One of the funniest posts I've seen was where a person said that if they didn't like the way the music sounded out of an ultra low distortion system then they would rather get used to listening to it like that than have it altered in any way by the system to make it more pleasing.
I think it was Nelson Pass who said something along the lines of "this isn't dialysis" It is hard to have a discussion about audio with someone who doesn't put enjoyment at the top of the priority list.
I've been through a lot of amps and a few speakers recently (too much time on my hands to build things) and I pick the 'best' by just trying them and the ones I listen to the longest are the ones that are the best for me.
Last edited:
invaderzim,
Thanks!
It is so hard to get people to enjoy the music.
I belong to an audio club.
Some are designers, builders.
Some are purchasers.
Some are listeners (most of those enjoy listening).
Some are dissatisfied with their system.
The club members are various combinations of the above.
Thanks!
It is so hard to get people to enjoy the music.
I belong to an audio club.
Some are designers, builders.
Some are purchasers.
Some are listeners (most of those enjoy listening).
Some are dissatisfied with their system.
The club members are various combinations of the above.
I've heard of one simple mod on a large guitar amp, if it was six in PP, pull a tube from one side. That resulted in something the user liked.🙂
""lopsided" power amps"..."one 6L6GC and one EL34"..."if it was six in PP, pull a tube from one side"...
Isnt that net effect similar to simply and deliberately unbalancing the cathodyne / whatever phase splitter drive to the output tubes? I.e. the second harmonic no longer cancels in the OPT?
I think this has been investigated by others - to the point where a "sweetness" control design was offered (given the term "sweetness" can be typically associated with an increase in 2nd harmonic content...)
Isnt that net effect similar to simply and deliberately unbalancing the cathodyne / whatever phase splitter drive to the output tubes? I.e. the second harmonic no longer cancels in the OPT?
I think this has been investigated by others - to the point where a "sweetness" control design was offered (given the term "sweetness" can be typically associated with an increase in 2nd harmonic content...)
I think it depends on which "camp" you happen to be in, as there's similarities in other contexts, such as "computing". There's computer users who just want to enjoy their out of the box user experience (tend toward Apple) and there's those who enjoy endlessly fiddle and ****** with it (tend toward PC).
I'm here in part because I tend strongly toward the latter - even with lavish regrets over the untold hours of my personal time sunk into the thing - which isnt that much, compared to many others. To the point where I've had thoughts like "I wonder if MS would be as rich if they had to actually pay every user for their time they took away, to straighten out ...". Who knows how many man-hours across the planet have been burned over simply getting the thing to work the way you want, again.
Just looking at some of the the titles of threads here, you can tell some are never going to make it all the way in the inevitably asymptotic approach to getting to finally enjoy the music. There's 1001 factors to fool with and it's going to take "forever" - a lifetime - to sort it all out. And even then, "Maybe the Goldwood 18's with their 30Hz Fs really will give me a bit more listening joy in (just) the bass; eh, what's another $200, 16 screws, getting out the measurement system, readjusting the DSP eq et al - compared to the possibility of a little bit better?"
Maybe it's impossible to get people who's nature strongly subscribes to the endless make-work investigation of things, to enjoy the music. Maybe the flip side of that is most who simply and naturally do enjoy the music, do so on compromised systems. (Not everyone, of course!)
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I’m not here because I enjoy the music though, I actually just like talking, reading and thinking about the technology plus occasionally building something. The music gets in the way most of the time 😀
The gig I did with him, no. He was much more closely related to Stolichnaya.
By the pint glass.
I did, for a dozen years. Recorded music, that is. I found it such a pale comparison to live music that I got rid of my gear and didn't go back for many years. Recorded music just didn't seem that interesting.
jjasniew,
You are correct,
Miss-adjusting the balance of the cathodyne splitter (or other splitter) is "similar" to either using different tube types in the output stage, or "similar" to pulling one tube out of a quad, six-some, or octal push pull output set.
Those will both create some 2nd harmonic distortion.
Three things determine the amount of 2nd harmonic distortion thus produced:
1. The degree of the AC un-balance in the cathodyne splitter (or other splitter).
2. The degree of the AC un-balance in the output stage.
3. The amount of negative feedback that is applied that includes the un-balanced stage (splitter stage or output stage) in that feedback loop (more negative feedback, less 2nd harmonic distortion).
Remember, negative feedback can "cover a multitude of sins".
"Similar" is one thing.
But as to the output stage, whatever you do that un-balances the DC currents in the output transformer causes a completely more complex effect.
"All un-balanced circuits are equal, but some un-balanced circuits are more equal than others" - I stole that from George Orwells "Animal Farm", and I modified it so that it would be more "distorted".
You are correct,
Miss-adjusting the balance of the cathodyne splitter (or other splitter) is "similar" to either using different tube types in the output stage, or "similar" to pulling one tube out of a quad, six-some, or octal push pull output set.
Those will both create some 2nd harmonic distortion.
Three things determine the amount of 2nd harmonic distortion thus produced:
1. The degree of the AC un-balance in the cathodyne splitter (or other splitter).
2. The degree of the AC un-balance in the output stage.
3. The amount of negative feedback that is applied that includes the un-balanced stage (splitter stage or output stage) in that feedback loop (more negative feedback, less 2nd harmonic distortion).
Remember, negative feedback can "cover a multitude of sins".
"Similar" is one thing.
But as to the output stage, whatever you do that un-balances the DC currents in the output transformer causes a completely more complex effect.
"All un-balanced circuits are equal, but some un-balanced circuits are more equal than others" - I stole that from George Orwells "Animal Farm", and I modified it so that it would be more "distorted".
Last edited:
Simply unbalancing the AC outputs from the phase splitter produces the mildest effect.
Misadjusting the bias to cause unequal DC currents on either side of the OPT will produce a different effect, and may induce OPT saturation on low frequency sounds. Saturation is generally not a good sounding distortion, but some bass guitar players like it. It does tend to drive the tube current up, possibly leading to dead parts.
Dissimilar output tubes can cause a different more complex effect. It the tubes have unequal Gm, but are adjusted to identical idle currents the effect is mild at low output levels, but more extreme as the volume is increased.
I have found all sorts of ways to alter the tonal palette of a vacuum tube guitar amp for unique sounds. Want to try something really crazy, try sticking a tone stack INSIDE a negative feedback loop. WARNING, this WILL lead to instability, often LOUD instability.....but some extreme sounding guitar sounds can be found right on the edge of instability.
Misadjusting the bias to cause unequal DC currents on either side of the OPT will produce a different effect, and may induce OPT saturation on low frequency sounds. Saturation is generally not a good sounding distortion, but some bass guitar players like it. It does tend to drive the tube current up, possibly leading to dead parts.
Dissimilar output tubes can cause a different more complex effect. It the tubes have unequal Gm, but are adjusted to identical idle currents the effect is mild at low output levels, but more extreme as the volume is increased.
I have found all sorts of ways to alter the tonal palette of a vacuum tube guitar amp for unique sounds. Want to try something really crazy, try sticking a tone stack INSIDE a negative feedback loop. WARNING, this WILL lead to instability, often LOUD instability.....but some extreme sounding guitar sounds can be found right on the edge of instability.
real musical instruments produce harmonics, why not amps?
do we call harmonics produced in real musical instruments distortions?
afaik, a really good amp should be able to pass all this....
do we call harmonics produced in real musical instruments distortions?
afaik, a really good amp should be able to pass all this....
You know....I have recently dug up some old literature on regenerative and super-regenerative receivers, filters and "Q multipliers."
The regenerative receiver operates on the edge of oscillation, the positive feedback is turned up to the edge, but not into oscillation. This effect can be used to sharpen the response of a filter, or boost the gain of an RF demodulator.
The super-regenerative design allows for greater positive feedback which would ordinarily provoke oscillation, but the oscillation is "quenched" by breaking the feedback periodically at an ultrasonic rate.
The ladder filter used in Moog style music synthesizers is a regenerative design. Perhaps "better" or sonically different results can be obtained by adding a "quench" cycle and turning that "resonance" knob up further.
FWIW in the Musical Instrument world things can be pushd well beyond the border, in search for a new sound.
In particular Peavey introduced a "Texture" control, which they falsely claim to "smoothly go all the way from Class A to Class AB sound"
Truckload of Marketing cow manure , but what it´s actually made of is a "volume/Master" control affecting *one* of the PP sides, allowing it to be turned down almost to zero.
Since the other half bias is NOT adjusted to simultaneously send it into Class A territory, the promise is unfulfilled.
On the other side, you end up with MASSIVE asymmetry (unless you are playing around 1W , that is, in the *already* Class A section of Class AB) .
This is Peavey Valveking 50W, notice Cathodyne PI plate signal goes straight to V5 ; while its cathode one goes to V4 grid through an external volume control labelled "Texture".
It is not allowed to go down to 0, which will probably sound ugly choppy, but 1M Log pot goes to ground through an 82k resistor, so attenuation stops above some 20dB.
Drastic enough anyway.
DC through OT is not directly affected, although the very asymmetrical signal will generate a DC component.
But different to fixed uncompensated core saturation caused by tricks mentioned above, this one will be dynamic, following signal level, so effect will be more complex.
In particular Peavey introduced a "Texture" control, which they falsely claim to "smoothly go all the way from Class A to Class AB sound"
Truckload of Marketing cow manure , but what it´s actually made of is a "volume/Master" control affecting *one* of the PP sides, allowing it to be turned down almost to zero.
Since the other half bias is NOT adjusted to simultaneously send it into Class A territory, the promise is unfulfilled.
On the other side, you end up with MASSIVE asymmetry (unless you are playing around 1W , that is, in the *already* Class A section of Class AB) .
This is Peavey Valveking 50W, notice Cathodyne PI plate signal goes straight to V5 ; while its cathode one goes to V4 grid through an external volume control labelled "Texture".
It is not allowed to go down to 0, which will probably sound ugly choppy, but 1M Log pot goes to ground through an 82k resistor, so attenuation stops above some 20dB.
Drastic enough anyway.
DC through OT is not directly affected, although the very asymmetrical signal will generate a DC component.
But different to fixed uncompensated core saturation caused by tricks mentioned above, this one will be dynamic, following signal level, so effect will be more complex.
Attachments
Well, the dogma of "super short signal path" leads towards the dogma of "sounds like a piece of straight wire".
Understand, that both are the exact opposite and contradict each other.
Understand, that both are the exact opposite and contradict each other.
I would be happy if I were able to build something similar. I havent' heard any of these but their appearance is, hm... appealing., at least for me.
I hope their marketing blah-blah is being criticized here, not their actual product.
(-0.1% distortion must be very low indeed, definitely 0.2% less than +0.1%)
I hope their marketing blah-blah is being criticized here, not their actual product.
(-0.1% distortion must be very low indeed, definitely 0.2% less than +0.1%)
TonyTecson,
you should be aiming to recognizably reproduce the spectral distortion of musical instruments.
you should be aiming to recognizably reproduce the spectral distortion of musical instruments.
Harmonics are part of original instrumentsound, and necessary for correct reproduction.
No, they are original sound.
Distortion refers to unneeded changesn to original sound, created afterwards while reproducing it.
Any distortion conspires against faithful reproduction.
By the way, that´s what distortion means, literally.