Capacitor quality is the reason why people prefer tubes over solid state ??
- Thread starter bob412
- Start date
c.coyle
Fighting the Dunning-Kruger effect.
I think you meant ". . this does not imply . . ." I wasn't.
If "[a]ny departure from the input signal is distortion," then what tubes do to alter a signal isn't "technically" distortion - it is actually distortion.
Do you see what you're doing here? To you, tube distortion is "bending," but solid state distortion is just plain "bad." No problemo, but others, with their own ears and brains, disagree. It's a subjective thing.
I'll leave it to others to discuss the nature of distortion and harmonics, and how to actually measure it. Now, back to enjoying my solid state amp with no electros in the signal chain.
EDIT WHILE I'M ON MY 4TH CUP OF COFFEE SINCE 0500: The first time I heard the Rolling Stones' Satisfaction was on a shitty transistor radio with a 1" speaker. It was coming to me via a low-fi signal from an AM radio station. Since then, I've listened to it hundreds of times and on some pretty good systems, yet I've never been blown away as much as that first time. Lots of us listen to music, not audio.
Last edited:
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
NOT. Right. Tone controls bend the signal as well. You can see it on the 'scope. This is mostly a subjective thread.
When you get down to fundamental parameters, the average single transistor is inherently more flawed (less linear) than the average single tube...
Just look at the transconductance curves- the tube curves are, on average, much closer to straight lines than the transistor curves. In essence- a single tube, by itself, without feedback, "bends" the sound LESS than a single transistor.
This is one reason why transistor amps require much more feedback than tube amps, to reach a decent level of linearity. And that feedback comes at a price- the creation of upper harmonics is one (not the only one, but a very significant one) of those.
The one good thing about transistors, is that they are SO cheap, that MANY of them can be used- in essence, to create enough gain that the feedback can be incorporated in high enough level to "force" the response to be linear, down to what, on paper, are very low levels of "total" distortion. However, when one looks at the harmonic structure of the distortion- a tube amp's distortion pretty much is confined to the lower harmonics (closer in frequency to the original signal), while transistor amps have audibly significant (and the levels to be significant can be VERY low from an audibility sense, at the higher harmonics) levels of these higher harmonics- harmonics actually CREATED by the feedback itself- once the action of the feedback loop is factored in. In essence, the farther the overtone is from the original fundamental, the more it is audible at the same level.... which can be problematic with high-feedback designs of any type...
It is possible to build solid-state amps with improved distortion behavior- but that's usually not going to happen with the traditional class-A or class-AB topologies. And it's difficult with the class-D and other alternative-tech solid-state amps as well- but people are figuring out ways to make that work better, as we go on...
Regards,
Gordon.
bob412
Active Member
I'm not in an argument or dispute !
.
willyrover
Super Member
And all this time I thought people who prefer tubes, preferred tubes...because of the tubes.
Christmas tree lights look pretty as well, but I'm not going to fit my hifi with them.
biscuithead
Me likes the eargasm retroplasm...
Since were all over the place, I feel like I need to share a story...
About 10 years ago I'm talking to my dad and he says he wants to meet for dinner in a week or two... but he says " NOT Red Lobster" . This is strange, since the last 20 times we've met for dinner, he insists upon Red Lobster... So, I ask why? Dad says he won't go to Red Lobster because "they don't have restrooms". Huh? I say, I am pretty sure that the RL we've been going to forever has restrooms, and I know we've all used them, and I say as much to dad... NO! he says, we aren't going there, they don't have restrooms!
I later talk to my step mom and she explains that in their town (4 hours away) the Red Lobster was under renovation, and when they last went the restrooms were closed...
So the leap was made from a RL under renovation with closed restrooms ... into "Red Lobster doesn't have restrooms" I noticed these leaps were more and more common as dad got older.
It seems as we get older, our logic and reason get muddled, and what we experience ( or read ) gets rearranged in our brains and when we try to regurgitate it, it gets even more muddled. This thread resembles that conversation I had with dad.
About 10 years ago I'm talking to my dad and he says he wants to meet for dinner in a week or two... but he says " NOT Red Lobster" . This is strange, since the last 20 times we've met for dinner, he insists upon Red Lobster... So, I ask why? Dad says he won't go to Red Lobster because "they don't have restrooms". Huh? I say, I am pretty sure that the RL we've been going to forever has restrooms, and I know we've all used them, and I say as much to dad... NO! he says, we aren't going there, they don't have restrooms!
I later talk to my step mom and she explains that in their town (4 hours away) the Red Lobster was under renovation, and when they last went the restrooms were closed...
So the leap was made from a RL under renovation with closed restrooms ... into "Red Lobster doesn't have restrooms" I noticed these leaps were more and more common as dad got older.
It seems as we get older, our logic and reason get muddled, and what we experience ( or read ) gets rearranged in our brains and when we try to regurgitate it, it gets even more muddled. This thread resembles that conversation I had with dad.
NAD80
Super Member
http://www.waltjung.org/PDFs/Picking_Capacitors_1.pdf Here is the 1st part.
Just have her concede that you are a MARINE! Then explain......."MARINE's ARE ALWAYS RIGHT! I'm a MARINE, Therefore I'm ALWAYS Right!" (Then duck and weave out of the way of Cast Iron Fryiing pans, and sharp Kitchen implements.)
Last edited:
fred soop
Super Member
The article by Jung in Audio magazine many years ago did not mention tubes ..... unless he did more than one capacitor article.
Douglas Self has tested and demonstrated that electrolytic capacitors in the signal path are ok ..... BUT they must be large enough in value that there is no more than approximately 70 mV of signal across them at the lowest frequency of interest. Basically, this means that a capacitor value is chosen for the lowest frequency of interest, then that value is multiplied by 10 to bring distortion down to the noise floor. Electrolytics should NEVER be used for frequency shaping, such as limiting low frequencies at an amplifier input.
A lot of the favorable press toward tubes is based on the fact that many of the early solid state designs were audibly bad. Yes, I owned one and it was obvious. The basic purpose of high fidelity is to create the illusion of a live performance in the listening space. For proper evaluation of such, one needs to attend live performances. This would only apply to orchestral, chamber, jazz, or similar groups. The classic rock concert is electronically produced, distortion deliberately added, performed in a large sports venue to accommodate the crowd with bad acoustics and a lot of ambient noise. If this is your thing, then you are probably not qualified to evaluate sound quality as related to tubes or capacitors.
Douglas Self has tested and demonstrated that electrolytic capacitors in the signal path are ok ..... BUT they must be large enough in value that there is no more than approximately 70 mV of signal across them at the lowest frequency of interest. Basically, this means that a capacitor value is chosen for the lowest frequency of interest, then that value is multiplied by 10 to bring distortion down to the noise floor. Electrolytics should NEVER be used for frequency shaping, such as limiting low frequencies at an amplifier input.
A lot of the favorable press toward tubes is based on the fact that many of the early solid state designs were audibly bad. Yes, I owned one and it was obvious. The basic purpose of high fidelity is to create the illusion of a live performance in the listening space. For proper evaluation of such, one needs to attend live performances. This would only apply to orchestral, chamber, jazz, or similar groups. The classic rock concert is electronically produced, distortion deliberately added, performed in a large sports venue to accommodate the crowd with bad acoustics and a lot of ambient noise. If this is your thing, then you are probably not qualified to evaluate sound quality as related to tubes or capacitors.
biscuithead
Me likes the eargasm retroplasm...
Not frying pans with my wife. She has more marksman medals than me, and although her grips might be made of pearl and jewels, her lead always hits its mark. I might be a Marine, but she is a two time ladies tactical division title holder, and won some F-Class Emerald matches. When she says " I hit it " , she hit it. I'd be ducking lead, not iron.
...but if I'm in a "discussion" with her, she has the ability to make me take a side that I don't support, and she can muddle a point until neither one of us remember what the original topic was. My bewitching betwixting beguiling bride... Love it !
steveUK
Active Member
If you want the truth about capacitors, a very knowledgeable guy, Cyril Bateman RIP, did some serious, open minded research a few years ago. It was all published in Electronics World (that's a serious electronics mag not a 'stuck up its own ***' hifi mag). Top and bottom is, capacitors of different types do give rise to extremely small, minuscule amounts of distortion. But we're talking about levels of distortion so low as to be at the edge of what test equipment can measure. See: https://linearaudio.nl/cyril-batemans-capacitor-sound-articles
And remember, to put this in perspective, the very best speakers produce distortion in whole numbers, not thousandths of a percent..
And remember, to put this in perspective, the very best speakers produce distortion in whole numbers, not thousandths of a percent..
The reason I asked was that Walt Jung is the electronics guy and Walt Yung appears to be a rapper or something who may or may not know anything about capacitors or tubes. The OP had both names/spellings so there was the confusion. It's since been edited though.
Craig
restorer-john
Addicted Member
There's something magical about a steam engine as compared to a diesel. The way it just pulls the entire train is better. Maybe it's the wood they used. I like wood. I don't like diesel.
In the U.K. there is a railway hill called the Lickley Incline. It is the steepest hill on the rail network. In the age of steam, a 'helper' engine was stationed at the bottom to assist engines as they struggled with the hill. These days, diesel electric locos with 2000ton trains take this hill at 75 miles per hour.
When solid state amplifiers were first released they were relatively poor in quality and power terms - poor quality germanium transistors. The tube followers were probably right about non-linearity and so on. These days, well designed solid state equipment will out perform almost anything fitted with valves. Texas instruments have a data sheet for OPA2234 which has a suggested circuit to enable designers to be able to measure it's distortion in the audio band. It's THD and IMD is so vanishingly small that it is almost impossible to measure it.
The 'tubists' still go on about soft clipping. A hifi amplifier being driven into clipping is just too small. A 20 watt valve amp could go into clipping quite easily and so could a 20 watt solid state amp. I agree with valve proponents that under these circumstances the soft clipping valve amp will sound less bad than a hard clipping solid state amp of the same output. Replace it with a 200 watt SS amp doing the same service and clipping becomes irrelevant. But still the old 'valves are best' brigade continue to tell us that valve amps are better. They are not, and that is why most manufacturers don't make them anymore.
RobInONT
Active Member
Played around with tube equipment for a few years. Yes, it does sound "different" but whether you think it's "better" is entirely subjective. Tube amps are esentially effects boxes with gain. Some people like syrup on their pancakes, some like 'em plain. Gone all SS now, but there are times I miss the fire-bottles.
I'm sorry, but this reads like someone who hasn't seen or heard actual modern-design valve amps.
The results speak for themselves- from the most recent Munich, AXPONA, and Capital Audiofest shows- while there were a plethora of high-power, very expensive, TOTL solid state amps present in many very elaborate and sophisticated systems- the combination that was pretty much unanimously granted "best of show" awards by pretty much every significant reviewer, was the VAC/Von Schweikert room- powered by the VAC Statement 450iQ valve amps. In fact, many of these reviewers went so far as to say that they had never heard a system of such quality, at ANY time before EVER. That's pretty stout language- most reviewers are known for couching their praise in very qualified language- seldom are they willing to go "out on the limb" and say something is UNEQUIVOCABLY better than everything else. But, they did- for a very state-of-the-art valve/tube amplifier.
In short- there's nothing "old" about the design of current SOTA tube/valve amps. They are expensive to make- and that is why most manufacturers don't make them- economy of scale doesn't apply to them- but to say that the performance isn't there, just isn't an informed opinion...
Regards,
Gordon.
