tubes and seasoned age

[mikebse2a3]

Mike's questions/thoughts at the begining of this thread are legitimate ones to ask and I have no doubt they were asked in the interest of trying to learn and understand things better and I believe it is an important part of this forum. It is good to have people asking questions that make us think and reach for a better understanding of why things are the way they are or perceived to be anyway.

For the record I met Doc in Hope last year and have actually talked to him and he has a genuine interest and his own perspective like all of us and I believe he is like alot of us "I hope" and wants to explore and learn the real answers as to what is really happening when we perceive and prefer certain aspects of sound reproduction whether it's in the recording, our equipment, our rooms...etc...........

mike tn

[mikebse2a3]

6L6s RULE!

See the can of worms you opend Duke![]

For me it's 2A3s SE or PP although I've heard some beautiful music from 6BQ5/EL84 amps also!

mike tn[]

[mas]

It is good to have people asking questions that make us think and reach for a better understanding of why things are the way they are or perceived to be anyway.

I don't know about an "understanding of why things are", but it sure seems that its going to take allot more than a few questions to get most on this site to do any of that "thinking" to which you refer.

[DrWho]

lol

Seems I'll have to bring this topic back up in a few months and not make any jokes. Like Maron mentioned....imperfect hearing doesn't matter if you keep yourself calibrated with live music.

Care to share any of your measurements, Mike? [][]

[sputnik]

I don't know about an "understanding of why things are", but it sure seems that its going to take allot more than a few questions to get most on this site to do any of that "thinking" to which you refer.

That's a lot of attitude for someoe who "thinks" that water is a diatomic molecule.

[BS Button]

Apart from distortion characteristics (since those have been beat to death), what are the other factors?

Slew rate.

Thanks - sounds like I've got a bit more reading to do.

No, not really Doc. Just more listening. You can't explain everything you hear, hear well or don't hear at all. Now, if you could ever just tell me what treatments I need for that "Slap Ecco" (sp) bay area. What do I need?

I'm confused - are you saying slew rate doesn't matter?

As far as that pingy slapback action - I think a few absorption type panels going along the sides of the parallel walls surrounding the couch would be a good start. Go as thick as you can (like no less than 4" if it'll fit). I'm not exactly sure what kind of aesthetics you're aiming for, but you might consider throwing a heavy curtain that wraps around back there or something crazy like that - it would probably help to cover up that window and the folded shape of the heavy curtain will do a little diffusion as well (provided it's heavy enough - none of this lace stuff...). It would probably also help to throw some stuff along that front wall too, but diffusion is probably the better route there. The absence of side walls will kinda be working to your advantage, but there's some chance that the room is coming back at the listening position all weird too (something easily verified with a few measurements). I suppose it sounds like a lot of work, but it could be done way overkill for under $500. You can work your way down from that to fit a price range and aesthetic impact that you desire.

I'll get my wife on that heavy curtain[]. I could handle the foam on the side walls. Thanks

BS

who gives a crap about slew rates?

BS

Todd, You have a PM.

tc

I see nothing, Terry. I know nothing, Shultz.

T

[mas]

I don't know about an "understanding of why things are", but it sure seems that its going to take allot more than a few questions to get most on this site to do any of that "thinking" to which you refer.

That's a lot of attitude for someoe who "thinks" that water is a diatomic molecule.

Nope, just the Oxygen component and the hydrogen components. Both are. With oxygen being by far the more common atoms in this form. But I do know that a calorie is a calorie.

Without going back and looking, did I fail to state fully that that the diatomic molecules form a dipole/polar molecule? Oh gee, I guess my focus was on the net result, explaining the heat of fusion in a sentence. Next time I guess we will have to go into greater detail regarding the nature of all of the bonds as well, and watch as many think I'm talking about some form of sexual deviancy...

But then I can spell "someone"....

[*-)]

[IB Slammin]

Apart from distortion characteristics (since those have been beat to death), what are the other factors?

Slew rate.

Thanks - sounds like I've got a bit more reading to do.

No, not really Doc. Just more listening. You can't explain everything you hear, hear well or don't hear at all. Now, if you could ever just tell me what treatments I need for that "Slap Ecco" (sp) bay area. What do I need?

I'm confused - are you saying slew rate doesn't matter?

As far as that pingy slapback action - I think a few absorption type panels going along the sides of the parallel walls surrounding the couch would be a good start. Go as thick as you can (like no less than 4" if it'll fit). I'm not exactly sure what kind of aesthetics you're aiming for, but you might consider throwing a heavy curtain that wraps around back there or something crazy like that - it would probably help to cover up that window and the folded shape of the heavy curtain will do a little diffusion as well (provided it's heavy enough - none of this lace stuff...). It would probably also help to throw some stuff along that front wall too, but diffusion is probably the better route there. The absence of side walls will kinda be working to your advantage, but there's some chance that the room is coming back at the listening position all weird too (something easily verified with a few measurements). I suppose it sounds like a lot of work, but it could be done way overkill for under $500. You can work your way down from that to fit a price range and aesthetic impact that you desire.

I'll get my wife on that heavy curtain[]. I could handle the foam on the side walls. Thanks

BS

who gives a crap about slew rates?

BS

Todd, You have a PM.

tc

I see nothing, Terry. I know nothing, Shultz.

T

Todd,

Gave it another shot.

tc

[pauln]

I would like to hear more about the robots DrWho is building. Anything like this one that rents for $3500/day?

[pete almquist]

no, no, sorry to break this to you but dr. who's robot's always looked like animated tin-cans...

[mas]

...some tin cans...[:|]

Someone call Ray Bradbury....quick! []

[pauln]

Wondering if Asimov's three rules could apply to this forum?

1.
A forum member may not injure another forum member's feelings or,
through inaction, allow a forum members' sense of self esteem to come
to harm.

2 A forum member must obey orders given to it by the forum
moderators beings except where such orders would conflict with the
First Law.

3 A forum member must protect his own post count as long as
such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Female robot from Blade Runner...

[dkp]

I don't know about an "understanding of why things are", but it sure seems that its going to take allot more than a few questions to get most on this site to do any of that "thinking" to which you refer.

That's a lot of attitude for someoe who "thinks" that water is a diatomic molecule.

Nope, just the Oxygen component and the hydrogen components. Both are. With oxygen being by far the more common atoms in this form. But I do know that a calorie is a calorie.

Without going back and looking, did I fail to state fully that that the diatomic molecules form a dipole/polar molecule? Oh gee, I guess my focus was on the net result, explaining the heat of fusion in a sentence. Next time I guess we will have to go into greater detail regarding the nature of all of the bonds as well, and watch as many think I'm talking about some form of sexual deviancy...

But then I can spell "someone"....

[*-)]

Go easy, mas. Therz allot uf misspellin' on duh forumz. []

[garymd]

I'd call that one a typo. Much ado about nada.

[Gilbert]

I would like to hear more about the robots DrWho is building. Anything like this one that rents for $3500/day?

Let me know what she can do, and then I'll give you my answer.... heheheheheh [6]

[mas]

I don't know about an "understanding of why things are", but it sure seems that its going to take allot more than a few questions to get most on this site to do any of that "thinking" to which you refer.

That's a lot of attitude for someoe who "thinks" that water is a diatomic molecule.

Nope, just the Oxygen component and the hydrogen components. Both are. With oxygen being by far the more common atoms in this form. But I do know that a calorie is a calorie.

Without going back and looking, did I fail to state fully that that the diatomic molecules form a dipole/polar molecule? Oh gee, I guess my focus was on the net result, explaining the heat of fusion in a sentence. Next time I guess we will have to go into greater detail regarding the nature of all of the bonds as well, and watch as many think I'm talking about some form of sexual deviancy...

But then I can spell "someone"....

[*-)]

Go easy, mas. Therz allot uf misspellin' on duh forumz. []

Hey, if others are going to quibble over my not presenting a complete accounting of the molecular dynamics involved in phase changes, including anomalous forms of such!!!, presented in 1-2 sentences, I can quibble over their equally silly spelling errors! ;-) ;-)

But as others can attest - and just ask Doc - when I chat, my typing is ... well, let's just say it is 'creative' to be polite!! ...To be more accurate, it is more akin to developing my own language or an indecipherable code!

So if I can manage to catch most of the typing errors I make, I would appreciate a bit of the same slack others desire as well! Is that reasonable??

But rest assured! I am not going after everyone's spelling errors! After all, I fear I would head the list!!!! ;-)

Its the 'thinkin' (or lack thereof) errors that are harder to fix! ;-) ;-) ;-)

[dkp]

I don't know about an "understanding of why things are", but it sure seems that its going to take allot more than a few questions to get most on this site to do any of that "thinking" to which you refer.

That's a lot of attitude for someoe who "thinks" that water is a diatomic molecule.

Nope, just the Oxygen component and the hydrogen components. Both are. With oxygen being by far the more common atoms in this form. But I do know that a calorie is a calorie.

Without going back and looking, did I fail to state fully that that the diatomic molecules form a dipole/polar molecule? Oh gee, I guess my focus was on the net result, explaining the heat of fusion in a sentence. Next time I guess we will have to go into greater detail regarding the nature of all of the bonds as well, and watch as many think I'm talking about some form of sexual deviancy...

But then I can spell "someone"....

[*-)]

Go easy, mas. Therz allot uf misspellin' on duh forumz. []

Hey, if others are going to quibble over my not presenting a complete accounting of the molecular dynamics involved in phase changes, including anomalous forms of such!!!, presented in 1-2 sentences, I can quibble over their equally silly spelling errors! ;-) ;-)

But as others can attest - and just ask Doc - when I chat, my typing is ... well, let's just say it is 'creative' to be polite!! ...To be more accurate, it is more akin to developing my own language or an indecipherable code!

So if I can manage to catch most of the typing errors I make, I would appreciate a bit of the same slack others desire as well! Is that reasonable??

But rest assured! I am not going after everyone's spelling errors! After all, I fear I would head the list!!!! ;-)

Its the 'thinkin' (or lack thereof) errors that are harder to fix! ;-) ;-) ;-)

Just ribbin' ya, mas. From this point onward I shall pick on thee, no mas!!! []

-David

[mas]

As if I care if you 'get' or like what I say, sheepboy.

Sorry, but you're not my type.

Oh, and you might want to wipe the puke from your chin.

[3dzapper]

Someone has a visual on their ilium.

Who, As to you initial hypothesis: If we the aged hearing impaired have gone to thermionic valves to get more high frequency output, why do we eschew tone controls? Wouldn't t make more sense to say that the high frequency impaired music lover would opt for SS and a large range of tone controls?

[DrWho]

Hey Rick,

The bit about aging was just me poking some fun. I would argue that if you know what real live music sounds like with the current state of your ears, then you can compare how well your system at home matches the live sound. So really, hearing damage doesn't reduce one's ability to analyze music / sound systems and I can think of many old recording engineers with blown ears that pump out some great sounding music. They're good at it because they know what live music sounds like with their old blown ears.

As far as SS, I wasn't intending to compare between formats because SS can have high output impedances as well. It's just that tubes generally have higher output impedances.

It's interesting that you mention tone controls though, because that is where I was trying to go...

By varying the output impedance of the amplifier, you are also going to change its frequency response, and this change will mimic that of the speaker's impedance. So in essence, the process of changing the output impedance of the amplifier would effectively be a process of employing a complex form of EQ. My question was simply one of wondering if some of the differences people note between similar but different amplifiers has something to do with the change in frequency response resulting from changes to the output impedance.