|
|
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Bell" wrote That doesn't surprise but then I bet they don't have identical specs anyway. Actually, blind men don't wear specs - they mostly wear shades...... You aobviously don't know very many blind men then. Only these five: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keith_g/show/Mazin'%20Grace.mp3 Kool. Nice recording. Is there an album? Several - start he http://www.rosebudus.com/blindboys/ .....and there's more than five of them now, it appears!! |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Bell" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: "Ian Bell" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: "Ian Bell" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote Who says valves have to produce a non-linear output? you can build perfectly linear valve amps if you try. A linear valve amp and a linear SS amp rated to driev the same loads, will sound *identical* to each other in any measurable way. 'Measure' being the operative word. In the real world the difference in the sound *quality* is night and day AFAIAC. Is that right? So how do you *measure* quality? Simple, you need a timing device to time how long it takes you to get fed up with the sound you're listening to. That's not a measurement, it's merely a sample. OK, there's another way - you need a builder's tape (say up to 50m) measure for this: Fix the end of the tape to your hifi stand, put the music on each amp in turn and keep a grip of the tape until you realise you've stopped listening to the music. Check the tape measure to see how far you have wandered off each time...... ;-) I think that puts me in next door's bedroom ;-) Wot, again!!!?? :-) Ian |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Bell" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: "Ian Bell" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: "Ian Bell" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote Who says valves have to produce a non-linear output? you can build perfectly linear valve amps if you try. A linear valve amp and a linear SS amp rated to driev the same loads, will sound *identical* to each other in any measurable way. 'Measure' being the operative word. In the real world the difference in the sound *quality* is night and day AFAIAC. Is that right? So how do you *measure* quality? Simple, you need a timing device to time how long it takes you to get fed up with the sound you're listening to. That's not a measurement, it's merely a sample. OK, there's another way - you need a builder's tape (say up to 50m) measure for this: Fix the end of the tape to your hifi stand, put the music on each amp in turn and keep a grip of the tape until you realise you've stopped listening to the music. Check the tape measure to see how far you have wandered off each time...... ;-) I think that puts me in next door's bedroom ;-) Wot, again!!!?? :-) Ian |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Molton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:55:33 -0000 "Keith G" wrote: Yeah, but 'exactly the same way' means that they have to have the same distortion characteristics. Yup. Ok, so now you agreed that driving the same voltage on the speaker terminals will cause the speaker to move the same way, given that the amps PSU is up to it, then: You don't sell insurance for a living by any chance, do you? :-) 1) Explain why a SS amp could not drive the voltages in the same way as a valve one Forgetting that little magic word, are we?? 2) At what point do you declare differences to be inaudible? Out on the back step - all the way indoors, up to the patio door, I can tell without any problem. Once outside, it starts to become less obvious - specially if I'm cutting the grass (petrol mower)..... equipment exists that can measure down to about -140dB - are you suggesting the 'valve sound' comes from sub -140dB artifcats ? We're bird-feeders - I see any artifcats round here they get an apple (when available or handful of peanuts, if not) chucked at them! perhaps this is why speaker wire makes a difference - maybe they were right after all! OK, enough ****ing about. Ian, it's no big deal - you either *get* valves or you don't. Not everybody does, so don't bash yer brains out. It's not easy to describe the 'difference' without resorting to subjective phrases like 'space', air', 'texture', 'vitality', 'musicality' or whatever. These phrases immediately draw a (usually hostile) reaction from the unbelievers and the strange phenomenon of valves and SS becoming antagonistic and mutually exclusive starts to appear. (A load of ********, given that I've had an SS amp driven by valve pre's on the go today! - See http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit...w/sharkey1.MOV for a ****e little movie of this in action! :-) Also the 'science' involved is a) mostly way over my head and b) not clearly agreed on by any significany majority of the theorists. All I can say is if you haven't spent any time with a valve amp yourself, get a good listen and see if it does anything for you. Knowing this don't happen on every street corner, I often say people I *know* on this group are welcome to come and hear mine (and take the ****, if that's what they want) if it's doable. (I'm in Cambridgeshire right on the A1, where are you? - Cornwall, I expect, given your predilection for dragons!) :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Molton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:55:33 -0000 "Keith G" wrote: Yeah, but 'exactly the same way' means that they have to have the same distortion characteristics. Yup. Ok, so now you agreed that driving the same voltage on the speaker terminals will cause the speaker to move the same way, given that the amps PSU is up to it, then: You don't sell insurance for a living by any chance, do you? :-) 1) Explain why a SS amp could not drive the voltages in the same way as a valve one Forgetting that little magic word, are we?? 2) At what point do you declare differences to be inaudible? Out on the back step - all the way indoors, up to the patio door, I can tell without any problem. Once outside, it starts to become less obvious - specially if I'm cutting the grass (petrol mower)..... equipment exists that can measure down to about -140dB - are you suggesting the 'valve sound' comes from sub -140dB artifcats ? We're bird-feeders - I see any artifcats round here they get an apple (when available or handful of peanuts, if not) chucked at them! perhaps this is why speaker wire makes a difference - maybe they were right after all! OK, enough ****ing about. Ian, it's no big deal - you either *get* valves or you don't. Not everybody does, so don't bash yer brains out. It's not easy to describe the 'difference' without resorting to subjective phrases like 'space', air', 'texture', 'vitality', 'musicality' or whatever. These phrases immediately draw a (usually hostile) reaction from the unbelievers and the strange phenomenon of valves and SS becoming antagonistic and mutually exclusive starts to appear. (A load of ********, given that I've had an SS amp driven by valve pre's on the go today! - See http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit...w/sharkey1.MOV for a ****e little movie of this in action! :-) Also the 'science' involved is a) mostly way over my head and b) not clearly agreed on by any significany majority of the theorists. All I can say is if you haven't spent any time with a valve amp yourself, get a good listen and see if it does anything for you. Knowing this don't happen on every street corner, I often say people I *know* on this group are welcome to come and hear mine (and take the ****, if that's what they want) if it's doable. (I'm in Cambridgeshire right on the A1, where are you? - Cornwall, I expect, given your predilection for dragons!) :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 23:54:54 -0000
"Keith G" wrote: You don't sell insurance for a living by any chance, do you? :-) No, I write code ;-) fx: hides tail 1) Explain why a SS amp could not drive the voltages in the same way as a valve one Forgetting that little magic word, are we?? fx: bats eyelids 'please?' OK, enough ****ing about. Ian, it's no big deal - you either *get* valves or you don't. If you dont get any you wont have any to build your amp with... Not everybody does, so don't bash yer brains out. Please, enough of that - Im not stupid and dont need to be talked down to. I *OWN* some valve gear. sadly its been damaged (cosmetically only) and I dont use it anymore, but I did like its sound. I certianly wouldnt have applied terms such as 'linear' or 'accurate' to it though. More 'warm' and 'coloured'. Most valve amps (like most transistor amps) were mass market, and had a good number of nonlinearities and other problems (not least of which bursting into flames, on both 'sides'). The good ones were more linear and had less distortion. I'd bet that the *best* valve and transistor amps are sonically indistinguishable, perhaps so much so as to be hard to tell apart on equipment. It's not easy to describe the 'difference' without resorting to subjective phrases like 'space', air', 'texture', 'vitality', 'musicality' or whatever. Thats because phrases like 'musicality' belong nowhere near terms like 'accurate reproduction'. If you like the valve sound, you might as well be honest and admit you like a good gob of distortion, because the 'valve sound' was characterised by the common valve amps, and not the (more) linear ones. The same happens in transistor amps too - people still like that 'valve like sound' and even extremely expensive transistor amps seem to deliberately cultivate high 2nd harmonic distortion levels. These phrases immediately draw a (usually hostile) reaction from the unbelievers No, they just make anyone interested in an accurate account of the 'valve sound' cringe and look elsewhere. You'd get far more converts if you just told people 'this gear makes the sound good' instead of 'this gear reproduces it better'. and the strange phenomenon of valves and SS becoming antagonistic and mutually exclusive starts to appear. Weird huh? Also the 'science' involved is a) mostly way over my head Its simple stuff. anyone with a GCSE in math or insect biology (or better, O-level) can do it. and b) not clearly agreed on by any significany majority of the theorists. Sorry, but thats out-right wrong. besides improvement in technology based on things that theoretical that theoretical is WELL beyond your ability to hear it. (or just plain snakeoil...) All I can say is if you haven't spent any time with a valve amp yourself, get a good listen and see if it does anything for you. I have. I like them. but I'll be keeping my SS amp - its just as good as a good valve amp, and a lot cheaper to maintain and run. Knowing this don't happen on every street corner, I often say people I *know* on this group are welcome to come and hear mine (and take the ****, if that's what they want) if it's doable. (I'm in Cambridgeshire right on the A1, where are you? - Cornwall, I expect, given your predilection for dragons!) Cheshire, actually. I have a friend in St. Neots though... (no, Im not carting my Radford Monitor ones down there - way too heavy to get on the train... -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 23:54:54 -0000
"Keith G" wrote: You don't sell insurance for a living by any chance, do you? :-) No, I write code ;-) fx: hides tail 1) Explain why a SS amp could not drive the voltages in the same way as a valve one Forgetting that little magic word, are we?? fx: bats eyelids 'please?' OK, enough ****ing about. Ian, it's no big deal - you either *get* valves or you don't. If you dont get any you wont have any to build your amp with... Not everybody does, so don't bash yer brains out. Please, enough of that - Im not stupid and dont need to be talked down to. I *OWN* some valve gear. sadly its been damaged (cosmetically only) and I dont use it anymore, but I did like its sound. I certianly wouldnt have applied terms such as 'linear' or 'accurate' to it though. More 'warm' and 'coloured'. Most valve amps (like most transistor amps) were mass market, and had a good number of nonlinearities and other problems (not least of which bursting into flames, on both 'sides'). The good ones were more linear and had less distortion. I'd bet that the *best* valve and transistor amps are sonically indistinguishable, perhaps so much so as to be hard to tell apart on equipment. It's not easy to describe the 'difference' without resorting to subjective phrases like 'space', air', 'texture', 'vitality', 'musicality' or whatever. Thats because phrases like 'musicality' belong nowhere near terms like 'accurate reproduction'. If you like the valve sound, you might as well be honest and admit you like a good gob of distortion, because the 'valve sound' was characterised by the common valve amps, and not the (more) linear ones. The same happens in transistor amps too - people still like that 'valve like sound' and even extremely expensive transistor amps seem to deliberately cultivate high 2nd harmonic distortion levels. These phrases immediately draw a (usually hostile) reaction from the unbelievers No, they just make anyone interested in an accurate account of the 'valve sound' cringe and look elsewhere. You'd get far more converts if you just told people 'this gear makes the sound good' instead of 'this gear reproduces it better'. and the strange phenomenon of valves and SS becoming antagonistic and mutually exclusive starts to appear. Weird huh? Also the 'science' involved is a) mostly way over my head Its simple stuff. anyone with a GCSE in math or insect biology (or better, O-level) can do it. and b) not clearly agreed on by any significany majority of the theorists. Sorry, but thats out-right wrong. besides improvement in technology based on things that theoretical that theoretical is WELL beyond your ability to hear it. (or just plain snakeoil...) All I can say is if you haven't spent any time with a valve amp yourself, get a good listen and see if it does anything for you. I have. I like them. but I'll be keeping my SS amp - its just as good as a good valve amp, and a lot cheaper to maintain and run. Knowing this don't happen on every street corner, I often say people I *know* on this group are welcome to come and hear mine (and take the ****, if that's what they want) if it's doable. (I'm in Cambridgeshire right on the A1, where are you? - Cornwall, I expect, given your predilection for dragons!) Cheshire, actually. I have a friend in St. Neots though... (no, Im not carting my Radford Monitor ones down there - way too heavy to get on the train... -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Molton" wrote Please, enough of that - Im not stupid and dont need to be talked down to. Forgive me - your apostrophic deficiencies imply otherwise.... :-) I *OWN* some valve gear. sadly its been damaged (cosmetically only) and I dont use it anymore, but I did like its sound. Well there you are then! (Makes me wonder what all the fuss is about!) I certianly wouldnt have applied terms such as 'linear' or 'accurate' to it though. Fine, neither would I.... More 'warm' and 'coloured'. If you like. If it makes you happy (and if that's all you've ever heard.... ;-).... Most valve amps (like most transistor amps) were mass market, and had a good number of nonlinearities and other problems (not least of which bursting into flames, on both 'sides'). The good ones were more linear and had less distortion. Few say so... I'd bet that the *best* valve and transistor amps are sonically indistinguishable, perhaps so much so as to be hard to tell apart on equipment. Very likely, I wouldn't know - I'm light years away from the 'best' of either one.....!! It's not easy to describe the 'difference' without resorting to subjective phrases like 'space', air', 'texture', 'vitality', 'musicality' or whatever. Thats because phrases like 'musicality' belong nowhere near terms like 'accurate reproduction'. Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? - I'm in the business of entertaining myself, not supplying myself with fekkin' laboratory data! If you like the valve sound, you might as well be honest and admit you like a good gob of distortion, Be 'honest'??? What is it with all you SS 'purists'? You want us valvey types to break down in some sort of confessional hysteria about our 'weaknesses'??? I got news for you - *all* hifi gear distorts to some degree, compond that distortion with a bad mix of kit and you can easily spend a lot of money to end up with summat that sounds a damn sight worse than a Dixon's 'music centre'!! because the 'valve sound' was characterised by the common valve amps, and not the (more) linear ones. The same happens in transistor amps too - people still like that 'valve like sound' and even extremely expensive transistor amps seem to deliberately cultivate high 2nd harmonic distortion levels. Yup, 'valvelike' is one of the popular buzzwords in the hifi comix atm. These phrases immediately draw a (usually hostile) reaction from the unbelievers No, they just make anyone interested in an accurate account of the 'valve sound' cringe and look elsewhere. If only they would - the reality is that they usually come full-on in some sort of 'apocryphal' way trying desparately to make us see the 'error of our ways'. (I think they feel threatened...) You'd get far more converts if you just told people 'this gear makes the sound good' instead of 'this gear reproduces it better'. Who TF needs converts? If you had read any of my previous posts on the subject of valves I think you will find I have said often that I prefer them but I don't think they're for everybody (or somesuch). Put another way, I would say if anyone doesn't like valves then they should avoid them, just don't try telling me SS (amps) sound better because they don't AFAIAC!! OK? and the strange phenomenon of valves and SS becoming antagonistic and mutually exclusive starts to appear. Weird huh? Yep! Happens all the time in here - we had it with vinyl a year ago. (Like there's some law says you can't do both digital *and* analogue or summat!) rest snipped - it's getting late Cheshire, actually. I have a friend in St. Neots though... (no, Im not carting my Radford Monitor ones down there - way too heavy to get on the train... And my brother in law lives in Cheshire - small world innit? :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Molton" wrote Please, enough of that - Im not stupid and dont need to be talked down to. Forgive me - your apostrophic deficiencies imply otherwise.... :-) I *OWN* some valve gear. sadly its been damaged (cosmetically only) and I dont use it anymore, but I did like its sound. Well there you are then! (Makes me wonder what all the fuss is about!) I certianly wouldnt have applied terms such as 'linear' or 'accurate' to it though. Fine, neither would I.... More 'warm' and 'coloured'. If you like. If it makes you happy (and if that's all you've ever heard.... ;-).... Most valve amps (like most transistor amps) were mass market, and had a good number of nonlinearities and other problems (not least of which bursting into flames, on both 'sides'). The good ones were more linear and had less distortion. Few say so... I'd bet that the *best* valve and transistor amps are sonically indistinguishable, perhaps so much so as to be hard to tell apart on equipment. Very likely, I wouldn't know - I'm light years away from the 'best' of either one.....!! It's not easy to describe the 'difference' without resorting to subjective phrases like 'space', air', 'texture', 'vitality', 'musicality' or whatever. Thats because phrases like 'musicality' belong nowhere near terms like 'accurate reproduction'. Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? - I'm in the business of entertaining myself, not supplying myself with fekkin' laboratory data! If you like the valve sound, you might as well be honest and admit you like a good gob of distortion, Be 'honest'??? What is it with all you SS 'purists'? You want us valvey types to break down in some sort of confessional hysteria about our 'weaknesses'??? I got news for you - *all* hifi gear distorts to some degree, compond that distortion with a bad mix of kit and you can easily spend a lot of money to end up with summat that sounds a damn sight worse than a Dixon's 'music centre'!! because the 'valve sound' was characterised by the common valve amps, and not the (more) linear ones. The same happens in transistor amps too - people still like that 'valve like sound' and even extremely expensive transistor amps seem to deliberately cultivate high 2nd harmonic distortion levels. Yup, 'valvelike' is one of the popular buzzwords in the hifi comix atm. These phrases immediately draw a (usually hostile) reaction from the unbelievers No, they just make anyone interested in an accurate account of the 'valve sound' cringe and look elsewhere. If only they would - the reality is that they usually come full-on in some sort of 'apocryphal' way trying desparately to make us see the 'error of our ways'. (I think they feel threatened...) You'd get far more converts if you just told people 'this gear makes the sound good' instead of 'this gear reproduces it better'. Who TF needs converts? If you had read any of my previous posts on the subject of valves I think you will find I have said often that I prefer them but I don't think they're for everybody (or somesuch). Put another way, I would say if anyone doesn't like valves then they should avoid them, just don't try telling me SS (amps) sound better because they don't AFAIAC!! OK? and the strange phenomenon of valves and SS becoming antagonistic and mutually exclusive starts to appear. Weird huh? Yep! Happens all the time in here - we had it with vinyl a year ago. (Like there's some law says you can't do both digital *and* analogue or summat!) rest snipped - it's getting late Cheshire, actually. I have a friend in St. Neots though... (no, Im not carting my Radford Monitor ones down there - way too heavy to get on the train... And my brother in law lives in Cheshire - small world innit? :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:31:56 -0000
"Keith G" wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote Please, enough of that - Im not stupid and dont need to be talked down to. Forgive me - your apostrophic deficiencies imply otherwise.... :-) Pure laziness, I assure you... Few say so... Ok, it looks like a point is being missed. Given you already know you cant *measure* 'quality', which is your subjective views on a systems sound, there is only one way to 'rate' an amp, and that is to determine how accurately it can reproduce a waveform on its output that differs only in amplitude from its input (into any given speakers). There is simply nothing else to measure. All else is, completely, utterly subjective. Thus when people talk about how good a piece of kit is relative to any other, they *must* talk in terms of this accuracy, as to compare subjective opinions of the kit is just plain meaningless. Who knows - some people may even *like* crossover distortion and class C amps. The 'valve' vs 'solid state' argument, is, thus, completely moot - the only measure you can apply is that above, and so you cannot claim an amp with an inferior output (in those terms) is better. wether you like one amp better or not is irrelevant in such a comparison. Heck, many people choose their amp and speakers based on their size, or even less tangible traits such as 'coolness'. Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? Well, Im sure you'll be the first to admit that the best possible sound is obtained from sitting in front of the musicians. Thus, a 100% accurate reproduction will sound 100% like the real thing. Of course if you like to turn the bass up (effectively distorting the signal) then you may CHOOSE to rate the system as 110% as good as the original, but you can hardly claim your listening preference is more musical than the original musicians. (unless you listen to something like britney spears or summat) - I'm in the business of entertaining myself, not supplying myself with fekkin' laboratory data! Ditto, which is why, when watching that scene in LoTR where sauron 'explodes' I turn my tone controls from 'neutral' to 'thundering bass'. Im not about to claim I made the soundtrack more, um, musical, though... If you like the valve sound, you might as well be honest and admit you like a good gob of distortion, Be 'honest'??? What is it with all you SS 'purists'? You want us valvey types to break down in some sort of confessional hysteria about our'weaknesses'??? No. not really. Unless it turns you on or something ;-) just stop saying its 'better' or 'more musical' please (bear in mind this applies to any nonlinear system, not just nonlinear valve amps). You might like it better, but unless it sounds more like the original than another system, more musical it aint. On a slightly different track... There is a point to be made in that some recordings 'sound' is so utterly 'classic' and 'well known' that its accepted that the recording is supposed to sound like that - eg. a lot of pop and rock that was recorded onto vinyl. People just expect it to sound like vinyl, and one way of getting that sound is simply to play records (on a non-linear amp if thats part of the expected sound, too). There is *nothing* that says a linear system with a clean digital source cant sound identical, but you have to play the right signal into its inputs if you want the right output... I got news for you - *all* hifi gear distorts to some degree Some audibly, some not. Yup, 'valvelike' is one of the popular buzzwords in the hifi comix atm. implying that either transistor amps now sound like a hypothrtically linear valve amp, or a linear transistor amp has been made to sound like a nonlinear valve amp. Take your pick ;-) If only they would - the reality is that they usually come full-on in some sort of 'apocryphal' way trying desparately to make us see the 'error of our ways'. (I think they feel threatened...) If you would use words like 'linear' instead of 'SS' or 'sounds better to me' instead of 'its more musical' I suspect you'd get a much less hostile reaction. just don't try telling me SS (amps) sound better because they don't AFAIAC!! OK? In many cases the only measurable quantity is better in the SS amp (is seems its easier to design a basically 'OK' transistor amp, compared to a basically 'OK' valve amp). Saying it 'sounds better' when its clearly distorting the sound compared to the original is just wrong. Simply say you prefer the sound, its not an absolute and its clearly subjective. And my brother in law lives in Cheshire - small world innit? only a few thousand miles across... -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:31:56 -0000
"Keith G" wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote Please, enough of that - Im not stupid and dont need to be talked down to. Forgive me - your apostrophic deficiencies imply otherwise.... :-) Pure laziness, I assure you... Few say so... Ok, it looks like a point is being missed. Given you already know you cant *measure* 'quality', which is your subjective views on a systems sound, there is only one way to 'rate' an amp, and that is to determine how accurately it can reproduce a waveform on its output that differs only in amplitude from its input (into any given speakers). There is simply nothing else to measure. All else is, completely, utterly subjective. Thus when people talk about how good a piece of kit is relative to any other, they *must* talk in terms of this accuracy, as to compare subjective opinions of the kit is just plain meaningless. Who knows - some people may even *like* crossover distortion and class C amps. The 'valve' vs 'solid state' argument, is, thus, completely moot - the only measure you can apply is that above, and so you cannot claim an amp with an inferior output (in those terms) is better. wether you like one amp better or not is irrelevant in such a comparison. Heck, many people choose their amp and speakers based on their size, or even less tangible traits such as 'coolness'. Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? Well, Im sure you'll be the first to admit that the best possible sound is obtained from sitting in front of the musicians. Thus, a 100% accurate reproduction will sound 100% like the real thing. Of course if you like to turn the bass up (effectively distorting the signal) then you may CHOOSE to rate the system as 110% as good as the original, but you can hardly claim your listening preference is more musical than the original musicians. (unless you listen to something like britney spears or summat) - I'm in the business of entertaining myself, not supplying myself with fekkin' laboratory data! Ditto, which is why, when watching that scene in LoTR where sauron 'explodes' I turn my tone controls from 'neutral' to 'thundering bass'. Im not about to claim I made the soundtrack more, um, musical, though... If you like the valve sound, you might as well be honest and admit you like a good gob of distortion, Be 'honest'??? What is it with all you SS 'purists'? You want us valvey types to break down in some sort of confessional hysteria about our'weaknesses'??? No. not really. Unless it turns you on or something ;-) just stop saying its 'better' or 'more musical' please (bear in mind this applies to any nonlinear system, not just nonlinear valve amps). You might like it better, but unless it sounds more like the original than another system, more musical it aint. On a slightly different track... There is a point to be made in that some recordings 'sound' is so utterly 'classic' and 'well known' that its accepted that the recording is supposed to sound like that - eg. a lot of pop and rock that was recorded onto vinyl. People just expect it to sound like vinyl, and one way of getting that sound is simply to play records (on a non-linear amp if thats part of the expected sound, too). There is *nothing* that says a linear system with a clean digital source cant sound identical, but you have to play the right signal into its inputs if you want the right output... I got news for you - *all* hifi gear distorts to some degree Some audibly, some not. Yup, 'valvelike' is one of the popular buzzwords in the hifi comix atm. implying that either transistor amps now sound like a hypothrtically linear valve amp, or a linear transistor amp has been made to sound like a nonlinear valve amp. Take your pick ;-) If only they would - the reality is that they usually come full-on in some sort of 'apocryphal' way trying desparately to make us see the 'error of our ways'. (I think they feel threatened...) If you would use words like 'linear' instead of 'SS' or 'sounds better to me' instead of 'its more musical' I suspect you'd get a much less hostile reaction. just don't try telling me SS (amps) sound better because they don't AFAIAC!! OK? In many cases the only measurable quantity is better in the SS amp (is seems its easier to design a basically 'OK' transistor amp, compared to a basically 'OK' valve amp). Saying it 'sounds better' when its clearly distorting the sound compared to the original is just wrong. Simply say you prefer the sound, its not an absolute and its clearly subjective. And my brother in law lives in Cheshire - small world innit? only a few thousand miles across... -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 23:54:54 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:55:33 -0000 "Keith G" wrote: Yeah, but 'exactly the same way' means that they have to have the same distortion characteristics. Yup. Ok, so now you agreed that driving the same voltage on the speaker terminals will cause the speaker to move the same way, given that the amps PSU is up to it, then: The amps PSU has nothing to do with it, as any effects there will mean that the voltages at the speaker terminals are *not* the same. You don't sell insurance for a living by any chance, do you? :-) 1) Explain why a SS amp could not drive the voltages in the same way as a valve one Forgetting that little magic word, are we?? Actually, the question is why a tube amp is incapable of accurately amplifying its input voltage, and the answer lies in low gain and transformers. 2) At what point do you declare differences to be inaudible? When you can't hear them under level-matched blind conditions. There should be a 'duh' in there somewhere.................. Out on the back step - all the way indoors, up to the patio door, I can tell without any problem. Once outside, it starts to become less obvious - specially if I'm cutting the grass (petrol mower)..... Yeah, riiiiiight. Oddly enough, I can hear the crappy sound of valves at a fair distance, too................ equipment exists that can measure down to about -140dB - are you suggesting the 'valve sound' comes from sub -140dB artifcats ? Nah, 'valve sound' comes from even-order distortion at a per cent or two, and microphonic reverberation at say 60 dB below the main signal, combined with soft clipping because 'audiophile' valve amps are gutless. Nothing esoteric or below the noise floor at all. Those select few valve amps which do *not* suffer such problems (think C-J Premier or ARC Reference) sound exactly the same as good SS amps. We're bird-feeders - I see any artifcats round here they get an apple (when available or handful of peanuts, if not) chucked at them! An air rifle is more effective, handy for craftyrats, too......... perhaps this is why speaker wire makes a difference - maybe they were right after all! It doesn't, dood! OK, enough ****ing about. Ian, it's no big deal - you either *get* valves or you don't. Not everybody does, so don't bash yer brains out. It's not easy to describe the 'difference' without resorting to subjective phrases like 'space', air', 'texture', 'vitality', 'musicality' or whatever. Sure it is - see above. These phrases immediately draw a (usually hostile) reaction from the unbelievers and the strange phenomenon of valves and SS becoming antagonistic and mutually exclusive starts to appear. (A load of ********, given that I've had an SS amp driven by valve pre's on the go today! - See http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit...w/sharkey1.MOV for a ****e little movie of this in action! :-) Also the 'science' involved is a) mostly way over my head and b) not clearly agreed on by any significany majority of the theorists. All I can say is if you haven't spent any time with a valve amp yourself, get a good listen and see if it does anything for you. Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. Knowing this don't happen on every street corner, I often say people I *know* on this group are welcome to come and hear mine (and take the ****, if that's what they want) if it's doable. (I'm in Cambridgeshire right on the A1, where are you? - Cornwall, I expect, given your predilection for dragons!) Yep, and regulars are welcome to come to my place just south of Nottingham, to hear what a good recording really *should* sound like! -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 23:54:54 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:55:33 -0000 "Keith G" wrote: Yeah, but 'exactly the same way' means that they have to have the same distortion characteristics. Yup. Ok, so now you agreed that driving the same voltage on the speaker terminals will cause the speaker to move the same way, given that the amps PSU is up to it, then: The amps PSU has nothing to do with it, as any effects there will mean that the voltages at the speaker terminals are *not* the same. You don't sell insurance for a living by any chance, do you? :-) 1) Explain why a SS amp could not drive the voltages in the same way as a valve one Forgetting that little magic word, are we?? Actually, the question is why a tube amp is incapable of accurately amplifying its input voltage, and the answer lies in low gain and transformers. 2) At what point do you declare differences to be inaudible? When you can't hear them under level-matched blind conditions. There should be a 'duh' in there somewhere.................. Out on the back step - all the way indoors, up to the patio door, I can tell without any problem. Once outside, it starts to become less obvious - specially if I'm cutting the grass (petrol mower)..... Yeah, riiiiiight. Oddly enough, I can hear the crappy sound of valves at a fair distance, too................ equipment exists that can measure down to about -140dB - are you suggesting the 'valve sound' comes from sub -140dB artifcats ? Nah, 'valve sound' comes from even-order distortion at a per cent or two, and microphonic reverberation at say 60 dB below the main signal, combined with soft clipping because 'audiophile' valve amps are gutless. Nothing esoteric or below the noise floor at all. Those select few valve amps which do *not* suffer such problems (think C-J Premier or ARC Reference) sound exactly the same as good SS amps. We're bird-feeders - I see any artifcats round here they get an apple (when available or handful of peanuts, if not) chucked at them! An air rifle is more effective, handy for craftyrats, too......... perhaps this is why speaker wire makes a difference - maybe they were right after all! It doesn't, dood! OK, enough ****ing about. Ian, it's no big deal - you either *get* valves or you don't. Not everybody does, so don't bash yer brains out. It's not easy to describe the 'difference' without resorting to subjective phrases like 'space', air', 'texture', 'vitality', 'musicality' or whatever. Sure it is - see above. These phrases immediately draw a (usually hostile) reaction from the unbelievers and the strange phenomenon of valves and SS becoming antagonistic and mutually exclusive starts to appear. (A load of ********, given that I've had an SS amp driven by valve pre's on the go today! - See http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit...w/sharkey1.MOV for a ****e little movie of this in action! :-) Also the 'science' involved is a) mostly way over my head and b) not clearly agreed on by any significany majority of the theorists. All I can say is if you haven't spent any time with a valve amp yourself, get a good listen and see if it does anything for you. Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. Knowing this don't happen on every street corner, I often say people I *know* on this group are welcome to come and hear mine (and take the ****, if that's what they want) if it's doable. (I'm in Cambridgeshire right on the A1, where are you? - Cornwall, I expect, given your predilection for dragons!) Yep, and regulars are welcome to come to my place just south of Nottingham, to hear what a good recording really *should* sound like! -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 23:54:54 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:55:33 -0000 "Keith G" wrote: Yeah, but 'exactly the same way' means that they have to have the same distortion characteristics. Yup. Ok, so now you agreed that driving the same voltage on the speaker terminals will cause the speaker to move the same way, given that the amps PSU is up to it, then: The amps PSU has nothing to do with it, as any effects there will mean that the voltages at the speaker terminals are *not* the same. You don't sell insurance for a living by any chance, do you? :-) 1) Explain why a SS amp could not drive the voltages in the same way as a valve one Forgetting that little magic word, are we?? Actually, the question is why a tube amp is incapable of accurately amplifying its input voltage, and the answer lies in low gain and transformers. 2) At what point do you declare differences to be inaudible? When you can't hear them under level-matched blind conditions. There should be a 'duh' in there somewhere.................. Out on the back step - all the way indoors, up to the patio door, I can tell without any problem. Once outside, it starts to become less obvious - specially if I'm cutting the grass (petrol mower)..... Yeah, riiiiiight. Oddly enough, I can hear the crappy sound of valves at a fair distance, too................ equipment exists that can measure down to about -140dB - are you suggesting the 'valve sound' comes from sub -140dB artifcats ? Nah, 'valve sound' comes from even-order distortion at a per cent or two, and microphonic reverberation at say 60 dB below the main signal, combined with soft clipping because 'audiophile' valve amps are gutless. Nothing esoteric or below the noise floor at all. Those select few valve amps which do *not* suffer such problems (think C-J Premier or ARC Reference) sound exactly the same as good SS amps. We're bird-feeders - I see any artifcats round here they get an apple (when available or handful of peanuts, if not) chucked at them! An air rifle is more effective, handy for craftyrats, too......... perhaps this is why speaker wire makes a difference - maybe they were right after all! It doesn't, dood! OK, enough ****ing about. Ian, it's no big deal - you either *get* valves or you don't. Not everybody does, so don't bash yer brains out. It's not easy to describe the 'difference' without resorting to subjective phrases like 'space', air', 'texture', 'vitality', 'musicality' or whatever. Sure it is - see above. These phrases immediately draw a (usually hostile) reaction from the unbelievers and the strange phenomenon of valves and SS becoming antagonistic and mutually exclusive starts to appear. (A load of ********, given that I've had an SS amp driven by valve pre's on the go today! - See http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit...w/sharkey1.MOV for a ****e little movie of this in action! :-) Also the 'science' involved is a) mostly way over my head and b) not clearly agreed on by any significany majority of the theorists. All I can say is if you haven't spent any time with a valve amp yourself, get a good listen and see if it does anything for you. Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. Knowing this don't happen on every street corner, I often say people I *know* on this group are welcome to come and hear mine (and take the ****, if that's what they want) if it's doable. (I'm in Cambridgeshire right on the A1, where are you? - Cornwall, I expect, given your predilection for dragons!) Yep, and regulars are welcome to come to my place just south of Nottingham, to hear what a good recording really *should* sound like! And will somebody tell that bugger Molton to trim his line lengths? I can't afford a 22" widescreen monitor! -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 23:54:54 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote in message ... On Wed, 7 Jan 2004 17:55:33 -0000 "Keith G" wrote: Yeah, but 'exactly the same way' means that they have to have the same distortion characteristics. Yup. Ok, so now you agreed that driving the same voltage on the speaker terminals will cause the speaker to move the same way, given that the amps PSU is up to it, then: The amps PSU has nothing to do with it, as any effects there will mean that the voltages at the speaker terminals are *not* the same. You don't sell insurance for a living by any chance, do you? :-) 1) Explain why a SS amp could not drive the voltages in the same way as a valve one Forgetting that little magic word, are we?? Actually, the question is why a tube amp is incapable of accurately amplifying its input voltage, and the answer lies in low gain and transformers. 2) At what point do you declare differences to be inaudible? When you can't hear them under level-matched blind conditions. There should be a 'duh' in there somewhere.................. Out on the back step - all the way indoors, up to the patio door, I can tell without any problem. Once outside, it starts to become less obvious - specially if I'm cutting the grass (petrol mower)..... Yeah, riiiiiight. Oddly enough, I can hear the crappy sound of valves at a fair distance, too................ equipment exists that can measure down to about -140dB - are you suggesting the 'valve sound' comes from sub -140dB artifcats ? Nah, 'valve sound' comes from even-order distortion at a per cent or two, and microphonic reverberation at say 60 dB below the main signal, combined with soft clipping because 'audiophile' valve amps are gutless. Nothing esoteric or below the noise floor at all. Those select few valve amps which do *not* suffer such problems (think C-J Premier or ARC Reference) sound exactly the same as good SS amps. We're bird-feeders - I see any artifcats round here they get an apple (when available or handful of peanuts, if not) chucked at them! An air rifle is more effective, handy for craftyrats, too......... perhaps this is why speaker wire makes a difference - maybe they were right after all! It doesn't, dood! OK, enough ****ing about. Ian, it's no big deal - you either *get* valves or you don't. Not everybody does, so don't bash yer brains out. It's not easy to describe the 'difference' without resorting to subjective phrases like 'space', air', 'texture', 'vitality', 'musicality' or whatever. Sure it is - see above. These phrases immediately draw a (usually hostile) reaction from the unbelievers and the strange phenomenon of valves and SS becoming antagonistic and mutually exclusive starts to appear. (A load of ********, given that I've had an SS amp driven by valve pre's on the go today! - See http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keit...w/sharkey1.MOV for a ****e little movie of this in action! :-) Also the 'science' involved is a) mostly way over my head and b) not clearly agreed on by any significany majority of the theorists. All I can say is if you haven't spent any time with a valve amp yourself, get a good listen and see if it does anything for you. Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. Knowing this don't happen on every street corner, I often say people I *know* on this group are welcome to come and hear mine (and take the ****, if that's what they want) if it's doable. (I'm in Cambridgeshire right on the A1, where are you? - Cornwall, I expect, given your predilection for dragons!) Yep, and regulars are welcome to come to my place just south of Nottingham, to hear what a good recording really *should* sound like! And will somebody tell that bugger Molton to trim his line lengths? I can't afford a 22" widescreen monitor! -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:31:56 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote If you like the valve sound, you might as well be honest and admit you like a good gob of distortion, Be 'honest'??? What is it with all you SS 'purists'? You want us valvey types to break down in some sort of confessional hysteria about our 'weaknesses'??? I got news for you - *all* hifi gear distorts to some degree, No, good equipment does *not* possess any *audible* distortion - that's why it all sounds the same. There should be a 'duh' in there somewhere............ compond that distortion with a bad mix of kit and you can easily spend a lot of money to end up with summat that sounds a damn sight worse than a Dixon's 'music centre'!! Yup, there's no doubt that vinyl, valves and horns can do that! because the 'valve sound' was characterised by the common valve amps, and not the (more) linear ones. The same happens in transistor amps too - people still like that 'valve like sound' and even extremely expensive transistor amps seem to deliberately cultivate high 2nd harmonic distortion levels. Name one which does this. And Molton, trim your bluddy line lengths! -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 01:31:56 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote: "Ian Molton" wrote If you like the valve sound, you might as well be honest and admit you like a good gob of distortion, Be 'honest'??? What is it with all you SS 'purists'? You want us valvey types to break down in some sort of confessional hysteria about our 'weaknesses'??? I got news for you - *all* hifi gear distorts to some degree, No, good equipment does *not* possess any *audible* distortion - that's why it all sounds the same. There should be a 'duh' in there somewhere............ compond that distortion with a bad mix of kit and you can easily spend a lot of money to end up with summat that sounds a damn sight worse than a Dixon's 'music centre'!! Yup, there's no doubt that vinyl, valves and horns can do that! because the 'valve sound' was characterised by the common valve amps, and not the (more) linear ones. The same happens in transistor amps too - people still like that 'valve like sound' and even extremely expensive transistor amps seem to deliberately cultivate high 2nd harmonic distortion levels. Name one which does this. And Molton, trim your bluddy line lengths! -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote snip replies to bits I didn't post and some I did Also the 'science' involved is a) mostly way over my head and b) not clearly agreed on by any significany majority of the theorists. All I can say is if you haven't spent any time with a valve amp yourself, get a good listen and see if it does anything for you. Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. Hmmm, how does that work - both a 'Nice pleasant sound' and '****e sound'......??? (An interesting paradox born of extreme prejudice, methinks....) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote snip replies to bits I didn't post and some I did Also the 'science' involved is a) mostly way over my head and b) not clearly agreed on by any significany majority of the theorists. All I can say is if you haven't spent any time with a valve amp yourself, get a good listen and see if it does anything for you. Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. Hmmm, how does that work - both a 'Nice pleasant sound' and '****e sound'......??? (An interesting paradox born of extreme prejudice, methinks....) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote No, good equipment does *not* possess any *audible* distortion - that's why it all sounds the same. Heh heh! Of *course* it does (and all those different designs are just examples of wasted time and opportunity), but I bet none of it ever *measures* the same...... :-) (Funny, when you put whole systems together they never sound the same though, innit?) There should be a 'duh' in there somewhere............ Damn right there should! which does this. And Molton, trim your bluddy line lengths! No, that's OK (that and the absence of 'strophes, pore spelin and Missing Capitals) - he 'writes code' for a living...... :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote No, good equipment does *not* possess any *audible* distortion - that's why it all sounds the same. Heh heh! Of *course* it does (and all those different designs are just examples of wasted time and opportunity), but I bet none of it ever *measures* the same...... :-) (Funny, when you put whole systems together they never sound the same though, innit?) There should be a 'duh' in there somewhere............ Damn right there should! which does this. And Molton, trim your bluddy line lengths! No, that's OK (that and the absence of 'strophes, pore spelin and Missing Capitals) - he 'writes code' for a living...... :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Molton" wrote Ok, it looks like a point is being missed. ****ing with rain today so it looks like Ill have to spend the day farting around with my kit and posting more bollox on the group! Ho hum..... (Who knows? - Perhaps I'll get some floor space back today!) Given you already know you cant *measure* 'quality', which is your subjective views on a systems sound, there is only one way to 'rate' an amp, and that is to determine how accurately it can reproduce a waveform on its output that differs only in amplitude from its input (into any given speakers). There is simply nothing else to measure. All else is, completely, utterly subjective. Agreed. Thus when people talk about how good a piece of kit is relative to any other, they *must* talk in terms of this accuracy, as to compare subjective opinions of the kit is just plain meaningless. Nope - this 'accuracy' you claim is meaningless to (probably) the majority of people who buy and use amplifiers. Who knows - some people may even *like* crossover distortion and class C amps. Yup, there's no accounting for taste...... The 'valve' vs 'solid state' argument, is, thus, completely moot - the only measure you can apply is that above, and so you cannot claim an amp with an inferior output (in those terms) is better. Depends what you mean 'better' - AFAIAC, if I prefer the sound of a system with a particular amp in it then it follows that amp is 'better' for me. wether you like one amp better or not is irrelevant in such a comparison. Heck, many people choose their amp and speakers based on their size, or even less tangible traits such as 'coolness'. Or even with glowing feet which change colour as the temperature rises.... Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? Well, Im sure you'll be the first to admit that the best possible sound is obtained from sitting in front of the musicians. No. Mistake No.1 with the 'accurists' is to *presume* that 'music consumers' like me are trying to re-create the real experience. Wrong and futile, no matter kit you use. Turn up the wick as high as you like, a blast from the equivalent *real* instrument in your listening room will blow the kit away. (Been there, done that dozens of times....) Thus, a 100% accurate reproduction will sound 100% like the real thing. Correct but meaningless. Of course if you like to turn the bass up (effectively distorting the signal) then you may CHOOSE to rate the system as 110% as good as the original, but you can hardly claim your listening preference is more musical than the original musicians. Read my posts - you will be hard put to find I've made any 'claims' whatsoever, omly expressed my own (clear) preference from time to time. (unless you listen to something like britney spears or summat) - I'm in the business of entertaining myself, not supplying myself with fekkin' laboratory data! Ditto, which is why, when watching that scene in LoTR where sauron 'explodes' I turn my tone controls from 'neutral' to 'thundering bass'. Hmmm, thanks for the spoiler! (I ain't sinnit yet!) Im not about to claim I made the soundtrack more, um, musical, though... If you like the valve sound, you might as well be honest and admit you like a good gob of distortion, Be 'honest'??? What is it with all you SS 'purists'? You want us valvey types to break down in some sort of confessional hysteria about our'weaknesses'??? No. not really. Unless it turns you on or something ;-) just stop saying its 'better' or 'more musical' please (bear in mind this applies to any nonlinear system, not just nonlinear valve amps). Another thing with you SS accurist pedants is that you're pretty good at trying to lay down the law! This is a general audio group which (as I have said before) caters for any audio gear from MP3 'wris****ches' to recording studio kit and as such is open to people with differing tastes to express opinions and state their own preferences. So stop saying 'stop saying'...... You might like it better, but unless it sounds more like the original than another system, more musical it aint. Here, have these on me - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' On a slightly different track... There is a point to be made in that some recordings 'sound' is so utterly 'classic' and 'well known' that its accepted that the recording is supposed to sound like that - eg. a lot of pop and rock that was recorded onto vinyl. People just expect it to sound like vinyl, and one way of getting that sound is simply to play records (on a non-linear amp if thats part of the expected sound, too). :-) Now, you're starting to 'get it'...... Clue: Most of the music I like was recorded in the 40s/50s/60s/70s and some in the 80s. There hasn't been anything that springs to mind in the last 20+ years that has interested me on anything other than the radio (and probably in the car). Speaking of which, atm I have Radio 2 droning on and I've just realised I stopped listening to it some while back - what's the betting the SS amp is out of the rack by lunchtime? (See? - That's how it works, it's failed to 'engage' me....) If only they would - the reality is that they usually come full-on in some sort of 'apocryphal' way trying desparately to make us see the 'error of our ways'. (I think they feel threatened...) If you would use words like 'linear' instead of 'SS' or 'sounds better to me' instead of 'its more musical' I suspect you'd get a much less hostile reaction. Again with the *instructions*. How TF can anyone make claims about an amps 'linearity' (a subjective phrase if ever there was one) if they don't know its characteristics? Wot an utterly meaningless phrase that is - it might serve to describe the difference between two amps on the lab bench but it means SFA to anyone in the real world. To say 'I like my amp because it is linear' conveys less information than someone saying 'I like my amp because it makes my balls tingle'....... just don't try telling me SS (amps) sound better because they don't AFAIAC!! OK? In many cases the only measurable quantity is better in the SS amp (is seems its easier to design a basically 'OK' transistor amp, compared to a basically 'OK' valve amp). Saying it 'sounds better' when its clearly distorting the sound compared to the original is just wrong. Sez who? I, for one, use my audio gear to produce an 'end product' - I'm not try to recreate anything and don't get hung up on the nth degree of accuracy. I select kit only on the basis that I like that product, you want to call it names that's your problem. AFAIC, Lionel Hampton (to name but a few) sounds 'dead right' on my kit - he might have sounded like **** in real life.... Get the idea?..... ;-) Simply say you prefer the sound, its not an absolute The only 'absolute' in this life is death.... and its clearly subjective. Of course it is, isn't everything? Another clue: If you get stopped for speeding, just ask the fuzz when was the last time they had the radar gun calibrated..... ;-) (Accurists! - Don'tcha just love 'em......!!) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Molton" wrote Ok, it looks like a point is being missed. ****ing with rain today so it looks like Ill have to spend the day farting around with my kit and posting more bollox on the group! Ho hum..... (Who knows? - Perhaps I'll get some floor space back today!) Given you already know you cant *measure* 'quality', which is your subjective views on a systems sound, there is only one way to 'rate' an amp, and that is to determine how accurately it can reproduce a waveform on its output that differs only in amplitude from its input (into any given speakers). There is simply nothing else to measure. All else is, completely, utterly subjective. Agreed. Thus when people talk about how good a piece of kit is relative to any other, they *must* talk in terms of this accuracy, as to compare subjective opinions of the kit is just plain meaningless. Nope - this 'accuracy' you claim is meaningless to (probably) the majority of people who buy and use amplifiers. Who knows - some people may even *like* crossover distortion and class C amps. Yup, there's no accounting for taste...... The 'valve' vs 'solid state' argument, is, thus, completely moot - the only measure you can apply is that above, and so you cannot claim an amp with an inferior output (in those terms) is better. Depends what you mean 'better' - AFAIAC, if I prefer the sound of a system with a particular amp in it then it follows that amp is 'better' for me. wether you like one amp better or not is irrelevant in such a comparison. Heck, many people choose their amp and speakers based on their size, or even less tangible traits such as 'coolness'. Or even with glowing feet which change colour as the temperature rises.... Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? Well, Im sure you'll be the first to admit that the best possible sound is obtained from sitting in front of the musicians. No. Mistake No.1 with the 'accurists' is to *presume* that 'music consumers' like me are trying to re-create the real experience. Wrong and futile, no matter kit you use. Turn up the wick as high as you like, a blast from the equivalent *real* instrument in your listening room will blow the kit away. (Been there, done that dozens of times....) Thus, a 100% accurate reproduction will sound 100% like the real thing. Correct but meaningless. Of course if you like to turn the bass up (effectively distorting the signal) then you may CHOOSE to rate the system as 110% as good as the original, but you can hardly claim your listening preference is more musical than the original musicians. Read my posts - you will be hard put to find I've made any 'claims' whatsoever, omly expressed my own (clear) preference from time to time. (unless you listen to something like britney spears or summat) - I'm in the business of entertaining myself, not supplying myself with fekkin' laboratory data! Ditto, which is why, when watching that scene in LoTR where sauron 'explodes' I turn my tone controls from 'neutral' to 'thundering bass'. Hmmm, thanks for the spoiler! (I ain't sinnit yet!) Im not about to claim I made the soundtrack more, um, musical, though... If you like the valve sound, you might as well be honest and admit you like a good gob of distortion, Be 'honest'??? What is it with all you SS 'purists'? You want us valvey types to break down in some sort of confessional hysteria about our'weaknesses'??? No. not really. Unless it turns you on or something ;-) just stop saying its 'better' or 'more musical' please (bear in mind this applies to any nonlinear system, not just nonlinear valve amps). Another thing with you SS accurist pedants is that you're pretty good at trying to lay down the law! This is a general audio group which (as I have said before) caters for any audio gear from MP3 'wris****ches' to recording studio kit and as such is open to people with differing tastes to express opinions and state their own preferences. So stop saying 'stop saying'...... You might like it better, but unless it sounds more like the original than another system, more musical it aint. Here, have these on me - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' On a slightly different track... There is a point to be made in that some recordings 'sound' is so utterly 'classic' and 'well known' that its accepted that the recording is supposed to sound like that - eg. a lot of pop and rock that was recorded onto vinyl. People just expect it to sound like vinyl, and one way of getting that sound is simply to play records (on a non-linear amp if thats part of the expected sound, too). :-) Now, you're starting to 'get it'...... Clue: Most of the music I like was recorded in the 40s/50s/60s/70s and some in the 80s. There hasn't been anything that springs to mind in the last 20+ years that has interested me on anything other than the radio (and probably in the car). Speaking of which, atm I have Radio 2 droning on and I've just realised I stopped listening to it some while back - what's the betting the SS amp is out of the rack by lunchtime? (See? - That's how it works, it's failed to 'engage' me....) If only they would - the reality is that they usually come full-on in some sort of 'apocryphal' way trying desparately to make us see the 'error of our ways'. (I think they feel threatened...) If you would use words like 'linear' instead of 'SS' or 'sounds better to me' instead of 'its more musical' I suspect you'd get a much less hostile reaction. Again with the *instructions*. How TF can anyone make claims about an amps 'linearity' (a subjective phrase if ever there was one) if they don't know its characteristics? Wot an utterly meaningless phrase that is - it might serve to describe the difference between two amps on the lab bench but it means SFA to anyone in the real world. To say 'I like my amp because it is linear' conveys less information than someone saying 'I like my amp because it makes my balls tingle'....... just don't try telling me SS (amps) sound better because they don't AFAIAC!! OK? In many cases the only measurable quantity is better in the SS amp (is seems its easier to design a basically 'OK' transistor amp, compared to a basically 'OK' valve amp). Saying it 'sounds better' when its clearly distorting the sound compared to the original is just wrong. Sez who? I, for one, use my audio gear to produce an 'end product' - I'm not try to recreate anything and don't get hung up on the nth degree of accuracy. I select kit only on the basis that I like that product, you want to call it names that's your problem. AFAIC, Lionel Hampton (to name but a few) sounds 'dead right' on my kit - he might have sounded like **** in real life.... Get the idea?..... ;-) Simply say you prefer the sound, its not an absolute The only 'absolute' in this life is death.... and its clearly subjective. Of course it is, isn't everything? Another clue: If you get stopped for speeding, just ask the fuzz when was the last time they had the radar gun calibrated..... ;-) (Accurists! - Don'tcha just love 'em......!!) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:51:32 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: The amps PSU has nothing to do with it, as any effects there will mean that the voltages at the speaker terminals are *not* the same. fair comment. perhaps this is why speaker wire makes a difference - maybe they were right after all! It doesn't, dood! Im almost certain I put a smiley in there originally... Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. you're as bad as Keith... you say 'nice pleasant sound' and '****e sound' referring to the same thing, in the same paragraph! -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:51:32 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: The amps PSU has nothing to do with it, as any effects there will mean that the voltages at the speaker terminals are *not* the same. fair comment. perhaps this is why speaker wire makes a difference - maybe they were right after all! It doesn't, dood! Im almost certain I put a smiley in there originally... Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. you're as bad as Keith... you say 'nice pleasant sound' and '****e sound' referring to the same thing, in the same paragraph! -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Molton" wrote in message ... On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:51:32 +0000 (UTC) (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: The amps PSU has nothing to do with it, as any effects there will mean that the voltages at the speaker terminals are *not* the same. fair comment. perhaps this is why speaker wire makes a difference - maybe they were right after all! It doesn't, dood! Im almost certain I put a smiley in there originally... You did. Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. you're as bad as Keith... you say 'nice pleasant sound' and '****e sound' referring to the same thing, in the same paragraph! He does, doesn't he? :-) Wouldn't have been so bad if he had said summat like 'linear, yet strangely non-linear' in the same para, I suppose! (We should mebbe cut him a little slack - check the time he posted, I'm sure there's blobs of boiled eggy on my copy of that post..... :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Ian Molton" wrote in message ... On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 07:51:32 +0000 (UTC) (Stewart Pinkerton) wrote: The amps PSU has nothing to do with it, as any effects there will mean that the voltages at the speaker terminals are *not* the same. fair comment. perhaps this is why speaker wire makes a difference - maybe they were right after all! It doesn't, dood! Im almost certain I put a smiley in there originally... You did. Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. you're as bad as Keith... you say 'nice pleasant sound' and '****e sound' referring to the same thing, in the same paragraph! He does, doesn't he? :-) Wouldn't have been so bad if he had said summat like 'linear, yet strangely non-linear' in the same para, I suppose! (We should mebbe cut him a little slack - check the time he posted, I'm sure there's blobs of boiled eggy on my copy of that post..... :-) |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Keith G wrote:
Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. Hmmm, how does that work - both a 'Nice pleasant sound' and '****e sound'......??? Nice, pleasant, inoffensive, muffled ****e is what comes out of my DVD player. My DAC, being clearer and more detailed, is less forgiving and, therefore, better. -- Wally www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk On webcam: Black Cat In Coal Cellar |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Keith G wrote:
Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. Hmmm, how does that work - both a 'Nice pleasant sound' and '****e sound'......??? Nice, pleasant, inoffensive, muffled ****e is what comes out of my DVD player. My DAC, being clearer and more detailed, is less forgiving and, therefore, better. -- Wally www.art-gallery.myby.co.uk On webcam: Black Cat In Coal Cellar |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 10:45:01 -0000
"Keith G" wrote: Given you already know you cant *measure* 'quality', which is your subjective views on a systems sound, there is only one way to 'rate' an amp, and that is to determine how accurately it can reproduce a waveform on its output that differs only in amplitude from its input (into any given speakers). There is simply nothing else to measure. All else is, completely, utterly subjective. Agreed. In that case, WTF are you going on and on about? Thus when people talk about how good a piece of kit is relative to any other, they *must* talk in terms of this accuracy, as to compare subjective opinions of the kit is just plain meaningless. Nope - this 'accuracy' you claim is meaningless to (probably) the majority of people who buy and use amplifiers. The *VAST* majority of amplifiers are bought by people who neither know nor care about accuracy *or* subjective opinions - they probably couildnt tell the difference between class A and class C in a blind test anyway. Out of the remaining sales, the majority are probably bought as expensive d*ck extensions. Out of the tiny number of sales left after that, I'd bet the majority are bought to try and reproduce a recording as accurately as possible. Very few, I'll bet, are bought to deliberately change the sound. Depends what you mean 'better' - AFAIAC, if I prefer the sound of a system with a particular amp in it then it follows that amp is 'better' for me. No, it means you prefer it. If I had two pairs of kitchen scales, one accurate to 10g and the other to 0.5g, but the 0.5g one was asthetically ugly, it would STILL be the better pair of kitchen scales, despite that you might prefer the less accurate device. And theres only one measure of how good an amp really is, in real terms. Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? Well, Im sure you'll be the first to admit that the best possible sound is obtained from sitting in front of the musicians. No. Mistake No.1 with the 'accurists' is to *presume* that 'music consumers' like me are trying to re-create the real experience. Thats what music reproduction is about. If you want playback or to play with the sound, feel free. but most people seem to want to listen to the music asit was 'supposed' to be (how they know their kit does the job is beyond me) At least if you start with a decent linear system, you can go back to a flat reference once you finish playing with the tone controls... Read my posts - you will be hard put to find I've made any 'claims' whatsoever, omly expressed my own (clear) preference from time to time. just stop telling me how musical your system sounds - for all I know you could well be tone deaf. its meaningless. Ditto, which is why, when watching that scene in LoTR where sauron 'explodes' I turn my tone controls from 'neutral' to 'thundering bass'. Hmmm, thanks for the spoiler! (I ain't sinnit yet!) I refuse to feel guilty for revealing the *beginning* of a film thats been out for over a year. Another thing with you SS accurist pedants is that you're pretty good at trying to lay down the law! This is a general audio group which (as I have said before) caters for any audio gear from MP3 'wris****ches' to recording studio kit and as such is open to people with differing tastes to express opinions and state their own preferences. So stop saying 'stop saying'...... It applies to all those categories. you cant use terms like 'musical' 'sweet' 'wooly' or anything else wholly subjective as a basis for comparison. Sure they might convey some idea about the sound, but one mans 'sweet' is another mans 'muffled and dull' You might like it better, but unless it sounds more like the original than another system, more musical it aint. Here, have these on me - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' Where in that last sentence would you have me put them ? I can find one spot, but thats not even in a 'real' word. Now, you're starting to 'get it'...... Always did. I'll add, though, that you can make a recording of all your sweet, warm, honey soaked, or whatever, gear, complete with vinyl pops and crackles, and crummy bass, and you can put it on a CD and play it through a nice linear amp into good speakers, and it will sound the same. Again with the *instructions*. How TF can anyone make claims about an amps 'linearity' (a subjective phrase if ever there was one) Linearity is directly measurable. you dont get a lot more objective. To say 'I like my amp because it is linear' conveys less information than someone saying 'I like my amp because it makes my balls tingle'....... You might find it sounds better if you connect the output terminals to your speakers though... Seriously though... One says 'I like my amp because it doesnt alter the sound', the other say 'I like my amp because I like my amp'. Which truely says more? (Accurists! - Don'tcha just love 'em......!!) nice watches, so Im told... -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 10:45:01 -0000
"Keith G" wrote: Given you already know you cant *measure* 'quality', which is your subjective views on a systems sound, there is only one way to 'rate' an amp, and that is to determine how accurately it can reproduce a waveform on its output that differs only in amplitude from its input (into any given speakers). There is simply nothing else to measure. All else is, completely, utterly subjective. Agreed. In that case, WTF are you going on and on about? Thus when people talk about how good a piece of kit is relative to any other, they *must* talk in terms of this accuracy, as to compare subjective opinions of the kit is just plain meaningless. Nope - this 'accuracy' you claim is meaningless to (probably) the majority of people who buy and use amplifiers. The *VAST* majority of amplifiers are bought by people who neither know nor care about accuracy *or* subjective opinions - they probably couildnt tell the difference between class A and class C in a blind test anyway. Out of the remaining sales, the majority are probably bought as expensive d*ck extensions. Out of the tiny number of sales left after that, I'd bet the majority are bought to try and reproduce a recording as accurately as possible. Very few, I'll bet, are bought to deliberately change the sound. Depends what you mean 'better' - AFAIAC, if I prefer the sound of a system with a particular amp in it then it follows that amp is 'better' for me. No, it means you prefer it. If I had two pairs of kitchen scales, one accurate to 10g and the other to 0.5g, but the 0.5g one was asthetically ugly, it would STILL be the better pair of kitchen scales, despite that you might prefer the less accurate device. And theres only one measure of how good an amp really is, in real terms. Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? Well, Im sure you'll be the first to admit that the best possible sound is obtained from sitting in front of the musicians. No. Mistake No.1 with the 'accurists' is to *presume* that 'music consumers' like me are trying to re-create the real experience. Thats what music reproduction is about. If you want playback or to play with the sound, feel free. but most people seem to want to listen to the music asit was 'supposed' to be (how they know their kit does the job is beyond me) At least if you start with a decent linear system, you can go back to a flat reference once you finish playing with the tone controls... Read my posts - you will be hard put to find I've made any 'claims' whatsoever, omly expressed my own (clear) preference from time to time. just stop telling me how musical your system sounds - for all I know you could well be tone deaf. its meaningless. Ditto, which is why, when watching that scene in LoTR where sauron 'explodes' I turn my tone controls from 'neutral' to 'thundering bass'. Hmmm, thanks for the spoiler! (I ain't sinnit yet!) I refuse to feel guilty for revealing the *beginning* of a film thats been out for over a year. Another thing with you SS accurist pedants is that you're pretty good at trying to lay down the law! This is a general audio group which (as I have said before) caters for any audio gear from MP3 'wris****ches' to recording studio kit and as such is open to people with differing tastes to express opinions and state their own preferences. So stop saying 'stop saying'...... It applies to all those categories. you cant use terms like 'musical' 'sweet' 'wooly' or anything else wholly subjective as a basis for comparison. Sure they might convey some idea about the sound, but one mans 'sweet' is another mans 'muffled and dull' You might like it better, but unless it sounds more like the original than another system, more musical it aint. Here, have these on me - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' Where in that last sentence would you have me put them ? I can find one spot, but thats not even in a 'real' word. Now, you're starting to 'get it'...... Always did. I'll add, though, that you can make a recording of all your sweet, warm, honey soaked, or whatever, gear, complete with vinyl pops and crackles, and crummy bass, and you can put it on a CD and play it through a nice linear amp into good speakers, and it will sound the same. Again with the *instructions*. How TF can anyone make claims about an amps 'linearity' (a subjective phrase if ever there was one) Linearity is directly measurable. you dont get a lot more objective. To say 'I like my amp because it is linear' conveys less information than someone saying 'I like my amp because it makes my balls tingle'....... You might find it sounds better if you connect the output terminals to your speakers though... Seriously though... One says 'I like my amp because it doesnt alter the sound', the other say 'I like my amp because I like my amp'. Which truely says more? (Accurists! - Don'tcha just love 'em......!!) nice watches, so Im told... -- Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup. |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Keith G wrote:
"Ian Bell" wrote That doesn't surprise but then I bet they don't have identical specs anyway. Actually, blind men don't wear specs - they mostly wear shades...... You aobviously don't know very many blind men then. Only these five: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keith_g/show/Mazin'%20Grace.mp3 Kool. Nice recording. Is there an album? Several - start he http://www.rosebudus.com/blindboys/ ....and there's more than five of them now, it appears!! Being blind hasn't stopped them breeding then ;-) Ian |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Keith G wrote:
"Ian Bell" wrote That doesn't surprise but then I bet they don't have identical specs anyway. Actually, blind men don't wear specs - they mostly wear shades...... You aobviously don't know very many blind men then. Only these five: http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/keith_g/show/Mazin'%20Grace.mp3 Kool. Nice recording. Is there an album? Several - start he http://www.rosebudus.com/blindboys/ ....and there's more than five of them now, it appears!! Being blind hasn't stopped them breeding then ;-) Ian |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Keith G wrote:
Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? - I'm in the business of entertaining myself, not supplying myself with fekkin' laboratory data! I do, because if it is *not* an accurate reproduction it won't be the the performance the originator wanted you to hear. If that is not of interest then you could always buy the sheet music ;-) Ian |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Keith G wrote:
Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? - I'm in the business of entertaining myself, not supplying myself with fekkin' laboratory data! I do, because if it is *not* an accurate reproduction it won't be the the performance the originator wanted you to hear. If that is not of interest then you could always buy the sheet music ;-) Ian |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Wally" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. Hmmm, how does that work - both a 'Nice pleasant sound' and '****e sound'......??? Nice, pleasant, inoffensive, muffled ****e is what comes out of my DVD player. No, you can't get away with that contradiction either - 'nice ****e'....?? My DAC, being clearer and more detailed, is less forgiving and, therefore, better. Interesting, my recently-purchased eBench DVDP (38 quid!) sounds quite good (for digital) and was a very pleasant surprise. I'll be playing it through a little QED DAC I've got to see how it compares..... |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
"Wally" wrote in message ... Keith G wrote: Been there, done that. Nice pleasant sound, even on ****e recordings, hence not high fidelity. Also softens really great recordings, so ****e sound, basically. Hmmm, how does that work - both a 'Nice pleasant sound' and '****e sound'......??? Nice, pleasant, inoffensive, muffled ****e is what comes out of my DVD player. No, you can't get away with that contradiction either - 'nice ****e'....?? My DAC, being clearer and more detailed, is less forgiving and, therefore, better. Interesting, my recently-purchased eBench DVDP (38 quid!) sounds quite good (for digital) and was a very pleasant surprise. I'll be playing it through a little QED DAC I've got to see how it compares..... |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Keith G wrote:
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote No, good equipment does *not* possess any *audible* distortion - that's why it all sounds the same. Heh heh! Of *course* it does (and all those different designs are just examples of wasted time and opportunity), but I bet none of it ever *measures* the same...... :-) (Funny, when you put whole systems together they never sound the same though, innit?) Mainly because at present the weakest links in most audio reproductio chains are the speakers and the room. Ian |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
Keith G wrote:
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote No, good equipment does *not* possess any *audible* distortion - that's why it all sounds the same. Heh heh! Of *course* it does (and all those different designs are just examples of wasted time and opportunity), but I bet none of it ever *measures* the same...... :-) (Funny, when you put whole systems together they never sound the same though, innit?) Mainly because at present the weakest links in most audio reproductio chains are the speakers and the room. Ian |
"What HiFi" - can it be trusted?
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 12:50:18 +0000, Ian Bell
wrote: Keith G wrote: Who TF gives a rat's arse about 'accurate reproduction' if it ain't *musical*? - I'm in the business of entertaining myself, not supplying myself with fekkin' laboratory data! I do, because if it is *not* an accurate reproduction it won't be the the performance the originator wanted you to hear. Perfectly stated - the goal of hi-fidelity audio reproduction should be to aloow the listener hear the music as the artists/producers intended it to be heard (within the limitations of domestic environments). How can I tell whether something is "musical" or not (jn terms of the performance or its recording and production) if my system isn't reproducing it with some degree of accuracy? If that is not of interest then you could always buy the sheet music ;-) .... visions of the valve/vinyl brigade gathered around an out of tune upright piano ... :-) Julian -- Julian Fowler julian (at) bellevue-barn (dot) org (dot) uk |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:55 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2006 AudioBanter.co.uk