This thread points out some of the classic arguments. There are technophiles involved discussing the relative harmonics of ss vs. tubes and others who are listeners. The goal of your system is YOUR goal, not necessarily someone else's. If the object is objectivity, then perhaps there is a nod to be given to ss over tubes (based on what I read, not necessarily what I enjoy).
Tubes provide a sound reproduction quality that I find irresistable and not at all tiring. My goals in system building are to optimize that which I can afford both on an economic and personal interface level (read this last as WAF).
I've attempted to optimize ss gear and had success for the system I was listening to at the time. However, for my personal enjoyment -- tubes are my preference. There's no judgement here, just personal preference. There are other aspects that come into play as well -- from the hobbyist perspective I can roll tubes whereas I do not have the ability (skill, talent whatever) to "roll" rectifiers and capacitors or whatever else you could do. Thus I have the added bonus of expanding my hobby into alternative areas. All with the same goal in mind -- to reproduce sound that pleases.
This does sound like "I don't know about art but I know what I like" and I'm OK with that. The pleasure I obtain from hearing voices floating in air in front of me as I listen to the music I enjoy is sufficient justification for my preference in equipment.
Great discussion. Thanks to all who offered the input.
F7 |
This thread has more tubes than the USS Eldridge
hehehehehe
--==Poof==-- |
Eldartford, try the LP Direct to Disk of "Jun Fukamachi at Steinway" if your cartridge can track it. I think it is a Japanese Toshiba Pro-Series recording. This is one of the most lifelike piano recordings I've heard. But fair warning, the dynamics are enough to jump many cartridges right out of the groove, or at least cause major mistracking. |
Eldartford - Both you and Allan are correct, nothing comes remotely close to reproducing the realism of a living breathing piano, ahhh a Steinway Grand in the home, I envy you!
So far as good recordings and not necessarily performances, Nojima plays List and Nojima plays Ravel on RR are both excellent but probably a bit too reverberant as are most of Reference recordings but very good performances and sonics. I have the vinyl of both.
As best as I can tell "Fatha" on Realtime which is an M&K subsidiary is about as good (realistic) a piano sound as I have heard recorded. It is a direct to disc recording made in 1978 a year before Earl Hines died. A great performance as well and highly recommended, especially on vinyl if you can find it. If not, try the CD version which can be ordered directly from M&K (Miller Kreisel).
Another superb recording(s) but mediocre performances are the Wilson Recordings "Razzmatazz" by Mark P. Wetch. There are 3 volumes of some of Ragtimes great pieces performed on a modified upright grand. Very live, realistic piano sound. For further selections check out the thread "Amazing piano solos" under music. I use the Hines recording as a reference when evaluating gear. The dynamics are staggering and about as close to real as I have heard on a recording but still far short of your Steinway.
Here is the link http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?gmusi&984287002&read&3&4& |
If you like eye candy the Berning is not your choice! The thing does sound remarkable and is very well designed. I love how lightning fast it is. Tubeg and Allan have it right, I think it is an amazing product and should be on your audition list. |
Once live music hits a microphone, it's colored from then on, all you can try an do is reproduce what was recorded without adding anymore colorations, that is, if that is what the end user wants but some want that warm feeling and others want that dryer sound.
The Berning really sounds like neither but can sound like either, depending on your associated equipment.
The Berning never draws attention to itself, as well as it shouldn't, it's one ugly amp :) (sorry guys) an amp only a owner of one can relate too. |
Tubegroover...I agree that "piano as a litmus test" is good, but I have never heard a recorded piano that sounds exactly right (and I know what it should sound like because we have a Steinway grand piano in the house). Do you have any suggestion as to a recording (LP, CD, SACD, DVD-A, no tape) that you find exceptionally good, so that I can reduce the effect of that variable in any comparisons? |
Tubegroover. Very well put. |
Eldartford if one is searching for true fidelity it is only in the concert hall. I do agree with you that most but not all tube designs STILL euphonize or bloat the sound at an absolute level when comparing to the real thing but I think there is a bit more to it. It is not just the tonality of instruments as you suggest but also the dynamic swings and fine low level nuance, the breathing of the instruments that help recreate the illusion. This is an area where tubes seem to excel over SS but as you rightly point out often with too much exaggeration of the harmonics. It can be fun listening but when you go to a concert and hear the real thing it is obvious that it isn't quite right.
My litmus test when listening is the piano which I find the most difficult instrument to reproduce accurately. Getting the harmonic overtones, natural tonality without the bloat along with realistic dynamic shifts and air around the notes without it becoming too full or too thin is tough for audio systems to get right. I spent 5 weeks listening to a highly regarded Class A OTL tube amp of comparable power in comparing directly with the zh270. Where both excelled was in that elusive presence area or ability to recreate the life and immediacy of the music. The Class A amp had an ability to get you more emotionally involved, richer harmonics. The Berning didn't have the fullness or the expanse of the soundstage but in most respects seemed more accurate. Which is better? It really depends on what one is trying to achieve, both were enjoyable but the Class A with zero feedback was probably more so, more of the goose bump factor which is not measurable unfortunately. Which one was more accurate and closer to the fidelity of the recording? The Berning without a doubt. It has to my ears the virtues of both SS and tubes with less of the limitations of either. It has the tonality, the presence and the immediacy. Some will still love traditional tube designs, myself included, for the sheer pleasure they give but now there is another choice, especially for those afraid of tubes |
Irrational fears, phobias? This is a hobby, like 84 said.
When I first discovered tubes, I was truly mystified, at their spaciousness, and sweet sound. Then after many years I vascilated back and forth. At one time it was all tubes, amp and pre. Then I was a steadfast Tube pre, and solid amp.
What most people fail to realize is that all amps and preamps interact differently as pairs. What works with one system simply does not sound good with another. Plus room accoustices, cables and on and on. With the variables that exist the sound differentials are infinite.
As to irrational fears. I have had problems with tubes...and solid state. Actually its about even. Tubes, like light bulbs have a known life expectancy, but so do transistors; its just that nobody talks about that. Buy what sounds good, and listen to music. Its fun, don't make it so complex and confrontational.
Oops, I have to go, I think I just heard a capacitor explode.
Good listening.
Larry |
Wow!!! Guys, we are making this a lot more complicated than it is. It's ok if you like SS gear. I think tubes are clearly a better value for dollar investment. I would challenge you to find something that sounds better than the Berning at it's price point. Biasing amps is something I have no interest in doing. I had a Sonic Frontiers tube amp that was more trouble than it was worth so I went back to solid state until I found the Berning.
Preamps are a different story. I challenge anybody to find a better value than the Eastern Electric Minimax, or the Belles 21A at those price points. I think you clearly get more "bang for buck" with a tube preamp. It's just my opinion, I'm not interested in converting anyone. I would respectfully suggest more listening and les hang ups about specs. I have had tube preamps in my home from CJ, SF, Thor, Rogue, Belles, Eastern Electric, and Essence over the last 15 years with absolutely no tube problems or issues. If you like Ss better that's fine. The whole point of this hobby is to have fun. thanks |
Johnk, you maybe right if you sum all amps that have tubes into one category but the Berning is different animal all together, what we assume is tube coloration is really transformer coloration.
David Berning has done presentations to other physicists where he shows that tubes can react as fast as SS devices, however the problem is, we are somewhat stuck in the past with the designs of tube equipment and as audiophiles we too want big heavy SUV type amps in our homes, we relate weight and size to quality and sound, so how good can a ten pound amp sound.
Well we have put this amp up against some very big competition, many SS stuff, in front of a lot of people, guys from the Chicago audio society, manufacturers and engineers, all with the same startling results, so maybe there is a exception to the rule that all tube amps are the same, maybe you just need to hear this amp.
There are several speaker companies using the ZH-270 as their design reference, Merlin, Sonus Faber, Cain&Cain, as well, there are Berning amps in recording studios.
Down Side, due to the complexity and manufacturing time of the amp, less than two dozen are made a year, currently sold out until January-February next year and probably a dozen people or more in the wings waiting for a used one to pop up.
I will try an see if I can get you an audition but I know of no one in your area.
Do you travel anywhere? |
Johnk...It has long been recognized that the fact that tube amplifiers characteristly produce even harmonics, and that even harmonics are typically part of musical instrument sounds, makes their distortion relatively unobjectionable. A violin, for example, might sound not like itself, but still very much like a violin: just one made by a different craftsman and having different harmonic structure. The unmusical harmonics produced by transistor amplifiers require that distortion be at a low level, and it generally is. If so it is inaudible. Both amps can sound good, but the transistor amp sounds like the real violin and the tube amp sounds like a different violin, and the difference will be a richer harmonic structure which gives a lush sound that many people find enjoyable.
Allanbhaganinfo...I'm in western Massachusetts. Are there any Berning dealers? Anywhere? |
Ozfly, I was just correcting an interpretation and having a little fun, no conflict here.
But Sean does have very good point, we aren't all created equal, so why is every tube amp lumped into "Tube amp" category, as if they were all created equal? |
Ya know, i heared somewhere that Gods name was in fact Sean.
Now, i dont claim to know if we are looking at the right sean here, but keep an eye out on those seans. one of them might be THE Sean. |
Surely Sean never claimed to be Eric Clapton ;-) "Equal" is a fairly murky word which can mean many things. It could mean "the same", it could mean "as much" or it could mean other things. Let's not let different interpretations draw us into the conflict Unsound congratulated us on avoiding. Great discussion all, I'm really enjoying it. Thanks. |
Tubes are used in electric guitar amplifiers because they produce a specific type of distortion when overdriven. Jsujo, are you implying that euphonic distortion is also why certain audiophiles are drawn towards tubes? |
Sean.
I did not say we are created equal, I said in the eyes of God, we are created equal. Unless you are God, then of course you would know. |
JohnK: Distortion is distortion is distortion. It is not part of the original signal and is strictly a by-product or "sonic signature" of the circuit. As such, it should be avoided, if possible, while still allowing the circuit to sound as good as possible. If one prefers specific attributes of a circuit, albeit distortion characteristics, un-even tonal balance, etc... so be it. They should buy what they like.
Allanbhagen: Your comment about us all being created equal is not Biblical ( if that is the God that you worship or make mention of ). The Bible teaches that we are all given our own talents and it is up to us to find and utilize those talents. As such, "equals" would all share the same talents and thought process, making us all part of the "Borg collective". The fact that we do have individual talents, physical skills and thought processes is what makes us individuals and not "clones" or "robots". If everyone were equal, we would be no different than an army of ants. Then again, i'm sure that ants have different skills, jobs and feel "different" from one another. Having said that, even the animal / insect kingdoms have various ranks and positions in their own personal societies.
The idea that you refer to about "all being created equal" can be found in the U.S. Constitution though and that is what many people get confused. Having said that, the majority of those involved in writing the Constitution had and were slave owners, so they obviously didn't mean what they were saying / writing. That is, as we interpret it today. This can be a very touchy "non-PC" subject, so i'll leave sleeping wolves alone. Sean
>
PS... tubes and SS are not "equals". Each has their own "skills" and "weak points". Viva la difference : ) |
To whoever scoffed at the guitar players with tubes,,,,Dont you realize that the sound is just so much more musical? The guitar player is creating, not reproducing a recording, so why would he have to be SS amplified?
There is no better sound than a Gibson ES175D played on a Fender Twin reverb with JBLansing drivers...No wonder most guitar maestros like Steve Howe, Mark Knopfler, David Gilmore, Steve Hackett, and others, still use tube amplification. |
Eldart you are confusing odd order and even order harmonic distortion, tube amps have the much more enjoyable form of distortion ,solid state has the worst sounding type .Tube amps dispite there specs are more enjoyable then solid state.At least to me and it seems many more audiophiles every year . If all you buy is gear that specs well ,I feel for you because you will have 1 hell of a sterile unmusical system.I pick stuff that sounds great then I check specs .I have learned threw much cost that gear that specs the best is no fun for me .But if you like your solid state who am I to say its no good ,its all about personal tastes and experiances .Happy listening |
I think Allabhaganinfo, has hit it right. Based on my own limited experience, to say that just the presence of tubes/transistors can make everything right, is just as silly as saying that just the presence tubes/transistors can make everything wrong, Never mind the fact that, just as there are arguments as to the virtues of particular transistors, there are arguments as to the virtues of particular tubes. Compound this with circuit design, related parts, pre and post components, it's easy to see how difficult it is to get ones arms around the situation. Generalizations are always suspect. |
Hi Gang. For those poor souls that suffer with Popatube-aphobia! Calm down... its OK. There is nothing to be ashamed of.Try 5cc's of valium about an hour before turning on the system.Hell...I have a mild phobia about big solid state amps.... I'm not ashamed...I use a little cotton baton in each ear just before listening..... instant relief! |
Eldartford
I didn't mean to come across as flip with the remark and yes, I think it is reasonable to be concerned about the distortion measurements but more reasonable to listen to the amp on its own terms without predjudice of how its measurements MIGHT affect its sound. This amp really can't be compared to other tube amps as Allan notes, it is too different in too many ways to really compare, the real surprise may be its performance relative to its poor measurements. |
Eldartford
Where are you located? The Berning has silenced many a spec-ulator, engineers included, maybe there is a Berning customer near you.
2%THD at full output is remarkable, this is full power output THD, at 60 watts it's probably .05 and probably 3% at 77 watts, I wonder where most SS amps would spec out at 10% over there rated power output.
You need to hear it.
We heard a well respected 500 watt digital amp compared to the Berning, one sounded powerful, clean, dynamic, effortless, open and most important less compressed an distorted, prize for guessing which one it was.
I traveled 2000 miles to hear it at Tubegroover's place, with a very educated engineer from Orlando, who by the way was also sure that the big amp was going to kill the little amp.
Results,... well Tubegroover is more cocky now, ain't he :) |
Tubegroover...A slight correction..I am not "hung up" about high distortion as you might note from my remark:
"I know that distortion specs are not the whole story, but when THD gets over 1 percent it becomes a big obstacle to overcome by other virtues".
I think that this comment is pretty reasonable.
Regarding degradation of electronic components in tube power amps...back when I was involved with repairing/tweeking these things it was "standard operating procedure" to go through and replace all the interstage coupling capacitors every time you worked on it. I never asked why, but such customs are usually based on experience.
I just observed another thread where MacIntosh amp characteristics, considered good, were attributed to use of output transformers (even though the circuit is solid state). And here we have ingenious circuitry designed to avoid the use of a transformer in a tube circuit. Go figure!!
|
And the beat goes on........ and on and on
There are "Tube amps" and then there are amps that use tubes, I am not sure if they are the same and I am not sure if the Berning falls into either catagory, so I can fully understand the confusion.
I don't think it's irrational to be afraid of "some" tube amps or is it amps that use tubes??
Either is it irrational to be afraid of "some" SS amps, in the eyes of God we are all created equal but I'm afraid that's where e-quality ends :)
The Berning sounds remarkable on maggies. |
Higher voltages are more likely to arc, not only to from a component or point of connection to circuit or chassis ground but also through the dielectric of a cap. On top of this, the high heat levels associated with output tubes can cook capacitors too. All capacitors have a shorter lifespan as temperature rises. Most caps will be rated for XXXX amount of hours at a specific temperature. Dropping below that tempurate extends their lifespan and going above that shortens the lifespan. Sean
> |
I have never heard what Eldartford claims--that because of the high voltages run in tube amps, the capacitors and other components have a shorter life span. Anyone care to comment on this? |
"What's the point of this amp if you can't use the low feedback configuration".
Elhartford my guess is that the low feedback setting may be problematic with the load of the Maggies, don't know for sure. The point of the amp is its flexibility into low impedance loads and the reason for the 3 settings. Most tube amps measure lousy compared to SS anyway and you seem to be hung up on the distortion measurements of the amp without the benefits it offers over conventional OTL's and transformer coupled amps which is its ability to operate into lower impedance loads as well as better bass definition, Into an 8 ohm load it measures almost to DC which is impressive in itself for a tube amp. I Hope to hear it someday driving the Maggies, I too am quite curious.
Allan Bhagan, a dealer for the Berning has a prototype pair running directly into the stators (no transformer on the speakers) of a pair of SoundLab M-3's which are more inefficient than the M-1's, maybe he can chime in?
I agree Sean, the Pass Labs amps are very nice. It seems Nelson Pass has a knack for designing amps that offer many of the better characteristics of tubes. |
Correct me if I'm wrong, but, isn't the TacT really the best example (not best amp, but, best example) of a digital amp. |
Thank you very much for posting that Twl. I have some comments that i'd like to add to that thread, but have to run off to work. Some of my comments are both pro and con about this type of amp and other Carver / Sunfire products. Being an owner of multiple Sunfire products might help keep the negative things that i have to say in perspective for those that are otherwise "awed" by the sound of this amp even though it measures attrociously. Sean
>
PS... I have to wonder just how much of this really is Carver and / or if Bob is simply marketing his name ??? You guys check into that and let me know, will ya ??? : ) |
I agree. They are a long way from tubes. Just providing the link that Sean requested. |
Twl...Digital PWM switching amps are a long way from tubes! Interesting just the same. I am contemplating the Spectron unit, if they agree to put out a 3-channel version.
I gather from the link, that the adverse specs result from aberations which are at too high a frequency to be audible if the speaker were capable of reproducing them, which it isn't. This is a bit different from the tube amps we were discussing. |
Sean, here's the link to the audiocircle discussion on the digital amps. http://audiocircle.com/circles/viewtopic.php?t=5123There's about 9 pages of discussion on the apparent poor measurements and good sound reports from it. John Curl and Brian Cheney are involved. |
What is boils down to is $$. I've auditioned over 100 SS and tube amps combine. There are plenty of good solid state amps that performs as good as some of the best tube amps. However, the price for the SS are always outrageously higher than the equal performance tube gear.
i.e. If I need SS 100Watt power amp that can be better than a HK Citation II, I'll need to spend at least over $2000 in SS amp to achieve to same sonic performance.
Anything less just doesn't cut it.
The cost of a vintage HK Citation II is only arond $800. In the silimar price range SS amp, thin, dull, dry and flat sounding SS amp are not my cup of tea. It just doesn't have the same bandwidth as the tube gear.
However, if you're talking about current production tube amp, the price tag is much closer these days ( the manufacture jack up the price on tube gear since it is "HOT". In any case, I still prefer vintage tube gear.
Just my 2 cents |
Sean...About the pop music performers using tube gear..if the naturally-produced distortion isn't enough, they have a gadget that makes more!
About the RF application...My hearing range does not extend to RF. But, seriously, when Transponders for light aircraft first came out the circuitry was all transistors, except for one Traveling Wave Tube. Guess why the thing was frequently in the avionics shop. Now they (ours anyway) are all solid state.
Tubegroover...What's the point of this amp if you can't use the low feedback configuration. Also, according to Twl, the distortion characteristics of a particular type of speaker (single driver full range) are necessary to cancel out the amplifier distortion. How does this work with Maggies? |
Sean- here you go:
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/viewtopic.php?p=44742#44742 |
Kana & Twl: can you post a link to the threads on Audiocircle that you are referring to ?
El: tubes are VERY much alive in high powered RF and in the music industry. Just ask a "rockin" guitar player. Sure, some of them use SS amps, but a huge portion still cling to and are drawn to the sound of a Marshall, Ampeg, Hi-Watt, Orange, Fender, Mesa-Boogie, etc.. tube head. Even some of the Peavey amps use tubes to great effect to obtain their specific gain characteristics and tonality.
Tubegroover: Low distortion can be achieved two ways. One is to build a very simple yet well designed wide-bandwidth circuit that is relatively stable into the intended type of load that will be used with it. This can be relatively costly as it is harder to keep a simpler circuit stable into various loads and do so while retaining wide-bandwidth. As such, it may require a lot of R&D prior to arriving at a suitable design.
The other method that is FAR more common is to build a pretty decent circuit and then try to correct any deficiencies in linearity with gobs of negative feedback.
The second method is a LOT cheaper than the first to build, design and market. As one might surmise, the cheaper one almost always sounds worse but is more stable over-all, hence the use of such approach by most mass production manufacturers. I think that Halcro tried to combine both approaches but probably used too much negative feedback in order to obtain phenomenally good measurements in specific areas. One could probably add a great deal of "musicality" to the Halcro by changing a few caps, etc.. internally. Just a guess though.
As a side note, I find that i like a lot of Nelson Pass' designed amps. The funny thing here is that they don't have "killer specs" in any specific area*. The distortion is surely not "ultra-low" nor are they phenomenally "fast" in terms of rise time or slew rate. As such, i think that Nelson tried to achieve the best of both worlds i.e. some of the more desirable sonic attributes of tubes with the better measurements and bass impact of SS. From what i can tell by the specs, he seems to have found a compromise between the two. The specs appear to fall somewhere between the two different types of products i.e. lower distortions and faster response than most tube circuits but higher distortions and slower responses than the "best" ( in terms of specs ) SS amps. Has anybody else ever taken note of this or shared these thoughts ? Sean
>
* Other than price : ) |
"70 watts at 2 percent distortion, with output impedance of 8.7 ohms, and all for a mere $4500. Sorry, I don't think my Maggies would like that"
Elhartford, first hand I wouldn't know but it is my understanding that David Berning was using one of his amps with Maggies and I have heard from others that it works quite well although it wouldn't seem so. You are quoting the spec for the low feedback setting, you would probably have to use the normal setting with Maggies.
I suppose if specs were the be all end all of what we hear, most well healed audiophiles would own Halcro amps, they don't and some suggest it has a "sterile" sound. Reminds me of the 30K Denon amps from 10 years back or so that I heard, extremely wide bandwidth with ultra low distortion specs which is how it was marketed. Bottom line is I hold very little value in specifications when listening, the design, application and end result is what really matters. While it is quite easy to hear the 2nd order harmonic distortions in many tube amps, there are other designs where this is less apparent. Tube amps definitely have their limitations in many applications without getting into the humongous beasts that require huge transformers, many tubes and costly maintenance but a viable choice for those that have difficult loads that would pass on SS.
I'm not knocking ss, I haven't heard them all and it is evident that they are improving and if they provide the magic of the illusion to those that listen, bravo, that is all that matters. I would love to hear a ss amp based system that provides the magic I have experienced from some of the great tube systems I have heard, I haven't to date, just good sound.
And Slappy, when you finally get around to tubes, which I am confident you will, just make sure it has a cover to keep that mischevous dog from temptation. |
Macrojack,
Dogs.
thats an interesting way of putting it.
My reccommendation however, is if you have a Dog do not get a tube amp.
I have a dog, a nice german shepard mix named Jagermeister, one day she started looking ill, i took her to the vet and they thought something might be obstructing her digestive track.
Got some X-Rays done and sure enough, she swallowed a lightbulb.
Yep.
She ate a lightbulb. The X-ray showed it to be intact, and they had to remove it from her belly.
Not a HUGE lightbulb mind you, just a little 40-Watter, same size as what you find in lavalamps.
So.... from MY experience, If you have a dog, dont keep things that look like lightbulbs laying around the house, which includes Tubes.
Ohyeah, and dogs CAN unscrew things. They had no trouble unscrewing the cap on my waterbed. No puncture marks, no teeth marks, but they DID unscrew the cap.
lost about 10-15 gallons. Up all night long with a Rug-Docter sucking the water outta the carpet.
Got a mattress the next day.
I love dogs.
Oh and yes, i kept the lightbulb, it still worked. :) |
Kana813, that is an interesting discussion going on over there at audiocircle. |
A little off the subject, but the spec/measurement/listening debate
has a new battle front with the new digital amps coming
to the market.
Interesting discussion of the CarverPro ZR amps over on audiocircle.com, with J.Curl measuring these amps.
Personally, I love tubes, but I can no longer deal with
their high energy cost and heat by products. Some people enjoy the involvement of tube rolling, tweaking caps,power supplies and cables.
Every audiophile should own a tube amp at some point. Some will fall deeply in love and rediscover the joy of listening to music. |
Dogs are nice but getting one is a lifestyle decision. Tubes need to be viewed the same way. When I was much younger, no effort or compromise was too great in pursuit of the absolute sound. I've since receded in my dedication to that pursuit. Today many things are just too much trouble. Tubes are on that list.
Once you progress in this hobby to the point where you can be happy with what you have, then you are no longer plagued by concerns for what you may be missing. Salud!! |
Slappy, I'm not going to probe that one. |
Twl, your not being harsh at all. You make some very good points. I'm not deaf to the charms of tubes. I've gone on record for admiring Sonic Frontier pre-amps and VTL amps. I'm very curious to hear the Berning and Wolcott stuff. These products seem to use rather unique approaches to answer the traditional tube criticisms. I have also gone on record to say that tubes are probably the better choice for higher impedance loads. I sometimes wonder if the sometimes glibb advise that occasionlly appears from time to time that suggest tubes as the pancea for all your audio woes is a catalyst for the anti-tube backlash. I can't help but believe that like most things the answer is more grey than black and white. |
I'm afraid of tube amps because thier glow reminds me of the alien spaceships that keep abducting me.
hahahahahaha |
Okay. I didn't say that they were for everyone. |
Twl...In a nutshell, you say that errors of the amp and a particular type of speaker are "correlated". (That's the word we academic types use for this well-known situation). Could be so. Thanks for the logical explanation instead of just the usual rant. Unfortunately, not everyone believes that full-range single driver speakers are satisfactory.
As I stated above, the technology of these amplifiers is interesting, but, in your crusade to convince people that tube amps are the best, I suggest that you find a more conventional circuit to tout. |
The specs you quoted are from the Berning website, and are the typical David Berning conservative type specs, which he always shows "worst case" types of figures. The distortion figures are at clipping for that amp. It is stated that the figures are lower at more normal outputs.
In addition, nearly all the distortion is located at the 2nd harmonic, which is where we want it to be when using the single-driver loudspeakers that this type of amp is designed to typically drive. For more info on this, see Eduardo DeLima's article "Why Single Ended Amplifiers?" on the web. This is an article with detailed test info which shows the complementary relationships between single driver loudspeakers and single-ended amplifiers, with both showing harmonic distortion profiles predominating at the 2nd harmonic. In both theory and testing, it was shown that this complementary relationship will cause the self-cancellation of some(and in most cases the majority) or all the THD in the AMP/SPEAKER combination. It shows the folly of attempting to extrapolate any meaning from single component distortion specifications, when these may not hold true when exhibited in a system context. True, most other systems with wide spectrum harmonic distortion profiles(solid state) are purely additive in distortion, due to their harmonic distortion being all over the place. But in this case, the THD is not purely additive between these types of components, and in fact is subtractive in most cases, and even totally self-cancelling in the most perfect case(not likely). So it is concievable, and shown to be proven by this article, that the case of single-ended amp and single driver speaker have a unique relationship that can actually cause the SYSTEM to have a measureably and audibly lower distortion than ANY other type of amp/speaker system regardless of technology or cost.
This is where the spec game is totally lost. Nobody measures system distortion, only individual component distortion. They see half the info, and try to make definitive statements. This is also why I urge listening testing.
I have fought this "spec battle" for over 20 years, and there is always someone who "knows it all" because he looked at some scope trace, or read some spec sheet, or rides a test bench, and thinks what he learned from that is applicable to audio. The specs are a trap. They are a trap that stops people from learning the full truth. A marketing ploy.
The "scientific minded" people are the first to fall into this trap. They are numbers minded, and get suckered right in. They use the specs to "show why this can't be so". It's a magic show. They aren't showing you everything. They are showing you just enough to make you think their way.
I have written this type of post numerous times on this forum. And there is always another person coming along with the spec argument. You cannot rely on any spec, except maybe 120VAC 60Hz input. They are measured in an "out of context" testing regime, and mean nothing in regard to how they perform in a system context. To place a big trust in these specs will lead you down the primrose path to poor sound.
Maybe I sound harsh, but I am really trying to be helpful and informative. I didn't fall off the turnip truck yesterday. I know all about testing methodology, meters and scopes, what they do and what they don't do. I was once a "spec believer". Then I woke up, when somebody showed me the flaw in it. Now I'm doing the same for others. Some won't listen. |
