tcb Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 /// Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stan krajewski Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 Yup. We'll finally settle this topic once and for all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 Sounds like they were using a 3.5 watt solid state amp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 Oh no! NOT this again. A double blind study a decade ago found that the more analog front-end equipment used in the audio chain, the more 100+ members of the audience liked it, when the audience doesnt know, they prefer vinyl with tube pre and power amplifiers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWho Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 ---------------- But the preceding section points out that amplifiers are often operated far out of their linear range at signal levels which would cause severe distortion. Under these conditions, tubes and transistors appear to behave quite differently from a sound viewpoint. ---------------- In their normal nonoverload range all three amplifiers sounded very clean. The listening tests clearly indicate that the overload margin varies widely between different types of amplifiers. Engineering studies show that any amplifier adds distortion as soon as the overload point is reached. The tests show that all amplifiers could be overloaded to a certain degree without this distortion becoming noticeable. It may be concluded that these inaudible harmonics in the early overload condition might very well be causing the difference in sound coloration between tubes and transistors. ---------------- Some clarifications...this author was comparing how amps respond when running into "overload." I don't know about the rest of the world, but I certainly don't listen to music with clipping amps. He also mentions how the inputs on mixing consoles CAN easily run into clipping. He then goes to claim that because they CAN be run into clipping, that they are always being clipped and this is the reason we hear a difference between tubes and solid state. Granted, sometimes the mixer will want the sound produced by a clipping tube pre-amp or amp, but this is a tonal choice made by the mixer based on the sound he's going for, not a choice based on the performance of his gear. ---------------- A double blind study a decade ago found that the more analog front-end equipment used in the audio chain, the more 100+ members of the audience liked it, when the audience doesnt know, they prefer vinyl with tube pre and power amplifiers ---------------- At the same time, if the 100+ members of the audience had heard the original source material (aka, sat in the room with the guitar player), then they would have pointed out that the digital solid state was a more accurate representation. At least that is my own opinion, I'd have to do an experiment to "prove it" I think the whole problem with the tubes versus solid state debate is that there are no optimums anywhere in the signal chain. Any comparisons that are made force the situations to be identical for both devices when the optimal performance for each device portrays itself in different environments. We all know that tubes distort nicer than transistors (the only plausible conclusion to this author's discussion), but there are many advantages to solid state as well that this author chose to ignore completely. To avoid a debate, I'm not going to get into all of the differences...I'm just trying to put this article into perspective. (Btw, did anyone else notice that the author was coming across as trying to "prove tubes?") Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 "A double blind study a decade ago found that the more analog front-end equipment used in the audio chain, the more 100+ members of the audience liked it, when the audience doesnt know, they prefer vinyl with tube pre and power amplifiers" Are you sure that wasn't a double deaf study? I'm working on a set of Type A crossovers right now designed to simulate the sound of vinyl. I've added what I'm calling "the snap, crackle, pop mod". Basically, I've added a spoked wheel, a deck of cards, and 52 clothepins. I use a chimp to pedal the wheel around. Sounds pretty good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ctiger2 Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 Tooobes Roooole! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klipschguy Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 I agree with DrWho. This article was written not as an objective, unbiased investigation of tubes vs. solid state. He was selective about his evaluation criteria to skew the results towards tubes. An interesting read, but this type of investigation would NEVER fly in real science. BTW, remember when Stereo Review set up that double blind study where the "golden ear audiophiles" could not hear the difference between various amplifiers? When they knew what they were listening to, they either praised or blasted the amplifier depending on their biases. Blind, the audiophiles where demonstrated to be audiofools. Not necessarily a golden study - but hilarious to read. I am not saying all amps sound the same, or that tubes do not have advantages over SS. Clearly biased studies, when presented as fact, just bug me. Do it double blind. Before the double blind standard in medicine, the healing art was all over the map - based largely on empiricism and testimonials. Of course a lot more is at stake in medicine. I'm glad I do not take this hobby too seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablum Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 Stereo Review? This place goes round and round and round in circles, a very few progressing, many more regressing, and the same type of responses, over and over again. I find the Klipsch forums a mutated example of the Peter Principle in the Audio World. As new recruits enter the fray, they get shipped down the wrong channel to side with whichever Peter that aligns with the Klipsch Moon. A few call themselves "scientists," a serious warning sign, and others the naysayer elite. This "painful reality" has the most appropriate name of the entire lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 LOL Oh well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-MAN Posted June 9, 2004 Share Posted June 9, 2004 It's a reasoned discussion of some attributes of both topologies, although a little BIASED (ha!) toward the tube side of things... I like the idea of the human being being the analyzing piece of equipment, although the last person that I would believe about audio would be a musician. The point is that the end-results are defined by ear rather than by electronic means, which I agree with. I have heard some pretty clean amps (spec-wise) that really sounded BAD. The second that there is no room for differing opinions on this forum, we all should just hang up our spurs...and put on put earmuffs. DM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.