Solid state preamp grain compared to valves

[Lawrence001]

My working assumption behind the difference was that there was something about how silicon transistors or op amps work, possibly down to the molecular level or at least a micro level, that produced a mild but perceptible distortion compared to how valves work, but I know nothing about that to justify the argument. If anyone does know the physical mechanism by which a transistor multiplies a signal I'd be intrigued to know.

Sent from my BLN-L21 using Tapatalk

[walpurgis]

http://www.michaelsharris.com/electr...lification.htm

Valves do similar things. Check out triode operation.

[Haselsh1]

I totally agree here that grain when applied to photography is a physical characteristic that can actually be measured and quantified. Also of course it can be controlled by development to a greater or lesser degree. Can audible 'grain' be treated in the same way..? I haven't a clue.

[Haselsh1]

A bit off topic: why did Capa's image become so grainy? Did he underexpose the shot and so had to push the development? Whatever, 'grainy' photos can often be very effective. In the day I used to use Kodak Tri-X film (400 ASA) for 'arty' black and white photos. Could never see the point in developing film myself, but did spend many (often fruitless) hours in the darkroom printing up various frames, and messing about 'burning in', 'holding back' and 'dodging' areas of the image.

Grain can be made to be highly excessive by developing a film at 'normal' temperature and then, after fixing, plunging the film and spool into ice cold water. Strictly speaking this is not grain but reticulation. The effect though is very 'arty'.

[Pharos]

The measured distortion figures on SS compared with valve would tend against valves being better.

[Marco]

The measured distortion figures on SS compared with valve would tend against valves being better.

Lol... Dennis, we know that measurements don't always tell the full story, certainly in terms of what people consider sounds best, which ultimately is all that matters. If they did, we'd all be using the same 'universally proven/most transparent', and therefore 'best' amp, speakers, cables or whatever, and forums such as this would have virtually no purpose!

Marco.

[Firebottle]

My working assumption behind the difference was that there was something about how silicon transistors or op amps work, possibly down to the molecular level or at least a micro level, that produced a mild but perceptible distortion compared to how valves work, but I know nothing about that to justify the argument. If anyone does know the physical mechanism by which a transistor multiplies a signal I'd be intrigued to know.

Sent from my BLN-L21 using Tapatalk

I'm sure it is the intermodulation distortion, but have no way to prove it.
Harmonic distortion is tolerable or even euphonious whereas intermod is a cacophonous mixture of all frequencies within the recording.

A low level of this can give a coarseness to the overall sonic image.

[Mr. C]

Not having grain in any solid state pre amplifier I own, can't ever say its been a problem.

Some valve pre's do sound very enticing and with system matching can work very well indeed, as has been mentioned before each person choice is that THEIR choice, affected by any hearing issues?, room speaker interface, bad mains supply and system in-balances can all give different results with different systems etc.

I have a good friend who uses an Audio M10 (with further upgrades by AN) sounds wonderfully musical without question, does it bring something to the party hell yes, it is really and truly accurate, nah! but does that matter if YOU enjoy the sound, of course not.

You can knock up a basic active pre amp in a couple of days, a passive even less, you purchase what is right for YOU and YOUR system

Personally passive pre amps good but no cigar, a decent active pre amp imho is essential for quality playback what ever takes your fancy valve or SS.

Put it bluntly your signal either flows across the top of grid plate of a valve or switches throught the FET (some of which are truly superb these days) op-amps like I've said else where:-

"Certainly would agree with the modern chips quoting ultra low noise floors, slew voltages and large bandwidth, low distortion figures, however it is the implementation that delivers the results.

Correct grounding, dual mono isolated power supplies will all help with stage depth, texture, separation and linearity.

Personally I prefer fully discrete designs, yes more 'real estate' required, however the results can be quite special if more long wind"

The pre amp has always been much maligned, however we see it as a prerequisite.

[Haselsh1]

Sorry, I wasn't having a pop at you, I was having a pop at the folks who propagate misinformation and mislead people like you who don't have the electronics background to challenge it. The idea that the valve is there "only" to drive the interconnects implies that a unity gain buffer is so trivially simple that it must be 100% transparent whereas a non-unity gain amplifier is inevitably flawed. It isn't true.
I just don't like to see people misled like you were by WAD.

Cheers Andrew. So there's no need to release the dove of peace then

[Marco]

Personally passive pre amps good but no cigar, a decent active pre amp imho is essential for quality playback what ever takes your fancy valve or SS.

That's also the conclusion I've come to. Even the best ones I've heard, in fully compatible systems, sound a little 'soft' and lacking in 'drive'/punch, thus despite sounding open and 'sweetly musical', reproduce music in a somewhat lifeless fashion, compared with the best actives, valve or SS.

Passives are a good solution, up to a point, particularly in complimentary budget systems, if finds are tight, but for ultimate high-fidelity sound, no. The exception to that rule, however, to my ears, are LDRs, which don't lack drive in the slightest; indeed the best ones, in the right system, can sound rather beguiling.

Marco.