|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
100.35.67.208
In Reply to: RE: Why bother? posted by MikeCh on June 11, 2017 at 13:31:50
nt
Follow Ups:
did you get a clear answer to your question. :)
But feel free to conduct your own tests to educate yourself.
and find that experience-free speculation like yours provides zero value in the real world. Do enlighten us with which ones you've used.
But then, you know better than companies like Audio Research, right?
Do you mean yourself?
I own or have owned ARC, CJ, BAT, Hagerman, Music Reference, Melos, Sonic Frontiers, EAR, Musical Fidelity and other tube gear over the years.
You'd have to be ignorant to not understand (or be open to understanding) that tube microphonics have a large effect on sound quality, especially with phono and preamplifiers. Don't believe me? Do some objective testing yourself; just don't use an AC voltage probe to test for presence of RFI.
not every single tube in every single preamp/phono stage we use is so microphonic that it greatly influences sound. All the tubes in all the gear you listed as having owned were so microphonic that you were sure it was influencing the sound?
Gotta wonder.....since no tube preamp reproduces music *without* tubes, how the hell would you determine how much a microphonic tube was influencing the sound UNLESS you had tubes available that had very low microphonics to compare 'em with?
Some of us seek out tubes with very low microphonics.
Gotta wonder....
Take tube "X"; perform measurement; place tube damper on tube "X"; repeat measurement. Repeat to your heart's content using various tubes.
You'd have to be ignorant to not understand (or be open to understanding) that tube microphonics have a large effect on sound quality
We completely agree! That is the topic under consideration. And I've found that such can cause false brightness in the results.
Not that you've actually answered the question about which dampers you've used, but why are you acting your usual role as aho?
Until further notice (and this applies to all the AA wards):
- Cease responding to one anothers' posts
- If you disagree with each other's response to a post, whether a matter of fact or opinion, direct your alternative perspective to the original poster (so long as it was neither of you). When doing so, do not refer to, obliquely or otherwise, or in any way comment in a manner that impugns, the other; The Bored will be the sole judge of whether or not this has happened and will act accordingly
- Failure by any of the parties to adhere to this agreement will result in a ban of the offending party
- Don't use the Asylum Emailer services to communicate with each other.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Fax mentis incendium gloria cultum, et cetera, et cetera...
Memo bis punitor delicatum! It's all there, black and white,
clear as crystal! Blah, blah, and so on and so forth ...
And I've found that such can cause false brightness in the results.
How did you determine that tidbit of information and did you find that it applies to all tube gear you have owned?
How did you determine that tidbit of information and did you find that it applies to all tube gear you have owned?
A concept that is totally foreign to you - experimentation.
Would you kindly answer Rick's question and mine?
You seemingly understand the challenge but are somehow unable to connect part of the solution. :)
Hint: It involves the use of an oscilloscope. If you know what one of those is, it's not too difficult to determine my test regiment.
I stand by my assertion that tube gear "sounds good", in part, due to its microphonic properties. The fact that you can change tube a preamplifier sonic signature by using tube dampers sort of illustrates my point.
Hope this wasn't too difficult to understand and that it answers your collective questions.
Hint: It involves the use of an oscilloscope. .
So, tell use what is good and what is bad on a sillyscope? Give us examples citing different tube dampers.
I stand by my assertion that tube gear "sounds good", in part, due to its microphonic properties.
Sorry to hear that.
Once again, you provide zilch in the way of definitive reasoning and conclusive answers. So what dampers have you used? Is that a difficult concept to grasp?
But then, that's we fully expect of you. In lieu of conclusive answers - you've yet to answer either Ricks or mine - you paint vague responses and reference topics but never understand the questions.
We'll leave it there as usual. :)
Tell you what... PM me your shipping address and I'll send you my Hameg HM-605 oscilloscope and my testing procedure then you can replicate my tests and publish your results. You pay for one-way shipping costs and you may keep the scope when you're done. Win, win - you and everyone else will benefit from your learning experience!
Btw, I don't recall the OP mentioning he was trying to solve a "brightness problem" with his Rogue gear.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: