[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] FW: [ARSCLIST] Internet audio: What do you expect of it ?
There really isn't any need to make audiophile quality tubes...yet.There are so many NOS ones out there.But I can see them running out in my lifetime.The demand is so strong,either the ones from Eastern Europe will get better,or someone,probably The Japanese,will make new ones of the quality of the ones from the 50s and 60s... at $750.00 for a matched pair.The WE ones are overpriced,considering they are made in Eastern Europe ?
Roger
phillip holmes <insuranceman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: The problems are:
1) Cathode emulsion quality (as in, the new tubes don't have it)
2) Cleanliness of the plants (as in, the 2nd world plants aren't very)
3) Inadequate pumping of the tubes because:
a) They don't pump the tubes to sufficient vacuum due to time
b) They can't pump the tubes because the machines are 50 years old
4) The gettering material is impure
5) The metal parts aren't put together with enough care (they are
misaligned)
That being said, JJ makes good tubes (though not as good as ANY company
from the '50s). SED (aka Winged C) also makes good tubes. The Chinese
tubes aren't as putrid as they once were, but they still suck compared
to any decent tube from the '60s to early '70s.
There are plenty of dumpster tubes that can be used in new designs that
could keep tube audio going for a long time. TV tubes, weird filament
voltages, etc.. Some of the makers are making decent enough tubes that
they can be aged, tested out and the worst ones rejected. Several
outfits age the tubes, test them at real life voltages and do real
matching. I made the mistake of buying a, /ahem/, "matched quad" of
Svetlana EL34. What a joke. One tube had an intermittent short, one
was gassy and the other two were "just okay". I got these at a guitar
center. I took them back, got another new set and had the same
problems. I don't like badmouthing companies, but avoid Svetlana for
any serious application, UNLESS you are buying them from someone you
trust that has aged and tested them under real world conditions. The
same thing applies to the Chinese tubes. JJ and SED are worth
trusting. They try. Unfortunately, if they really built tubes to the
same quality as tubes made in the '60s, they'd have to rebuild all their
machinery, improve all their materials several times over and charge 10X
the price. Then, all the guys who are so romantic about tubes would get
romantic about transistors. Just consider what the price was for a tube
in 1950, look at the price today, and calculate for inflation. We're
paying way less for tubes when you consider inflation (just like for CDs).
Phillip Holmes
Scott Phillips wrote:
> ..you might change your mind, when the NOS tubes run out and all you can
> get are the terrible quality tubes from the eastern bloc countries. It
> is getting painful and very expensive to find good sounding tubes even
> for guitar amplifiers. I sometimes have to service tube equipment, and
> the characteristics of new tubes vary all over the map. Cathode and grid
> bias settings in the amplifiers don't hold at all any more because the
> newly manufactured tubes are so poor. New-old-stock tubes from the US
> and Europe were very stable from tube to tube. There just isn't anyplace
> that wants to pollute the environment making them anymore, except where
> they don't care about that. Must be why they don't care about the tube
> quality either....
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger and Allison Kulp
> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2007 4:29 PM
> To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] FW: [ARSCLIST] Internet audio: What do you
> expect of it ?
>
> When I listen to anything other than a computer,I refuse to use anything
> but tubes.
>
>
> Roger
>
> Robert J Hodge wrote: -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert J Hodge
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 9:25 AM
> To: 'jhartke@xxxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: RE: [ARSCLIST] Internet audio: What do you expect of it ?
>
> When the transistor was first marketed as an amplifying device, it
> suffered from its' ability to act like a switch- that is to say until
> the signal at the base became high enough to make it conduct. Germanium
> and early silicon based transistors had this anomalism.
> I had a couple of those early amplifiers and got rid of them after
> trying to live with them. At low signal levels, they sounded terrible.
>
> As with anything of an early design, this problem was overcome with
> better transistor design.
>
> I have used mosfet power amplifiers now for many years and will never go
> back to the tube units. Of course, even overdriving a mosfet unit will
> sound terrible! Clipped is clipped.
>
> I keep the tube units around, just in case.
>
> Bob Hodge
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jerry Hartke
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 6:40 AM
> To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Internet audio: What do you expect of it ?
>
> Being rather ancient, I go back to tube amplifiers of the 1940's, and am
> confused about the reference to "solid state distortion." Does this
> refer to hard clipping when transistors are overdriven? Although tube
> amplifiers clip more gradually, they also introduce distortion in the
> process. Thus neither form of amplification should be overdriven.
>
> Tube amplifiers are limited by their output transformer that matches the
> high output impedance of the tubes to a low load impedance. This
> transformer significantly degrades frequency and phase response, placing
> severe constraints on the amount of negative feedback that reduces the
> inherent distortion of the amplifier. I paid as much as $100 back in the
> '50s for a superior output transformer, and still struggled to achieve
> 20-20,000 Hz with 0.1% intermod.
>
> Solid state amplifiers normally do not have output transformers, and
> thus can use greater amounts of negative feedback. This results in much
> lower distortion, better frequency (and transient) response, and
> superior damping than that achieved by most tube amplifiers. It seems
> that solid state amplification would be preferable provided that
> amplitudes stayed within their dynamic range (always necessary for
> fidelity.)
>
> I do not disagree with those, including myself, raised on tube
> amplifiers and accustomed to their limited frequency response and
> somewhat higher distortion. Many of us like this "sound." However, we
> should not confuse this preference with faithful reproduction.
>
> Jerry Hartke
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>> [mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steven C. Barr(x)
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:06 PM
>> To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Internet audio: What do you expect of it ?
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Don Cox"
>>
>>> Hello Steven
>>> On 18/12/07, Steven C. Barr(x) wrote:
>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Roger and Allison Kulp"
>>>>
>>>>> I see it as a latter day version of the all-tube FM tuner,rather
>>>>>
> than
>
>>>>> the CD/phono amp.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Keep in mind that the appeal of vacuum-tube audio equipment is NOT
>>>>
> its
>
>>>> "perfect" reproduction (which probably doesn't...in fact,
>>>> CAN'T...exist?!) but rather the fact that the distortion it
>>>>
> generates
>
>>>> is much more enjoyable for steady listening than its solid-state
>>>> equivalent...?!
>>>>
>>> Yes, but if you feed an unpleasantly distorted signal into a box
>>>
> with a
>
>>> tube in it, the tube will not magically remove that unpleasantness.
>>>
>>> Remarkable things can be done with software to improve a nasty
>>> recording, and I expect such software to improve in the future, but
>>>
> a
>
>>> simple tube based amplifier stage cannot make a silk purse out of a
>>> sow's ear.
>>>
>>>
>> That, actually, was my point...! If an audio signal has been, at any
>> point in its life, been subjected to solid-state distortion...
>>
>> 1) The listener has my deepest sympathy...
>>
>> 2) AND...the signal will never again sound good, regardless of what it
>>
>
>
>> is played on/through...!
>>
>> Steven C. Barr
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try
> it now.
>
>
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.