- Joined
- Jul 21, 2019
- Messages
- 2,774
- Likes
- 4,080
With a remarkable 99% male demographic, I guess you could consider Stereophile as a female repellent.What I don't understand is why people read those rags.
With a remarkable 99% male demographic, I guess you could consider Stereophile as a female repellent.What I don't understand is why people read those rags.
You bring up a different point, and you may be on to something but I honestly believe that the acoustic harmonics missing would likely be lost due to the speakers or recording rather than anything else. But now we're into the realm of the unknown as to what can and cannot be recorded. Then we have to determine whether the signal altered by tubes' harmonic distortion has a greater affect than the missing harmonics being introduced.Fully agree.
I do wonder sometimes whether some of the complex and subtle harmonics of acoustic instruments are not picked up to their full extend during a recording, or are not fully reproduced by the listener's speakers. In such cases, adding similar harmonics artificially during playback may result in s sound that is more akin to hearing a live acoustic instrument. I use a sonic exciter in my signal path, and the harmonics it adds - if used in moderation - do seem to make voices and acoustic instruments more 'lively'.
It was an off-target implication that, to the individual listener, those two alternatives are indistinguishable.
Aaaah so we get to the "circle of confusion" that Dr. Toole has warned us about - the recording engineer and production team, choice of microphones, microphone placement, room reverb, added digital reverb in post-production, etc. That all has a HUGE effect on capturing the sound; then you have the mixing engineer whose personal listening preferences come into play - he can choose to make the drums more prominent, compress the vocals a bit more, reduce the high hat a touch, etc. At best, your hifi system is replaying the producer's unique vision (he may even be correcting for bad mic placement!) but it is NOT replaying what was heard in the studio if you actually sat there. The fact that studios use $9,000 tube microphone plus compression to warm up a singer's voice for recording says all we need to know.From my perspective on the production side, this is his argument's own goal. What is this less tangible thing that is retained? He would say soul, emotion, euphoria, engagement, whatever. I would confirm: so that's all in the file, but it's in danger of being stripped away, so it needs to be consciously retained? He would agree. I would ask him - how did it get in the file in the first place? Immediately after the microphone diaphragm everything goes through cold, hard, sterile solid state, and, even worse, digital. If we put it in that way, why can't we get it out the same way?
No, nothing to do with circles of confusion - merely a question: why does JA2 need tubes downstream of the file, to "retain" stuff that was put there by solid state equipment and software simulations?Aaaah so we get to the "circle of confusion" that Dr. Toole has warned us about - the recording engineer and production team, choice of microphones, microphone placement, room reverb, added digital reverb in post-production, etc. That all has a HUGE effect on capturing the sound; then you have the mixing engineer whose personal listening preferences come into play - he can choose to make the drums more prominent, compress the vocals a bit more, reduce the high hat a touch, etc. At best, your hifi system is replaying the producer's unique vision (he may even be correcting for bad mic placement!) but it is NOT replaying what was heard in the studio if you actually sat there. The fact that studios use $9,000 tube microphone plus compression to warm up a singer's voice for recording says all we need to know.
Agreed.But also, obviously this applies to one degree or another to ALL our sighted listening experiences. Which would included your reviews of speakers as I'm sure you'll agree. Could just be sighted bias.
Yes but I will admit that, if I have my own doubts, I will do some of my own measurements.But, that the speakers you review do sound different is highly plausible, so even though you have no access to the measurements before writing the review, you feel the sonic impressions are warranted.
LOL ExactlyNo, nothing to do with circles of confusion - merely a question: why does JA2 need tubes downstream of the file, to "retain" stuff that was put there by solid state equipment and software simulations?
If the knobs were just using resistors and caps, then its obvious.This being ASR, the answer would be obvious - examining what if anything was done with the circuits of those knobs, measurements, blind test - so I presume you were channeling Jim Austin there?![]()
No, nothing to do with circles of confusion - merely a question: why does JA2 need tubes downstream of the file, to "retain" stuff that was put there by solid state equipment and software simulations?
Spend more time designing, building, measuring and listening to them and it will make more sense.I know this is your hobby horse but it still doesn't make sense.
why don't his subjective reviewers and their readers don't hear these impairments?
Of course, the little bitty TV pentodes had a little bitty cheap-as-dirt output transformer that barely did the voice range.well, of course!
Vaccum tube have je ne sais quoi.
Some have far more than others.
Little 7-pin miniature power pentodes used for single-ended audio output in 1960s US color TVs -- not so much.
Direct heated power triodes like the 2A3, 300B, 45, or 50 are drippin' with it.
![]()
Regarding distortion, which is a non linear phenomenon, the plot thickens a lot.
Spend more time designing, building, measuring and listening to them and it will make more sense.
Well -- there is that.Of course, the little bitty TV pentodes had a little bitty cheap-as-dirt output transformer that barely did the voice range.
I can't categorize made-up concepts. Tube amps have widely divergent distortion levels and profiles, widely divergent source impedances, widely divergent overload and recovery behavior.That's a non-response to the problems I posed to your claim. Your technical experience doesn't entail that all the arguments you make are sound. For reasons I've given, you seem to be aiming at a straw man, one where "tube sound" is discussed without any distinctions whatsoever.
Many people who design, build, measure and listen to tube amps (not just manufacturers) would agree with what I wrote - that tube amps *can* sound different from solid state (whereas it would be more rare for those distortions to be audible between solid state amps). So it's relevant to have a category of "tube sound" where specific characteristics can be discussed.
There is nothing about having a "tube amp" category that means it can't be measured, since tube amps CAN measure differently, sometimes audibly so. The only way to cling to your position, it seems to me, is to do some sort of tautology like "I'm referring to the category of tube amps that don't measure or sound different from each other or from solid state - therefore there is no Real Tube Sound."
.