logo (10/24/82)
anybody care to express opinions on Absolute Sound vs. International Audio Review sorts of reviewing and evaluation? how about tube vs. solid state? i would be especially interested in hearing from audiophile equipment designers. David (Reisner) uucp : ...!ucbvax!sdcsvax!logo arpanet : sdcsvax!logo@nprdc
burris (10/27/82)
#R:sdcsvax:-240900:ihlpb:4000008: 0:939 ihlpb!burris Oct 27 1:17:00 1982 Regarding solid state vs. tubes I can only state this. Many people feel that tubes have a "warmer" sound than solid state equip. This may be true depending on your definition of "warmer". If you are one of the people who feel this way then nobody can convince you otherwise, so go buy one. I can however, prove that solid state equipment can out perform tube equipment in signal-to-noise and distortion. This is providing that you believe the solid state test equipment that I would be using. Power consumption is beyond comparision by approximately an order of magnitude. The one thing that can be said of solid state equipment that is properly designed is that there is NO coloration of the original signal. If the proper transistor, op amp., etc. is chosen and biased properly the only difference between the input and the output should be gain and phase in relation to the input signal. Dave Burris ihlpb!burris BTL - Naperville
jj (10/27/82)
Regarding tubes vs. transistors: The only source of difference between tubes and a properly designed solid state amplifier that I have found is the lack of IM distortion at high frequencies of the transistor amplifier, as compared to the tube amplifier's output transformer. For those of you who are sceptical, try adding a little frequency-dependant non-linearity at the input of the solid state amplifier( Damned if I know how to show a schematic over the net!) I think that you will find that your "warmth" will return. This must be taken with some care, however, as there are a bunch of VERY bad sounding older solid state amplifiers out there. (The bunch that was designed before the realization of slew rate limiting, and TIM, to be specific.) I must say that I'm not an audiophile. I just like my music to sound the same as it did when it was performed.
ken (10/28/82)
in regard to the tubes versus solid state equipment, virtually everybody talks quickly about the tube equipment sounding warmer than solid state equipment. then the rush to talk about specs start. i quess as engineers you can't help it. no audiophile i know ever looks at the specs when reviewing a piece of equip- ment or system. the only thing that counts is how it sounds and there rarely is a direct connection between specs and how it sounds (to the individual). not afraid to sign my name,
burris (10/30/82)
#R:sdcsvax:-240900:ihlpb:4000009: 0:2235 ihlpb!burris Oct 29 9:53:00 1982 Just what are the qualifications to be an audiophile? Where do you get certified or are audiophiles self-proclaimed? I have work with all types of musicians in live performances and I KNOW what they are supposed to sound like. Does this make me an audiophile? I KNOW I wish to maintain as much accuracy in the record/playback process as possible such that the recording sounds like the performance sounded. Does this make me an audiophile? I KNOW that what I want to come from my speakers is an accurate representation of what is on my albums. Does this make me an audiophile? I KNOW that detailed specifications will indicate the degree of accuracy in reproducing the audio source. Thus, I will look at the specifications. Does this mean I am not an audiophile? I get rather annoyed with the self-proclaimed "audiophiles" who rattle off their opinions in HI-FI magazines. The ones that annoy me the most are the ones who begin the article with a list of esoteric equipment as proof that they are audiophiles. An example of this is a recent article by an english professor at some university. His rhetoric and writing style were great, too bad his technical knowledge was practically nonexistant. He had rated a few digitally mastered albums and then proceeded to discount the digital recording process. The article must be read to be appreciated. The word "audiophile" is one of the more misused terms in audio. There seems to be no way to distinguish whether or not one is an audiophile or not but once you have decided you are one then your opinion becomes a "professional" opinion. At this point is doesn't matter what proof is presented as argument to the opinion because the response is "I don't care about any of those proofs, I think this sounds better". If you think that a particular piece of equipment sounds good, then TO YOU it does sound good and you should be content with that but any person's opinion does not indicate the accuracy of the reproduction. Specifications are an indication of equipment performance which can be proven or disproven and are a true representation of the accuracy of the equipment. Opinions just exist and cannot be proven or disproven. Dave Burris ihlpb!burris BTL - Naperville
lmg (10/30/82)
The term "audiophile" belongs in the same category as "hacker". It means different things to different people, and it can be either a compliment or pejoritive. I would call Dave Burris an audiophile based on his feelings about his music. Others might want to reserve that word for the people with five figure systems and bricks on top of their amps. It might be easier to decide who is definitely *not* an audio- phile. I nominate anyone who: * Cleans a stylus with an index finger. * Stacks records on a changing rod. * Never cleans or demagnetizes his tape deck. * Praises the acoustics of the Byrne Arena. (for us Jerseyites) Comments? (I need to ask?) Larry Geary Bell Labs, Holmdel ...npois!houxi!hosbc!lmg
wm (11/01/82)
I know this is a dangerous position to take, but I once read something that made a good case for the position that stacking records *does not* hurt them. The person writing this article had done many tests, and after you think about it, it makes sense. The point is: what about stacking records damages them? There are two possible causes, damage from the record groves on one record rubbing against the grooves of the other record, and damage from the stylus angle changing with the number of records that have dropped. In the first case, he showed that air pressure would keep the grooves from hitting each other, even if they could, for infact, they cannot. The edge and center of the record are thicker than the part with grooves, and keeps the grooves from touching. And, even if they could touch, and even if the air pressure didn't keep them from touching, the possible damage from the two record surfaces touching was nothing compared to the 9 tons per square inch pressure that the typical stylus exerts on the groove walls. In the second case, the vertical stylus angle does not change that much with the number of records dropped. In fact, turntables that are set up to either play singly or multiply (like most duals and other old favorites) are angled so that the third record gets the proper vertical tracking angle. Even so, many records have some warp in them that is more than the width of the record. And how many audiophiles even bother to set up the vertical tracking angle of their cartridge? (I will probably get mail from all ten of them). The point is, vertical tracking angle doesn't make that much difference. There are, of course two different ways that stacking records does cause problems. First, if someone doesn't bother to clean the stacked records, because it is easier to clean a record at a time while they are rotating, and difficult to clean them while they are stacked. This is not an argument against stacking per se. I am perfectly capable of cleaning my records one by one, and my cartridge has a little brush for getting any last minute lint that decides to come along. The biggest problem is, if you stack records every self proclaimed audiophile who comes along feels like it is their duty to yell and scream at me for stacking records. That is why I gave up stacking records. So, in the list of people who are not audiophiles, let's change people who stack records to people who do not clean their records. There is no excuse for that! Wm Leler - UNC Chapel Hill
dmmartindale (11/01/82)
Ordinary (elliptical or spherical) cartridge styli are probably rather insensitive to vertical tracking angle, but the newer styli that try to have a groove contact footprint which is closer to a vertical line would be quite fussy about vertical tracking angle.