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

[MakeMineVinyl]

I don't see that happening here at all. Our minds are wide open to investigating any claims that can be supported by any scientific method.

Sorry but that's an oxymoron. If you left out the 'supported by any scientific method' I might be able to take what you said seriously, but apparently you can't believe the concept that perhaps, just perhaps, we don't know everything there is to know - perhaps even on a mature subject like audio. I'm not knocking scientific method - I do it every day during my audio design activities at work - but where curiosity ends, all progress stops. Alternative views might on closer examination be utter shit (and subjective ones usually are), but that doesn't excuse not having at least a semblance of an open mind. Who the hell knows, maybe one day we'll come up with a test which truly quantifies the dynamic behavior of audio components with infinitely complex signals like music which reveals behaviors we are blind to now.

 

[100rounddrum]

There is no audible difference between ss and tube amps.

Then again, I can’t hear a difference between the Senn HD800 and HD650. But I have no hearing damage (tested it out at the audiologist a week ago). He actually said I have fantastic hearing.

But yeah, snake oil as always. Just like the HD800 is a rebranded HD650 with bigger cups.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Fremer has supposedly had some blind success. He picked out amps in the original challenge - https://www.stereophile.com/features/113/index.html

Do you know which VTL monoblocks were used? The internal link in the article is broken.

I found measurements for the Adcom amp here; I'm guessing the differences that were heard were due to the VTL.

and then cables here, allegedly -
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB120044692027492991

Anyone know the back story? Is he having us on?

Would you mind summarising? WSJ is behind a paywall.

EDIT: although I couldn't find the identity/measurements of the VTL, there were some measurements of its presumably larger sibling of the same era here. There are numerous reasons to think it would produce potentially audible differences from the Adcom, not least of which is its 1.5 Ohm output impedance.

 

[ahofer]

Do you know which VTL monoblocks were used? The internal link in the article is broken.

I found measurements for the Adcom amp here; I'm guessing the differences that were heard were due to the VTL.



Would you mind summarising? WSJ is behind a paywall.

VTL 300B monoblocks (https://www.stereophile.com/content/blind-listening-page-2)

WSJ (Lee Gomes, re Home Entertainment Show)
"
Portals became an official exhibitor at T.H.E. Show last week. I set up a room with two sound systems, identical except for one component. Everything except the speakers was hidden behind screens. (A shout-out to Totem Acoustics for the Forest speakers loan and to Magnum Dynalab for the MD-308 amps. They all sounded sensational.)

With the same music playing on both, participants used a remote control to switch between the two, and then tell me which sounded better.

One of the tests compared a high-quality MP3 file from an iPod with a CD on a $3,000 player. Three-quarters of the 24 people taking this test preferred the CD.

That was no surprise. However, when I played .wav files on the iPod -- these are digital but uncompressed files; I was connecting the headphone jack to the amplifier -- 52% of the 21 who took this test preferred the iPod.

That made me smile, not because snooty audiophiles got the "wrong" answer, but because it suggests great sound can come from popular, cheap gear.

I also tested speaker cables, which are controversial even among audiophiles. Some spend tens of thousands of dollars on cabling, while others consider it an absurd waste of money.

Using two identical CD players, I tested a $2,000, eight-foot pair of Sigma Retro Gold cables from Monster Cable, which are as thick as your thumb, against 14-gauge, hardware-store speaker cable. Many audiophiles say they are equally good. I couldn't hear a difference and was a wee bit suspicious that anyone else could. But of the 39 people who took this test, 61% said they preferred the expensive cable.
That may not be much of a margin for two products with such drastically different prices, but I was struck by how the best-informed people at the show -- like John Atkinson and Michael Fremer of Stereophile Magazine -- easily picked the expensive cable."

 

[Julf]

Sorry but that's an oxymoron. If you left out the 'supported by any scientific method' I might be able to take what you said seriously, but apparently you can't believe the concept that perhaps, just perhaps, we don't know everything there is to know - perhaps even on a mature subject like audio. I'm not knocking scientific method - I do it every day during my audio design activities at work - but where curiosity ends, all progress stops. Alternative views might on closer examination be utter shit (and subjective ones usually are), but that doesn't excuse not having at least a semblance of an open mind. Who the hell knows, maybe one day we'll come up with a test which truly quantifies the dynamic behavior of audio components with infinitely complex signals like music which reveals behaviors we are blind to now.

The scientific method is fundamentally based on an open mind and curiosity. It is also totally based on "we don't know everything there is to know". It is a method to learn new things and allowing us a certain level of confidence in actually knowing what they are, as opposed to beliefs and wild fantasies.

 

[Julf]

VTL 300B monoblocks (https://www.stereophile.com/content/blind-listening-page-2)

WSJ (Lee Gomes, re Home Entertainment Show)
"
Portals became an official exhibitor at T.H.E. Show last week. I set up a room with two sound systems, identical except for one component. Everything except the speakers was hidden behind screens. (A shout-out to Totem Acoustics for the Forest speakers loan and to Magnum Dynalab for the MD-308 amps. They all sounded sensational.)

With the same music playing on both, participants used a remote control to switch between the two, and then tell me which sounded better.

One of the tests compared a high-quality MP3 file from an iPod with a CD on a $3,000 player. Three-quarters of the 24 people taking this test preferred the CD.

That was no surprise. However, when I played .wav files on the iPod -- these are digital but uncompressed files; I was connecting the headphone jack to the amplifier -- 52% of the 21 who took this test preferred the iPod.

That made me smile, not because snooty audiophiles got the "wrong" answer, but because it suggests great sound can come from popular, cheap gear.

I also tested speaker cables, which are controversial even among audiophiles. Some spend tens of thousands of dollars on cabling, while others consider it an absurd waste of money.

Using two identical CD players, I tested a $2,000, eight-foot pair of Sigma Retro Gold cables from Monster Cable, which are as thick as your thumb, against 14-gauge, hardware-store speaker cable. Many audiophiles say they are equally good. I couldn't hear a difference and was a wee bit suspicious that anyone else could. But of the 39 people who took this test, 61% said they preferred the expensive cable.
That may not be much of a margin for two products with such drastically different prices, but I was struck by how the best-informed people at the show -- like John Atkinson and Michael Fremer of Stereophile Magazine -- easily picked the expensive cable."

Right, so no controls, and blind rather than double-blind. Harry Houdini, James Randi, Penn Jillette or even Uri Geller would have had a field day.

 

[TankTop]

All this begs the question, how well can we record audio without coloring it? Are you simply trying to re-create what the sound engineer intended?

 

[Julf]

All this begs the question, how well can we record audio without coloring it? Are you simply trying to re-create what the sound engineer intended?

With most modern music, that is the only thing you really can recreate. Most recordings are heavily processed composites of tens or hundreds of separately recorded components.

 

[MDAguy]

I think one reason tubes are seen has having a different sound is a lot of tube amps historically had a lot of distortion relative to SS amps... so much that it manifested itself into a "Tone" ... probably due to a significant 2nd and 3rd order (hopefully not more) distortion.

I know in the case of many well designed modern tubes ... for example my McIntosh C1100 pre-amp (Freq response of +0/-.5db from 20Hz to 20KHz, 0.005% THD, S/N 107dB) measures like many solid state amps.. and practically no feedback needed. So what's to hear? it's a pre-amp, and a good one at that, tube or otherwise.

 

[MDAguy]

With most modern music, that is the only thing you really can recreate. Most recordings are heavily processed composites of tens or hundreds of separately recorded components.

which is why a lot of "audiophiles" tend to prefer recordings from the 50's and 60's..

 

[andreasmaaan]

VTL 300B monoblocks (https://www.stereophile.com/content/blind-listening-page-2)

WSJ (Lee Gomes, re Home Entertainment Show)
"
Portals became an official exhibitor at T.H.E. Show last week. I set up a room with two sound systems, identical except for one component. Everything except the speakers was hidden behind screens. (A shout-out to Totem Acoustics for the Forest speakers loan and to Magnum Dynalab for the MD-308 amps. They all sounded sensational.)

With the same music playing on both, participants used a remote control to switch between the two, and then tell me which sounded better.

One of the tests compared a high-quality MP3 file from an iPod with a CD on a $3,000 player. Three-quarters of the 24 people taking this test preferred the CD.

That was no surprise. However, when I played .wav files on the iPod -- these are digital but uncompressed files; I was connecting the headphone jack to the amplifier -- 52% of the 21 who took this test preferred the iPod.

That made me smile, not because snooty audiophiles got the "wrong" answer, but because it suggests great sound can come from popular, cheap gear.

I also tested speaker cables, which are controversial even among audiophiles. Some spend tens of thousands of dollars on cabling, while others consider it an absurd waste of money.

Using two identical CD players, I tested a $2,000, eight-foot pair of Sigma Retro Gold cables from Monster Cable, which are as thick as your thumb, against 14-gauge, hardware-store speaker cable. Many audiophiles say they are equally good. I couldn't hear a difference and was a wee bit suspicious that anyone else could. But of the 39 people who took this test, 61% said they preferred the expensive cable.
That may not be much of a margin for two products with such drastically different prices, but I was struck by how the best-informed people at the show -- like John Atkinson and Michael Fremer of Stereophile Magazine -- easily picked the expensive cable."

Thanks. It's hard to know what to make of the speaker cable test. Did JA and MF "easily" pick the best cable once, or a statistically significant number of times from repeat trials?

Interestingly FWIW, 61% of 39 (i.e. 24/39 correct outcomes across the whole group) falls somewhat short of a 95% confidence level (which would require 26 correct outcomes out of 39 trials).

 

[Julf]

which is why a lot of "audiophiles" tend to prefer recordings from the 50's and 60's..

Right. What was that quote (attributed to Alan Parsons) again? "Audiophiles don't use their equipment to listen to your music. Audiophiles use your music to listen to their equipment."

 

[TankTop]

With most modern music, that is the only thing you really can recreate. Most recordings are heavily processed composites of tens or hundreds of separately recorded components.

I have a friend with a recording studio that has terabytes of digitized audio just on the piano alone.

I love what Amir and ASR does, setting the benchmark for audio purity. It’s a great thing to know so you can decide what you like and why.

 

[Julf]

I think one reason tubes are seen has having a different sound is a lot of tube amps historically had a lot of distortion relative to SS amps... so much that it manifested itself into a "Tone" ... probably due to a significant 2nd and 3rd order (hopefully not more) distortion.

And, as has been mentioned many times, high output impedance because of the output transformer, leading to uneven frequency response.

and practically no feedback needed.

You say that as if feedback is bad. Actually most tube amps have a lot of feedback too - it definitely improves the sound.

 

[Julf]

I have a friend with a recording studio that has terabytes of digitized audio just on the piano alone.

But does he have that ultimate killer sample we all are looking for - the one with two freight trains loaded with harpsichords colliding?

 

[andreasmaaan]

I think one reason tubes are seen has having a different sound is a lot of tube amps historically had a lot of distortion relative to SS amps... so much that it manifested itself into a "Tone" ... probably due to a significant 2nd and 3rd order (hopefully not more) distortion.

And, as has been mentioned many times, high output impedance because of the output transformer, leading to uneven frequency response.

And, I would add, soft clipping.

 

[SIY]

Right, so no controls, and blind rather than double-blind. Harry Houdini, James Randi, Penn Jillette or even Uri Geller would have had a field day.

And self reported. Did I mention my wife, Morgan Fairchild? Who I’ve seen naked.

 

[MDAguy]

You say that as if feedback is bad. Actually most tube amps have a lot of feedback too - it definitely improves the sound.

referring to it's use on Solid State.

 

[MDAguy]

And, as has been mentioned many times, high output impedance because of the output transformer, leading to uneven frequency response.

which is why McIntosh uses an output transformer on all amps, tube and SS...

 

[Julf]

referring to it's use on Solid State.

Feedback is feedback, no matter if it is a tube amp or a solid state amp. Exactly the same purpose, exactly the same effect. So not sure about your point.