Page 3 of 3

#31 Re: Going on from simons 45 thread

Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2022 10:14 am
by steve s
That isnt to say its not a good sounding system,

Paul the reason I started this thread is that I believe there is always a technical reason for an amplifier that sounds better or worse, what's clear to me is that most measurements and theories don't explain things that we hear, you would think in this day and age, a simple subject like understanding a waveform whilst playing music would be common knowledge


As an aside a few weeks ago, I did a few searches on transistor grain, a 32 page thread on diy audio produced nothing but wonderment at some of the posts, but no real explanation
I'm sure there is cause all the same

#32 Re: Going on from simons 45 thread

Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2022 11:05 am
by Nick
Ok, lets decompose that a little
I believe there is always a technical reason for an amplifier that sounds better or worse
Ok, so I think the word technical in the above is totally redundant, but going by what I think you mean, there will be behavior that any amplifier has that determines what the output will be like given an input and a load. That's entirely empirical and generally able to be measured. At the least we can subtract the input from the output and look at the difference, so we can see exactly what its doing at any time. But then you say "sounds", so that brings in two more unknowns, the transducer that converts the output of the amplifier to sound, and the ear and brain that listens to that sound and makes a better or worst judgement. Those two parts are far more uncontrolled and much harder to measure. But the amplifier, that easy. But exactly how do you suggest we measure "better", is your better the same as my better? Is your better today the same as your better yesterday? Once you find a way of fixing the right hand side of that sentence, I think making a amplifier that does it will be simple.

Rereading that, I will in fact say, there will always be a reason why an amp sounds better or worst, and some times the answer will be technical in that its something the amp is doing, but is also entirely possible to be one of many human issues that makes it sound better or worst.
you would think in this day and age, a simple subject like understanding a waveform whilst playing music would be common knowledge
I cant think why it would need to be common knowledge but in the context of analysis its generally well known. Again the problem is generally the part that isn't the amplifier. We can make amplifiers that have effectively zero effect on the sound, but in general people prefer them to have an effect, that's the problem.
As an aside a few weeks ago, I did a few searches on transistor grain
Well, first you would have to be sure that what you are describing as "grain" is a single thing, or if multiple, what parts are in it, but I think most of the answer you were looking for was in that John Curl video Mark posted.
a 32 page thread on diy audio produced nothing but wonderment at some of the posts
That's more of a comment of the social behavior of people on that forum than a commentary of the state of the art in amplifier design and understanding.

I don't want to sound all knowing (because I am not), but generally I think its perfectly possible to make a amplifier that is (to copy the word intentionally) to all intents and purposes blameless. There may be certain loads that makes that harder than others, and there may be other restrictions that also make that hard (must be efficient, must/must not use a particular device, must be a certain topology). And then we are back to the case where we want blame in the amp, because we like what it does. Or we may want to wrap marketing around it as a product, so we have to make it sound different to distinguish it from competitors. But generally I think all those are choices, not restrictions created by lack of understanding the problem.

In general I find the internet is not a great source of information if you just take random posts on a subject without applying some form of filtering. Just as true about audio as climate change.

#33 Re: Going on from simons 45 thread

Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2022 12:36 pm
by steve s
I think I'd agree with all that nick,

I also agree that much of whats written on the net and elsewhere nearly always has a slant, and filtering is really important, we tender to filter things out we dont agree with.
That could also be a double edge sword

To me retaining tone in the music is key
Not creating tone.
I'm lucky in that my daughter plays live, practices occasionally in my room, and has some well recorded music, which is a good comparator

I accept that I may well like a little 2nd harmonic in my music, but I find it strange that at lower volumes where there is little distortion at all, the signature and tone is still present.

If 2nd harmonic was creating tone I would expect changes with volume
Or maybe my ears decive me ?

And by the same score, most of the blameless-ish amplifiers ive heard tend to loose that tone, the better ones only slightly in my experence

That to me just begs more questions.

And just to point out it's not just my ears, I know from experience most of you guys have very good listening skills and recognise what I'm hearing.

What is tone.. and why do amplifiers and speaker seem to filter it out

And if changing a valve or component produces more tone with little change in distortion, what chance has the average oscilloscope got in identify what's gone on when it's full of components in the signal path?

The average low eff hifi speakers don't quite seem to be fully competent at tone,
As an example Lowthers can do it well, providing you can eliminate any cabinet effects.

Is the difference resultion, and are there are technical reasons for that?
And does the same apply to test gear?

#34 Re: Going on from simons 45 thread

Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2022 1:02 pm
by Nick
I accept that I may well like a little 2nd harmonic in my music
I think that's true for most, but the value of "little" will vary with the person and the music. I think now what you regard as "little distortion at all" I would regard as a huge amount, it varies. For example, at the end of Saturday at the Crannage show after it had all quietened down, listening to some stuff with just Mark, Andrew and Ali, the vinyl system with Ref phone, TX preamp, SS amps and the Lowther OB's to my ears the sound was as good as I wanted, and was what I had been aiming at for many years and heard occasionally elsewhere. The phono (and for that matter the cartridge) would add a little distortion but I was not missing the lack of valves in any other part of the system or hearing any SS artifact. YMMV.
but I find it strange that at lower volumes where there is little distortion at all, the signature and tone is still present.
Personally this varies and the hard to define thing tone to my thinking is not something to be added but something to be lost. Adding some 2nd doesn't create tone, and not adding it will also not hide it. However in some cases adding 2nd and 3rd can mask higher order distortion that will cause tone to be lost.
If 2nd harmonic was creating tone I would expect changes with volume
I don't think it does, but see above.
And by the same score, most of the blameless-ish amplifiers ive heard tend to loose that tone, the better ones only slightly in my experence
Not in my experience, but there are not that many blameless amplifiers. However if adding some 2nd is a way that will preserve tone, then adding it in the amp may prevent it being lost elsewhere. But again, you may conflate tone and 2nd, or you may not, its hard to know.
And if changing a valve or component produces more tone with little change in distortion
Well, that's an assertion I would like to see proven before I argue for or against it. I found very small changes in the distortion spectra is audible and measurable. As to if it directly alters tone, I don't know, again, I think tone is not created in the system its from the source and then lost in the system.
what chance has the average oscilloscope got in identify what's gone on when it's full of components in the signal path
I never said that an oscilloscope is the tool to be used here, its not.
And does the same apply to test gear
Of course, you would not use a carpenters ruler to set a tappet.

#35 Re: Going on from simons 45 thread

Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2022 1:06 pm
by Nick
By the way, in the above you can replace "tone" with "music" or any other poorly defined name for the thing we know when we hear it and miss when its not there. But whatever it is or we call it, I don't believe the system can create or enhance it, it can only mask it or not.

#36 Re: Going on from simons 45 thread

Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2022 2:45 pm
by steve s
Nick wrote: Wed Aug 17, 2022 1:06 pm I don't believe the system can create or enhance it, it can only mask it or not.
Thats my view too nick, which you all ready know... and was the direction my last post was aiming at

#37 Re: Going on from simons 45 thread

Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2022 7:33 pm
by Mike H
Fascinating!

:D