Measurement of acoustic distortion used to be difficult and expensive, not anymore.
The original is unknown, by definition.
Think of a picture. You have to reproduce an unknown picture. You put the right colour in the right place. You can measure it. Millions of points. What is the ppm allowed to make it right?
Now, the pictures are two: they change every second. You have two nozzles spraying at mach 1 to make one picture.
How many ppm are allowed to say: it's the original (by definition, unknown), it's not the original ?!
True. It's just we want to be convinced by the reproduction, that's why a little lie does no harm
When I first got into valve amps I thought the amp would somehow sound better, the ones I built don't, but they do sound different to my SS amp. Mine have better channel separation, but they're mono blocks so not surprising.
In my experience no amplifier has that much effect on the sound unless you talking about a Sansui top of the range jobby, speakers have more influence I think.
I like valves because a valve amplifier is relatively easy to design with my current level of knowledge, they don't die so quickly as three legged fuses and they look good.
Andy.
In my experience no amplifier has that much effect on the sound unless you talking about a Sansui top of the range jobby, speakers have more influence I think.
I like valves because a valve amplifier is relatively easy to design with my current level of knowledge, they don't die so quickly as three legged fuses and they look good.
Andy.
When the resurgence or popularity of valve amps took off in the late eighties a lot of transistor amps still sounded pretty harsh and so did the CD players at the time. A valve amp could take some of the edge off early CD players. My Valve amp purchased at the time has delivered superb sound stage and imaging for years that some very expensive SS amps would struggle to beat but.....
.... having built a Pair of ACA now with ultra low noise power supplies It's clear to me that the sound of one transistor clapping beats push pull triode for ultimate clarity and soundstage without sounding harsh. A single ended tube amp might be on the cards in the future - but I don't have Audio Note kit money lying around.
.... having built a Pair of ACA now with ultra low noise power supplies It's clear to me that the sound of one transistor clapping beats push pull triode for ultimate clarity and soundstage without sounding harsh. A single ended tube amp might be on the cards in the future - but I don't have Audio Note kit money lying around.
To me half the enjoyment is a fascination how things work. And the thermionic way tubes work is just so fascinating! And they are so forgiving and easy to work with, they are just fun. Besides, I love loud music, and my 8W/channel SET gives me gorgeous loud music and at the same time hinders me from going insane and bother the entire neighborhood.
If jsut listening to music and enjoying that, not thinking about creations or how stuff works, it dosnt matter to me if tube or SS, as long as they both sound good. Speakers make a bigger difference.
When it comes to instruments, especially guitar, tubes are the holy grail! Lets hope guitar never comes out of fassion and demand for tubes remains available well into climate hell.
If jsut listening to music and enjoying that, not thinking about creations or how stuff works, it dosnt matter to me if tube or SS, as long as they both sound good. Speakers make a bigger difference.
When it comes to instruments, especially guitar, tubes are the holy grail! Lets hope guitar never comes out of fassion and demand for tubes remains available well into climate hell.
same old story
in a reproduction system, every piece of equipment is 100% in the final judgement of the sonics
( did I say sonics ? )
i can confirm this, happened to me many times already, that is why i stopped tube rolling...
i have a friend who pocketed a 300b in his pants, but forgot about it when he suddenly sat down, boy i still remember the grimace in his face...years ago...
now he put them in catrons and in a paper bag...
I think the best attributes of tubes is that it appears they can achieve sota sq with much less complexity than ss. Very early tube amps can still rival the best ss in terms of transparency. Very simple tube amps can sound absolutely superb. The so called "tube" sound is always deliberately built in. Transparency is easy.
Tubes in guitar amps certainly have a sonic character, a response to the guitar players picking dynamics, beautiful harmonic content...
Especially small 'single ended' tube amps- amps with just one or two preamp tubes (typically 9-pin 12ax7's, but the late 1940's saw 6sn7 or 6sl7 glass or metal tubes), and one power amp output tube EL84/6bq5, or 6v6 (metal) or 6v6G ('g' for glass...gc for glass compact).
I've built many tube guitar amps from 5 watts to 120 watts ( 6 EL34's... so sounds more like 200 watts in 'tube' watts!)
VACUUM TUBE OSCILLATOR IN AN ORGAN
I play an all-tube (100 tubes!) 1958 Conn 815-Classic Vacuum Tube Individual Oscillator Tone Generator organ. It has just over 80 12au7 9-pin dual triode tubes . Each dual triode 12au7 tube has two identical halves. That said, each tube is used to generate two fundamental (8' pipe) notes on the organ. ie. C1 and F#1. The next tube C#1 and G1...and so on all the way to C6 (5 octaves +1 high C). So two keyboard manuals with 61 keys each, and the organ also has 32 bass pedals. So totaled that's 154 individual tube halves...77 12au7's just for the 8' pipes.
Fortunately the other notes are borrowed. Ie. So you want a 16' C on your 8' middle C key(C3)? Easy, just borrow it from the previous adjacent '2'octave. Doing that makes it a 16' C in the middle C position, but it's an 8' C in the C2 octave. This is how an organ sounds big and majestic. It borrows, or 'couples'. The Conn 815 (btw the 815 is uncommon. It's actually a common CLASSIC 810, but it's Limed Oak finish makes it 815) has 16', 8', 4', 2 2/3', 2', 1', and 1 1/3' pipe lengths, and TIBIA, STRING, REED, and DIAPASON .
I won't bore you with specs, but suffice to say the reason I play a 600 pound organ versus say a Nord or Yamaha organ or keyboard is because the organ delivers tonality and dynamic expression that you simply can't get from digital, or solid state electronic means.
My other favorite organs are my
1946 WURLITZER SERIES 31 ELECTROSTATIC KEYED FREE REED ORGAN.
1956 WURLITZER 4410 ELECTROSTATIC CONTINUOUS FREE REED ORGAN*
1972 HAMMOND X-66 ORGAN**
1975 GULBRANSEN RIALTO II ORGAN
1984 KAWAI ??3300 spinet model...lots of animated features...its okay
1965 WURLITZER 4300 DISCRETE TRANSISTOR DIVIDER SPINET ORGAN...incredible tone!
GO TO MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL paulj0557...I posted lots of organ videos...lots of records of the models listed above, including me playing the 1956 WURLITZER 4410 ELECTROSTATIC CONTINUOUS FREE REED ORGAN ...just google that plus paulj0557
Check out- WURLI 4600 page on the North Suburban Hammond Organ Society ( NSHOS) site. My 4410 is the spinet version of the 4600 thoroughly presented in this very cool interactive technical article.
**Look also at the HAMMOND X-66 ORGAN as well as the Hammond B3 tone wheel organ at the NSHOS as well.
Especially small 'single ended' tube amps- amps with just one or two preamp tubes (typically 9-pin 12ax7's, but the late 1940's saw 6sn7 or 6sl7 glass or metal tubes), and one power amp output tube EL84/6bq5, or 6v6 (metal) or 6v6G ('g' for glass...gc for glass compact).
I've built many tube guitar amps from 5 watts to 120 watts ( 6 EL34's... so sounds more like 200 watts in 'tube' watts!)
VACUUM TUBE OSCILLATOR IN AN ORGAN
I play an all-tube (100 tubes!) 1958 Conn 815-Classic Vacuum Tube Individual Oscillator Tone Generator organ. It has just over 80 12au7 9-pin dual triode tubes . Each dual triode 12au7 tube has two identical halves. That said, each tube is used to generate two fundamental (8' pipe) notes on the organ. ie. C1 and F#1. The next tube C#1 and G1...and so on all the way to C6 (5 octaves +1 high C). So two keyboard manuals with 61 keys each, and the organ also has 32 bass pedals. So totaled that's 154 individual tube halves...77 12au7's just for the 8' pipes.
Fortunately the other notes are borrowed. Ie. So you want a 16' C on your 8' middle C key(C3)? Easy, just borrow it from the previous adjacent '2'octave. Doing that makes it a 16' C in the middle C position, but it's an 8' C in the C2 octave. This is how an organ sounds big and majestic. It borrows, or 'couples'. The Conn 815 (btw the 815 is uncommon. It's actually a common CLASSIC 810, but it's Limed Oak finish makes it 815) has 16', 8', 4', 2 2/3', 2', 1', and 1 1/3' pipe lengths, and TIBIA, STRING, REED, and DIAPASON .
I won't bore you with specs, but suffice to say the reason I play a 600 pound organ versus say a Nord or Yamaha organ or keyboard is because the organ delivers tonality and dynamic expression that you simply can't get from digital, or solid state electronic means.
My other favorite organs are my
1946 WURLITZER SERIES 31 ELECTROSTATIC KEYED FREE REED ORGAN.
1956 WURLITZER 4410 ELECTROSTATIC CONTINUOUS FREE REED ORGAN*
1972 HAMMOND X-66 ORGAN**
1975 GULBRANSEN RIALTO II ORGAN
1984 KAWAI ??3300 spinet model...lots of animated features...its okay
1965 WURLITZER 4300 DISCRETE TRANSISTOR DIVIDER SPINET ORGAN...incredible tone!
GO TO MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL paulj0557...I posted lots of organ videos...lots of records of the models listed above, including me playing the 1956 WURLITZER 4410 ELECTROSTATIC CONTINUOUS FREE REED ORGAN ...just google that plus paulj0557
Check out- WURLI 4600 page on the North Suburban Hammond Organ Society ( NSHOS) site. My 4410 is the spinet version of the 4600 thoroughly presented in this very cool interactive technical article.
**Look also at the HAMMOND X-66 ORGAN as well as the Hammond B3 tone wheel organ at the NSHOS as well.
Opinion only, but my take:
Especially with a lot of current or recent music, there really isn't "an original," what you have is a deliberately and elaborately combined and crafted amalgam of different sources and intentionally-created effects (with strong potential for different intentionally-created effects for different sources within the amalgam, and even for the same exact sources at different moments). How that all comes through (and there is often a lot crammed in) and comes across at the far end nearest your ear is probably affected, to strong or subtle degrees, by various things along the way. Inaccuracies are inevitable, and it's plausible that some inaccuracies or artifacts are more appealing than others, either across the board or depending on the individual listener.
I've got no interest in or respect for the 'phoolery type stuff like ridiculously expensive cables, or anything else of the hocus-pocus sort. But I do believe from experience of trial and error over the years that subtle and intangible differences aren't always dismis-sable. I kept my vinyl LPs and turntable, all along, back when people thought it was insane to keep vinyl, now I get to chuckle at the resurgence of LPs. My preference in power output technologies gradually drifted away from solid state and generally towards tubes. I've more recently developed a strong interest in eventually building and experimenting with SETs, to my own complete surprise (I previously thought they were in the hocus-pocus category), after playing with a cheapo single ended tube amp, and having the almost eerie experience of it seeming like Margo Timmins was holograpically there up close to me beyond the speakers, not just coming out of the speakers (same speakers, previously not the same effect, with some substantially more upmarket amplification hardware). That was a cheap single ended EL84 pentode amp, and if that was that interesting, now I want to build and check out an SET type (if/ when I can find time, I am absurdly overextended) to see if they live up to their reputation.
Embrace what you happen to enjoy, and enjoy it. It's great that we have choices, and opportunities like this forum to learn from one another and check things out.
Of course theres an original. Its what the artists, producer and engineer heard in the studio. Maybe inacuracies are inevitable but with the electronics these days they can be inaudable. So if you want effects boxes that add inacuracies to the sound go ahead but dont say there better. More appealing (many people love hyper bass in there headphones) is just fashion.
You may think so, i do not. And many others do not.
Because all amplifiers have flaws. More than you know.
dave
Dosnt mean your right. Thats exactly what the people selling hi end amps want you to think. Do they do blind testing? No,they make excusses that they dont work. Im not talking about cheap AV recievers but there is a point, relatively low, that you will not hear a difference, unless it was designed to be an effects box, like many tube amps. Do you sell gear?
Last edited:
Nope. Nor you. There is so much still unknown.
A much greater understanding of the human ear/brain is a major stumbling block.
I’ve done lots of blind tests.
And by using the term “effects box” that you have little understading of high output impedance amps. Withmost commercial speakers — the ones with ugly impedance curves* will have signifcant FR deviations directly related to the shape of that impedance curve.
If you have a high output impedance amp you are much more limited on speaker choice — and many still choose unsuitable speakers, just because they claim to be efficient. Speakers, amp (and the connection between them) is a system. If the parts don’t match it won’t work.
Now i would say that the predominate Class AB amplifiers sound broadly similar (with exceptions of course) with low output impedance designed to work with most speakers. But hook it up to a set of Vulcan horns for instance, it is going to sound bad, because the speaker is designed specifically for high output impedance amplifiers.
dave
A much greater understanding of the human ear/brain is a major stumbling block.
I’ve done lots of blind tests.
And by using the term “effects box” that you have little understading of high output impedance amps. Withmost commercial speakers — the ones with ugly impedance curves* will have signifcant FR deviations directly related to the shape of that impedance curve.
If you have a high output impedance amp you are much more limited on speaker choice — and many still choose unsuitable speakers, just because they claim to be efficient. Speakers, amp (and the connection between them) is a system. If the parts don’t match it won’t work.
Now i would say that the predominate Class AB amplifiers sound broadly similar (with exceptions of course) with low output impedance designed to work with most speakers. But hook it up to a set of Vulcan horns for instance, it is going to sound bad, because the speaker is designed specifically for high output impedance amplifiers.
dave
I'm not into fuzz or warmth or boom, or effects of any kind, I like to hear subtleties, and I've never been "in the business." I've had some very good solid state amps like a Hafler DH-500, but at this point, I find more of the subtleties and details that I like to hear out of my current rig that some unknown person hand-built out of the shell and transformers of a Dynaco ST-70, but with good NOS US JAN 6L6-es for output tubes, some exceedingly OCD attention to power supply design and construction- a fleet of sizeable Mallory computer grade capacitors (eight in total) for separate filtering arrangements for various subsectors of the amp (right down to filtered DC on the low level filaments), and generally top quality (but not mystical-BS) components in the signal chain on some nice glass-epoxy boards. None of it resembles any of the "available" ST-70 remakes, aftermarket upgrades, or add-ons, from 10 feet away with the cover on, it looks mostly like any old ST-70. It seems to have been one person's one-off labor of love (or total madness, the whole thing is wildly OCD precise in electrical and physical design and execution, down to wax-cotton-tied teflon-insulated internal wiring, all laid out and routed with care bordering on artwork)(and how they fit it all, neatly, within the shape of a stock ST-70). Nothing in the design looks intended to add artifacts, everything seems done with great care to avoid artifacts. I picked it up, relatively cheap, from someone who didn't know its origins but who became unable to keep it running well when one of the B+ capacitors drifted out of spec and it started to have some hum. I diagnosed and replaced that cap and it's run nicely for me for several decades since.
I'm not saying it's better than someone else's X/make/model solid state amp, but I enjoy its sound, precisely because it has great clarity, and to my ears, major lack of "effects"
I earned spending money as a teen fixing friends' and neighbors' tube TV sets (in the waning days of mainstream consumer tube gear) and at that point thought that the last thing I'd ever want as a personal audio system was tube gear. For myself, I hear the difference mostly in the power amp stages and I'm, so far, totally agnostic about tube vs. solid state in things like preamplifiers, as long as it's quality design.
To each their own, maybe it is just what you personally prefer as your chosen variant of different. Maybe to some there is no difference, but from experience I totally reject the idea that tubes are somehow inferior across the board.
The Motional Feedback system enabled unprecedented Hifi coming from 15 liter 3-way active speakers. Although very accurate and expensive in the 70s and 80s it's not popular anymore. That's to say there's more to audioholics than plain measurement alone. If you ever heard a line array of speakers you know what I mean. Although the FR is not "hifi" it brings a realism that is scaring. This can't be copied by closed boxes, but one has to compromise somewhere
- Status
- Not open for further replies.