"TT" wrote



The biggest gain I have noticed is "magically" that
fatiguing CD sound has gone and it has that more natural
SACD/analog sound.


*Ding Dong*........

;-)

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...


Andy Evans wrote:



which we know from a litany of posts about valve equipment. No, I'm
speaking about instrumental timbre which appears to be more faithful
rather than less. I can only ask people posting on this subject to hear
this for themselves, since neither scientific method nor adjectives
will substitute for the actual sound itself.

Since musical timbre entirely *depends* on rich harmonics to sound good,
it's
hardly surpising then that a toob will 'flatter' them is it ?



More from the 'It's ****e but at least it's *accurate*!' school of thinking?

What do you people play recorded music for - to be entertained and pleased
or sit there with a notepad and write down what defects you *think* you can
hear....??

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...


Keith G wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...

Andy Evans wrote:

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.

There is precious litle 'modern' about any valve circuit. I learnt on
them
btw.

Nahh, I doubt that - you post like you've learnt nothing at all.....

Do continue. What is it you think I do / don't know ( have / haven't
learnt )
about valves ?


See my response to your 'shocking failings' post......

So? The purpose of the DAC is to listen to it.

Addenda, "The purpose of having the DAC is to listen to it"

Up to the listener, of course, if they actually want specific examples
of waveforms to be accurately reconstructed, or if they want them
altered in specific waysJLS

This is one of many ways of saying "true believers use accurate
reproduction systems, while heretics worship at their own pagan
shrines" - I think the implications are clear enough.

"Eeyore" wrote


Listening will only tell you what *you* think of it, i.e. subjective
evaluation.
That is no reliable measure of 'goodness' whatever as easily can be
seen
from
those who think SET tube amps are great despite shocking failings wrt
precision and linearity.

'Shocking failings'....???

By any established technical standard for sure.


(I love it when you Denial Boys start to talk dirty.....!! :-)

You haven't heard the half of it.


OK...

First question - have you ever heard a SET and if so, on what speakers?
Second question - how is an amp failing when it a) switches on and off OK,
b) amplifies perfectly well all day long, b) sounds better than the other
amps one may have to hand?

Next - what price 'precision and linearity' to someone who is interested in
*using* the kit and not designing it? When it comes to audio, provided no
harm comes to kids, the elderly and little fluffy animals, I believe 'the
end justifies the means' and I am not too strung out about some of the
'facts and figures' when it comes to *measurements* and the like.

A task for you - play this fairly explosive track:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...0In%20Love.mp3

....and listen to it first on a pair of headphones and then over your 'hifi
system'.

Report here what 'shocking failings' in your system you found. Comment on
the 'fidelity' aspect and tell us how *accurate* you think it sounds. Then
make the effort to hear it on a SET amp and tell us how it compares and what
you have *learned* - this is what *we* SET users do, who also have a
selection of other amps *both* SS and valves.....

(SETs are pretty thin on the ground in the UK and I have a leetle tiny
suspicion that many people with strong opinions about them have simply never
heard one....??)

SETs are pretty thin on the ground in the UK and I have a leetle tiny
suspicion that many people with strong opinions about them have simply
never
heard one

A leetle tiny suspicion??? Does this come from a Zorro film? I'd love
to see the sign of the Z on all the Audiolab gear about town, and a
caped intruder floating away into the darkness........

What do you people play recorded music for - to be entertained and
pleased
or sit there with a notepad and write down what defects you *think* you
can
hear....??

There are people who believe that if you drive from Huddersfield to
Bognor Regis in a) a Trabant and b) a Ferrari (pick your model) and the
journey time is identical, then the driving experience must be the same.

It's my experience that "hybrid" amplifiers have both tube and ss
amplification stages, not ss current sinks, active loads etc. It would
be deviating from common practice to call a circuit where the
amplification stages were all tube a "hybrid" circuit

Thank you. It is indeed a 'hybrid'

You're not being (gulp) "wilfully perverse" here are you? There may be
hope yet.

In article , Keith G
writes

"Eeyore" wrote


Listening will only tell you what *you* think of it, i.e. subjective
evaluation.
That is no reliable measure of 'goodness' whatever as easily can be
seen
from
those who think SET tube amps are great despite shocking failings wrt
precision and linearity.

'Shocking failings'....???

By any established technical standard for sure.


(I love it when you Denial Boys start to talk dirty.....!! :-)

You haven't heard the half of it.


OK...

First question - have you ever heard a SET and if so, on what speakers?
Second question - how is an amp failing when it a) switches on and off OK,
b) amplifies perfectly well all day long, b) sounds better than the other
amps one may have to hand?

Next - what price 'precision and linearity' to someone who is interested in
*using* the kit and not designing it? When it comes to audio, provided no
harm comes to kids, the elderly and little fluffy animals, I believe 'the
end justifies the means' and I am not too strung out about some of the
'facts and figures' when it comes to *measurements* and the like.

A task for you - play this fairly explosive track:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...0In%20Love.mp3

Which deck did you record that off Keith?....

...and listen to it first on a pair of headphones and then over your 'hifi
system'.

Report here what 'shocking failings' in your system you found. Comment on
the 'fidelity' aspect and tell us how *accurate* you think it sounds. Then
make the effort to hear it on a SET amp and tell us how it compares and what
you have *learned* - this is what *we* SET users do, who also have a
selection of other amps *both* SS and valves.....

(SETs are pretty thin on the ground in the UK and I have a leetle tiny
suspicion that many people with strong opinions about them have simply never
heard one....??)





--
Tony Sayer

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"TT" wrote



The biggest gain I have noticed is "magically" that
fatiguing CD sound has gone and it has that more natural
SACD/analog sound.


*Ding Dong*........

;-)

Despite years of the Great Arny Krueger trying to convince me "that *all* CD
players the same and *ALL* DACs sound the same and that an external DAC is a
complete "waste" of time I believe I have found something that works
exceptionally well.

Regards TT