Yea. I agree. Lets talk audio. How you doing? |
They were looking so good ...then a THD of 1% showed up. I consider <0.1% a maximum standard. ATI ss amps for instance are <0.005% at rated power.
Oh, well. Thanks anyway. |
'Supposedly, there exist a few 'triode' (tube) amplifier designs of exceptional transparency. Usually their power output is below 20W and insufficient to drive most speakers'... most important are low output impedance (<0.4 ohm) and low distortion (<0.1%) of the amplifier over a 5 Hz to 50 kHz frequency range' (Seigfried Linkwitz).
The best I could find among the popular tube brands is 1-2% THD, and only over 20hz-20khz range. 'Rogue' looked better than any of those. But I am not sure the compromise in transparency (low distoriton) is worth the 'bloom' of tubes when you need more than 20w to power your mid and upper range drivers. (always use ss for woofers)
The ATI line of solid state amps are <0.005THD, for instance. As are the vintage Hafler DH-200/220, the Muse 160 (and Bry$ston, and the very $$ Jeff Rowland) solid state amps.
If you just want a 'warm', 'soft' sound, put cotton in your ears, or hang a blanket over your speakers. It will accomplish the same thing. Really. |
The Cary 805 for instance, has a limited frequency range (only 20hz-20khz) and they do not even mention distortion in their specs. That cannot be good.
For inaudible distortion you want a min of <0.1% THD, IMD, over a 5hz-50khz frequency range. As well as Outut Impedance <0.4 ohms.
The Canary is more like it, but notice: 8w
McIntash models show <.5% THD but only over a 20hz-20khz
No mention in your post, but Rouge also has decent specs and ample power. That is, a 40w tube amp is approx equivelent to a 100w solid state.
It is not that easy to find distortion free amps, especially tubed units. By far the majority of mfgrs do not come close.
No wonder the myth is perpetuated that specs do not matter. So few meet minimum requirements for inaudible distortion. Insteade they glorify their distortion qualites in poetic terms and sell the dream preached by the 'connoisseurs of colorations' magazine reviewers.
I wonder how many mfgrs will advertise in a magazine that gives their products unfavorable reviews. It does not sound like good business.
I wonder how many reviewers will remain employed when mfgrs begin pulling their advertising based on their unfavorable reviews. |
Though the CA-301SE is getting there, and better than most (the 10 Damping Factor is a good sign) still at THD <0.5% (over a very decent frequency range), it still is noticabley over a cutoff of <0.1% THD.
An excellent ss amp for instance is typically more like <0.005% THD, and IMD. And at 22w... what can it drive?
I mean, you do not HAVE to go tubes, and in my opinion, it cannot be worth to add distortion. |
I am glad you are happy. I saw a guy once picking his nose and eating the booger. He was very content. I did not care to watch it, but I had no anamosity or resentment for the fellow, you know what I mean.
You listen to your tubes, I will listen to the music.
BTW, it is by listening that I discerned the more live like sonics of the amps with no distortion. Especially with transparent speakers laborously set up to get the most out them.
That is how I knew. At first I took a chance on the logic, and reasonableness of the science, i.e., the specs. That distoriton can be measured. That to the degree it is present in the system, it will interfer with what the music is that artists made in real life. At least as well as it got produced and engineered onto the recording.
Not much we can do about their end, except become intelligently discerning about the choices we make on what to support with our purchases.
But then again, if you have sufficient distortion in your system, however much you may be enjoying it, you will not hear how poor the recording is, so it will make no difference to you. That is the unacknowledged point, is it not. |
You guys are relentless. And angry. Like that has anything to do with me. |
Yes, I do not go over well with the 'connoisseurs of coloration'. My perspective is a pin that pops their 'preference-for-a-specific-distortion-chracteristics' bubble.
So they rant, shoot at the messenger as it were, instead of cry, and kick themselves for being so gullible, and begin listening for 'live' like sonics instead.
I uderstand. The hardest thing for a man to do is admit he is wrong. But a 'man' does, and has a happy wife. Boys do not, and their marriages are in trouble.
|
I think tubes are great. It is distortion that I do not like. It interfers with the music, which is what I prefer to hear rather than the system. (The 'connoissers of coloration' nothwithstanding :-)
For some reason fewer tube amps are made with distorion <0.1% at rated power, than solid state amps, which is ironic since it is more difficult to accomplish with solid state.
If you perfer to call that 'an issue', fine. But how could you expect 'it' to go away? That is, as long as there are those who's principal interest in audio is 'true to the original', rather then this preferance for that particual distortion characterist over that one, etc., even if typically described poetically. |
Did you just miss the point, or is it a strategy to so erronously characterize what I actually said, or at least obviously meant.
I am not 'die hard' anything other than 'true to the original' as a principal in audio. Though I realize it is a departure from the 'connoisseur of coloration' to personal subjective taste approach.
I want to hear the music, not my system, and fully accept that audiophila is predominatly populated with those who perfer the latter, but there still exist some who prefer the former like me, and who tend to respond to my views quite differently.
AT any rate, if I could find a 40w tube amp with a maximum <0.1% THD/IMD at rated power over a 5hz-50khz frequency range... do you know of one? I would prefer it to drive the mids/treble of my system (ss is better for woofers). |
So why keep clicking on them, taking the trouble to read them, only to further bother to write critical, condescening, and insulting remarks.
What is that about. |
They do not even list distortion, even in the manual. So they apparently are not proud of it. Contrare. So why bother listening. Nor do they show greater than 20hz-20khz frequency range. Though the Output Impendance is in line with what I consider a minimum standard. That of course is not near enough to validate an amp's accuracy.
If you know of one that meets standards for accuracy (distortion free), I would like to see it. |
What, are you a lawyer, restricting me to 'yes' and 'no' responses? You are funny. 'Sig heil' :-)
Please do not ask me any more questions if have any agenda about the answer. I am free, and I am staying that way. You should try it. It can be fun. like 'live' like accuracy in a playback system. |
NO I do not put the Cary amp in the same catagory with ATI. They have too much distortion to qualify. I am trying to get distortion out of my system so I can hear the music instead.
Since discovering do not have to settle for distortion in an amp, I have no incentive to characterize it various poetic terms: 'sweet', 'warm', 'bloom', 'smooth', etc.
Your anchor analogy does fit the album producers. Not much we can do about the inferior sonic quality of so many recordings. Except become selective, which is easy once you actually hear the recording when it is not masked by the system/room setup distortions. That could put some demand on producers to go easy on the mixing console, and require more of incompetant engineering.
Did you know it is more difficult to design ss amps to lower distortion levels than tubes. Makes you wonder, doesn't it. I mean what the market really is for tube equipment. It appears the 'connoisseures of coloration' have it there.
Oh, well. Any discernable difference between the same low distortion in tubes vs ss would be very subtle indeed. Though I would prefer it, if it were availble (with enough power to drive my main panels at least --40w min). |
Distortion is measurable, as well as audible: just listen to the poetic terms the 'connoissers of coloration' use to describe it :-)
Those specs are a major conveniece in the auditioning process (when it is low enough that the mfgr will publish it for public scrutiny, that is).
Imagine a component with 'no' distortion. Whats to audition? Whats to listen to in order to discern and choose? It makes no sound to hear. Your choices then are size, price, build quality, or perhaps aesthetics. And Bob's your uncle, as they say.
I have been there: auditioning, creating terms to express what I hear, even though I find myself saying verbatim what everybody else says, about every product: even the component isolation device and the power cord.
Trading componets, over, and over again. Trying this, then that. Never satisfied. The absurdity which is mixing and matching distortion qualities. One to compensate for another. As though all that were rational, reasonale, and necessary. Or the worse, superior.
To those still in it, who have not found their way out, or who beleive and perhaps do no want out, mentioning'spec's has the same affect as light to Darcula. Or, the notion of 'blind test' as well.
You know what I am saying.
|
That is an amplifier spec. I guess what you want from speakers is transparency. It can be evaluated by using reference earphones (Shure ER2: $100, tested and reviewed at www.linkwitzlab.com Reference Earphones link.
Listen to the recording, then compare what you hear in the room through your system. It can be disapointing, even discouaging, but like Dr Phil says, 'you cannot change what you do not acknowlege'.
Of course the first thing may be to work on setup. Making sure you are getting the most of what the speakers have to offer. You can just check the specs for the amp: to see if it is the culpret, or a participant.
But once you get those right, you will find the 'live' like quality of the music so involving, that there is little incentive to be so concerned about the top end components, cables, or tweaks. |
If you have measurable amounts of distortion in your system, especially audible amounts, which get described in poetic terms by the 'connoisseurs of coloration', you will not hear the music. Even as much as actually got recorded on the source material. That is the whole point.
Reference earphones (Sure ER2: $100, tested and reviewed at www.linkwitzlab.com Reference Earphones link) can be used to hear the recording. THen compare to what you hear in the room, through your system.
Of course there is not much to be done about how the recording was produced, except be selective in purchases. If more were, perhaps the labels would restrain the overuse of those 1/4 million dollar, room size, mixing consoles, and requrire more of the engineers, in capturing more of what the artists create on their instruments.
BTW there is a list of tested and proven sonically superior reference quality CD's in a variety of musical genres at the MUSIC link at www.linkwitzlab.com |
C1...
The difference is .4% :-) though surely not as relevant as the difference between say 0.005% and 1 to 2% (or more). But the point is whether it is audible, or not. Or if you like the idea of the source material being affected by a component at all, or whether you want to attempt to 'improve' the music with some distortion quality or other in one or more components.
Once recorded, though, is that even possible?
Please define, 'sounded "nice"'.
I really do not care to argue with those who enjoy their various qualities of distortion, regardless of how seductive the poetic terms used to describe it. From my perspective, there is No point.
Two schools of audio can be differentiated by 'goal'. Note that those who argue surprisingly ferverently against me personally (whatever that is about), and much less the point I attempt to make, rarely mention the music. And obviously have no ambition to reproduce it as accurately as possible in their listening room.
I do not know to what degree they acknowledge it, but they seem to only be concerned about the 'sound' of the individual components, and of their system collectively. Any sound whatever of which has to be 'distortion'. 'A good system is a silent system.' One that gets out of the way, and lets the music through.
That is my position, and I am sticking to it.
I imagine that if a musician was found to be so invloved in the sound of their instrument they would be corrected by their teachers and instructed to focus primarily on the music. Perhaps even to the degree of faithfully depicting the intention of the composer.
Anyway, I notice the Wavac's have no distortion measurement in their specs at all. They are pretty, though.
I have yet to see, even after contacting mfgrs specifically, that a spec indicating low distoriton was ever unintentionally omitted from publication. The cutoff seems to be 1 to 2% (THD/IMD) Some, but not all, 'brand names' will show that much, but never more. Whereas a mfgr ALWAYS shows when it is less. Hmmm.
To all: nothing personal, and no offence. BTW I have never cut and pasted a post in my life; Nor is my relationship with Seigfried Linkwitz other than one of a buyer to a seller. Since my speaker system is his design, I am just grateful he is accessible (and didactic by nature :-) |
Spoken like a true 'connoisseur of coloration'. An eloquent justification.
'The power of suggestion works exceedingly well, when listeners cannot trust their own hearing. I recommend to re-calibrate yourself frequently. Listen closely to all sorts of un-amplified sounds in order to recognize and remember natural aural patterns. It becomes an endless and futile pursuit to listen for and try to evaluate differences between speakers, equipment and accessories without a reality based mental reference.' (SL) |
Slay? in what way?
Define 'good sounding'.
FYI
It is actually more difficult to design a distortion free solid state amp than a tube design. It makes you wonder why it is more difficult to find tube amps with tolerable levels of distortion.
But then so many are more interested in how their system sounds than in listening to the actual music, which would lead one to aspire to hear it accurately: as played by the musicians in whichever environment.
Oh, well. To each his or her own, I suppose. |
A wise man once said, ' most error is the result of a false premise, carelessly assumed, then building on that premise'.
You do not know what I have listened to. Yet you proceed as though you did, then presume to have made a convincing argument.
At any rate, my view is based on levels of distortion produced by a component, which is measurable. Not how it 'sounds'. I prefer it have no sound of its own since it is distortion that you hear even though many have very definate tastes for various specific characteristics of distortion, often described in affectionate and poetic terms.
I have no argument with these 'connoisserus of coloration', and certainly no interest in debating their subjective tastes for the 'sound' they like. I want to hear the music. As accurately, and live like, as possible.
Have I not been clear about that? |
I am not interested in learning something 'new'. 'THere is nothing new under the sun.' I am interested in learning someing 'true'.
BTW you do not think that because it is a 'Masters thesis' that it is true, do you? The President went to Harvard.
How did you get a 'link' to show up as a link on a Reply anyway. I have typed, and cut/paste many but they show up as text only...not a functioning link. |
I have sent the paper to Siegfried Linkwitz for his opinion.
Scanning the Conclusion it appears that he does not necessarily take the postion specs are not useful for evaluation.
But he does infer the premise that listening is subjective so 'whatever 'sounds' good to you is good'. As opposed to the more scientific approach that much can be done to more accurately replicate the live performance in all its accoustical subtelty and nuance in recording and playback.
I will let you know if I get an opinion from SL.
How about the link issue? |
Why do you care what I think, or even whether I think, and why are you so angry? I know it does not have anything to do with me.
You also sound like the President. If you challenge what he thinks you are not patriotic. To critique a Republican does not make you a Liberal, or anything else.
Lets discuss 'audio'. That is why we are here, is it not? Otherwise call Dr Phil. He can help you with your personal problems. |
Your insults (which say more about you than me) notwithstanding, hear is SL's reply as I promised:
'I am not sure that I had seen Cheever's thesis, but glancing at it I see that I have been familiar with his observations. I sometimes say that "the first Watt" is most telling about an amplifier's audible performance. It brings out problems due to crossover distortion with its high harmonics and poor feedback designs. This is where tube equipment shines and has its strength, so that it takes very little knowledge to design a decent low power tube amp. It is the area that has given solid-state amps a bad name and makes the design of good ss-amps exceedingly difficult. But it can be done.'
|
How far into name calling will you go before coming up for air and emulate some semblence of maturity, dignity, respect and sanity, anyway.
What you call others says more about you than them. It does not change anyone in any way. Even if they retaliate: push your face in, or worse (which you obviously have no fear of here in the safety of cyberspace) they just demonstrate they are like you already, or worse. You do not make them that way. No one can.
What do you get out of it anyway. What do you 'like' about it, to do it so persistently. Is it anything you can share? In the light of day.
What ever happened to 'audio'? Thankfully youall are a minority here. |
ATI,
...though I continue the search for low distortion (<0.1% THD/IMD over a respectable frequency range, somewhat greater than 20hz-20khz) tube amp with say at least 40w of power.
I would use it for the main panels of my active eq/xo 2-way open baffle system. Contiuing to use SS for the also open baffle woofers (2-12" dynamic drivers in push-pull configuration each woofer) which reqire only 50w of power themselves.
A 40w tube amp is roughly equivenent to say a 100w solid state (the min reqmt for the 2-8" mid + tweeter panels).
There are several distortion free ss amps available for as little as $200, I just believe the ATI is the better bargain.
If I had money to burn, which I would be doing, I would indugle myself in the exquisite beauty of the Jeff Rowland Design Gourp line (which actually come with an optional clear plastic to reveal the interior, which is a work of art...but $8k) though not because I expected it to perform any better than say even the $200 vintage Hafler DH-200/220.
Do you know of a tube amp that will meet the criteria (above)? |
