Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#201
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Powell" wrote in message
... "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote There are areas where vacuum tubes are still at the top. High power radio/tv transmitters, CRTs and microwave ovens come to mind. Audio amps isn't one of them. Really, how so? Please site empirical examples of pre/power tube amps which fail to meet consumer needs? I never once used the word fail. So why say, "Audio amps isn't one of them"? Because audio amps are not devices where tubes are the pinnacle of technology. I could dig a swimming pool with a tea spoon. Although there are better tools for the task I can't really say the spoon "failed". Maybe you need Arny's help with a bigger shovel. Whatever... Consumer needs are vast and tube amps will likely always have a home. Obviously some people like the way a tube amp colors the music. If so why say, "Audio amps isn't one of them"? Because audio amps are not devices where tubes are the pinnacle of technology. The rest of us... You don't speak for anyone here except Arny and yourself... two narrow minded peas in a pod. I only speak for myself. Although, if tube amps were in the mainstream we'd see them at retailers other than the odd high-end shop. One thing I liked about Stereophile was the "approximate number of dealers" figure. It was always fun to see a product with a single digit distribution chain. I'll admit a glowing tube is one of the sexiest pieces of electronics. You're either unsophisticated, just easily amused or financially challenged, which is it? I guess just easily amused. For me however, the audible shortcomings are too much to bear. How would you know, mr. No Experience? Because tube amps are deficient in every technical parameter. How about you stepping up to Arny's Behringer challenge? Maybe you need Arny's help with a bigger shovel. Maybe you need to put your money where your mouth is. Please list makes and models of tube pre/power amps you have personally measured/auditioned in your home setup... last 10 years (manufactured date)? Short of that, in the last 20 years? Why would you believe my experiences when you obviously have your own agenda? Hehehe.. Broke-Ass®. Why does my net worth interest you so much? Stick to the discussion at hand. You are the one making the outlandish and unsupportable claims about tube amps. So why say, "Audio amps isn't one of them"? Because audio amps are not devices where tubes are the pinnacle of technology. It is up to YOU to prove the rest of the professional world wrong. Good luck with that. Hehehe... WHO has sited YOU as a "professional?" I don't see any attributes of professionalism or empirical experiences in your bandwidth, just like Arny. Did I say I was an audio professional? Although, I may be I wasn't using that as a basis for my logic. One can simply make the following observations about the professional audio world. No mainstream amplifier company uses tubes No mainstream electronics company makes tubes No tube discussion in design related electronic magazines No tube discussion in IEEE journals or conferences No tube amp discussion in peer reviewed audio journals No tube amp meets or exceeds a generic SS amp in any technical measure. Further, search the archives of the US Patent and Trade Office. No new patents issued for audio tube amplifier technology. However, there are dozens of new patents for reproducing "tube sound" with solid state devices. These patents have exquisite detail about the deficiencies, colorations and distortions of tube devices. Properly designed solid state amplifiers do not add anything audible except gain and must be degraded to sound like tube amps. Tube distortion obviously can be used to artistic merit such as overdriven guitar amplifiers. For final amplification I prefer not to color the artists work further by using tubes. How about YOU giving a tube amp example that technically meets or surpasses any reasonably modern SS amp. I'll even throw out power output and cost (within reason) to give you a head start. What would you know about "modern SS amp" that didn't come from a Musician's Friend catalog? I've designed 6 or 7 amplifiers for embedded applications with total unit sales slightly under 3 million. That's probably more than all the "high-end" tube amps sold since tube went out of vogue. In fact, over 3x the number of Stereophile magazines sold in the last 10 years (to harp on another thread). I've never seen a Musician's Friend catalog... Please list makes and models of SS power amps you have personally measured/auditioned in your home setup and test methodology used... last 10 years (manufactured date)... , if any ? First, you want to know which tube amps I own. Then, you want to know which SS amps I own. Why does my collection matter to you? Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. That's why you keep misdirecting the thread. |
#202
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
|
#203
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Rusty Boudreaux" wrote snip quacking Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier POWER OUTPUT: 280 watts POWER BANDWIDTH: (-3dB points) 12Hz to 100kHz. FREQUENCY RESPONSE: (-3dB points at 1 watt) 0.5Hz to 160 kHz. OUTPUT TAPS: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ohms. OVERALL NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: 10dB. HUM & NOISE: Less than 0.2mV RMS 110dB below rated output. POWER SUPPLY ENERGY STORAGE: Approximately 448 joules. Please site three SS manufactures and specific model numbers as examples with comparable specifications. Perhaps you can start with Arny’s picks “Good brands to look at include QSC, Hafler, and Crown.” |
#204
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
In article ,
dave weil wrote: Sterwart: Maybe you need to stop ducking and diving, and answer the question. Thank you Arnold. I thought Rusty had done an accidental double-posting. Stephen |
#205
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 09:34:24 -0500, "Powell"
wrote: "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote snip quacking Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier Somehow, one just knew that an ARC Reference amp would pop out of the woodwork at this point! :-) And do you know the most distinctive thing about them? They sound just like a good SS amp...................... POWER OUTPUT: 280 watts POWER BANDWIDTH: (-3dB points) 12Hz to 100kHz. FREQUENCY RESPONSE: (-3dB points at 1 watt) 0.5Hz to 160 kHz. OUTPUT TAPS: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ohms. OVERALL NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: 10dB. HUM & NOISE: Less than 0.2mV RMS 110dB below rated output. POWER SUPPLY ENERGY STORAGE: Approximately 448 joules. That's nothing like an adequate specification list, while the inclusion of power supply storage capacity, output taps and negative feedback figures are utter irrelevancies. Where are the *distortion* figures, Powell? Please site three SS manufactures and specific model numbers as examples with comparable specifications. Perhaps you can start with Arny’s picks “Good brands to look at include QSC, Hafler, and Crown.” We could certainly look at the Bryston 4B SST, the Rotel RB-991, and the Adcom GFA 5802. One should of course immediately note that the admittedly reasonably powerful (for a tube amp) ARC still puts out the same 280 watts into a 2 ohm load, unlike the SS amps............. In fact, the old '60 watt' Audiolab 8000S integrated amp puts out as much power into a 2 ohm load! And note that while the SS amps quoted above easily match or exceed the specs of the ARC, they are *vastly* cheaper to buy and to maintain. -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#206
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
|
#207
|
|||
|
|||
When did home theater take over?
"Powell" wrote in message
"Rusty Boudreaux" wrote There are areas where vacuum tubes are still at the top. High power radio/tv transmitters, CRTs and microwave ovens come to mind. Audio amps isn't one of them. Really, how so? Please site empirical examples of pre/power tube amps which fail to meet consumer needs? My listening room. Please list makes and models of tube pre/power amps you have personally measured/auditioned in your home setup... last 10 years (manufactured date)? Short of that, in the last 20 years? Red herring. The solid state revolution in audio was over, 20 years ago. |
#208
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Powell" wrote in message
"Rusty Boudreaux" wrote snip quacking Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier POWER OUTPUT: 280 watts POWER BANDWIDTH: (-3dB points) 12Hz to 100kHz. FREQUENCY RESPONSE: (-3dB points at 1 watt) 0.5Hz to 160 kHz. OUTPUT TAPS: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ohms. OVERALL NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: 10dB. HUM & NOISE: Less than 0.2mV RMS 110dB below rated output. POWER SUPPLY ENERGY STORAGE: Approximately 448 joules. Please site three SS manufactures and specific model numbers as examples with comparable specifications. It's a bogus spec sheet. Since very few solid state amps don't have output taps, output taps are an irrelevant standard. Ditto for power supply energy storage, and negative feedback. The high frequency limits specified are sonically irrelevant. Perhaps you can start with Arny's picks "Good brands to look at include QSC, Hafler, and Crown." Here's what matters, audibly: (1) power output (2) response in the range of 10 Hz to 20 KHz. (3) noise at levels that can actually be heard* (4) nonlinear distortion at levels that can actually be heard, say 0.1% or more. * really low output noise voltage only matters with highly sensitive speakers, and highly sensitive speakers don't need a lot of power. |
#209
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Powell" wrote in message
... Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier POWER OUTPUT: 280 watts POWER BANDWIDTH: (-3dB points) 12Hz to 100kHz. FREQUENCY RESPONSE: (-3dB points at 1 watt) 0.5Hz to 160 kHz. OUTPUT TAPS: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ohms. OVERALL NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: 10dB. HUM & NOISE: Less than 0.2mV RMS 110dB below rated output. POWER SUPPLY ENERGY STORAGE: Approximately 448 joules. Please site three SS manufactures and specific model numbers as examples with comparable specifications. Perhaps you can start with Arny's picks "Good brands to look at include QSC, Hafler, and Crown." You neglected to add some pertinent specs for that amp. Just to remind everyone: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier (TUBE) Distortion 1% over 20Hz to 20kHz. 0.05% at 1W DF ~ 11 And just for fun efficiency: 31% Since you suggested QSC, Hafler and Crown: QSC SRA 1222 (class AB) 1200W bridge mono 4 ohms 20Hz-20kHz ±0.2dB 8Hz to 50kHz +0/-3dB 0.01% THD typ, 0.03% 20-20kHz DF 500 QSC DCA2422 (Class H switching just for fun) 1200W bridge mono 4 ohms 10Hz-10kHz ±0.1dB 8Hz to 50kHz +0/-3dB 0.01% THD typ, 0.03% 20-20kHz DF 500 efficiency 79% Hafler 9505 750W bridge mono 0.15Hz to 300kHz +0/-3dB 0.2% THD 20-20kHz DF 1000 efficiency 89% Crown SRII 1115W bridge mono 4 ohms 20Hz to 20kHz ±0.1dB 4Hz to 75kHz +0/-3dB 0.005% THD typ, 0.1% 20-20kHz DF 20,000 efficiency 74% Over the audio band all handly toast this reference tube amp while consuming 2-3 times less power. |
#210
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
Nothing but silence since listing four "better than tube"
solid-state amplifiers from the suggested three "lousy" companies. So let's try a comparison with a cheap multichannel solid state amp. _______________________________________ Left Column: Outlaw Audio 770 (solid state) 7 channels Right Column: Audio Research REF300MKII (tube) Reference Monoblock ________________________________________ Output power, continous, all channels 7x300W 1x280W Power Bandwidth (+0dB, -3dB) 5Hz to 100kHz 12Hz to 100kHz Total Harmonic Distortion typical 0.005% 0.05% 20-20k 0.050% 1.00% Signal to Noise 119dB 110dB Damping Factor 850 ~11 Power efficiency at rated output 78% 31% Weight (per channel) 13 lbs 132 lbs Size efficiency (cubic inches per channel) 340 4700 Cost per channel $260 $15,000 ________________________________________ There you have it. The reference tube amp fails to equal the SS amp on any given parameter. Further, the reference tube amp is trounced by the cheap SS amp by a wide margin on most parameters. |
#211
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Rusty Boudreaux" wrote in message
Nothing but silence since listing four "better than tube" solid-state amplifiers from the suggested three "lousy" companies. So let's try a comparison with a cheap multichannel solid state amp. _______________________________________ Left Column: Outlaw Audio 770 (solid state) 7 channels Right Column: Audio Research REF300MKII (tube) Reference Monoblock ________________________________________ Output power, continous, all channels 7x300W 1x280W Power Bandwidth (+0dB, -3dB) 5Hz to 100kHz 12Hz to 100kHz Total Harmonic Distortion typical 0.005% 0.05% 20-20k 0.050% 1.00% Signal to Noise 119dB 110dB Damping Factor 850 ~11 Power efficiency at rated output 78% 31% Weight (per channel) 13 lbs 132 lbs Size efficiency (cubic inches per channel) 340 4700 Cost per channel $260 $15,000 ________________________________________ There you have it. The reference tube amp fails to equal the SS amp on any given parameter. Further, the reference tube amp is trounced by the cheap SS amp by a wide margin on most parameters. Did you check out the Behringer I posted a URL for a few days ago? Maybe twice the power per channel for about 2/3 the price per channel, as I recall. |
#212
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Rusty Boudreaux" wrote Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier POWER OUTPUT: 280 watts POWER BANDWIDTH: (-3dB points) 12Hz to 100kHz. FREQUENCY RESPONSE: (-3dB points at 1 watt) 0.5Hz to 160 kHz. OUTPUT TAPS: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ohms. OVERALL NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: 10dB. HUM & NOISE: Less than 0.2mV RMS 110dB below rated output. POWER SUPPLY ENERGY STORAGE: Approximately 448 joules. Please site three SS manufactures and specific model numbers as examples with comparable specifications. Perhaps you can start with Arny's picks "Good brands to look at include QSC, Hafler, and Crown." Since you suggested QSC, Hafler and Crown: QSC SRA 1222 (class AB) Won't drive 1 ohm loads... ARC will. QSC DCA2422 (Class H switching just for fun) 1200W bridge mono 4 ohms Arny wrote "There's at least a loose relationship between RMS power ratings and ability to drive speakers to useful volume levels." Wrong watts rating comparison (425 watts)... thanks for proving my point. Hafler 9505 750W bridge mono Sorry, won't drive 1 or 2 ohm loads... ARC will. Crown SRII 1115W bridge mono 4 ohms Arny wrote "There's at least a loose relationship between RMS power ratings and ability to drive speakers to useful volume levels." Wrong watts rating comparison (360 watts)... thanks for proving my point. Over the audio band all handly toast this reference tube amp while consuming 2-3 times less power. Not relevant to your supposition... "There are areas where vacuum tubes are still at the top. High power radio/tv transmitters, CRTs and microwave ovens come to mind. Audio amps isn't one of them." You were unable to show by an apple to apple comparison (watts) to support your thesis. But like Arny you attempted to twisted your findings in an attempt to coverup the embarrassment, mr. Egg-on-Face. |
#213
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Arny Krueger" wrote "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote snip quacking Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier POWER OUTPUT: 280 watts POWER BANDWIDTH: (-3dB points) 12Hz to 100kHz. FREQUENCY RESPONSE: (-3dB points at 1 watt) 0.5Hz to 160 kHz. OUTPUT TAPS: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ohms. OVERALL NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: 10dB. HUM & NOISE: Less than 0.2mV RMS 110dB below rated output. POWER SUPPLY ENERGY STORAGE: Approximately 448 joules. Please site three SS manufactures and specific model numbers as examples with comparable specifications. It's a bogus spec sheet. Please do your homework. Perhaps you can start with Arny's picks "Good brands to look at include QSC, Hafler, and Crown." Here's what matters, audibly: How would you know? Please note that the Stereophile’s Buyers Guide lists 119 powers amps manufactures. Your three best buys are not named among them. The same can be said for the Home Theater Guide which lists 93 power amp manufactures. |
#214
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote snip quacking Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier Somehow, one just knew that an ARC Reference amp would pop out of the woodwork at this point! :-) When tube quality counts except no substitutes . |
#215
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Powell" wrote in message
"Arny Krueger" wrote "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote snip quacking Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier POWER OUTPUT: 280 watts POWER BANDWIDTH: (-3dB points) 12Hz to 100kHz. FREQUENCY RESPONSE: (-3dB points at 1 watt) 0.5Hz to 160 kHz. OUTPUT TAPS: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ohms. OVERALL NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: 10dB. HUM & NOISE: Less than 0.2mV RMS 110dB below rated output. POWER SUPPLY ENERGY STORAGE: Approximately 448 joules. Please site three SS manufactures and specific model numbers as examples with comparable specifications. It's a bogus spec sheet. Please do your homework. Perhaps you can start with Arny's picks "Good brands to look at include QSC, Hafler, and Crown." Here's what matters, audibly: How would you know? Empirical knowledge. Or, for people with a more of a day-to-day attitude, practical experience. Please note that the Stereophile's Buyers Guide lists 119 powers amps manufactures. Your three best buys are not named among them. The same can be said for the Home Theater Guide which lists 93 power amp manufactures. Yup, the sun rises and sets on Stereophile's recommendations. If some Stereophile publication doesn't list it, it can't possibly sound any good. I thought you want us to believe you're well-read, Powell. |
#216
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Powell" wrote in message
"Rusty Boudreaux" wrote Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier POWER OUTPUT: 280 watts POWER BANDWIDTH: (-3dB points) 12Hz to 100kHz. FREQUENCY RESPONSE: (-3dB points at 1 watt) 0.5Hz to 160 kHz. OUTPUT TAPS: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ohms. OVERALL NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: 10dB. HUM & NOISE: Less than 0.2mV RMS 110dB below rated output. POWER SUPPLY ENERGY STORAGE: Approximately 448 joules. Please site three SS manufactures and specific model numbers as examples with comparable specifications. Perhaps you can start with Arny's picks "Good brands to look at include QSC, Hafler, and Crown." Since you suggested QSC, Hafler and Crown: QSC SRA 1222 (class AB) Won't drive 1 ohm loads... ARC will. If it's a typical QSC it will drive 1 ohm loads, just not as efficiently and coolly as it will drive 2 ohm loads. QSC uses almost pure current limiting, which means that they clip pretty cleanly into very low impedance loads, much like a lower-powered amp. I have a QSC amp on my bench that I use from time-to-time to drive modest lengths of heavy speaker cable with the other end shorted, for testing purposes. It doesn't put its full rated 4 ohm power into the near-short, but it remains clean and happy when used within reason, and even quite a ways outside of reason. That said, this beefy QSC will probably put out at least 300 wpc into a 1 ohm load, noising out the ARC. QSC DCA2422 (Class H switching just for fun) 1200W bridge mono 4 ohms Arny wrote "There's at least a loose relationship between RMS power ratings and ability to drive speakers to useful volume levels." Wrong watts rating comparison (425 watts)... thanks for proving my point. Powell must be free-associating again. The amp is disqualified because it puts out too much power???? Hafler 9505 750W bridge mono Sorry, won't drive 1 or 2 ohm loads... ARC will. Since its been a while since I last checked out a Hafler, I can't speak as directly. However Haflers are well-known for tolerating low-impedance and ridiculous loads, like you-know-who's Acoustats. Powell is believing everything he reads on the spec sheets and nothing else. No relevant empirical experience with them, I guess. Crown SRII 1115W bridge mono 4 ohms Arny wrote "There's at least a loose relationship between RMS power ratings and ability to drive speakers to useful volume levels." Wrong watts rating comparison (360 watts)... thanks for proving my point. Powell must be free-associating again. The amp is disqualified because it puts out too much power???? Over the audio band all handily toast this reference tube amp while consuming 2-3 times less power. Not relevant to your supposition... "There are areas where vacuum tubes are still at the top. High power radio/tv transmitters, CRTs and microwave ovens come to mind. Audio amps isn't one of them." Powell's complaints are one, more ludicrous than the next. You were unable to show by an apple to apple comparison (watts) to support your thesis. Sue us because solid state power is clean, plentiful, and has excellent price/performance. But like Arny you attempted to twisted your findings in an attempt to coverup the embarrassment, mr. Egg-on-Face. Notice how Powell dismisses what he doesn't understand and/or has no empirical experience with! |
#217
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Arny Krueger" wrote snip quacking Big yawn. |
#218
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Powell" wrote in message "Arny Krueger" wrote "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote snip quacking Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier POWER OUTPUT: 280 watts POWER BANDWIDTH: (-3dB points) 12Hz to 100kHz. FREQUENCY RESPONSE: (-3dB points at 1 watt) 0.5Hz to 160 kHz. OUTPUT TAPS: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ohms. OVERALL NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: 10dB. HUM & NOISE: Less than 0.2mV RMS 110dB below rated output. POWER SUPPLY ENERGY STORAGE: Approximately 448 joules. Please site three SS manufactures and specific model numbers as examples with comparable specifications. It's a bogus spec sheet. Please do your homework. Perhaps you can start with Arny's picks "Good brands to look at include QSC, Hafler, and Crown." Here's what matters, audibly: How would you know? Empirical knowledge. Or, for people with a more of a day-to-day attitude, practical experience. I guess that counts you out then . Please note that the Stereophile's Buyers Guide lists 119 powers amps manufactures. Your three best buys are not named among them. The same can be said for the Home Theater Guide which lists 93 power amp manufactures. Yup, the sun rises and sets on Stereophile's recommendations. If some Stereophile publication doesn't list it, it can't possibly sound any good. I thought you want us to believe you're well-read, Powell. Hehehe... it’s not a list of recommended products, it's a index of product manufactures. |
#219
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
Nobody buys high fidelity tube amplifiers for their economy or efficiency or
superior technical specs; they buy them because they feel they sound better, e.g.. more realistic. So what's the point of all this? "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote in message ... Nothing but silence since listing four "better than tube" solid-state amplifiers from the suggested three "lousy" companies. So let's try a comparison with a cheap multichannel solid state amp. _______________________________________ Left Column: Outlaw Audio 770 (solid state) 7 channels Right Column: Audio Research REF300MKII (tube) Reference Monoblock ________________________________________ Output power, continous, all channels 7x300W 1x280W Power Bandwidth (+0dB, -3dB) 5Hz to 100kHz 12Hz to 100kHz Total Harmonic Distortion typical 0.005% 0.05% 20-20k 0.050% 1.00% Signal to Noise 119dB 110dB Damping Factor 850 ~11 Power efficiency at rated output 78% 31% Weight (per channel) 13 lbs 132 lbs Size efficiency (cubic inches per channel) 340 4700 Cost per channel $260 $15,000 ________________________________________ There you have it. The reference tube amp fails to equal the SS amp on any given parameter. Further, the reference tube amp is trounced by the cheap SS amp by a wide margin on most parameters. |
#220
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
Harry Lavo Shelleyed: Nothing but silence since listing four "better than tube" solid-state amplifiers from the suggested three "lousy" companies. Nobody buys high fidelity tube amplifiers for their economy or efficiency or superior technical specs; they buy them because they feel they sound better, e.g.. more realistic. So what's the point of all this? Rusty is a 'borg. He can't help himself. |
#221
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
news:ijgKb.64680$I07.280505@attbi_s53 Nobody buys high fidelity tube amplifiers for their economy or efficiency or superior technical specs; they buy them because they feel they sound better, e.g.. more realistic. There's no accounting for taste or the lack of it, eh? So what's the point of all this? Please read message |
#222
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:37:21 -0500, George M. Middius
wrote: Harry Lavo Shelleyed: Nothing but silence since listing four "better than tube" solid-state amplifiers from the suggested three "lousy" companies. Nobody buys high fidelity tube amplifiers for their economy or efficiency or superior technical specs; they buy them because they feel they sound better, e.g.. more realistic. So what's the point of all this? Rusty is a 'borg. He can't help himself. Maybe a little WD-40 would help. |
#223
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
There's no accounting for taste or the lack of it, eh? You prove that every time you talk about audio or music. Why Arny, with such unsophisticted taste, would want to argue taste would be hard to understand if we didn't already know what a rude idiotic looser he is. |
#224
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
Harry Lavo wrote:
Nobody buys high fidelity tube amplifiers for their economy or efficiency or superior technical specs; they buy them because they feel they sound better, e.g.. more realistic. So what's the point of all this? "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote in message ... Nothing but silence since listing four "better than tube" solid-state amplifiers from the suggested three "lousy" companies. So let's try a comparison with a cheap multichannel solid state amp. _______________________________________ Left Column: Outlaw Audio 770 (solid state) 7 channels Right Column: Audio Research REF300MKII (tube) Reference Monoblock ________________________________________ Output power, continous, all channels 7x300W 1x280W Power Bandwidth (+0dB, -3dB) 5Hz to 100kHz 12Hz to 100kHz Total Harmonic Distortion typical 0.005% 0.05% 20-20k 0.050% 1.00% Signal to Noise 119dB 110dB Damping Factor 850 ~11 Power efficiency at rated output 78% 31% Weight (per channel) 13 lbs 132 lbs Size efficiency (cubic inches per channel) 340 4700 Cost per channel $260 $15,000 ________________________________________ There you have it. The reference tube amp fails to equal the SS amp on any given parameter. Further, the reference tube amp is trounced by the cheap SS amp by a wide margin on most parameters. Well stated. For those whose buying decisions are going to be based solely on price, largest affordable output power, or specifications, per se, then comparing the 2 types of amplifiers is a wasted intellectual exercise. Those folks can use thier criteria and satisfy themselves. For those that, as you say, find a given tube amplifier, FOR WHATEVER REASON, to be more personallly satisfying within the context of their particular set of components, to increase their listening pleasure, that is all that is relevant and/or necessary. Bruce J. Richman |
#225
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:37:21 -0500, George M. Middius wrote: Harry Lavo Shelleyed: Nothing but silence since listing four "better than tube" solid-state amplifiers from the suggested three "lousy" companies. Nobody buys high fidelity tube amplifiers for their economy or efficiency or superior technical specs; they buy them because they feel they sound better, e.g.. more realistic. So what's the point of all this? Rusty is a 'borg. He can't help himself. Maybe a little WD-40 would help. LOL ! WD-40 isn't George prefered lubricant... :-) |
#226
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Rusty Boudreaux" said:
There you have it. The reference tube amp fails to equal the SS amp on any given parameter. Further, the reference tube amp is trounced by the cheap SS amp by a wide margin on most parameters. Yeah, but it has a thicker front panel! So there! -- Sander deWaal Vacuum Audio Consultancy |
#227
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:20:32 +0100, Lionel
wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:37:21 -0500, George M. Middius wrote: Harry Lavo Shelleyed: Nothing but silence since listing four "better than tube" solid-state amplifiers from the suggested three "lousy" companies. Nobody buys high fidelity tube amplifiers for their economy or efficiency or superior technical specs; they buy them because they feel they sound better, e.g.. more realistic. So what's the point of all this? Rusty is a 'borg. He can't help himself. Maybe a little WD-40 would help. LOL ! WD-40 isn't George prefered lubricant... :-) Yep, definitely threatened by homosexuality. |
#228
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
dave weil a écrit :
On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 20:20:32 +0100, Lionel wrote: dave weil a écrit : On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 11:37:21 -0500, George M. Middius wrote: Harry Lavo Shelleyed: Nothing but silence since listing four "better than tube" solid-state amplifiers from the suggested three "lousy" companies. Nobody buys high fidelity tube amplifiers for their economy or efficiency or superior technical specs; they buy them because they feel they sound better, e.g.. more realistic. So what's the point of all this? Rusty is a 'borg. He can't help himself. Maybe a little WD-40 would help. LOL ! WD-40 isn't George prefered lubricant... :-) Yep, definitely threatened by homosexuality. When I see you so *serious* this remember me McKelvy sentence : "Weil is a nitpicking anal retentive waiter" ;-) |
#229
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 09:20:01 -0500, "Powell"
wrote: "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier POWER OUTPUT: 280 watts POWER BANDWIDTH: (-3dB points) 12Hz to 100kHz. FREQUENCY RESPONSE: (-3dB points at 1 watt) 0.5Hz to 160 kHz. OUTPUT TAPS: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 ohms. OVERALL NEGATIVE FEEDBACK: 10dB. HUM & NOISE: Less than 0.2mV RMS 110dB below rated output. POWER SUPPLY ENERGY STORAGE: Approximately 448 joules. Please site three SS manufactures and specific model numbers as examples with comparable specifications. Perhaps you can start with Arny's picks "Good brands to look at include QSC, Hafler, and Crown." Since you suggested QSC, Hafler and Crown: QSC SRA 1222 (class AB) Won't drive 1 ohm loads... ARC will. So what? Do you have 1 ohm speakers? If you did (Apogee Scintillas, for instance), you wouldn't use the ARC, since it's putting out the equivalent voltage of a 35 watt SS amp! On the 1 ohm tap, the ARC will put out a 'mighty' 280 watts, just the same as it does into 8 ohms. My '50 watt' Krell KSA-50 mkII will put out 400 watts into 1 ohm. If you're dumb enough to get into this kind of debate, it helps if you actually understand how amps work..................... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#230
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
On Mon, 5 Jan 2004 09:22:13 -0500, "Powell"
wrote: "Stewart Pinkerton" wrote "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote snip quacking Can't you cite just ONE example of a tube amp outperforming a SS amp? No, you can't. SPECIFICATIONS: ARC REFERENCE 300MKII Power Amplifier Somehow, one just knew that an ARC Reference amp would pop out of the woodwork at this point! :-) When tube quality counts except no substitutes . When quality counts, accept no tubes............... -- Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
#231
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ... "Rusty Boudreaux" wrote in message Nothing but silence since listing four "better than tube" solid-state amplifiers from the suggested three "lousy" companies. So let's try a comparison with a cheap multichannel solid state amp. _______________________________________ Left Column: Outlaw Audio 770 (solid state) 7 channels Right Column: Audio Research REF300MKII (tube) Reference Monoblock ________________________________________ Output power, continous, all channels 7x300W 1x280W Power Bandwidth (+0dB, -3dB) 5Hz to 100kHz 12Hz to 100kHz Total Harmonic Distortion typical 0.005% 0.05% 20-20k 0.050% 1.00% Signal to Noise 119dB 110dB Damping Factor 850 ~11 Power efficiency at rated output 78% 31% Weight (per channel) 13 lbs 132 lbs Size efficiency (cubic inches per channel) 340 4700 Cost per channel $260 $15,000 ________________________________________ There you have it. The reference tube amp fails to equal the SS amp on any given parameter. Further, the reference tube amp is trounced by the cheap SS amp by a wide margin on most parameters. Did you check out the Behringer I posted a URL for a few days ago? Maybe twice the power per channel for about 2/3 the price per channel, as I recall. |
#232
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
In article ,
"Rusty Boudreaux" scribbles: I only speak for myself. Although, if tube amps were in the mainstream we'd see them at retailers other than the odd high-end shop. If good amplifiers, period, were in the mainstream, we'd see more solid state amps like Crowns and McIntoshes, as well as some nice tube amps, sold by more retailers. Unfortunately, cheap junk is what popular with the so-called mainstream. BTW, how do you explain there being enough demand for the reproduction MC2000, 50th anniversary, amp for McIntosh to have designed and introduced the MC2102? Yes, consumer demand resulted in this. No mainstream amplifier company uses tubes McIntosh uses tubes. No tube discussion in design related electronic magazines That depends upon which magazines one reads. No tube discussion in IEEE journals or conferences http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/select/0898/tube.html IEEE Spectrum Cover story: "The Cool Sound of Tubes: One of the last remaining tube domains is in music applications, but there the devices flourish and even innovate", by Eric Barbour, August, 1998 -- Copyright (C) 2003 R. D. Davis The difference between humans & other animals: All Rights Reserved an unnatural belief that we're above Nature & 410-744-4900 her other creatures, using dogma to justify such http://www.rddavis.org beliefs and to justify much human cruelty. |
#233
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Stewart Pinkerton" wrote My '50 watt' Krell KSA-50 mkII... Somehow, one just knew that a Krell KSA-50 mkII would pop out of the woodwork at this point! Arny wrote: "There's no accounting for taste or the lack of it, eh?" If you're dumb enough to get into this kind of debate, it helps if you actually understand how amps work..................... Quack, quack, quack... |
#234
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Powell" wrote in message ... Quack, quack, quack... If it looks like a duck, talks like a duck, and swims like a duck, it's Powell! ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#235
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Powell" wrote in message
... Won't drive 1 ohm loads... ARC will. Wrong. All of the listed SS amps are guaranteed stable into near short circuit (around 100 milliohms). Efficiency and power output will decrease when driving 1 ohm loads but they will still put out more power at lower distortion than the ARC. Wrong watts rating comparison (425 watts)... thanks for proving my point. Wrong watts rating comparison (360 watts)... thanks for proving my point. You were unable to show by an apple to apple comparison (watts) to support your thesis. Gee, is that the best argument you've got? Comparing a $30,000 tube amp to a $500 solid state amp is invalid because the tube amp is too wimpy? Ridiculous! My thesis was tube amps are not the pinnacle of technology in audio amplification. I think that stands up pretty well. 360W is about 0.8dB higher gain and 425W is about 1.5dB higher gain than 300W. Most people would consider this an irrelevant difference in power anyway. However, if you really want to dig a deeper hole we could list less powerful amplifiers from the same companies and still toast the ARC in performance. But I guess you're right it's not a valid comparison since the SS has more power, better frequency response, better power bandwidth, lower distortion, higher DF, higher efficiency, smaller size, less weight and costs 60 times less. But like Arny you attempted to twisted your findings in an attempt to coverup the embarrassment, mr. Um, I'm not embarrassed. Shouldn't you be? Your suggested $30,000 "reference" tube amp was toasted by several cheap SS amps in every parameter. We didn't even stack the deck (like you did) with high-end SS amps. Geesh, even a "lowly" PWM switching amplifier spanked that lousy tube amp. Just to reiterate: "There are areas where vacuum tubes are still at the top. High power radio/tv transmitters, CRTs and microwave ovens come to mind. Audio amps isn't one of them." |
#236
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
... Did you check out the Behringer I posted a URL for a few days ago? Maybe twice the power per channel for about 2/3 the price per channel, as I recall. Although it seems promising I didn't take time to check out the Behringer. Since Powell challenged with QSC, Hafler, and Crown I thought those would be good places to start. |
#237
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
news:ijgKb.64680$I07.280505@attbi_s53... Nobody buys high fidelity tube amplifiers for their economy or efficiency or superior technical specs; they buy them because they feel they sound better, e.g.. more realistic. I never said people couldn't design, buy or enjoy tube amps. So what's the point of all this? Powell started this thread to ridicule me. He didn't like it when I said (and have now shown) tube amps are not the technical leaders in the field of audio amplifiers. |
#238
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"Sander deWaal" wrote in message
news "Rusty Boudreaux" said: There you have it. The reference tube amp fails to equal the SS amp on any given parameter. Further, the reference tube amp is trounced by the cheap SS amp by a wide margin on most parameters. Yeah, but it has a thicker front panel! So there! Hey, if you're a chubby-panel-chaser go for it! |
#239
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
"R. D. Davis" wrote in message
... In article , "Rusty Boudreaux" scribbles: I only speak for myself. Although, if tube amps were in the mainstream we'd see them at retailers other than the odd high-end shop. If good amplifiers, period, were in the mainstream, we'd see more solid state amps like Crowns and McIntoshes, as well as some nice tube amps, sold by more retailers. Unfortunately, cheap junk is what popular with the so-called mainstream. I agree there's a lot of junk out there. I doubt amplifier seperates will ever be in the true mainstream. The performance and value of amplified receivers is too compelling for most consumers. BTW, how do you explain there being enough demand for the reproduction MC2000, 50th anniversary, amp for McIntosh to have designed and introduced the MC2102? Yes, consumer demand resulted in this. I have no insight into McIntosh's product plans. Do you know what the demand actually was for this amp? Product development teams have to work on something. No mainstream amplifier company uses tubes McIntosh uses tubes. According to Gartner/Dataquest McIntosh's share of the audio amplifier market is less than 1%. I wouldn't call them mainstream. No tube discussion in design related electronic magazines That depends upon which magazines one reads. Design releated electronic magazines. No tube discussion in IEEE journals or conferences http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/select/0898/tube.html IEEE Spectrum Cover story: "The Cool Sound of Tubes: One of the last remaining tube domains is in music applications, but there the devices flourish and even innovate", by Eric Barbour, August, 1998 Spectrum is a technology information magazine, not a journal or conference. The article is a writers' essay not a scientific paper. The article does not claim tubes are technically superior to solid state...just that some people enjoy the colorations of tubes (like guitar amps). Note the title's emphasis on music, not audio. |
#240
|
|||
|
|||
Rusty Boudreaux quacking on tube amps
R. D. Davis wrote:
In article , "Rusty Boudreaux" scribbles: I only speak for myself. Although, if tube amps were in the mainstream we'd see them at retailers other than the odd high-end shop. If good amplifiers, period, were in the mainstream, we'd see more solid state amps like Crowns and McIntoshes, as well as some nice tube amps, sold by more retailers. Unfortunately, cheap junk is what popular with the so-called mainstream. BTW, how do you explain there being enough demand for the reproduction MC2000, 50th anniversary, amp for McIntosh to have designed and introduced the MC2102? Yes, consumer demand resulted in this. No mainstream amplifier company uses tubes McIntosh uses tubes. As does Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, VTL, Cary, Jolida and some other companies whose products have been purchased by audio hobbyists for a number of years. All ot these companies are quite well established and have been in business for qutie some time. No tube discussion in design related electronic magazines That depends upon which magazines one reads. No tube discussion in IEEE journals or conferences http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/select/0898/tube.html IEEE Spectrum Cover story: "The Cool Sound of Tubes: One of the last remaining tube domains is in music applications, but there the devices flourish and even innovate", by Eric Barbour, August, 1998 -- Copyright (C) 2003 R. D. Davis The difference between humans & other animals: All Rights Reserved an unnatural belief that we're above Nature & 410-744-4900 her other creatures, using dogma to justify such http://www.rddavis.org beliefs and to justify much human cruelty. Bruce J. Richman |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Book Review: Home Theater For Everyone: A Practical Guide ; Harley, Holman | General | |||
Audio Alchemy DDE v1.1 vs. Home Theater Receivers' Internal DACs | Audio Opinions | |||
Home Theater "Junkyard Wars" | Audio Opinions | |||
Home theater recommandation please | General | |||
Home Theater Recommendation | Audio Opinions |