 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
88.12.179.251
I have had a few interesting discussions with fellow audiophiles recently on the limitations of SET amplifiers with regards to the design of a specific unit. is the sound quality (not power as assuming 1 x 300b is 9 watts) you can get out of the amp ultimately limited primarily by the design, and secondly by the parts?Does it even improve sound quality at all by upgrading from standard say Elna caps to Black gates, resisitors to tantalums, or are we missing the point?
I am thinking if you/we buy a SET amp that was designed and voiced with high quality parts (BGs, best transformers, Tants, silver wire everywhere) and manufactured and sold at 3 levels and 3 price points, would it be like this?:
I want a fast coupe but don't have the money, so instead of buying the GT version,
I get the L version. Then I replace the tires, upgrade the suspension and then
soup up the engine. Then I have the GT version, because it was designed to take the power and stresses in the chassis. If I buy a saloon say, and do the same to that, the chassis will never handle as good, and the engine will never be as powerful as the coupe. See what I am thinking?I used to have a 'de-commissioned' rally car, made legal for the road, and it smoked just about everything out there. It's a thought.....
And if we bought a 'well designed' SET amp, can it be economically and logically taken to a higher level by buying better quality parts?
Follow Ups:
Well I think you are eluding to Audio Note - they have done the work for people by making steps - so like cars you have a base version and the maker makes the next level up with the pieces that make the next version better.I have not heard the Kits go from one level to the next but the mere change from listening to the J/L copper wired speaker to the J/spe was so great that I felt that I could not go back.
As a kit owner you would have more difficulty because you generally can't compare the base model with the upper scale model. At least not in a timely manner.
The speakers from AN are all upgradable after the fact so you could buy the level 2 and then go to the level 3 and hear for yourself the kind of difference -- or perhaps listen to an AN M2 and then in the same system try the M3 preamp. I have found that when you go up levels with AN the notion of diminishing returns is less evident. In other words when you pay more you get a LOT LOT better.
Kit builders do not have the expertise or know how of the people making the finished products -- so while I may have all the best ingredients in front of me -- do I want to cook it or do I want the master chef to cook it?
Yeh RGA
I do have Audio Note products, in fact all my system except the speakers.
I have heard the M2 and the M3 is better, much better. And I have friends who have upgraded a Meishu from base version to sliver, and it is a bigger and smoother sound.my thoughts were, I spent enough on the M3, and Conquests, I am not complaining, I love the sound, but am intrigued by the possibility to push them further up the scale. And of course the parts and self fit are cheaper (generally) than selling and buying again. Ok, selling can be ok, but you generally take a 40% hit minimum, then have to find the extra say 50% on top of your original purchase price, so 3 times the amount you got for selling at least.
If the design is right, and it can go to another level, and the parts are real world prices, plus the circuits are realtively simple, then bingo, you have an upgrade path for folk who are not oozing cash, like me.
I am one of those hi-fi enthusiasts that love the hobby, but hasn't the funds or the permission (you know what I mean, and no I'm not a mouse, just married!) to swop and change every month. I have kept hold of stuff I like. I think I will be with AN for a long time, and sneaking in the odd Black Gate or nice valve here or there.
Isn't that what's nice about SET and valve gear. In a fast throw away world we live in, I like the idea we still love old valve designs, and that old amps out there are still used, and still cut it. Hell, my computer was wacked as soon as I bought it.. And I really am into the idea that an amp or pre amp, or even a speaker has upgradable options and replacable parts.
Maybe there is a land fill site somewhere, full of all the old TV sets, transistor radios and none injection motor cars. Wait till we run out of petrol, where do we put all those obselete cars!!??
Hum is a big one!The rest is all voodoo to me. Sure everything will make a difference, but I'd rather not try 18 variants to get the sound I want. Let the designer do that. If you like the "house" sound, then the turbo model will be more of it.
But then again, it's a hobby. If I only had the time.....I know just enough to be dangerous.
-Rod
And also: which measurements? THD,IMD, Bandwidth? Slewing rate?
Standard measurement protocols take one not very far in terms of
explaining many subjective sonic attributes. As far as the "wisdom of
the designers" well -- there are several well-respected designers
present in this forum, and you might be suprised at what they'll
tell you about this.Remember, most $100 car-stereo amplifiers measure far "better"
in terms of the standard lab audio measurement protocols than
about ANY SET you will find. I wonder why everyone here does
not just run-down and grab one of those for their listening
room and dump the expensive SET???See the stereophile.com article "God is in the Nuances" by Markus
Sauer --search for it in their online archives. This would probably
be a good introduction for you regarding the measurements/sonics
issue.Good Luck,
-T.M.
Yes, I think you missed the tongue in cheek. But I am serious about hum. It's the nasty little secret that no one talks much about until you get speakers that are more efficient than 100db.
-Rod
it is the trickiest part to clean up, but the biggest thing is correct wiring/grounding. :)Later
D
A humble suggestion.As other people have suggested, it's one of those "weakest link" situations--design, parts, and construction all have to be top notch, and one area can't fully compensate for a weakness in another.
That said, I'm under the impression that transformers are a particularly cruicial and expensive link in the SET's chain. It's challenging and expensive to build one that sounds great.
Certainly those challenges exist in other areas, but the relatively high cost of the transformer and the constraints of physics means if shortcuts are going to be made, they'll be made there.
I read many posts about people who have upgraded OPTs and love the sound, etc. That makes sense to me as more than psycho-acoustics, because of the engineering challenges.
Bottom line: from what I've read, if I had a blank check and could upgrade one part of my SET, it would be the output transformer. Perhaps something with silver wiring that weighs a couple hundred pounds.
But I've been wrong before. What do you all think?
Best,
George
to design, and super-exotic/expensive OPTs are not necessary. I'd
have to say that to build a sonically exceptional unit requires some
thought and a little more money for better quality OPTs and so on
--but still nothing too outrageous if you are building in the 1-10
watt power range. I've found the SET topology to be quite forgiving
in most respects ( much more so than push-pull), and even the little
Hammond cheapie 1625 units can be used to make really quite nice
little 2A3 jobs. That extra little bit of refinement could really
cost though. Also: going much above 20 watts things start to get
expensive fast, and suitable (not to mention affordable)OPT's
get much more rare and harder to source.-T.M.
...makes the most difference.As all of us have agreed, everything makes a difference, but I believe that improving the quality of the powersupply will bring the highest rewards. That's why I start there when improving amps.
Read Lynn Olson's 'Ultrapath, Parallel Feed, and Western Electric' article in issue 16 of 'Vacuum Tube Valley'; you might agree.
-------------------------------------------------------
Tin-eared audiofool and obsessed landscape fotografer.
http://community.webshots.com/user/jeffreybehr
Just say by comparing a stereo to a pair of monos assuming the same size power supply. In the stereo the power supply is for both channels and in the monos they have their own. So if all the conditions are similar, the monos should be better?Is that a fair test?
For instance, the best-sounding PS might include tubed rectification, the highest-quality caps money can buy, low-DCR, correct-inductance chokes, etc., and all sized correctly. Also the same should be done for the supply/supplies for the frontend* and maybe the bias and heater (if DC) supplies too.I think a super-high-quality PS would have NO 'lytics (but for BlackGates) in it and be composed of all film (or PIO) caps, carefully selected, of course. Conrad-johnson has been doing this ('this' being using NO 'lytics and using 'propylene and 'styrene caps in HV PSs) for years now, and I think their reputation for excellent sound is due at least partially to that.
I do NOT want to sound pendantic**; these are only my opinions, but they guide what I do with my own stuff.
* I THINK (but don't KNOW) that ASL got that right in the AQ1006(845) with its vacuumtube-regulated PS (using a paralleled-sections 6SN7 error amp and a triode-wired 6L6 as a series-pass device) for the 2 'N7 Voltage-gain/driver tubes.
** and I written many times that I'm NOT golden-eared, in the sense that I cannot easily hear subtle differences that others apparently hear. But I do hear cumulative differences and improvements (or 'disprovements') thereto, to the point that I've managed to build, with lots of advice from Jeffrey Glowacki of Sonic Craft, the best-sounding system I've ever heard...anywhere...anytime. Of course, ALL other systems start with a handicap--they're not tuned for MY sonic preferences. :-)
-------------------------------------------------------
Tin-eared audiofool and obsessed landscape fotografer.
http://community.webshots.com/user/jeffreybehr
every other Kimber hookup cable i took out from my homebrew JE Lab 300B (replacing with Harmony 14 gauge OFC) gives sonic improvement.
Astro
Your talking to a guy here that has a 2001 mustang gt with the steeda package and then I put the Kenne Bell super charger on and mass air flow sensor upgrade with 24lb injectors..Had I bought a mustang cobra with all these goodies today it would be considerably more money and I got the car used but almost new with low miles from a divorce settlement.
I see where your comming from but even the best amps in the world have limits to taste of design cues and there is always a way it can be altered to suit each indivdual taste.
Some manufacturers are aware of this and I think they purposely hold back on a thing or two for later models that will compel the buyer to want to upgrade to a newer model.
astrostar59, hi. However, your question may be not clearly defined.
"well designed..." What have you in mind?The assemblage of parts necessary for music playback (amplifier) that I find best you may not. Actually, there may be no best but rather a variety of approaches that bring the listener closer to the music - approaches that in their various ways are all good but not similar. If you DIY you may wind up with a variety of amps built around your favorite tubes. Each amp would do something best. I think this is common.
There are those flogging the art of audio ugrades who should be running a three card monte concession in a carnival. However, sometimes just a simple part substitution or small piece of signal wire change can make what one would have to call big magic.
Personally, I don't like metal film or metal oxide resistors in vacuum tube amplifier circuits. I prefer wire wound precision 1% and carbon film. For 1/4 W I like to use 1/2 W or bigger - and so on. Electrolytic caps should be avoided - the only exceptions: Black Gate and Cerafine (discontinued). There may be others who only use carbon composition R. Who is right? Who is listening?
Yes - everything matters - layout, chassis material, component parts, excellence of power supply, ad nauseum. The art lies in making part decisions that combine to make something greater than the sum of the parts. (so to speak) In this way one creates an amplifier that can bring the music back to life in the moment. It is also possible to take very very good parts and make something that just sounds blah. This is both the wonderful and terrifying thing about design. The blank page.
Let's think of pizza. Only a few ingredients and it matters if you use the finest ingredients.Using the finest olive oil, the olive oil itself can be enough to make the whole a fine product.
Some of these high-end opts, are like fine olive oil. They can add such a rich tone that that is captivating in itself.
But it really needs to go to a way higher level than that.
I see audio as more like 'film'. Sound goes to its own artistic level just as film does.
Let me try to make my point clear by using an analogy of comparing two amps in an a/b comparison.
I recently compared one amp with the same amp in parallel configuration, i.e., two output tubes per channel. The parallel amp had some better characteristics. I don't remember exactly, but I think the parallel had a little more clarity and detail, a little more dimensionality. But it was clear to me that the nonparallel was just a better amp.
With the parallel, this was better and that was better. So how is the other one a better amp?
It's because of the way you listen. When you get to great amps, you listen and you assess 'wholistically'. You are receptive to the sound, to the gestalt, and you feel and experience it. It's the same with the music, that is how you listen when music is great. You feel the whole gestalt.
You are really encountering sound, audio reproduction, as art, and its ability to provoke the listener and experience.
Let's take a great film like "Bicycle Thief". The idea is that film captures or presents a reality, but it is really valued as art in itself by how good it can show emotional reality, or how it is just an artistic medium to provoke deep aesthetic experience.
Let's say something about music, the software that we are dealing with. In jazz, for example, some of these artists, Art Blakely, etc., etc., brought music to such a high and stunning artistic level. And that is the substance we have to work with. Artists who brought music, as a gestalt, to such a high artistic/aesthetic level. Then you have a recording engineer like Rudy Van Gelder who could capture what the artists were doing.
I have to say maybe things are going a little bit down hill from there. We are dependent on how good the music is and how well it is recorded too.
You can take something stock and improve the parts, but it is unlikely to take you where a great amplifier is. You could feel your way around to see where you can take it by replacing this and that. As long as you look at what ingredients you want to start with, the opts, the driver tubes, the output tubes, ac/dc, etc. etc..
And let's mention the history of the field and what so many great engineers have already done with sound. It is quite a rich tradition and field.
Astro,I want a 1972 Lotus Europa... man I love the style of that car or maybe it was my first glimpse of what a car really was.
Anyway... back to the subject. I have said this a thousand times. If you put 10 engineers in a room with the same parts and ask them to design and build a 300B SET amplifier. You will get 10 totally different sounding amplifiers.
The design is critical to the outcome of the amplifier. I have designed I think around 80-90 different 300B amplifiers. I have made over 600 of them. The design means allot to the way they sound.
The parts make the design work. The problem here is that just throwing better parts without the design is worthless. It's a chemistry like fine wine. You have to dable a bit and go too far and come back before you realize what sounds best.
Lastly how it's put together can make or break the sound. Grounding it self is something that I wish they taught us in school and noise... why not spend an entire year on what noise is and how to get rid of it.
Anyway... you get the point.
Have fun!
Gordon
J. Gordon Rankin
.
The same questions can be asked about anything you build, and the obvious answer is yes, to a point. That point is what we all spend years figuring out by trial and error. We can tell you what sounds good to us, but you have to decide what sounds good to you. That's the fun part of the hobby anyway.
"We can tell you what sounds good to us, but you have to decide what sounds good to you. That's the fun part of the hobby anyway.
"Yeah, one guy might like to run the tubes well out of there operating range so that it produces a lot of harmonic content. That might just be the sound he likes. Another might play with the operating point and loading to produce the least harmonics so he can hear what's on the recording. That's just what he likes. It's all a matter of taste.
Tre'
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
.
Have Fun and Enjoy the Music
"Still Working the Problem"
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
