MakeMineVinyl
Major Contributor
Huh? WTF does the 1980s have to do with tube sound, and 'old peeps'?Aren't tube enthusiasts just old peeps trying to recreate that 80s sound?
Huh? WTF does the 1980s have to do with tube sound, and 'old peeps'?Aren't tube enthusiasts just old peeps trying to recreate that 80s sound?
Come on, please!Tubes were obsolete by the end of the 60's ...
Personally, I'm dismayed that tube manufacturing has even descended to the point where they intentionally introduce distortion. In the days when vacuum tubes were current technology, the design goal of every manufacturer was to reproduce the cleanest signal possible with the least distortion. There was none of this 'tubes as tone control' shit as we have now. When I replaced the 12AX7A tubes in my preamp, I had to order 10 of them even though I only needed two so that I could find a reasonably matched pair out of the batch. That is insane. The problem is not tubes - its the current state of mind of tube manufacturers.One of the reasons that tube swapping is a "thing" is that there are clearly audible differences between tubes. It's one of the aspects of the hobby where the hobbyist has some sense of control over the sound.
Some 30 years ago, I lived in Berkeley California, walking distance from an electronics shop that sold tubes, had a tube tester and a big NOS stock of tubes. I'd swap out tubes for my Stax Amp/Energizer [hybrid: J-Fets driving Triodes], later for an Ampex MX-10, [all-tube, ancient and very funky], Marantz 8B [glorious mid-range at the expense of everything else], and a 'starved tube' microphone preamp [another hybrid, op-amps driving the tubes, if I'm not mistaken]. Compared to the exclusively solid-state gear, the upper octaves of tube hybrid gear sounded more "rounded off" and there was a bit of soft clipping on peaks. A lot less 'grain'. The systems I'm using now, while extended as far as I can hear in the upper register, have few upper register resonances or audible hot spots. The Stax earspeakers were peaky on top, producing good "presence" and spatial effects. So were the speakers I was using for monitoring, little NHT bookshelf speakers. The Drop 6XX 'phones and the a/d/s 400 speakers in use now are as smooth as silk, driven by solid state gear.
The biggest difference with tube-swapping was in the upper registers. I'd use a Rat Shack tone generator connected to the inputs of the tube gear, connect the output to a cassette deck and look for differences in level. Also did this with various interconnects. There was a 5 db difference at 10K swapping out line level interconnects on the MX-10. The interconnects I made without shielding had the most treble, some old, thick Monster Cable stuff that was overloaded with di-electric had the least. I asked Jack Vad what was going on, he said "Send me a schematic". After looking at it, he called back, said "There's no cathode follower." I know what a cathode follower is now, didn't know then. This issue didn't happen with any of the other gear.
This all points to some of the more "Audiophilus Nervosa" aspects of the hobby. ASR would say tube gear has obvious, bad, distortions. I'm sure SET gear has oodles of distortion. I'm sure the kind of loudspeakers favored by SET enthusiasts have wonky frequency response. The sum total must be full of mismatched impedances and easily measured distortions. But all these "broken" aspects of design can be fiddled with endlessly until the golden-eared audiophile gets the sound he deserves for a price he really can't afford.
If the amplifier in question is push-pull output, than that type of circuit will tend to cancel even order harmonic distortion originating in that stage. Same thing with balanced circuits.I seem to recall that many/most tube amp measurements show plenty of third harmonic (memories of many Stereophile tests). I suspect it's how these harmonics are evenly spread that can aid the so-called 'tube sound' in many *domestic* designs...
One of the reasons that tube swapping is a "thing" is that there are clearly audible differences between tubes. It's one of the aspects of the hobby where the hobbyist has some sense of control over the sound.
Some 30 years ago, I lived in Berkeley California, walking distance from an electronics shop that sold tubes, had a tube tester and a big NOS stock of tubes. I'd swap out tubes for my Stax Amp/Energizer [hybrid: J-Fets driving Triodes], later for an Ampex MX-10, [all-tube, ancient and very funky], Marantz 8B [glorious mid-range at the expense of everything else], and a 'starved tube' microphone preamp [another hybrid, op-amps driving the tubes, if I'm not mistaken]. Compared to the exclusively solid-state gear, the upper octaves of tube hybrid gear sounded more "rounded off" and there was a bit of soft clipping on peaks. A lot less 'grain'. The systems I'm using now, while extended as far as I can hear in the upper register, have few upper register resonances or audible hot spots. The Stax earspeakers were peaky on top, producing good "presence" and spatial effects. So were the speakers I was using for monitoring, little NHT bookshelf speakers. The Drop 6XX 'phones and the a/d/s 400 speakers in use now are as smooth as silk, driven by solid state gear.
The biggest difference with tube-swapping was in the upper registers. I'd use a Rat Shack tone generator connected to the inputs of the tube gear, connect the output to a cassette deck and look for differences in level. Also did this with various interconnects. There was a 5 db difference at 10K swapping out line level interconnects on the MX-10. The interconnects I made without shielding had the most treble, some old, thick Monster Cable stuff that was overloaded with di-electric had the least. I asked Jack Vad what was going on, he said "Send me a schematic". After looking at it, he called back, said "There's no cathode follower." I know what a cathode follower is now, didn't know then. This issue didn't happen with any of the other gear.
This all points to some of the more "Audiophilus Nervosa" aspects of the hobby. ASR would say tube gear has obvious, bad, distortions. I'm sure SET gear has oodles of distortion. I'm sure the kind of loudspeakers favored by SET enthusiasts have wonky frequency response. The sum total must be full of mismatched impedances and easily measured distortions. But all these "broken" aspects of design can be fiddled with endlessly until the golden-eared audiophile gets the sound he deserves for a price he really can't afford.
Sand some of that hard digital edge off your DAC’s output
An EQ wouldn't introduce distortion, which I think is the reason this type of distortion box exists. Audiophile mentality always seems able to find new depths of non-logic.Wouldn't it be easier to just use EQ rather than feed the signal though a box like this with the only adjustments being changing tubes to the wrong type that don't work correctly in the circuit?
I say it's worth testing, if only for the sake of comparison.Obviously , not the type of product that goes down well here. The interesting question isnt "Why buy this?"- but "Why buy this not something like https://www.amazon.co.uk/SENUCN-AUD...=1&keywords=tube+buffer&qid=1626085359&sr=8-5 ?" Or, put another way, what does $1600 get you here that $30 doesnt in something like the linked product- lets be honest, it cant be any worse!
Wouldn't cost enough, wouldn't have enough distortion. If you want this specific species of awful sound, you gotta pay.Wouldn't it be easier to just use EQ rather than feed the signal though a box like this with the only adjustments being changing tubes to the wrong type that don't work correctly in the circuit?
I've seen it. Have read many times of producers/engineers/musical artists bouncing their "sterile" digital productions to analog tape in order to take advantage of analog tape's soft limiting. Of course, one could simply use a digital compressor/limiter tweaked just so, but I digress.If the amplifier in question is push-pull output, than that type of circuit will tend to cancel even order harmonic distortion originating in that stage. Same thing with balanced circuits.
Funny thing is, tape recorders by their nature produce odd-order distortion almost exclusively. The more 'perfect' the recorder is, the more the even order harmonic distortion products are suppressed. As far as I've seen, nobody has ever commented one way or the other about tape distortion.
I've done that a couple times too. My recorder is all vacuum tube so it adds back some even order distortion along with the saturation effects.I've seen it. Have read many times of producers/engineers/musical artists bouncing their "sterile" digital productions in tapes in order to take advantage of analog tape's soft limiting. Of course, one could simply use a digital compressor/limiter tweaked just so, but I digress.
The old KPFA building had these Ampex r to r machines all over, all the studios and the music library. When I started there in 1988 some people were still using tape, digital editing hadn't quite happened [it was not really available to most people back then] and KPFA continued to use whatever still worked. When they moved, there were a few Otari reel to reel decks, but most folks already moved on to DATs and there were a number built into the studios.I've done that a couple times too. My recorder is all vacuum tube so it adds back some even order distortion along with the saturation effects.
View attachment 140702
Tell that to nearly every band & recording studio on the planet lolTubes were obsolete by the end of the 60's ...
Aren't tube enthusiasts just old peeps trying to recreate that 80s sound?
DAT tape was the worst... the rolloff from hell lol...When they moved, there were a few Otari reel to reel decks, but most folks already moved on to DATs and there were a number built into the studios.
One can purchase belt driven CD Transports costing thousands of dollars and Tube DAC for thousands of dollars. Contradictions have rarely been a concern in high-end audio.. I my memory when CD player or DAC had solid state and tube buffer output I always prefered solid state. I used to own sonic frontiers preamp that I liked, but it was over 2 decades ago. But I understand that some audiophiles want to "enrich" the sound of class D amps with crap like this buffer.