"Wally" wrote in message
...
Eeyore wrote:

They're quite different styles. What's your point ?

They are indeed quite different styles. It just so happens that I like
both
styles, probably in pretty equal measure. For me, the quality that one
example has over the other is that it is involving - it takes me
somewhere.
The lad doing the rock version of Pachabel's Canon can riff like a
good-un',
but it lacks soul. The guy with the uke takes the tune to a different
level,
another dimension.

I've played guitar for many years (less so in the last two or three), and
my
repertoire includes both of those styles. I can feel what the ukelele guy
is
doing - he's doing stuff that even he barely knows is happening
(especially
during the strummy passage near the end, where he's multiplying the rythm
strokes - totally tripped out). I know what that feels like because, when
I'm "on it", the same thing happens to me. By contrast, the Canon Kid
knows
exactly what he's doing, every note of the way.

You start by knowing what you're doing - you know the chord shapes, the
finger movements, the timing of the notes and strums, etc. You are overtly
conscious of the physical actions that are required to present a rendition
of a tune. Then you start listening to what you're doing without actually
thinking about the hand movements - you become your own entertainer with
the
unique ability of being able to make the music change
mood/feel/tempo/whatever - by mind power, essentially. Eventually, you
have
those moments where stuff comes out that you're barely aware that you, the
musician, are making happen - to the extent that you wonder if it really
is
you that's 'making it happen'.

There are peices I've been playing for 20 years that I *still* haven't
been
able to analyse in terms of the hand movements - I 'wrote' them, but I
couldn't tell you a damn thing about them, because 'I' wasn't paying that
sort of attention when they were written. Ever wondered why some artists
talk about being a conduit or channel? It's because they're so
disassociated
from the the conscious application of technique or theory (stuff literally
just comes out), that they're not even sure it's coming from themselves.

I'll give the kid two stars for effort - I like the tune, his technique is
generally clean, and his chord riffing is excellent (if you like tight as
****, bang-on-the-money rock riffing, that is). He's docked for lack of
imagination in phrasing (gets repetitive) and there's a dodgy edit at the
traffic sign thing where I suspect he's dubbed in a better concluding
passage. Fair play to the lad, it's a good effort. Give him another 10
years
and he might progress from player to musician.

The ukelele guy? Undoubted five star material. He gets the five stars for
the sheer ability to let go and give his subconscious free reign. When a
piece of music takes you to where the ukelele guy is, 'listening' - 'aural
observation' if you like - has nothing to do with it.

When you approach music with a perspective like this, stuff like
'accuracy'
and 'fidelity' just *don't matter*. It's about the emotional experience
that
the sound induces in you.

The Canon Kid is listening. The uke guy is living it.



That guy is a Flamenco player with an undersized guitar.....

I liked this one too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l89JJ...elated&search=

None too smooth yet but he's got the right 'mouth movements'..!! :-)

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
. ..

"Andy Evans" wrote in message
oups.com...
"If it ain't glowing, it ain't going"

Is that the best you've got to offer ? Graham

The best I have to offer is a preamp kit with DHTs, filament supply,
stepped attenuator, case and power supply. Currently six people I know
are building preamps with DHTs as a result of hearing the difference in
their systems.


And two more coming up:-)



Don't.....

ATM I'm winning these:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...MEWA%3AIT&rd=1


I'll be in the sodding doghouse again if I get 'em!!

(It ain't just the drivers, it's the 200+ quid's worth of board &c. you need
to go with 'em!! :-)

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Keith G
wrote:

The problem here is the 'producers' (pros/retired pros/self-styled pros
who aren't really pros/wannabee pros who never will be pros) can't even
create a neutral product. Never mind that they should try to dictate
what we, the consumers, do with it once we've bought it....

Indeed. The snag, though, is that the results vary from one
CD/LP/broadcast
to another. I don't listen and think I can hear 'valves' or 'DHT' or
'solid
state'. I want each LP/CD/broadcast to sound as I'd expect for the
individual source.

The odd thing is that despite all the arguments, and the only valve in my
systems being a CRT for the display for video where appropriate, the
results tend to sound like music to me, and I enjoy them.

My experience is that when I listen to something like a prom from the RAH
it sounds to me a lot like what I heard when I attended them in person. So
much so that listening to the music gives me great pleasure. I don't seem
to need any valves, etc, to get this result.


Another shining example of 'it's not what you say, but the way that you say
it'....!!

I can only respond with my usual 'advice' - if you don't perceive any
benefit or advantage with valves, then don't use 'em!! ;-)

In article , Iain Churches
wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...


Maybe they're just easily contented ?

No Graham. Probably quite the reverse.

Is that an absolute assertion, or just a possibilty? :-)


The tube audio people that I
know seem to spend a long time looking for that last few percent in the
musical performance. That's why there is so much interest in things
like SET and open baffle speakers, horns etc.

But, if you don't care about the ability to differentiate between an
oboe and a cor Anglais then it doesn't really matter, does it?

Alternatively you may care, or be able to distinguish, but be able to do so
using equipment which does not make you wish to spend your time on anything
other than doing so by listening to and enjoying the music.

Could even be possible to do this using audio systems that have no valves,
or SETs, or... :-)

I can understand that some people feel dissatisfied with what they have,
though.

A few days ago I was enjoying a couple of DVDs of Brendel playing. Both
recorded in the same location, but on different occasions. I could easily
hear that the sounds differed - I think, because of the differences in mic
types and positions[1] - yet I still enjoyed the music. I guess I am easily
satisfied - having spent a few decades working at getting the audio systems
I use to deliver the results I enjoy. :-)

Although I admit that in my case, "open baffle" speakers do seem to help me
enjoy the music. Thank you, again, PJW.[2] ;-

Slainte,

Jim

[1] Although perhaps he was more plastered on one occasion than the
other. He plays better when plastered, and it did seem that the Liszt
gave the better stereo image, etc. :-)

[2] Who also moved on from valves to SS in due course and despite
being a keen musician tended then to be puzzled by the ongoing
arguments about valve amps. I can't recall him ever complaining
that without valves he couldn't tell an oboe from a cor any more...

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In article , Keith G
wrote:

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...

My experience is that when I listen to something like a prom from the
RAH it sounds to me a lot like what I heard when I attended them in
person. So much so that listening to the music gives me great
pleasure. I don't seem to need any valves, etc, to get this result.


Another shining example of 'it's not what you say, but the way that you
say it'....!!

I can only respond with my usual 'advice' - if you don't perceive any
benefit or advantage with valves, then don't use 'em!! ;-)

I appreciate you giving me permission. :-)

But don't worry, I had no plans to, anyway.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

"Iain Churches" wrote in message
news
Arny. I don't know what the situation is in your part of
the world, but here in Scandinavia, where people probably
have more disposable income, and hopefully a higher level
of taste/expectation, tube amps have the majority market
share at the very top end of the market.

Whatever that means.

I am told that this group includes professional people,
doctors, lawyers, and many musicians, so they hardly fit
into your "poorly-educated, well-funded,
obsessive-compulsives" category.

Whatever that means.

"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Eeyore"
wrote
in message
...


Keith G wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Iain Churches" wrote in
message

"Andy Evans" wrote in
message
oups.com...
What they are confusing this with is their preference
for an intentionally flawed but
entirely pleasnt and relatively benign form of
distortion. Nothing wrong with their
listening preference but the presentation of this as
inherently superior is utterly
bogus.

The idea that valves are simply "added distortion"
and nothing else could only be made by somebody with
a) very little knowledge of modern valve circuits
and how they sound or b) somebody with cloth ears.


A Swedish "very high end" dealer told me just
recently: quote:

" The very top of the audio market is totally
dominated by tube amplifiers. Music lovers in this
sector (many of who have speakers at 10k a pair) are
highly discerning."

In short, he has a lot of respect for people that pay
his way. Proves nothing.

*Denial* is the 'Christian Way', eh Arny? :-)

In truth what one high-end esoteric dealer says does
indeed prove nothing.

It reflects the situation in his own location, amongst
his own client-base. I agree this may or may not be
representative of the situation in other regions, or as a
whole.

Or, what he wishes it to be.

The Scandanavians must be a gullable lot if their folklore doesn't include a
lot of jokes along the lines of:

Q: How can you tell that a salesman is lying?

A: His lips are moving.


I feel sure that if the dealer had said "tube amp sales
are zero" then both you and Arny would have both responded
gleefully, "There, you see! That proves it!"

Iain forgets that I own a Conrad-Johnson preamp.

"Eeyore"
wrote
in message
Arny Krueger wrote:

"Andy Evans" wrote in
message
oups.com
All it has to do is sound as *realistic* as possible for
me - that's
*my* realistic, not anyone else's and it definitely
helps if I can hear
*all* of the voices, *all* of the words (where
applicable) and *all* of the instruments. Keith.

Keith, you're definitely heading for one of my small-DHT
preamps - I can give you all the kit bits cheap and you
can assemble it. Don't ask me why, but these small DHTs
have a clarity I don't find in any other amplification
stage. You have a little treat in store. Andy

DHT = Directly-Heated Triodes. They must be a treat to
bias properly given that the cathode isn't all at the
same potential.

I'm perplexed as to how a heater method can alter the
'sound' other than in the believer's mind.

DHTs could be prone to humming.

Either the
cathode's at the right temperature for emission or it
isn't.

Given how ancient most DHT devices are, they might not be the most linear
things around. The filaments could be more microphonic, too.

"Iain Churches" wrote in message

"Eeyore"
wrote
in message
...


Iain Churches wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news "Iain Churches" wrote in
message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message


What do you people play recorded music for - to be
entertained and pleased

Yeah, and there's a ton of music in this world that
does not need to be wallpapered to sound good.

or sit there with a notepad and
write down what defects you *think* you can
hear....??

That seems to be what you tube bigots do.

Arny. Why do you choose to call people who use/enjoy
tube amps "bigots" Is this in keeping with your
new-born Christian beliefs?

Just calling things what I see them to be. I guess
Iain would prefer that
I lie or obfuscate.


It hasn't bothered you up to now, Arny, so why change?
:-) In my experience tube amp owners are one of the most
contented groups of people with an interest in audio
and music. As Peter Lewis put it, "Happiness is a warm cathode" :-)

Maybe they're just easily contented ?

No Graham. Probably quite the reverse. The tube audio
people that I know seem to spend a long time looking for that last
few percent in the musical performance. That's why
there is so much interest in things like SET and open
baffle speakers, horns etc.
But, if you don't care about the ability to differentiate
between an oboe and a cor Anglais then it doesn't really
matter, does it?
I have made my choice, a homebrew EL34 PPP amp.
http://www.kolumbus.fi/iain.churches...em/C50_002.jpg


I am happy to leave you to make yours.

I moved past fiddling with that kind of crap in the late 1960s.

I am less confident that you will get what you pay for - particularly
at prices well above the average. Unless, of course, you are paying for
a brand name and items with an impressive reputation Jim

I would be very wary of brand names and established products. They may
well be less innovative, use standard parts rather than higher grade
alternatives, and in many cases will be "built to a price" because
overheads and advertising may be built in to the margin.

Small companies may be more cutting edge (except in the case of complex
technology) and better value with less overheads e.g. with direct sales
via internet or even ebay shops. They may be more risky, but the best
should offer more for the price. How to know which are the best? This
is maybe what you mean by "reputation" in the form of reviews, but
since their products take less time to come to market they may have had
less opportunity to "impress".