View Full Version : What's the recording studio doing in your hifi
The Vinyl Adventure
24-12-2009, 01:25
I have had a fairly lengthy listening sesion tonight and feel I have come to a conclusion that frankly has confused me a bit and I'm hoping some of the parhaps more informed members on here can help me get a grasp on what is happening
the last few weeks I have been very happy with my amps but have felt at times it been a touch harsh - I haven't been that worried as I have been reliably informed that this is mostly down to the fact the pre amp and the output valves are very new
this said certain music has sound very very good - zero 7, leftfield, underworld and certain music quite harsh and lacking in the mids - crash test dummies (the worst offender), fleetwood mac
so tonight I plug in the copper dac and I have had an almost polar oposite experience. Zero 7 sounds a bit too smothed over but crash test dummies sounded b-e-a-utifull!!!
This leads me to belive there is no problems with my amps, but in fact some issue with my choice source
or
Is it down to the recording it's self? Are my different sources compensating for differences in recording equipment, or the ears of those makeing the recordings? Should I strive to find a source that makes everything sound good all the time?
To be honest, and I think I might be going out on a whim on this one... I might just use the copper dac when required and the dac in the majik when required... I don't really see any issue doing this as il be happy more of the time... If fact I would go as far to say this could help me not want to box swap for a long time!
It's not like recording equipment is all the same, and it is always noted that certain kit is better for certain music .. Well maybe just having slight differences in source (for eg) is the best way to make up for these differences ... Maybe I'm just taking shite?
Thoughts please
Rare Bird
24-12-2009, 01:32
It's really another case of idiots behind the studio engineering seat in CD mastering..The equipment they use is a lot to be desired regardles of what lot think,i think your copper DAC is highlighting or not, what you other didnt.Youve got a caiman, is this the last DAC your comparing it to?
The Vinyl Adventure
24-12-2009, 01:36
In fact, marco, I seem to remember you fairl recently saying you would like somthing between the copper dac and your Sony dac... Surely having both for different circumstances would be better...
I am now super confident I have the amp/speaker combo spot on as it has produced superb results for all my types of music... Just with slight changes in source ... This does bring me back to what I was saying about the source being most important the other day... I know that is a dated mantra.. But this seems to make ever more sence to me now...
Maybe my sorce is just wrong??...??
The Vinyl Adventure
24-12-2009, 01:40
It's really another case of idiots behind the studio engineering seat in CD mastering..The equipment they use is a lot to be desired regardles of what lot think,i think your copper DAC is highlighting or not, what you other didnt.Youve got a caiman, is this the last DAC your comparing it to?
Nope, comparing it to the dac in the majik...
The majik does make some musik sound better than the majik digi out into copper dac. And the majik digi out into copper dac does makes some music sound a lot better than the majik alone!!
Rare Bird
24-12-2009, 01:44
This reflects the topic i started regarding CD-r i burned from vinyl Vs the shop bought CD of the same, i was experiencing the same as you with digital source, till i realised the CD-r's i did gave me less difference between change, than the shop bought issues of the same...
Rare Bird
24-12-2009, 02:08
Hamish.
I used to play many CD's that were very transparent sounding, which seemed to be brilliant recordings at the time, but soon realised that this engineered sound wasnt so, the brightness was just overwhelming my emotions!
Question arose when i would try a CD-r i made from a vinyl of the same albums i first played, the bright impressive sound i was experiencing, toned down a tad, i got to realisng that the original CD's were actually overbright, the CD-r's were infact natural & more correct sounding, compared to the record it was taken from.
A change of DAC gave me a very slighly more transparent sounding CD-r to previous but not the false seemingly convincing studio mastered quality of the shop bought issue first tried on last DAC, there wasnt that much between the two DAC's with the CD-r's, but to put the original issue then on the second DAC was a tad uncomfortable..Confused yet? :)
So the morel of the story for me was CD mastering is tripe..I totally blame how CD's are presented for the problems experienced with the sound.
Haselsh1
24-12-2009, 08:22
You know, I've said this so many times on this forum but here goes again...
I once bought a Cranberries CD and the sound from it was truly awful. It was so loud and brash it was to me, unlistenable. I then got to hear the same album on vinyl. Oh my God what a difference...! The vinyl version was just so gorgeous. I bought the vinyl version and trashed the CD.
Why oh why must we suffer such shite on CD...???
Haselsh1
24-12-2009, 08:24
By the way; I can't remember the name of the Cranberries album but it's on yellow vinyl and it contains the track 'I Just Shot John Lennon'
Andre talks a lot of sense here
Often what you are hearing is poor mastering
But as your system develops more resolution it will also show up potential faults more too. Bad mains and poor isolation do not help
The copper DAC is very revealing But it took about 3 weeks before the dac sounded at it best and intially when I first got it was quite harsh
Definitely bad mastering. In the early days of CD, in the rush to reissue the back catalogue, they often used the LP master (or even the cassette master!) as the CD master, rather than remastering from scratch. Not a good idea, especially when some LP masters already had the RIAA eq on them.
Also, in order to show that CD could go up to 20kHz they often increased the upper frequencies. I have plenty of CDs from those early days that are unlistenable due to over bright treble.
Latterly of course, the quality of mastering has gone right down, and much chart stuff is mastered to sound good in MP3 and on crappy ipod earphones.
But there are many CD's from the early days that sound amazing. Some mastering engineers really cared about sound quality, as they still do today.
But some LP's sound awful as well. For example the LP of George Dukes 'Guardian of the Light'. I'm sure the master had the RIAA eq encoded on it, then at the cutting stage they added RIAA eq again.
Listening to studio master tapes (rather than LP or CD production masters) is an eye opener. And it's immediately obvious where the problem lies - in the final production mastering.
In my opinion, you can't say that LP's are better than CD's. It depends on the LP and the CD, and a lot of the time, it depends on the final mastering for release. But what I can say, with some certainty, is that what you hear on the CD or LP is in many cases light years away (in a bad way) from what it sounded like in the recording studio.
Should I strive to find a source that makes everything sound good all the time?
IMO no way! Even if you could find such a thing, it would be very coloured and give a very false interpretation of the music. If your source is changing the sound so much that it makes bad recordings sound good, it doesn't necessarily follow that its making good recordings sound even better.
Are my different sources compensating for differences in recording equipment
IMO, yes. The sonic signatures of different equipment are acting almost as tone controls. A bright recording won't sound good with equipment that has a bright sonic signature, and vice versa.
As Kris says.
As far as I am concerned, when I have a doubt about a recording, I give it a good listen through Studio headphones (that are ruthless). If it sounds bad, well, it should sound bad through the main system, no doubt. I wouldn't want it to sound "nice".
Nevertheless, sometimes I prefer less detail. It doesn't depend on the recording, rather depends on my mood.
But , in such a case, I wouldn't like the source to be the filter... ;)
Instead, I have found a solution : I have a Denon A/V amp which is very forgiving. So, whenever I don't want details (or the recording is bad) I listen through the 3808. A wonderful amp, indeed. Although many of you, I know, will not agree. :)
I find good kit just lets you get on with listening to the music.....<cough>
Hi Hamish,
John is spot on here:
Often what you are hearing is poor mastering
But as your system develops more resolution it will also show up potential faults more too. Bad mains and poor isolation do not help
The copper DAC is very revealing But it took about 3 weeks before the dac sounded at it best and intially when I first got it was quite harsh
The bit in bold is *exactly* what is happening - have no doubts about that. Having lived with the very DAC you're using now in my own system for quite sometime and having heard another version of it on numerous occasions in Ian Walker's system, I know exactly what it's capable of sonically.
The copper DAC (and also Steve's acrylic one which Duncan also made) is one of the most neutral and transparent DACs I've heard to date - it tells you precisely what's going on in your system (and with recordings), and of course the truth sometimes can come as a bit of a shock!
My modified DAS-R1 does this too, but adds a richness of tone to proceedings (I suspect due to the 'analogue' sounding nature of the TDA1541 chips), which Dunc's DACs lack, although the valve-equipped one you have adds air and space and top-end extension (both valve traits, IME) which the solid-state designed Sony doesn't have. I want both, hence why in the new year I will look into this. There are a number of options I intend to explore.
Anyway, I go back again to what John wrote... As your system gains greater resolution, so it will showcase any faults elsewhere. This is what's happening now in your system; in fact, if you remember, you've already heard this effect when Steve came round with his preamp :)
The important thing to keep in mind is not to blame the copper DAC for revealing issues in your system elsewhere, but instead to fix the issues at source when they're revealed! Never try to mask things by using less revealing components (or cables) as a 'sticking plaster'.
That way, you'll end up with a truly superb sounding system which acts as a genuine 'open window' on all recordings you play through it. It also kills endless box-swapping dead because your system is fundamentally sorted at a ground roots level. This is where I'm at now with my own system after years of trial and error.
Keep us posted on how things develop with your new DAC, and most of all, enjoy the music! :cool:
Marco.
The Vinyl Adventure
24-12-2009, 11:08
Ok, I should point out that I'm not blameing the copper dac or saying it sounds bad...
I'm gonna get it all set up properly and then come to better conclusions.. Like I said it's not really fair commenting on the copper dac when it is sat on tip of a speaker..
The thread was more to do with how a source reveals the music an weather different sources are better for different types of music, or indeed different recording methods... All the CDs I quoted are pretty well produced it would just apear now I have the equpment to resolve these differences, different sources make then sound better or not quite as good
Ok, I should point out that I'm not blameing the copper dac or saying it sounds bad...
I know you're not (I know exactly what you're saying) but I don't necessarily agree with the "different sources are better for different types of music" bit.
My view is build a system that has as much resolution and dynamic range as possible, choosing components in the process which synergise together sonically, and any music played on it will sound as it's supposed to sound, which of course is either superb or dire, depending on how good the respective recordings are. This is precisely what hi-fi is about. However, if you get the synergy bit right then even bad recordings are eminently listenable.
It's undoubtedly a difficult thing to achieve though; quite simply there's no substitute for experience :)
Marco.
The Vinyl Adventure
24-12-2009, 11:38
Well, I shall continue to play about with my new bits and bobs and see how I get on once it's set up properly
That's exactly what to do, matey. Enjoy :)
Remember too that you've still to sort out your stands (and mains too, yes?), so there's plenty more 'shenanigans' to come ;)
Marco.
The Vinyl Adventure
24-12-2009, 11:48
Yep yep yep, loads more fun to be had!
yes and loads more costs!
But if you wanting the best sound you can get you are on the right track but it is a frustrating process
All you need to make *many/most* CD's sound good is to get some B&W M801's at least. They tend to have a boomy bass, sucked out mid and fizzy sparkle up top and this seems to balance badly mastered CD's out rather well - I can't believe the number of mastering facilities using these speakers. I know Polygram had all theirs donated and maybe EMI did too, but even so..............
I spent Sunday afternoon at a family get together talking with a Music composer/record producer talking about Hifi of course and how the recording process has changed, when he started out he was signed to Abbey road under George Martin the year before the Beatles and when he recorded the track it was taken straight from the master tape to the room next door and cut straight onto a disc no interfence from external engineers at all, he still composes stuff now and has his own studio at home, me imagining a great big room for all the kit, buy no that was then, now it is now housed in a what he calls a toilet size room with a computer at the base of it all where he can add effects to his heart content including effects that mimic a valve sound, the music piece is then sent on to a matering studio where they sort his dablings out, hopefully the next time i'm in London i will pop in for a play.
I have also found that the better the equipment is the worse some recordings sound, but as Marco says it trying to find a system that once matched together all recordings should sound good is the name of the game
A good system "at any price" should try to make the bad recordings sound as reasnable as possible, 'cos impressive recordings will always sound impressive. My ancient system sounds really good in musical terms on the clapped out LP's and singles I've been playing and superb on the good ones as well it should.
Perhaps the copper DAC puts emphasis on midband details, I don't know. Impedance mismatches could also count for the treble "gentleness" perhaps?
You'll get there I reckon. You'll just need to have the gains sorted etc...
I'm afraid I agree with Marco - Ideally a system, and particularly a source, should be utterly transparent, a window into the recording. That which attractively colors poor recordings masks the best of them and misses the point.
I suspect that Marco and I completely disagree on how to get there and even on what it sounds like once you've arrived, but we seem to have the same objective.
Tim
Steve Toy
29-12-2009, 14:10
Marco's (mine also) method of getting there actually works Tim. It's not idle theory. And it's not subtle.
Spendor BC1's and 2's are small fry in old-scale real terms, but they're big in our sitting room---
http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q8/DSJR_photos/BC2sinsitu.jpg
IMO no way! Even if you could find such a thing, it would be very coloured and give a very false interpretation of the music. If your source is changing the sound so much that it makes bad recordings sound good, it doesn't necessarily follow that its making good recordings sound even better.
I agree with this 1000%. The recording, for better or worse, is the source, the reference. There is nothing else. If you color the bad recordings with component choices, you color the good ones (unless the component is eq, which is easily adjustable and reversible). But all of that only matters if you strive for those evasive and nearly undefinable virtues -- transparency and accuracy (upon which detail, resolution and imaging depend...). If you like the color a piece of kit adds, even on the best recordings, that's simply a choice. The wrong one for me, but you ain't me.
Tim
I agree with that 1005%!
I suspect we would disagree, as you say, on how to get there ;)
Marco.
Rare Bird
04-01-2010, 14:06
Look at it this way, i happen to think you are colouring the source by using a valve amplifier!
Of course the source is coloured to some degree through *any* equipment; I would simply argue that mine succeeds to reproduce it with greater accuracy than most.....
I'm sure that others here would say the same thing, with a valve amp or otherwise! ;)
Marco.
I agree with that 1005%!
I suspect we would disagree, as you say, on how to get there ;)
Marco.
Not sure I follow you, Marco. Do we agree that seeking color or character in components colors the good with the bad and that is inconsistent with the goal of accurately reflecting the recording, but disagree on what constitutes "color" or "character" in a piece of kit?
That is so easily resolved in my view -- anything less than flat frequency response is coloring the recording. Measurement does nothing, of course, to determine what you hear, but it can easily determine whether or not the signal from the recording is being changed by a component. That science is pretty straightforward and very well-established.
The ability to measure the effect that some colorations can create, for some listeners -- a sense of ambiance or naturalness or musicality that blunt objective accuracy may not create for those listeners, is far fuzzier and utterly subjective without blind listening testing, which most of the aforementioned listeners do not believe in anyway. No point in discussing it, really. Just trust your ears, as you would say. And for such effects, for such listeners, I can only agree 1010%!
Tim
Rare Bird
04-01-2010, 14:13
Of course the source is coloured to some degree through *any* equipment; I would simply argue that mine succeeds to reproduce it with greater accuracy than most.....
I'm sure that others here would say the same thing, with a valve amp or otherwise! ;)
Marco.
But arnt you just using a sticky plaster in the form of tailoring a tone to suit your ear, this is all an EQ is basically doing, the thing with EQ is you can lift the top frequency on a bad dull recording, bypass the EQ if not required.Not a permanent fixture you know.
Not sure I follow you, Marco. Do we agree that seeking color or character in components colors the good with the bad and that is inconsistent with the goal of accurately reflecting the recording, but disagree on what constitutes "color" or "character" in a piece of kit?
Precisely! :)
That is so easily resolved in my view -- anything less than flat frequency response is coloring the recording. Measurement does nothing, of course, to determine what you hear, but it can easily determine whether or not the signal from the recording is being changed by a component. That science is pretty straightforward and very well-established.
Agreed again, although it's often what's not measurable, such as you allude to below that's as important (or sometimes even more so) than what can currently be measured...
The ability to measure the effect that some colorations can create, for some listeners -- a sense of ambiance or naturalness or musicality that blunt objective accuracy may not create for those listeners, is far fuzzier and utterly subjective without blind listening testing, which most of the aforementioned listeners do not believe in anyway. No point in discussing it, really. Just trust your ears, as you would say. And for such effects, for such listeners, I can only agree 1010%!
Real music is full of natural distortions and colorations, Tim, and some equipment captures this more faithfully than others. In my experience this is usually equipment which doesn't forensically strip such distortion/coloration bare in the quest for 'perfect' measurements, as dictated by scientific methodology and associated apparatus which only tells half of the story (i.e. it currently cannot measure everything in audio that we can genuinely hear) ;)
This is where a well-engineered valve amplifier, voiced by someone with requisite experience and designed by ear in conjunction with predetermined measurement criteria, IME, often performs the above task more effectively than its solid-state counterpart - particularly ones where the primary goal is to remove as much distortion/coloration as possible, and with it some of the music (read as the natural distortions/colorations which real music exhibits).
Where do you think we'll be with this discussion in 10 pages time? :eyebrows:
Marco.
But arnt you just using a sticky plaster in the form of tailoring a tone to suit your ear, this is all an EQ is basically doing, the thing with EQ is you can lift the top frequency on a bad dull recording, bypass the EQ if not required.Not a permanent fixture you know.
Yes but you only want to EQ things once, and that's during recording at the studio. After that the job of a hi-fi system is to reproduce a given recording with the greatest fidelity possible, not to add further distortions with an unnecessary box.
We can then all argue until the cows come home on the best way to achieve that and what equipment we should use to get there!!
See you back at the beginning in 20 pages time....... ;)
Marco.
Rare Bird
04-01-2010, 14:37
Na no chance, you telling me every recording in you collection sounds right to you on your system! Me nor think so, i have a quite few that sound shit but sound better with a tad lift. It's near on impossible especially that flat 80's shit :lol: If you pick & choose recording co they sound half decent well thats a bit sad really...I'm not gonna sit there & listern to a flat lifeless recording when i can at least do a bit to it...You get use to your music, you know what needs what & when.
Na no chance, you telling me every recording in you collection sounds right to you on your system!
No - it sounds as "right" (to me) as the recording engineer intended within the limitations of my system. That for me could be good or bad!
There's really no point in continuing this argument, Andre, as we're poles apart on what we consider as representing high-fidelity with music.
One day, if you come down for a listen, which you're very welcome to do, (or you go to the Scalford Hall bake-off), you'll hear where I'm coming from and hopefully then understand me better :)
Marco.
In fact Marco agrees that distortion is unwanted but disagrees that distortion can be measured with existing measurement instruments... :)
Quite, Dimirti. Not every effect in audio genuinely heard by us can currently be measured - and that's where the problems start!
There's distortion, and there's distortion - not all of it is bad. It's a matter of getting rid of as much of the unwanted stuff as possible and retaining that which is naturally present in real voices and instruments. This is why equipment, in the final analysis, MUST always be voiced by ear. The measurement apparatus currently available to us only tells us so much.
It is why, based on extensive listening experience, I find properly engineered and designed valve equipment has the edge over its solid-state counterparts, because the distortion/coloration inherent in valves and valve equipment, in my opinion, better replicates that present in real music; thereby it is by definition subjectively more accurate - quite the opposite of what the objectivists believe!
Therefore, the reason that I run a largely valve-based system is not to intentionally colour or tailor the sound in some way, but in fact quite the opposite!! I'm trying to get closer to the real thing, and indeed feel that I have succeeded.
Do you see where I'm coming from? :)
Marco.
Rare Bird
04-01-2010, 15:01
No - it sounds as "right" (to me) as the recording engineer intended within the limitations of my system. That for me could be good or bad!
There's really no point in continuing this argument, Andre, as we're poles apart on what we consider as representing high-fidelity with music.
It's not an argument it's healty debate.. ;)
Were back to that old chestnuts of def Engineers i'm sorry to say & believe me their is a lot of em, more so now that back then but they were still a plenty. It's nothing really to do with what the sound engineer gives in terms of sound quality, if it feels uncomfortable you have the option to alter it slightly instead of just sitting there & letting things go by...At the end of the day your not hearing what is in that recording studio anyway & never will cos for a fact both your record player & Valve amp are adding tone & distortion to the recording...
It is why, based on extensive listening experience, I find properly engineered and designed valve equipment has the edge over its solid-state counterpart, because the distortion/coloration inherent in valves and valve equipment, in my opinion, better replicates that present in real music.
Yes, Marco, but all this is clearly explained in measurement. It is called odd-order distortion. It's what musicians use for the guitar amplifiers. ;)
Is this what you mean ?
(I'm just trying to see what you mean - this is not an interrogatory or something !)
Of course, Dimitri, and that's partly what I mean. The fact is though it's not always the equipment which measures the most accurately (according to known parameters) that sounds best to our ears.
That's why in many people's opinions some valve amps, although measuring worse based on the above parameters, actually sound better - and it's not necessarily because those people wish to imbue their favourite music with coloration! ;)
It's because they believe, often through considerable experience of listening to real instruments and having a good handle on how they should sound, that good valve equipment is more faithful in terms of creating that sound. That is precisely where I'm at :)
Marco.
Well, then, Marco, I'll give you my opinion on this :
I believe that:
- valves are better than ss for amplifying low voltages
- transistors are more practical for everyday use
- transistors have less overall distortion, unfortunately sometimes they generate unpleasant (even-order) distortion on critical frequencies. So, sometimes, solid state equipment is harsh and unpleasant.
- valves have little even-order distortion on critical frequencies, unfortunately sometimes they generate an important, yet not unpleasant (odd-order) distortion on critical frequencies. So, sometimes valve equipment is coloring the original signal, although this coloration is not unpleasant.
- In any case, all this can be measured, although most people don't agree where coloration or unpleasantness starts.
I agree with most of that, Dimitri. However some things we can genuinely hear in audio do not show up on the measurement apparatus and technology currently available to us.
For example, how do you explain why two valves (i.e. of the same date, type and manufacturer), which measure identically on a valve tester, measuring all necessary known parameters, sound quite different from each other when listened to through the same valve amplifier, system and with the same music?
I've experienced this on many occasions, and I'm not imagining it.
I'm not saying that if we knew what to measure and had a device to successfully measure it, there wouldn't be a scientific explanation for what's happening - what I'm saying is that phenomena in audio exist that our ears can hear but which currently can't be proven through measurement. That situation may well change of course as technology improves.
One such phenomenon, certainly, is why valves often makes music sound more 'alive' and 'real' than transistors, which often measure much better (measuring all that we are currently able to measure, of course).
This is an old subject though and probably best for another day.
Marco.
For example, how do you explain why two valves (i.e. of the same date, type and manufacturer), which measure identically on a valve tester, measuring all necessary known parameters, sound quite different from each other when listened to through the same valve amplifier, system and with the same music?
I've experienced this on many occasions, and I'm not imagining it.
Marco, a valve tester does not measure much, afaik. Just some basic values, no ? :)
Thus, I'm not amazed that they sound different, and I'm sure that with the usual measurement material you would see their differences.
One such phenomenon is why valves often makes music sound more 'real' than transistors, which often measure much better (measuring all that we are currently able to measure, of course).
This is an old subject though and probably best for another day.
Marco.
This is measured also. It is very well explained in the theory of transistors and a well-known fact. Simply, some engineers dispute that this is audible. (as usually ;))
But we can leave it for another day.
Peter Galbavy
04-01-2010, 15:56
Now we start getting into chaos theory and "sensitive dependence on initial conditions" etc.
I think the problem with perceiving the issue clearly here is that on one side (where I tend to start from) is the "scientific measurement" brigade and on the other the "what does it dound like" posse. Both sides can heatedly discuss the issue, I think, without realising that while you can measure everything, what we end up doing is measuring a few specific metrics and maybe not even knowing that other measurables exist. To take an extreme example, what would the point of measuring the current in a circuit be without knowing the voltage too ?
Marco, a valve tester does not measure much, afaik. Just some basic values, no ? :)
Thus, I'm not amazed that they sound different, and I'm sure that with the usual measurement material you would see their differences.
What else can be measured in relation to valves then that doesn't show up on a professional valve tester (I'm talking about proper ones here, not 'toys')?
Andre and Peter I'll come back to you later as right now I must dash!
Marco.
Dimitri, I think you got your odd and even order distortion the wrong way round guv...
Even order distortion that's not (feedback) smeared all over can add to the tone of an instrument and is not unpleasant. odd order, especially third, fifth and seventh order a la CB Naim's of yore, coupled with crossover distortion in older class B amps, can be very unpleasant indeed..
It's all a question of design-balance IMO. Glenn Croft claims to have a far better performance from his simple looking hybrid Seies 7 power amp than from his old Series 4 valve amp (and probably his OTL too) for example and Graff made some incredibly "lean" sounding valve amps.
Most valve amps are transformer coupled and I suspect a heck of a lot of the performance potential of such a design is in the transformer (all that wire for the signal to pass through...).
P.S. Some of the finest vintage audio gear was designed using measurements but with talented designers - Arthur Radford and Peter Walker to name but two...
anthonyTD
04-01-2010, 16:33
Dimitri, I think you got your odd and even order distortion the wrong way round guv...
Even order distortion that's not (feedback) smeared all over can add to the tone of an instrument and is not unpleasant. odd order, especially third, fifth and seventh order a la CB Naim's of yore, coupled with crossover distortion in older class B amps, can be very unpleasant indeed..
It's all a question of design-balance IMO. Glenn Croft claims to have a far better performance from his simple looking hybrid Seies 7 power amp than from his old Series 4 valve amp (and probably his OTL too) for example and Graff made some incredibly "lean" sounding valve amps.
Most valve amps are transformer coupled and I suspect a heck of a lot of the performance potential of such a design is in the transformer (all that wire for the signal to pass through...).
P.S. Some of the finest vintage audio gear was designed using measurements but with talented designers - Arthur Radford and Peter Walker to name but two...
:)
Dimitri, I think you got your odd and even order distortion the wrong way round guv...:lol:
Proof (if needed) that I shouldn't write while at work... :)
What else can be measured in relation to valves then that doesn't show up on a professional valve tester (I'm talking about proper ones here, not 'toys')?Any non-linear characteristics, for instance ?
Rare Bird
04-01-2010, 17:34
:lolsign:
Andre,
It's not an argument it's healty debate.. ;)
Indeed - same difference. You're presenting your argument to the discussion (as am I) as part of the healthy debate we're having :)
Were back to that old chestnuts of def Engineers i'm sorry to say & believe me their is a lot of em, more so now that back then but they were still a plenty.
Defo - no dispute there!
It's nothing really to do with what the sound engineer gives in terms of sound quality, if it feels uncomfortable you have the option to alter it slightly instead of just sitting there & letting things go by...
As I said elsewhere, that might work as a 'fix' for you, but it doesn't for me. The added distortion of a graphic equaliser would annoy me more than the sonic deficiencies of a poor recording.
At the end of the day your not hearing what is in that recording studio anyway & never will cos for a fact both your record player & Valve amp are adding tone & distortion to the recording...
I completely agree, but I love the sound my system makes and how it reproduces my favourite music. I can assure you beyond doubt that there is never any occasion where I'd feel that adding a graphic equaliser would improve matters. YMMV.
Dimitri,
Any non-linear characteristics, for instance ?
I'm not sure. If a professional valve testing device can't reveal those in valves then what type of measurement apparatus would?
Marco.
Dimitri,
I'm not sure. If a professional valve testing device can't reveal those in valves then what type of measurement apparatus would?
Marco.An oscilloscope can show some none-linear characteristics.
Some, perhaps, but "some" isn't enough though is it to fully explain what's going on? ;)
Marco.
Some, perhaps, but "some" isn't enough though is it to fully explain what's going on? ;)
That wasn't the point, Marco. I was simply explaining that the tester doesn't show much, and that probably the differences heard on identical valves could be somewhere else. ;)
That wasn't the point, Marco. I was simply explaining that the tester doesn't show much, and that probably the differences heard on identical valves could be somewhere else. ;)
That's the bit I'm unconvinced about, Dimitri. Perhaps someone like Anthony could confirm exactly what known parameters a professional valve testing machine is designed to test, and which ones (if any) it fails to test for? :)
Marco.
Rare Bird
04-01-2010, 19:10
You can test a valve to spec written down as much as you want, but testing is nothing to do with how the valve behaves in circuit, it's the implimentation within the design that gives the desired results.
I agree and that's pretty much what I'm saying, Andre. It's how that in turn translates subjectively into what we hear through our speakers, and whether the effect heard is measurable (and through what test apparatus?), which is the grey area under debate :)
Marco.
Rare Bird
04-01-2010, 19:26
Marco is your amp *parallel push pull*
Just gonna stick another log on the fire mate :lol:
Nah, it's single ended with flutter on his bottom end.....:D
Naaaaayyyyyy.... It runs on pure fart gas! :lol:
Marco.
Rare Bird
04-01-2010, 19:39
4x KT88 per side i take it?
And your point is, muchacho?
Marco.
Rare Bird
04-01-2010, 19:51
nothing mate i was just wondering
LOL - it's just a 30W Class A P/P amp using 4 x KT88s :)
Marco.
Steve Toy
04-01-2010, 21:10
It is the little brother to mine, also 30 Watt class A push-pull, 4 x KT88s, TESLAs in my case, GECs in Marco's.
Precisely! :)
Agreed again, although it's often what's not measurable, such as you allude to below that's as important (or sometimes even more so) than what can currently be measured...
Real music is full of natural distortions and colorations, Tim, and some equipment captures this more faithfully than others. In my experience this is usually equipment which doesn't forensically strip such distortion/coloration bare in the quest for 'perfect' measurements, as dictated by scientific methodology and associated apparatus which only tells half of the story (i.e. it currently cannot measure everything in audio that we can genuinely hear) ;)
This is where a well-engineered valve amplifier, voiced by someone with requisite experience and designed by ear in conjunction with predetermined measurement criteria, IME, often performs the above task more effectively than its solid-state counterpart - particularly ones where the primary goal is to remove as much distortion/coloration as possible, and with it some of the music (read as the natural distortions/colorations which real music exhibits).
Where do you think we'll be with this discussion in 10 pages time? :eyebrows:
Marco.
Oh I think we'll be, more or less, in the same place we are now, unless we go ahead and agree to disagree now. :) And really, there are only two points upon which I think you've got it truly wrong, all subjectivism aside:
1)
Real music is full of natural distortions and colorations, Tim, and some equipment captures this more faithfully than others. In my experience this is usually equipment which doesn't forensically strip such distortion/coloration bare in the quest for 'perfect' measurements
If it's in the "real music," or more to the point of this discussion, the recording, it's not distortion, it's the signal, and reproducing that, without adding or stripping away anything, is the objective. No "objectivist" design engineer I've ever heard of, communicated with or read about is attempting to strip anything from the recording and if it was stripped, forensically or otherwise, the measurements would not be perfect, because the recording, flawed or otherwise, is the benchmark.
2)
This is where a well-engineered valve amplifier, voiced by someone with requisite experience and designed by ear in conjunction with predetermined measurement criteria, IME, often performs the above task more effectively than its solid-state counterpart - particularly ones where the primary goal is to remove as much distortion/coloration as possible, and with it some of the music (read as the natural distortions/colorations which real music exhibits).
You are welcome to your estimation and your preference for valve kit, sir, but again, I know of no competent designer whose goal is to remove anything from the recording, and I'm not even sure it is even possible while maintaing the goals of flat frequency response and low noise/distortion. The goal of "objectivist" (an insufficient term, but I think we know what we're talking about) playback equipment design is to add nothing, to take away nothing. I've spent a fair amount of time in hifi shops, in recording studios and on internet sites like AOS, and this is the first time I ever recall seeing this position, that equipment designers are attempting to strip the recording of natural colorations, put forward. I don't think it's logical, much less accurate. The goal is long established - a wire with gain, adding nothing, subtracting nothing.
Perhaps this would be a good time to agree to disagree, unless you have some references to support this theory.
Tim
At the end of the day your not hearing what is in that recording studio anyway & never will cos for a fact both your record player & Valve amp are adding tone & distortion to the recording...
I completely agree, but I love the sound my system makes and how it reproduces my favourite music.
...or perhaps we don't need to agree to disagree after all. Enjoy your kit.
Tim
Steve Toy
05-01-2010, 01:50
I've yet to hear an all-solid state system accurately reproduce texture, tonality and nuances of real instruments, capturing say, the rasp of saxophone or the reverb of guitar pick-ups or that complex harmonic structure of bass guitar so you know it's a particular bass guitar with a particular pick-up or the contrasting warmth and body of acoustic massed double bass. Bear in mind also that our resident design engineer also designs and manufactures amplification for musicians to play live music. Valves have a faster rise time and distort less with transients than complex solid state circuitry. The resulting sound is more immediate, more tactile and more real and sounds louder to the ear conveying more passion. There is also greater separation between instruments when lots of them are playing together and the overall presentation is more three-dimensional.
If I want a hi-fi system to capture the nuance and expression of a solo saxophone playing as I hear a talented busker play it on the London underground I know a valve setup following a top-notch CD transport and DAC or a fully-fettled turntable via well-designed cabling, optimised mains and isolation for all components is going to get closest. Accurate measurements of THD alone may get close but they will likely miss that X factor.
Dynamics are also the key and for that decent power supplies at all key stages in active components are paramount.
Tim, I suggest that your benchmark as a listener to recorded music is somewhat more modest than ours, hence your scepticism (note spelling).
Tim, I suggest that your benchmark as a listener to recorded music is somewhat more modest than ours, hence your scepticism (note spelling).
In rare and really good live recordings, you can sometimes hear the true character of the instruments, filtered through the ambiance of the venue. When the equipment and technique is good enough you can, indeed, hear the difference between a Martin Dreadnought and a Martin OM, a Les Paul Special with low gain single-coil pickups, a Les Paul Standard with medium output humbucking pickups and a modern Les Paul with contemporary high-gain humbuckers. I know these benchmarks, and many more musical instrument comparators, from 40 years as a working musician performing with, and surrounded by, such instruments, both acoustic and electric, on stage and in rehearsal rooms and living rooms.
With that benchmark in the forefront of my mind and experience, regarding the superiority of valves in accurate reproduction, we will have to disagree. My benchmark is high enough, I simply hear things differently than you do.
As an American, using American software, sceptical sets off my spell-checker with that annoying squiggly red underline. Skeptical does not. Two nations separated by a common language, as they say.
Tim
Rare Bird
05-01-2010, 08:45
It is the little brother to mine, also 30 Watt class A push-pull, 4 x KT88s, TESLAs in my case, GECs in Marco's.
Sorry thought it was Parallel PP but i see from your avatar you have two per side...Don't these amp suffer from symmetrical cliping!
I know of no competent designer whose goal is to remove anything from the recording, and I'm not even sure it is even possible while maintaing the goals of flat frequency response and low noise/distortion.
+1
All in all, the competence of the designers and the economic goals of the manufacturer are the real differentiators in the final product quality.
Valves/hybrid/transistors are simple means.
Hi Tim,
No "objectivist" design engineer I've ever heard of, communicated with or read about is attempting to strip anything from the recording and if it was stripped, forensically or otherwise, the measurements would not be perfect, because the recording, flawed or otherwise, is the benchmark.
It's about the way equipment is designed to reproduce recordings of music. If a recording of music has been captured as accurately as possible in the studio (something you contend these days with modern digital methods is the case) then in effect the equipment we use to reproduce that is dealing with 'real music', and in turn the natural distortions and colorations present within it.
Stripping anything away from the recording is not the intended goal of any designer - it's a by-product of an obsessive desire to remove distortion/noise wherever possible, even when some of that distortion is necessary for the faithful reproduction of the information on the recording, preserving music's natural colorations, as I referred to earlier, in the process.
*That* is where, in my opinion, designers whose primary goal is to achieve 'perfect measurements' with audio equipment (in reality there is no such thing) get it fundamentally wrong. And it clearly shows, sonically, (and thus musically, too) in the end results obtained whenever I listen to equipment born largely from such principles.
Perhaps this would be a good time to agree to disagree, unless you have some references to support this theory.
Nope - so let's just call it quits now and agree to disagree because we both know from past experience where these types of discussions are likely to end, and I'd prefer a happy ending this time where we both leave politely disagreeing with but respecting each other's valid opinions :)
Marco.
Sorry thought it was Parallel PP but i see from your avatar you have two per side...Don't these amp suffer from symmetrical cliping!
Not that I'm aware of. Is that a bad thing? What is it exactly and what does it sound like when it happens? :)
Marco.
there is no doubt in my mind that most types of distortion are an easily measured aspect of audio reproduction...
most sources measure quite well .. and many modern cheapish cd players will sound well on top end kit
amps are another thing... and valve amps are easy to slag because of the 5 % distortion that many can produced when turned up.. may i add not at normal levels
but what is so bad about say 3% 2nd harmonic...
well as far as your ears are concerned its nothing to worry about
the trouble is that people assocate anything more than a fraction of a % as poor, is nothing to do with what they can hear..
the bulk of what most listen to is in the 45 hz to 8.5khz, going as far back as Olson he discovered that 5% 2nd and 3% 3rd harmonics are just noticable..
above that range and with the higher harmonics as those produced by class b, pentode amps and solid state amps. the level that you can acuctally hear changes down to just a fraction of 1%.. so a fraction of a % of these higher harmonics are noticable... where as 3% 2nd is not...
so different types of distortion are not all equal as far as our ears are concerned and there is an 'acceptable' level for each type...
all music is made up of harmonics, my girls accoustic or her electric gutar on a quite an expensive amp fills the room with very musical 3d harmonics..
much more than my hi fi..
harmonics and the overtones make a sound into music, my view is that a good hi fi should reproduce these harmonics to a reasonable level, i've heard some very expensive solid state kit that starts to..but some valve kit seems better at it..
how do you measure harmonics in replayed music.. i'm sure its possible?
most testing seems to be done on steady tones.. or 3 or 4 tones together
harmonics of one string or six playing together are much more complex
if i swap out a coupling cap for another make in my amp i can hear the differences usually in the tone and harmonics, the scope shows the same trace regardless.
but nothing i've heard seems to reproduce harmonics at a realistic level from a recording.. valve amps seem better at it... but, is that what some think of as valve amps adding their own tone? the fact that a good one will reproduce some of it..
so my point is that if only 2% or 3% of 2nd harmonics cannot be heard, what the issue with that?.. i seem to hear lots of aguments aginst it.. but when i turn on my valve amp on the arguments seem loose their credibilty..
so.. back on track...
i'd like to add that as my kit has got better over the years, the reproduction has changd from some recordings sounding very poor, to, after my last change of speakers, they have seemed to make all recordings sound very acceptable.. even the once flat sounding 80's ones....not perfect.. but very acceptable...
but i do feel i'm getting i feel a good level of harmonics through the system now... and those flat recording are not as flat as they once sounded
steve
Harmonic distortion is not the only kind of distortion you know guys.
Many SS amps from the 70's and even into the 80's suffered severe crossover distortion and intermod distortion. Both of these can be nasty to hear and apparently some lower-caste valve products of yesteryear weren't too hot on these either.
Lets face it, charming as they are, the Quad II's are gloriously innacurate, losing deep bass and rolling of the top into easy loads. The bit that's left is fab though, I have to admit..
I also remember some SS amps deliberately bandwidth limited and rolled off to "sound" like a "Valve Amp" and I'm thinking of the Sugden A48's and Musical Fidelity A1 (most of the varients). Totally "wrong" and often veiled and distorted in the case of the late 70's A48... IMO of course :)
anthonyTD
05-01-2010, 13:06
hi all,
a few points have been mentioned so here are my take on those, push-pull amps whether valve or solid state should in design clip symetricaly, if not then then they can be judged as being non linear by poor design. most traditional single ended designs due mainly to biasing technics will inherently clip non symetricaly, although it is posible to design single ended configuration to clip symetricaly, one such example is the soul series. as for traditional valve testers,well here are what the best test, current draw at set anode/plate/screen, grid voltages, GM,current gain [milliamps per volt] internal shorts, and GAS. these are the basic but very necsesary conditions that all valves will need to be tested for before contemplating fitting them into any amplifier, also the test procedures enable one to match the conditions of any paticular valve [very important in output stages and driver] ie, matching the current draw and GM for a given bias voltage plus plate and screen, this is very important in push-pull output stages as the output transformer is not designed to handle standing current hence any mismatch in current draw between the two output valves will result in a residue of current in the transformer core which if severe enough could cause the core to saturate which is not good! single ended transformers on the other hand are designed to handle all the current due to the way single ended works compared to push-pull, although it is still beneficial to match the characteristics of output valves in parralel single ended output designs for obvious reasons.
distortion characteristics are a tricky one when trying to justify why one type of device is better [diffrent] than another, the main diffrence with valves compared to solid state amps is they produce mainly lower order distortion, and yes some circuits can produce up to 10% of even [2nd] harmonic distortion without any adverse affects to the listner, third order is a diffrent thing! solid state amplifiers produce low order even and odds and high order [2,3,5,7,9,etc] and its the high order distortion that is objectionable even in very small amounts, therefore IMHO its why most solid state designers see it as an advantage to get the over-all [THD] distortion figures as low as posible!
crossover distortion is another type which although difficult to measure can be very objectionable to the listner, that is one of the reasons why some of the best sounding push-pull valve or semi-conductor circuits are class A.
regards,anthony,TD...
Hi Tim,
It's about the way equipment is designed to reproduce recordings of music. If a recording of music has been captured as accurately as possible in the studio (something you contend these days with modern digital methods is the case) then in effect the equipment we use to reproduce that is dealing with 'real music', and in turn the natural distortions and colorations present within it.
Stripping anything away from the recording is not the intended goal of any designer - it's a by product of an obsessive desire to remove distortion/noise wherever possible, even when some of that distortion is necessary to the faithful reproduction of the information on the recording, preserving music's natural colorations, as I referred to earlier, in the process.
*That* is where, in my opinion, designers whose primary goal is to achieve 'perfect measurements' with audio equipment (in reality there is no such thing) get it fundamentally wrong. And it clearly shows, sonically, (and thus musically, too) in the end results obtained whenever I listen to equipment born largely from such principles.
Nope - let's just call it quits now and agree to disagree because we both know from past experience where these types of discussions are likely to end, and I'd prefer a happy ending this time where we both leave politely disagreeing with but respecting each other's valid opinions :)
Marco.
I'm happy to agree to disagree on what approach produces the more accurate sound. Nothing either of us could say would change anything. But I do need to clarify one point:
If a recording of music has been captured as accurately as possible in the studio (something you contend these days with modern digital methods is the case)
I don't contend that at all, and never have. I contend that modern digital recording equipment has the capability of capturing the performance more accurately than old analog gear, whether or not it actually does is up to the skills and taste of people. It very often falls short.
And this, I think, is not a simple matter of disagreement:
Stripping anything away from the recording is not the intended goal of any designer - it's a by product of an obsessive desire to remove distortion/noise wherever possible, even when some of that distortion is necessary to the faithful reproduction of the information on the recording, preserving music's natural colorations, as I referred to earlier, in the process.
Not only do I not believe that modern SS designers are deliberately or inadvertently stripping away natural "distortions" of instruments and voices (not at all sure what these would be, frankly) in an over-zealous attempt to minimize the distortions that can be created by the equipment itself, I'm not sure it is even possible. In any case, it's a pretty wild accusation on a public forum that some of those designers would probably think borders on slander. Do you have any source for this or is it just a personal theory?
Tim
Steve Toy
05-01-2010, 13:40
Tim, thinkink of the chewing gum representing the distortion and the cotton wool it's stuck to representing the distortion. With all the required complexities to the signal path to lower overall measured distortion as much as possible this is akin to removing a lot of cotton wool to remove all the chewing gum.
Hi Tim,
I'm happy to agree to disagree on what approach produces the more accurate sound. Nothing either of us could say would change anything. But I do need to clarify one point:
If a recording of music has been captured as accurately as possible in the studio (something you contend these days with modern digital methods is the case)
I don't contend that at all, and never have. I contend that modern digital recording equipment has the capability of capturing the performance more accurately than old analog gear, whether or not it actually does is up to the skills and taste of people. It very often falls short.
Ok, that's fair enough. But I presume then you agree that modern recording equipment and techniques have the ability to accurately capture a musical performance? Whether or not that ability is always realised I think is moot, as the ability is there. It's up to designers then to use the best recordings available as test material when voicing their equipment.
Therefore, it follows then that (valve or solid-state) equipment is reproducing, to all intents and purposes, 'real music', so therefore it must preserve the natural distortions and colorations in 'real music' within recordings, unless of course you don't agree that real music exhibits its own natural colorations?
Where we definitely disagree is I believe that, (not all valve gear) but truly the very best examples, do the above better than any solid-state designs I've heard, simply because of the distortion characteristics of both design topologies and inherently how valves treat music signals in comparison to transistors.
Incidentally, you should read and digest what Anthony TD has written. He has a very good grasp of what's going on!
Not only do I not believe that modern SS designers are deliberately or inadvertently stripping away natural "distortions" of instruments and voices (not at all sure what these would be, frankly) in an over-zealous attempt to minimize the distortions that can be created by the equipment itself, I'm not sure it is even possible.
Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that because it's partly what I suspect is happening, and I can hear the negative sonic effect in equipment designed by people who place 'perfect measurements' to the forefront of their design goals, and seemingly in turn place more importance on that than in the final analysis also voicing equipment by ear.
In any case, it's a pretty wild accusation on a public forum that some of those designers would probably think borders on slander. Do you have any source for this or is it just a personal theory?
It's a personal opinion/theory, Tim, nothing else, and I'm entitled to express it; it certainly isn't slanderous.
But consider this:
When AVI, for example, bang on about reducing distortion wherever possible, placing specifications and measurements above all else, could their equipment in the process be stripping away some of the natural colorations of music present in the recording, as I have alluded to, due to obsessing over removing (as far as possible) all forms of distortion in their quest for 'perfect measurements'?
I believe that it is possible, although you'll of course disagree. Incidentally, AVI's designs are by far the only ones guilty of this. When you know the effect or sonic signature to listen for in equipment designed that way, however, it is readily identifiable.
How far should this discussion continue now - have we reached the point yet where we can walk away politely disagreeing with but respecting each other's equally valid viewpoint?
Please say yes and we can move onto something more interesting to discuss instead of the 'same old, same old'! :)
Marco.
Tim, thinkink of the chewing gum representing the distortion and the cotton wool it's stuck to representing the distortion. With all the required complexities to the signal path to lower overall measured distortion as much as possible this is akin to removing a lot of cotton wool to remove all the chewing gum.
I could think of it that way, Steve, but that would do nothing to help me discern whether or not this reduction of natural "distortions" along with those added by the electronics is something based in fact or merely a personal theory, which would explain why I've never heard of it before. Nothing in the world wrong with personal theories, but in fairness to the discussion and to the people whose work is being judged by it, I think it should be identified as that small or justified as something larger. By the way, as in valve gear, the SS path to lower distortion has much more to do with headroom, the quality of the components and simplification of the signal path than it has to do with "required complexities," so I'm not sure this one even stands on firm theoretical ground.
Tim
Nothing in the world wrong with personal theories, but in fairness to the discussion and to the people whose work is being judged by it, I think it should be identified as that small or justified as something larger.
How can I possibly quantify something like that, Tim? :scratch:
I listen to and then judge equipment based on the results of what I hear, and then express my opinions on that. What else would you suggest?
Marco.
purite audio
05-01-2010, 16:15
Why don't you guys record a member of your family playing an instrument, singing or even talking in your listening room, use something like a Korg m1000 then play it back in your listening space, you can even have a live versus recorded A/B.
It is an informative experience.
Keith.
Spectral Morn
05-01-2010, 16:21
Why don't you guys record a member of your family playing an instrument, singing or even talking in your listening room, use something like a Korg m1000 then play it back in your listening space, you can even have a live versus recorded A/B.
It is an informative experience.
Keith.
Did you have a good Christmas Keith ?
I plan to do exactly that on Reel to Reel tape, half track at 15 ips, in the not to distant future.
Regards D S D L
purite audio
05-01-2010, 16:32
Neil Hi, that's very thoughtful of you to ask, yes very pleasant thanks and yourself?
Re the recording thing it is interesting and it is something I plan to pursue, I believe the guy , Kinoshita Rey? who developed TAD drive used to record his family and then compare the live versus reproduced in the same space.
Very best,Keith.
I feel the need of pointing out that the distortion that is already recorded, cannot be measured by any designer (by nobody, in fact) for the simple reason that it is part of the initial signal.
A distortion measurement is a two-state comparison, not an absolute measurement of a particular signal, afaik.
So, no designer can even detect recorded distortion, let alone trying to "take it away"...
hi all,
a few points have been mentioned so here are my take on those, push-pull amps whether valve or solid state should in design clip symetricaly, if not then then they can be judged as being non linear by poor design. most traditional single ended designs due mainly to biasing technics will inherently clip non symetricaly, although it is posible to design single ended configuration to clip symetricaly, one such example is the soul series. as for traditional valve testers,well here are what the best test, current draw at set anode/plate/screen, grid voltages, GM,current gain [milliamps per volt] internal shorts, and GAS. these are the basic but very necsesary conditions that all valves will need to be tested for before contemplating fitting them into any amplifier, also the test procedures enable one to match the conditions of any paticular valve [very important in output stages and driver] ie, matching the current draw and GM for a given bias voltage plus plate and screen, this is very important in push-pull output stages as the output transformer is not designed to handle standing current hence any mismatch in current draw between the two output valves will result in a residue of current in the transformer core which if severe enough could cause the core to saturate which is not good! single ended transformers on the other hand are designed to handle all the current due to the way single ended works compared to push-pull, although it is still beneficial to match the characteristics of output valves in parralel single ended output designs for obvious reasons.
distortion characteristics are a tricky one when trying to justify why one type of device is better [diffrent] than another, the main diffrence with valves compared to solid state amps is they produce mainly lower order distortion, and yes some circuits can produce up to 10% of even [2nd] harmonic distortion without any adverse affects to the listner, third order is a diffrent thing! solid state amplifiers produce low order even and odds and high order [2,3,5,7,9,etc] and its the high order distortion that is objectionable even in very small amounts, therefore IMHO its why most solid state designers see it as an advantage to get the over-all [THD] distortion figures as low as posible!
crossover distortion is another type which although difficult to measure can be very objectionable to the listner, that is one of the reasons why some of the best sounding push-pull valve or semi-conductor circuits are class A.
regards,anthony,TD...
Thanks for this, Anthony. ;)
Hi Keith,
That sounds like a fun idea, but how much do Korg M1000s cost (mics are not things I keep lying around) and everything else that would be needed to do the job properly?
It's something I'd have to buy as a one-off, as I doubt that I'd have any further use for it.
Hope that you had a cool yule, too, and also a nice Christmas :cool:
Marco.
I feel the need of pointing out that the distortion that is already recorded, cannot be measured by any designer (by nobody, in fact) for the simple reason that it is part of the initial signal.
A distortion measurement is a two-state comparison, not an absolute measurement of a particular signal, afaik.
So, no designer can even detect recorded distortion, let alone trying to "take it away"...
Indeed, Dimitri, but the point I'm making is that nothing considered as important is being 'taken away' by anyone deliberately - that is (obviously) not the goal at the outset for any equipment designer (valve or solid-state).
However, in my opinion it's something that happens indirectly through design/component choice and topology, and particularly how much emphasis is placed on achieving 'perfect measurements'. Equipment can after all be 'voiced' or made as 'measurably accurate' as a designer sees fit through making those choices, and this directly impacts on how the music it reproduces is handled and in turn heard and appreciated (or not) by us.
Remember that our ears and brain don't process music signals from hi-fi equipment in exactly the same way as scientific apparatus measures the 'noise' it makes!
The rest of my thoughts on the matter have already been explained in previous posts.
Marco.
Indeed, Dimitri, but the point I'm making is that nothing is being 'taken away' by anyone deliberately - that is not the goal at the outset for any equipment designer (valve or solid-state).
However, in my opinion it's something that happens indirectly through design/component choice and topology.
Ah, ok: I understand what you mean, now. you mean that the ears are more sensitive to the absence of the recorded distortion.
It wasn't clear to me, sorry. :doh:
Many mics have a distinct treble rise, so make sure you use one with a flat response..
Ah, ok: I understand what you mean, now. you mean that the ears are more sensitive to the absence of the recorded distortion.
It wasn't clear to me, sorry. :doh:
Precisely! :)
Marco.
How can I possibly quantify something like that, Tim? :scratch:
I listen to and then judge equipment based on the results of what I hear, and then express my opinions on that. What else would you suggest?
Marco.
I'm not really asking you to quantify this notion that, in the process of attempting to minimize the distortions generated by their gear, solid state designers eliminate "natural distortions." I'm asking if this is a widely-held theory among audiophiles that I've somehow never heard before, or if it is a personal theory of yours.
Tim
Why don't you guys record a member of your family playing an instrument, singing or even talking in your listening room, use something like a Korg m1000 then play it back in your listening space, you can even have a live versus recorded A/B.
It is an informative experience.
Keith.
I've done it many times with musicians, not family members on everything from analog tape gear played back on valves and horns to a MacBook Pro, played back on active studio monitors.
Tim
I'm not really asking you to quantify this notion that, in the process of attempting to minimize the distortions generated by their gear, solid state designers eliminate "natural distortions." I'm asking if this is a widely-held theory among audiophiles that I've somehow never heard before, or if it is a personal theory of yours.
Dunno - I can't see me being the only one who's thought of it, though :)
Marco.
Dunno - I can't see me being the only one who's thought of it, though :)
Marco.
Thanks. That's what I wanted to know.
Tim
Many mics have a distinct treble rise, so make sure you use one with a flat response..
Many also have proximity effect, a rise in lower mid range as the singer or speaker moves closer to the mic. The recording process is fraught with colorations, sometimes to be avoided, sometimes to be used as a part of the creative process. The best a reproduction system can hope to do is not add to or take away from what it is given.
Tim
Hi Tim,
Whom are you referring to here:
I'm reminded of a fellow I knew on another board who constantly raved about his rare, heavily-modified and incredibly shiny-groovy valve amp. He was trying to drive a pair of big floor-standing speakers with an efficiency somewhere in the mid 80s, with a 30-watt valve amp. I assure you he was listening to clipping most of the time. Then he discovered vintage Tannoys and declared them the greatest thing since toilet paper on a roll. In spite of their antiquated design and many flaws, the old Tannoys were a revelation for him. For the first time, he was hearing his amp with enough breathing room to operate properly. He had traded distortions, but I don't doubt he had traded up.
Source: http://hddaudio.net/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=564
I trust it's not me, as regardless of the (rather blinkered) observations, there's also huge factual inaccuracy - I never used "big floor-standing speakers with an efficiency somewhere in the mid 80s" before I got the Tannoys!! :lol:
So if it wasn't me, who were you referring to?
Marco.
Hi Tim,
Whom are you referring to here:
Source: http://hddaudio.net/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=564
I trust it's not me, as regardless of the (rather blinkered) observations, there's also huge factual inaccuracy - I never used "big floor-standing speakers with an efficiency somewhere in the mid 80s" before I got the Tannoys!! :lol:
So if it wasn't me, who were you referring to?
Marco.
I'm making an effort to keep my discussion here, even with you, very civil and unemotional, as I know we tend to rub each other the wrong way. Bringing in posts from other forums, where my "objectivist" views and taste in gear are much more accepted, and my statements are, understandably, much more blunt, probably isn't helpful. But if you insist, yes, I was thinking of you. Did I get your Spendors wrong? I thought you had Se 8s. My mistake.
Tim
Tim,
The UK audio forum world is a small one; always remember that! :eyebrows:
On AoS we appreciate honesty and people being themselves, as pretending to be something you aren't is rather disingenuous...
If what you wrote on the HDD forum is how you honestly feel then say the same thing here, or word it more constructively. I like people to be honest and upfront, rather than reading something like that on another forum about the system I use. It's not very nice, to be honest, and is far more liable to piss me off than you being upfront and saying the same thing here to me.
Of course, quite rightly, you would accordingly be robustly challenged on your considerable misconceptions! ;)
And yes, you got my previous speakers completely wrong, so if you're going to write things like that you should get your facts right first. They were large stand-mount speakers, not floorstanders, and their efficiency was 90db, not "in the mid 80s", as you mentioned.
As for the clipping "most of the time" nonsense, let's just, as you say be gentlemanly and agree to disagree as, quite frankly, that last remark shows your ignorance of how properly designed, high-quality valve amps work! :cool:
Marco.
On AoS we appreciate honesty and people being themselves. If what you wrote on the HDD forum is how you honestly feel then say so here. I like people to be honest and upfront. There's not much point pretending to be someone else...
Of course, quite rightly, you will accordingly be robustly challenged on your misconceptions! ;)
I'm not so sure, given my experience here in the past, that you do appreciate it when I'm honest, Marco, but I'm not trying to be someone else, I'm trying to be civil by not referring to your opinions as "blinkered" or your arguments as "misconceptions." Instead, I have simply and consistently questioned statements you've made that seemed ill-conceived to me, but were presented by you as fact...
Real music is full of natural distortions and colorations, Tim, and some equipment captures this more faithfully than others. In my experience this is usually equipment which doesn't forensically strip such distortion/coloration bare in the quest for 'perfect' measurements...
...until we finally got to the fact that you had just made it up:
Tim --
I'm not really asking you to quantify this notion that, in the process of attempting to minimize the distortions generated by their gear, solid state designers eliminate "natural distortions." I'm asking if this is a widely-held theory among audiophiles that I've somehow never heard before, or if it is a personal theory of yours.
Marco --
Dunno - I can't see me being the only one who's thought of it, though
Marco.
Then, your response was to quote a completely unrelated old post, from another board, as if somehow catching me in an error is an answer to being caught presenting a rationale you created on your own, as fact. Yes, my point of view is feeling quite welcome. I can't imagine why I wouldn't state it more bluntly and see if I can't be called something worse than blinkered or have something even less relevant introduced into the discussion to discredit me.
Tim
...until we finally got to the fact that you had just made it up
What on earth are you on about making it up? I made up nothing!!!
What I told you was genuinely my honest opinion based on considerable listening experience to examples of both solid-state and transistor amps. I was wondering about why you made that remark 'thanks that's what I wanted to know', or whatever it was you said. If you think I made that up then you obviously know nothing about me!
Then, your response was to quote a completely unrelated old post, from another board, as if somehow catching me in an error is an answer to being caught presenting a rationale you created on your own, as fact.
Now you're putting words into my mouth!!! :rolleyes:
I never presented the rationale as a fact. Show me where I said it was a fact - go on! It was simply my own genuinely-expressed theory.
I quoted your blinkered nonsense from HDD because I couldn't believe that on one hand you're writing that kind of stuff there, and on here acting all nice as pie - talk about two-faced!!
You should be utterly ashamed of yourself, Tim! I was going to see how you'd react to me catching you out, and if you had apologised I'd have brushed it under the carpet and moved on, but no, you're just as pig-headedly indignant as ever that you're right!!!!
Yes, my point of view is feeling quite welcome. I can't imagine why I wouldn't state it more bluntly and see if I can't be called something worse than blinkered or have something even less relevant introduced into the discussion to discredit me.
How exactly do you expect me to react to the sort of ignorant remarks you make about equipment I use????
You've never heard my system - don't have the faintest clue about how it sounds, yet you feel qualified to comment on my amplifier's clipping characteristics based on completely erroneous information :wanker:
You admit that you rub me up the wrong way, so obviously you get the same in return. I had enough of you the last time, but I thought I'd give you another chance. Bad move on my part!
You just don't fit in here, as I wouldn't do on the HDD forum, because the views you express are so diametrically opposed to both mine and those of the majority of people on this forum (witness how disrespectful you also were to Chris about his CD treatments - I wish I hadn't bit my tongue when I read your rude remarks, trying to make him look like some kind of deluded fool), so I suggest you leave as you're no longer welcome. Please don't visit here again.
Cheery-bye! :wave:
Marco.
Steve Toy
06-01-2010, 14:25
But if you insist, yes, I was thinking of you.
So why the f*ck didn't you say so in the first place? What a slimy little weasel! :wanker:
This Tim bloke hasn't got a clue and is clearly here to troll. :door:
As much as I was never a fan of the Spendor SP100s (8SEs indeed, the bloke can't get his facts straight) they were an easy load and went bloody loud on the end of a cheap 30 Watt Chinese fire-cracker valve amp. This was precicely the experience that got me into valves. I think it went along the lines of,
"30 Watts, is that all?!"
So why the f*ck didn't you say so in the first place? What a slimy little weasel!
I know, can you believe it????? Words fail me!!! :mental:
Marco.
Steve Toy
06-01-2010, 14:31
Are you going to pull the trigger or me?
Now children, stop it!!!! I'm in between you in age and can see both sides and feel some mediation is in order!!!!!!!!!! :)
Now, Tim. Marco was using Spendor SP100's on stands (Mana) which feature a 12" bass unit, a "liquid smooth" polyprop mid driver which probably self absorbs very fine details (according to Alan Shaw of Harbeth when comparing such cones with his "Radial" material) and a tamed Scan tweeter which still distorts a bit at 9Khz. The sensitivity is in the upper 80's I believe, although it features a good size passive crossover..
Marco also uses a very carefully designed valve amp which may have 30W, but may have far more as I suspect it's never been comprehensively tested. In any case, decent valve amps soft clip VERY gently and to our ears, give the impression of far more power and "grunt" than technically they have. I'd also respectfully suggest that good valve amps distort or clip in an extremely ear-friendly way and neither of us, let alone Marco, know exactly what the Copper amp does (or doesn't) when pushed into an SP100 loading, let alone the Lockwoods.
Now Marco, a shame that recent weather conditions prevented me from attending a sad family event up your way, as I'd loved to have popped in and listened to your system, not to compare with anything, but to enjoy some tunes and put the world to rights ;) For whatever reason, it seems that valve amps do appear far more powerful than their modest measured output suggests, but you'd probably need a fairly benign loading such as your Spendors and Tannoys give/gave - the Tannoys being perfect as Tim has suggested. We've already discussed AVI ad nauseum and in a very recent HDD thread, a poster has opened up a little more as to the exact capabilities of the ADM9.1 amp pack in terms of voltage and current swing into the 5 Ohm drivers. The amp packs are also surface-mount, meaning very short signal paths and Martin's amp circuit is used still I understand, giving practically no crossover distortion even though it's Class B and remaining distortions well into the extremely low noise floor when using the drive units they were designed to drive - Martin G keeps VERY well abreast of the latest transistors etc. unlike others using a 1950's design almost unchanged and less stable than originally conceived..... The ported ADM box won't resonate too badly either as there's little of an "air-spring" involved and I suspect that box colouration won't be an issue overmuch, giving a genuinely clean 108db output as my active and passive ATC 20's could do with similar size bass units - ok, the 15" Tannoys probably have 10db headroom over this ;).
Both - Modern technology and low-cost build has meant that the ADM9.1 should be able to deliver superb performance for its size and that it would cost at least double (250%+ more likely) to get a passive system anything like as good - oh, I dunno, Harbeth P3ESR's with a Crofty pre/power..... and that's without DAC... On the other hand, to get good consistent and LINEAR valve performance from something built in the UK to high standards is going to cost a lot of money (and that Copper amp wasn't cheap, was it Marco?) and those Tannoys don't really apply to most domestic situations and aren't now anything like original anyway with re-built crossovers and different drive-units. Any potential colourations in the Tannoys easily being balanced by the huge sense of "ease" a good big speaker gives.
Does this help you two? better now?
I hope so, for everyone's blood pressure! ;)
anthonyTD
06-01-2010, 14:38
Are you going to pull the trigger or me?
i am disapointed to read this thread especialy the somewhat two facedness expressed here,,, and on that other forum, but i would recomend that we give tim the option of either posting positive and constructive here considering our ethos, or not, i am sure he knows that his antics have not been seen as all together fair to the members here and their beliefs.
A...
Nah, just let him go himself - we might get a parting shot to laugh at before he goes ;)
Marco.
Steve Toy
06-01-2010, 14:41
The Copper amp actually measures just shy of the rated 30 wpc according to the Jason Kennedy review on the Tube Distinctions site.
Anthony?
Marco, you don't have specifically say something is fact to present it as such. You only have to say it in a very matter of fact manner, without any qualifications, until after several rounds of posts you finally admit it was just a personal theory that you're not even sure existed outside of your own mind until you posted it here. Which, I think pretty much meets the qualifications for "made up." YMMV.
I quoted your blinkered nonsense from HDD because I couldn't believe that on one hand you're writing that kind of stuff there, and on here acting all nice as pie - talk about two-faced!!
I speak more bluntly among friends with whom I share opinions than I do with those whose opinions I know differ from my own. I don't walk into a roomful of conservatives and start spouting liberal rhetoric just to start a fight. That's not two-faced, it's common decency. Had I used your name in the quote you brought here totally out of context, then turned around, come here and congratulated you on your Tannoys without mentioning that I thought they were a step up largely because your amp had been clipping while trying to drive the Spendors, that would have been two-faced.
I apologize to the forum. When I saw this stuff about "natural distortions" being stripped away in the process of minimizing the creation of electronic distortion in SS gear, I knew it was complete nonsense, but should have left it alone. I should have known it would end this way, even if I did approach it trying to be "all nice as pie."
The last word is yours, Marco. I won't be responding to your posts going forward.
Tim
Hi Dave,
The sensitivity is in the upper 80's I believe...
No offence mate, but no it bloody wasn't!! They were rated at 90db
Has everyone got that now? :lol:
I'll reply to the rest of your post later. There's no hope for Tim. After his latest shenanigans, he's no longer welcome here.
Marco.
And what are the Lockwoods? 98 - 100db with a 10db extra headroom over 6 1/2" bass units? LOVELY :peace: :guitar: :trust:
Steve Toy
06-01-2010, 14:52
95 I do believe.
Marco, you don't have specifically say something is fact to present it as such. You only have to say it in a very matter of fact manner, without any qualifications, until after several rounds of posts you finally admit it was just a personal theory that you're not even sure existed outside of your own mind until you posted it here. Which, I think pretty much meets the qualifications for "made up." YMMV.
I speak more bluntly among friends with whom I share opinions than I do with those whose opinions I know differ from my own. I don't walk into a roomful of conservatives and start spouting liberal rhetoric just to start a fight. That's not two-faced, it's common decency. Had I used your name in the quote you brought here totally out of context, then turned around, come here and congratulated you on your Tannoys without mentioning that I thought they were a step up largely because your amp had been clipping while trying to drive the Spendors, that would have been two-faced.
I apologize to the forum. When I saw this stuff about "natural distortions" being stripped away in the process of minimizing the creation of electronic distortion in SS gear, I knew it was complete nonsense, but should have left it alone. I should have known it would end this way, even if I did approach it trying to be "all nice as pie."
The last word is yours, Marco. I won't be responding to your posts going forward.
Tim
What a load of crap! I'll dissect and expose that shite for what it is later.
Oh, and I've changed my mind - you've done more than enough now to be banned, idiot.
Marco.
Hold on, a minute. What are the "shenanigans" you're talking about ?
I read the whole thread, I see none of Tim's posts which is near this notion.
No offence mate, but no it bloody wasn't!! They were rated at 90db:lol:
Now, Marco, I will copy this somewhere and keep it for future reminder : First time I see you referring to measured characteristics as part of your arguments !!! :lolsign:
Hold on, a minute. What are the "shenanigans" you're talking about ?
His comments quoted earlier, Dimitri, were completely out of order. Scroll back and see. Those are the "shenanigans" I'm referring to.
See the quote of what Tim wrote in my post #98, which was taken from the HDD forum, then read my response to it. If you don't think Tim was out of order then you and I live on different planets.
Marco.
Steve Toy
06-01-2010, 15:00
Marco can be excused. He's not measured them himself. :laugh:
In any case, measurements have their place. They just aren't the be-all-and-end-all, that's all.
Easy Steve - 95db at the bass bump and 90db in the mid (I'll have to look on the Yahoo Spendor group for the pretty response diagram :lol:)
Steve Toy
06-01-2010, 15:06
Frequency/impedance curves are very important when partnering with valve amps.
His comments quoted earlier, Dimitri, from the HDD forum were completely out of order. Scroll back and see. Those are the "shenanigans I'm referring to".
Ah, the other forum. Ok.
But, then, Tim's opinions about all-amplifiers-sound-the-same are quite common in the audiophile world. Almost all electronic or mastering engineers I know think more-or-less the same.
This position is not necessarily true in certain situations/rooms/speakers but, as Tim seems to say "driving reasonably efficient speakers at reasonable listening levels" well he covers most of what is not true.
To me, this position is not shocking, as long as you don't promote it as THE truth.
But then, I'm only a member, here. :)
anthonyTD
06-01-2010, 15:20
Now children, stop it!!!! I'm in between you in age and can see both sides and feel some mediation is in order!!!!!!!!!! :)
Now, Tim. Marco was using Spendor SP100's on stands (Mana) which feature a 12" bass unit, a "liquid smooth" polyprop mid driver which probably self absorbs very fine details (according to Alan Shaw of Harbeth when comparing such cones with his "Radial" material) and a tamed Scan tweeter which still distorts a bit at 9Khz. The sensitivity is in the upper 80's I believe, although it features a good size passive crossover..
Marco also uses a very carefully designed valve amp which may have 30W, but may have far more as I suspect it's never been comprehensively tested. In any case, decent valve amps soft clip VERY gently and to our ears, give the impression of far more power and "grunt" than technically they have. I'd also respectfully suggest that good valve amps distort or clip in an extremely ear-friendly way and neither of us, let alone Marco, know exactly what the Copper amp does (or doesn't) when pushed into an SP100 loading, let alone the Lockwoods.
Now Marco, a shame that recent weather conditions prevented me from attending a sad family event up your way, as I'd loved to have popped in and listened to your system, not to compare with anything, but to enjoy some tunes and put the world to rights ;) For whatever reason, it seems that valve amps do appear far more powerful than their modest measured output suggests, but you'd probably need a fairly benign loading such as your Spendors and Tannoys give/gave - the Tannoys being perfect as Tim has suggested. We've already discussed AVI ad nauseum and in a very recent HDD thread, a poster has opened up a little more as to the exact capabilities of the ADM9.1 amp pack in terms of voltage and current swing into the 5 Ohm drivers. The amp packs are also surface-mount, meaning very short signal paths and Martin's amp circuit is used still I understand, giving practically no crossover distortion even though it's Class B and remaining distortions well into the extremely low noise floor when using the drive units they were designed to drive - Martin G keeps VERY well abreast of the latest transistors etc. unlike others using a 1950's design almost unchanged and less stable than originally conceived..... The ported ADM box won't resonate too badly either as there's little of an "air-spring" involved and I suspect that box colouration won't be an issue overmuch, giving a genuinely clean 108db output as my active and passive ATC 20's could do with similar size bass units - ok, the 15" Tannoys probably have 10db headroom over this ;).
Both - Modern technology and low-cost build has meant that the ADM9.1 should be able to deliver superb performance for its size and that it would cost at least double (250%+ more likely) to get a passive system anything like as good - oh, I dunno, Harbeth P3ESR's with a Crofty pre/power..... and that's without DAC... On the other hand, to get good consistent and LINEAR valve performance from something built in the UK to high standards is going to cost a lot of money (and that Copper amp wasn't cheap, was it Marco?) and those Tannoys don't really apply to most domestic situations and aren't now anything like original anyway with re-built crossovers and different drive-units. Any potential colourations in the Tannoys easily being balanced by the huge sense of "ease" a good big speaker gives.
Does this help you two? better now?
I hope so, for everyone's blood pressure! ;)
:)
anthonyTD
06-01-2010, 15:22
The Copper amp actually measures just shy of the rated 30 wpc according to the Jason Kennedy review on the Tube Distinctions site.
Anthony?
28 watts unclipped!!!
A...
alfie2902
06-01-2010, 17:23
Now children, stop it!!!! I'm in between you in age and can see both sides and feel some mediation is in order!!!!!!!!!! :)
Now, Tim. Marco was using Spendor SP100's on stands (Mana) which feature a 12" bass unit, a "liquid smooth" polyprop mid driver which probably self absorbs very fine details (according to Alan Shaw of Harbeth when comparing such cones with his "Radial" material) and a tamed Scan tweeter which still distorts a bit at 9Khz. The sensitivity is in the upper 80's I believe, although it features a good size passive crossover..
Marco also uses a very carefully designed valve amp which may have 30W, but may have far more as I suspect it's never been comprehensively tested. In any case, decent valve amps soft clip VERY gently and to our ears, give the impression of far more power and "grunt" than technically they have. I'd also respectfully suggest that good valve amps distort or clip in an extremely ear-friendly way and neither of us, let alone Marco, know exactly what the Copper amp does (or doesn't) when pushed into an SP100 loading, let alone the Lockwoods.
Now Marco, a shame that recent weather conditions prevented me from attending a sad family event up your way, as I'd loved to have popped in and listened to your system, not to compare with anything, but to enjoy some tunes and put the world to rights ;) For whatever reason, it seems that valve amps do appear far more powerful than their modest measured output suggests, but you'd probably need a fairly benign loading such as your Spendors and Tannoys give/gave - the Tannoys being perfect as Tim has suggested. We've already discussed AVI ad nauseum and in a very recent HDD thread, a poster has opened up a little more as to the exact capabilities of the ADM9.1 amp pack in terms of voltage and current swing into the 5 Ohm drivers. The amp packs are also surface-mount, meaning very short signal paths and Martin's amp circuit is used still I understand, giving practically no crossover distortion even though it's Class B and remaining distortions well into the extremely low noise floor when using the drive units they were designed to drive - Martin G keeps VERY well abreast of the latest transistors etc. unlike others using a 1950's design almost unchanged and less stable than originally conceived..... The ported ADM box won't resonate too badly either as there's little of an "air-spring" involved and I suspect that box colouration won't be an issue overmuch, giving a genuinely clean 108db output as my active and passive ATC 20's could do with similar size bass units - ok, the 15" Tannoys probably have 10db headroom over this ;).
Both - Modern technology and low-cost build has meant that the ADM9.1 should be able to deliver superb performance for its size and that it would cost at least double (250%+ more likely) to get a passive system anything like as good - oh, I dunno, Harbeth P3ESR's with a Crofty pre/power..... and that's without DAC... On the other hand, to get good consistent and LINEAR valve performance from something built in the UK to high standards is going to cost a lot of money (and that Copper amp wasn't cheap, was it Marco?) and those Tannoys don't really apply to most domestic situations and aren't now anything like original anyway with re-built crossovers and different drive-units. Any potential colourations in the Tannoys easily being balanced by the huge sense of "ease" a good big speaker gives.
Does this help you two? better now?
I hope so, for everyone's blood pressure! ;)
Hi Dave the peacekeeper.
Could you point me in the direction of the highlighted thread please.
Cheers, alfie
__________________________________________________ _____________
Quick Rant
I for one will miss Tim, again! I've always enjoyed his posts & think he talks alot of sense most of the time. I don't agree with all he posts but I don't agree with all of what anyone posts TBH! :)
Seems a shame that we can't respect each others points of view & choices of kit sometimes. I'm somewhere in the middle of alot of stuff thats get said as I've got my ADM system & my 'legacy' valve LV system (trying out a nice KT66 integrated atm) & I like & enjoy what both do! :eyebrows:
Audiophiles & our forums can be a bit pathetic at times! we come together with a love for music & Hi-Fi systems & spend to much time slagging each other & each others systems & beliefs off! It's a joke really! What works & is right for one is not always right for anyone else! I do understand the need to defend your own choice of kit as I often defend my ADMs. I own them & enjoy them & get pissed off when people slag them off, but I don't feel the need to convert people to the 'One true way'. I'll defend all my kit choices & why & how I've chosen them but don't feel the need to preach my choice as the 'One true way' & anyone that doesn't believe what I say is either deaf or deluded! If the kit you own makes you happy thats great but it may not work for everyone!
Cheers, alfie
Ali Tait
06-01-2010, 19:12
Well said Alfie.
Ali Tait
06-01-2010, 19:13
Traded up the KEL already? :eyebrows:
Hi Dave the peacekeeper.
Could you point me in the direction of the highlighted thread please.
Cheers, alfie
I hope it's alright to quite JC Brum on here - ah well, never mind...
Sort of like a modern Quad 44 where all inputs were user configurable.
Nice idea, and I don't think many have ever beaten the engineering aspects of Quad's die-cast era, resulting in a much more elegant solution than the pressings and folded metalwork of the later era.
But ......... It sure is expensive to produce that elegant design with plug-in option cards etc.
I have examined the internal components of adm9's and can say the circuit boards and components are of absolutely first class quality, - no expense has been spared there.
The cost savings which are great in the AVI design come from integration of the circuit design using very modern surface mount technology which can be produced very efficiently by robotic machines and the almost complete absence of expensive chassis work.
Everything is mounted on a thick metal back plate which serves as a heat sink having a surface area several times larger than is usual in separates designs, but is simple and low cost to produce as well as being very rigid and effective.
It is difficult to see how any further cost savings could be made. The whole assembly including the painted cabinets are of the very highest design and component quality, but with the very most economical construction method.
It would be very easy to make them cost twice as much to produce, but I can't see any way that they could be made even 10% lower in cost and still maintain the obvious top quality.
The DAC for example is simply the necessary integrated chips laid out with the associated support components on a dedicated couple of square inches of very high quality circuit board.
The amplifiers have the very posh output devices mounted straight onto the heat sink plate with very short connections straight onto the immediately adjacent circuit boards. There is no simpler or lower cost way to do it.
A very nicely made and no doubt costly toroidal transformer in each loudspeaker, (so the construction is effectively monoblocs, with a separate power supply for each channel) supplies 50v on strong signals into the nominal 5 ohms of the tranducers, so that on loud bits they are supplying easily 10 amps. I have checked mine on full signal with a digital storage scope and can confirm they don't clip. Ohms law tells us that on loud bits the power is therefore volts x amps, which is 50x10=500watts. Music is not all loud bits though and I think AVI use a conservative 250 watt rating when describing the main amp power output.
I did attend the 'Gadget Show' at the NEC recently, and can say the ambient noise level was very high indeed, making it necessary to run the adm9.1's on display at very close to maximum output all day every day for the whole three days of the show. The backplates got warm but not worryingly hot, and in normal use they hardly get warm at all, because the output stages are very efficient, and deliver all the power into the drivers not into the casings and heat sinks. Because the plate area is much larger than conventional separates they run cooler anyway.
These are some of the reasons why I chose AVI kit for my own use and I think it's important to speak as you find because some others seem to me (not you Rob) to want to invent all sorts of ways to try to discredit adm9's.
I am a big fan, .... you might have noticed
JCBrum."
Steve Toy
06-01-2010, 19:45
The issue with Tim was him making Marco and his system the subject of ridicule on another forum and not letting the facts get in the way of his story followed by a bit of self justification.
This act of disingenuousness came on the back of taking the sneering objectivist line that amounts to trolling just as it would if I went on a petrolheads forum extolling the virtues of lowered speed limits, buses, bicycles and 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling.
Tim's objectivist stance alone did not trigger the ban but his statements elsewhere have revealed his true colours.
Beechwoods
06-01-2010, 19:56
That's exactly how I saw it too Steve.
Indeed, chaps! I'll be adding my own thoughts later in some detail.
Marco.
Can't we just leave it please?????
Steve Toy
06-01-2010, 20:31
Problem is Dave there will be those who will genuinely believe he was shown the door just for disagreeing with Marco. This is not true. This situation also raises wider issues.
Meanwhile we don't want to be frightening the horses.
Spectral Morn
06-01-2010, 20:43
Neil Hi, that's very thoughtful of you to ask, yes very pleasant thanks and yourself?
Re the recording thing it is interesting and it is something I plan to pursue, I believe the guy , Kinoshita Rey? who developed TAD drive used to record his family and then compare the live versus reproduced in the same space.
Very best,Keith.
Not to bad Keith, thank you...bar a very bad cold...not pig flu though, thankfully.
I have felt for awhile that a quality recording done in your own listening environment (in my case it will be acoustic guitar + female vocals) is the best kind of reference,for the evaluation of kit; as you where there and know how it sounded at the time. This is something only a very few of us could claim about any of the music we listen to on our systems at home.
Of course most of us have an idea how instruments should and do sound and thus can spot when a system or component is messing that up.
Regards D S D L
Problem is Dave there will be those who will genuinely believe he was shown the door just for disagreeing with Marco. This is not true. This situation also raises wider issues.
Tell you what, let's leave things on a positive vibe with Neil's last post :)
People like Tim Farney are a waste of bandwidth, so we'll just forget all about him.
Marco.
alfie2902
06-01-2010, 22:20
Traded up the KEL already? :eyebrows:
Hi Ali,
No mate the KEL stays!
I just had the chance to try something KT66 based & it's very nice too, but just trying out different valves to see what I like. Might get the chance to try 2 other amps at the weekend 1 with 6550s & 1 with 300bs
Really like the EL84's though :) but we will see! :)
alfie2902
06-01-2010, 22:25
I hope it's alright to quite JC Brum on here - ah well, never mind...
Sort of like a modern Quad 44 where all inputs were user configurable.
Nice idea, and I don't think many have ever beaten the engineering aspects of Quad's die-cast era, resulting in a much more elegant solution than the pressings and folded metalwork of the later era.
But ......... It sure is expensive to produce that elegant design with plug-in option cards etc.
I have examined the internal components of adm9's and can say the circuit boards and components are of absolutely first class quality, - no expense has been spared there.
The cost savings which are great in the AVI design come from integration of the circuit design using very modern surface mount technology which can be produced very efficiently by robotic machines and the almost complete absence of expensive chassis work.
Everything is mounted on a thick metal back plate which serves as a heat sink having a surface area several times larger than is usual in separates designs, but is simple and low cost to produce as well as being very rigid and effective.
It is difficult to see how any further cost savings could be made. The whole assembly including the painted cabinets are of the very highest design and component quality, but with the very most economical construction method.
It would be very easy to make them cost twice as much to produce, but I can't see any way that they could be made even 10% lower in cost and still maintain the obvious top quality.
The DAC for example is simply the necessary integrated chips laid out with the associated support components on a dedicated couple of square inches of very high quality circuit board.
The amplifiers have the very posh output devices mounted straight onto the heat sink plate with very short connections straight onto the immediately adjacent circuit boards. There is no simpler or lower cost way to do it.
A very nicely made and no doubt costly toroidal transformer in each loudspeaker, (so the construction is effectively monoblocs, with a separate power supply for each channel) supplies 50v on strong signals into the nominal 5 ohms of the tranducers, so that on loud bits they are supplying easily 10 amps. I have checked mine on full signal with a digital storage scope and can confirm they don't clip. Ohms law tells us that on loud bits the power is therefore volts x amps, which is 50x10=500watts. Music is not all loud bits though and I think AVI use a conservative 250 watt rating when describing the main amp power output.
I did attend the 'Gadget Show' at the NEC recently, and can say the ambient noise level was very high indeed, making it necessary to run the adm9.1's on display at very close to maximum output all day every day for the whole three days of the show. The backplates got warm but not worryingly hot, and in normal use they hardly get warm at all, because the output stages are very efficient, and deliver all the power into the drivers not into the casings and heat sinks. Because the plate area is much larger than conventional separates they run cooler anyway.
These are some of the reasons why I chose AVI kit for my own use and I think it's important to speak as you find because some others seem to me (not you Rob) to want to invent all sorts of ways to try to discredit adm9's.
I am a big fan, .... you might have noticed
JCBrum."
Thanks for that Dave:)
Still doesn't really say much though LOL
alfie2902
06-01-2010, 22:30
Tell you what, let's leave things on a positive vibe with Neil's last post :)
Marco.
Seems like a good idea! :) :peace:
Thanks for that Dave
Still doesn't really say much though LOL
What else do you wish to know? No baffle-step correction, +/- 2db 110 - 22KHz approx, -6db at 60Hz or thereabouts, port not tuned to augment the bass overmuch with electrical and mechanical filtering below 30Hz or so to prevent the cone bottoming out, 4th order (IIRC) LR active filters in analogue domain quite high in frequency as bass unit goes out to nearly 10KHz cleanly and reputedly one of the best DAC's out there, isolated and designed by an experienced engineer who has worked with DAC chips in various audio and other apps for decades....
Oh, I know what it is, the bass unit isn't 12" or more.. :lolsign:
Ali Tait
06-01-2010, 22:35
Hi Ali,
No mate the KEL stays!
I just had the chance to try something KT66 based & it's very nice too, but just trying out different valves to see what I like. Might get the chance to try 2 other amps at the weekend 1 with 6550s & 1 with 300bs
Really like the EL84's though :) but we will see! :)
Cool.It's good to try different valves.300b is nice,45 nicer but not enough watts for you.If you can,try and hear someting with a transmitter valve-211,845,813.KT66 is very nice in triode mode apparently.
alfie2902
06-01-2010, 22:41
What else do you wish to know? No baffle-step correction, +/- 2db 110 - 22KHz approx, -6db at 60Hz or thereabouts, port not tuned to augment the bass overmuch with electrical and mechanical filtering below 30Hz or so to prevent the cone bottoming out, 4th order (IIRC) LR active filters in analogue domain quite high in frequency as bass unit goes out to nearly 10KHz cleanly and reputedly one of the best DAC's out there, isolated and designed by an experienced engineer who has worked with DAC chips in various audio and other apps for decades....
Oh, I know what it is, the bass unit isn't 12" or more.. :lolsign:
I Just thought they may be slipping a few measurements out to back up some of the claims ;)
alfie2902
06-01-2010, 22:53
Cool.It's good to try different valves.300b is nice,45 nicer but not enough watts for you.If you can,try and hear someting with a transmitter valve-211,845,813.KT66 is very nice in triode mode apparently.
Thanks for that Ali, I'm trying to work my way through as many as I can :) The transmitter valves look interesting :eyebrows:
The transmitter valves look interesting :eyebrows:
Transmitter valves rock! :guitar:
alfie2902
06-01-2010, 23:03
Transmitter valves rock! :guitar:
Sound right up my street then!! :fingers:
Ali Tait
07-01-2010, 10:27
They're a good way of getting PP-like grunt with SE finesse.
alfie2902
07-01-2010, 21:24
Hi Ali,
Am I right in thinking you had a Mr Liang 845 in the past?
If so what was it like, Build quaility, Transformer quality etc? Any problems?
How did it sound & how does it compare to your Audioromy 813?
All subjective I know Ali but just looking for a few pointers!
Cheers, alfie
Ali Tait
07-01-2010, 21:43
Yes I had a Liang.It's an excellent piece of kit,built like a battleship (41kg!) and good quality components.Transformers are very good too,I tried the amp with a pair of James and a pair of AE output transformers.It was quite a surprise to find that the stock trannies were actually better than the James and only slightly edged by the AE's,which were amorphous-cores and not cheap!
Frankly,I think a Liang would be a great match for your speakers.845's do very good bass,so would be suited to your music preference.As to how it compares to an Audioromy,well in my system,the 813 was much better,but I feel this is purely down to power output.The Liang is 20w,and the 813 is 30w,and this made a big difference to driving the statics.I was really happy with the Liang until I heard what the 813 did.
On the other hand,I was recently round at Mike's,and on his Yammies,the WAD 300b PP sounded absolutely superb,and made the 813 sound crude by comparison,though we both agreed there was a lot of potential there,say with better output trannies and a few choice components.It did better bass though,strangely even better than my Musical Fidelity A370 at 185w/ch!
alfie2902
07-01-2010, 22:25
Yes I had a Liang.It's an excellent piece of kit,built like a battleship (41kg!) and good quality components.Transformers are very good too,I tried the amp with a pair of James and a pair of AE output transformers.It was quite a surprise to find that the stock trannies were actually better than the James and only slightly edged by the AE's,which were amorphous-cores and not cheap!
Frankly,I think a Liang would be a great match for your speakers.845's do very good bass,so would be suited to your music preference.As to how it compares to an Audioromy,well in my system,the 813 was much better,but I feel this is purely down to power output.The Liang is 20w,and the 813 is 30w,and this made a big difference to driving the statics.I was really happy with the Liang until I heard what the 813 did.
On the other hand,I was recently round at Mike's,and on his Yammies,the WAD 300b PP sounded absolutely superb,and made the 813 sound crude by comparison,though we both agreed there was a lot of potential there,say with better output trannies and a few choice components.It did better bass though,strangely even better than my Musical Fidelity A370 at 185w/ch!
Thanks for that Ali :) very interesting!
I'm quite hesitant of the chinese amps as there does seem to be some quality control issues with them that come to light on the internet. They do seem a very good starting point though, especially if you have the knowledge & skills to first check their safety & then to mod on with better transformers, caps etc! But thats a bit risky for people such as me without the knowledge or skills required! What may seem a bargain could end up costly after paying someone to check/repair/mod for you. Feel a bit more confident about the Mr Liang now though :)
Cheers, alfie
Ali Tait
08-01-2010, 14:37
As long as you get the last version made,I'd have no qualms in recommending the Liang to you.It's NOT the usual Chinese fare.There is a thread about the amp on diy audio,and a chap therein relates his experiences visiting the Liang workshop in China.Turns out it's owned by a successful buisinessman(not in audio),who had a long-standing interest in hi-fi,and decided to build his own stuff just cause he could,and had the money to indulge himself.He employs a small staff,and even the transformers are wound in-house,so not the cheap generic stuff found in most Chinese gear.I can say from personal experience that this is definately not a cheaply-made amp.The chassis is stainless steel,with a 10mm ali front plate.The circuit boards are as well made as anything I've seen.
The amp as standard is very good,and with some decent nos valves and a couple of component tweaks,can be made excellent.I'd definately recommend one.The later one seems better-I sold mine to a chap who already had one,but preferred mine to his earlier version.
alfie2902
08-01-2010, 15:06
Thanks again Ali,
It seems the one that's stirred my interest in the Mr Liang my well be your old one! From what you say the Mr Liang sounds head & shoulders above some of the other chinese stuff.
I will look up the thread on diy audio. Thanks mate.
Cheers alfie
Ali Tait
08-01-2010, 15:35
Welcome.Gimme a shout if you end up buying one.I can do the mods for you no problem.:)
alfie2902
08-01-2010, 15:50
Welcome.Gimme a shout if you end up buying one.I can do the mods for you no problem.:)
I think you've already modded the one I'm looking at Ali. Well thats if you sold yours to a guy named Kev in Castle Douglas, South West Scotland.:)
Ali Tait
08-01-2010, 16:05
Haha yes that's the chap! Out of interest,what's he using now?
If you have the spare cash,buy it! I know it's ok,with no issues.
alfie2902
08-01-2010, 16:13
I think he's still using the Mr Liang into a pair of Revolver Music 5 or Klipsch RB81 but not sure TBH.
"Looking to swap my rather large valve amp for an all in one hi-fi system. eg New style Linn Classik Music, NAD Viso 2, Primare 10 etc." This is taken from his ad though, I've PM'd him to see if he's interested in cash rather than a swap. The location of the amp might prove a problem though. I'm just feeling the waters atm tbh. :)
Ali Tait
08-01-2010, 16:16
I may be able to help there if you buy it.
alfie2902
08-01-2010, 16:30
I may be able to help there if you buy it.
Thanks Ali I will keep that in mind! I still have your number if things progress that way I may just give you a call!
While I'm picking your brain for knowledge & experiance Ali, have you ever come across Cayin amps?
P.S. sorry all for hijacking this thread :( It had seemed to come to a conclusion though.
Seems a shame that we can't respect each others points of view & choices of kit sometimes.
Audiophiles & our forums can be a bit pathetic at times! we come together with a love for music & Hi-Fi systems & spend to much time slagging each other & each others systems & beliefs off! It's a joke really! What works & is right for one is not always right for anyone else! I do understand the need to defend your own choice of kit as I often defend my ADMs. I own them & enjoy them & get pissed off when people slag them off, but I don't feel the need to convert people to the 'One true way'. I'll defend all my kit choices & why & how I've chosen them but don't feel the need to preach my choice as the 'One true way' & anyone that doesn't believe what I say is either deaf or deluded! If the kit you own makes you happy thats great but it may not work for everyone!
Cheers, alfie
A bit late replying,but great post Alfie.
Hi Alfie,
I'd also agree that it was a good post. However this requires some comment:
I do understand the need to defend your own choice of kit as I often defend my ADMs. I own them & enjoy them & get pissed off when people slag them off...
I of course agree with your sentiments, but if you want to know why many people are so anti-AVI, regardless of how good (or otherwise) their products are, you only have to look at the antics of Ashley James and his cronies here on the HDD forum where I'm being slagged off (and also my system) and referred to as a "knob head" by both him and his sycophantic side-kick JC Brum, and some other knob-jockey called 'Nik':
http://hddaudio.net/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=604
Read the thread and ask yourself if you think that's an acceptable and professional way for the MD of AVI to behave?
Of course Farney's on there too, bleating away for being justifiably banned, and putting a rather humorous and factitious spin on the events that lead up to his banning!
Ashley also bombards me with unsolicited emails periodically, the most recent of which refers to AoS as a "potty forum", and me as a "demented despot". Nice eh? I won't tell you how I responded!
Alfie, the bottom line is, if Ashley (and JC Brumbo the Dumbo) didn't behave like such arrogant, condescending pricks, then AVI products would get a much easier ride than they do, so blame the boss of the company for any grief you have to put up with as an ADM9 user! ;)
Because of him they've been unfairly stigmatised and that will continue until his bad attitude changes.
Marco.
alfie2902
09-01-2010, 02:53
Hi Marco,
It's a little hard for me to comment on your post specifically as i'm a live & let live sort of chap.
I don't think its acceptable for anyone to be personal about another on a forum, even more so when people have no right to reply. I have read the thread over on HDD & I wouldn't feel comfortable acting in the same way! So that should tell you alot.
Like I said in the post "It Seems a shame that we can't respect each others points of view & choices of kit sometimes.
Audiophiles & our forums can be a bit pathetic at times! we come together with a love for music & Hi-Fi systems & spend to much time slagging each other & each others systems & beliefs off!"
As I see things a componant either works for me or it doesn't! That doesn't really make any product better or worse just more suitable for me & my system! But thats just my take on things & all that can really matter to me! At the end of the day it's only Hi-Fi.;)
alfie
At the end of the day it's only hi-fi until it goes beyond that and becomes personal - then you have to do something about it ;)
I'm glad that you've read the thread and agree that the idiotic behaviour of Ashley James, JC's bum, et al, was completely unacceptable. I also consider that the way Darren runs the HDD forum is a total joke. The rules there are worthless because he manipulates them to suit himself.
Quite frankly, any forum where the administrator(s) in charge not only see fit to host the details of disputes from other forums and allow non-members with no right of reply to be freely antagonised and ridiculed, but where the administrator himself takes part and encourages the abuse, is in my opinion an absolute disgrace.
Anyway, you're undoubtedly a good advert as an AVI user despite the unfortunate and unproductive way the company markets its products. I heard on the grapevine that they're struggling a bit at the moment, which to me comes as no great surprise. Unassailable arrogance eventually wins you no friends.
Marco.
Steve Toy
09-01-2010, 04:36
JC Brum gives Brummies a bad name. This guy lied to me on the phone (number withheld) about not trolling under a second pseudomym (Evilpsycho666) before we caught him red-handed. The silly old duffer forgot which account he was using....
Ali Tait
09-01-2010, 07:43
Hi Alfie,
Nope,never come across any Cayin gear.Anyone? Was it something specific you were looking at?
Hi Marco,
It's a little hard for me to comment on your post specifically as i'm a live & let live sort of chap.
...
As I see things a componant either works for me or it doesn't! That doesn't really make any product better or worse just more suitable for me & my system! But thats just my take on things & all that can really matter to me! At the end of the day it's only Hi-Fi.;)
alfie
I would also add, that, as far as I am concerned, personal views of a designer/engineer/seller/adept of a piece of kit never interfere with my opinion about this kit.
As a proof, Ray Dolby, who was (from what I believe, being president of the AES in the early eighties) one of the key men in the clash between the objectivists and the subjectivists, and supported unconditionally the redbook "evolution", has the perfect profile of being someone I would strongly disapprove. See the Stereophile article of that time if you want to see what I mean : http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/182/
Nevertheless, I never looked at the Dolby products in a non-objective way, keeping for myself the thoughts about the man.
Of course Farney's on there too, bleating away for being justifiably banned, and putting a rather humorous and factitious spin on the events that lead up to his banning!
.
I thought it was bad form to discuss banned members, given they have no right to reply?
Indeed, Joe, but not when they start a thread on another forum to slag AoS off and me! If you do that you then lose all rights to what you're referring to above.
I've never understood the mentality that dictates when you've been banned from one forum that you then have to announce it to all and sundry on another forum completely unrelated to the argument... :scratch: :mental:
For what purpose is this done exactly? It just smacks of childish foot-stomping petulance.
Equally, I've never understood why said other forum would be remotely interested in hosting the ensuing diatribe :rolleyes:
If you're banned from somewhere, just go quietly and forget about it!
Marco.
Well, yes. But then equally I can't see the point of dragging the discussion back here, saying 'look at how nasty they're being'. it simply prolongs the misery.
JC Brum gives Brummies a bad name. This guy lied to me on the phone (number withheld) about not trolling under a second pseudomym (Evilpsycho666) before we caught him red-handed. The silly old duffer forgot which account he was using....
I know that was f*cking hilarious :lol:
I guess that's what happens when senility sets in!!
Marco.
Well, yes. But then equally I can't see the point of dragging the discussion back here, saying 'look at how nasty they're being'. it simply prolongs the misery.
Indeed. The only reason I brought it up is because the head honcho of AVI is bombarding me with insulting unsolicited emails, so I thought I'd address the situation here in the hope that the embarrassment would shut him up!
Marco.
Indeed. The only reason I brought it up is because the head honcho of AVI is bombarding me with insulting unsolicited emails, so I thought I'd address the situation here in the hope that the embarrassment would shut him up!
Marco.
I think you underestimate the thickness of his skin!
Indeed, but trust me, what's being written here pisses him off big time, otherwise why would he be sending me those emails? :eyebrows:
I must admit to a certain amount of guilty smug satisfaction that what I write here about hi-fi gets right up his nose! This amuses me no end and acts as ample reward for having to swallow the blinkered propoganda he's infected every specialist audio site in the land with ;)
Marco.
alfie2902
09-01-2010, 14:01
At the end of the day it's only hi-fi until it goes beyond that and becomes personal - then you have to do something about it ;)
I'm glad that you've read the thread and agree that the idiotic behaviour of Ashley James, JC's bum, et al, was completely unacceptable. I also consider that the way Darren runs the HDD forum is a total joke. The rules there are worthless because he manipulates them to suit himself.
Quite frankly, any forum where the administrator(s) in charge not only see fit to host the details of disputes from other forums and allow non-members with no right of reply to be freely antagonised and ridiculed, but where the administrator himself takes part and encourages the abuse, is in my opinion an absolute disgrace.
Anyway, you're undoubtedly a good advert as an AVI user despite the unfortunate and unproductive way the company markets its products. I heard on the grapevine that they're struggling a bit at the moment, which to me comes as no great surprise. Unassailable arrogance eventually wins you no friends.
Marco.
Hmm.. Marco
I would think this thread is in danger of turning into what you state above (highlighted in red) which smaks a little of hypocrisy.
Rise above it mate & let it go ;)
alfie
Point taken, Alfie, as we value our good reputation. I've said what I needed to say and know that those whom it was aimed at have read it! ;)
Job done.
Marco.
alfie2902
09-01-2010, 20:48
Hi Alfie,
Nope,never come across any Cayin gear.Anyone? Was it something specific you were looking at?
Hi Ali,
I was looking at these http://www.cayin.de/english/ev_860.htm There's a pair not to far away from me for sale. Cayin seem to sell alot of amps but that's no judge of quality :)
Ali Tait
09-01-2010, 21:25
Mmm yes looks nice.You already have a PP amp though,would it not make sense to try a hgher power SE like the Liang to see where your preferences lie? Any joy on that front?
alfie2902
09-01-2010, 21:36
Mmm yes looks nice.You already have a PP amp though,would it not make sense to try a hgher power SE like the Liang to see where your preferences lie? Any joy on that front?
Yes an higher power SE amp would make more sense Ali. I'm just looking around to see whats on offer really & they looked interesting in triode mode. I was looking forward to listening to a couple of amps today but the snow put an end to that! :(
The Guy with the Liang is still looking for a swap so I'll give him another couple of days & then try again :)
Ali Tait
09-01-2010, 21:46
It's a very good amp.
alfie2902
09-01-2010, 22:11
It's at the top of my list Ali :)
The fact that its SE, 845 valves, well fettled & great VFM puts it there! I'll probably try again tomorrow Ali!
LOL If it comes off I'll soon own more of your amps than you! :lol:
Ali Tait
10-01-2010, 10:25
:) I've only got three now!
Ali Tait
10-01-2010, 10:26
Oops,sorry four,forgot about the Sugden!
alfie2902
10-01-2010, 13:04
Deal looks off Ali :(
The Liang doesn't seem to turn up on ebay anymore do you know if they can be bought direct from Liang?
It may pay me to import one & pay the Duty/P&P etc Then get the mods done as of the DIYaudio thread! Would you have any idea about how much this would cost? & any contact details for Mr Liang?
Cheers, alfie.
alfie2902
10-01-2010, 13:38
What else do you wish to know? No baffle-step correction, +/- 2db 110 - 22KHz approx, -6db at 60Hz or thereabouts, port not tuned to augment the bass overmuch with electrical and mechanical filtering below 30Hz or so to prevent the cone bottoming out, 4th order (IIRC) LR active filters in analogue domain quite high in frequency as bass unit goes out to nearly 10KHz cleanly and reputedly one of the best DAC's out there, isolated and designed by an experienced engineer who has worked with DAC chips in various audio and other apps for decades....
Oh, I know what it is, the bass unit isn't 12" or more.. :lolsign:
Hi Dave,
Sorry to dig this up & I'm not trying to start shit throwing again but just never got to address this point. :)
TBH if AVI did release alot of measurements i.e. old Hi-Fi mag style Lab tests. They wouldn't really mean that much to me! I get lost with some of the facts & figures!
It just seems very odd, even to me a very happy ADM owner, that a objectivist type of company that always state how much better the ADM measure than anything else i.e. 100x or 1000x less distortion, Jitter free DAC. etc etc. will not back up their claims in black & white & always skirt around the issue of proving their measurement claims! It usually goes on then to say just buy a pair & hear the difference subjectively. It seems to me while ever they use this rather twisted method that they will be open to ridicule.
Whats your thoughts Dave?
Cheers, alfie
Ali Tait
10-01-2010, 14:08
Deal looks off Ali :(
The Liang doesn't seem to turn up on ebay anymore do you know if they can be bought direct from Liang?
It may pay me to import one & pay the Duty/P&P etc Then get the mods done as of the DIYaudio thread! Would you have any idea about how much this would cost? & any contact details for Mr Liang?
Cheers, alfie.
Hi Alfie,
Sorry,don't know where else to get one. All you can do is keep an eye out on the forums and ebay.
I'd composed a great reply and the computer threw a wobbly when I asked it to do a spell check..:steam:
I'd very much appreciate a full technical and subjective analysis done the old fashioned way between ADM9.1's and, say, ATC active 50's, where the design compromises and achievements in both designs could be examined in detail, but I doubt this would ever happen now.
I agree that claiming 1000 times less distortion is a bit meaningless, but I can guarantee that Martin Grindrod will have carefully researched this speaker from beginning to end and catalogued it all, from consultations on the drive units down to choice of output transistors and the active crossover filters.
If you take some of the ideas here - most passive crossovers can create severe problems unless they're VERY carefully optimised and they can take something like 50% at least of the efficiency away (B&O claimed 75%) and most of any bass control an amp may have. Also, the drivers in a good speaker MUST have a wider bandwidth than they need as this helps the crossover very much - ATC have a once groundbreaking midrange dome that has a very narrow bandwidth and goes to pieces outside of it, especially up top and this means that the passive speakers using it are going to be extremely compromised, whatever the make, when compared with the active ones, where exact matching of phase etc can be achieved. I don't mean to appear to slag off ATC's (far from it), but their compromises are such that active is really the only way to go with their three way models...
Regarding passive speakers, Harbeths are only as good as they are I suggest, because the main drive unit is so bloody good and the crossover sensibly set (and fastidiously designed) so the (mostly) metal dome drivers don't scratch around too low. Indeed Harbeth's whole ethos is around a sweet toned, slightly warm-but natural (if that isn't a contradiction) sounding speaker that one can play at sensible levels for hours and hours with no fatigue (and neighbour annoyance) and they do this to perfection IMO... If you want an idea of just how far miniatures have come, then just compare some LS3/5A's with Harbeth P3ESR's - you'd be in for a severe shock I can tell you...!
I'm not sure I can say any more to be honest, as it's all been done to death really. ADM9.1's are spectacular value for money, but if you want a much larger sound with a separates system, then the world's your lobster innit? :lol:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.