How will my system benefit from a tube amp?

[Parrot]

Paul,

By extrapolation of your quick dig at SET amps the same can be said for your PP amp at 20 watts. It will clip more often than a 100 watt SS amp. Therefore the SS amp is a better option?

Obviously my amp is the BEST option of all. I defy anyone with Klipsch speakers to make it clip.

If I weren't using high efficiency speakers, I'd certainly use 100W or more. PWK recommended 20W as a *minimum* for his speakers, and I'm fine with 60W. Someone trying to sneak by with 1.5W is severely limiting himself (and limiting the signal).

[oldtimer]

Sorry Max I took the Hercules from your system profile.

Still asking this of anyone:Additionally, for those out there in the know, how does warm measure compared to not warm or cold?

[mas]

Here is the thing. If matching of amp and speakers means anything

other than finding something with the right amount of power to drive

the things then surely I might WANT an amp that minimizes the

distortions of my speakers. If my speakers are very bright sounding a

more rolled off amp might well make them sound better to the listener's

ears than one that is truely flat through the frequency range.

Of course - you could apply that same "rolling off" from other

points in the chain. I might choose a source that is more rolled off

and this totally linear amp. There are many ways to skin this

particular cat.

I have concluded therefore, that a system (source to speaker to room

to listener) is actually a summing of errors that gives a listenable

result - where it is implemented correctly. The old addage - 2 wrongs

does not make a right does not, IMO, apply to home audio.

An audiophile is not merely someone who walks into a shop and buys

the best possible equipment to make his system. An audiophile is a

person who takes time to assess how well given pieces of equipment

match together to create the sonic illusion he (or she) is looking for.

I could go out and buy simply the best of everything according any

given magazine and then discover to my horror that the sonic result is

far from perfection. My $100,000 amp does not drive my $150,000

speakers very well afterall. My $100,000 turntable does not match very

well with my $15,000 arm and my $12,000 cartridge. My $50,000 pre-amp

has an impedance mismatch with my $100,000 amp etc. etc.

Well put, Max! If it sounds good to you in your listening room, it

is good. If it sounds good to me in my listening room, it is good. If

one person wears a different size and style of shoes from another

person, it doesn't imply that one of them is "wrong". This is home

audio, not lab experiments. The designers and engineers do the

experiments, we pick the flavour we like, since all the components have

a flavour (here in the real world), and hopefully enjoy listening to

the "sum of the errors".

Very good points - and

exactly the same reason why I've got my tagline at the bottom of all of

my posts [Y] It's about find the combination of least compromise - not

the best of each component.

That said, I think some of us would

like to think that there is an objective way to measure "system

synergy" - or rather, be able to predict when certain components will

go well together. I believe the goal of good engineering is to use

science as a tool to design the device to behave exactly the way you

want it to on the first try. For those of us not designing anything, we

can apply the engineering method to predict the behavior of already

designed devices. I'm sure we are all aware that even the best of

engineering doesn't result in a device behaving exactly as expected -

which means we can't perfectly describe the behavior of a device

without actually trying it. But it costs way too much money to try

everything not to mention it would take too much time with every device

out there, so we're left with measurements providing us with only a

general idea as to the behavior.

So all that to say, always let your ears be the final judge.

One

other comment...measurements are always true in the sense that whatever

the graph is showing actually existed when the measurement was taken. I

would argue those that claim that measurements don't correlate to what

their ears tell them simply aren't interpreting the measurements

correctly. And if one cannot interpret measurements, I would question

how well they can predict how a device will perform. To put it another

way - anyone that claims there is no correlation between a measurement

and what is heard must provide an alternative model explaining the

behavior...otherwise they're just tinkering - not engineering.

And in an attempt to build upon this...

You know, there has been suggested a larger model that keeps being completely and utterly ignored, despite its having been brought up again and again.

It does address the seeming schizm between the subjective and the OLD classical models that keep being trotted out again and again by the very same folks who are so quick to complain that the old classical models do tell us enough and that they do not correlate to subjective opinion! (But that comes close to the popular definition of insanity, doesn't it? Hmmm.)

The model is much greater than any individual component. It is a systems approach. But then, some are going to have to do more than simply keep trotting out the same tired arguments.

It also is not some measurement or quantity with a simple numerical value. It is a relational measure, and it speaks to complex relationships. So you who are looking for quick answers that do not require a bit of examination and thought...well, quite frankly, what does it matter as not much will change.

The fact is, the relationship can be 'captured' and measured. It renders much of the old information, well , as fascinating footnotes. We don't know everything abut what it shows us. And it definitely renders allot of the old tired debate moot. And the old one trick pony of what about this measurement, taken out of context with the system is rendered anomalous.

And it can potentially address the perennially tired issues such as the role of interconnects and cables, amplifiers, speakers, and the interaction of any combination of said items, etc. etc. etc.!

The biggest problem it aces is that so many who fancy themselves arbiters of audio and acoustical knowledge are going to be challenged to learn something new! And that, rather than the technical aspects, is the real threat to many.

I just wonder how long the same authorities are going to continue debating against the new advances in understanding. As I, quite frankly, tire of listening to the same less than fruitful debates equivalent to listening to old pre-quantum models of the atom. We can move forward. Or we can listen to yet a new PPT presentation on the old model of the atom yet again.

So I'm curious...How many of the 'old authorities' have the cahones to face a new model in the form of the Heyser Spiral and Nyquist spiral and to address the various domains, their meanings and implications?

I'm curious, 'cause there is allot of security inherent in continuing to trot out the old tired frustrations about how measurements don't correlate to subjective experience as little or nothing is done to advance understanding...well, other than to simply aggrandize some isolated audiophile's subjectivist ego's claim to possess some golden talent greater than others to judge equipment.

After all, if its ALL subjective, no one's opinion is more valid than another's! Now, that should stick in the subjective 'audiophile's' craw!

[]

[anarchist]

I am dumbfounded by the realization I actually read this whole thread - of course, I did jump around from page to page trying to skip parts but...

I have come to a few conclusions:

1) The ability to read and comprehend what is read is sorely lacking and can be verified by reading some of the more verbose posts. (In fact, I question if some can comprehend what they are actually writing.)

2) Dean is funnier than hell at times with his quips and sarcasm.

3) You can read this nonsense all day long, listen to inane arguments which reveal an ignorance about what people mean by soundstage and/or imaging or you can go listen to a good tube amp (in its linear operating range of course ) and realize quickly music has taken on a whole new level of realism which didn't exist under the SS amp.

[PrestonTom]

......
Very good points - and exactly the same reason why I've got my tagline at the bottom of all of my posts [Y] It's about find the combination of least compromise - not the best of each component.

That said, I think some of us would like to think that there is an objective way to measure "system synergy" - or rather, be able to predict when certain components will go well together. I believe the goal of good engineering is to use science as a tool to design the device to behave exactly the way you want it to on the first try. For those of us not designing anything, we can apply the engineering method to predict the behavior of already designed devices. I'm sure we are all aware that even the best of engineering doesn't result in a device behaving exactly as expected - which means we can't perfectly describe the behavior of a device without actually trying it. But it costs way too much money to try everything not to mention it would take too much time with every device out there, so we're left with measurements providing us with only a general idea as to the behavior.

.................

This idea of system synergy, I will "label" as coupling of the components. Deep down inside I believe this is what MAS is talking about and he is suggesting that there are ways to measure these things. However, it requires more than just a scope and spectrum analyzer with third octave filtering. However, I am being careful not to put words into his mouth, since he has a more sophisticated view than this.

But Mike, do you really think we need to buy and try preamps that cost $3000 or cables that cost $700 to know that they are probaly not appreciably more accurate (I said accurate, I did not say "different") than components that cost less. Can we use simple logic to figure out the money is best spent on the speakers and treating the room to get a more accurate sound (accurate, not "diferent")? After that, I would go for a better amp, but it would not need to be a mega buck unit.

Good Luck,

-Tom

[PrestonTom]

My perspective is that the chain of signal reproduction should be exactly that - "reproduction" of what was on the recording (which may be a performance, or it may be something "created" in the studio). I believe this notion, which I agree certainly agree with, is at the heart of MAS's argument. If folks want a "warmer" sound or whatever, then an equalizer is better way to achieve that goal. Using an amp or tube CD player, or speaker cables that someone has "snuck" an inductor into is not a great substitute. The pieces in the chain should be neutral.

================

And how is neutral determined?

Good question!

Simply as food for thought, how about using a 2-channel spectrum analyzer.

Channel 1 gets an output of the DAC and Channel 2 gets the output of the mic placed in front of the speaker (in a very large & dead room). The mic and DACs are not the weak links. So now we perform a transfer function. The phase spectrum will be funny due to the propagation delay, but there are some work arounds for that problem.

Most things can usually be measured, even the listener's discriminablity.

-Tom

Okay everyone go out and buy the above mentioned test equipment. If you don't your surely never going to enjoy another piece of music.

Craig, When you modify an amp what is your proceedure for verifying that the modification results in an actual improvement. Surely, there is scope and a spectrum analyzer in your shop. Do you hook the amp to a speaker or to a power resistor. Is the test signal music or an impulse or what? What is the best piece of music to use (is all music equal as a test signal). At what point do you use your ears to verify the result (what sorts of things are you listening for)? I am not being argumentative, it is just that the process, unless it was systematic, could go on forever (which combination of this and that etc ...).

Again, this is not an argumentative response. Without measuring some sort of transfer function, I truely do not see where one would start. I am sure there is some solution, but it eludes me.

Good Luck,

-Tom

[DrWho]

I would love to purchase every device in the audio chain objectively, but no manufacture provides the necessary data! Really, they need only provide the measured impulse response of every device in the chain - and then from that you should be able to objectively choose the system synergy. So in light of our non-ideal world, I too purchase equipment based on my ears - though everything audio I own has been acquired without ever hearing it first... [] The system I have at home isn't the best I've ever heard and is certainly not where I'd like to be, but I think that's true of every music loving freak on the forum....always wanting the next level better, but never having the money/time needed to achieve it. But despite that, I extremely enjoy my system and would welcome anyone to swing by and give it a listen - y'all might be surprised what it sounds like (that's if y'all can ignore your biases).

[DrWho]

......

Very good points - and exactly the same reason why I've got my tagline at the bottom of all of my posts [Y] It's about find the combination of least compromise - not the best of each component.

That said, I think some of us would like to think that there is an objective way to measure "system synergy" - or rather, be able to predict when certain components will go well together. I believe the goal of good engineering is to use science as a tool to design the device to behave exactly the way you want it to on the first try. For those of us not designing anything, we can apply the engineering method to predict the behavior of already designed devices. I'm sure we are all aware that even the best of engineering doesn't result in a device behaving exactly as expected - which means we can't perfectly describe the behavior of a device without actually trying it. But it costs way too much money to try everything not to mention it would take too much time with every device out there, so we're left with measurements providing us with only a general idea as to the behavior.

.................

This idea of system synergy, I will "label" as coupling of the components. Deep down inside I believe this is what MAS is talking about and he is suggesting that there are ways to measure these things. However, it requires more than just a scope and spectrum analyzer with third octave filtering. However, I am being careful not to put words into his mouth, since he has a more sophisticated view than this.

But Mike, do you really think we need to buy and try preamps that cost $3000 or cables that cost $700 to know that they are probaly not appreciably more accurate (I said accurate, I did not say "different") than components that cost less. Can we use simple logic to figure out the money is best spent on the speakers and treating the room to get a more accurate sound (accurate, not "diferent")? After that, I would go for a better amp, but it would not need to be a mega buck unit.

Good Luck,

-Tom

Without a doubt! Once you start understanding how crappy a room is and how much it doesn't matter how perfect the upstream equipment is, you quickly start to divert your attention to the bigger compromises in the entire system. Start with the weakest links in the chain.

[maxg]

Mas,

I think you might be agreeing with me too - but in a very technical way and I dont know anything about "the Heyser Spiral and Nyquist spiral ".

I will search for it online and see if I can understand what it is refering to in some vague way - probably unsuccessfully.

As for this:

"After all, if its ALL subjective, no one's opinion is more valid than another's! Now, that should stick in the subjective 'audiophile's' craw! "

Doesn't stick in my craw at all, although I would caveat it with the following:

Even in the complete absence of the ability to explain technically, in accounting for differences that may or may not be observable, experience counts for a lot. If I were to declare ZYX component as the best available at any price one would rightly want to ask what other examples of that component I have heard. Of course this would be a silly claim anyway as no-one has heard all the components out there - but even a more molified claim - it is a damn good example - must be relative to something - or a lot of somethings.

The most important opinion - even more important than that of massive experience - is that of ownership. If I own and I like it / am happy with it - or even dont like it / am not happy with it - that one counts a bunch - for the owner.

[mas]

......

Very good points - and exactly the same reason why I've got my tagline at the bottom of all of my posts [Y] It's about find the combination of least compromise - not the best of each component.

That said, I think some of us would like to think that there is an objective way to measure "system synergy" - or rather, be able to predict when certain components will go well together. I believe the goal of good engineering is to use science as a tool to design the device to behave exactly the way you want it to on the first try. For those of us not designing anything, we can apply the engineering method to predict the behavior of already designed devices. I'm sure we are all aware that even the best of engineering doesn't result in a device behaving exactly as expected - which means we can't perfectly describe the behavior of a device without actually trying it. But it costs way too much money to try everything not to mention it would take too much time with every device out there, so we're left with measurements providing us with only a general idea as to the behavior.

.................

This idea of system synergy, I will "label" as coupling of the components. Deep down inside I believe this is what MAS is talking about and he is suggesting that there are ways to measure these things. However, it requires more than just a scope and spectrum analyzer with third octave filtering. However, I am being careful not to put words into his mouth, since he has a more sophisticated view than this.

But Mike, do you really think we need to buy and try preamps that cost $3000 or cables that cost $700 to know that they are probaly not appreciably more accurate (I said accurate, I did not say "different") than components that cost less. Can we use simple logic to figure out the money is best spent on the speakers and treating the room to get a more accurate sound (accurate, not "diferent")? After that, I would go for a better amp, but it would not need to be a mega buck unit.

Good Luck,

-Tom

Tom, not only is acoustics a major part of it, but the systems approach to the synergy between components is also possible.

And I get a 'sad' laugh out of the previous overview. It is truly inspiring to watch as someone reads and finds justification in what he understands and dismisses references of that which he missed carried forth from an earlier thread and totally dismisses those references to that which he is not familiar.

There is a larger view that addresses this. There are measurement tools that can very accurately measure it. And to understand the concepts does not even require that one measure everything.

But before one can begin, one must become familiar with the approach.

And now is when I guess we get the biggest laugh of all and wait for the inevitable demand for "the answer" in 3-5 words.

[maxg]

Paul,

By extrapolation of your quick dig at SET amps the same can be said for your PP amp at 20 watts. It will clip more often than a 100 watt SS amp. Therefore the SS amp is a better option?

Obviously my amp is the BEST option of all. I defy anyone with Klipsch speakers to make it clip.

If I weren't using high efficiency speakers, I'd certainly use 100W or more. PWK recommended 20W as a *minimum* for his speakers, and I'm fine with 60W. Someone trying to sneak by with 1.5W is severely limiting himself (and limiting the signal).

With your constant reference to 20 watts I though that was what you actually had. I would imagine with 60 wpc and KHorns clipping would indeed be a very rare event.

1.5 wpc (or any arbitary number come to that - below the 20 you hold so dear that is) COULD prove limiting depending on the size of your room, the sensitivity of your speakers, your listening habits, prefered volumes etc etc.

All part and parcel of making informed choices according to your needs. A Porsche 911 is a great car - but not so much use when you have 2 dogs.

[mas]

Mas,

I think you might be agreeing with me too - but in a very technical way and I dont know anything about "the Heyser Spiral and Nyquist spiral ".

I will search for it online and see if I can understand what it is refering to in some vague way - probably unsuccessfully.

As for this:

"After all, if its ALL subjective, no one's opinion is more valid than another's! Now, that should stick in the subjective 'audiophile's' craw! "

Doesn't stick in my craw at all, although I would caveat it with the following:

Even in the complete absence of the ability to explain technically, in accounting for differences that may or may not be observable, experience counts for a lot. If I were to declare ZYX component as the best available at any price one would rightly want to ask what other examples of that component I have heard. Of course this would be a silly claim anyway as no-one has heard all the components out there - but even a more molified claim - it is a damn good example - must be relative to something - or a lot of somethings.

The most important opinion - even more important than that of massive experience - is that of ownership. If I own and I like it / am happy with it - or even dont like it / am not happy with it - that one counts a bunch - for the owner.

Max, the irony is that I do not dismiss any specific part of the experience...be it the scientific analysis, the radical subjective analysis, or any other part. It is simply another perspective and frame of reference in analyzing the elephant.

As far as finding allot on line regarding the Heyser spiral, etc, I fear you will not find allot.

Dick wrote of allot of it in the AES anthology of his works, and Davis and Patronis provide a general overview of it in the new 3rd Edition of Sound System Engineering.

Additionally, Don Davis has some articles in ProSoundWeb and scattered a few other places.

Part of my lament is that the most fruitful discussions of the ramifications have occurred in SynAudCon seminars with the aforementioned persons and including, among others, Don Keele.

It is a subject that I would love to discuss if people are open to exploring the concepts. It is also a subject that is past the need for some self-appointed naysayer to feel the need to come in and attempt to discredit the concepts. Anyone feeling the need, sorry, but you are too late, and better folks have already tried and failed.

It is also a subject where one can be content to be familiar with it in a casual sense, or you can dive into the math and the mapping of topological spaces and the underlying fabric to one's hearts content.

The subject area both encompasses many traditional areas - and you get to dive into just what impedance really means! But if its any consolation, you will quickly discover that imaginary numbers are anything BUT imaginary!

I guess we have a choice on the forum - or actually a couple of choices.

We can choose to begin a deliberate exploration of some of the new approaches, including the proverbial small room acoustics thing, and then expand it to include electronics - as they are all interconnected...in a spirit of exploration, questions and a genuine desire to expand horizons, or we can deal with a few incompletely posited notions with the seemingly inevitable nay sayers who often feel the need to advance some principle by deftly displaying their ignorance and unwillingness to assume that other know a bit more and subsequently trying to learn. I say this as there is a great difference between understanding and positing objections in the desire to transcend them, and simply complaining about something with such an incomplete knowledge that the goal is simply to obfuscate the matter. But that's the human part. One approach is a joy (even with its concomitant frustrations), and the other, pointless.

There are also opportunities for us to actually measure and compare systems that we feel offer subjective symbiosis and those that do not, to discover similarities and differences, as well as to measure systems that may both sound subjectively good to see just how they differ from others that sound good as well, in order to determine patterns, aspects of correlations, and difference.

One exciting aspect of this that while the theoretical aspects have been oft debated, not many have spent allot of time moving this into the realm of actual hand's on comparative analysis. I know folks who have looked at some systems and have practical opinions, but I am not personally aware of a large systematic study. So there is allot of room to move our understanding forward.

All this is to mean, I am not aware of a single book that will present everything there is to know and to be gleaned on the subject in one setting. That is the neat thing about being in a living science - this is the Renaissance, and it is rapidly evolving as we speak.

[maxg]

Mas,

Start posting - in a new thread - I for one will be very interested. the only request I have is to not get too bogged down in the maths - but to stay high level on the concepts until the dire need for math rears its head.

Just as a guideline - I didnt understand much of what you posted in this thread.[]

[mas]

A Porsche 911 is a great car - but not so much use when you have 2 dogs.

Let's see...one in the front seat and the other in the trunk. What problem?

[NOSValves]

Craig, When you modify an amp what is your proceedure for verifying that the modification results in an actual improvement. Surely, there is scope and a spectrum analyzer in your shop. Do you hook the amp to a speaker or to a power resistor. Is the test signal music or an impulse or what? What is the best piece of music to use (is all music equal as a test signal). At what point do you use your ears to verify the result (what sorts of things are you listening for)? I am not being argumentative, it is just that the process, unless it was systematic, could go on forever (which combination of this and that etc ...).

Again, this is not an argumentative response. Without measuring some sort of transfer function, I truely do not see where one would start. I am sure there is some solution, but it eludes me.

Good Luck,

-Tom

Of course I use test equipment to gain a base line for stable operation and reasonable distortion numbers. But in the end test equipment tells you just about nothing as to what the amplifier will sound like. Many an amp has crossed my bench testing very similar to some other amp but ends up sounding very different. Basing your system components just on specification will net you very questionable results IMHO. The spec difference of SS or tubes is so small when talking quality gear ran within it's comfortable power range the actual distortion is not really audible by the human ear. This aurguement going on here will never end because the differences in the sound of amps is not yet measureable whether it be SS or Tubes again IMHO.

SS is never going to replace tubes and tubes will never replace SS. Everyone needs to get over it.

Heck if the number were everything we would all end up with the same speakers, amps, preamps and sources.

I really do not see what this debate is all about.

Craig

[oldtimer]

Thanks for answering my question Craig.

[mas]

I really do not see what this debate is all about.

Craig

Some Bozos had the unmitigated audacity to suggest that there were good SS amps as well as good tube amps and that either could suffice, much to the ire of the 'only tubes' crowd.

...The usual insane debate. But then, there was no ongoing cable/interconnect debate to jump in on.

(BTW, the Heyser Spiral/Nyquist Spiral models can also provide insight into any aspect of amp/cable/speaker interaction as well.Its not a 'new' measurement. It simply transcends and includes every other domain that we have been using in an integrated fashion.)

[Guest " "]

NOSValves:

" I really do not see what this debate is all about."

There's no debate.  We are all taking turns keeping Mas busy in this thread so he stays out of the other's.  It seems to be working.

I think I'm up soon.  I'm waiting for the "your turn" PM.

[NOSValves]

fritz,

You have a PM

[Deang]

There's no debate. We are all taking turns keeping Mas busy in this thread so he stays out of the other's. It seems to be working.

LMAO!