Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Re: Lucio Cadeddu interviewing Dieter Ennemoser.

Hi
I have a fundamental problem with this approach.
If one is making a music producer, then anything goes.
If one is making a music re-producer then one wants a faithful reproducer which adds, subtracts, re-arranges as little as possible.
It is simply not possible for a coating to impart “preferred” frequencies or force a “musical” structure into something (his supporters propose coating speaker cones, electronic parts etc).
Not only that, what “if” one played non musical program material which is not structured as he proposes?

So far as “distortion” since the Beetles white album (I believe it was this one) many recordings have used tube circuitry and now tube emulators to add “sweetness” and such. One of the pro magazines had an entire issue last year dedicated to recording processors. Harmonics are added preferentially, they are audible and it began with the Beetles and mis adjusted tube circuitry.
Now, many guitar players still prefer tube amplifiers because of the nature of the distortion they produce, especially when over driven.
While tubes can also produce very low distortion and low order distortion, I’m am not sure that is what your hear with some “modern” amplifiers.

From the beginning, distortion was something thought to be good to eliminate, as in sufficient quantity, it is plainly audible and represents the cumulative departure from a straight line “perfect” function of a wire with voltage gain..
Through the evolution of tube amplifiers there was only primitive test equipment but many many keen ears.
They gradually found ways of making more power per pound /per dollar, more power with less distortion and all the while, no one could be fooled by marketing because mostly people listened and heard real improvements as things went on.
Early on in that process, it was also found that transformers are audibly colored at any signal level, switching to Class A, P/P allowed the output transformer to be significantly better in performance for the same cost / weight and the largest distortion component (the 2nd) to be largely self canceled. No one argued the older SET’s sounded better than PP back then.
The last time I looked at the state of “modern” SET amplifiers, it seemed like they often used a transformer at each stage, choke loading (adding iron nonlinearity) in addition to running DC through the transformer. Nostalgia I understand, the reasoning now I don’t so much.

How could that be better?

To your ears, a ragged but drooping hf response may actually sound bright, a distorted subwoofer played alone sounds much more like a kick drum than a low distortion one. My point, what it “sounds like” to your ears, might not be “what it is” acoustically, your ears can be fooled. Look up maxx bass (or something close) it (by use of harmonics) it is even suppose to make your hear low bass when there isn’t any coming from your speaker.
If one can clearly see / measure / hear non linearity in several stages of transformers alone (leaving out all the other electronics), with a simple sine wave, how could this be considered more musical?
Because to your ears it sounds “like” something musical and so, because it sounds better but measures worse, the measurements are “wrong”. No, if its audible with a sine wave, you are adding content NOT in the original signal, if audible with music it may “sound nice” but obviously adding to the sound in not in the spirit of faithful reproduction.
That approach to tube amp design is based on “ah listen to the nice colors”…. but you can’t turn them off when you choose.

Tom




This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  VH Audio  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.