"I must say my sound surpasses any live event I have been to"
I would only ask this, do you mean the emotional involvement is better through your system than at a live performance or that your system just sounds better to your ears? I mean really, what is more enjoyable, a live performance or sitting between 2 speakers 8 feet back all by your lonesome? The one sure thing about going to a live performance, for me at least, is that the focus is on the performance not on the sound. |
Hi Dinster,
My listening experiences at jazz venues are very different from yours. I'd say 75-80% of the time the sound is unamplified(just pure and natural). The consistent chracteristic is how full bodied,warm, rich and colorful/vivid the various instruments sound.The bite and power are present but no sharp edges. Most audio components err towards leaner,thinner and flat(missing the bloom heard live). As you say(and I agree), to each their own. |
"03-18-15: Csontos
What I find a little self-aggrandizing is the declaration that "Ive finally arrived at the perfect synergy and all there is to do now is enjoy the music". Hogwash! The objective fact is that no playback system even approaches live/real events. Not only that but it's being declared here on an 'audiophile' site where music is what facilitates the hobby. It's laughable. If I could acquire a perfect system, I'd sabotage my interest. It would then cease to exist, the challenge is no more. Fact is I love the hobby. Without the gear to focus on, I'd have to take up stamp collecting while listening to music."
Wow, I know it sounds right that the recorded sound should approach the live event....I must say my sound surpasses any live event I have been to. Firstly for pop/rock etc. the live event is often pretty ordinary, All depends on the venue and the mixing desk and the PA. You are in fact listening to a giant stereo system!! Secondly for Classical depends on where you sit and the amplifications system and the hall. Sorry but I never get to sit front row dead centre, maybe you do? At home I am always dead centre.
I search out unamplified musical events to use as a reference...they are few and far between usually chamber and jazz ensembles...and you know what they are bright and edgy, the trumpet and violins can be uncomfortably piercing, the kick drum is often a bit overwhelming and loose, the cymbals often dominate the sound uncomfortably...it is not syrupy smooth.
Perhaps accuracy is not what we are looking for..rather a sound that pleases and fidelity to pick the characteristics of the instruments, and finally speed and timing that excites??? That maybe why there are such differing opinions on equipment e.g.. tube vs SS....each to his own:)
I am now going to duck for cover. |
I don't recall anyone claiming "perfect" synergy or aystem that sound 100% live. I will say that my current system composition brings me closer to the live sound and feel that I crave. People are into audio for various reasons and different objectives. I was involved in music(played the trumpet) and attende live jazz before I discovered High End audio. So my goals may be different from what others want or need. I simply wanted to own components that get me as close to a natural sound as I could managed to do. I'm very happy with what I have now and enjoy my music immensely.
No doubt other folks are into audio for different reasons and are more into the components themselves. That could be the majority on this site, but that has nothing to do with me and those with similar objectives. I'll assume that people are into High End for a multitude of reasons. I am very glad I was able to find components that increase the joy of listening to music. I could be in the minority on this forum, but I'd think others share my same desire. It's a big world. |
Gpgr4blu wrote,
"Funny how a good tube system is said to have many characteristics of ss and a good ss system is said to be liquid and have the bloom of tubes."
Uh, I'm pretty sure NOONE is saying SS has the liquid characteristic and bloom of tubes. |
What I find a little self-aggrandizing is the declaration that "Ive finally arrived at the perfect synergy and all there is to do now is enjoy the music". Hogwash! The objective fact is that no playback system even approaches live/real events. Not only that but it's being declared here on an 'audiophile' site where music is what facilitates the hobby. It's laughable. If I could acquire a perfect system, I'd sabotage my interest. It would then cease to exist, the challenge is no more. Fact is I love the hobby. Without the gear to focus on, I'd have to take up stamp collecting while listening to music. |
Czarivey, sure, and quite often distinguishing a true one from an imposter is similar to an ABX test. |
Funny how a good tube system is said to have many characteristics of ss and a good ss system is said to be liquid and have the bloom of tubes.That should tell us that we like the dimensionality and liquidity of tubes but the impact, speed and precision of ss. I'm a tube guy generally speaking but I have heard ss that I could live with, like D'Agostino amps which I would choose over most tube amps. In short, as always it depends. |
Tube amps are more fun...that's the important difference. |
I would encourage any one to listen to any component they have an interest in obtaining or if just curious. This is an open forum and we're all just sharing our various experiences. I personally don't view listening to music as a scientific exercise.Over the years I've
heard many components and systems and as a result have formed opinions based on that. Other people may have their own way of judging what they hear and reaching conclusions. There's no one correct way (and all else is wrong)to go about this. Listen and note how you react and respond. It will be a bit different for each of us(as would be expected). when the the sound/ music reproduction is right, you'll know it. No one will have to direct your or influence your natural reactions. You don't have to justify what you like(or why you like what you like), just enjoy what you've found. I know what has consistently worked for me and has been the more satisfying emotionally. If it's different for someone else that perfectly fine. In my case, analytical method doesn't work. I must be moved and drawn into the music, I operate on emotion and spontaneous involvement.
Charles, |
For mentioned God and also all who joined Him, they're same. |
It is as I mentioned in previous posts. If one offers opinions regarding tube vs solid state or amp vs amp and does not offer reference points, then the comparisons are not based on fact.
the bottom line is that one will see lots of opinions regarding tube vs solid state and how tubes are Gods gift to the world and solid state is the lazy persons offering to the music reproduction world. And that couldn't be further from the truth.
One has to compare apples to apples. To simply say tubes are better, warmer, etc. is not accurate or true. in comparison to what???
Don't take anyone's word as gospel. Pick a price point, find some solid state amps and tube amps within that price point. Taking into account your existing system and speakers and the load it represents to the amp. The room size, the volume level that you are comfortable with and get those amps into your system and listen for yourself.
One would be doing a large disservice by saying that tube amps are better than solid state or visa versa (yeah,,,, no the are not) without a direct scientific and listening comparison.
There are some really great solid state amps out there that I would take in a second. Just as there are some really great tube amps out there that I would also take in a second.
To say one is better than the other is not based on any comparisons that I have seen.
If I was to be thinking of buying amps, I would establish my price point, the power ratings and impedance I need to drive my specific speakers, go demo them in my system (for that kind of money, absolutely it would be in my home system and not in a store), take careful, thoughtful notes, and decide.
As I don't 100% trust anyone else's opinion or ears except my own, that is how I would go.
getting someone's views is one thing, but buying based on that person's view is not smart.
enjoy |
^^ This.
Music is process in the limbic centers of the brain- unless some aspect of the sound is altered enough that the brain detects a problem- and then the music processing is transferred to the cerebral cortex.
This is literally why some systems are emotionally involving while others are not. Obviously the goal would be to keep the processing in the limbic centers. |
Electro slacker,
Well stated, when the musical listening experience is emotionally involving and realistic, the mental checklist is erased and you just sit there and get involved and engaged with the music. You express the gist of this contrasting experience well. There becomes no need or desire to have an analytical approach, just relax and enjoy. A different body response is evoked and it feels right, no mental dissection needed when the sound is more natural.
Charles, |
Charles: FWIW, I recall my encounters with ss in analytical terms--"the Class'e seemed more solid, but the McCormack seemed faster," but I recall my encounters with tubes warmly as cherished experiences, and I don't compare one tube experience to another. This makes me think the tube experience was profoundly musical, free of checklists and ratings. This is only realized as I look back over the experiences. Perhaps distance is required to see the pattern, and I have little confidence I could discern this difference in the moment. |
Hi Csontos,
I believe you and others who say they hear the desirable attributes I described for tubes in SS, personally I have not. I admit my impressions aren't universally shared. I have heard good SS amps sound better than a number of tube amps. I am comparing the best examples I have heard from each camp. So far the high quality tube amps win the realism/natural title. Totally subjective of course but that is what I consistently hear. I appreciate Your different perspective. |
Charles, your definition is very accurate. I recognize every aspect you describe in a 'lousy' amp. However, I also observe the attributes you mention in ss. Not sure how that would compare to a great in my estimation tube amp. |
Electroslacker,
I relate to your SS to tube transition, they just sound more natural and closer to live performers. This point was made vividly clear for me as I listen to live music in my home in my case a piano and the many live Venues I attend regularly. It just seems to be that solid-state is handicapped by its production of higher odd order distortion, it just makes instruments and human voices sound less real. There is a pervasive flatter leaner sound that just sounds incomplete to me, I know others have different experiences but these are mine. To use a food analogy, solid-state seems to present a more lite presentation where as tubes if designed properly deliver the entire sonic harmonic scope and picture in other words just more natural with the key ingredients intact. SS comes off as artificially processed by comparison. This debate will go on foreverer I recognize. |
Ralph, can a ss amp have such low distortion as to make that comparison not tenable? I suppose a better question would be, have you ever listened to a ss amp without the typical characteristics you ascribe to them? I have heard one solid state amp that was quite musical- it also cost $100K and made 100 watts total. It was also zero feedback. It was better than most tube amps I have heard. But it is the exception by far. I've yet to see a solid state amp with such low distortion as to not be bright- in fact it seems that the lower distortion units are more irritating to the human ear. That this occurs is nothing new- audiophiles have been commenting on this for decades. Norman Crowhurst wrote about this issue many years ago- back in the 1950s- we are not going over new ground here... I am not an advocate of 'distortion of tubes' either; I prefer as little distortion as possible, but I am pragmatic in the understanding that distortion is part of the tonality of any amplifier because that is how the human ear behaves and all amplifiers have distortion. |
^Human hearing can quite readably differentiate direct sound from indirect sound, especially if there is enough time between the direct sound and the reflected sound. This is how we are hardwired. For home audio with loudspeakers this can quite successfully be accomplished with proper loudspeaker and listener seating positioning. Room treatment and room correction can be most beneficial in this regard as well.
If headphone listening was so superior, why isn't the use of headphones at live performances ubiquitous? Why is it that we have no trouble having conversations in domestic rooms? If headphone listening was so much better than loudspeaker listening, why wouldn't audiophiles more often forego expensive loudspeaker based systems for the for less expense, more mobile, more convenient, less obtrusive headphone alternative?
Having music put directly into our ear canals from extreme angles is unnatural. Sure, it eliminates the influence of room sound upon the recorded soundstage, (something that can be quite beneficial to focus on specific elements of equipment and recordings) but introduces other problems that affect the gestalt of the way we naturally hear.
I fear we have already hijacked this thread enough. I will not comment on headphones vs. loudspeakers again here. Perhaps on another thread? |
Tube amps at the low end of price are more emotionally engaging for opera, tears in the eye at dramatic vocal passages. Solid state requires more money to achieve tear jerker status, more likely to get a mental hand clap than tears. |
Headphones actually provide the pure clear unadulterated signal including the soundstage information that is captured during the recording. Why screw with that pure signal with extraneous room reflections, standing waves, comb filter effects, echoes, etc.? That's what I'd like to know about? It sounds like you believe the soundstage is created by room anomalies. |
The sound we "collect" effect the sound perception in a predictable (and natural) way outside of rooms that is different than the more direct sound that comes from headphones. |
Unsound, the music that your ears "collect" is actually the room- produced information like reflections and so forth, you know, the very things we try to tame or eliminate since they distort the pure sound from the speakers and which headphones don't suffer. Even more polarizing in the Speaker/Headphone debate, as it were, are Tiny Portable systems, even portable FM/AM radios, that have even less problems than ordinary Headphone set ups. I.e., no transformers, no fuses, no house AC, no interconnects and no internal wiring which, as fate would have it, like fuses is connected backwards 50% of the time. The speaker magnets and transformers are BAD in my world because they generate magnetic fields that distort the sound. |
For me, the difference is arrived at by induction rather than deduction. I was never inclined towards tubes or particularly wanted them. But after listening to many different systems over many years I realized the ones that I loved listening to all had tubes--Jadis tubes, Manley tubes, Atmasphere tubes, VAC tubes, and McIntosh tubes. In the mix was Levinson, Goldman, Pass, Classe, and McCormack solid state, which often impressed me with power and authority, but never sent me into a state of "thoughtless joy" with a yearning for it not to end.
If I try to analyze it, the feeling is similar to hearing a chord sequence such as I-IV-V resolve back to the root. There is something so pleasing in that completion that is similar to the feeling from tubes, whereas solid state was more of a matter-of-fact I-IV-V that stopped short of that final completeness. Solid state had more of a Joe Friday "just the facts" while tubes were more of film noir fascination.
So I guess I'm saying that tubes have provided a musical completeness that my brain seems to crave, and this sense of completeness is the difference. |
Geoffkait, In many ways you are correct. Especially with regard to room anomalies, though with room treatment and room correction, speakers can overcome some of this issue. Most high quality headphones still have cables. Magnets? Some headphones have cross-overs, some speakers don't. Some speakers can be run class A all the way, though I'm not sure just how important that is. Some headphones have multiple drivers, some speakers don't. Some speakers don't have phase issues, (and with regard to this thread, interestingly enough, most of those present a load that tend work better with ss amplification).
Headphones are heard from an unnatural extreme left/right directions, which almost never happens in live music performances. The sound is sent more directly into the inner ear without the outer ear collecting sound in the more natural manner. One of the unnatural outcomes of this is that one often hears the sound as though it's coming from within ones head, missing the natural soundstage qualities of a live performance.
Headphones can offer more precise indication of specific elements of recordings and play back, but ultimately, at least for me, the whole sounds unnatural. |
In many ways headphones are the most natural way to listen to music. I'll tell you why. There are no room anomalies to worry about. There are no speaker cables to worry about. There are no big honking magnets in speakers to hurt the sound. There is no crossover. You usually run Class A all the way. There are no (phase) issues with multiple speaker drivers. No issues with trying to locate the ideal speaker locations. No need for a preamp in many cases. Thus, the sound of headphones can often be more natural than speaker systems in terms of transparency, dynamics, inner dynamics, air and tonality. |
I own a fairly good set of cans, they sound good, but I still prefer the two channel magic of a good sound system more. |
^I'm sorry, but I don't understand the first sentence.
Headphones are typically an unnatural way of hearing things. Some headphones use signal processing to try and compensate for this unnaturalness.
Old fashioned loudness controls allow for some compensation of the way the human ear perceives sound at unnatural lower volume levels. Which interestingly enough, is further argument as to how the above mentioned graph only reflects human hearing/perception vis-a-vis an accurate stimuli. |
you'll hear the frequencies as described be it signalk distortion, whatever. Of course the goal is always to minimize distortion or at least what is perceived as distortion.
If you look at frequency response of some transducers, like certain headphones you can see some are designed to compensate for ear sensitivity at various frequencies at various DBs and some do not. Much like the old style loudness controls on vintage receivers and amps.
What sounds best is solely a matter of preference but in general keep noise and distortion to a minimum and things should sound pretty good personal preferences aside. |
Mapman, Gpgr4blou, Please realize that chart reflects how humans hear/percieve undistorted musical instruments/sound frequencies. One would not hear/perceive those instruments/sound frequencies as the chart portrays if the sound was distorted (for example; deviating from flat frequency response) before one heard it. For the purposes at hand it's merely an academic curiosity, and flat frequency response from our systems is still highly desirable. |
Atamsphere, It's not just with my speakers and it's not just me, others have noticed the same thing for some time now; please see the my earlier post on this thread dated 03-10-15. |
Ralph, can a ss amp have such low distortion as to make that comparison not tenable? I suppose a better question would be, have you ever listened to a ss amp without the typical characteristics you ascribe to them? Could you be fooled in an ABX test? Sorry, I really don't mean to take you to task this way but there always seems to be a need to arrive at a defensible position when this topic comes up. It's probably just me but my perspective is borne of observation. I mean the tube guys vs the ss guys. My goal is accurate to life sound. To this end, the fine detail I hear in ss is just not there in the tube amps I've auditioned. Nor is the bottom end drive/slam of a high current ss. Mind you they have been few and far between but always not impressive and very typical sounding. I find a lot more variation among ss amps sound wise. |
Yes but use power. The Hersey syrup causes the amp to sound,err, too syrupy. |
Try hot cocoa for a warmer sound. |
I just poured whole milk into my solid state equipment in order to make it sound more like tubes. I'll report back once the steak is done on the grill and stuffed into my speaker ports. To be continued.... |
GP,
I think you can still order printed copies of the chart. I have a framed copy on my main listening room wall. Its a work of art in that context to a technical nutcase like me. The interactive version online is even better.
It really helps you understand what you are hearing and why, for anyone who really cares about the facts. |
I find tube amps to typically sound brighter than ss amps. Your experience here is unusual! The majority does not share it. This might have something to do with the speaker you are using- it might have a much higher impedance at high frequencies than lower down. |
Mapman:
Wow--what an enlightening chart. Thanks. |
Rsrex, I have already recognized lumpy frequency response in loudspeakers before.
Geoffkait, some of you may have found that, more recently others found the opposite to be true.
Atmasphere, I find tube amps to typically sound brighter than ss amps.
Mapman, flat frequency response as being discussed here is in regard to the relationship of measured input to output. |
Czar, you might be right about the brainwashing, but I have to admit I pay a premium for many products that I consider to be healthier mainly because they have less of the bad stuff they would have otherwise. Mostly for convenience reasons.
ALthough at home if I am not in a rush I will mix and water down things on my own in order to better fit my diet. |
Raymoda, I do not consider skim milk healthy. It's just a part of brainwash. All ya have to do is to blend water and milk 50/50 |
"IOW it may be flat but it may not sound like it."
Actually it won't EVER sound flat if in fact it is because the frequency response of human ears is not flat.
See the Ear Sensitivity chart here for details and how that affects what we hear when listening to music.
http://www.independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm
That does not mean that flat frequency response in the sound making system is not a good thing. It is. It means whats coming out is the same as what went in, even if not always pleasant. |
The problem here is that often the ear will give weight to distortion perceived as tonality over actual frequency response.
A classic example is the brightness of transistor amps. On the bench they might test with the same bandwidth as a tube amp but will sound brighter. Its due to trace amounts of higher ordered harmonic distortion, which the ear translates into tonality: brightness.
IOW it may be flat but it may not sound like it. Not that you can get flat frequency response out of a speaker anyway- just look at their response and you will see that getting flat frequency response is a fool's errand. |
No I missed that one. Help me out. |
Raymonda,
Looks like you obviously did not get Czarivey's joke - that you really had to specify which is which?
:-) |
Unsound wrote,
"Dollar for dollar through most typical loud speakers; high quality tube amplifying devices will more likely distort frequency response more than high quality solid state amplifying devices will."
The problem is distortion is overrated as a measurement of sound quality. So is frequency response. Gotcha covered. Lol. Besides, we found out back in the 70s and 80s that tube amps with 0.05% THD just plain sounded better than solid state amps with 0.0005% THD. |
Ebm, but it will crush! LMAO! |
Unsound, while you are technically correct I'll bet you can't identify the colorations / response deviations while listening to music. |
|
