It is a matter of fact that all amps distort, some just distort more than others. We are all listening to a distorted signal of some sort. I suspect that the distortion of the speakers is dominant, but that is not the point here.
I remember an add for Kodachrome film (a long long time ago) that did not claim the accuracy of the colors in the new film. It stated that the color reproduction was "pleasing to the eye". Many people were pleased enough to buy the product, it still exists today. It isn't the only film product available, so there must be other opinions about what is "pleasing to the eye".
The same thing is happening in the HiFi world. We are building systems that are pleasing to the ears. I think it is safe to assume that they are not sonically perfect systems, but the ones that are common must please enough ears to survive.
I remember an add for Kodachrome film (a long long time ago) that did not claim the accuracy of the colors in the new film. It stated that the color reproduction was "pleasing to the eye". Many people were pleased enough to buy the product, it still exists today. It isn't the only film product available, so there must be other opinions about what is "pleasing to the eye".
The same thing is happening in the HiFi world. We are building systems that are pleasing to the ears. I think it is safe to assume that they are not sonically perfect systems, but the ones that are common must please enough ears to survive.
I think you may misunderstand me, I am not dismissing tube amps in any way shape or form!!! I know a ton of people who love tubes, and as I have said, most of the guitar amps I like the most are tubes. My ONLY argument is that the "tube sound" most people claim to love is primarily due to distortion. This is, of course, not always the case, and I will be the last person to tell anyone that they shouldn't like something. My only argument is the source of the "tube sound."Bas Horneman said:
I find it really unfortunate that this thread has been highjacked by the ancient idea that people that like tubes simply prefer the sound of distortion. It's tremendously condescending when someone says "you can listen to your tubey distortion if you want, but I prefer a clean accurate reproduction." The fact is we ALL want a clean accurate reproduction. (Maybe I shouldn't say all; I can't speak for the fringe, but it's not the fringe that I represent.) The people I know that have turned to tubes, and in some cases gone to extremes with ultra simple SE triodes, have all done so in search of more realistic reproduction. Nobody with ears that I respect has ever said "that sounds good, but can we make it more rich and gooey?" No, actually they tend to go looking for the cleanest, least gooey operating points. Again I can't speak for everyone, but we tend to go for realistic reproduction. Virtually every time someone hears my system for the first time they respond with a WOW! and exclaim with amazement that they have never experienced such realism before.
If it's just a tubey sound we like, then it ought to be a simple matter to put a tube preamp in front of an 'accurate' SS amp to subjectively 'improve' it. Unfortunately, that has never worked. The flat sounding SS amp remains flat as ever.
EC8010 did allude to the possibility in the post at the top of this thread "Are we all lovers of grunge?" but I suspect that the allusion was *mostly* hypothetical. I say mostly because I think he's open minded enough to keep the possibility, but understands that it's probably all about something else.
Anyway, it's unfortunate that this thread started out as an open minded search for that something else, but has become mired in the old and tedious.
-- Dave
If it's just a tubey sound we like, then it ought to be a simple matter to put a tube preamp in front of an 'accurate' SS amp to subjectively 'improve' it. Unfortunately, that has never worked. The flat sounding SS amp remains flat as ever.
EC8010 did allude to the possibility in the post at the top of this thread "Are we all lovers of grunge?" but I suspect that the allusion was *mostly* hypothetical. I say mostly because I think he's open minded enough to keep the possibility, but understands that it's probably all about something else.
Anyway, it's unfortunate that this thread started out as an open minded search for that something else, but has become mired in the old and tedious.
-- Dave
tubelab.com said:
Fuji, in both their print and transparency films, provide greater color saturation than the "real world". Maybe we can label them the " a single-ended film". Kodachrome is engineered for a warmer tonal quality that especially helps with making "not-so-warm" complexions look better.
What is it all about?
For me ...no one says it better than Lynn Olsen, in content and style.
Illusion engines
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/illusion-engines.html
The Sound of the Machine
The Hidden Harmonics behind THD
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/FindingCG.html
Harmonic distortion over the ages.
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/tinyamps.html
And if you want to read it all (The library)
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/index.html
For me ...no one says it better than Lynn Olsen, in content and style.
Illusion engines
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/illusion-engines.html
The Sound of the Machine
The Hidden Harmonics behind THD
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/FindingCG.html
Harmonic distortion over the ages.
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/tinyamps.html
And if you want to read it all (The library)
http://www.nutshellhifi.com/library/index.html
Reply to Dave Cigna
Most tube based amps sounds just so-so IMHO. That includes some Heathkit, Dynaco Stereo, Grommes, Bell, Fisher, Scott, etc. Even after mods to the above, they were NOT great performers. I can not tolerate colored amps often called warm sounding. For example, some state they like a '40s vintage RCA 6SN7GT. What a crappy sounding tube per my ears.
However, the right tube amp sounds better than solid-state amps per what I have heard. I went to DIY designs & I find the right tube amp immediate in responce, airy with a huge soundstage, uncolored & transparent. To achieve that sonics, only one type & manufacture tube does it in the tube chain. And, selling 1000s of tubes has given me access to about every tube ever manufactured in both US & foreign types. Components are as important as the tubes plus the speakers.
Solid-state has never performed like the DIY tube amp I own. Perhaps I just have not listened to the 'right' amp. I would not have any issue with solid-state as unlike tubes, they do not require hundreds of dollars of spare tubes.
As for others being astonished with the DIY amplifier performance, they report the hair stands up on the back of their neck when hearing my system.
Most tube based amps sounds just so-so IMHO. That includes some Heathkit, Dynaco Stereo, Grommes, Bell, Fisher, Scott, etc. Even after mods to the above, they were NOT great performers. I can not tolerate colored amps often called warm sounding. For example, some state they like a '40s vintage RCA 6SN7GT. What a crappy sounding tube per my ears.
However, the right tube amp sounds better than solid-state amps per what I have heard. I went to DIY designs & I find the right tube amp immediate in responce, airy with a huge soundstage, uncolored & transparent. To achieve that sonics, only one type & manufacture tube does it in the tube chain. And, selling 1000s of tubes has given me access to about every tube ever manufactured in both US & foreign types. Components are as important as the tubes plus the speakers.
Solid-state has never performed like the DIY tube amp I own. Perhaps I just have not listened to the 'right' amp. I would not have any issue with solid-state as unlike tubes, they do not require hundreds of dollars of spare tubes.
As for others being astonished with the DIY amplifier performance, they report the hair stands up on the back of their neck when hearing my system.
Hi,
Exactly.
I still have to hear a single solid state amp regardless of what speaker it's driving give me that uncanny realism that is possible with a well set up tube system.
IMHO it's the utter simplicity of the audio tube itself requiring little or no correction that allows more of the music through.
All too often I hear arguments such as: my preamp (SS) is much more detailed than that (tubed) preamp of yours.....
Is it really? I don't think so. The SS preamp just throws the details at you in a way unrelated to music. That's what I think about it anyway.
Same for the bass, maybe no impressive slam from the tube amp but you can actually hear all the inflections of the bass guitar.
On the SS amp all bass pretty much sounds the same; impressive maybe but no music.
Than there's dynamic range.
I hear KW SS amps (AKA Arcwelders) sounding as flat as a pancake where most tube amps just follow the flow of the music naturally.
There's noise too. Tubes are generally much more noisy than their SS counterparts yet I just hardly ever hear that noise and when I do it just doesn't seem to bother me as much as that dreadful hissing sound I hear from SS devices.
What I'm saying is that, although far from perfect, tube amps seem to let the music through much more naturally.
One of the best piano recordings I have is a 50 year old Decca recording. A simple Blumlein recording with far from perfect mics and tape machines, cut on a no doubt far from perfect lathe but somehow the engineers managed to capture that piano in such a way that errrrrr.....well it sounds like a piano.
Not just that but you'll hear the acoustics of the studio as if you'd been there.
No doubt in my mind that it's not a perfect rendition of what it really sounded like at the time in the studio but hey, the realism is still there.
Play that same recording back on a SS amp and it gives you the impression that you're listening to a cheap electronic piano.
Gone is that lovely portrayal of a pianist playing, gone are the emotions.
What once was art now turned into a sterile rendition of what should have been.....
The tube amp is certainly outdone in the spec department by the SS amp but it makes you wonder where it all went wrong with the SS amp doesn't it?
To continue the nostalgic mood, no they don't make recordings like they used to anymore. Heck, they don't even make music like they use to anymore.....
Guess I got the blues, 😉
Exactly.
I still have to hear a single solid state amp regardless of what speaker it's driving give me that uncanny realism that is possible with a well set up tube system.
IMHO it's the utter simplicity of the audio tube itself requiring little or no correction that allows more of the music through.
All too often I hear arguments such as: my preamp (SS) is much more detailed than that (tubed) preamp of yours.....
Is it really? I don't think so. The SS preamp just throws the details at you in a way unrelated to music. That's what I think about it anyway.
Same for the bass, maybe no impressive slam from the tube amp but you can actually hear all the inflections of the bass guitar.
On the SS amp all bass pretty much sounds the same; impressive maybe but no music.
Than there's dynamic range.
I hear KW SS amps (AKA Arcwelders) sounding as flat as a pancake where most tube amps just follow the flow of the music naturally.
There's noise too. Tubes are generally much more noisy than their SS counterparts yet I just hardly ever hear that noise and when I do it just doesn't seem to bother me as much as that dreadful hissing sound I hear from SS devices.
What I'm saying is that, although far from perfect, tube amps seem to let the music through much more naturally.
One of the best piano recordings I have is a 50 year old Decca recording. A simple Blumlein recording with far from perfect mics and tape machines, cut on a no doubt far from perfect lathe but somehow the engineers managed to capture that piano in such a way that errrrrr.....well it sounds like a piano.
Not just that but you'll hear the acoustics of the studio as if you'd been there.
No doubt in my mind that it's not a perfect rendition of what it really sounded like at the time in the studio but hey, the realism is still there.
Play that same recording back on a SS amp and it gives you the impression that you're listening to a cheap electronic piano.
Gone is that lovely portrayal of a pianist playing, gone are the emotions.
What once was art now turned into a sterile rendition of what should have been.....
The tube amp is certainly outdone in the spec department by the SS amp but it makes you wonder where it all went wrong with the SS amp doesn't it?
To continue the nostalgic mood, no they don't make recordings like they used to anymore. Heck, they don't even make music like they use to anymore.....
Guess I got the blues, 😉
Hi,
Ha....You probably mean Graaf?
They're not as little known as you may think and no they don't make generators but mostly OTL amps.😀
Cheers, 😉
Ha....You probably mean Graaf?
They're not as little known as you may think and no they don't make generators but mostly OTL amps.😀
Cheers, 😉
It's unfortunate that this thread got off track. Past the first few pages it just reads like any other "tube vs SS" thread.
One thing that keeps bugging me: can it really be a simple answer like a weighted distortion spectrum? I mean there are countless suggestion about the distortion spectrum and higher orders being more objectionable, it seems to me that developing a test (even with the challenge of human factors) to try to optimize a weighting for distortion spectrum is really not that challenging (not that expensive) and somebody would have tried it by now.
Every time somebody brings that up I think of the plot of the movie "Blade" where as soon as the doctor says "vampirism must be a virus" she finds the cure in a few hours 🙂
One thing that keeps bugging me: can it really be a simple answer like a weighted distortion spectrum? I mean there are countless suggestion about the distortion spectrum and higher orders being more objectionable, it seems to me that developing a test (even with the challenge of human factors) to try to optimize a weighting for distortion spectrum is really not that challenging (not that expensive) and somebody would have tried it by now.
Every time somebody brings that up I think of the plot of the movie "Blade" where as soon as the doctor says "vampirism must be a virus" she finds the cure in a few hours 🙂
Why is this being said again? There was no "track" as far as I'm concerned. Or do you mean it's unfortunate that you can't walk away with a mantra?
Anyone who thinks this particular thread was going to settle all the reasons why we listen to tube amps, and how they should be evaluated - is delusional.
this thread is 50 years old
It’s interesting to notice that we are discussing here about the same arguments and ideas as 50 years ago and even more. I had (again) a look onto the Radiotron at chapter 14 (see the attachment!) …
… yes we are using an obsolete technology as EC was saying in the very first post but, I wonder in my reckless ignorance, did these arguments evolved to a certain extent in the last 50 years? Probably they did and surely I didn’t notice it but I do not care.
I am building tube amps because:
- I don’t know what to do with sands and only know the basics of tube (thanks M. Jones & DIYAUDIO)
- I do like the bright light
- I do like the sound
- I do like building them
Everyone listening to music is hearing its own music, I mean when we listen our brain is elaborating the signals … is this to be considered distortion as well? We are using a technology even more obsolete then tubes … our ears, nerves and brain.
Yes I am an engineer as well ... but sometimes feelings cannot be measured with numbers ... well ... mr Millett was close enough to that measure with his gedanken experiment
http://www.pmillett.com/etf_sod.htm
Ciao
Gianluca
It’s interesting to notice that we are discussing here about the same arguments and ideas as 50 years ago and even more. I had (again) a look onto the Radiotron at chapter 14 (see the attachment!) …
… yes we are using an obsolete technology as EC was saying in the very first post but, I wonder in my reckless ignorance, did these arguments evolved to a certain extent in the last 50 years? Probably they did and surely I didn’t notice it but I do not care.
I am building tube amps because:
- I don’t know what to do with sands and only know the basics of tube (thanks M. Jones & DIYAUDIO)
- I do like the bright light
- I do like the sound
- I do like building them
Everyone listening to music is hearing its own music, I mean when we listen our brain is elaborating the signals … is this to be considered distortion as well? We are using a technology even more obsolete then tubes … our ears, nerves and brain.
Yes I am an engineer as well ... but sometimes feelings cannot be measured with numbers ... well ... mr Millett was close enough to that measure with his gedanken experiment
http://www.pmillett.com/etf_sod.htm
Ciao
Gianluca
Attachments
leadbelly said:
One possibility that has been raised for that is to use CCIR468-2 weighting of the distortion residual. The filter was developed for assessing the subjective nuisance of communications noise (which at the time was not just white noise, but also interference from telegraph).
I don't see a problem with using harmonic distortion as a metric. The problem was when the marketing people hijacked it and misused it. I think we all know now that measuring a digital system at full output using harmonic distortion (or any other, for that matter) is a meaningless measurement that only tests the analogue buffer. The problem is that if we want to make meaningful measurements, we have to make more than one, and we have to know the weaknesses of the system we're measuring.
I design and build my own amplifiers and I have a lab full of test equipment. I want measurements that will predict whether a particular circuit will sound good because by the time I've considered three or four different topologies for each stage that's an awful lot of potential amplifiers to listen to. I want to shorten the time it takes from getting an idea to listening to a new amplifier. A couple of years ago, I built an amplifier that went through twenty measured iterations on the test bench before it looked good. That took time, but not nearly as much time as building a pair of amplifiers sufficiently safely that could be listened to. (Oh, and the amplifier that was finally built sounded good.)
So, to try to get the thread back on track, I'm asking for experiences from engineers who have made measurements then listened. What's it all about? Which measurements presaged good sound? We have far better test equipment than fifty years ago - it ought to be possible to identify what's going on...
EC/all most probably you know the pmillett's experiment (see the link a few posts above) and I found it very interesting.
Won't it give any guidelines at all?
Gianluca
Won't it give any guidelines at all?
Gianluca
I'm no engineer, but.... tone bursts. Square waves. Alternating bursts (just under then just over clipping). MLS and impulses. All those things with varying loads. Does an amp recover quickly or does it choke? Or burst into oscillation? As the load swings current around, how does the amp kick back? How does the source impedance vary with load, level, frequency, and history? I've built a few amps over the years and the ones that sounded good (with "good" being defined by my ears) invariably had good load tolerance and outstanding overload recovery, in addition to competent linearity. Nothing new here, but I maintain that there IS nothing new to be found in this area.
Crowhurst's "Amplifier Distortion Story" is as valid today as in 1959. I suspect you've read it.
Crowhurst's "Amplifier Distortion Story" is as valid today as in 1959. I suspect you've read it.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.