If tubes amplifiers measure poorly, why are they perceived as sounding better?

[Chr1]

I guarantee that I am not part of a fanboy base of buyers who was misled by reading too much woo in the audio press. I bought my valve amplifier second hand for a good price, and use Neumann KH310s as my daily drivers. Which I love. I also happen to enjoy the euphonic distortion of the VTL valve amp with some of my other speakers too. I do not claim valves are high fidelity. Just that they are enjoyable. To me.
This constant insinuation that I am deluded or just foolishly wasting my money pisses me off tbh. The enjoyment of music is subjective and not always logical. This is the bit that lots here ignore. It also needn't be so damn tribal. I use DSP and room treatment plus subs with both the valve amplifier and the Neumanns. Just wish people could see past the "tubes are old and stupid" point of view. No one is saying that you have to like or enjoy them. Just that it is ok if you do.

The question in the title of the thread is about trying to figure out why.
I say there's more to it than just delusion and/or placebo.

 

[Jim Taylor]

I guarantee that I am not part of a fanboy base of buyers who was misled by reading too much woo in the audio press. I bought my valve amplifier second hand and use Neumann KH310s as my daily drivers. Which I love. I happen to enjoy the euphonic distortion of the VTL valve amp with some of my other speakers too. I do not claim valves are high fidelity. Just that they are enjoyable. To me.
This constant insinuation that I am deluded or just foolishly wasting my money pisses me off tbh. The enjoyment of music is subjective and not always logical. This is the bit that lots here ignore. It also needn't be so tribal. I use DSP and room treatment plus subs with both the valve amplifier and the Neumanns. Just wish people could see past the "tubes are old and stupid" point of view. No one is saying that you have to like them. Just that it is ok if you do.

The question in the title of the thread is about trying to figure out why.
I say there's more to it than just delusion and/or placebo.

In addition to the many members who post in this thread, there are potentially hundreds or thousands of visitors (1,506 guests at this exact moment) who scan these pages for information. Admittedly, it is unlikely that the majority stumble across this particular thread.
However ... the ones that do need to be apprised of the fact that there are scam artists and manipulative people out there who try to lure them into buying overpriced and under-performing tube gear. As I said, that gear is nowadays the majority of the market offerings.

There are members here who know and understand a great deal about tube gear, far beyond the limits of audio applications. They have designed tube gear, and are quite competent to critique tube circuits and characteristics. They could design and manufacture tube gear, and offer it for sale to the public.

They don't.

You know the properties of tubes. You like the properties of tubes. That is fine, because there is, after all, no gainsaying preference. But your preference is just your own, unique to you.
It's best to not accidentally enable the scam artists in this industry by advocating something that is, in all probability, not applicable to newbies.

You are a valued member here, and your content has been very interesting. So please ... don't take criticism of tubes personally.

 

[Chr1]

---

Thank you. And apologies if I have come accross as loud or argumentative at any point. That's not my intention.
I absolutely agree with you that we need to safeguard against people being fleeced. I would hope however, that this doesn't mean that people are unable to have constructive dialogue as to why they like one thing or another. Be it valves or anything else. I have read so much here of use and now find some of the trickier things concerning psychoacoustics very interesting. My feeling is that people's enjoyment of valves has more to do with this than anything else. This is why it is complex. Anyway, I think that it is ok and normal to disagree when talking about why people enjoy things. Reckon it would be weird if we didn't. Surely it is all part of healthy debate and discussion. And also how we learn imho.

 

[Madlop26]

In addition to the many members who post in this thread, there are potentially hundreds or thousands of visitors (1,506 guests at this exact moment) who scan these pages for information. Admittedly, it is unlikely that the majority stumble across this particular thread.
However ... the ones that do need to be apprised of the fact that there are scam artists and manipulative people out there who try to lure them into buying overpriced and under-performing tube gear. As I said, that gear is nowadays the majority of the market offerings.

There are members here who know and understand a great deal about tube gear, far beyond the limits of audio applications. They have designed tube gear, and are quite competent to critique tube circuits and characteristics. They could design and manufacture tube gear, and offer it for sale to the public.

They don't.

You know the properties of tubes. You like the properties of tubes. That is fine, because there is, after all, no gainsaying preference. But your preference is just your own, unique to you.
It's best to not accidentally enable the scam artists in this industry by advocating something that is, in all probability, not applicable to newbies.

You are a valued member here, and your content has been very interesting. So please ... don't take criticism of tubes personally.

I am not going to lie, I wish I could write like Jim

 

[Jim Taylor]

I am not going to lie, I wish I could write like Jim

Thank you for the compliment, but anyone - including you - can write like I do. Nothing I do is special or noteworthy.

1) Marshall your thoughts. Explanation without cogent order is confusing.
2) Understand your weaknesses (I have many) and avoid them.
3) Have the courage of your convictions. Not everyone will agree with you, but your inner sincerity will allow you to weather the storm.
4) Speak from your heart. Pretend the person with whom you are conversing is sitting right across from you at home, and talk as you would under those circumstances.
5) Be honest. If you're wrong (and I sometimes am), admit it. Honesty gives you a mental freedom unavailable to manipulators.
6) Eliminate weasel words. A streamlined presentation communicates your ideas most efficiently. (I frequently fall down here.)
7) Avoid emotional appeals. They are powerful, but dangerous. Facts are more useful.

Follow these guidelines and I assure you, you will write better than I do!

p.s. - Thank you, Mrs. Franklin ... wherever you are.

 

[LTig]

Any high output impedance amplifier adds an equalizing effect to your system. It can be inaudible, small or huge depending on the speaker/headphone impedance curve. It may be beneficial or bad. You can use https://github.com/rwhomeaudio/FreqRespGraph to calculate the effect on a frequency response. Example 9 shows a very bad case, low impedance Headphone (with peaking impedance at 100 Hz) on a very high output impedance amplifier:

View attachment 430235

Yep, and the result is a kind of loudness effect which people prefer, even in a blind test, especially when you calibrate the output level at 1 khz. Then any power amp with low output impedance is doomed to fail.

The sad thing is that one can get the same effect much cheaper with solid state amps, using EQ or tone controls, or by adding a power resistor of 1 to 4 Ohm between power amp output and speaker cable. I've read about a blind test where someone did the latter and got the magic tube sound this way. Pity I can't find it.

 

[Chr1]

I would love to see it. Have to say that I think that it is not as easy to emulate with simple EQ as is made out. I have tried. I reckon that you can probably do so with PKanes Distort, or other tube emulating VSTs. I doubt very much that you could, with anything more basic tho. However, I don't have a problem with being proven wrong! I think the harmonics involved are complex, and obviously dependant on the amplifier in question.
Not saying it isn't possible. Just I am yet to be convinced it is just a case of "do it with EQ". ie it's more than a simple bass hump with diminishing treble.

I'd also add that the speakers that I use with my valve amp are very benign in terms of their impedance (Tannoy V12s). They only play 70/80 Hz and up, so there is no wandering of frequency due to lack of power required. This is why subwoofers were invented surely?!

 

[LTig]

I would love to see it. Have to say that I think that it is not as easy to emulate with simple EQ as is made out here. I have tried. I reckon that you can probably do so with PKanes Distort, or other tube emulating VSTs.

These are rtwo different things. EQ has nothing to do with distortion, and good tube amps are below the level of audibility, hence my view that tube sound is mainly change of frequency response which is audible.

I'd also add that the speakers that I use with my valve amp are very benign in terms of their impedance (Tannoy V12s). They only play 70/80 Hz and up, so there is no wandering of frequency due to lack of power required. This is why subwoofers were invented surely?!

Well, if a speaker has a flat impedance curve it will not see the "loudness" effect. But those are few. For all others the change in frequency response is independent of power as long as the tube amp is not driven too close to the limits of its output transformer.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Or are you suggesting that they sound the same as SS?

I certainly am suggesting that a well designed tube preamplifier where distortion and noise are better than human hearing and the frequency response is flat will be indistinguishable in blind testing from a well designed solid state preamplifier where distortion and noise are better than human hearing and the frequency response is flat.

Power amplifiers are problematic. Tubes are high voltage, low current devices; whilst loudspeakers need lower voltages and higher currents. The only common fix is an output transformer. But even then, output impedance is not optimal. Meanwhile, low-coloration output transformers are extraordinarily difficult to design and are expensive. Even the very best are simply not as good as a solid-state output stage.

 

[sq225917]

There's no reason why we should prefer the lowest distortion producing components, only that we are unlikely to prefer those that produce the most distortion. Between those two extremes exist all reasonable preferences. Tube amps can produce very low distortion, many however don't.

People's preference in sound is based on what they've been brought up on and what ideas, and audible representations of those concepts, they've hitched their wagon to.

There's no reason we should all prefer the lowest distortion gear, none at all.

Low distortion gear being more accurate, more faithful, to the recorded event has almost nothing to do with individual preference.

Just accept the difference and move on.

 

[Chr1]

Indeed. Highest fidelity does not always equate with highest enjoyment. Fact.
High measuring Topping amps last a week, yet are lauded. SINAD is fetishised, which is weird to me tbh. On one hand people are telling me that there's no difference between valves and SS. It's all placebo.

Next thing it's, look how badly they measure. Why are you wasting your time and money. You're nuts.
Fact is that I mostly listen to my Neumanns.
What, exactly is the problem with liking both tho?

Anyhoo. It's mainly about source, speakers and rooms anyway, surely?

Apologies. Way too simplistic and also very hard to address to be honest.
I've inbibed a few... so I'm out.
For now.

 

[Timcognito]

Low distortion gear being more accurate, more faithful, to the recorded event has almost nothing to do with individual preference.

For many at ASR it does and measurements rule. Try to hold AA meeting at bar. Lots of tube devotes here, as for for quite few years that's all there was. Saying something is better when it just preference is your point but not to those want measurement assurance. Sounding better is a preference for sure but also more accurate is also a preference. This same type discussion is associated with vinyl.

 

[Madlop26]

Indeed. Highest fidelity does not always equate with highest enjoyment. Fact.

Chr1, I am not trying to be arrogant, but that is a BIG statement with huge implications, as a man of science i cannot take it granted unless you back it up with reliable data.

 

[Chr1]

Surely. I will fax it to you forthwith...

Just got to fix myself a bourbon.

 

[Timcognito]

On one hand people are telling me that there's no difference between valves and SS. It's all placebo.

Many have stated that tubes can measure well within the audible range and be indistinguishable from SS. I think the rub for me is that those have vested interest in tubes are selling them on there virtue of sounding more pleasing and natural when that is not true, is pure advertising fabrication. The same happens with vinyl as with tubes, THD, S/N, IMD, FR generally all favor digital and SS, but is it audible? Even here are there are no audibility lines on pertinent graphs, say for the average 20 year old person.

 

[Randolf]

Maybe it is interesting to see the actual equalizing effect of high amplifier output impedance on a more realistic scenario. I used Erin's Klipsch Forte IV measurements (perhaps a speaker people like to use with a tube amp) and simulated the effect of adding 1, 2 or 3 Ohm resistance to it using VituixCAD. This is the result:

I guess it might be benificial in the 50-80Hz region, but due to the rsising impedance from 700-5000 it may cause problems as well.

 

[SIY]

Maybe it is interesting to see the actual equalizing effect of high amplifier output impedance on a more realistic scenario. I used Erin's Klipsch Forte IV measurements (perhaps a speaker people like to use with a tube amp) and simulated the effect of adding 1, 2 or 3 Ohm resistance to it using VituixCAD. This is the result:

View attachment 430386
I guess it might be benificial in the 50-80Hz region, but due to the rsising impedance from 700-5000 it may cause problems as well.

The conflation of "high source impedance" and "tube amplifier" is inaccurate. Yes, lots of tube amps have high-ish source impedances compared to solid-state amps (whether significant or not depends on the speaker), but it's not because they use tubes as the active devices or that solid state amps use transistors. It's trivial to design a solid state amp to have a higher source impedance, if that's the coloration you're after.

Or you can hang a 1R power resistor at the amp output terminals .

 

[LTig]

Maybe it is interesting to see the actual equalizing effect of high amplifier output impedance on a more realistic scenario. I used Erin's Klipsch Forte IV measurements (perhaps a speaker people like to use with a tube amp) and simulated the effect of adding 1, 2 or 3 Ohm resistance to it using VituixCAD. This is the result:

View attachment 430386
I guess it might be benificial in the 50-80Hz region, but due to the rsising impedance from 700-5000 it may cause problems as well.

The effect is better to see when you match the curves in the middle of the spectrum (500 Hz?)

 

[mhardy6647]

Or you can hang a 1R power resistor at the amp output terminals .

That is a surprisingly popular thing to do in some circles.

Of course, so is stuffing $300 worth of boutique parts into a $30 "valve preamp" using repurposed Soviet or Chinese HF pentodes at truly weird operating points -- and raving over the warm and velvety sonic character imparted to that harsh, sterile digital stream fed through said "preamp" into a harsh, sterile solid state amplifier.

 

[MaxBuck]

"If tube amplifiers measure poorly, why are they perceived as sounding better?"

For the same general reason some people claim vinyl records played on a phonograph sound better than streamed music from Tidal, Qobuz and Idagio.