How will my system benefit from a tube amp?

[Guest " "]

" But Mas here isn't about that. He is about creating an illusion of brilliance above all the ignorant masses assembled here, and apparently will stop at nothing including dissembling whenever it suits his so-called "argument" - which I might add has not been understood by a single soul on this forum. "

There is hope for bother Mas.  We just need to get him some equipment, some records, and give him some time to smell the roses.  I can offer up a loaner tube pre-amp, some nice cables, and other wares that may or may not make an difference in the sound he will hear.  I have a nice 1976 turntable with a new cartidge and needle, as well as some records from various artists.  I don't have an extra tube amp, but do have an extra decent SS amp that is claimed to run in class A mode.  Also have 3 pairs of Hersey speakers, I can loan up a set in oak or walnut.  Have a decent CD player as well as a decent DAC.  Edit insert - almost forgot the small collection of new tubes so he can try some tube rolling as well.

After we graduate him from basic music enjoyment.  I'd like to step him through some basic crossover modifications and upgrades.  And finally, assist him in his understanding of how he can customize the sound of his system by manipulating the apparent load his amp sees using....you guessed it...his favorite subject.....some transformers.

All Mas needs to do is get in touch with me an pay shipping both ways.

 

[Deang]

From earlier: I simply assumed that "linear range" is the area where something is being run within its design parameters, not in a way or beyond what it was designed to do.

Those that claim that measurements don't correlate to what their ears tell them ...

Mike, I'm not claiming that at all. There is an audible difference (sometimes significant) between tube amps and solid state amps -- and output impedance, predominate distortion form, and behavior while under a speaker load obviously account for most of it. The point is, even the most basic measurements point to a difference in sound -- so telling someone they're not likely to hear a difference or that people like me are hearing the inaudible is kind of idiotic. Not only that, but since no two amps measure exactly the same in every parameter (all of them, not just the ones the manufacturers choose to tell us about) -- why is it such a reach that people can hear the difference between them? I guess those of us who can even hear the difference between different tube amps must really be falling off the deep end.

You're a brilliant guy mas, and I love going over your posts, but sometimes you come off like a pompous ***. Like with a lot of things said on this forum, I guess I'll eat the meat and spit out the bones. Sorry, but on the whole, good tube amps just sound cleaner, smoother, and more open to me. I'm sure there are great solid state amps, but I don't have $5000 to try any of them.

There you go folks, just get yourself a nice receiver from Best Buy and do some room treatments.

[Parrot]

mas,

When MDeneen calls you a liar, as he does above, you know you've hit a nerve. I predict another meltdown soon.

[Deang]

We need a FX generator for tube gear. A choice between Bipolar hash and MOSFET haze would be nice, and a knob so you can dial in the midrange glare would be cool too. Might as well throw in a 'quick grit' button for those times you feel lazy and don't want to fiddle with fine tuning the sound. In this way, tube guys could get the accuracy into their systems without having to sell everything off.

[Parrot]

There you go folks, just get yourself a nice receiver from Best Buy and do some room treatments.

On the other hand, you could buy into the Bad Cowboy's philosophy of room doesn't matter, amps don't matter, as long as you buy a Jubilee.

[Parrot]

We need a FX generator for tube gear.

There are devices like that. Celebrated mastering engineer Steve Hoffman (of the old DCC gold audiophile discs fame) has a device that he uses at times, that has (if I remember correctly) 5 different degrees of "tube sound" that he can add to a project he's working on. Some tapes he plays straight, some need a "little help," some need more, and so on, up to some tapes need a "whole lot of help." The original tape is being subject to distortion every step of the way when he runs it through this tube device, but he has a large number of loyal fans who love the result of his choices, and certainly has the most devoted audience to the works of any particular mastering engineer.

The vintage tube sound that many people associate with tubes is not the normal tube sound that you get with modern designs (exceptions abound, so don't get too excited if you know of an example that does not apply).

[Deang]

On the other hand, you could buy into the Bad Cowboy's philosophy of room doesn't matter, amps don't matter, as long as you buy a Jubilee.

Did that already.

[Deang]

When MDeneen calls you a liar, as he does above, you know you've hit a nerve. I predict another meltdown soon.

Sorry Paul, but Mark is right, and it's the main reason I'm not even bothering to respond to anything in his posts. He misrepresents the positions, builds a straw man argument, then of course says we're just not getting it. If I allude to crossover distortion in solid state amps, I get "see avatar".

[Parrot]

Your continued attempts to paint everyone here is ignorant and incapable of understanding anything about the choices they make is supported by your continual "rephrasing" or simply lying about what has been said.

Speak for yourself, dude. You may think he's painting you as ignorant, but I don't feel offended.

[Parrot]

When MDeneen calls you a liar, as he does above, you know you've hit a nerve. I predict another meltdown soon.

Sorry Paul, but Mark is right, and it's the main reason I'm not even bothering to respond to anything in his posts. He misrepresents the positions, builds a straw man argument, then of course says we're just not getting it. If I allude to crossover distortion in solid state amps, I get "see avatar".

Sorry Dean, but you're wrong. And if you look at my avatar, you'll understand why no one should use SET amps.

[mas]

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.

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

That's a completely inaccurate assessment of what the debate is or was about. It's simply an assertion you have made up from thin air. No one here said that tubes were the "only" good amplifiers. Let me refresh your memory. When the question was asked, "What might a tube amp do in my system?" A few people chimed in that tubes would simply "add distortion" or become "FX" machines in a system. I painstakingly demonstrated that every amplifier ever made has distortion in every range it can be operated in. And therefore, choosing an amp one was simply choosing which distortions were least objectionable.

Your continued attempts to paint everyone here is ignorant and incapable of understanding anything about the choices they make is supported by your continual "rephrasing" or simply lying about what has been said. When caught in these lies, you revert back to some historical posts in other threads at other times by other people. You tried this on me several times and when called on it you begin to writhe and wiggle about Heyser Spirals in some ditch effort to toss up enough techno-babble nonsense to confuse the issue. You demonstrated beyond any doubt that you know less than nothing about amplifiers or their distortions, tubes or SS, and your great contribution was to claim that "amplifiers ideally should be a straight wire with gain." Well, my, my, my, isn't that a profound insight. But, we are all ignoramuses laboring under various "fantasies" about the way things sound?

A good argument is fun. To answer Craig's question a few posts back, no, there's no real purpose here - - it's entertainment to discuss these things. But Mas here isn't about that. He is about creating an illusion of brilliance above all the ignorant masses assembled here, and apparently will stop at nothing including dissembling whenever it suits his so-called "argument" - which I might add has not been understood by a single soul on this forum.

His opening sentence here again about the "only tube crowd" is just the same reversion back to a platform from which he can denounce everyone as "ignorant". Talk about a one trick pony.

Whatever...

You are the one who has trouble understanding linear and non-linear operation. And that distortion is the non-linear response to a linear input signal.

And as to whether many or any here understand that to which I refer doesn't make me the ignorant one. But don't let stop you from learning something. Go read up on Dennis Gabor's Analytic Reposne, and Heyser's work. And then you can criticize them as you don't understand that to which they refer as well. And then check out the Domain relationship map I have posted many times here and which is also posted in Sound System Engineering on page136. And then brag that you know nothing about the Heyser Spiral and the Nyquist compliment - or what if often referred to as both Heyser spirals, one in the frequency domain and the other in the time domain.

You simply trot out the same tired pony. You missed my point long ago. I have no interest in debating your outdated model. No more than I feel the need to debate the classical model of the atom.

"I painstakingly demonstrated that every amplifier ever made has distortion in every range it can be operated in. And therefore, choosing an amp one was simply choosing which distortions were least objectionable." Wow, I hope you didn't hurt yourself too badly. Are you telling us that an amplifier's transfer function is not unity? Gee! Thanks! I hope the crowd here captured that bit of valuable insight! Seems you were surprised by and subsequently belittled the classic concept of the ideal goal of an amplifier doing that.

The point is that your in depth analysis is really not that helpful. Things distort. Pick the one you like. As if there is any other option!

So tell me, what are the exact implications of an impedance mismatch between source and load? What happens with a source that is primarily inductive and a load that is primarily capacitive, or visa versa, or both are primarily capacitive or primarily inductive? Is the result causal or non-causal? What effect does it have on the phase of the system response? Is it minimum phase? At what point is it no longer minimum phase?

And after all is said and done what effect does this have relative to the interface of the speaker and the room? Is the difference that this amplifier makes significant in regards to the issues involved in this interface or not?does it make sense to wax poetically and spend thousands of dollars on an amp while then simply making your subjective analysis in a room where the predominate determining characteristics of that subjective experience you value so much is totally dominated by the speaker-room interaction?

Whatever Mark. No, you don't understand where I am coming from. And it is difficult to speak of it when you have no clue as to what I am referring. And your responses are completely non sequiter. The point is, they do not address the issue. They really don't matter. Not because you cannot develop some thesis that develops an answer to 26 decimal places, but that the question you are jumping up and down about simply is not that important in the larger system view. But that is where we differ. I don't obsess over a particular component in a piece of equipment that has more of an emotional effect than a larger system effect, be it a turntable or an amplifier. I don't care if your Yugo's glove box is mink lined. It's still a Yugo.

And no Mark, I don't refer to everyone, I only refer to you. You don't get what I, and perhaps a few others, are saying. You are ignore-ant - unaware of - what I am talking about. And that's also why you couldn't fathom the use of "pro" gear in the earlier thread. You don't have a clue as to what the focus is of some of the folks here who worry about more than the nameplate on a particular piece of gear.

And you have absolutely no grasp of a quality known as tongue an cheek humor.

[maxg]

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?

Mas,

There's an engine in the trunk.

All,

Now - I have been away from this thread for about 2 hours - playing with my daughter who has now fallen asleep.

I see there are some doubts being expressed as to Mas' ability to produce what he claims. I am expecting something akin to the single unifying theory of the universe as applied to systems / rooms etc whereby I can nummerically predict system synergies both between components and between system/room.

Are we saying I will be disappointed?

[anarchist]

No need to refer even ONCE more to the "name" of the process - - it's time now for you to demonstrate the actual process. Use it---show me how it works. This is what you wanted. A chance to demonstrate the usefulness of your process to select everything from cable to amps. So please - - it's all yours.

Perhaps after this demonstration, he can then provide the names of the equipment to purchase so we all can enjoy "straight wire with gain." It is obvious Mas has insight into "neutral" equipment and if we give him the courtesy of time, he will inform us of exactly what should comprise each of our systems.

An equipment list Mas if you don't mind; I, for one, want distortion free equipment which reproduces music accurately and adds no character of its own - make it pretty too because I damn sure don't want any equipment which looks like it would fit in with Deans "ugly" Jub's.

I have learned one thing. All these years I thought it amazing a guitarist could play three different instruments simultaneously. I was even more stunned when dead guys suddenly started playing duets with live artists. To learn this is done by "magic" in a recording studio destroys me. The band doesn't even have to be in the same room at the same time to record a song? Say it isn't so.

[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?

Mas,

There's an engine in the trunk.

All,

Now - I have been away from this thread for about 2 hours - playing with my daughter who has now fallen asleep.

I see there are some doubts being expressed as to Mas' ability to produce what he claims. I am expecting something akin to the single unifying theory of the universe as applied to systems / rooms etc whereby I can nummerically predict system synergies both between components and between system/room.

Are we saying I will be disappointed?

What compartment is that in the front? Don't look! A trunk???

Oh, and the numeric answer? You win the prize ! But you're several pages late! Go back and look on page 9!

I don't have to produce... Heyser already has. []

[PrestonTom]

I guess this ranting has become very tedious.

For those of you who are interested, much of what is being referred to (and criticized) is work done primarily by Richard Heyser. Some of you will recognize his name as a reviewer at Audio magazine. In fact he did one of the more interesting reviews of the Klipschorn years ago. His name is also strongly associated with Time Delay Spectroscopy. He regularly published in J. Audio Engineering Society. A complilation of that work is:

Time Delay Spectrometry, softbound, 280 pages, 8.25" by 11.25", is available from Audio Engineering Society Inc

Don Davis also has an updated version of "Sound System Engineering" This uses& explains many of the ideas being discussed.

Although some of you have been gracious enough to credit MAS with inventing these techniques, they actually have a longer and more widespread history and following. Some of the researchers that MAS has mentioned (Richard Heyser, Don Davis, DB Keele - who incidentally was associated with Klipsch Inc at one time) are/were heavy hitters in the audio field. If you are attacking their thinking and work, then you are probably on very thin ice. The is much to be learned from those folks.

At one level this is an engineering & scientific endeavor. There is a great deal of math and physics involved, simply as a preliminary background. It would be nice if these things could be simply summarized, but such summaries end up being simplistic (i.e., "lite" definitions of group delay and impedance). It ends up being frustrating for all concerned. However, at many levels it not a requirement that one understands TDS, systems analysis or whatever. Nor does one need to run a TDS on Klipschorn to appreciate that it is something special. However, the idea that things can not be measured or that physics & engineering should be thrown out the door when audio equipment is being created or is being discussed is bothersome. I work as a scientist, I believe MAS is a practicing engineer. It took some effort to get there, it is not a mtter of owning some audio equipment. Doctors & Lawyers simply don't just hang up their shingle one day and practice. I am not sure what everyone's background is, but I am certain that it is probably fairly varied. Someone mentioned earlier the distinction between engineering and tinkering. I believe this is an apt one. Certainly contributions can result from tinkering - but it can also be haphazard. Having these additional tools is helpful if not crucial. Now the task becomes more systematic and I am biased I don't think the idea of doing something "by ear" (unless it is the final stages) is a systematic approach. I confess, this is my bias. However, these tools do require some homework. When I started working with digital sound, I had to learn quite a bit. You do not pick it up by osmosis or by making some lucky guesses.

Having said this, do you need a dgree in engineering, or physics etc. to enjoy audio? Absolutely not. However, should you blindly argue against something that you have not yet studied for yourself? I'll let others answer that.

Again, what is being discussed (and criticized) was developed by some heavy hitters in the field. Large parts of it I remain ignorant of. But that is simply a reason to learn about it rather than than to ignore it.

Good Luck,

-Tom

[mas]

Mas,

Are you familiar with "My Fair Lady?" Do you remember Liza's lament in the song "Show Me?" She's sick of the men talking about love, she wants them to show her love. So, here it is real simple for you. Stop talking about the Heyser Spirals and create a proper example right here and now. The original question was "how will a tube amp sound in my system?" So please - the stage is all yours - take it. Demonstrate for us using your advanced techniques and principles how his system will be for the better or the worse sounding if he inserts a tube amp.

Shouldn't be difficult - you seem intimately familiar with the terms and you have bandied them about endlessly. Make whatever assumptions you want, state the objectives of your analysis, show the steps in the process you will use, show the data, and state the outcome. No need to refer even ONCE more to the "name" of the process - - it's time now for you to demonstrate the actual process. Use it---show me how it works. This is what you wanted. A chance to demonstrate the usefulness of your process to select everything from cable to amps. So please - - it's all yours.

hahaha!

You ask "how will a tube amp sound in my system?" Hmmm. Well, if you are using a 6DJ8, I would say "noisy as hell".

Demonstrate the actual process? You are the fool. Its not a

prognostication tool! The more you talk, the more apparent it is that

you know nothing of what I speak. At least I know the names!

And as far as referencing " Liza's lament in the song "Show Me?" She's sick of the men talking about love, she wants them to show her love." Sorry, but I don't swing that way, bowtie boy. Thanks, but no thanks.

Do you have any purpose here other than your vested self-interest to sell your tube equipment, TubeBoy?

Here, you want a VERY simple example of how a Heyser spiral might be useful?

Given a system where you knew the reactances of various amplifiers in a bi-amped SR system, you have LF bins, and MF/HF packs. You have a choice of amps, and one model is predominantly capacitive at <1KHZ and inductive in the >1KHz passband, the other is primarily inductive <1 KHz and capacitive in the >1KHz passband.

It would make more sense to use the model that is inductive at <1 KHz to

drive the LF bins, as using an amplifier that was capacitive at less than 1 KHz to drive low frequencies would not be an optimal match.

For the rest of you, unlike bowtieboy, who have a few functioning brain cells, capacitive reactance resists low frequencies and passes high frequencies.

And conversely, it would make sense to use the model that is capacitive <1 KHz to drive the MF/HF packs, as using an amp with an inductive reactance above 1 KHz to drive MF/HF would not be optimal as inductance tends to resist MF/HF. Need I explain this?

But with the noise of that 6DJ8 buzzing in your ears, bowtieboy probably can't hear what we are saying. But he DOES know noise!

But as Bowtieboy the consummate TUBE salesman fails to understand, the measurements can provide insight into the nature of a sytem IF you were interested in playing or balancing a system. That is not its primary purpose.

But you might ask the self-interested Tube Salesman just what is different in a system where the complex impedance exhibits a closer match throughout the time and frequency spectrum, versus one with radical mismatches where low frequencies are being driven, transmitted or reproduced by a unit that exhibits a capacitive reactance, or conversely a unit whose reactance is inductive at high frequencies being used to drive, transmit, or reproduce high frequencies.

And if the overall complex impedance is matched throughout the system chain as opposed to radical mismatches?

You think the various systems can sound different? Damn right they can!

This is already something that has already been used in SR systems.

And now Bowtie the Tube Salesman can tell use why he has a vested interest in pushing and dismissing the noise and distortion characteristics of his noisy 6DJ8 tubes. []

[mas]

SELL THEM TUBES!!!!!

You have the personal self-interest in pushing your wares. I don't!

And if you want to criticize the techniques and methods advanced by folks allot smarter than you, fine. I am just a messenger and one who has made an effort to understand and to actively employ them.

I have nothing to sell TUBE BOY. I just suggest that there is more to audio and acoustics than your tired out of date arguments - as well as your lousy sales techniques.

[Guest " "]

mas

I have been reading your last run of post on this forum.....I sense that you are troubled and are harboring some pain.......will you begin the journey of healing and share this pain with us...find it in yourself to unlock this pain that you have been harboring and release it....what is your pain...every man has some pain that he harbors that will devour him unless he can be rid of it....please brother Mas.....share your pain....and release it.

[Spongeworthy]

Your continued attempts to paint everyone here is ignorant and incapable of understanding anything about the choices they make is supported by your continual "rephrasing" or simply lying about what has been said.

Speak for yourself, dude. You may think he's painting you as ignorant, but I don't feel offended.

lol, were you even in the conversation? Why would you be offended?

[ajcllc]

So do all of these posts on this thread mean that there is no black or white answer to my question? []