Toobs are for Boobs

[Montucky]

Why do I love my tube amp? Because it's FUN! A tube amp can sound fantastic, but more than anything, it just adds another layer of involvement that is too often lacking from our increasingly digital world. Kind of the same reason I love my vinyl so much.

It's not always about what is "the best," but rather simply, what sometimes brings us the most enjoyment. Even a modern cheap-o family car is vastly superior to even some of the best of the classics. Better handling, better refinement, better fuel economy, more bells and whistles, and often even faster. But sometimes, we like to get our hands dirty, tool around under the hood once in a while, detail the engine bay or interior, give it a nice wash and wax in your driveway on a warm, summer day. But, man, when you turn the engine and the roar of that old V-8 comes alive, then...you know what it's about. Tube amps and vinyl give me the same kind of warm and fuzzy feelings. Doesn't hurt that they truly can sound darn nice too.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Why do I love my tube amp? Because it's FUN! A tube amp can sound fantastic, but more than anything, it just adds another layer of involvement that is too often lacking from our increasingly digital world. Kind of the same reason I love my vinyl so much.

It's not always about what is "the best," but rather simply, what sometimes brings us the most enjoyment. Even a modern cheap-o family car is vastly superior to even some of the best of the classics. Better handling, better refinement, better fuel economy, more bells and whistles, and often even faster. But sometimes, we like to get our hands dirty, tool around under the hood once in a while, detail the engine bay or interior, give it a nice wash and wax in your driveway on a warm, summer day. But, man, when you turn the engine and the roar of that old V-8 comes alive, then...you know what it's about. Tube amps and vinyl give me the same kind of warm and fuzzy feelings. Doesn't hurt that they truly can sound darn nice too.

Yeah, that’s what I figured to be the salient reason - personal preference and enjoyment.

This is a hobby. Whatever helps to make us happier.

 

[jsrtheta]

when done right analog can be just as good, you are correct , 'when done right' , so much comes down to the mastering. Analog requires greater $$ spent to bring out it's best compared to digital IMO.



likewise ................

Analog what? Tape, LP, wire recorders?

 

[TechHDS]

Umm,..a dude by the name of Bob Carver, built some very nice monoblock tube amp, BB sells them. Expensive they are lots of tubes up front good specs, output if I remember right 100 watts. This being a hobby for most and a business for some who both hangout in all the internet forum's. Last tube amp I had was back in the early 80's nothing special about it.

 

[connieflyer]

These Atma-Sphere amps are well known tube amps and great design and reliablie amps. Being from Michigan this one was especially interesting for the winter months. 108 tubes in the amp....http://www.atma-sphere.com/Products/#MA-3

 

[highfigh]

I've never understood the fascination with tube amps for playback. I've heard many of them, and I simply never hear anything odd or unusual, or most of all, preferential. In my experience, with the exception of hot cheap garbage, the vast majority of amps (tube and solid state) are sonically transparent, unless over driven.

I know someone who's determined to buy one, and told me that he only reads positive testimonials, and I can't dispute that. I just wonder why the fascination...

Because it's an available option. Some people had nothing BUT tube equipment when they were young and they remember the good times it provided. Others, learned to tinker with this stuff and enjoy repairing, restoring or building things. Some, kept their tube gear because they hated the first solid state stuff, which sounded like crap, generally. Since most tubes are still available, they can easily keep it going for decades to come. Let's see someone do that with an amp that used discontinued, specialized transistors.

 

[highfigh]

Again, their place in production is well documented. For playback, it's just chumpish...

Why does your opinion matter to someone who chooses tubes? Do they need to ask for your permission?

I don't know how long you have been interested in audio, but in case you care to learn about it, most of the first CDs sounded like crap. They weren't mastered for CD, they had the same equalization used for vinyl, so on some tracks, the bass sucked, on others the treble was harsh and over-bearing. One thing I found is that because some tube amps have a somewhat soft high end, it removed a lot of the bad from the sound of the CDs that needed help. Tube amps aren't necessarily limited in their HF response, just by designers that had a tight budget, didn't care to provide full-range response or by people who cobbled their amp together from parts on the shelf. With better output transformers, they can easily go past 20KHz without it being -20dB.

 

[highfigh]

I had thought for a while that there was bleed over from pro audio into home audio.

"Since Clapton uses a tube amp on stage, I'll do the same at home for playback!"

Holding aside that Clapton is deliberately over-driving his amps, which are better designed for that use, (you aren't or shouldn't be) and you should want to hear Clapton, as recorded, who already made the decision for how much distortion and coloration was needed on his hit albums.

That would be one of the lamest reasons to use a tube amplifier for reproduction. OD is great for guitar, Clapton has rarely had sound as good as he did in The Bluesbreakers or Cream. The 25dB boost in his guitars was certainly a major cause of the bad sound and what he gets/got when he played something other than the Strats with the boost is far better, IMO. Most guitar amps sound better when the output or phase inverter is overdriven, anyway and it's better to overdrive WITH the input tube than to overdrive it.

 

[highfigh]

Interestingly enough, I found out I have a soft spot for SE types.

And it's easier to get bad sound from those, because they're dependent on the impedance curve for their own response. They also have a characteristic called 'bloom' when driven hard. This is one of the things guitar and blues harp players like about them.

 

[ATLAudio]

Why does your opinion matter to someone who chooses tubes? Do they need to ask for your permission?

I don't know how long you have been interested in audio, but in case you care to learn about it, most of the first CDs sounded like crap. They weren't mastered for CD, they had the same equalization used for vinyl, so on some tracks, the bass sucked, on others the treble was harsh and over-bearing. One thing I found is that because some tube amps have a somewhat soft high end, it removed a lot of the bad from the sound of the CDs that needed help. Tube amps aren't necessarily limited in their HF response, just by designers that had a tight budget, didn't care to provide full-range response or by people who cobbled their amp together from parts on the shelf. With better output transformers, they can easily go past 20KHz without it being -20dB.

Why does your opinion matter to someone who chooses tubes?


That’s for them to decide.


Do they need to ask for your permission?


No, they can ask for my opinion and I’ll offer it. I’m also posting on an audio forum my thoughts and opinions, which is the spirit of an audio forum.


That said, much of what you said about digital quantization and mastering and recording isn’t based off of reality. Moreover; you’re relying on a very narrow selection of music, none of which shares the same recording standard, and then do the typical double Dutch with tubes that they are both colorfully warm, and somehow also more accurate.

 

[highfigh]

Why does your opinion matter to someone who chooses tubes?


That’s for them to decide.


Do they need to ask for your permission?


No, they can ask for my opinion and I’ll offer it. I’m also posting on an audio forum my thoughts and opinions, which is the spirit of an audio forum.


That said, much of what you said about digital quantization and mastering and recording isn’t based off of reality. Moreover; you’re relying on a very narrow selection of music, none of which shares the same recording standard, and then do the typical double Dutch with tubes that they are both colorfully warm, and somehow also more accurate.

Why describe it as "chumpish"?

I worked for one of the first 50 dealers to get the Sony CD players and when the newer discs came out after the initial batch of 25 titles, we listened to them in AB comparisons. We weren't trying to see if we could tell the difference, we could always do that, we were finding out if they were actually better-sounding and in a lot of cases, they weren't. Not reality? How so? The reality is that the new CDs that used the original masters often sucked. How am I "relying on a very narrow selection of music"?

Never said tube are more accurate.

 

[M Code]

Why describe it as "chumpish"?

I worked for one of the first 50 dealers to get the Sony CD players and when the newer discs came out after the initial batch of 25 titles, we listened to them in AB comparisons. We weren't trying to see if we could tell the difference, we could always do that, we were finding out if they were actually better-sounding and in a lot of cases, they weren't. Not reality? How so? The reality is that the new CDs that used the original masters often sucked. How am I "relying on a very narrow selection of music"?

Never said tube are more accurate.

Biggest issue with the early CD releases was levels..
Since the mastering and mixing engineers were used to analog streams if the levels were too high, it was a simple task to back off to minimize distortion. However for digital streams and electronics if the levels are too high the stream comes apart... This was eventually overcome as the engineers learned how to handle and process the digital streams.

However the next challenge was amplifiers and loudspeakers, since at best the dynamic range of analog streams are <80dB compared to a dynamic range of +110dB for digital streams this put extreme pressure on later developments for better amplifiers and loudspeakers to handle this....

Just my $0.02..

 

[ATLAudio]

@highfigh Wether I feel like it’s chumpish doesn’t mean they need my permission, or anything of the sort.

You’re more than welcome to place a premium on an uncontrolled sighted listening test, but I’m not. Your guess as to why you think they sounded worse, due to masters, just doesn’t make sense. That’s simply not how it works. That said, you’re talking about a smattering of early CD releases, right? That’s a very narrow selection, right? No, you didn’t say tubes were accurate, but at the same time you mentioned a HF roll off you say that most don’t do that. It’s double talk I’ve come to expect from tube afficinados.

 

[highfigh]

Biggest issue with the early CD releases was levels..
Since the mastering and mixing engineers were used to analog streams if the levels were too high, it was a simple task to back off to minimize distortion. However for digital streams and electronics if the levels are too high the stream comes apart... This was eventually overcome as the engineers learned how to handle and process the digital streams.

However the next challenge was amplifiers and loudspeakers, since at best the dynamic range of analog streams are <80dB compared to a dynamic range of +110dB for digital streams this put extreme pressure on later developments for better amplifiers and loudspeakers to handle this....

Just my $0.02..

The issue of levels in digital was apparent in the LACK of dynamic range in early CDs- we had systems with RTA connected and when the CD and LP were synched & level-matched, the CDs didn't have as much dynamic range as the vinyl. When the level on the LP may have dropped to -30dB, the CD was at -20dB. When peaks would go to +5dB, the CD only went to 0dB. It could also be seen on VU meters, but those are much slower to react.

Also, when dither is added, it can be audible- that reduced the dynamic range of the CD but you must be thinking of digital streams over 16 bit and Redbook, at 16 bit, is good for a theoretical range of 96dB, not 110dB.

Something you might not be considering- many people are impressed when something sounds loud. Doesn't mean it IS loud, so the mastering engineers often use processors to achieve this. If they don't want the level to exceed 0VU, it won't, but it's gonna be hitting its head on the ceiling. The dynamic range of music has decreased- the 110dB range is only theoretical and if you search the AH podcast and article archives, you'll see that the lack of dynamics in music has been addressed several times.

 

[highfigh]

@highfigh Wether I feel like it’s chumpish doesn’t mean they need my permission, or anything of the sort.

You’re more than welcome to place a premium on an uncontrolled sighted listening test, but I’m not. Your guess as to why you think they sounded worse, due to masters, just doesn’t make sense. That’s simply not how it works. That said, you’re talking about a smattering of early CD releases, right? That’s a very narrow selection, right? No, you didn’t say tubes were accurate, but at the same time you mentioned a HF roll off you say that most don’t do that. It’s double talk I’ve come to expect from tube afficinados.

Years of CD releases, listened to for their differences (easy to compare and they don't degrade after each playing).

GO ahead and do the comparisons for yourself but don't use any CD that has been remastered.

HF DOES have limits in tube equipment! It's well known and I didn't write anything about 'most' not having it. A lot of tube amps were spec'd as having 30-15KHz +/- 3dB fequency response, some wider. Look it up.

I don't give a rat's butt if you believe me- the info is out there, but at least read something written by someone who doesn't think tubes make the sun rise and set. If you can, test a good tube amp using a spectrum and distortion analyzer.

 

[M Code]

The issue of levels in digital was apparent in the LACK of dynamic range in early CDs- we had systems with RTA connected and when the CD and LP were synched & level-matched, the CDs didn't have as much dynamic range as the vinyl. When the level on the LP may have dropped to -30dB, the CD was at -20dB. When peaks would go to +5dB, the CD only went to 0dB. It could also be seen on VU meters, but those are much slower to react.

Also, when dither is added, it can be audible- that reduced the dynamic range of the CD but you must be thinking of digital streams over 16 bit and Redbook, at 16 bit, is good for a theoretical range of 96dB, not 110dB.

Something you might not be considering- many people are impressed when something sounds loud. Doesn't mean it IS loud, so the mastering engineers often use processors to achieve this. If they don't want the level to exceed 0VU, it won't, but it's gonna be hitting its head on the ceiling. The dynamic range of music has decreased- the 110dB range is only theoretical and if you search the AH podcast and article archives, you'll see that the lack of dynamics in music has been addressed several times.

Back in the 80s, we consulted for Mobile Fidelity...
When they would remaster the stamper disk to be sent to Japan(JVC) for pressing the vinyl LP from the master tape, levels were closely monitored and usually increased significantly. Thats one reason these Mobile Fidelity pressings are selling for big $...
Levels would be 6-8dB higher than the commercial CD release.

Just my $0.02..

 

[ski2xblack]

And it's easier to get bad sound from those, because they're dependent on the impedance curve for their own response. They also have a characteristic called 'bloom' when driven hard. This is one of the things guitar and blues harp players like about them.

Gotta admit, I have a little single ended 6l6 guitar practice amp which I absolutely love. Doesn't do loud, but can do full overdrive at non-ear shattering volumes, and generally fantastic tone. Fun, fun, fun.

As for using them for hi-fi and the output impedance mediated frequency aberrations, those are not as bad as you would expect. Plus, linear distortions can be eq'd out upstream, assuming one is not dogmatically opposed to such things (lotta tube nuts decry any sort of tone controls or eq for some bizarre reason). I suspect my enjoyment of the single ended types stems more from the utter lack of crossover distortion. Phase splitters invariably ruin the magic. (This is based on admittedly limited DIY experience building both SE and pp types.)

 

[highfigh]

Gotta admit, I have a little single ended 6l6 guitar practice amp which I absolutely love. Doesn't do loud, but can do full overdrive at non-ear shattering volumes, and generally fantastic tone. Fun, fun, fun.

As for using them for hi-fi and the output impedance mediated frequency aberrations, those are not as bad as you would expect. Plus, linear distortions can be eq'd out upstream, assuming one is not dogmatically opposed to such things (lotta tube nuts decry any sort of tone controls or eq for some bizarre reason). I suspect my enjoyment of the single ended types stems more from the utter lack of crossover distortion. Phase splitters invariably ruin the magic. (This is based on admittedly limited DIY experience building both SE and pp types.)

I haven't heard any, but the SE amp crowd that uses highly sensitive full-range speakers are a pretty rabid group.

I have two SE amps- one is an Oahu lap steel guitar amp from about 1937 and has a 6L6G output tube, the other is a 1959 Magnatone 210 with 6V6GC output- the Oahu is far louder and even at its age, it's a very low-noise amp. Has a field coil speaker, too. The Magnatone is what Fender wanted the Vibro Champ to be but since it had tremolo rather than vibrato, it failed. I had a VC and never really liked it- as soon as I played the Magnatone, it was the low powered amp I had been looking for.

I don't bother to think about why they sound the way they do, but it's always interesting to hear the differences between amplifier types. My other amps are push-pull 6L6- one is a Stromberg-Carlson PA-type used in offices and commercial applications- I removed one octal speaker socket with two 1/4" in one metal plate that prevented needing more holes and I replaced the other octal socket with a Marshall-style impedance selector. The amp I have had the longest is a '58 Fender Bassman.

 

[highfigh]

Back in the 80s, we consulted for Mobile Fidelity...
When they would remaster the stamper disk to be sent to Japan(JVC) for pressing the vinyl LP from the master tape, levels were closely monitored and usually increased significantly. Thats one reason these Mobile Fidelity pressings are selling for big $...
Levels would be 6-8dB higher than the commercial CD release.

Just my $0.02..

I have several from MFSL- that period of higher quality LPs was a good thing. One thing that has always bothered me is the variations in sound quality- I can listen to 15 good ones and then, something that has good music sounds like total crap and the LP is in excellent condition. Some are just terrible- I'll have to make a list of the worst ones.

 

[M Code]

I have several from MFSL- that period of higher quality LPs was a good thing. One thing that has always bothered me is the variations in sound quality- I can listen to 15 good ones and then, something that has good music sounds like total crap and the LP is in excellent condition. Some are just terrible- I'll have to make a list of the worst ones.

Keep in mind...
Mobile Fidelity was working from the master tape supplied by the record label....
If the master tape included certain negative byproducts such as mismatched levels, aggressive EQ, or Aphex usage these could not be removed... The major sonic improvements of the Mobility Fidelity releases including the UHQRs were:

• Lower surface noise
• Elimination of clicks/pops
• Improved/balanced levels

I have about 50 of the Mobile Fidelity releases, my favorites are the John Klemmer, Lyle Lovett, Beatles Sgt Pepper LPs. Note that most of the MF Beatle releases are excellent as they were taken from the UK EMI masters, whereas for some of the USA releases by Capitol were actually mono due to certain licensing issues.

Just my $0.02...