna goes even further using two 5AR4 rectifier tubes in a dual-mono design to present your music with a three-dimensionality that will give you goosebumps."
Tube rectification is not the gold standard.
It's not quieter than solid state rectification (assuming we would spend the extra $2 on Schottky diodes).
It is not all that expensive to implement, often times there's a spare 5V winding on the available power transformers for such projects so you are talking about a tube and a socket.
I wonder why they don't use four tube rectifiers if two is so good? There are tons of really well loved vintage tube amps with solid state rectifiers.
Great ad copy is the real gold standard, I'd guess. Among other examples, my newish Rogue Atlas is all tubes with a SS supply. I like the combo; it sounds fine to me. A SS replacement could plug right into the 5AR4 socket in the Sunn amp to tighten up the bass a little. I'd throw in new, higher working-voltage, caps if going that route too. Less load on the power tranny & heat to boot.
It amazes my how extreme some prices and audio designs have gotten. It also seems that some reviewers are entranced with tubes (and more is more better) when great sound is also available without any glass. I'm thinking PrimaLuna is betting on the attraction of retro-chic gear.
It amazes my how extreme some prices and audio designs have gotten. It also seems that some reviewers are entranced with tubes (and more is more better) when great sound is also available without any glass. I'm thinking PrimaLuna is betting on the attraction of retro-chic gear.
I did a SS voltage tripler and 2SC3503 with 22uf cap provides cleaner power then any of this.
the twin 6922's B+ noise is below the 106db s/n.
the twin 6922's B+ noise is below the 106db s/n.
Right on! The 3 (arguably) most revered units: Harman-Kardon Citation II, Marantz 8B, and McIntosh MC-275 employ SS rectifiers.
IMO, the "review" that prompted the start of this thread has little, if any, credibility. I strongly suspect that a case of "Emperor's New Clothes Syndrome" has been encountered.
Isn't that same chassis what the use in power amp? So there is some extra holes where power tubes should be, so fill the holes with some rectifiers and audiophile electrolytics, and then you have preamp.
The answer is on the Price Tag.
Mike
Just like the (commercial!) preamp I saw with a 300B used as a half-wave rectifier. AND a 300B pass tube. There can't be any practical reason why you'd do that.
Its simply a matter of taste. Some of you swear by SS rectifiers I swear at them. Don't like them and never will...my personal taste my preference.
There would seem to be a lot of hype in the advertisement the manufacturer has where he uses two 5AR4's but what the hell? I made a line stage up one time with dual power supplies with regulation and separate chassis for each channel and power supply. Was it any better? I'd like to think so but then again it a preference.
Isn't the purpose of DIY to boldly go where no one has gone before? Just look at the circuit design changes here over the years the different number of boards people can buy to try a different circuit or concept.
There would seem to be a lot of hype in the advertisement the manufacturer has where he uses two 5AR4's but what the hell? I made a line stage up one time with dual power supplies with regulation and separate chassis for each channel and power supply. Was it any better? I'd like to think so but then again it a preference.
Isn't the purpose of DIY to boldly go where no one has gone before? Just look at the circuit design changes here over the years the different number of boards people can buy to try a different circuit or concept.
Last edited:
Personal preferences, when clearly stated, are easily understood and will be respected. HOWEVER, 2X 5AR4s in a preamp is a train load, not a mere crock, of crap.
😡 I call bullsh*t!I've got some vacuum rectifiers in my "stash" and will find a reasonable use for them. The "hen scratch" PSU is (eventually) going into a phono preamp.
Attachments
It would seem like this forum has gone down hill quite a bit. There used to be a time when you could express your personal opinion without being slammed.
I'll continue to think my equipment with tube rectifiers sounds better to my ears and those that don't agree with me can keep their personal comments to themselves.
As audiophiles we continue to express our opinions about equipment, parts, and circuits. Manufacturers continue to design and market equipment with assorted bells and whistles at exorbitant prices and people continue to purchase. To be blunt I doubt there is anything being marketed today worthy of its price but I have to laugh at a design that incorporates an elaborate design and the people that purchase that equipment. SO, what the hell? Somebody made a piece of equipment that was overkill and somebody will buy it.
So, I say its a matter of taste and a prerequisite of a thick pocket book of the purchaser that allows companies to design a piece of equipment and them to buy it.
As for my like or dislike of SS rectifiers... I managed to share my feelings on the subject only to be kicked like a junkyard dog by some of you. Let me remind you that your entitled to your opinion as much as I am mine. I'll respect your opinion and you respect mine. Some of you want to "call ********" and that's your privilege just don't kick me in the process.
I'll continue to think my equipment with tube rectifiers sounds better to my ears and those that don't agree with me can keep their personal comments to themselves.
As audiophiles we continue to express our opinions about equipment, parts, and circuits. Manufacturers continue to design and market equipment with assorted bells and whistles at exorbitant prices and people continue to purchase. To be blunt I doubt there is anything being marketed today worthy of its price but I have to laugh at a design that incorporates an elaborate design and the people that purchase that equipment. SO, what the hell? Somebody made a piece of equipment that was overkill and somebody will buy it.
So, I say its a matter of taste and a prerequisite of a thick pocket book of the purchaser that allows companies to design a piece of equipment and them to buy it.
As for my like or dislike of SS rectifiers... I managed to share my feelings on the subject only to be kicked like a junkyard dog by some of you. Let me remind you that your entitled to your opinion as much as I am mine. I'll respect your opinion and you respect mine. Some of you want to "call ********" and that's your privilege just don't kick me in the process.
Last edited:
Its OK, man… (BurntDigits) We all have our personal foibles.
I'm old enough to appreciate brutal honesty: there is an esthetic glossiness to lots-of-glass, to mirror polished external chassis, to ridiculously steampunk knobs and fittings, that is the other reason we build and covet highest-end audiophile equipment.
Some time back (oh, maybe 25 years), out of frustration with having an insufficient budget to afford buying and drinking some of the better French, Australian and American red Bordeaux wines, I set out to learn competant wine making. The goal… to produce 'hundred buck bottles' that in double-blind tasting could either rank with, or beat those very same revered wines I loved … and couldn't afford.
Years of trying passed. Years and tens of thousands of dollars in equipment, tools, trials, failures, some successes, then a LOT of successes. Winning the San Francisco wine competition outright was the icing on the cake. The self-education … worked. I was producing top-top-shelf wine easily worth $100 a bottle … for a production cost less than $10 a throw.
THAT is what I maintain is the reason we audio-føøls come to DIYaudio, and dedicate much of our 'hobby life' to creating these ridiculous works of art. And yes, if we are brutally honest, it is about the glass. The glow. The polish, and the finish.
Which honestly has precious little to do with the sound, but hey… this is a hobby of Art as well as a bit of Science.
⋅-⋅-⋅ Just saying, ⋅-⋅-⋅
⋅-=≡ GoatGuy ✓ ≡=-⋅
I'm old enough to appreciate brutal honesty: there is an esthetic glossiness to lots-of-glass, to mirror polished external chassis, to ridiculously steampunk knobs and fittings, that is the other reason we build and covet highest-end audiophile equipment.
Some time back (oh, maybe 25 years), out of frustration with having an insufficient budget to afford buying and drinking some of the better French, Australian and American red Bordeaux wines, I set out to learn competant wine making. The goal… to produce 'hundred buck bottles' that in double-blind tasting could either rank with, or beat those very same revered wines I loved … and couldn't afford.
Years of trying passed. Years and tens of thousands of dollars in equipment, tools, trials, failures, some successes, then a LOT of successes. Winning the San Francisco wine competition outright was the icing on the cake. The self-education … worked. I was producing top-top-shelf wine easily worth $100 a bottle … for a production cost less than $10 a throw.
THAT is what I maintain is the reason we audio-føøls come to DIYaudio, and dedicate much of our 'hobby life' to creating these ridiculous works of art. And yes, if we are brutally honest, it is about the glass. The glow. The polish, and the finish.
Which honestly has precious little to do with the sound, but hey… this is a hobby of Art as well as a bit of Science.
⋅-⋅-⋅ Just saying, ⋅-⋅-⋅
⋅-=≡ GoatGuy ✓ ≡=-⋅
Burnedfinges said:
I like your handle Burnedfingers; it's perfect for anyone heavily into tubes. As with my political preferences, I'm somewhat a Centrist regarding amplifier choices, but tend to fall onto the hollow glass side more often than SS.
I, for one, am truly interested in why you prefer tube rectification. If it sounds good, either type is fine with me, but can understand why tubes may be a better choice for those who can detect a difference. I suspect tube rectifiers limit some AC line garbage that squeaks through with SS. It could be that even better high-speed Schotky diodes may let something pass that is blocked in a cathode-to-plate transition of electrons.
Let any criticism pass and spill the beans. Is there anything in particular you can describe about the sound being better with tube power supplies - ie. smoother and less fatiguing, perhaps? Just curious; I can't always quantify everything I hear, so I'm interested in what others notice about sound reproduction.
My personal feelings about the difference is sound is this... to me SS rectification seems to be more punchy and tube rectification more laid back. I'm sure my post will now bring forth more criticism but I'm being honest in my criticism. Having said the above I do find myself replacing the tube rectifier with a plug in SS rectifier if I'm going to listen to say AC/DC. I may need my head examined but I seem to feel there is a sonic difference between SS and tube and between different tube rectifiers. Yes, I have made a spread sheet in the past which listed the current draw of the circuit and the B+ for each rectifier I tried. I even used rectification which consisted of fast response diodes which rectified the voltage prior to the rectifier tube. The tube in conjunction with the diodes possibly smooths the B+? To me it sounds different and prompted me to do a blind test where I had a friend switch rectifiers and I picked the combination. Then again if I can hear a difference or think I can it opens up the can of worms whereas capacitors make a difference in sound and tube rolling actually contributes to a different sound.
So, to be blunt who the hell knows?
So, to be blunt who the hell knows?
Thanks for your further clarification. It's hard arguing with repeatable results in a blind test. All that really matters is that we enjoy what we hear.
I'd like to believe somebody has shown waveform differences using a scope and a variety of AC + noise with both types of rectification. Maybe the air-gap between a tube's anode & cathode prevents some junk that can otherwise tunnel through a "Sand-State" device.
I'd like to believe somebody has shown waveform differences using a scope and a variety of AC + noise with both types of rectification. Maybe the air-gap between a tube's anode & cathode prevents some junk that can otherwise tunnel through a "Sand-State" device.