What causes grainy sound

Heed Audio – Obelisk family


These amps are class A? You must be joking.

Well, they could be biased at 10 watts or more into class A... so what..

it is capacitor coupled, that is what you wanted. they sound damn fine. I listened to them 3 times. No capacitor sound blabla.

This is another witch hunt at some poor little parts such as caps and resistors, their quality is 100X what it used to be in the first tube amps and people go after this like it is the new plague. Ignorance it is.
 
Well, they could be biased at 10 watts or more into class A... so what..

They cannot. It is physically impossible. It wasn't me who dragged class A into this in the first place, just noticing the facts 🙂 Which are, that for some reason only a tiny percentage of the amps being manufactured at present are cap coupled to the speakers. 1%? Less? Do people realise what they are missing on?
 
Ugly electrolytic capacitors are far less harmful than balanced topologies.
Over the last few years my valve system gradually migrated to being fully balanced and IMO each step has been a significant improvement in fidelity.

As the preamp has the ability to convert SE > BAL and BAL > SE i have reached the conclusion that an intrinsically balanced source is of insignificant usefulness compared to a balanced power amp.

So here is something more we can agree to disagree upon 😀
 
Last edited:
This is a really weird statement.
Yes. Context is with the question.
Everything proven to be audible was easily measurable with standard tests.
That's the problem. If it is not measurable then it is a lie, inaudible and unproven. No, I don't think it is easy. People need to know the mechanism first then they will be able to figure out suitable test. But it is not going to happen because (1) you need a respondent that will hear the difference (2) you need to prove that it will affect not only the respondent.
 
Yes. Context is with the question.

That's the problem. If it is not measurable then it is a lie, inaudible and unproven. No, I don't think it is easy. People need to know the mechanism first then they will be able to figure out suitable test. But it is not going to happen because (1) you need a respondent that will hear the difference (2) you need to prove that it will affect not only the respondent.

I don't understand a word you're saying.
It just doesn't make sense at all.
 
I don't understand a word you're saying.
It just doesn't make sense at all.

Then pick one simple segment and ask specifically about that.

You said: everything proven to be audible was easily measurable...

There are things (claimed to be) audible that have not been proven. Like the resistor's sound. How are you going to prove that they are indeed audible? You are then pushed to conclude that either (1) those are liars (2) you don't understand. Many prefer option (1).
 
You proof things to be audible with a properly conducted double blind listening test. And then publish the test results with the "tell" so others can learn what to listen for and verify it. If it's verified by several other people, you have your proof. It's been done over and over again.

If resistors have a sound, these tests will show it. If they don't, the test results will be negative. It's just that many people don't accept these test results, then cognitive dissonance kicks in and science is raped.
 
Last edited: