|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
210.55.245.18
If you inhabit forums, then "it sounds better" comes up a lot and although it probably means something to the person that wrote it, what does it mean. What's the "it" and what does "better" mean?
The folk here occupy a spectrum from "can't measure it, can't be happening" through to "solder needs to break in" with everyone else occupying the middle ground between.
The cap break in thread recently highlighted these two extremes. If you can't measure it then it can't be heard is a common line to dismiss anyone that hears something that can't be technically explained. I have yet to see anyone come up with a technical measurement to confirm sound quality outside gross errors in frequency, phase or distortion measurements. So this leads to the conclusion that all competently designed amplifiers, given equal specs must sound the same or else the listener is delusional.
The main issue I have is not to deride the technical measurements we know about and can easily perform to determine basic performance. That's the easy bit and relevant. But there are a whole raft of things we hear that just can't be determined by easy measurements or with gear the average person round here has access to.
And in the end, why would most bother? This is a listening hobby as well as a technical one. Sure this brings up another spectrum. Those that are in it for the technical aspects at one end and those that are just here to get a sound that pleases them. And the rest of us lie somewhere in between.
If we look a bit closer at what we're doing for the most part it's listening to music. We don't just "hear" music with our ears but also with our body. Everyone's ears are different. Stick your fingers in your ears and you can still hear. Most folk are disarmed to hear what they sound like on a recording. That's not the recording's fault but a perception issue of the individual. Just one feature of the "mix of listening"
Resonant cavities unique to our own body add peaks and troughs into the mix. And that's all before a person's "unique microphone" sends electrical signals to the brain. The brain then processes the signal based on a whole bunch of concepts, culture, taste and preconceived ideas to produce a result of "what it sounds like" in our head.
Obviously there is no relateable standard by which we can compare this between folk. We are not calibrated and the calibration can change from one monent to the next as the variables invloved in processing is too much. That any of us can agree on anything is incredible in itself.
Add into the mix that we like different music, interpret from that music different aspects with different priorities in what we listen for, then the idea of an improvement is also up for grabs.
With all that complexity, the idea that a simple suite of measurements, once a general level of goodness is reached is going to be relevant to what we hear or can't hear or how "it's sounding" is a bit far fetched.
And for completeness, I have measurement equipment, come from an engineering background and believe in "technical excellence" at a level that is appropriate for what I'm doing or trying to achieve. There are no absolutes in life so why should there be any here?
Follow Ups:
Nt.
Mark in NC
"The thought that life could be better is woven indelibly into our hearts and our brains" -Paul Simon
Good enough is good enough!
I alternate six DIY tube amplifiers of mine and two SS commercial amplifiers (in the same listening room and with the same sources).
The tube amplifiers are all PP and one is OTL.
My preferred listening level is about 75 dB SPL +/- 6 dB (as measured by the smartphone).
In order to get such a 'comfortable' listening level the speakers certainly require less than 10W.
When listening to a high quality FLAC streaming like 'radio swiss jazz' there is no way to say which amplifier 'sounds better'.
You may perceive differences but you cannot say 'this one sounds better'.
Omnes feriunt, ultima necat.
You may perceive differences but you cannot say 'this one sounds better'.
Sure I can.
I use recordings I made as a reference (I have them on LP and CD). I know what they sound like- I was there when the recording was made. My speakers at home are easily driven- they are 16 ohms, 98dB and are flat to 20Hz (Classic Audio Loudspeakers T-3 special edition). At power levels of less than a watt I can easily hear differences in amps and also can tell which is 'better'. That first watt is very important, so much that Nelson Pass has an amplifier line named after it.
"I know what they sound like- I was there when the recording was made."
That's where you and I have a leg up on most people.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Good for you!
About 10 years ago I was in a listening session at an high end fair.
The seller was presenting his new loudspeaker line and how to install it in the living room in order to get the best possible response at low frequency at the preferred listening position.
The idea was to show the eigenvalues/eigenfrequencies of the listening room by moving furniture around and the speakers w.r.t. the wall in 5 cm steps.
What a surprise when the seller realized that most of the audience (the cash rich customers) did not hear low level frequencies below 40 Hz at all!
At the time I was one of the very few that was responsive to the blind test down to 20 Hz (now I am no longer shure).
When he used test tones above 10 Khz most people was not responsive to the blind test.
We tube lovers are seasoned boomers still fond of a forgotten technology that will end with us.
And because we are old our hearing is constantly impaired by time.
We can dream of still listening below 40 Hz and above 10 Khz but this is not generally true.
When you realize that you are old then you appreciate that good enough is good enough and you only enjoy music.
Omnes feriunt, ultima necat.
I've not heard of low frequency loss, but very familiar with HF loss. Back in the mid-70s my high end hearing was acute- I could hear (or was easily aware of) 25KHz. I found that out because that was the frequency of the motion detector horn at the Allied Radio Shack service department where I first worked. People would forget to turn it off, and that thing hurt!
But nowadays my hearing has lost that top octave; I know it goes past 10KHz because I test it at work fairly frequently. But 'going past 10KHz' is putting a nice shine on it...
It is so sad that when you are young and your hearing is at its top you cannot afford hi-end
and when you can afford hi-end your hearing is generally impaired.
Even an equalizer cannot solve the problem because when playing extreme bass and high at high SPL (more thanx 80 dB, because of hearing loss) then it is your hear that intermodulates.
Omnes feriunt, ultima necat.
Hearing a steady note above 10k is one thing and most people of a certain age will struggle. But there is evidence and experience to suggest we are aware of frequencies above that when it comes to harmonic overtones in music.
IME, I don't hear some high frequencies attributable to oscillation like ringing but am certainly aware of them.
I use the women in my life to help in evaluation as their hearing is often much better.
My girlfriend's hearing is better on top than mine. She really likes the stereo too. So if we audition things together to see if we hear the same things. It really helps that our musical taste is very similar!
Understanding those rules and then applying engineering to meet them is paramount to getting something to sound better. The more you pay attention to the rules the better it will sound.You wind up with something that measures according to those rules and sounds better at the same time.
That is not the same as saying it will measure well according to the traditional regime, which tends to ignore human perceptual rules.
The best example of that is the distortion signature that any amplifier has. Super low THD won't help you if there is nothing to mask the presence of the higher ordered distortion content that is present. You need the lower orders (2nd, 3rd and 4th) in sufficient quantity to mask the higher orders.
Tube amplifiers are pretty good at this which is why they usually sound smoother than solid state amps despite having greater amounts of higher ordered harmonic content. Quite literally this is why tubes are still around.
You can get class D amps to do this and traditional solid state amps as well, if they have enough gain bandwidth product to support the amount of feedback needed to insure consistent distortion measurements at all frequencies, not just 100Hz.
If you get the distortion signature right, the amp will sound smooth, detailed and neutral; it will be transparent and 'sound better'. If the lower orders are not there the amp will have a brightness and harshness since the ear assigns tonality to all forms of distortion and that is how it perceives the higher orders.
If these facts are ignored in the design- if it is only built to look good on paper (the spec sheet) then how good it 'sounds' will be a crap shoot. Some people will think such a design is 'neutral' but since it is ignoring human hearing perceptual rules this is really expectation bias more than anything else.
Edits: 06/08/21
Fascinating. I'm curious whether unmasked higher order distortions contribute to the experience of a system being "fatiguing". Any thoughts/experiences?
cheers and thanks, Derek
Derek
=
nt
Thanks Ralph. Your response was the sort of thing I had hoped for. Couldn't agree more and I think if this could be expanded upon, we might get further along the road as to why things sound the way they do.I suspect though we might need more sensitive equipment and more thoughtful analysis than whether a voltage is developed across a component or not given the complexity of music vs a simple voltage measurement.
My main point was there are very few people that would go as far as you have and little to none that have taken it further. I've seen testing where difference in components can be identified; where they deviate from their ideals but how that translates into how it sounds seems to be missing although there is some correlation to the quality of the result.
Edits: 06/08/21
I've seen testing where difference in components can be identified; where they deviate from their ideals but how that translates into how it sounds seems to be missing although there is some correlation to the quality of the result.
The less the parts behave as their ideals the less the circuit will perform as it should. We can describe this as distortion. Parts can be testing in a bridge circuit to sort out what is real and what is expectation bias. There's usually some way to sort out what is real and what isn't.
For example capacitors have different ESR (Extended Series Resistance) values based on construction including the dielectric used. A cap that has a lower ESR is going to act more like a cap than one that has a higher ESR. This should be particularly true at audio frequencies.
And so on. You don't want the passive components contributing to distortion if you can help it.
I think our test equipment is sensitive enough. Finding the will to use it properly is something else altogether! It does no good to know the distortion if you don't also know what the spectrum of harmonics looks like. That takes more work and a person has to cause their hand to move to get it done. Most don't.
Its also a good idea to keep an open mind about some of the old tropes like 'if it has high THD it will have high IMD too' which as it turns out is false. More has to do with the nature of the HD, whether generated by a quadratic non-linearity as opposed to cubic, that sort of thing.
There are some things we've known for a long time; Norman Crowhurst was writing about the distortion caused by feedback but it took until this century to sort out the implications.
I guess I'm saying that more has to do with what we know about how things work rather than the limitations of our test equipment. When you think you know everything that's when you're more likely to make dumb mistakes.
I think capacitors are some of the most "flavour-some" components we use especially in the audio sections. I agree that electrical specs such as ESR leads to a better performing cap.
Back in the day before the choice of exotic caps we can choose from today, we used to focus on ESR as a value of goodness so focussed on caps for pulse applications such as WIMAs FKP1 series. They also had another point of merit as they were film/foil.
Part of selecting caps can be down to other measureable parameters such as vibration. It is possible to listen to caps outside the electrical domain with a stethoscope at a minimum. I bet that could be moved on with better instrumentation.
Vibration control with winding tension and case retraint/damping can alter how it measures if that's what you're looking for and so can change the distortion/harmonic profile which as you say, can lead to a measure of goodness.
After that, personal taste probably comes in to play; just plain ol' whether you like the sound or not.
Thanks, Ralph! Well done!-Dennis-
Edits: 06/08/21
not you Stephen, but all the others who did
Edits: 06/08/21
Although that's gone now, it was interesting how two folk round here, seeing the same thing, came to completely different conclusions based upon ... well who knows what which was kinda my point.
It is curious... and the nature of how our beliefs are formed and motivated reasoning and bias play out. We are all susceptible. There are practices that can help us become more aware and lessen the impact of our biases and encourage better thinking, however.I'm glad my background is (partially) in research and investigation, and I now have an opportunity to nudge the work culture/behaviours of a workgroup doing important work more in the direction of learning. It is rewarding and highlights the myriad benefits of retaining some curiosity... which some inmates seem to want to shut down in others.
Cheers.
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
Edits: 06/10/21 06/11/21 06/11/21
nt
View YouTube Video
There's no virtue in being old,
it just takes a long time
The only people who should be using "ears" as a primary SE tube amp evaluation tool are people like DF and the MLP design team or similar "professional" audio people with many years of competitive experience at trade shows.
The "average joe" SE tube amp builder who is at a "novice" level should be learning some FFT and scope skills to do basic circuit qualifications.
That way gross mistakes can be avoided that waste a lot of time.
Subjective "ear" testing can augment measurements as another level of refining a basic tube amp circuit.
DT667
All true, but the novice builder would fare
better if he already has a few commercial efforts
that are pretty good at hand, so he can compare his
work with something that is decent.
One can then advance by
trying to outperform what's already out there.
-Dennis-
"... so he can compare his
work with something that is decent"
why not just compare the sound produced with the real thing, the sound of live unamplified instruments?
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
I think in some respects, you have a good point. However, the end result is far from that ideal.
As you no doubt know from your hands on experience, musical instruments are bloody loud and incredibly dynamic things. Most if not all domestic systems have no chance of recreating this in our rooms at home and if they did, it would be unbearable.
Take into account the recording and playback mediums most employ, and the best we can hope for, mmainly, is a smaller scale event in all respects.
I hate to say this, really struggling here, but Denis has a point. IF we want to improve our builds, it does sometimes help to have a reference that goes well in order for us to get closer to the ideal you suggest.
I say this from my own experience where I didn't stride out to beat my power amps of 20+ years until I felt spending the money on a DIY design would get me closer to place I wanted to be.
"All true, but the novice builder would fare
better if he already has a few commercial efforts
that are pretty good at hand, so he can compare his
work with something that is decent."
"One can then advance by
trying to outperform what's already out there."
An audiophile with sufficient budget should buy a complete Serious Stereo audio system and enjoy the music.
That will save them decades of frustration trying to do something of similar quality and failing to be satisfied.
DT667
How can one buy a Serious Stereo amp or system?Other than used gear, there is no company. The WEB site has been down for over year.
Perhaps Dennis has thrown in the towel. And that's perfectly OK.
What ever, but your relentless shilling for this subject is getting really old.
Perhaps you also need to go to camp LowMu for a while!
Edits: 06/08/21
My 45 SET amps and Oris Horn System sounds much better. ---
"My 45 SET amps and Oris Horn System sounds much better." ---
Bert D. of Oris seems to prefer the Serious Stereo 2A3 vs. a Korneff SE 45 amp on his horn system as heard at RMAF per DF.
You need a set of DF's amps to make a direct comparison to the TAL/Korneff SE 45's in your Oris system.
DT667
I can't find any mention of Serious Stereo on Bert's website.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
On 6/9/2021
Bert, in your opinion, what is the best Sounding SET amplifier that you have heard on your Oris Horns?
**************************************************************************
Wow, that is a long time ago! I have had 300B SET (Border Patrol), 845 SET (Unison Smart) but also OTL and balanced EL34 amps.
All did great! On my full-range path...
These days I play with the Orphean and DIY Gain Clone amps (BD30).
Bert
PS only a few 300B or other SET based amps will sound great, a lot of them sound okay too but with too much noise or no good sound at all (sloppy bass and coloured)
****************************************** *******************************
No mention of Jeff Korneff, Serious Stereo or 45 or 2A3 Amps.
"Bert, in your opinion, what is the best Sounding SET amplifier that you have heard on your Oris Horns?"
This was not a direct question regarding BD's use of the Serious Stereo 2A3 amplifiers at RMAF or with BD's interactions with DF.
The answer you got might be based on a false memory since it was long ago.
I think you need to resolve this question with both DF and BD so there is no confusion on what actually happened at RMAF between these two icons.
Audiophile legacies are on the line here.
DT667
You're in so deep with a belief system so strong, you can't comprehend the truth when presented to you by the person involved.Edit: clue, it wasn't Bert. See Dennis's reply.
Edits: 06/10/21
"You're in so deep with a belief system so strong, you can't comprehend the truth when presented to you by the person involved.
Edit: clue, it wasn't Bert. See Dennis's reply."
Please have a bit of common sense.
Do you think Bert D. is going to come here and admit to using another manufacturers amplifiers with his Oris horn system?
Probably not. Bert D. would promote his own solid state amplifiers.
DT667 had got the "real" story directly from DF via personal email communications which have NOT been posted on AA forums in their complete format.
DF did add a bit of colorful detail in his recollection posted below.
Great content, BTW.
DT667
If Bert was so impressed with the Serious Stereo 2A3 amplifiers that he traded speakers for a pair of them and if they are as good as you say, Bert would still be using them today. End of story.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
The year was RMAF 2004-- first ever RMAF. The room
featured the Oris 2-way speaker which used one
of Bert's (BD Designs) 15" woofers, driven by a solid-state
plate amp, and a German (AER)- midrange/tweeter setup
with a notched, semi-directional (depending on which side
of the unit you were looking at) machined, polished brass
phase plug.The ORIS horn load was applied to this driver, which was
driven by a 300B SE tube amp..Bert's Canadian partner (the demo room was
shared) later arranged to get a pair of my amps-- (those
are still up in Canada today). The two ORIS units
became mine, and I took them home-- sold them
later. That AER tweeter is as good as anything I ever heard.It didn't hurt that Bert's D/A converter was in the
mix-- it was very good also.Oh, yes! They played Emmy Lou Harris a lot. Class Act.
One can read Bert's comments on Positive Feedback Online--
Mr. Clark's writeup-- there's a picture of both Bert
and myself there. It was my first RMAF-- and a lot of fun.I did not have a room that first year. Terry Cain had insisted
I build a Red Pair of amps and bring them to the show. They
ended up in the ORIS room by request after my demo..Those amps, up in Canada today, had about 25 hours on them,
people there were are sharp as a tack, noticed it, and
TOLD ME they would improve even further with more hours.
Terry conducted an amp shootout Saturday after supper,
until wee hours complete with Washington State wine.
Many amps were played, each amp got about 10-15 minutes.
I was shy, and did not push to get mine in, they sat there
on the floor. Eventually a guy asked Terry to put them in.
The rest of that evening-- for several hours, they stayed in.
Every time they were to be removed people asked to leave them in.Terry had rented a large room, and we had about 60-70 people.
Terry later told me about having wine there for everyone who
was of legal age-- he believed in it...After closing about 50 people stood up, a guy talked about me
and my amps, and then the others stood up. I received a standing
ovation with lots of applause.Time to go to bed! Everyone! We all packed-up and out of
Terry's demo suite. The ORIS room got the amps for Sunday.On Sunday evening, I was packing the amps out of the ORIS room,
then into Terry's room to pack them up to go into my Diesel
pickup.Terry's large, spacious demo room had lots of floor space!
Bert's partner, after I had the amps all boxed up, ran down
thru the Hotel floors, and came into Terry's room just as I was
leaving with the second amp. He said they were NOT leaving,
how much for them? The man didn't have enough for them, so they
traded the ORIS speakers straight across for my amps.My Ford Diesel truck could hold those speakers in the
box-- no problem! OK, that's how I acquired the ORIS.I'll tell you one thing for sure-- those AER units are
good! REALLY good.RMAF was fun, and that's why I have, over all these years,
recommended that forum members go to RMAF. Never a bad year
for me-- I did them all until I missed one in 2012. Big
forest fire out here-- I lost it all in August, RMAF was
in October..Next year I was back. A guy had sent me a pair of the amps
he had bought from me, so I could easily get some more
built, then I sent them back. He refused to allow me
to pay him anything-- and he paid shipping both ways.Because of him, in 2013, we were back in Denver...
-Dennis-
Edits: 06/09/21 06/09/21 06/10/21 06/10/21 06/10/21
" Terry had rented a large room, and we had about 60-70 people.
Terry later told me about having wine there for everyone who
was of legal age-- he believed in it..."
60-70 people in a large room drinking wine is no way to evaluate the sonic quality of a tube amp or anything else. If you think so, you have even less credibility than I previously thought, which trust me, wasn't much. Your brand of self promotion serves no purpose on this forum. It is not educational, it is not entertainment, and it is not fun. That is what this forum should be about. It's just pathetic.
"Starting in the middle of a musical sentence and moving in both directions at once." - John Coltrane.
Cpwill
One can read Bert's comments on Positive Feedback Online.
-Dennis-
.
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Positive Feedback Online's coverage of the first RMAF--
2004. Mr. Clark was the writer.Just go thru the whole thing. You'll find other rooms,
speakers, amps, and interviews. There are several
places to read, if you wish to.Wherever those amps showed up, comments were made.
The amps sort of made it all over the Hotel. The links
to all this were on my old website (gone, has to be redone),
but PFO's coverage should still be on THEIR website-
that might be archives, etc.I would just look for
their RMAF 2004 coverage. It's all in there, in many places.Why all the fuss, anyhow? I'm moving on-- I like the
KT-88/KT-150 project a lot!Since I found the right driver for the KT's. I even
shared it with you-- it's the 6E6P. The right gain, the
right sound qualities.What more could one wish for?
-Dennis-
Edits: 06/10/21
I found it."The serious side of Bert Doppenberg of BD Designs. I will admit that the first day of the show this room was not to my taste, but by Sunday he had it really hitting on all cylinders! The first day, Bert was using the Sophia integrated and well, it just didn't have the magic. Bert got the music off his laptop through a TwinDACPlus. Way cool!"
" On Sunday the little Serious Stereo 1-watt monoblock amplifiers from Dennis Fraker were in use ($11k the pair, and that is for the best 1-watt you will ever need, if you got the right speakers) and they sounded really, really good. Very musical!"
"The Serious Stereo 1-watt amplifier. Not much to look at, but a lot to listen to! These amplifiers were getting a lot of exposure throughout the show (Cain & Cain room among others) and had generated a bit of a stir. Very expensive, but what music."
Those quotes are from Dave Clark, nothing from Bert. Reviewers say a lot of things. It doesn't mean that much. Hey, it's a 2a3. I wouldn't expect it to sound bad up to it's power limit. But you make out like it's the best thing since sliced bread. With all the short comings in your design.....I'll take the sliced bread.
You and DT made this article sound like it was going to be the proof. It's not. Dave says a lot of good things about a lot of gear. It's his job. If Dave really loved your amps he would own a pair. I would bet he doesn't.
Years ago I designed and built an OTL amplifier. My friend Bill heard them. The next thing I knew he's in production (Naked Truth Audio Calla OTL). He got a few positive reviews. None of that meant much.
Dennis, you've got a big head. I guess that not all that bad. If you can't believe in yourself no one else will!
Carry on but don't talk smack. I'll call you on it every time.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
Edits: 06/10/21
"You and DT made this article sound like it was going to be the proof."
Only DF mentioned the Positive Feedback article.
DT667 posted a very basic summary of the interaction between DF & Bert D. at RMAF 2004 per email communication from DF.
It was a moment in audiophile history when two icons of the industry came together for a common cause - the realization of true greatness in high fidelity audio reproduction.
Most of us in this hobby will never experience something similar.
A moment in time when a legend was born.
DT667
Thanks!
Bert's own comments are in there
somewhere also. Keep looking.... you'll find
a picture of him in that material. He was
happy "now that it is sounding good"-- something
to that effect.
Bert is a great guy. I'll always think of
him.., and remember his happy, honest smile.
The AER tweeter/midrange unit deserves
further mention.
It has a palpable ability to deliver the
finest of high frequency transients like
nothing else (in my experience) is able to
do that well.
The ORIS 2-way-- with that driver-- is able to lay out
triangles, harpsichords etc., into the room and
actually deliver what's normally somewhat truncated in a
driver's throat-- out into the room in spades, and not
lose the dynamic nature or spread and depth of the instrument.
-Dennis-
"Bert relaxing to the music. "I have made too many things! Besides, it is Sunday and now it finally is sounding good!""
I read that as 'finally sounding good for that weekend, in that space, in that room'. Not 'finally sounding good' as if he has never ever had it sounding good.
Like I said, you have an inflated ego and when you receive a complement you take it way to "seriously". In some ways you are like a little kid. Immature and not rational.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
"Bert's partner, after I had the amps all boxed up, ran down
thru the Hotel floors, and came into Terry's room just as I was
leaving with the second amp. He said they were NOT leaving,
how much for them? The man didn't have enough for them, so they
traded the ORIS speakers straight across for my amps."
Can you name this person? Does he still have and use the amplifiers?
If he does then I guess he doesn't have much sway over his partner, Bert, because Bert didn't get a pair or use a pair or even mention them in his email reply to CT. Unless he did but doesn't talk about it. If your amps were the big life changing event that you make them out to be, why doesn't Bert own or use them (or even mention them) after having heard them?
I think these are straight up questions but you never give straight up answers. I don't think you're capable so I don't expect a coherent answer.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
It is interesting to read about DF's beginnings at RMAF in 2004.
Standing ovations for the SS 2A3's - no doubt a masterful performance.
A true inspiration for others who aspire to greatness in the industry.
Thanks for sharing.
DT667
Denis is so far over the line he can no longer see it. Given the duration of his writing nonsense on this forum, I am quite willing to bet he has forgotten what it even looked like.
No action need be taken. Bert is golden.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
He designs his own. Look at his site and the produccts he sells.
Bert D. wanted a set of SS 2A3's so bad that he traded a pair of Oris speakers for them at RMAF per DF.
It was the first time BD ever heard his Oris horns sound as he envisioned them.
That was not happening with the Korneff SE 45 circuit and others vs. the SS 2A3 amps.
DT667
I will never be frustrated by trying to make something that sounds like one of Denis-es amps. True frustration would come from owning one with no ability to build something that actually works.
cheers,
Douglas
Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world...but thou art standing where I am about to shoot.
"That will save them decades of frustration trying to do something of similar quality and failing to be satisfied."
If the end game is all your interested in, then IMHO, you're in the wrong place. Note the main word in the forum title - DIY.
The DIY element implies a journey. In many of life's journeys, there are mistakes and knowledge gained in making them. And in the end, satisfaction in making something yourself.
Maybe you have a different agenda here?
I'm very satisfied with what I'm listening to. Similar to Dennis in being 2A3 SET and Altec, but all DHT.
And I'd speculate your system sounds better - or more to my liking - than the Serious Stereo rig. The (very) occasional Serious Stereo best of RMAF from back in the day? Meh.
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
I hope that nobody here is against measurement in building audio equipment - that would be ridiculous.
But I think the point made is that "beyond a certain point design and construction choices are directed by the sound of the equipment for whoever is the relevant listener". Relevant listener could be a panel of people, the client, the designer or whatever.
I don't have a problem with this at all.
The discussion you referenced wasn't about listening; it was about accuracy and excellence in the amplifiers we use for that purpose. Only by refusing to see that distinction and by claiming there are no absolutes can you A) believe this is a "listening hobby" and then B) use that characterization to denigrate those who disagree.
"So do you agree that if the cathode bypass capacitor is sufficiently large so that the cathode has no detectable AC voltage, the capacitor cannot be responsible for coloring the sound?"
Silence.
I'm highly skeptical of your supposed technical credentials and experience, and more so of your competence and honesty in bringing any of that to the table. Why don't you post a project, something you've accomplished in this field, if you want to be of benefit to the forum? That's what most of us come here for, not to be told that everything's subjective and there's no right or wrong. What a bunch of hooey.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
I'm confused by most of your post and think you're using a straw man arguement. I never said what you are claiming but it wouldn't be the first time. Very predictable.
I also think that somehow you believe this is aimed at you personally otherwise you wouldn't start to attack me. But if the shoe fits ;)
As for silence, I spoke up and posted on said subject and you failed to enter the discussion. I also agree with Mr Slagle on his assertions.
I'm also very surprised about your further claims about my expertise but hey, I'm not here to prove anything. My qualifications and real world commercial experience in the aerospace industry is good enough for me. I couldn't care less what anyone thinks. What someone thinks is no business of mine.
If you want to challenge any of the points I made, by all means go ahead but at least be accurate.
And as for "post a project". Are you kidding? All my work is available online for anyone to see warts and all. I suspect sometimes you'd rather someone else does the work rather than you actually go out and find out what's going on. I've even helped you with that sometimes.
I would challenge you to post as much detail as I have on the interweb. Many folk have built my designs and I have helped many people do so over the years. Some have done a better job of it than me but I'm also OK with that. None of it is ground breaking but then what is with valves.
Geez, this is meant to be fun. Meds nnot working?
Blah, blah blah. I forwarded an important and often overlooked concept based on established electrical theory. You and Slagle don't like it because it doesn't fit your theories of audio mysticism. I don't really care what you believe, just don't expect to push back against this or (especially) to misquote what I said without being called to task. The latter, in particular, is what crosses the line into dishonesty.
--------------------------
Buy Chinese. Bury freedom.
I wish you had quoted me though and accurately but clearly you don't want to be technically accurate in this discusdion. May I refer you to Ralph's response which opens up the discussion rather than you throwing a tantrum.
"This is a listening hobby..."even for the technicals
Do you understand what that means?
I guess I don't. Please explain.
My point was, for most if not all of us, it comes down to listening to reproduced music in our home.
Indeed.
A spectrum is a range where the two extremes in this particular case are folk obsessed with technical aspects which triumph over the listening experience and the other end where the listening experience triumph over the technical aspects.
And most of the rest of us combine the two and live in between.
Kinda like a bell curve distribution with the extremes being more evangelical with their belief systems without the proof required to back up their position and blind to anyone pointing this out.
This can be applied to just about anything.
Kinda like a subset of real life ;)
Agree on the bell curve. The interesting thing about the bell curve aspect is while the majority fall within the 70% in the middle, the 13% on either side are still lucid and rational. What I find interesting is how the people in the 3% of one extreme always seem to be the most vocal, paint with wide brushes and try to place everyone on the other side of the mean at the opposite extreme.
I would put myself at the break between the first and second deviation on the side that traditional measurements and theory / accepted though does not tell the whole story. I 100% adhere to science but refuse to let it explain away what I think I hear. TK insisted I was into mysticism, I'd say I'm more of a luddite. Consider that this is a tube based forum and amongst the entire EE world we all reside several deviations to the mystical side of things.
dave
.
"Confusion of goals and perfection of means seems to characterise our age." Albert Einstein
Agree, thanks
Definition of subjective
(Entry 1 of 2)
1 : of, relating to, or constituting a subject: such as
a obsolete : of, relating to, or characteristic of one that is a subject especially in lack of freedom of action or in submissiveness
b : being or relating to a grammatical subject especially : nominative
2 : of or relating to the essential being of that which has substance, qualities, attributes, or relations
3a : characteristic of or belonging to reality as perceived rather than as independent of mind : phenomenal — compare objective sense 2a
b : relating to or being experience or knowledge as conditioned by personal mental characteristics or states
4a(1) : peculiar to a particular individual : personal subjective judgments
(2) : modified or affected by personal views, experience, or background a subjective account of the incident
b : arising from conditions within the brain or sense organs and not directly caused by external stimuli subjective sensations
c : arising out of or identified by means of one's perception of one's own states and processes a subjective symptom of disease — compare objective sense 2c
5 : lacking in reality or substance : illusory
Me?
I'm number 5. :-)
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: