PDA

View Full Version : valves versus solid state, reminder.



anthonyTD
21-09-2009, 10:06
hi all,
this thread was originaly posted earlier in the year but after recent events on another forum that shall remain anonymous i have decided to resurrect it to remind all who know me and what i am about why i continue in my paticular chosen field...:)


Valves versus solid state.

Valve amplifiers be it single ended or push-pull, have long been thought of by many as superior beasts to solid state… whether their use be musical instrument related, or purely for audio replay, but what is it that still makes them more desirable to musicians and audiophiles world wide than often the best of what solid state has to offer ? Well, first off, valve designs produce predominantly low order harmonics (which is musically related); while solid state designs generally produce a full range of harmonic distortion, including the objectionable high order harmonics. This is due to a number of factors, including the transformer output of valve designs, and the large amounts of negative (electronic) feedback required in solid state designs, in comparison, valve designs need very little negative feedback, and some good sounding amps don't use any at all!
Circuit design undoubtedly plays an important role, tube circuits are often less complex and laid out differently, therefore It can be argued that simplicity is usually best, as the length and complexity can change the inductance and capacitance of a circuit. A more complex circuit will have a more complex sonic distortion characteristic. Minimalist single ended valve amps for example typically have a dominant very simple harmonic distortion spectrum. Complex modern transistor designs often have low level but extremely complex harmonic distortion spectra.
Another advantage of most valve amplifier designs is the high input impedance typically 100k in modern designs and as much as 1 MΩ in classic designs. By contrast, solid state amplifiers may have much lower input impedances, some as low as 20k This implies that it requires more energy to excite the input of a typical transistor amplifier to any given voltage than it does a typical tube amplifier. If sensitivity to small signals is a significant goal, then tube designs will typically outperform transistor designs.
valve amplifiers in general do not need to use as much negative feedback as transistor amplifiers, and while some will argue [and rightly so in some cases] that the absence of negative feedback slightly increases harmonic distortion, but by limiting the amount of negative feedback, it avoids instability, as well as slew rate and bandwidth limitations imposed by dominant-pole compensation in transistor amplifiers.
Valves versus transistors when driven hard distort quite differently, and it is well known and documented that valves clip more softly than transistors therefore allowing higher levels of distortion to be tolerated whilst still being able to portray the complex harmonic structure of for example a musical instrument..

regards,anthony,TD...

DSJR
21-09-2009, 13:03
I don't think it particularly matters what devices are used - it's the WAY they're used that is important. If you can get the results from modern-day valves Anthony then that's wonderful :)

being the devil's advocate (a trait it seems), I also ought to give a shout for MODERN transistors, which are FAR more capable than they were even twenty years ago (domestically available ones anyway) and because of their superior linearity these days, simple transistor circuits should now be easily possible. Handling of low level signals is very well handled in the best of solid-state tuners and radio signals are a tiny, tiny fraction of that of the lowest output moving coil cartridge peaking out/resonating at not much more than 50KHz.

I've seen some superbly simple and well performing amps (dare not mention the manufacturer ;)) and also some US made hugely complex valve gear. Wasn't it Conrad Johnson that used to deliberately add 2nd harmonic distortion to "create" a "valvier-than-valve" sounding product...

So, PLEASE fella's, don't choose a good amp based PURELY on what's inside (or glowing on the top). Choose the amp for its good, sensible design and music making abilities.

anthonyTD
21-09-2009, 13:29
I don't thin kit particularly matters what devices are used - it's the WAY they're used that is important. If you can get the results from modern-day valves Anthony then that's wonderful :)

being the devil's advocate (a trait it seems), I also ought to give a shout for MODERN transistors, which are FAR more capable than they were even twenty years ago (domestically available ones anyway) and because of their superior linearity these days, simple transistor circuits should now be easily possible. Handling of low level signals is very well handled in the best of solid-state tuners and radio signals are a tiny, tiny fraction of that of the lowest output moving coil cartridge peaking out/resonating at not much more than 50KHz.

I've seen some superbly simple and well performing amps (dare not mention the manufacturer ;)) and also some US made hugely complex valve gear. Wasn't it Conrad Johnson that used to deliberately add 2nd harmonic distortion to "create" a "valvier-than-valve" sounding product...

So, PLEASE fella's, don't choose a good amp based PURELY on what's inside (or glowing on the top). Choose the amp for its good, sensible design and music making abilities.

hi dave,
i was hoping this would cause some re-interest,;) and i agree people shouldnt choose products purely on the merits of the devices used, and again your points are of course valid, it is posible to make realy good and bad performing amplifiers using both technologies, its just in my experience solid state devices and their implementation arent often used in the right manner in main stream equipment as to get the best from them on the whole. thats why when people hear even mediocre valve set ups its like a breath of fresh air to some after what most have gotten used to listening to.
regards,anthony,TD...

anthonyTD
21-09-2009, 14:04
hi all,
it would seem that i need re-educating by some on another forum, as its just been stated that valves arent linear! :scratch: seriously,,, anyone worth their salt will know that the triode valve is probably one of the most linear devices ever dsigned!!! also just to elaborate on why some of these characters seem to have started a witch hunt, yesterday i stated that it is posible to make a badly designed solid state circuit sound listenable by adding a valve stage after it, i never went into any detail of how this circuit would need to be designed to over-come or even cancel out high order harmonics, but it now seems i may have to,,, just to put this to bed over there. of course all well designed valve circuitry will pass all harmonics created by previous circuitry wether solid state or valve, it would have to, otherwise the vacuum valve would be worthless as a true amplifying device! but it is posible to design a simple valve cicuit to tag onto the end of a a paticular circuit that is producing nasty high order ODD harmonics that will filter out or cancel, and a valve, paticularly a triode would be ideal for this job as at worst the only harmonics it may add would be low order.
i hope i have now made myself clear.
regards,anthony,TD...

Ali Tait
21-09-2009, 15:15
Hi Anthony,
From my limited understanding there's no probably about it,DHT's are the most linear devices yet concieved.Show me a feedbackless sand amp!

anthonyTD
21-09-2009, 15:23
Hi Anthony,
From my limited understanding there's no probably about it,DHT's are the most linear devices yet concieved.Show me a feedbackless sand amp!
hi ali,
exactly.:smoking:
i realy despair sometimes, and wonder whats the point!
these type of characters are the whole reason that i never join or get involved with forums as a whole, AOS is the only one you will find me contributing to.
regards,anthony,TD...

Spectral Morn
21-09-2009, 15:42
hi ali,
exactly.:smoking:
i realy despair sometimes, and wonder whats the point!
these type of characters are the whole reason that i never join or get involved with forums as a whole, AOS is the only one you will find me contributing to.
regards,anthony,TD...

Hi Anthony

"Pearls Before Swine"..... no more no less. You are wasting your time over there as is Steve IMHO. I see a nice little attack has gone unmoderated on that thread...typical ZG....selective modding or let the ZG approved get away with what they like.....:doh::(


Regards D S D L

anthonyTD
21-09-2009, 16:14
Hi Anthony

"Pearls Before Swine"..... no more no less. You are wasting your time over there as is Steve IMHO. I see a nice little attack has gone unmoderated on that thread...typical ZG....selective modding or let the ZG approved get away with what they like.....:doh::(


Regards D S D L
hi neil,
i totally agree mate, i had a similar conversation with steve earlier about the whole thing and he agree's its not worth the effort, obviously there are people who post here and there, and that is the reason why things are still being drawn out, hopefully it will burn itself out soon and they can get back to whatever it is they normaly do:confused:
regards,anthony,TD...

anthonyTD
21-09-2009, 16:33
hi all,
just to show i am not completely biased here are some Disadvantages of using valves, and,,, wait for it... some Advantages of using transistors!

first,,,
Vacuum Tubes: Disadvantages
1. Bulky, hence less suitable for portable products Higher operating voltages generally required.
2. High power consumption; needs heater supply that generates waste heat and yields lower efficiency, notably for small-signal circuits.
3. Glass tubes are fragile, compared to metal transistors.
4. Sometimes more prone to microphonics than transistors, depending upon circuit and device.
5. Cathode electron-emitting materials are used up in operation.
6. High-impedance devices that need impedance matching transformer for low-impedance loads, like speakers; however, the magnetic cushion provided by an output transformer prevents the output tubes from blowing up. Sometimes higher cost than equivalently powered transistors.

and,,,
Transistors: Advantages
1. Usually lower cost and smaller than tubes, especially in small-signal circuits.
2. Can be combined in the millions on one cheap die to make an integrated circuit, whereas tubes are limited to at most three functional units per glass bulb.
3. Lower power consumption, less waste heat, and higher efficiency than equivalent tubes, especially in small-signal circuits.
4. Can operate on lower-voltage supplies for greater safety, lower costs, tighter clearances.
5. Matching transformers not required for low-impedance loads.
6. Usually more physicaly rugged than tubes (depends upon construction).

how's that:eyebrows:
A...

Spectral Morn
21-09-2009, 16:45
IMHO Anthony you know more than all of those so called experts over on ZG. Who love slapping themselves on the back as the only truth is theirs, everyone else is either deluding themselves or suffering from a placebo effect. The moral guardians of the objectivist universe :lolsign: Its a pity more of them had the actual experience to offer qualified comments rather than be court jesters:lol::mental:


Leave em to it, which is precious little as most of the good guys have gone to pastures greener and brighter.

I think its rich that the closed minded reckon they have the most open minds in audio forums :doh:deluded or what?

Regards D S D L

Joe
21-09-2009, 16:56
Even more deluded IMO is to think you can change what you regard as closed minds. You might as well find a nice solid brick wall and bang your head against it.

anthonyTD
21-09-2009, 17:04
hi all,
enough said, unless genuine members on AOS have any comments to add,,,thats it from me on the subject, Elvis has left the building!:gig:
A...:)

DSJR
21-09-2009, 17:13
Final comments from me - this took longer to type than I expected it to...:)

I think we have to look at the "male jewellery" aspect of HiFi - the way we fella's get romantically attached to our gear, cars, cameras, bikes etc...

These days, Class B can be achieved with distortion down in the noise (couldn't be done thirty years ago that well) and zero (to all intents and purposes) crossover artifacts. As all the distortion harmonics are down in the noise floor, these amps just need to have their clipping behaviour adjusted so the clipping is as benign as possible and there is no instability - something some of the mid-nineties amps encouraged because WTF and its followers liked the artificial "excitement" caused by this "ringing." Don't think valve people didn't do this either - the Michaelson (yes, the MF guy) & Austin TVA-1 started life as a lovely and fairly reliable 50WPC amp, yet grew into an unreliable and VERY harsh 100WPC amp (and "you lot" think CB era Naim is harsh.......). The Tube Technology Genesis Mono amps I had were incredibly "fast," but ate output tubes in a year. far better to down-rate the power available and increase reliability...

For me these days, there's something "comforting" about great valve amps. They look wonderful on the whole, careful design with top modern components should ensure reliability for years and whatever it is that there is in the sound - microphony, ringing, I don't know, suits my tired old ears, which cannot take any harshness of any description now, due to age and damage.. (I know I use "Class AB+B" amps - a forerunner to the Current Dumper circuit Quad use, but they clip so gracefully when bridged and the BC2's are efficient enough not for this to happen)

Another rambling sermon. I'll have to get off my a*se and make it to one of your get-togethers and have a proper chat over a pint or three... By the way, James over there is right, there's more "sand" in the glass of a valve amp I reckon than there is in a transistor :D

Varun
21-09-2009, 17:16
Hi Anthony,

I have no doubt what so ever that transistors haven't got a chance to compete. I have had enough trial and experience of listening and yes transistors can do a job- seemingly well but, the question is on what grounds.

The kind of music reviewers listen and the items chosen to decide what is better and what is not, leaves such judgements gaping wide with poor science. However-people reach opinions for reasons that may have no logic behind-jump to conclusions-but then fight because they feel their very identity is being questioned. Rudeness is often the result of it.

DSJR
21-09-2009, 17:18
I think it's fair to say that most recordings made in the last 40 odd years have been through more transistors than all our solid-state amps added together yet many of these are superb if done right....

hifi_dave
21-09-2009, 18:26
I believe that a good amp is a good amp whether tube or solid state. I don't think you can categorically state that all tube amps are good and all SS is bad or vice versa it depends on the design and quality of components.

Some years ago, Tim De Paravicini built two amps with identical specs, one tube and one SS. The goal was to prove that he could design SS and tube designs to sound identical and he did. They were truly excellent sounding amps with not the slightest difference between the two. Kessler raved over them in HFN at the time.

Mike Reed
21-09-2009, 18:49
.

Some years ago, Tim De Paravicini built two amps with identical specs, one tube and one SS. The goal was to prove that he could design SS and tube designs to sound identical and he did. They were truly excellent sounding amps with not the slightest difference between the two. Kessler raved over them in HFN at the time.

Interesting ! And they were.....?

Ken Kessler, late of Burgate, Canterbury, raved about most things in his American English hyperbole. Believe he was/is a 'tube' man through and through, though.

The Grand Wazoo
21-09-2009, 19:01
Some years ago, Tim De Paravicini built two amps with identical specs, one tube and one SS. The goal was to prove that he could design SS and tube designs to sound identical and he did. They were truly excellent sounding amps with not the slightest difference between the two. Kessler raved over them in HFN at the time.


I thought of those Yoshino amps when I was posting about the Carver amps here:
http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=3931

But I didn't want to complicate things!!

Ali Tait
21-09-2009, 19:06
I now have to eat my words! It's been pointed out to me by someone who knows far more than me about amps that there is indeed a SS amp with no feedback.See here-

http://www.firstwatt.com/downloads/F2-service-manual-sm.pdf

But hey,at least I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong.(Which is quite often!) :lolsign:

hifi_dave
21-09-2009, 19:33
The best amp I have heard was a brief audition of an amp which IIRC had an input matching x'mer, a step-up x'mer, a pair of transistors with a few resistors and an output matching x'mer. Power supply was a heap of car batteries. Nothing else. The sound was so fast and crystal clear I can still hear it now over twenty years later.

I don't know much about these things but I believe it was a similar design to the EAR solid state amp I referred to previously.

Ali Tait
21-09-2009, 19:44
Dave,that is just how this prototype direct-coupled amp for my statics sounds.Considering Nick put it together just with what he had to hand,the sound is amazing.I can't wait to hear the final version.

Varun
21-09-2009, 20:14
Hello Dave (W)

Why did he not (TdeP) carry on producing SS amps if he believed it was so easy and why did he stick with the tubes? Might it not be because he has similar views as Anthony's. Ken Kessler the man of watches Eh. Normally it is much more desirable to have more than one opinion to check a finding. So may I be at the liberty to say I remain unconvinced. Not wishing to appear fixed in my views but I have just been listening as a part of my experiment- which I do most of the time to:-

a Decca CD (Stravinski-Symphony in 3 movements-Solti-60s/90s) with a Super Analogue LP of the same work but conductor Ansermet- again 1962/1992. For those who may know-The Superanalogue LPs made in Japan were cut directly from the master (tape) using a tube amplifier. The purpose of mentioning this is that- the strings are pushed to the hilt in this work- and can sound very brash and that is precisely what happened on the CD. Put that CD in a SS amp- and most people will walk away. It will be unbelievably unpleasant and fatiguing to listen to.

DSJR
21-09-2009, 20:18
Another Dave replying here, but in an interview some years ago, T de P said that he makes "male jewellery." He probably wouldn't make as good a living if he did purely SS devices, BUT, he keeps his hand in with the various Musical Fidelity models he's had his hand in over the decades...

Long live EAR Yoshino is what I say!

hifi_dave
21-09-2009, 20:21
EAR do have SS amps but why the one I'm talking about and can't recall the name of, was never put into production I don't know. Bl**dy annoying because I had a couple of orders for it and Tim didn't want to know.:doh:

Varun
21-09-2009, 20:33
Well Dave (W);

Not surprising of him though- was he also not linked with Chesky records once?

Dave (DSJR);

Taking you advice I am not going to compare the digital LP with Decca SXL. Instead (on another thread) I will come back with a comparison of EMI (1962) EMI CFP (1972) and Decca SXL 1969?- Mahler 4th all on Vinyl.

I do not know why all the people who re-issued 180gm LPs chose Decca SXL and London labels preferentially. I must say that this is not entirely true though as there are many Mercury; Victor; CBS and DG works which were also re-issued.

NRG
21-09-2009, 21:22
I've just read a recent post in *that* thread about valve linearity and the 300B example curves...gave me the biggest laugh of the week...way to go. :doh:

anthonyTD
22-09-2009, 08:32
I've just read a recent post in *that* thread about valve linearity and the 300B example curves...gave me the biggest laugh of the week...way to go. :doh:
hi dave,
then i sugest you re-read what has been written and take it in the context it was meant, no body is saying that transistors cant be made to perform as linear devices and that their distortion characteristics cant be tame'd it just means they need feedback and aditional circuitry [usualy quit a bit] to correct them and make them suitable. DHT valves and many small signal valves are very linear devices period!
A...

DSJR
22-09-2009, 08:42
Varun,

I can tell you about the Solti Decca Mahler 4 (is this the performance you're referring to?). The 1964 LP (purple label) was cut with masses of eq apparently and when my mate mastered it for CD he tried to copy the original eq and found it sounded horrid. he ended up doing the CD transfer "flat" - i.e. as the producer passed it.

Without telling me what went on, he brought the LP's to my place (in the Mentor/Decca era) and I thought the LP's sounded too rounded and "dull." The CD's sounded far more like real string-tone. he *only then* told me the story...

Just go with your heart on this one. If you over-analyse as I often do, it only leads to confusion. I'm glad I don't have shedloads of money to indulge this hobby any more, as I have a reasonable sound and can concentrate on the music instead - I have a fifty year long LP collection to re-discover ;)

MattC
22-09-2009, 11:03
Some years ago, Tim De Paravicini built two amps with identical specs, one tube and one SS. The goal was to prove that he could design SS and tube designs to sound identical and he did. They were truly excellent sounding amps with not the slightest difference between the two. Kessler raved over them in HFN at the time.

It was in the August 1992 HFN&RR

The amplifiers were called the Yoshino XXXA & Yoshino XXXB the former being the transistor variant, and the latter the tubed version.

Ken did reckon that the transistors had the edge at the bass end, whereas the tubes had the better mid & top-end.

The cost of these things? £21,000 for a pair of XXXA and £25,000 for a pair of XXXB

there seems to be very little on the web about them, but TdP himself comments on them in this thread:
http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/0/27851/16/0/



cheers
Matt

Marco
22-09-2009, 11:07
Originally Posted by NRG
I've just read a recent post in *that* thread about valve linearity and the 300B example curves...gave me the biggest laugh of the week...way to go. :doh:




hi dave,
then i sugest you re-read what has been written and take it in the context it was meant, no body is saying that transistors cant be made to perform as linear devices and that their distortion characteristics cant be tame'd it just means they need feedback and aditional circuitry [usualy quit a bit] to correct them and make them suitable. DHT valves and many small signal valves are very linear devices period!
A...


LOL! Who's Dave? That was Neal you quoted, ya wee Vallee daftee - and he was agreeing with you by referring to the nonsense being written on the ZG thread! :lol:

Best stay off that funny cider... :eyebrows: ;)

Marco.

pure sound
22-09-2009, 11:11
It was in the August 1992 HFN&RR

The amplifiers were called the Yoshino XXXA & Yoshino XXXB the former being the transistor variant, and the latter the tubed version.

Ken did reckon that the transistors had the edge at the bass end, whereas the tubes had the better mid & top-end.

The cost of these things? £21,000 for a pair of XXXA and £25,000 for a pair of XXXB

there seems to be very little on the web about them, but TdP himself comments on them in this thread:
http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/0/27851/16/0/



cheers
Matt

I remember seeing a (perhaps the only?) pair of the transistor version in HiFi Confidential in London at about that time. I wonder what became of them.

MattC
22-09-2009, 11:11
Why did he not (TdeP) carry on producing SS amps if he believed it was so easy and why did he stick with the tubes? Might it not be because he has similar views as Anthony's.


Hi Varun,

TdP does currently offer a SS preamp and monoblocks

have a look on their website
http://www.ear-yoshino.com/

the SS pre is the 312
the SS monoblocks are the M100a

(their site doesn't make it easy to link to the specific pages)


cheers
Matt

Spectral Morn
22-09-2009, 11:12
It was in the August 1992 HFN&RR

The amplifiers were called the Yoshino XXXA & Yoshino XXXB the former being the transistor variant, and the latter the tubed version.

Ken did reckon that the transistors had the edge at the bass end, whereas the tubes had the better mid & top-end.

The cost of these things? £21,000 for a pair of XXXA and £25,000 for a pair of XXXB

there seems to be very little on the web about them, but TdP himself comments on them in this thread:
http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/0/27851/16/0/



cheers
Matt


Hi Matt

Welcome to AOS, and thank you for the info. Maybe you might like to pop into the Welcome section and say hello, tell us a wee bit about yourself the kind of music you like and the system you use.

Regards D S D L

anthonyTD
22-09-2009, 11:15
LOL! Who's Dave? That was Neal you quoted, ya wee Vallee daftee - and he was agreeing with you by referring to the nonsense being written on the ZG thread! :lol:

Best stay off that funny cider... :eyebrows: ;)

Marco.
hi marco,
oops!!!:mental: sorry neil mate, i just glanced at the sig and thought it was someone else i had been conversing with earlier having a dig, please accept my sincere appologies if your reading this.
regards,anthony,TD...

Marco
22-09-2009, 11:23
Hehehe... Btw, Paul Ranson has been officially invited to come and challenge you here one-to-one on the observations you've made regarding valves and ss. No-one else will be allowed to participate on the thread so that Paul doesn't feel he's being 'bullied' in any way.

I know that you'll be on your best behaviour if he accepts the challenge - that is of course if he has the balls to do it ;)

We'll soon see...

Are you cool about it?

Marco.

Spectral Morn
22-09-2009, 11:45
Hope it happens.


Regards D S D L

hifi_dave
22-09-2009, 12:11
I remember seeing a (perhaps the only?) pair of the transistor version in HiFi Confidential in London at about that time. I wonder what became of them.

We had them to try out with the smoke still rising from the soldered joints. We had a couple of likely customers booked in for dems and they wanted to order but it wasn't to be. They were last seen, covered in dust under Tim's bench.:scratch:

anthonyTD
22-09-2009, 14:56
Hehehe... Btw, Paul Ranson has been officially invited to come and challenge you here one-to-one on the observations you've made regarding valves and ss. No-one else will be allowed to participate on the thread so that Paul doesn't feel he's being 'bullied' in any way.

I know that you'll be on your best behaviour if he accepts the challenge - that is of course if he has the balls to do it ;)

We'll soon see...

Are you cool about it?

Marco.
hi marco,
thats fine, as you know i am quite a calm character who will more often than not find ways of conversing with most poeople usualy in a calm and considerate manner, if i am deliberately bated,,,then most of the time i just let it go, and put it down to experience, but sometimes things need to be aired out to put things finaly to bed.
regards,anthony,TD...

Marco
22-09-2009, 14:58
I completely agree. There is too much nonsense talked by people with agendas and blinkered minds, and it needs tackling - robustly too! :)

So far the silence over on ZG is deafening...

Marco.

Steve Toy
22-09-2009, 15:01
ZG is quiet in general (nothing unusual there :D). I guess Paul is probably at work.

Joe
22-09-2009, 16:58
Clearly the answer is to set up a dedicated forum, with membership limited to just two people, wherein Paul Ranson and Anthony TD can thrash out this thorny subject.

Marco
22-09-2009, 17:38
Hi Joe,

I don't think that's quite necessary. A separate thread will suffice, should Paul take up Anthony's challenge which, if I were a betting man, would say are very slim odds ;)

Marco.

Varun
22-09-2009, 17:40
Hi Varun,

TdP does currently offer a SS preamp and monoblocks

have a look on their website
http://www.ear-yoshino.com/

the SS pre is the 312
the SS monoblocks are the M100a

(their site doesn't make it easy to link to the specific pages)


cheers
Matt


Many thanks Matt,

I have looked at that web site. That 100w mono block amp is indeed Class A. My amp250w/ch does a very good job too. Knowing that 509s were designed to bring the sound close to non-valve sound but without the edginess if TdeP has designed a Class A SS amp then that is not a big deal. Class A is a good alternative to valves depending on the sound characteristics of course and one's preferences.

My gripe relates to generic SS sound A/B)-the likes of Naim and Linn and Audiolabs and so on.

Joe
22-09-2009, 17:43
Hi Joe,

I don't think that's quite necessary. A separate thread will suffice, should Paul take up Anthony's challenge which, if I were a betting man, would say are very slim odds ;)

Marco.

But why should Paul come 'over here' if Anthony won't go 'over there'?

Varun
22-09-2009, 17:48
Varun,

I can tell you about the Solti Decca Mahler 4 (is this the performance you're referring to?). The 1964 LP (purple label) was cut with masses of eq apparently and when my mate mastered it for CD he tried to copy the original eq and found it sounded horrid. he ended up doing the CD transfer "flat" - i.e. as the producer passed it.

Without telling me what went on, he brought the LP's to my place (in the Mentor/Decca era) and I thought the LP's sounded too rounded and "dull." The CD's sounded far more like real string-tone. he *only then* told me the story...

Just go with your heart on this one

Hi dave;

I shall come back on that comparison with picts. The Mahler 4th I have is the London version (Red label) which I bought in Princeton Record Exchange for $10 in 2001. I also bought a couple of other LPs- Ravel's Bolero etc for $34 and on returning found the records sounded terrible. This despite cleaning them in the newly acquired VPI 16.5. They have been sitting sidelined until I brought them over last weekend. Nothing wrong with them-they needed the right VTA setting.

The Grand Wazoo
22-09-2009, 17:54
But why should Paul come 'over here' if Anthony won't go 'over there'?

Because we're grown up enough to stand back & let them get on with it & not hurl insults & abuse???????
Aren't we gents?

Marco
22-09-2009, 17:56
Joe,


But why should Paul come 'over here' if Anthony won't go 'over there'?


He doesn't have to, of course. The point is that Paul made this comment on ZG (see post #472 on 'that thread'):


(I see more ludicrousness from 'anthonyTD' on the other side. I wonder what the chances of anybody picking him up on it are?)

...Therefore, given the above statement, and as Paul is referring over on ZG to things that Anthony has written here, then it seems appropriate that it is here where Paul should 'pick up' on Anthony's "ludicrousness", no?

Anthony didn't specifically 'target' Paul; it was vice versa. If Paul chooses to shoot his mouth off like that on another forum then he should have the gumption to face his 'challenger' on his home soil, mano-a-mano, as it were, without interruption from anyone else here or the lynch mob no doubt Anthony would face over on ZG.

The ball is now very much in Mr Ranson's court...

Marco.

P.S Chris, yes, you're spot on.

Joe
22-09-2009, 18:11
Joe,



He doesn't have to, of course. The point is that Paul made this comment on ZG (see post #472):



...Therefore, given the above statement, and as Paul is referring over on ZG to things that Anthony has written here, then it seems appropriate that it is here where Paul should 'pick up' on Anthony's "ludicrousness", no?

Calling people 'idiots' and likening them to 'pork' is also quite insulting, isn't it?

Dave Cawley
22-09-2009, 18:15
Guys, I'm monitoring the other forum. I believe it is time for AOS to pull right out, stop completely, finally. It's now doing no good whatsoever I'm afraid, you will never win. Some things you just have walk away from................

Regards

Dave

Steve Toy
22-09-2009, 18:16
Joe, I don't need to say it a third time, do I?

Joe
22-09-2009, 18:18
Joe, I don't need to say it a third time, do I?

I know ya loves me really, Steve, but I'm spoken for.

Steve Toy
22-09-2009, 18:23
So am I despite not having a full head of hair :p

Marco
22-09-2009, 18:25
Calling people 'idiots' and likening them to 'pork' is also quite insulting, isn't it?

Oh, definitely. I guess there's a limit to someone's tolerance threshold for sheer bloody-minded blinkeredness and tireless penchant for petty point-scoring ;)

...Especially when Anthony's professional opinion (and reputation as an audio designer) is also being rather rudely dismissed as "ludicrousness".

Marco.

Marco
22-09-2009, 18:36
Guys, I'm monitoring the other forum. I believe it is time for AOS to pull right out, stop completely, finally. It's now doing no good whatsoever I'm afraid, you will never win. Some things you just have walk away from................


Indeed, Dave. Before we do that, let's just give Paul the opportunity to accept the challenge or not :)

Marco.

Steve Toy
22-09-2009, 18:44
Indeed. Anthony is a really placid guy but when someone is almost questioning your integrity/competence in your specialised field it is hard not to get ever so slightly rattled.

Joe
22-09-2009, 18:54
Indeed. Anthony is a really placid guy but when someone is almost questioning your integrity/competence in your specialised field it is hard not to get ever so slightly rattled.

I maintain a glacial, studied politeness under such conditions. It's far more annoying and much less damaging to the old blood pressure.

Marco
22-09-2009, 19:00
I maintain a glacial, studied politeness under such conditions.


Yeah, we noticed that when you ran off in a huff the last time!!

;)

Marco.

Dave Cawley
22-09-2009, 19:01
With respect, and being able to see the wood, the trees and a glass of cold Grolsh, I think it should stop now, there and here. To most people it looks like a fight, and AOS members don't do that! We are way bigger than that!

Trust me.......................

Regards ( & respect )

Dave

Joe
22-09-2009, 19:02
Yeah, we noticed that when you ran off in a huff the last time!!

;)

Marco.

That was an ironic huff.

Steve Toy
22-09-2009, 19:06
What is an 'ironic huff?'

Marco
22-09-2009, 19:07
He's taking the piss, Steve!

I think we can agree though that his reacton wasn't exactly one of "glacial, studied politeness". :eyebrows:

Marco.

Steve Toy
22-09-2009, 19:14
I know. He is also the only active poster common to both AOS and ZG apart from me.

Joe
22-09-2009, 19:20
I know. He is also the only active poster common to both AOS and ZG apart from me.

What does that say about you and me?

anthonyTD
22-09-2009, 19:23
hi all,
well,,, i think its time i put an end to this myself, i do not and will not allow this forum to become a mockery or a laughing stock on my behalf, yes i said a few un-choice words describing the behaviour of some of the characters on that forum, but they were not aimed at anyone in paticular and were just as a response to the constant baiting of some of our members there at that paticular time, i have no need or the interest to get involved in pety bickering.
i will however stand by AOS and help in discusions and meaningfull debates when i can and if i think they are beneficial to members and the forum.
regards,anthony,TD...

Steve Toy
22-09-2009, 19:29
Paul Ranson is polite enough and would engage in a meaningful discussion. As for a few others, one in particular, that is another matter

muffinman
22-09-2009, 19:29
FWIW my kit6550 blew up last week (lots of blue flashes, crackling through the speakers and, interestingly, the smell of digestives :confused:)

Due to time constraints atm i can't repair it so looked for a quick and easy replacement

I picked up a mint Marantz pm7200 for £115 at my local smack generator

....and the big new is - It's not bad at all (rather good in class A)
It really isn't disgraceing itself (and i could get used to remote control input and volume)

Basically, life's too short

Joe
22-09-2009, 19:31
The answer to the question 'are valve amps better than solid state amps?' is 'sometimes' and that is also the answer to the question 'are solid state amps better than valve amps?'.

There. Easy-peasy.

Marco
22-09-2009, 19:34
Yes, but solid-state amps are only better on a Tuesday - you forgot that.

Marco.

Joe
22-09-2009, 19:35
Yes, but solid-state amps are only better on a Tuesday - you forgot that.

Marco.

Unless it's a leap year, of course.

Steve Toy
22-09-2009, 19:37
Tuesday, isn't that non-NHS day?

Joe
22-09-2009, 19:38
Tuesday was always scouse-day in our house.

Marco
22-09-2009, 19:39
You ate Scousers???

Marco.

anthonyTD
22-09-2009, 19:41
move along now,,, nothing to see here.:lol:
A...

Joe
22-09-2009, 19:42
You ate Scousers???

Marco.

No. We ate scouse, made with lots of salt, pepper, beef, carrots, spuds, and turnips. Dunk the sliced white bread in the gravy. Fill yer boots!

Marco
22-09-2009, 19:45
As someone with a few friends from Liverpool, I'm very familiar with it - bloody good it is too!

Marco.

Beechwoods
22-09-2009, 19:45
You learn something new every day...

Spectral Morn
22-09-2009, 19:47
Guys

:mental::confused::scratch::doh::(


Regards D S D L

Marco
22-09-2009, 19:47
Beechy,

Have you not heard of scouse? I forgot you were a southern softie! :lolsign:

Marco.

P.S Neil, there's bugger all happening on ZG - as per usual unless someone from here (such as Steve) decides to go and liven things up! ;)

anthonyTD
22-09-2009, 19:51
Guys

This is starting to get out of hand here and on ZG. I am not quite sure what Joes game is on both forums, but can I suggest it stops now.

Regards D S D L
neil,
my last serious post on this thread explains my intentions on the whole thing,
i just want a peacefull life mate.
regards,anthony,TD...

Beechwoods
22-09-2009, 19:57
Have you not heard of scouse? I forgot you were a southern softie! :lolsign:

Southern?! :steam:

I'm from the Black Country! Born in Birmingham and bred in the Switzerland of the Midlands ( thank you (http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=HIr&q=%22Switzerland+of+the+Midlands%22&btnG=Search&meta=) Birmingham Evening Post :))

Southern softie my butt :ner:

Steve Toy
22-09-2009, 20:02
Yam alroit am ya?

Nick, I never had you down as a Yam Yam ;)

Beechwoods
22-09-2009, 20:16
Somehow it passed me by! Must've been all the fresh air I was getting!

Marco
22-09-2009, 20:28
Mr Ranson: Yes, but having reviewed the AoS thread, and knowing more than enough about the forum owner, I'm going nowhere near it.

FYI the key ludicrousness in Anthony's post was the paragraph about input impedance. Perhaps he didn't mean it. But, as written, it's ludicrous.


It's a pity that Paul wasn't more specific in the first place rather than (seemingly) categorising everything Anthony had written as "ludicrousness"... Let's hope he'll be more careful in future.

Or maybe he did mean that everything Anthony wrote was 'ludicrous', and the input impedance part was just the "key" bit...

The forum owner? That'll be Steve, then! ;)

Any views on the input impedance thing, Anthony?

Marco.

Dave Cawley
22-09-2009, 21:49
OK, so you are going to push this to the limit guys? AOS is bigger than this............

Dave

Marco
22-09-2009, 21:52
Dave,

I think the 'challenge' is as dead as a Dodo now, after Paul's rather convenient cop-out ;)

Marco.

Dave Cawley
22-09-2009, 21:55
So leave it be, you know it makes sense?

Dave

Marco
22-09-2009, 21:58
That's fine by me. I just wanted to give Paul the opportunity to redeem himself, which he's sadly chosen to reject :)

Marco.

Dave Cawley
22-09-2009, 22:03
So now lets lock the thread and listen to some music??

Dave

Marco
22-09-2009, 22:41
I don't think it's appropriate to lock the thread, especially as Anthony may wish to respond to Paul's assertion about the input impedance issue (it's his thread, remember) and also others may still have something else to add.

I appreciate your concern Dave, but I'll decide when threads are to be locked. Let's go and listen to music, by all means! :)

Marco.

Steve Toy
22-09-2009, 23:45
This thread will remain unlocked. It is essentially Anthony's thread and he's genuinely here to help. The prowess of his products both in terms of measured and subjective performance makes his input here worthy of the greatest of respect.

Here at AOS we hold dear the contributions of those who really know what they are talking about and this includes your good self Dave. :)

Marco
22-09-2009, 23:54
The prowess of his products both in terms of measured and subjective performance makes his input here worthy of the greatest of respect.


Hear, hear! :)

What has Paul Ranson built in comparison that's worthy of mention? Does he even build equipment?? In fact...why should anyone respect his technical opinions on audio - period! Basically, what has he achieved commercially as an audio designer or engineer, in the way Anthony has done, that's worthy of anyone's respect? :scratch:

I could see the point if Anthony were debating the issue with Tim de Paravicini, or (the late) Peter Walker of Quad!

Marco.

Steve Toy
23-09-2009, 00:05
He's a polite contributor in general and did retract a little from his original disparaging remark.

I'd still like to encourage his input here under the controlled circumstances of a two-player dialogue.

Giant Haystacks
23-09-2009, 02:01
this sort of thing is only going to help to have more silent readers .why not let the engineers do the talking we are very honoured to have them .
and all others give non agressive opinions maybe im wrong. but i think a lot of members like me just listen and contribute very little

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 06:18
OK, of course it's your Forum Marco, how could we forget that!!! I apologise for even making the suggestion.............

But do me a favour guys, cut the hate campaign, it does you no good. Cut the constant criticism and concentrate on the technical stuff.

I'm not into personal attacks, especial across forums. I guess it is my choice to leave.

Regards

Dave

Marco
23-09-2009, 06:49
Hi Dave,

Chill, mate. There are no "personal attacks" here (by this I mean invective) - merely people being critical of the remarks others have made on ZG. Everyone is entitled to express their opinion (or not) on the matter. It is also largely Anthony's decision what happens, as it is essentially his thread.

I did say that I appreciated your concern, and it has been noted, but can we leave it at that now and let the thread either develop further or die a natural death?

Cheers :)

Marco.

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 06:53
but can we leave it at that now

Yes, now my point has been listen to! No more character assassination, great!

Dave

Marco
23-09-2009, 07:02
Dave,

The only "character assassination" that's taken place has been what Anthony was subjected to over on ZG (and his unfortunate, but IMO, justified retaliatory remarks). Paul Ranson, James McPeake (a.k.a 'The Devil') and his ilk are, shall we say, 'well-known' over many years by Steve and I.

Now please, if you don't like this thread then just ignore it. I really don't require any further advice on how it should proceed or not.

See you on jfine's Technics thread! :)

Marco.

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 07:39
Well, that is OK then!

Dave

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 09:04
It's a pity that Paul wasn't more specific in the first place rather than (seemingly) categorising everything Anthony had written as "ludicrousness"... Let's hope he'll be more careful in future.

Or maybe he did mean that everything Anthony wrote was 'ludicrous', and the input impedance part was just the "key" bit...

The forum owner? That'll be Steve, then! ;)

Any views on the input impedance thing, Anthony?

Marco.
hi all,
ok enough is enough on this particular subject for now, the SOLID STATE VERSUS VALVE is as far as i am concerned worthy of debate from time to time but as for the bullying and bating of forum members that includes us and those like paul on ZG there really is no need for it, i stated something he didnt agree with and in his mindset he felt it was worth challenging and thats fine, as i stated we have both said things in the heat of the debate that with hindsight we probably wouldnt have, but thats the nature of the beast, as for paul ranson not accepting whatever chalenge was supposed to have taken place here:confused: it means just that he dosent want to participate any further, lets leave it at that now lads. i would still like this thread to run in case anyone would like to contribute on a meaningful level, but it must be about the subject stated in the title!
regards,anthony,TD...

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 09:09
Great!

Are old design Triodes more or less linear that more recent ones?

And are transmitting Triodes designed for Class C and audio triodes for class A & A/B more or less linear? What did the designers have in mind and at their disposal?

Like is an 845 less linear because it was designed for Class C, than a 300B that was designed for Class AB ? (and in any case is this true)

Dave

Marco
23-09-2009, 09:16
lets leave it at that now lads. i would still like this thread to run in case anyone would like to contribute on a meaningful level, but it must be about the subject stated in the title!


No worries - as you wish. That's what we've always wanted anyway :)

I see that Dave is now furthering the discussion in the right direction... Time for some :popcorn:

Marco.

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 09:22
hi marco,
yes thank goodness, anyway i have work to do now but if no one has gotten back on dave's question by the time i come back [i should coco would probably be able to give as good an answer on this] i will put my thoughts up later.
regards,anthony,TD...

NRG
23-09-2009, 12:09
Great!

Are old design Triodes more or less linear that more recent ones?

And are transmitting Triodes designed for Class C and audio triodes for class A & A/B more or less linear? What did the designers have in mind and at their disposal?

Like is an 845 less linear because it was designed for Class C, than a 300B that was designed for Class AB ? (and in any case is this true)

Dave

Thing is Dave there are no 'new' design Triodes and there's only one class of valve ever designed for audio...the Beam Tetrode.

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 14:40
hi neil,
there are actualy a hand full of new triodes being made at the moment, some at blackburn uk, they are based on the ECC81, 82, AND 83's. i say they are a new design because they are nothing like the originals ie; construction wise and internals.
A...

Marco
23-09-2009, 15:03
Hi Anthony,

As Pete (i should coco) hasn't been back since your return, could you give us your opinion on Dave's assertions as mentioned earlier in his post #100?

I'm on a learning curve myself (as usual), so a definitive answer on this would be helpful :)

Marco.

P.S The TechTube ECC83-types being produced from the old Mullard factory in Blackburn are in my opinion the best of their type I have ever heard, NOS or otherwise. I can't wait to hear their (forthcoming) KT88s!!

Link to TechTube: http://www.techtubevalves.com/

Ali Tait
23-09-2009, 15:13
A few articles I've read have stated the 211 was originally an audio valve.Dunno how true that is.

Tony Moore
23-09-2009, 15:38
I can't wait to hear their (forthcoming) KT88s!!

A 300B at a reasonable price would be nice! ;)

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 16:02
Hi Anthony,

As Pete (i should coco) hasn't been back since your return, could you give us your opinion on Dave's assertions as mentioned earlier in his post #100?

I'm on a learning curve myself (as usual), so a definitive answer on this would be helpful :)

Marco.

P.S The TechTube ECC83-types being produced from the old Mullard factory in Blackburn are in my opinion the best of their type I have ever heard, NOS or otherwise. I can't wait to hear their (forthcoming) KT88s!!

Link to TechTube: http://www.techtubevalves.com/

hi marco,
too much to do in one go at the moment but here are a few details about triodes.

In the beginning was the triode valve, that's all there was originally as far as the first electrical amplifying device is concerned, the first prototypes were actually very crude designs and reworks of the common carbon filament LIGHT BULB of the time, the most commonly known high power triodes from the early days are of course the PX4 and PX25, with PP3/250 and PP5/400 being the mazda equivilents. both are of the directly heated type, this meaning there is no seperate cathode like in later triodes, pentodes and tetrodes, so the cathode is actually the heater, usually with a centre tap used for biasing and hum balance etc [some of the larger triodes used for transmitting etc have no centre tap] the PX4 used in single ended mode would yield around 3 to 4 watt [conservative] and the PX25 around 8 to 10 watts, both figures would be dependant on how the valve was run, ie, HT voltage and current being drawn, therefore if you see the abreviation DHT you now know that it stands for directly heated triode and why it is know as such. triode valves have three electrodes or active elements, an anode or plate, a control grid and a cathode.
to be continued...:)
A...

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 16:25
Great!

Are old design Triodes more or less linear that more recent ones?

And are transmitting Triodes designed for Class C and audio triodes for class A & A/B more or less linear? What did the designers have in mind and at their disposal?

Like is an 845 less linear because it was designed for Class C, than a 300B that was designed for Class AB ? (and in any case is this true)

Dave

Seriously guys, any chance of addressing my question of post #100 ? Especially the 845 300B issue?

Thanks

Dave

Marco
23-09-2009, 16:27
I think Anthony's attempted to do that, Dave. There's more to come, though :)

Marco.

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 16:38
OK, just don't want to loose the thread about Class C designed valves and their comparative linearity with Class A/B designed valves.

The first radio a built used an Acorn 954 valve, it almost worked first time, but I was only 12......................

Regards

Dave

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 18:07
OK, just don't want to loose the thread about Class C designed valves and their comparative linearity with Class A/B designed valves.

The first radio a built used an Acorn 954 valve, it almost worked first time, but I was only 12......................

Regards

Dave
hi dave,
as marco has already stated i intend on adding to this thread when i have time so bear with me, but it is open for anyone to contribute to yours or anyone elses questions concerns etc. as for your questions well i can tell you that the 300B was not originaly intended for high end audio,,, it was first developed by the western electric company for use in amplifying telephone signals!
but i guess you knew that.;) of course its potential as an excelent audio amplifier has been well documented since.
regards,anthony,TD...

Mike
23-09-2009, 18:30
Thing is Dave there are no 'new' design Triodes and there's only one class of valve ever designed for audio...the Beam Tetrode.

Hmmm... not too sure about that. :scratch: http://www.r-type.org/exhib/aaa0046.htm

Or do you mean 'output' valves?

Such as the EL34 pentode. http://www.r-type.org/exhib/aaa0014.htm

Marco
23-09-2009, 18:34
Hi Anthony,


well i can tell you that the 300B was not originaly intended for high end audio,,, it was first developed by the western electric company for use in amplifying telephone signals!
but i guess you knew that.


I believe that it was Tony Moore who mentioned the 300B, not Dave ;)

However, your observation remains a valid one!

Marco.

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 18:34
Telephone signals would be class A I suspect? No I didn't know that either, a bloody big valve a telephone circuit! I assumed it was an audio amplifier to modulate a transmitter? Anyway, I'll await your advice.

Regards

Dave

Mike
23-09-2009, 18:42
Some interesting 300B history here:... http://www.antiqueradio.com/300B_01-98.html

Cheers...

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 18:48
Great!

Are old design Triodes more or less linear that more recent ones?

And are transmitting Triodes designed for Class C and audio triodes for class A & A/B more or less linear? What did the designers have in mind and at their disposal?

Like is an 845 less linear because it was designed for Class C,
than a 300B that was designed for Class AB ? (and in any case is this true)

Dave
:)

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 19:05
Telephone signals would be class A I suspect? No I didn't know that either, a bloody big valve a telephone circuit! I assumed it was an audio amplifier to modulate a transmitter? Anyway, I'll await your advice.

Regards

Dave
hi dave,
ok no worries, as for other triodes like the 845, although it was originaly designed for use in AM radio transmision it is a very good audio valve if used within its most linear region ie, low plate voltage and high current.
in fact i think most of the triodes that were originaly designed for use in class B and C RF transmision can be made to work as linear devices for audio, the main difference being unlike class A triodes like PX4/25's where they need to be biased negatively to control their current draw, big class B and C triodes need to have their grids driven positively to make them draw current, one advantage of this is that the grids can be directly coupled to the previous driver stage thus eliminating the need for a coupling capacitor or interstage transformer which would impose bandwidth limitations.
hope this helps some.
regards,anthony,TD...

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 19:16
Hi Anthony, it goes same way, thank you. Class B was rarely used at RF as class C was way more efficient. I just wondered about the design, what the designers were thinking of. And did the 300B guy look at Class A and optimise for that, and the 845 guy know it was class C he wanted. And in reality was/would there have been a difference?

Regards

Dave

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 19:24
Hi Anthony, it goes same way, thank you. Class B was rarely used at RF as class C was way more efficient. I just wondered about the design, what the designers were thinking of. And did the 300B guy look at Class A and optimise for that, and the 845 guy know it was class C he wanted. And in reality was/would there have been a difference?

Regards

Dave
interesting,,, in the days when these paticular valves were designed IMHO i am pretty sure they would have been looking at efficiency and longevity as top priority, a lot of the circuits from the early days contained just enough of everything to make it work and no more...
regards,anthony,TD...

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 19:31
Yes, true. But there were in fact they were specifically designed for Class C and A respectively, what was the thought/design process behind that I wonder. And did it make a difference, if so why? if not why did they characterise in that fashion?

The 807 for example served well in WWII as both RF and AF, why was that? I've never understood valve design, or valve designers, although I never met any? What do you think?

Regards

Dave

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 19:42
Yes, true. But there were in fact they were specifically designed for Class C and A respectively, what was the thought/design process behind that I wonder. And did it make a difference, if so why? if not why did they characterise in that fashion?

The 807 for example served well in WWII as both RF and AF, why was that? I've never understood valve design, or valve designers, although I never met any? What do you think?

Regards

Dave
hi dave, the 807 valve is a very good all-rounder, my first memories of them were when i was a small boy, my dad used to use them in his home made transmitters, the military used them in feild transmitters too but they were deliberately limited to a few watts in power for what ever reason, maybe they didnt want the signal to travel far enough for the enemy to pick up,:scratch: :eyebrows::lol:
its also a good valve for audio but its reletivley high bandwidth design causes a few problems with ocilations in certain circuits, and if you connect it as a single ended triode or push-pull as used in the williamson design you can only run it up to around 300v safely due to its screen grid maximum design voltage rating.
A...

NRG
23-09-2009, 19:43
Hmmm... not too sure about that. :scratch: http://www.r-type.org/exhib/aaa0046.htm

Or do you mean 'output' valves?

Such as the EL34 pentode. http://www.r-type.org/exhib/aaa0014.htm

Yes, output valves...

NRG
23-09-2009, 19:49
hi neil,
there are actualy a hand full of new triodes being made at the moment, some at blackburn uk, they are based on the ECC81, 82, AND 83's. i say they are a new design because they are nothing like the originals ie; construction wise and internals.
A...


These are not 'new' valves Anthony, their electrical characteristics are the same as the designs they are based on. Their construction maybe different but so are valves from other manufacturers and we don't class them as 'new'.

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 19:50
Yes I would agree with that (807). Loads of gain = instability! But let's return to the 300B and 845, do you think they were deliberately characterised for class A and C on purpose? And what made them suitable for that? What was the design thought/process?

6146, now there was an RF valve if ever there was one, or was it? No idea why though?

Regards

Dave

Mike
23-09-2009, 19:57
Yes, output valves...

How about pentodes then? :)

There's a few of those I can think of which were designed for audio use. ;)

Mike
23-09-2009, 19:58
there's only one class of valve ever designed for audio...the Beam Tetrode.

Not all of them. ;)

http://www.r-type.org/exhib/aaa0546.htm

NRG
23-09-2009, 20:02
Sorry the Beam Tetrode was the only power valve specifically designed for audio, all other types where from some other background or for general use. Of course the design of the Beam Tetrode can be put to other uses as your link proves but don't mix the design with the function. ;)

Just to add to this the Pentode or Kinkless Tetrode was developed to get over the problem of secondary emission that was present in the design of the Tetrode which used a screen grid in an effort to over come the Triodes high inter electrode capacitance....

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 20:03
These are not 'new' valves Anthony, their electrical characteristics are the same as the designs they are based on. Their construction maybe different but so are valves from other manufacturers and we don't class them as 'new'.
hi neil,
from what i have been told by a good source i would say your right about 80%;) they are centred around original designs but they have deliberately changed some of the parameters for eg the gain on the ECC83 is lower due to problems with microphonics apparently!
A...

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 20:07
Sorry the Beam Tetrode was the only power valve specifically designed for audio, all other types where from some other background or for general use. Of course the design of the Beam Tetrode can be put to other design uses as your link proves but don't mix the design with the function. ;)
i'll go along with neil on this one mike,
if you go back far enough you will find that most early triodes pentodes etc were designed for either a diffrent application than audio or they were a universal device, we await to be proved wrong:)
A...

Mike
23-09-2009, 20:11
Sorry the Beam Tetrode was the only power valve specifically designed for audio, all other types where from some other background or for general use. Of course the design of the Beam Tetrode can be put to other design uses as your link proves but don't mix the design with the function. ;)

I just thought it was an interesting question, Neil. 'What valves were designed for audio use'... and thought I'd have a mooch about. :)

Make you wonder... what came first? The design? or the function?... did anyone ever build a valve and think "right!... what can we do with this?" :lol:

Cheers...

Mike
23-09-2009, 20:13
i'll go along with neil on this one mike,
if you go back far enough you will find that most early triodes pentodes etc were designed for either a diffrent application than audio or they were a universal device, we await to be proved wrong:)
A...

I'm sure you're both right. :)

As for the last bit... I'm not even going to try! :lolsign:

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 20:16
I just thought it was an interesting question, Neil. 'What valves were designed for audio use'... and thought I'd have a mooch about. :)

Make you wonder... what came first? The design? or the function?... did anyone ever build a valve and think "right!... what can we do with this?" :lol:

Cheers...
i think roosevelt comes to mind here, as in "necessity is the mother of invention!;)
A...

Dave Cawley
23-09-2009, 20:22
In essence, my question too "what came first? The design? or the function?... "

Still hoping for an answer from the experts.

Dave

Mike
23-09-2009, 20:32
i think roosevelt comes to mind here, as in "necessity is the mother of invention!;)
A...

That doesn't stop people from buggering about just for the sake of though... ;) :lol:

anthonyTD
23-09-2009, 20:36
In essence, my question too "what came first? The design? or the function?... "

Still hoping for an answer from the experts.

Dave
hi dave,
well going back to what has been said i would stick my neck out and say that the function would almost certainly provoke the design, throughout the valve era there were many diffrent valve designs for specific purposes, but a lot of valves were designed for the same purpose but were deliberately slightly diffrent to get around the complex patent laws of the time, for eg, the americans had 6V6, 6L6, 6550, all tetrodes of course, we had KT61, KT63, KT66, AND FINALY KT88's. i must stress that all the KT range had lower distortion characteristics than their american equivilents...these are just some examples but i think you get my gist.
regards,anthony,TD...

Marco
23-09-2009, 21:07
Hi Anthony,


hi neil,
from what i have been told by a good source i would say your right about 80% they are centred around original designs but they have deliberately changed some of the parameters for eg the gain on the ECC83 is lower due to problems with microphonics apparently!


That could well be the case, but all I can say is that they sound better than any of the originals I've heard. Of course that could be for a variety of reasons, not least of which being that the performance of NOS valves varies so much due to varying levels of deterioration over time, and as such is very unpredictable.

At least with the 'new' TechTube designs consistency should be vastly improved due to advancements in technology.

As for your last point, obviously I haven't measured the gain, but subjectively there is no difference there with the TechTube ECC83 I now have in the Croft compared to the NOS Tesla E83CC it replaced :)

What the TechTube ECC83 does have though is more 'drive', subjectively less noise, and a clarity and 'sparkle' through the mid and top-end that I've heard with no other valve of its type before. However, my observations are of course in the context of the Croft in my own system. Results may differ elsewhere, which is why one can never give universal recommendations with valves, NOS or otherwise.

Marco.

SPS
24-09-2009, 08:31
the px 4 was designed as a quality mains high power output valve back in 1929 they where designed to drive the then new moving coil loudspeaker that came out the year before
. there where other uses of course

it was only few years before that nearly all valves where designed for dc battery use, both transmitting and receiving, which related directly to audio

what we use in valve amps are only part of any valve radio
communications was the main goal for all valves, and amplifing audio sine waves is what valves are very good at from a quality aspect

on the back of the new loudspeaker came the need for more volume
the first pentodes in the early 30's and where aimed at battery sets, also class b valves came into to use...
the idea was to get more volume from less current, at the expence of a little quality...

I 've head so many people say so so valve was designed for audio (so it must be better ?)

yeh....

what we did find was many valves got worse from a out and out quality aspect, as the design aims changed towards higher outputs, smaller size etc

cheers

steve

promachos
29-09-2009, 09:24
Sorry the Beam Tetrode was the only power valve specifically designed for audio, all other types where from some other background or for general use. Of course the design of the Beam Tetrode can be put to other uses as your link proves but don't mix the design with the function. ;)

Just to add to this the Pentode or Kinkless Tetrode was developed to get over the problem of secondary emission that was present in the design of the Tetrode which used a screen grid in an effort to over come the Triodes high inter electrode capacitance....

The EL34 & EL84 were designed by Mullard specifically for consumer audio.:)

MartinT
07-10-2009, 14:13
Surely the EL84, as in the Leak Stereo 20, produced the most liquid and compelling midrange known to man? No amplifier running EL34 or (even worse) 6550 valves has ever, to my ears, produced the wonderful midrange of the '84. Just based on my experience of a variety of Leak, Radford, Dynavector and Croft amps.

anthonyTD
07-10-2009, 14:27
Surely the EL84, as in the Leak Stereo 20, produced the most liquid and compelling midrange known to man? No amplifier running EL34 or (even worse) 6550 valves has ever, to my ears, produced the wonderful midrange of the '84. Just based on my experience of a variety of Leak, Radford, Dynavector and Croft amps.
hi martin,
i know what you mean about EL84's but the main reason [ IMHO] any valve [we are talking pentodes here] has a paticular sonic signature is due to its internal plate resistance, for eg, an EL84 has an internal resistance of around 38k, now the other end of the scale an EL34 is roughly 15k, ie, the one with the lower impedance will have [to a point] a better ability to reproduce bass with more authority, therefore it can be forgiven to think that it may not be as good at mid-range as the EL84, but in fact it is, its just its frequency range is more even, hence less prominent in the mid range like the EL84.
hope this helps.
regards,anthony,TD...

MartinT
07-10-2009, 14:37
Thanks Anthony, very interesting. I also found that, while the bass of the Stereo 20 is light, the texture and detail of its bass is excellent. If you tie it up with, say, BBC LS3/5a speakers, the sound is superb and lack of bass hardly noticeable.

anthonyTD
07-10-2009, 15:19
Thanks Anthony, very interesting. I also found that, while the bass of the Stereo 20 is light, the texture and detail of its bass is excellent. If you tie it up with, say, BBC LS3/5a speakers, the sound is superb and lack of bass hardly noticeable.
hi martin,
again, i agree, when two such pieces of equipment as you have sugested are partnered, their sometimes known incompatibility found with other equipment vanishes and the performance can be truly magical.
A...

The Grand Wazoo
07-10-2009, 16:03
All of this makes me wonder as I have before, whether that old Sound Sales amp (model no. escapes me) followed the right approach - It was certainly an interesting one as the amp facilitated tri-amping through the use of different output valve types for the three different drive units. Has this been done anywhere else?

anthonyTD
07-10-2009, 16:37
All of this makes me wonder as I have before, whether that old Sound Sales amp (model no. escapes me) followed the right approach - It was certainly an interesting one as the amp facilitated tri-amping through the use of different output valve types for the three different drive units. Has this been done anywhere else?
thats interesting!
its one amp that i have never come across before, and from what has already been said on this subject so far,,, its easy to grasp what the intentions of the designers were.:)
A...

The Grand Wazoo
07-10-2009, 19:18
thats interesting!
its one amp that i have never come across before, and from what has already been said on this subject so far,,, its easy to grasp what the intentions of the designers were.:)
A...

I'll see if I can find the info I had on it & keep you posted. It was hearing about this amp that made me experiment with a mix of valves & SS in the past - something I may go back to sometime.

anthonyTD
07-10-2009, 20:31
I'll see if I can find the info I had on it & keep you posted. It was hearing about this amp that made me experiment with a mix of valves & SS in the past - something I may go back to sometime.
great!:)
A...