Are tubes more musical?

[MAB]

Ok. I already covered that though. I said “musical” is too vague too convey useful information. You yourself said earlier that you’d need to find out what someone means by it. I covered that also, by stating that if the defininition depends on the person, then it isn’t useful either.


Correct. The key difference is that I find “musical” too vague and too person-dependent, see the first paragraph.

The examples you gave, like Hollow, are physical phenomenons, as in objects can be hollow. Physical attributes have physical effects on sound waves. In contrast, Musical is a concept or idea, made even vaguer by being something subjectively ‘positive’.


It doesn’t communicate more or better than using the terms tilt or dull itself. It is at best a less accurate synonym. But it is much worse, see previous paragraph.



The problem with describing a sonic profile is that it completely depends on the input.

If a sonic profile sounds good (ie. “is musical”) on certain material - such as a downward tilt on overbright vocals - then it follows that it inversely works on the opposite material: it sounds terrible on dull vocals. The sonic signature itself can never always be musical.

This is what my loop back example points out.


Hey, exactly my point. So, in conclusion, using “musical” as a term for any audible effect makes no sense.


It’s not about a slippery slope, it’s illustrating that a sonic signature or audible effect in itself cannot be blanket statement something positive. And you agree on this.


Part of it is of course that you have a minority opinion. But I’ll give my view on other reasons why you’re getting the heat.

So just to be clear, I don’t think you are evil or something. You’re clearly passionate and respectful. You asked (though possibly retorically) and I answer.

First, you sometimes pull the debate far into the meta-philosophical, that at some point we end up debating “can the word musical ever, under perfect conditions, have a slight shimmer of usefulness”?
The rest seems to keep it in the practical realm - ie. “is the term musical useful or not?”
This can be seen as pedantic.

Then you have the tendency to agree with someone, even argue in favour, yet then reject that point without any supporting argument.

In the “loop back” example above, you first agree with me that a dull sound is “obviously not” audio nirvana, but then you turn it around on me that “thus my example wasn’t well founded”. If you have no argument to why it isn’t well founded, then the conclusion you should have drawn is that “thus musical isn’t a meaningful term”.

Or: you should’ve given an argument for why the argument was wrong. Calling it a slippery slope is a debate technique to invoke dismissal of the argument, without actually having to give an argument yourself.

So sometimes you go all the way with facts (dictionary screenshot), sometimes you rely on hand waving. That can be seen as pedantic.

If you really believe that musical is, or can be, a useful word, then the onus is on you on doing more research (interview audiophiles, measure what it is they like, etc). You need to have a case to be able to convince others. You are setting the cart before the horse, by trying to convince others you’re right, while your argument boils down to “audiophiles use this word”.

Great summary. Good points on rhetorical constructions. Agree the tactic is to deflect and dismiss without actually having to address anything of substance. Getting out the dictionary to win the debate at all costs was particularly ridiculous.

In a world where a 1dB louder playback is also considered positive - dare I say musical - that argument just isn’t strong.

This is such a good way of looking at this endless tube argument.

 

[antcollinet]

rather than just dismiss it as you like distortion and a crappy setup

Everything audible can be measured.

For audio there is only noise, distortion or frequency response. Good gear by the most reasonable definition, whether solid state, or tube based, has flat frequency response, and inaudible noise and distortion. So if you genuinely hear a difference with your tubes it can only be one of those things diverging from the inaudible to audible.

 

[solderdude]

Or they are effect boxes intended for home use without instruments specifically in mind.

That may well be seen that way but the effect is not the same. People making the claim of warmed up sound due to 2nd harmonics being added handily forget that not only fundamentals get higher harmonics added (where 2nd is also being masked) but also all recorded harmonics get extra harmonics added and every instrument/voice is getting that same change not just 1 or 2 instruments but, more importantly, IM is added which may not be masked and never is 'musical' nor desirable. For a single instrument this effect differs

 

[Chr1]

You could also argue that tone controls, an EQ unit or modern DSPs/VSTs are also simply "effects boxes" as they similarly change the source signal.
Whether in the digital or analogue domain.

 

[Mulder]

I skimmed over most of the thread, so I probably did take your comment out of context, so excuse me for that.

I agree with you. Musicality or musical is such vague word, that it has no use in a science forum. If you need to define it on a person to person basis, then it isn’t really a definition.
And if you can define it in existing terms of FR tilt or distortion, might as well use those more precise terms.


And infact, even tilt or distortion cannot be a synonym for musical. If that was the case, then more tilt and more distortion would never cease to be an improvement. The same recording loopbacked through the same “musical” amp would turn more and more tilted and distortion, until there’s only one highly distorted bass note left. Is that audio nirvana?

I’m sorry Matt, but your linguistic pedantry makes no sense and helps nothing imo.

No offence. I could probably have avoided ambiguities by more clearly distinguishing between overtones and harmony theory.
But I didn't want to delve too much into such matters, because as I said, that wasn't my point, but it was that the ability to perceive and create harmonies is part of human musicality. Sorry if I repeat myself.

 

[AdrianusG]

What is it that I’m hearing in my tube preamp and tubed headphone amp that is so romantic, warm, soft around the edges, and smooth, even syrupy sometimes? I’m not talking about hybrid amps or tube buffers. (My headphone amp is an OTL design, my preamp has no transistors in the audio circuit.) Do tubes enhance dynamics? They seem to create a feeling of space and holographic imaging. These qualities make it great for home audio applications. Of course they add distortion but it’s pleasing to the ear. The warm sound of tubes seems perfect for laid back and acoustic music styles like jazz. In my experience, most typical solid state gear can’t perform as well for getting the presentation and emotional impact of music right. Are tubes more musical?

They can sound more musical to YOU, it's a preference, if you like it Enjoy

 

[DanielT]

This weekend I will listen to my friend's newly purchased Edison 60 tube amp. He bought it very cheaply as a repair copy so he has been repairing, measuring, checking, changing components in it and so on for a while now. Now it is ready.
He doesn't listen to much music. He mostly finds it fun to repair and fix electronics. Nothing wrong with that, we have the hobbies we have.

Edison 60 is a, I think, push pull amp with EL34 power tubes. For being a tube amp, compared to other tube amps in that case, I don't know how good it is.
Okay now the point, when I listen to it what should I listen for if I want to hear the "magic tube sound"? I mean with his wonky speakers in his crap little listening room I'll just hear, ..well, I don't really know what I will hear with those conditions.


Edison 60:

 

[solderdude]

Just do some level matched blind comparisons (difficult to do) and then try to find a preference. At least 10 blind (possible) swaps for ar least some statistical relevance when the goal is truthfinding. Otherwise it does not really matter as it isn't really proof but just 'fun'.

 

[DanielT]

Just do some level matched blind comparisons (difficult to do) and then try to find a preference. At least 10 blind (possible) swaps for ar least some statistical relevance when the goal is truthfinding. Otherwise it does not really matter as it isn't really proof but just 'fun'.

Absolutely if there is time. He's younger than me and he, they recently had baby number 2 so it's a bit of the wild west at their apartment now.

Level matching is no problem. He might even have an amp switcher. We'll see what happens. Most likely it will "just" be a fun and enjoyable casual listening session in itself.

 

[pinger]

Absolutely if there is time. He's younger than me and he, they recently had baby number 2 so it's a bit of the wild west at their apartment now.

Level matching is no problem. He might even have an amp switcher. We'll see what happens. Most likely it will "just" be a fun and enjoyable casual listening session in itself.

Is his other amp SS? If so I would be interested in what you find (or hear) if you can do a legit comparison

 

[olieb]

This thread kind of opens Pandora's Box. Putting "tubes" and "musical" in one statement is like opening the gates to all possible subjective and semantic thunderstorms.
On a scientifically oriented forum one might expect that people try to make precise points and differentiate arguments into distinct cases. And to ask questions. And it happens, but those attempts seem to get swept away time and time again by those who mix everything together and insist on all kinds of possible interpretation of words and statements.

Good points on rhetorical constructions. Agree the tactic is to deflect and dismiss without actually having to address anything of substance. Getting out the dictionary to win the debate at all costs was particularly ridiculous.

You said it better than me.

For me it makes no sense to talk about a category like "tubes" (or "transformators" for that matter) without looking separately at those amps that have audible distortion ("effect boxes") and those that are considered "competent" with SNR and distortion below audibility. (These do exist, do they?) And the effect boxes again will fall into different classes, if one does not want to claim "all effect boxes sound the same".

For audio there is only noise, distortion or frequency response. Good gear by the most reasonable definition, whether solid state, or tube based, has flat frequency response, and inaudible noise and distortion. So if you genuinely hear a difference with your tubes it can only be one of those things diverging from the inaudible to audible.

That's it.

The same is true for the semantics of "musical". After finding out that it has a plethora of meanings, how can one continue to use the term without making clear (context) what aspect/meaning one is talking about? And of course the meanings of "musical" that are related to the creative qualities of content (human, zoologic or environmental) are not really helpful here.
Instead I want to look at two interpretations that were mentioned before
- serving the music --- (too vague, that could still mean all sorts of things about the sound, for me it would mean "low distortion")
- pleasing to the human ear --- (that is basically a sonic preference and as such a bit more concrete)
The latter is still vague, but at least gives some kind of direction.

What I do not get about the idea tube amps (of different kinds) modify sound in a unique way "pleasing to the ear". How can a sound modification be "pleasing to the ear" in any general sense? That is like a spice that makes everything better ("rounder", "holographic", "airy", "more depth" - all these words not very helpful). If that were the case, why is this not already applied to all recordings in the mixing process? At least to the "good" ones. Instead it is often claimed that the good recordings profit the most from this spice. But if it was actually already applied, does it get better with twice the dose? What is the "right" dose? Shouldn't it become worse sometimes too? Maybe some listeners (tube people) just want more of that spice than the average (solid state) person?

If that were the case one would expect extensive discussion about the right nature/amount of the spicing (as it will be individual to some degree). It would be much more difficult to find an individually appropriate tube amp, compared to people who only look for boring gear with no audible effects. And I assume this will be very dependent on the recordings one listens too. After all "better" for harpsichord does not necessarily mean "better" for flute too, and in popular music so much effects are used that I cannot imagine a "one size fits all" approach, but what do I know?
There is tube rolling and discussion about tube amps of course, but somehow for many (audiophiles) all kinds of tubes still seem to have the same or at least a very similar effect.

And then there are the "competent" tube amps, that will have no audible sound modification. Still many (not all!) insist on this "special something" and underpin that often with corresponding anecdotes. But how can you prefer something that is not there?
I wonder whether this "special something" would be still as popular, if it were worded more along "transformer sound" instead of "tube sound".

 

[robh36062]

You can argue about this to the cows come home if something is musical or not. It's completely subjective from a personal and cultural stand point. No different from humor. It's an opinion not a fact.

Rob

 

[Chr1]

I think that tube amps that alter the sound should be talked about in the same way as anything else that does so. ie EQ, tone controls, speaker voicing, DSP, whatever.

Nobody is forcing anyone to like tube amps, and as long as folks aren't claiming they are superior, where is the problem?

To me this kind of repeated circular debate on the meaning of "musical", and the constant criticism of people's choice to use tubes here gets kinda boring. Oddly enough I was just browsing a thread where folks were talking about the virtues of analogue EQs costing thousands.
Personally I use very good quality, transparent EQ and DSP. Which is free... but shoot me, I also like to use tubes sometimes too!

 

[DanielT]

Is his other amp SS? If so I would be interested in what you find (or hear) if you can do a legit comparison

Yes. He has recently serviced an HK 990 so we can use that but it is a bit unfair to the tube amp because then it will be pitted against:

Harman Kardon HK 990 integrated amplifier Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

I might take my vintage HK330C with me. Then it's pretty much the same power wise. I'll bring Santa too in that case, heh heh:


IF there is time to make any meaningful, serious comparisons, that is.

Some of the things he is working on now:


Sorry for the blurry pictures.

 

[DanielT]

You could also argue that tone controls, an EQ unit or modern DSPs/VSTs are also simply "effects boxes" as they similarly change the source signal.
Whether in the digital or analogue domain.

Like this one. Don't remember if it was already brought up in the thread? In any case:

What is PKHarmonic?​

PKHarmonic is a VST plugin for Windows, designed to add second and all the way up to the 8th harmonic by simulating a device non-linearity. A simple slider control for each harmonic lets you fine tune the level from -200dB to +10dB in real time, as you listen. This makes it possible to configure your playback software to generate similar levels of distortions to simulate a tube preamp or an amp, or another device with some level of non-linearity.

PKHarmonic VST Plugin - Audiophile Harmonics Generator | Distort documentation

PKHarmonic 1.0 is the initial release of this software. Use at your own risk!

distortaudio.org

 

[Smaestro]

Like this one. Don't remember if it was already brought up in the thread? In any case:

What is PKHarmonic?​

PKHarmonic is a VST plugin for Windows, designed to add second and all the way up to the 8th harmonic by simulating a device non-linearity. A simple slider control for each harmonic lets you fine tune the level from -200dB to +10dB in real time, as you listen. This makes it possible to configure your playback software to generate similar levels of distortions to simulate a tube preamp or an amp, or another device with some level of non-linearity.

View attachment 413091

PKHarmonic VST Plugin - Audiophile Harmonics Generator | Distort documentation

PKHarmonic 1.0 is the initial release of this software. Use at your own risk!

distortaudio.org

Here are some free good alternatives that are already 'preconfigured' to emulate tube- and transformer-distortion:

‘Aphex exciter’ effect: the hidden “holy grail” of audiophilism?

Being around as an audio enthusiast for a while I noticed a few things. 1) Besides some general regulations on electronics and a company’s own definition of looks and quality, it does not seem that there are any regulations on what an amp should be or how it should measure etc. 2. Audiophiles...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[Chr1]

Perhaps, rather than using vague terms like "musical", we should be describing the distortion profile, as in PKHarmonic?

As this is a science based forum, perhaps science based terminology would be best. We aim to do this for everything else, so why should valve amps be any different?
If, as some folks claim, good valve amplifiers have no distortion that is fine too. Measurements will show this.

Personally I think nowadays it's a bit mad using valve amplifiers that do not alter the sound in some way. Much simpler and cheaper to just use a decent transistor or chip amp surely?

I would suggest that whether one thinks a particular distortion profile, EQ profile or whatever else, either enhances or ruins the source signal is purely subjective.
Clearly if we are aiming for highest fidelity, there should be no alteration of the signal anyway.
(Room correction aside perhaps.)
My 2c.

 

[antcollinet]

He might even have an amp switcher.

I might be misremembering - but if he does I wouldn't use it. Tube amps are not supposed to be run unloaded and can be damaged if they are.



EDIT:

tube amp with no load

I have a transistor amplifier and a tube amplifier (Oldchen EL34-B), both of which I want to use on my speakers (not at the same time, of course). To switch between these two amps I have an amp switcher (Dynavox AMP-S MKII). When I switch the amplifier switch from tube amp to transistor amp...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[DanielT]

I might be misremembering - but if he does I wouldn't use it. Tube amps are not supposed to be run unloaded and can be damaged if they are.



EDIT:

tube amp with no load

I have a transistor amplifier and a tube amplifier (Oldchen EL34-B), both of which I want to use on my speakers (not at the same time, of course). To switch between these two amps I have an amp switcher (Dynavox AMP-S MKII). When I switch the amplifier switch from tube amp to transistor amp...

www.audiosciencereview.com

You are right about that. Hopefully he had thought of that before possible destruction of his tube amp. I also think that I would have thought about it myself when it was time for the on-site testing.

When I sold a DIY tube amp on assignment a few years ago, I took the opportunity to test it.I was very careful to make sure the speakers were plugged in when operating the amp.I almost got a little nervous about it. No banana plugs that could accidentally be disconnected while in use.
Cables properly screwed into the amp - speaker connectors to prevent that.

 

[Chr1]

Random and slightly off topic valve question :

My understanding is that Neumann are the makers of highly respected valve microphones, as are Manley and various other companies.
If valves are so detrimental to the sound why are these so widely used and respected in recording?
They are transducers, so ultimately extremely relevant to the sound/music obviously.

I get that they alter the sound and it's music production rather than playback/reproduction. Are there not a ton of high end "voiced" speakers that do this in playback too, so...