Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale Diamond II's
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"Mike Gilmour" wrote



Dunno Patrick I went back to Svetlana's 6550C's again because I lost at
least 50% of the dynamics with the '88's but gained some (psudeo?) 'air',
IMO not worth the trade. Tried KT90's which went far too far in the
other direction :-)


Interesting. I'm running my KiT88 with Svet 6550Cs in and have been for a
while now.

This started out as a temporary measure when I had a KT88 go down leaving
me one can short of a 6-pack, as it were, but since most of the people who
get to hear it have continued in their admiration of the sound (and the
cost of a set of four KT88s being not exactly chump change) I've not got
round to replacing them yet.

Is it your opinion that the 6550s are a better valve generally? - I'd
sooner not spend £150 or more to find out they are, if that's likely to be
the case!!

(I can't say I 'remember' a vastly different sound myself.....!!??)




Not all 6550's though the Svetlana 6550C is an excellent valve. When I got
them I ran them through the valve tester and they were vitually identical in
readings...well pleased :-)

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale DiamondII's
 

Nick Gorham wrote:

Here we go again, the effect I am considering is not a warm and rosy
one, if thats the effect you think I am talking about then you are
missing the point all together.

Ok so what would you describe the effect as? (subjective language is OK
here but may not convey much meaning).

As I said in the last post - I'm open to that possibility but since a
perfectly good explanation which *HAS* been tested exists, anyone
wishing to push this point needs to at least have performed the most
basic controlled tests.

And that explanation is ? (note, not for warm and rosy).

I have no explanation as I dont know what effect you are attempting to
describe. If you can convey the effect well perhaps I can attempt an
explanation.

As I said above, though - unless you can prove that you actually hear
the effect (which has nothing to do with the hardware per-se, and
everything to do with the test conditions), I wont really be interested
in persuing what is likely to be a figment of your immagination.

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale Diamond II's
 

In article ,
Nick Gorham wrote:
Yes, fine, I will do thanks, but are you not interested that there is a
consistant number of people who are reporting the same preference.

Easy enough to prove. If a valve amp is adding something, simply daisy
chain it to a decent SS one running into an appropriate dummy load. If the
SS amp is adding harshness and removing detail, the valve amp can't
possibly sort that.

--
*The man who fell into an upholstery machine is fully recovered.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale DiamondII's
 

Ian Molton wrote:
Nick Gorham wrote:

Here we go again, the effect I am considering is not a warm and rosy
one, if thats the effect you think I am talking about then you are
missing the point all together.


Ok so what would you describe the effect as? (subjective language is OK
here but may not convey much meaning).

Ok, quick try before going home.

The effect I feel that valve amplifers seem to convey, is a greator
sense of reality, the sound seems to convey the effect of the instrument
or voice actually existing in a space, and I seem to percieve of it as
actually being produced by a real object, not just a analog of one.

There seems to be a 3d depth to the sound, (I tend to use visual
descriptions of sound anyway, I think thats just how my head is wired)
but the sound has more of a actual shape, not just the music as a whole,
but the individual parts being played that makes up the music.

But not in a sense of disecting the sound, more allowing each part to
exist on its own, in its own frame of reference, but still each taking
part in the overall "dance".

The equivilant via solid state, is much less vivid, more of a copy of
the performance, and while I am aware of the things that SS does
better/differently to the sound (esp the bass), that doesn't to my ears
make up for the something that seems to be lacking.

Very subjective, and not that well described. I will try and think more
on trying to put what I mean down in words.

Of course this could just be me, and everyone else who I am claming to
have the same result, could think I am taking rubbish.

I should say that this is not a effect that every valve amplifier I have
heard has had to the same amount, its normally much less obvious in push
pull designed, Though the Amity is one PP amp that does have that effect
for my ears.

Before this is taken to mean its just SE 2nd harmonic thats doing it, I
have heard several commercial SE amps that just miss the point as well,
It seems to be most obvious in SE amps that are running well within
their power output, think 211 or 845 producing at most a watt or 2, or
maybe a 212 producing 5 watt's. But also at very low levels smaller amps
can do it as well, as the 6em7 I had did, but only at very low levels.

In experiments, it seems that not all triodes can do it as well, for me
2a3's can, and 300b's don't, PX25's do it very well, as do 211's, less
so 845's. I have also found in experimenting, that transformer coupling
is much more succesful in producing this than cap coupling, though some
DC coupling can do this, but often only when choke loaded.

I have found that adding CCS's to circuits tends to reduce the effect,
but doing the same thing with chokes doesn't.

Ok, bit of a ramble, but there you go.

Anyone else like to give their version of what they like about valve
amps and what they think is producing the effect ?

--
Nick

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale Diamond II's
 

"John Phillips" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:

"John Phillips" wrote in message
...
I annoy my musician friends by liking recordings which are not up to
their
high technical music performance standards.

That's odd because the Group's Resident Expert And Teacher On Nearly
Everything (GREAT ONE) tells us that 'musos' are notorious for having
****ty
hifi...???

Well, I was referring to high technical music performance standards in
the sense (broadly) of playing all the right notes (in the right order,
even), so I am not sure I would conclude that it says anything about
musicians' hi-fi systems.



I'll get me coat, then.....

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale Diamond II's
 

"Nick Gorham" wrote in message
...
Ian Molton wrote:
Nick Gorham wrote:

Here we go again, the effect I am considering is not a warm and rosy
one, if thats the effect you think I am talking about then you are
missing the point all together.


Ok so what would you describe the effect as? (subjective language is OK
here but may not convey much meaning).

Ok, quick try before going home.

The effect I feel that valve amplifers seem to convey, is a greator sense
of reality, the sound seems to convey the effect of the instrument or
voice actually existing in a space, and I seem to percieve of it as
actually being produced by a real object, not just a analog of one.


Yep.


There seems to be a 3d depth to the sound, (I tend to use visual
descriptions of sound anyway, I think thats just how my head is wired) but
the sound has more of a actual shape, not just the music as a whole, but
the individual parts being played that makes up the music.


Yep - individual instuments.


But not in a sense of disecting the sound, more allowing each part to
exist on its own, in its own frame of reference, but still each taking
part in the overall "dance".

The equivilant via solid state, is much less vivid, more of a copy of the
performance, and while I am aware of the things that SS does
better/differently to the sound (esp the bass), that doesn't to my ears
make up for the something that seems to be lacking.


Yep. Lacks 'life' and often fails to 'engage'.

(Sounds like the telly.....|)


Anyone else like to give their version of what they like about valve amps
and what they think is producing the effect ?


The best thing I like about valve amps is that they sound better than ss
amps......

:-)

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale Diamond II's
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"John Phillips" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:

Other than 'signal breakup' when the volume's wicked up too hard in
certain
circumstamces, what TF does this 'distortion' actually sound like?? What
should I be looking for?? Perhaps if I knew what it was I could develop
a
loathing for it also.....??? :-)

I annoy my musician friends by liking recordings which are not up to
their
high technical music performance standards.


That's odd because the Group's Resident Expert And Teacher On Nearly
Everything (GREAT ONE) tells us that 'musos' are notorious for having
****ty hifi...???

('musos' - just dripping with respect and admiration, ain't it? ;-)

**Not an unusual occurence. I once went to Australia's foremost conductor's
home, to demonstrate some equipment. It took me exactly 3 seconds to
determine that one of his speakers was wired out of phase. I asked if he was
happy with his present system and he told me that he was, but felt that it
was time for him to consider new equipment. Another muso friend of mine
plays in the first violins of the Sydney Symphony Orchestra. He turns the
tone controls all the way up, all the time. He is a great muso, but has no
idea about listening to a fine reproduction system.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale Diamond II's
 

"Keith G" wrote in message
...


A very interesting debate and difficult to snip.

My question is why is it that, in here, there's a few who constantly run
around screaming about 'distortion' like someone who's just been
gang-banged by the crew of a Russian trawler (or, perhaps, more likely
because they *haven't* been.... ;-) and then you ask someone *long in the
trade* of designing and building amps and they just smile?

And I just *know* the 'Zen' boys out in the Far East (where 'valves with
everything' rules**) would give you one of those looks which can't be
scruted....?? :-)

Other than 'signal breakup' when the volume's wicked up too hard in
certain circumstamces, what TF does this 'distortion' actually sound
like?? What should I be looking for?? Perhaps if I knew what it was I
could develop a loathing for it also.....??? :-)

**It's not that difficult. Here's how you do it:

1) Find an amplifier which has exemplary specifications (posted earlier by
me).
2) Compare the above-mentioned amplifier in a double blind test.
3) If you can hear a difference, one amplifier is distorting.


(Now, why do I also know that I'm not going to get an answer to this that
doesn't sound like it's coming from a raving looney?)

**Your attempts at projection, is duly noted.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale Diamond II's
 

"John Phillips" wrote in message
...
In article , Trevor Wilson wrote:

"mick" wrote in message
.. .

You can produce two signals with identical THD%.

**Yep.

One will have very audible distortion and the other won't.

**Yep.

It depends on the relative strengths of the harmonics.

**And the TOTAL level of those harmonics. Less than around 0.1% is
inaudible, regardless of the harmonic structure. That is why I cited
0.1%
as being a reasonable indicator of 'high fidelity'.

Out of curiosity I have been looking for tables of "just detectable"
distortion levels versus harmonic number. However I have not found
one yet.

There are some clues as well as the 0.1% figure above (well, maybe
clues if you take magazine reviews with just a small a pinch of
salt). From a Stereophile review of a Cary CAD-300SEI valve/tube amp
(http://www.stereophile.com/amplifica.../index5.html):

"It's a common mistake to consider a single THD figure an indicator of
distortion audibility. The THD+N figures in the previous graph sum all
harmonics and noise for a single figure and ignore which harmonics are
present and in what ratios. As you can demonstrate for yourself with
the second Stereophile Test CD, 0.3% of seventh-harmonic distortion
is more annoying than 10% of second-harmonic distortion. Generally,
lower-order harmonics are less audible, as are even-order harmonics
(second, fourth, sixth). The most benign harmonic distortion is
thus second-harmonic."

**Without knowing what frequencies are being discussed, it is impossible to
make such sweeping generalisations. The 7th harmonic of (say) 5kHz is
inaudible, whilst the second harmonic of 5kHz is. I do, however, agree that
odd order distortions are generally more objectionable than even order
distortions. HOWEVER, all distortion should be reduced/elimiated, where
possible.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Valve amp (preferably DIY) to drive apair of Wharfedale DiamondII's
 

Paul Dormer wrote:


The descriptions suggest (to me - correct me if I'm wrong) etched in
space/holographic type qualities? A visual equivalent might be sharpen
filters in Photoshop. The effect on the definition of instruments,
their edges, solidity..


Yes, I considered using the word holgraphic, but decided it may be a bit
misleading overused in the mags. But yes, in the sense that there is the
feeling that you could walk behind and between the individual sounds.

Not so sure about the sharpen filter idea, that seems to point to
unnatural sharpnes, thats not it at all, what I am describing seems
altogether natural, and not forced.

I should say, that what I am describing is what I am aiming fore, not
what I listen to every night, sometimes its there sometimes its just a
memory, quite elusive. So its not just a function of the kit, I also
have to be in a receptive mood, or the weather is correct, or the
factory down the road isn't putting crap on the supply lines, its not
just the amplifier, but there are other SS amps that I never see a
glimps of what I am talking about,

I think the "etched in space" does discribe it well, but its not so much
a imaging thing, as I said I tend to see sounds anyway. Its also a
function of the voids between the sounds thats as important as the
sounds themself.

Again, this could be raving, but you did ask.

--
Nick