If "Tube Sound" Is a Myth, Why Tubes?

[BillG]

ultimate goal should not be perfect reproducing of a sound recording

I'm not sure why you write such a thing on this forum, especially since most of us here are focused on high fidelity, audibly transparent electronics, and that should definitely be the goal of such.

When we get into the acoustics (i.e. the speakers and room) yeah... perfect reproduction is much trickier to achieve I'd imagine, and it's not something that I strive for either, but rather what is the most pleasing to me. Perhaps someone with more knowledge of acoustical engineering would share their thoughts on this...

 

[Julf]

And one can easily argue that something essential is lost when the base-line for the artistic statement is an auto-tuned bit of over-production.

That is a rather different discussion.

 

[BillG]

And one can easily argue that something essential is lost when the base-line for the artistic statement is an auto-tuned bit of over-production.

People said the same thing about effects pedals, yet here we are. People said the same thing about synthesizers, yet here we are. People said the same thing about computers in the studio, yet here we are...

 

[Julf]

People said the same thing about effects pedals, yet here we are. People said the same thing about synthesizers, yet here we are. People said the same thing about computers in the studio, yet here we are...

Before that, they looked down on the piano, because all you needed to get the right note was to hit the right key...

 

[firedog]

Tube amps or preamps can sound different. I can A/B in my setup between a passive, SS, and tube preamp. The tube sounds a little different than the other two. I personally think it sounds worse, but that's taste. I occasionally listen to it b/c it's a bit more of a "relaxed" sound and detail is seemingly a bit less emphasized.

I can imagine others would prefer it. I'd guess the tube preamp measures worse, but most audiophiles are actually looking for sound they like, or sound that fits a preconceived notion of what a system "should" sound like.

They aren't actually looking for accuracy. Many would reject the sound of perfectly accurate reproduction if they heard it.

 

[Willem]

In short, they prefer to be the recording engineer who knows better than the musician.

 

[SIY]

In short, they prefer to be the recording engineer who knows better than the musician.

And that's OK, since it's their living room, their system, their recordings.

My issue is more of a practical one- if you have a broken component, you can't turn the inaccuracy off or adjust it to suit different recordings.

 

[rwortman]

I don't think "what the artist intended" is sacrosanct either. I don't always agree with what the mix engineer did. I have some recordings that I wish they had sold me the project file so I could "fix" it so I liked it better. Some engineers seem to like an upper midrangey sort of splashy sound that I don't like at all.

 

[Julf]

I don't think "what the artist intended" is sacrosanct either. I don't always agree with what the mix engineer did. I have some recordings that I wish they had sold me the project file so I could "fix" it so I liked it better. Some engineers seem to like an upper midrangey sort of splashy sound that I don't like at all.

I have some records where I wish they had sold me the score so I could play it better.

 

[amadeuswus]

Between this thread and the one about the DarkVoice headphone amp, I am feeling an irrational need to try Quicksilver's Headphone Amplifier. Wish we had ASR measurements....

http://quicksilveraudio.com/products/headphone-amplifier/

 

[Juhazi]

My take on this scene is PrimaLuna Prologue Three preamp with 12AX7 tubes (two sets). I use it in my secondary set in a rather unorthodox setup.

Sources are Yamaha CDX-993, NAD 5120 with ProJect cartridge and MuFi RIAA, Audio-GD NFB-12 and Yamaha KX-380. Then I have a Minidsp 2x4HD between preamp and XTZ AP100 (classA/AB) power amp and Hypex DS2.0 subwoofer amp! I also have a NHT Power2 amp (ICEpower) that I can swap.

I call the PrimaLuna "distortion generator" because of this

and I think that I can hear the warmth and musicality it gives! Actually it is just for the fun of having tube gear without the problems with tube power amps! Most of my gear is second hand, speakers are mostly diy. The biggest factors in sound quality are speakers and the minidsp!

 

[Frank Dernie]

I still think that whilst valves can produce perfectly acceptable performance from well engineered low level components such as DACs, preamps and headphone anps (though they are often used as USP for poorly engineered dross) power amps are another kettle of fish.
I have often heard it said "people like the sound of transformers" and with valve power amplifiers they are effectively unavoidable. All reasonably priced and sized output transformers have pretty high levels of low frequency distortion. Since music has most of its energy at lower frequencies (check a spectrum of any bit of music you like) and more of the harmonic distortion products from low frequency distortion are in the audio band, obviously, a valve power amp playing typical music may well be adding most of its distortion harmonics in the low and mid frequency region which may be where the warmth reputation comes from.
I had a big Jadis amp on loan for a while and it was sort of like adding some caramel sauce to everything. Nice on some stuff, inappropriate on others, so it still comes back to better using a plugin to add this if and when you want it with a transparent system rather than end up with the audio equivalent of caramel on your onion rings whether you want it or not.
My amp at that time was a Spectral DMA180 fwiw and the dealer had both.

 

[board]

I'm not an expert in audio in any way, and I have no personal experience with tube amps, although I've listened to at least one tube amp briefly, but despite the visual fascination as well as the preference for a certain distortion profile, then I think an altered frequency response is part of what attracts some people to tube amps.
I've remastered a fair amount of music for fun, and I find that frequency response accounts for many/most of the differences we hear in audio gear (especially for something like phono cartridges, where the frequensy response varies wildly from model to model).
Here are some measurements of tube amps from Stereophile. It should be noted that the curvy lines are with a simulated speaker load. Some people have argued that the simulated load doesn't represent a real-life speaker load and is too light. So using real speakers would change the frequency response even more.

 

[Frank Dernie]

I'm not an expert in audio in any way, and I have no personal experience with tube amps, although I've listened to at least one tube amp briefly, but despite the visual fascination as well as the preference for a certain distortion profile, then I think an altered frequency response is part of what attracts some people to tube amps.
I've remastered a fair amount of music for fun, and I find that frequency response accounts for many/most of the differences we hear in audio gear (especially for something like phono cartridges, where the frequensy response varies wildly from model to model).
Here are some measurements of tube amps from Stereophile. It should be noted that the curvy lines are with a simulated speaker load. Some people have argued that the simulated load doesn't represent a real-life speaker load and is too light. So using real speakers would change the frequency response even more.

View attachment 38548

View attachment 38549

View attachment 38550

View attachment 38551

View attachment 38552

View attachment 38553

View attachment 38554

I completely agree.
Even low feedback solid state designs with high output impedances alter the frequency response too, probably enough to be heard.

 

[Wombat]

'phile SETs: Massage in a bottle.

 

[board]

I completely agree.
Even low feedback solid state designs with high output impedances alter the frequency response too, probably enough to be heard.

I used a cheap microphone to record some songs played through my two-box Naim amp as well as an Arcam A39, and when I compared the frequency responses, they differed a bit - not by a whole lot, but there were some differences.

 

[DonH56]

Make sure the mic is not moved during your tests. But yah, agree with you and Frank that amps can sound different driving a real load. Not usually as much as people gush...

 

[Willem]

The challenge for an amplifier designer is then to make sure that these differences are as small as possible, or even non-existent in real life. The challenge for speaker designers is to ensure that their speakers are easy to drive and have no crazy impedance curves etc.

 

[board]

Make sure the mic is not moved during your tests. But yah, agree with you and Frank that amps can sound different driving a real load. Not usually as much as people gush...

I made completely sure not to move the mic at all.
And I agree that although amps can sound different driving a real load, then it's not the night and day differences that so many gullible audiophiles wax about. With the two amps in question I still felt the difference was subtle - on some songs it was noticeable, but not life-changing; on other songs it was almost non-existing.
What's a real pity is that if most magazines even bother to measure amps at all they usually don't measure them with a dummy load, and if they do use a load then it's often not heavy enough.
So then if they don't measure with a load, we see useless measurements of completely flat frequency responses on all the amps being measured. "So all amps must sound the same".

 

[JS Hoover]

After rebuilding a lot of (ironically) SS vintage and doing comparisons, I've come to believe that the biggest ingredient of "tube sound" was/is: how transistorized equipment uses so many low voltage, polarized ELECTROLYTIC CAPS in the way of what is amplifying the signal path...while tube equipment does not; in addition to: the tube equipment having metal polypropylene (an obviously better-grade part than electrolytics to begin with and far more electrically stable in a high frequency circuit), non-polar caps of at least 400 volts in its design (wherever there's crossover filtering or blocking involved).
There still, for example, would've been in the early days during the changeover to Solid State (1965-1970) a lot more of an active "awareness" to try to "voice" tube sound by using transistors than there would be now. However, the rise of high powered amps brought to market required spec. sheets proclaiming the lowest distortion as *thee* selling point to justify their bombastic expense to a domestic installation...to the extreme -almost- of how today, I think, the practice has evolved to the point of SS amps being designed "clinical" on purpose. There was always a big problem with tube bass distortion interfering with LP rumble in the early days and the lack of high wattage (short of a pair of Marantz model 9's) resulting in bad woofer damping. This is why the "loudness" control is on nearly all antique amps.

BTW "tube sound": I've experimented with modding a lot of '70s Sansui/Marantz/Tandberg receivers and integrateds (I picked up at flea markets and thrift stores when they were pre-Ebay prices) where, I discovered: *just* by subbing non-polar, metal polypro capacitors in place of any electrolytic 10uF-and-under, the tone afterward was decidedly more transparent and UNshrill at a loud volume level. If THAT is not a characteristic akin to "tube sound"...then, it's not even something the accolytes to it can even claim is real if they feel they can't even *describe* it.