Tubes and Vinyl: An Often-Misunderstood Audiophile Debate

[UncleBingo]

I was the one who used Kinda Blue as and example, and I never said it was perfect, I believe I said it was honest. Flawed , maybe by a degree - as most recordings go it was pretty damned good, not perfect, but then again neither were the people playing the music. That's what makes it so great, because it's out there mistakes and all and it entertains. If I wanted perfect, I'd fire up the computer and let the sampling engines do the work. It's great because it's real, and this recording brings me back in time to a place that is tangible and believable.

Agreed. Jazz in real time in the studio; hard thing to get the energy and spontaneity on tape because it's essentially a high-wire act 2 feet off the ground. Very little at stake for the performers beyond listening to the playback with your band mates and laying down a real stinker or two.

 

[Audiovet]

Pweu!

At least one of many things I gleaned our of a very interesting discussion is the difference between folks' hearing/interpretation.. In that sense the differences alluded to loses its importance to pursue. For whose taste do I as a design engineer, design?

One must also bring in the venue factor, especially when enclosed. I have once read that more of what is heard in a venue is reflected than heard via 'direct path'. Then over to you favourite listening room, padded/reflectored up as it may be? How many listeners would be unimpressed/dismissive of the sound in the listening room, even if the original band would give their best performance there? So ample opportunity for subtle change to creep in via many holes/openings/relections.

I would say that 'equality' to original cannot eliminate a rather substantial factor, i.e. human hearing aberations . For myself, I believe my judgment is somewhat easier having classics as my preference.


But somewhere in the title is also the effect of tubes, left out the last couple of posts (as someone said there be quite a difference between the two subjects - agreed). Just to say that as a designer of both semiconductor and tube equipment for decades, I must have done something right because my products were ususually accepted with enthusiasm, sometimes very much so.

Thus, should the subject come up again - why was I never convinced of the (I would dare say 'classic') difference in 'tone' between the two diciplines? I certainly agree that in commercial equipment such exists - but that does not automatically make it dogma that such is an unavoidable/essential element (should then be two elements?) of the reproduction of the specific lines! (Confirmation of similarity by measurements, apart from listening tests?)

Not to bring diversion on this Special Day - just asking, if this part of the thread title is still - well - part of the thread!?

 

[infullview]

Yes! Ho ho ho (what? no Santa emoji!?). A lot of this has been about vinyl vs CDs and why vinyl is sometimes regarded as 'better'. It's more about the history of music production values than about the technology I think. Compression vs limiting etc.. We were more technologically naive during the era of vinyl, and it was my contention that the music on vinyl was more honest as a result. I don't think we had to many people arguing about tubes vs SS though, although most agreed that tubes can reproduce music well and have a warmer sound and perhaps introduce a pleasing form of distortion (especially when used on musical instrument applications). So that's my recap. Happy holidays to all!

 

[musichal]

I've read all posts to this point. The thread title, Tubes and Vinyl: An Often-Misunderstood Audiophile Debate, puzzled me before I even opened the thread. It refers to tubes and vinyl as a debate - singular, not plural. I note at least one post included the phrase tubes vs vinyl. Huh?

I think the OP was referring to more than one debate, and would perhaps have gleaned more had he stuck an s on the end of the word, but am not completely certain. Many debates on various general topics could be characterized as often misunderstood so I can kind of agree with the general sentiment. But if the object here were to attempt any clarity at all, then a more specific subject would perhaps have been helpful.

Still, there isn't anything at all wrong with introducing open topics/questions for discussion. However, I am unaware of any tube and vinyl debate. Most seem to have taken it straight to tube vs ss, and vinyl vs digital, which I also think was the OP's intent. Now, it may seem to some that I am parsing words too much here, but since they form the basis for communication, and since the idea of often-misunderstood was included, I find the lack of a clearly-defined subject here ironic.

None-the-less, it has sparked some interesting responses that have not devolved into various camps slinging mud at one another, so that's a good thing. As for tubes vs ss, I think that a great tubed preamp from Audio Research (or your favorite) feeding a great ss power amp would be my nirvana, but still isn't the way I chose to go for several reasons, mostly of a practical/usage nature. And when one becomes too decrepit for all the up-and-down of vinyl records (and owns three 400-disc players) then CD also gets the nod on a practicality/usage basis. Remote control is a major factor for me for each component, too.

I remain uncertain exactly what often-misunderstood debate is under discussion, though. Maybe that is why they(it?) are(is) often misunderstood. I do however, appreciate the use of irony, intended or otherwise.

 

[sqlsavior]

Although my first comment in this thread...

Generalizations are so much bullshit.

...summed up how I felt about the article pretty well, it wasn't very helpful for anyone who might wonder why I felt that way. And it probably offended some who prefer more polite expression. Fair enough. So here's why. The author states (about vinyl):

"B) I think it's perfectly OK to be a fan of the format. What's not OK is to suggest that the format is an accurate, high performance reproduction of the music as it was recorded by the artist, producer, and engineers."

I find it somewhat difficult to express my opinion of this viewpoint without profanity. I doubt the author deserves my efforts, but most AK'ers do. So let me use sarcasm instead of profanity: Thank you, Jerry del Colliano, for your dispensation. I'm glad that I am allowed to like records. I just wouldn't know what to do otherwise. The shame of not being an audiophile in your eyes would surely kill me off...

To me, the author comes off as a self-appointed oracle of good taste, who is making excuses for his friends not as enlightened as he. I find that attitude contemptible. I don't need your approval, jackass... Whoops! there goes the politeness! <sigh> I shall have to try harder. He goes on to volunteer his definition of audiophiles:

"Us audiophiles invest huge sums of money in seeking the Nth degree of performance, by investing in super quiet, low-distortion electronics; extremely capable, full-range loudspeakers; and source material that is capable of reproducing what the artist wanted us to hear as closely as possible. Getting as close to the recorded event, studio or live, on the master tape is the goal of audiophile music reproduction, simply put."

Myself, I find it difficult to exclude those of us who have listened carefully to dozens of vintage receivers and speakers from my definition of us audiophiles, not that I have, and never mind the pejorative connotations sometimes associated with the term. To me an audiophile is someone who cares about sound quality. I have no desire to be a gatekeeper, but there are plenty who do. AK is for the rest of us, in my opinion.

Mr. Calliano eventually transitions from apples and oranges to pears and tangerines, trying to associate tubes vs. solid-state with records vs. digital. It is scarcely a smooth transition, and leaves me wondering, like @musichal , why the mix? I think the reason may be simple prejudice against those with a less snooty definition of 'audiophile', trying to turn us into 'the other'. Screw that!... Whoops, again! <sigh> Intercourse that!

While I can acknowledge that records have dynamic limitations, I don't believe those detract significantly from listening to most music, and will sarcastically point out that those straining to hear the pppp passages over the sniffles and coughs of those seated next to them might actually appreciate a little real-time compression imposed by the conductor. Nawww...really?

It takes a pretty careful reading of the article to realize the Mr. Calliano approves of tubes more than he does vinyl. But he still seems to have a slight disdain for their 'warm' sound and 'pleasing' coloration - they are just not at the tippy-top of his rarified world. Having experienced my tubes beating solid-state in a way not based on preference, but rather a greater quantity of hear-able details and textures, I do get a little peeved at those who assume I must prefer lower fidelity and coloration. I have some other tube amps that are definitely not just warm, but rolled-off - limited in high-frequency capability - and I rather resent the generalization that would place all tube equipment in the same category.

That's why I wrote that generalizations are so much, um, bull-pucky.

Merry Christmas, everyone, whether or not you agree.

 

[Bodyblue]

To me, the author comes off as a self-appointed oracle of good taste

Yep, just like ever other audio writer on the planet..........read Stereophile for some of the worst of it.

 

[jazzmans]

Wow. I have about 2,000 records in my vinyl room, the rest in the storage room. Everyone is a joy to listen to, despite what you cats think are flaws. Just the other day, I put on Alan Parsons Project's Ammonia avenue, what a treat. If Alan Parsons ca't get it right, who can? I also listened to Fleet Foxes new LP, Crack-Up. Again, it is an audio wonder in my books. Should win a Grammy but wont because their not popular enough.

I think some have bought into the big lie that recorded music can sound like live music. That is just simply not the case. At least, not yet. The Dynamic range swings of a full orchestra would probably melt many under-powered amps and speakers it they were played at life like levels. The distortion levels would be very high as well.

It's Christmas eve. Why not just plan a day of listening to imperfect music. Played in an imperfect world. Someday, maybe someone will figure out how to reproduce the perfect musical event. It's not here yet.

Y'know what's funny? exactly as you were typing this, I was doing exactly that, and it was a sublime experience. I made a thread 'a funny thing happened' about it.

Just think its kind of amazing that you typed this as I was doing exactly this.

oh, and Ammonia Avenue is my second favorite Alan Parsons Project album.

of course, #1 is the original Alan Parsons Project, Tales of Mystery and Imagination, of Edgar Allen Poe.

 

[markshan]

I wish I hadn't clicked on this one.