Mapman,
Lol. Thats the spirit.
Steve Winwood is a gentleman. I had the honour to hang with him at some rehearsals some years ago.
He played with so many legends back in the day and I had no idea until he told the stories. I was too busy being born I while he was rocking n rolling I guess! Different times... |
"Lovely, but I hope the early reflections from the handrail didn't spoil the music."
The handrails were not easily removed, so I suppose we will never know.
Sometimes, you just gotta make the best out of things the way they are! :)
I've been to the Meyerhoff many times over the years. The only bad sound I ever got there was at a Steve Winwood concert with his small ensemble set up well towards the front of the stage, a good bit of electronic amplification and seats way up near the top of the venue and close to the rear left walls one level above these.
There were vocalists featured during this particular "Pops" concert and they were miked but whoever did the sound mixing did an exceptional job. |
Mapman,
Lovely, but I hope the early reflections from the handrail didn't spoil the music. |
Lol wolf,
I always thought muttering was very quiet and not quite noiseLESS, but i am sure it needed a floor for the mutterers to stand on. Even if a noisy floor. I must stop worrying about the floor and focus on the muttering. |
You can see where I sat HereGod bless the internet for making such trivia easily shared to bore others..... |
Seriously, to have a chance of reproducing what you hear in a larger major metro symphony hall in your listening room in a convincing manner, be sure to sit at least halfway back or more at the symphony hall. The further back you sit, the more your listening perspective might match (individual instruments "crammed" into a smaller "soundstage" and dynamics heard be reproducible.
Depending on how up to the task your home rig is, you can try sitting closer at the symphony each time and see how far you get reproducing something even remotely similar at home.
I sat about half way back at the Myerhoff Saturday night in the 3rd row left center balcony (grand tier) assessing what I heard versus at home. I came home pretty happy! |
Live un-amplified muttering is an acoustic phenomena that, weirdly, is noiseless by nature. I worry more about the ACTUAL floor. |
Wolf garcia,
I hope the noise floor is lower. Seems ashame to go to all the trouble and able to hear ppp sections due to rail noise. |
"The sound can best be described as angry muttering"
Palpable presence in spades i`m sure. |
I find that when I cram a symphony orchestra into my listening room they can't properly access their instruments...so everybody just stands there crammed together like sardines on a subway at rush hour...mostly without the sardine odor. Mostly. The sound can best be described as angry muttering. |
One other thing I was reading about damping factor is that damping factor can have an effect on frequency response in that speaker impedance can vary greatly by frequency and hence also the damping effects. Similar to discussions often found about matching pre-amp output to amp input impedance, but perhaps with even greater variability given the variability of speaker designs from an electrical perspective. So though bass is perhaps where damping effects are most noticeable, the effects can be quite broader it would seem and perhaps hard to predict or even generalize about, being different perhaps on almost a case by case basis.
Whatever ones preferences and findings, I think it is worthwhile considering the likely effects of damping factor based on specs when matching amp to speakers, especially with high output impedance tube amps where damping factor will be lower versus lower output impedance SS, where damping factor in general will be higher for any given set of speakers. Its probably always good to know what kind of amp the designer of the speaker recommends or uses.
Last nights visit to the local symphony reminded me that room acoustics always play a major part in regards to what sounds best. |
I have to give proper "props" properly to my 10 or 12 year old REL Q150E subwoofer...I bought this thing a couple of years ago from an apparent fool who noted the grill cloth was missing but otherwise it "seemed" to work, for about 200 bucks. Grill repaired and looking like new, I built a clean Neutrik Speakon (angled...had to special order that one) based cable, added a garden hose thick PS Audio AC cord, tightened all the bolts, and into the system it went. Having owned some more or less "full range" speakers in the past I thought I had enough bass around myself but now I can't imagine not using this thing. It's amazing, and it allows some fine tuning of bass level here and there that more than makes up for having zero tone adjustment on my preamp. I actually do use powered 18" subs in pro sound work, but somehow this little 10" wonder gets bass so right in my listening room I never feel the need for more....wait...Skrillex is calling...weird...brb... |
That`s one large coffee table.
Regards, |
My belabored and by now tedious point is that dynamics and slam and full range are not mutually exclusive relative to genre. If your system is capable of reasonably reproducing low notes, high notes, and middle notes, you should be happy. Skrillex is not going to borrow my rig for his next gig, and there is no place in my listening room for 2000 watt 18" woofers. Unless I move the coffee table. |
Wolf,
I think enough people with SET experience have said often that they feel no need to limit what types of music they listen.I include myself in that group without question, but no amplifier or any component does it all. Even if a system performs well across the musical board it won`t be the absolute best at everything, that simply not realistic.
SET can reproduce rock music very well but someone seeking the ultimate rock oriented system then SET would not likely be their first choice to build around. I can`t name any amplifier type that would reproduce 'all' genre of music in the very best fashion without some compromise somewhere along the way.For mapman`s priorities his current system(high power class D amps) may serve him best when all is taken into consideration.For me with different objectives/desires maybe not.That`s the beauty of choice in the marketplace of high end audio.
SET works out fabulously for me but it would`nt for others.
Regards, |
"I will never claim that my gear is "genre sensitive" or it's OUTTA HERE. "
I hear you and feel the same way in that I listen to all kinds of music and want it all to be completely satisfying to me all the time, soft, loud or whatever (recording permitting, but that is a different story).
Having it all usually comes at a cost. Its not uncommon to compromise on certain things if not important. We all do it to some extent I suppose since it seems there is always more out there that we seek.
I personally have some reservations about perhaps the most flea powered of SET amps with most any speakers that I have heard at least, to do this practically, but I suspect most any other amp suitably set up and matched to system can deliver the goods. |
I love the absolute distinction of how "rock" music is supposed to be heard. Classical music is supposed to be heard acoustically while surrounded with smelly old people in one of thousands of seat location options in a packed concert hall, and jazz is supposed to be enjoyed through a haze of cigarette smoke and waitress yammer while seated behind a hipster glued to his iPhone that's not supposed to exist in 1959. I've been a professional musician since 1967, I mix live shows from Richie Havens to Bill Charlap (in November...and it will sound GREAT using stereo condenser mics and a zero compression full range system), my band opened for a Led Zepplin show on the second half of their first tour, and I've worked in recording studios all over the place. All that and I will never claim that my gear is "genre sensitive" or it's OUTTA HERE. |
Charles,
What I have seen/heard to date with sets is consistent with your assessment and I would tend to agree.
Rock music is meant to be played/heard loud but some may not care for that so it is not an issue then.
Of course peaks on orchestral and even big band jazz recordings for example can get pretty loud, but from what I have heard, SET power may not be as big an issue there for most.
I have heard some orchestral recordings with convincing dynamics on at least one very high efficiency horn system using what I recall to be fairly low powered (but very expensive) Audio Note tube amps (not sure if these were SET or not though). |
Good SET systems do reproduce classical and jazz music convincingly.The irony is that recordings of these two genres are often done to a higher quaility standard than a lot of rock and in most cases also provide a much wider dynamic range gradient with better musical ebb and flow.Much of rock and pop music is by comparison compressed so it seems listeners will compensate by cranking up the volume.Absolute volume levels will be in the domain of higher power amps if that`s the goal.
I`ve heard SET play digital and analogue rock recorgings very well in terms of overall sound quality and involvement,it was loud but not 'crazy' loud.
Regards, |
Both my SET and my pushpull amps can be considered marginal, in terms of power, for my speakers. My SET amp is rated at something like 6.5 watts and the pushpull is 5 watts. I don't have any problems playing rock at fairly high volume.
Where some power issues do show up is with large-scale choral music. I do notice some compression and mild clipping if I try to play something like Rachmaninov's "Vespers" at somewhat high volume. |
Not to say it cannot be done, but I have yet to hear a SET amp do rock/pop well, at least on the usual terms of rock/pop music which is different than much classical, jazz.
At shows, when SETs and high efficiency horns have been featured, the demos are always jazz or classical.
At Capital Audio fest, after hearing some nice sounding Jazz being played, I asked to hear some Rush on vinyl in the Zu room where their larger high efficiency speakers were being demoed on a 5-6 watt tube amp. It sounded nice enough in a polite sort of way, but much lacking on any kind of muscle or drive needed for that kind of music. The ZU guy admitted more power was needed really for that.
So I am thinking it may be possible, but certainly much more of a challenge than other approaches perhaps. I just have not heard it yet, though I am sure I have not "heard it all" yet regarding SETS/hi eff. speakers.
THough no rock music was played, I felt like the Atmasphere/Classic Audio combo at teh same show could have done it nicely, but that was a much more powerful tube amp being used, not a SET. |
I use a tube amp with a MOSFET REL sub...thus I am conflicted as to what camp I'm in. Where am I, and who are these people? I'm frightened. |
A few months back I heard a rustling at my front door, when I peered through the window I could see a group of asian fellow's that looked quite serious, to my better judgement I opened the door and let them in. It turned out to be an impromptu visit from some audio club members. One of the lads had purchased a used pair of tube amps and wanted to try them in my system before settling them in at home. Being an open minded audiophile I of coarse told him to beat it. After much banter the amps were hooked up and running. Well Larryi may be right about having compatible speakers, but this miss match of SET amp and speakers had bass to die for. They didn't have the grip of the Levinson amps they replaced and sounded a bit unmoored in direct comparison, but the Cary CAD-805A's had bass that wasn't overbearing yet had extension and a subtle yet wonderful texture and fullness. I guess my point is that even driving my Revel Salons these tiny but not lite amps gave a compelling performance that shall not soon be forgot. |
I do like SET amps, and I have compatible speakers and can therefore largely sidestep their biggest tradeoff (lack of power), but that does not mean that I don't appreciate other kinds of amps equally.
The amp that is currently in my system, which I like very much, is a 5 watt pushpull amp. It is a terrific amp for my system. Is it great because of, or in spite of, it being a pushpull amp? I have no idea. It is different in so many other respects from my other favorite amp (parallel single-ended 2a3 amp). In addition to being pushpull, it uses a different combination of tubes (348 and 349), it has transformer inputs (matches my linestage's transformer outputs), etc. It does have a somewhat generic sounding bass response--not as tuneful, and varied as the bass from my SET amp and not as open on top--but it is punchy and very sweet sounding in the midrange. Every choice has some tradeoff.
On top of solid state vs. tube; pushpull vs. OTL vs. SET, there are almost infinite variables of tube choice, parts choice, specific design, implementation, etc. This is both part of the fun, or frustration, depending on how you look at things. If one insists on identifying "the best" in even one category, that would be largely delusional. I just look for what sounds good to me, if there is something out there that I missed, perhaps I will find it later; that is part of the fun. |
hi tmsorosk,
Actually I agree with you, most everything we state concerning audio is just based on our individual experiences and and the conclusions we form as a result. What I wrote is just my personal account and impression of my reaction to different amplifier types and not a universal proclamation to be accepted by everyone else.
Chad,Atmasphere, Larryi and others have noted findings same as my own, so I could relate to their points .Larryi`s satisfaction with SET amplifiers is something that I discovered several years ago and would not had thought possible prior to this exposure. OTLs also work great for some with the right speaker choices.
There`s no question there are a number of paths to achieve exceptional bass. I just think some are unaware of the very sucessful method available with high efficiency speaker and tube amps with low DF.This is counter to conventional wisdom.
Regards, |
Walsh type speaker drivers might be unique in terms of how high damping
affects the sound.
If you read up on lincoln walsh's design, you find walsh drivers operate as
a transmission line based on walsh's experience withradar systems in
ww2. Also, they are mounted vertical not horizontal and gravity
becomes more of a factor. I think the high damping helps the
transmission line principle function better to deliver better detail and
accuracy overall, not just nuanced and well controlled bass. |
Larryi's post makes me think that this is not as simple as tube v. solid state. There are topologies to also be considered. In the tube world, there is SET, push-pull, and OTL. In addition to triode, pentode and ultralinear designs (some tube amps have switches to select between these).
In the SS world, there are Class A, AB and D designs.
All of these have their own unique advantages and disadvantages, and each will work better with certain speakers than others. No one size-fits-all solution exists. |
Charles1dad makes allot of sense to me. But I think he paints with to broad a brush with his last sentence about tube amps. Natural and believable bass is a product of the ears and experience of the designer and how he implements those designs. I think by now we have all heard excellent and compelling bass from both technologies. It's really hard to pick a clear winner, at best, all you can do is choose the one you prefer. |
Assuming that the amp-speaker combination is basically compatible, one can get better dynamics and "slam" from tube amps than solid state. Try an OTL amp, you will be shocked at how much more lively such amps will sound than a solid state amp at the same average volume level. Solid state amps can provide a lot of power and can be made to play at loud levels, but, most sound dynamically flat at lower volume levels compared to a good tube amp, particularly OTL and SET amps (assuming the speakers are efficient enough for the very low powered SET amp).
While not reaching deep, and often not being able to do the room shaking thing, I like the bass from SET amps--it is tunefull, varies with the qualities of the particular music (does not sound generic or the same all the time), and natural. The bass on solid state amps can also sound very good. I know it is a generalization, but, I often have more issues with tube pushpull amp bass--everything seems to sound the same--punchy, but, sort of uniformly so. |
For quite sometime I`ve felt the amplifiers with high damping factor produced bass that seemed contrived and artificial.They just did`nt sound like bass instruments do in natural/live settings.It`s as though the normal bloom, tone,fullness,body and natural decay of bass instruments are sacrificed for enhanced tautness,tightening and 'slam'(organic vs hifi oriented traits it seems).I`ve never understood the advantage of ultra DF(ABOVE 100).Are there any speakers with Q factors so high that this level of DF is mandatory?I `ve yet to hear live bass produce the 'tightness'sound some do seek/prefer. I acknowledge it`s a matter of audio system preference like many other desires/choices.A friend and I attended a jazz club recently and listening to an unamplified stand up bass,the rich texture,warm tone and sheer density of that instrument was just beautiful. Did`nt matter if he plucked or played con-arco the full and rich sound was always present. An overdamped amplifier might just screw that up it you want that realism preserved.
My own sense of a more realistic and natural bass is just as Chad and Atmasphere described. I find that a good tube amp with the right speaker can provide a very natural and believable bass(if perhaps less spectacular at times).This is an interesting topic.
Regards, |
Chad, I'll agree it is a very system dependent thing.
As I outlined above, I can clearly hear the difference as others have described between the more highly damped bass (and sound overall) and less damped bass by switching between my BC ref1000m and TAD Hibachi 125 amps.
Which do I prefer?
With my main large OHM F5 series 3 speakers, I might lean towards the less damped sound with most smaller ensemble jazz, maybe not big band and similar scale classical, but for psynth/electronic music, big band large scale symphonic works, and other larger scale types of music, the high damping brings out the best with the large OHMs overall I would say.
With my smaller OHMs, it might start to lean more towards less damping.
With my smaller monitors, Dynaudio Contour 1.3mkII and especially Triangle Titus, things start to favor the less damped sound. I would love to run my Triangles off a tube amp someday to test those waters!
OF course those are just my observation and findings with my gear, but it does support the premise that whats best is very system dependent. |
I'm with Atmasphere,
If you are too lazy to read any further my answer to the question is NO.
For those more patient audiophiles-
Body and texture are what you would hear from a real bass in a reasonable room. That over damped thing is unnatural. Not to say electronic music cannot have it though.
The beauty of a synthesiser is you can completely control it's envelope. (Attack/Decay/Sustain/Release or ADSR). So if you want notes to be tight fast and nimble you can tell the synth to do it. Even to impossibly short lengths. An acoustic bass has a whole set of other characteristics which do not contain that kind of repetitive tone across the frequency.
To my ears and after having high sensitvity horns and all sorts of low sensitivity speakers, that over damped and very deep bass seems artificial. It can be impressive but ultimately unsatisfying.
My little SET amp with very low damping factor creates chest vibrating and very real sounding bass. It is full texture and life without ever feeling the need for tighter or deeper. Even with snappy electro music. Solidstate and other high damping amps tend to create deep bass with little texture IME.
But it's all about your system. The interaction between amp and speaker, and what you like is the ultimate test. A good hifi should play all music.
The question is too simple and the answer is more complex. |
Atmassphere,
Maybe some semantics at work. When I say "tight", I mean it has body, definition, impact and I like to say it is "articulate" as well.
I find I have to test bass using recordings of electronic music in addition to all the various acoustic types because I like it all. For me, I think electronic music ups the ante a bit for really good bass (call it what you like).
When its "tight" and all the rest, bass in electronic music sounds optimal to me as well as bass from acoustic instruments. It is also most dynamic and all the rest. Its very hard to get that way and still have acoustic bass sound real I think in that electronic music and acoustic music are different beasts with different attributes.
Electronic music is perhaps "less real" than acoustic, but real nonetheless.
All I know is it all sounds great and about as good as it gets in my house these days. After hashing through the technicalities, that in the end is all that really matters. |
Yes, 'tight' bass will be 'better' with higher damping. The issue is, best I can make out, is that 'tight' bass does not exist in the real world. Its seems to be an artifact of stereos. If you have ever turned up the volume seeking more impact then you know exactly what I am talking about. Real bass has body, definition and impact, but I never hear it being 'tight'.
I play in a rock band, and have played in jazz bands, orchestras and folk bands (string bass). I've also made a good number of recordings. So this issue of bass has been something about which I've really wanted to get right over the years, simply because I know what its supposed to sound like. One of the take-aways has been if the equipment is really doing its job, it won't matter what kind of music is going through it. |
'' which is better " , I think we all know the answer to that. |
"There are no speakers made that need an amplifier with a damping factor of over 40."
Maybe. 40-50 was the minimum I was shooting for for my OHM 5 series 3 speakers that seem to benefit from higher damping.
THe BC ref100m amps I went with and use have 1000 damping factor. WHen I first fired them up I thought to myself "what happened to the bass"? WHat happened was it was there as much or more than ever but also more tight, controlled, and articulate than ever as well. Definitely different than most bass I have heard elsewhere, either tube or SS. I've been running these for coming up for 2 years or so now and feel more than ever that I would not want to give up the bass I am getting now which is some the best I have heard anywhere in a home system to date.
Atmasphere, of course my system no way shape or form resembles the type of system I know you advocate in line with your products. I have heard your amps as well and they were very good all around including bass. WHich is better? I don't know. In lieu of an a/b test having heard both at different times, I can say that they are much different and both good in different ways. |
Mapman, I don't know how many times I have dropped this link but here it is: http://www.atma-sphere.com/Resources/Paradigms_in_Amplifier_Design.phpIn short, damping factor has little to do with getting bass, in fact if you have too much that is worse than having too little. And by too much: let's put it this way: There are no speakers made that need an amplifier with a damping factor of over 40. Its that simple- all speakers made are overdamped (not enough impact in the bass) if the amplifier has a damping factor of over 40! If there were no 4-ohm speakers, then there would be no speakers that needed over 20, the 40 figure only applies to 4-ohm speakers (because 'damping factor' is measured relative to 8 ohms). I know this is hard to digest and believe for some who have become enamoured of the numbers on a page, but that will not change the reality. You don't need an amplifier with a high damping factor to play really good bass. Let me give you an example. Sometimes I don't have an amplifier at home, because quite often I am playing a demo amplifier anyway. If that is the case, I have a set of adaptors that plug into my interconnect cables so I can use my preamp to play the speakers. You read that right: my **preamp**. Yes, its pretty gutsy, and can actually play a 16 ohm load which is what my speakers are. Yes, it is limited in volume but it sounds fine- no lack of bass at all. My speakers have dual 15" woofers. Point made?? |
I listen mostly to rock, and haven't found any solid state amp that makes me as happy as a good tube amp. Bass isn't all there is to rock - rock benefits just plenty from tonal accuracy, and to my ears a good tube amp excels at accurate tonality.
On a good tube amp, guitars it can sound like there are guitar amps in my room - I love that! |
"You don't need a super low output impedance to control 15" woofers either!"
No, but isn't damping factor the right (though still not perfect) spec to help predict relative control potential before buying? Damping does depend on output impedance, right? |
|
No Eric Johnson for 15 years...not easy. |
To say a tube amp clips warmer is an understatement. The last time I clipped a ss amp smoke wafted from my tweaters. That was the last night I listened to Eric Johnson and did an 8 ball for dinner in the same night. Ive been clean for 15 Years. |
. 10-04-12: Stevecham
One good system of either type, or a mix, can do it ALL.
Stevecham (Reviews | Threads | Answers | This Thread) I'm with Steve on this one. . |
|
"I find my system has difficulty with Algerian Death Polka. "
That's one form of World Music that I might be missing....... |
I find my system has difficulty with Algerian Death Polka. |
One good system of either type, or a mix, can do it ALL. |
Wolf said it all. Exactly right. |
There are excellent versions of each system. The idea is to get the best amp you can ...not how electrons move within the circuit. |
I run two different SS amps in two systems.
My main system uses Bel Canto Reference 1000m Class D monoblocks, 500w/ch, with a tube pre-amp friendly 100 kohm input impedance (unbalanced), 1000 damping factor fed from ARC sp16 tube pre-amp driving large OHM Walsh speakers that are known to benefit from high damping. THe sound is fast, vivid, powerful and articulate at ANY volume with any music. About as good as it gets I would say
ONce when the BCs were in the shop, I used my TAD 125 Hibachi monoblocks as a sub in their place. THese are 180w/ch SS and designed to provide tube like sound in a SS design. These have significantly lower damping and lower input impedance than the BCs. The sound is also quite good though not as much muscle and slightly less articulate in the bass compared to the BCs. The difference in sound corresponds exactly as I would expect from the differences in power and impedance ratings. You would likely not realize you were missing anything with the TADs unless you heard them in comparison to the BCs. THey still sounded really good, but not as good as the BCs.
I also have smaller OHM Walsh speakers in my second system. These have smaller Walsh drivers that are not as challenging for an amp to get a vice like grip on the driver for optimum control, articulation, detail, etc. They work even better with the TADs.
The TADs do have a lovely tonality in the midrange that I fancied compared to the BCs, I suppose part of their SS tube sound design.
Just an example in my case of how these kinds of specs actually turned out to be useful in choosing gear that works really well together. |
