Blind taste test, different transfer equipment (jazz)

[hvbias]

Unrelated question when I do @screename do you guys get a notification alerting you to the thread? Another forum with this software does this and I like using it more than the multiquote if I need to type a long reply.

 

[fas42]

Which I should have clarified in my post about it sounding more "live". The tube transfer also sounds more dynamic. I attend quite a few live jazz shows (by far my favorite genre of music) and to me that is how the cymbals, snare and sax sound in the upper registers. It doesn't sound as pleasant and glossed over EQ wise like it did on the SS transfer

Which shows how differently people hear ... SS version pleasant and glossed over - huuhh??

The tube version sounds perhaps more like the output from a mixing desk, from all the mic's - euphonic is just another word for distortion, some people are uncomfortable with the raw intensity of live instruments - personally, I prefer all the meat ...

 

[NorthSky]

You guys are fast to clarify the correct option is FILE 1 IS TUBE, FILE 2 IS SOLID STATE

@NorthSky to my ears I am hearing quite a bit more high frequency and air in the tube file. Which I should have clarified in my post about it sounding more "live". The tube transfer also sounds more dynamic. I attend quite a few live jazz shows (by far my favorite genre of music) and to me that is how the cymbals, snare and sax sound in the upper registers. It doesn't sound as pleasant and glossed over EQ wise like it did on the SS transfer. Regarding your second post

I am extremely satisfy of what you just said above. I trust my heart and my ears and soul with equal portion/balance of life's equilibrium.

And for me there is no challenge, just revelation and confirmation. ...But then, this was a very easy test. There are trillions of other tests to take, and we won't have the time ourselves to take them all; the next generations to come, will.
So, take your glove and see if it fits your own hand.

 

[NorthSky]

Well, I'm assuming each signal (file1,2) would be near-identically reproduced by the turntable itself, therefore from phono-stage(s) to recording stage, something changed the values. Personally, if it was my system(s), I'd like to know which version was more faithful to the original, regardless of which sounded "sweeter".

Also, since I've recently been considering using Lundahl transformers myself, the 1st thing that came to mind was the potential sonic effects of vastly different cartridge loading requirements?

One, a turntable cannot read audio files.
Two, the original recordings are often the worst sounding ones. Only the well recorded masters are worth collecting, and they ain't cheap either.
Tree, accuracy is sweetness to a man's soul. It's indescribable because it is live, and not a reproduction anyway. But! A reproduction is also live, and our eyes are highly attracted by that vinyl spinning on that rotating table, and our ears are caressed by the velvet sounds of whichever music medium we're listening @ the time, in the present moment.

Excellent . All I heard was the tube version being more distorted. I don't hear the euphonic effect of tube. And that has been a theme for me for a while including LP versus CD. I just want clean reproduction.

The first file is not only grotesquely distorted, it is also 'disillusionary' and raped of its musical essence.
I too don't hear any euphoria and euphony from the first file; all I hear is thinness like a can of sardines scratching against the cement floor of a street border walk under a rusty bridge where heroin addicts hang around with spoons and bic lighters.

The second file I have already described before.

So, which is which again (sandwich)? I didn't have a single clue when I made my choice/vote.
I only assumed that the superior sounding music file (#2) was the tube one. Oh, but was I wrong or what!
And I'm so glad to have been wrong because I don't have to sell my gear now and buy a new set of audio gear to go with all my music on digital medium; the one I'm listening to for the last two decades...and some.
Sure, I listened to analog for roughly three decades; but I run out of essential maintenance tools and energy; I got real lazy in all this entire processed musical journey. And coincidentally discovered what bass impact truly meant, and much much more scintillating stars above, in the sky.
Sure, the beauty, the richness, the eloquence, the romance, the nostalgia, the tics and pops, the cleanings, the brushing, the cart adjustments, the arm balancing, all that magical rotating cult and religious ceremonies and confessions, ...all that and more will for always be with me, inside.

Right now, the radio is playing; classical analog music from FM stereo analog tuning scale, with analog VU meter.
So, I'm still an analog man inside a digital people of the modern times, like that Charlie Chaplin's flick.

 

[RayDunzl]

Thanks Ray. Again I say ... huh. Not sure what to make of this

I wasn't either when the "which was which" was opposite to what I expected when I cheated and looked at the files.

So, I went back:

The tube tape pre is based around a DHT final stage with Lundahl amorphous output transformers (other two stages are high gm tubes, cap coupled with solid state CCS loading in both stages). The solid state version is based around the Pass Pearl 2 DIY phono stage that has EQ modified

Oh.

We have an LP source (so no "original digits" to look at) - now we don't, see below

We have a tube preamp (with or without RIAA?) - I see it says "Tape tube preamp" whatever that means.

We have a Pass (inspired or designed) DIY SS Phono stage (With RIAA?) (with modified EQ (whatever that means) in it) - this one?

Not sure what to make of this

Me too.

Now I see this:

@RayDunzl the original is a master tape dub, these are flat transfers from that tape

Ok, I have no clue how this is an "SS vs Tube" listening test right now. I don't know what it is, maybe a "Do you like A or B" test.

---

Put some Pink Noise through both devices and record that.

I'll look at it.

And go from there.

 

[NorthSky]

Oh yes and regarding the phase difference I'll have my friend look into that. Tubes are funny things and gain stages sometimes invert polarity.

Not only analog reverts polarity, digital too. I don't know which one does it more often though.

 

[NorthSky]

Unrelated question when I do @screename do you guys get a notification alerting you to the thread? Another forum with this software does this and I like using it more than the multiquote if I need to type a long reply.

1. Yes. ...Red alerts.
2. Multiquoting: I found out to be restricted to the same page. I tried more than one page before but to no avail.

 

[amirm]

@amirm thanks for giving your subjective opinion, yours was one I was looking forward to hearing. To hear the distortion was this on headphones or speakers? I will need to have a closer listen to the tube file to see if I can detect it. To me the major differences were the EQ and dynamics

I tested it using my Etymotic In-ear Monitors using my laptop.

 

[TBone]

Two, the original recordings are often the worst sounding ones. Only the well recorded masters are worth collecting, and they ain't cheap either.

couldn't disagree more ... the vast majority of remasters within my collection are far more compressed.

 

[Sal1950]

You and I Paul, are 100% in agreement.

Well if I'm understanding you folks right, that makes the 3 of us that voted for option 1.
Like I said in my first post here, I believed file 2 was the best sounding over all and being a tube guy voted as such.
Once again I wasn't really wrong, only mistaken.

 

[NorthSky]

Well if I'm understanding you folks right, that makes the 3 of us that voted for option 1.
Like I said in my first post here, I believed file 2 was the best sounding over all and being a tube guy voted as such.
Once again I wasn't really wrong, only mistaken.

Morning Sal,

[[[[[]]]]]
Members who voted for 'File 1 is solid state, file 2 is tube'

• NorthSky
• Sal1950
• JoeWhip

I was certain that the best sounding file was the tube one (#2), so I voted for the first option, along with you and Joe. But #2 file is SS.
Paul, Amir, Frank, TBone, hvbias, also preferred the file number two; we all have good hearing for what sounds best.
The thing is this: More members were convinced that the SS file was the best sounding one (#2), and they were right.
Me I was certain that tube is the best sound; I was wrong, and I voted honestly with my ears and heart.
And to have been wrong for this test demonstrates that SS is superior, in all aspects of music listening (to me).
Why? Because there is no argument regarding this test and this test only. It is not an admission that SS sounds better, but here it does.

What that truly means? Nothing more than what it is; people's own preference and difference of opinion when it comes to our music.
Preachers and sinners, they all going to heaven anyway when they all die; and the sinners will go through that door first, and they'll come out last.

Tubes are cool to look @ when glowing @ night; it goes well with analog rigs and TTs.
The distortion and flaws are all part of the experience.

SS gear is @ a higher level of son haute fidélité. Less masking of the flaws that are prone to the inconsistencies of analog rigs with tubes.
Digital wears down from hospital smell and antiseptic green walls, from therapy of the brain.
Analog requires more maintenance, and sounds more humane, less perfect, more normal in tandem with our life's habits.

But this test was clear; the SS music file sounds so much better with much more presence. And that, no matter what I said above; it all vaporized to let the music flow in the moment that it was flowing. And SS won. I lost because I thought tube was the better sounding one, and I was just "deadpool" wrong.
Now my life is going to change for the better, and if I want to explore more distortion and less presence in life I should invest in tubes.

@hvbias, this was a fun test; if you have more like that bring them on.

 

[amirm]

Thanks Bob. Would be good to have that feedback on what sounded best so that we can see if we all converge to solid state or not.

 

[RayDunzl]

Would be good to have that feedback on what sounded best so that we can see if we all converge to solid state or not.

I'm not convinced this is a test of SS vs VT...

Go back to the description of the devices:

• The tube tape pre is based around a DHT final stage with Lundahl amorphous output transformers (other two stages are high gm tubes, cap coupled with solid state CCS loading in both stages).

• The solid state version is based around the Pass Pearl 2 DIY phono stage that has EQ modified. ADC is from Ayre.

Maybe I'm wrong, but what are we comparing?

Tube vs SS doesn't (to me) account for the frequency response differences if we assume two 'flat' preamps.

 

[TBone]

But #2 file is SS.
Paul, Amir, Frank, TBone, hvbias, also preferred the file number two;

Not necessarily true; my preference# is not on record ...

 

[Sal1950]

Interesting split in the votes at this point.
I was focusing mainly on the simmer and air I thought I heard with the cymbals.
Since I'm an old tube guy I went with the choice as tube that sounded best to me.
We shall see.

Morning Sal,

[[[[[]]]]]
Members who voted for 'File 1 is solid state, file 2 is tube'

• NorthSky
• Sal1950
• JoeWhip

I was certain that the best sounding file was the tube one (#2), so I voted for the first option

Tubes are cool to look @ when glowing @ night; it goes well with analog rigs and TTs.
The distortion and flaws are all part of the experience

@hvbias, this was a fun test; if you have more like that bring them on.

Just shows how we all can be victims of our preconceived ideas and bias.
I voted tube cause I always felt that the revealing of fine inner detail and air in the midrange and top end were the strengths I admired from tube power amps, particularly my VTL mono blocks so I voted with my ears and heart.
But your right Bob, nothing warms the soul on a cold winters night like listening in a darkened room to the glow of a couple rows of tubes. That in itself has to bring something to the sound quality, after all isn't it really about the emotional experience? It's a fact that a tasty cocktail or some nice drawing herb can improve the perceived SQ of a system, why not the visual tube experience drawing us closer to the music?

Guess now I don't have to feel so bad about unloading my VTL amps and the rest before my move to FL. LOL

 

[fas42]

SS and tubes can both work, but when they're not quite right then the tube variation is probably easier to live with. I've never, ever used valves, and this gives me strong motivation to get it right - the unpleasantness of poor transistor sound "can drive a man insane", but once they're over a reasonable hurdle of decency the warm, fluffy blanket of lesser valve reproduction does nothing to attract ...

 

[NorthSky]

@Ray, yes, what was it exactly we voted for; you just mentioned some. It would be cool to find a real test performed between Tube and SS; there must be some we can find online, or another one here which would be closer than the one we participated in.
And tubes, should it be all tubes in the full chain; from the source, to the preamp and amp?

@ TBone, ok, not on record.

I'm not drawing a conclusion of this or that, I know what we like, the majority of us, and that was file #2, and as Ray said...from whichever it originated from.
This wasn't a scientific test, it was just for fun. And we know that the best advanced science is the one constantly questioning.
Ten years from now, we'll be adding a special mix of air in our rooms for better acoustic retrieval...maybe not.

@Sal, when I voted for file #2 as the more pleasant one, I had a secret hope somewhere deeper down.
Frank mentioned the main general attributes between SS and tube.

 

[hvbias]

Nothing like a couple of days on the water and even fresher air to start the week.

I wasn't either when the "which was which" was opposite to what I expected when I cheated and looked at the files.

So, I went back:



Oh.

We have an LP source (so no "original digits" to look at) - now we don't, see below

We have a tube preamp (with or without RIAA?) - I see it says "Tape tube preamp" whatever that means.

We have a Pass (inspired or designed) DIY SS Phono stage (With RIAA?) (with modified EQ (whatever that means) in it) - this one?



Me too.

Now I see this:



Ok, I have no clue how this is an "SS vs Tube" listening test right now. I don't know what it is, maybe a "Do you like A or B" test.

---

Put some Pink Noise through both devices and record that.

I'll look at it.

And go from there.

To reiterate (for the third time?) there is no vinyl involved anywhere in this comparison. Since there is no sharp rock dragging through a piece of plastic there would be no RIAA either. Tape Project use IEC EQ. It is impossible for the preamps to be "flat", think about the RIAA curve, there will always be some deviation depending on the implementation if it is done in hardware. The only perfectly flat EQ would be if it were done digitally.

Copy and paste of the first post:

A sample from a famous jazz album, one done with tube equipment and one done all solid state. See if you can pick which is which, which one you enjoyed the sound of more or anything else you feel like adding. The levels are not perfectly matched, so feel free to do that if you wish. No cheating by analyzing the files in software

This was not a tubes vs solid state, are tubes better than solid state (or vice versa) or any other holy war. It was a fun, non scientific poll and I admitted early on that it should have been reworded to say which one did you prefer the sound of more. I'm sorry the mere mention of vacuum tubes gets some peoples blood boiling...

Bob I will be doing more of these, but they won't be with equipment differences but with different digital versions/mastering. And the polls will clearly be which one do you prefer.

And my subjective opinion on which one I prefer, it is the tube DHT unit which sounds closer to the HDTracks hi-res file.

@amirm would you know of any software I could use to analyze the distortion in the files?

 

[RayDunzl]

Noted.

 

[Sal1950]

I've never, ever used valves, and this gives me strong motivation to get it right

My, you must really be a youngster. Or I'm just so damn old I can't imagine someone that didn't come to audio from a tube background.