Wow. Quick first responses! But before this gets too far in, I better qualify that I didn't mean that I'm new to EE or Physics or high-end audio listening. However, I am new to tubes as they're used in audio equipment. So my question is only partially about the physics/engineering behind tube implementation in audio. I realize that theory and circuitry may very well be part of any good explanation, so I don't want to discourage it. But the main question is about what tube enthusiasts like to hear and how they achieve that sound at their preferred listening levels.
I think Atmasphere understands where I'm coming from. In fact he/she may have answered part of my question, but I'd like to hear other viewpoints.
Mapman, I'm sure you have some good insight now that (hopefully) I've explained a bit better. I'm sure you know more about the subject than me and I look forward to more input from you. However my question is more subjective than came across. How does a tube enthusiast choose the right power for their system given that they actually may prefer more distortion of the right harmonics? If they choose a higher power amp I'm assuming (and yes I might be wrong!) that there will be less of the DESIRED distortion that adds to the fun of tubes.
Czarivey, I appreciate the input but you misunderstood the point that not all watts are created equal. They most certainly are not, or we'd all have $200 Bose equipment and stop there. |
OK. Let's please get off my "not all Watts are the same" comment. I didn't realize it would be so badly misunderstood - my mistake. Just so it's understood - I'm perfectly aware what a watt is and is not, so let's move on ... |
Thanks Bill, but your response answers the opposite of what I'm asking. I'm not trying to find out if tube enthusiasts like the sound of less clipping from more powerful amps. Rather, I'm asking if they prefer the sound from less powerful amps, and if so how to decide which power rating provides the best tube sound given an amp's characteristics together with the speaker sensitivity and the preferred listening level.
Maybe I need to explain how "tube sound" is partially related to distortion? I didn't want to do that here, and I'm not really the person to do it. An earlier post from Atmasphere explains the sound charateristics of push-pull circuitry. While that may be the most important influence on "tubiness", it's only part of the story. One also needs to consider harmonics that occur when an amp is almost or even softly clipping. These harmonics can be pleasing to the ear at certain levels.
Tube people, please feel free to add or subtract to my knowledge here. As stated I'm a tube audio newbie hence this post.
Anyone else want to take a stab at asking my question in an easier-to-understand way? Atmasphere? |
Mulveling - thank you!
"You want your amps to be running in their lowest-distortion range, every time (or as close to that as possible given your SPL needs) -- whether tubes or SS. And you can still clearly hear the effects of tube rolling even when amps are perfectly well within their "clean" range."
Great answer. Does every tube enthusiast agree with this? I know I shouldn't believe everything I read, but it sure seems there are a lot of "audiophiles" who believe a great amp is a great amp tube or SS, and unless you're nearing or at clipping you probably won't hear the tube characteristics that drove your tube enthusiasm to begin with.
So ... if you never operate in this range are you happy with your tubiness? |
Thanks Mapman. Great response, but is it really true that "that's about it"? Maybe it is. I'm not so certain which is why I posted the question, and I think the only way to know is to hear your same opinion echoed by enough other tube enthusiasts to make it convincing.
But I wouldn't say it's about "the purest tube sound" that I or anyone else seeks. It's about what makes tube listeners happiest. I'm not sure the purest or cleanest sound does it for everyone, but am ready to be proven wrong. |
Jmcgrogan2 - you missed the point of the rhetorical question. were you really laughing out loud?
Swampwalker - define "appropriate"
Zkzpb8 - you got the point of the non-rhetorical question. thank you and nice response!
everyone else - i am listening to whatever I can as much as I can every other day or so. there's only so much time though, so your answers might sway me in the direction of more lower powered tube amp listening. |
|
Charles - thanks for another very helpful post! I assume you mean wrt average power output, at your listening level, you're only using fractions of a watt. I suppose it doesn't matter since even if it is much greater at peak maybe we're talking only 2-8W which you can handle within optimal range. I do realize you have a very efficient setup so my math may be off, but the "fractions of a watt" does sound a bit surprising and if it's true then I'm impressed - jealous even. These are the Coincidents that you refer to?
Yes I understand how power relates to impedance. No need to go there.
Do realize that yours is another data point and opinion, albeit a very popular one. Others commenting here have stated that over-driven tube amps might be appealing to some listeners. Actually they said it more strongly than that, but I'm trying to keep this civil. |
Atmasphere - you have been most helpful. I won't sum up the list of your contributions quite yet though. Am hoping you're not done here ... |
Zkzpb8 & Mapman - thanks!
Almarg - very helpful, thanks! Yes, my post is focused narrowly on this one question, but I'm not. When I listen I listen for what pleases my ear. If this is one of the things that does or does not then I'll note that fact and keep listening. I'm not really looking for specific amplifier suggestions, at least it didn't occur to me to do that. If I do it will be in another post, but I doubt that'll be necessary. |
Zd - thanks for this most helpful reply. I do understand the idea of "less bad" distortion at at or near clipping (I really do!), so it's not a missing piece if there was one. Rather you hit the nail on the head when you wrote "But I think it would be a mistake to say people buy tube amps to make them distort." I would have believed that a month ago before I started reading ... whatever I've been reading (I know - maybe I should stop reading, but then again what are the rest of you doing here? You should be listening to your systems! Sadly mine is missing an amp). And now there's a couple people commenting here that seem to be contradicting your statement. So, are there any closeted tubies here willing to come forward and confess to their tube clipping fetishes? |
Zd- say again? Just that last paragraph - not sure what you mean. |
Anyone other than Mapman want to respond to Zkzpb8 posts? |
Mesch- Agreed! It's a bit of a circus in a classroom ... fun, educational and full of entertaining surprises.
Zd542, Zkzpb8, Charles1dad & Atmasphere - many thanks for keeping this thread moving forward. |
Atmasphere writes ...
"you never want to push an SET past about 20% of full power or else the higher ordered distortion products come into play (when this happens, its usually on transients, and because the human ear uses the higher orders as loudness cues, the result is that the SET sounds a lot more dynamic than it has any right to because the loudness cues are occurring on the transients. You read about this 'dynamic' character with SETs all the time, but its an indication that the speaker used is not efficient enough)."
20% of full power (I'm assuming that means average power) is a significant % but not outrageous if the speakers aren't crazy-sensitive. Am I to understand that SET owners go into it knowing they NEED to keep this contract if they want to enjoy their sound? If the "SET sounds a lot more dynamic" as it encroaches on this forbidden region, isn't it reasonable to think that SET owners (or dealers or wannabes) might poke through that limit just a wee bit to enjoy the subtle excitement of the extra dynamics? I need to hear this myself to know, but my guess is that doing such a thing might lead to one of those "wow, I never heard THAT before!" kind of moments. |
Atmasphere. Thanks for clarifying Peak vs Av. |
Orpheus10- I almost skimmed past your post. Most helpful - thank you. |
Thanks to everyone who posted here - there most certainly is more to this than meets the eye, and ear! |
