Tubes not good for rock??

[[email protected]]

I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
said tube amps don't have enough definition. Then someone else said he
only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
amp. What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?

[Eeyore]

wrote:

> I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
> someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
> said tube amps don't have enough definition. Then someone else said he
> only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
> amp. What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
> rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
> using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
> receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?

The reason is very simple.

Intermodulation distortion.

Graham

[Trevor Wilson]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
> someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
> said tube amps don't have enough definition.

**Bull****. There are some crappy tube amps and good tube amps. In just the
same way, there are good SS amps and crappy SS amps. It is just plain loopy
to brand one technology as innappropriate for a specific type of music. A
quality amplifier will just amplify exactly what is presented to it's
inputs, neither adding, nor subtracting anything. A good tube amp is
certainly capable of such performance.

Then someone else said he
> only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
> amp.

**Bull****. See above.

What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
> rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
> using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
> receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?

**It is stupid categorising one type of amplifier as being any better than
another type, for any given type of music. It is a far more sensible idea to
decide which speakers are appropriate for your needs and THEN select the
amplifier which best suits them.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[[email protected]]

Trevor Wilson wrote:

> **It is stupid categorising one type of amplifier as being any better than
> another type, for any given type of music. It is a far more sensible idea to
> decide which speakers are appropriate for your needs and THEN select the
> amplifier which best suits them.

Correct as far as it goes. But the simple reason that "tubes" are not
good for Rock has nothing to do with how good the amps may or may not
be but with the choice of speakers and volume of listening.

If one chooses a set of Pacific Rim many-driver JVC speakers such as
were mentioned here recently and chooses to listen at ear-bleed volumes
a tube amp is not for you. If one chooses a more accurate and
well-designed speaker and chooses to listen at reasonable levels (I did
*NOT* write "quiet" levels), then any well-designed amp, tube or SS
will do the trick.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[GregS]

In article . com>, wrote:
>I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
>someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
>said tube amps don't have enough definition. Then someone else said he
>only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
>amp. What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
>rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
>using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
>receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?
>

Why don't you decide for yourself.
Just listen.

greg

[[email protected]]

GregS wrote:

> Why don't you decide for yourself.
> Just listen.

The simple answer to that would be that perhaps he does not have
multiple amps floating about.

Peter Wieck
Wyncote, PA

[graham]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
> someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
> said tube amps don't have enough definition. Then someone else said he
> only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
> amp. What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
> rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
> using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
> receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?


.... chances are, many of the "mainstream 70's soft rock vinyl records"
you are interested in were recorded using tube amps, either in the
studio or on stage, microphones too .... a Fisher tube receiver with
a good set of efficient speakers should work just fine ...

[Phil S.]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
> someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
> said tube amps don't have enough definition. Then someone else said he
> only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
> amp. What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
> rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
> using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
> receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?
>

Let's not get too confused here.

For *playing* the music, tube amps are essential. The amp is part of the
instrument.

For reproduction of recorded music, most folks don't want to introduce too
much coloration or add distortion. Both tube amps and SS amps can be built
to do a fine job, but without unlimited resources, it is probably more cost
effective to buy SS. Most any $100 amp you can get at your local big box
store will handle good reproduction of rock music, which is inherently noisy
to begin with. Speakers are probably more of an issue in getting it to
sound like what you want, and they should be appropriate for your amp.

I think the real question, when it comes to playing recorded music, is
whether the listener's hearing acuity is able to distinguish any meaningful
difference. I'm going to guess that 99/100 can't tell the difference, even
people with a professional music background. Most of the stuff you can see
on a 'scope -- you can't hear it!

[Eeyore]

"Phil S." wrote:

> For *playing* the music, tube amps are essential. The amp is part of the
> instrument.

An amp is not meant to be an instrument. It's meant to be neutral and recreate
the input signal faithfully at its output.

OTOH if you actually want to add colouration, tube amps are ideal.

Graham

[Eeyore]

"Phil S." wrote:

> I think the real question, when it comes to playing recorded music, is
> whether the listener's hearing acuity is able to distinguish any meaningful
> difference.

Between what and what ?

> I'm going to guess that 99/100 can't tell the difference, even
> people with a professional music background. Most of the stuff you can see
> on a 'scope -- you can't hear it!

A scope alone won't help you much. I imagine you mean an audio analyser ?

Graham

[Jim]

Bret Ludwig wrote:

> graham wrote:
>
> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>
>>>I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
>>>someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
>>>said tube amps don't have enough definition. Then someone else said he
>>>only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
>>>amp. What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
>>>rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
>>>using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
>>>receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?
>>
>>
>>... chances are, many of the "mainstream 70's soft rock vinyl records"
>> you are interested in were recorded using tube amps, either in the
>> studio or on stage, microphones too .... a Fisher tube receiver with
>> a good set of efficient speakers should work just fine ...
>
>
>
> If you want the hard, constant slam of 70s hard rock and metal acts
> and other bass-and-drum driven pop at high level, no efficiency of
> speaker will work with a low powered amp.

Depends on your desired SPL and what you consider "low powered." But
tube amps generally lose out to SS when it comes to damping factor and
bottom end thump.

> Direct radiating surface-a
> lot of it- is essential to getting that hard slam and if that's what
> you really want you need big speakers with big woofers. Not horns.

How 'bout a big woofer in a horn? I have some Klipshorn knock offs that
are very efficient with moderately powered tube amps.

> And
> big amps, tube or solid state, to drive them. Suitable tube amps either
> have multiple pairs of beam tetrodes in the 6550/KT88 class or big
> transmitting tubes, 211s, 813s, 812s or various Eimac confections. Big
> money if you roll your own, even more if you don't. Solid state is
> therefore more the way to go there.

I'd tend to agree. At this time, I still own one tube integrated amp
(HK A500). But when I pulled the MONSTER corner horns in favor of a
smaller home theater array (and two SOLID subs powered by a JBL 6290),
the HK now goes unused. I have a bit of a frankenstein system, because
I liked my Luxman stereo R-117 so much that I tacked on a Vantas digital
dolby processor with front and rear power amps. If I compared the power
of the HK to the current setup, I probably increased it by a factor of
about fifty!

I tend to prefer SS for sound reproduction and tubes for sound
PROduction (electric guitar). ...but I do have a Acrosound amp using a
TO-300 that I've threatened to refurbish for center channel home theater.


>
> However, I don't like harsh bong hit music so I have efficient
> speakers and medium power tube amps which provide good efficiency. For
> soft rock they are very excellent. I wouldn't consider buying ANY old
> receiver unless you are a collector rather than a listener. Get
> yourself a hi-fi rather than a DJ table and either buy an integrated
> amp or a power amp and a pre, or better build them. If you can't
> solder, and don't fancy nbecoming a technician, buy a solid state
> integrated amp from any of several modestly priced choices and enjoy
> the music. You can't afford to pay others to work on old cars or old
> tube amps.
>

[[email protected]]

GregS wrote:
> Why don't you decide for yourself.
> Just listen.
>
> greg

And where would I go to listen to tube amps,
especially old ones?
I'm in Los Angeles county.

[[email protected]]

Bret Ludwig wrote:
> I wouldn't consider buying ANY old
> receiver unless you are a collector rather than a listener.

Why? Many people on the internet have said that the
Fisher 400, 500, and 800 series sound great.
They say they love listening to them. Is it for no reason?

[[email protected]]

Eeyore wrote:
>
> An amp is not meant to be an instrument. It's meant to be neutral and recreate
> the input signal faithfully at its output.
>
> OTOH if you actually want to add colouration, tube amps are ideal.
>
> Graham


Hi RATs!

Sure, kid, sure. Nobody can hear any difference between technically
excellent amps. Or, more important to your net of fish: Nobody can
measure any difference.

Nothing in the Universe is meant to be a musical instrument. We made it
up. Music is not real, we imagine it.

Machines are an useful model for many things. Not everything. Sigh.
Mechanical musicians may have moments, too, but, not until somebody
alive dreamed them up.

Player pianos work well, if they are properly tuned and maintained and
fed good recordings.

Digital synthesis works well, if someone takes the time to teach that
pig to sing ;)

Happy Ears!
Al

[Trevor Wilson]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> GregS wrote:
>> Why don't you decide for yourself.
>> Just listen.
>>
>> greg
>
> And where would I go to listen to tube amps,
> especially old ones?
> I'm in Los Angeles county.

**Before you do that, you need to know the impedance and efficiency
characteristics of your speakers. AFTER you ascertain that information, you
can go amp hunting. You need to listen to any amplifier through your own
speakers. Otherwise, you're just wasting your time.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

[Eeyore]

" wrote:

> Eeyore wrote:
> >
> > An amp is not meant to be an instrument. It's meant to be neutral and recreate
> > the input signal faithfully at its output.
> >
> > OTOH if you actually want to add colouration, tube amps are ideal.
> >
> > Graham
>
> Hi RATs!
>
> Sure, kid, sure. Nobody can hear any difference between technically
> excellent amps. Or, more important to your net of fish: Nobody can
> measure any difference.

Where did I ever say such a thing ?

Graham

[Eeyore]

wrote:

> Bret Ludwig wrote:
> > I wouldn't consider buying ANY old
> > receiver unless you are a collector rather than a listener.
>
> Why? Many people on the internet have said that the
> Fisher 400, 500, and 800 series sound great.
> They say they love listening to them. Is it for no reason?

Because they happen to like that particular sound ?

It's no guarantee you'll find it to your taste.

Graham

[[email protected]]

Eeyore wrote:
> " wrote:
>
> > Eeyore wrote:
> > >
> > > An amp is not meant to be an instrument. It's meant to be neutral and recreate
> > > the input signal faithfully at its output.
>
> Where did I ever say such a thing ?
>
> Graham


Hi Graham,
You didn't. You implied that "neutral" and "faithful" were possible. If
this were true, two neutral and faithful amps would sound the same. Or,
do the words lack some meaning?

I don't mind being a fool in love, but listening to you yahoos speaking
as if everything ever to be known about home music reproduction is past
tense gives me the giggles :)

Just assume that the Audio Precision is smarter than you. The live
performance thing is probably an aberration, eh? What are you, a
Romantic?

There may be something left for our great-grandchildren to accomplish,
even if they are Muslims and not allowed any Music. Their
great-grandchildren won't be, **** just keeps changing, and I would
hate for them to think we knew it all and didn't tell them to keep on
searching ...

If you want to write reports to your employers which clearly state your
designs are as good as humanly possible, fine. If you think I am too
sick to remember live Music, phooey.

Sitting on the toilet whistling "Sunshine of Your Love" while doing the
drum parts with my feet is not Grand Opera. But, it is obvious to me
Music is something which brings me joy, not because I have conquered
it, but, because it conquers all ;)

Tubes not good for Rock? Jesus, morons, Rock'n'roll is not good for
anything. I love it.

Happy Ears!
Al

[Ned Carlson]

Eeyore wrote:

> An amp is not meant to be an instrument.

It is if it's a guitar amp.

> It's meant to be neutral and recreate
> the input signal faithfully at its output.

Then the signal goes through speakers that have
impedance curves, bizaare electrical characteristics
and distortion that would give even SET amp designers
a fit. If only air molecules were so easy to push around
as predictably as electrons are.

Man, you have time to pile up posts on this newsgroup
as well as MTRA? Why didn't you crosspost your chemical
weapons warning to MTRA as well, if it was so important?

--
Ned Carlson
SW side of Chicago, USA
www.tubezone.net

[zack]

i use a marshall 9200 2/ch 100w rms p/ch
great sound.

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
> someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
> said tube amps don't have enough definition. Then someone else said he
> only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
> amp. What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
> rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
> using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
> receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?
>

[Arny Krueger]

"Eeyore"
> wrote
in message
> " wrote:
>
>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>
>>> An amp is not meant to be an instrument. It's meant to
>>> be neutral and recreate the input signal faithfully at
>>> its output.
>>>
>>> OTOH if you actually want to add colouration, tube amps
>>> are ideal.
>>>
>>> Graham
>>
>> Hi RATs!
>>
>> Sure, kid, sure. Nobody can hear any difference between
>> technically excellent amps. Or, more important to your
>> net of fish: Nobody can measure any difference.
>
> Where did I ever say such a thing ?

Nowhere - it was just another one of those silly tubie trolls.

[Arny Krueger]

> wrote in message
ups.com
> Eeyore wrote:
>> " wrote:
>>
>>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>>
>>>> An amp is not meant to be an instrument. It's meant to
>>>> be neutral and recreate the input signal faithfully at
>>>> its output.
>>
>> Where did I ever say such a thing ?
>>

> You didn't. You implied that "neutral" and "faithful"
> were possible.

Given the well-known imprecision of the human ear, its not only possible,
its probable.

> If this were true, two neutral and
> faithful amps would sound the same.

And if you do bias-controlled listening tests, you find that this is true.

> Or, do the words lack some meaning?

Your life obviously lacks experience.

> I don't mind being a fool in love, but listening to you
> yahoos speaking as if everything ever to be known about
> home music reproduction is past tense gives me the
> giggles :)


Again nobody is saying that but you, Mr. Garden.

> Just assume that the Audio Precision is smarter than you.

Just assume you don't know it all!

> The live performance thing is probably an aberration, eh?

It's a really high bar, one that no tubed amplifier can come close to as a
reproduction device.

> What are you, a Romantic?

A realist.

> There may be something left for our great-grandchildren
> to accomplish, even if they are Muslims and not allowed
> any Music. Their great-grandchildren won't be, **** just
> keeps changing, and I would hate for them to think we
> knew it all and didn't tell them to keep on searching ...

> If you want to write reports to your employers which
> clearly state your designs are as good as humanly
> possible, fine. If you think I am too sick to remember
> live Music, phooey.

> Sitting on the toilet whistling "Sunshine of Your Love"
> while doing the drum parts with my feet is not Grand
> Opera. But, it is obvious to me Music is something which
> brings me joy, not because I have conquered it, but,
> because it conquers all ;)
>
> Tubes not good for Rock? Jesus, morons, Rock'n'roll is
> not good for anything. I love it.

Try listening to some live performances.

[Arny Krueger]

"Ned Carlson" > wrote in message
. com
> Eeyore wrote:
>
>> An amp is not meant to be an instrument.
>
> It is if it's a guitar amp.
>
>> It's meant to be neutral and recreate
>> the input signal faithfully at its output.
>
> Then the signal goes through speakers that have
> impedance curves, bizaare electrical characteristics
> and distortion that would give even SET amp designers
> a fit.

Wrong - impedance curves are most deadly to SET amp designers.

> If only air molecules were so easy to push around
> as predictably as electrons are.

Confusion between electronics and acoustics noted.

[PhattyMo]

wrote:
> I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
> someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
> said tube amps don't have enough definition. Then someone else said he
> only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
> amp. What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
> rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
> using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
> receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?
>


Bah! Tubes RULE for rock music..
I've never heard a SS amp that could make guitars sound like they do on
a tube amp..it's heavenly,no comparison.

[Eeyore]

PhattyMo wrote:

> wrote:
> > I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
> > someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
> > said tube amps don't have enough definition. Then someone else said he
> > only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
> > amp. What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
> > rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
> > using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
> > receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?
>
> Bah! Tubes RULE for rock music..
> I've never heard a SS amp that could make guitars sound like they do on
> a tube amp..it's heavenly,no comparison.

It's that rich toob distortion that does it.

Graham

[robert casey]

>
> The reason is very simple.
>
> Intermodulation distortion.
>

Any amp that relies on large amounts of negative feedback to get the THD
numbers down will suffer from intermod worse than an amp with decent THD
numbers achieved without, or very low amounts of, NFB. The error signal
(the NFB signal) has to pass thru the same nonlinear part of the circuit
that made the distortion in the first place. Busy music (music with
lots of different instruments and singers going on at the same time)
will have a pretty busy spectra, and all that stuff will intermod with
each other to create lots of higher frequency "mud". And the NFB will
create even more junk.

An old magazine article (like Consumer Reports, a magazine that didn't
depend on audio industry advertisements) said, when you go shopping for
audio amplifiers, to listen to various kinds of music thru them. Some
classical solos, and then some "busy" music like 70's metal bands. To
see if it sounds "clean". Basically they had you listening for intermod
issues that THD numbers don't show well.

A well designed tube amp should play all music well.

[[email protected]]

Eeyore wrote:
>
> It's that rich toob distortion that does it.
>
> Graham

Hi Loyal Oppositionistas,

You are all perfectly free to assume I am deaf and ignorant and stupid
:)

Sometimes I feel that way, myself.

I had almost forgotten Arne, the truth is all the same blarney.

Nice to see you protecting that big Fort of Truth all by yourself :)

The good news is, besides proving fodder for the Trolls of
Transcendence, this NG gives a few people an inkling that there is some
joy to be had playing Audio Madman.

I truly appreciate the comparison to the late Gizmo. He was a hero :)

Life is whatever we choose to make of it. Spearing fish in a barrel is
fun, for some. No true harm done ;)

Happy Ears!
Al

[Eeyore]

" wrote:

> Eeyore wrote:
> >
> > It's that rich toob distortion that does it.
> >
> > Graham
>
> Hi Loyal Oppositionistas,
>
> You are all perfectly free to assume I am deaf and ignorant and stupid
> :)

I believe I will in that case !


> Sometimes I feel that way, myself.
>
> I had almost forgotten Arne, the truth is all the same blarney.
>
> Nice to see you protecting that big Fort of Truth all by yourself :)
>
> The good news is, besides proving fodder for the Trolls of
> Transcendence, this NG gives a few people an inkling that there is some
> joy to be had playing Audio Madman.
>
> I truly appreciate the comparison to the late Gizmo. He was a hero :)
>
> Life is whatever we choose to make of it. Spearing fish in a barrel is
> fun, for some. No true harm done ;)

Was there anything you wanted to say whilst you were here ?

Graham

[zack]

ive used transistor amps like the rotel ra1212
the dick smith mosfet kit and the jaycar
pro series kit of 185w p/ch rms, now
i have the marshall it ****es all over
the others ive had, and only 100w p/ch rms
and sounds better, have never gone back
since.

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> I kept reading how tubes were so great. Now today for the first time
> someone told me you can't listen to rock music on a tube amp. WTF? He
> said tube amps don't have enough definition. Then someone else said he
> only listens to acoustical music and one other type of music on a tube
> amp. What I was going to do was buy up a lot of mainstream 70's soft
> rock vinyl records and play them through a tube amp. I was thinking of
> using a technics 1200 turntable and probably an old fisher tube
> receiver. Should I stick with a solid state amp for the 70's soft rock?
>

[[email protected]]

Eeyore wrote:
>
> Was there anything you wanted to say whilst you were here ?
>
> Graham

Hi Eyesore,

Tubes and music can be a pleasant combination, unlike you and air.

Do you own any tube gear?

Or are you just here because you love to share yourself with the great
unwashed ...

Somehow, your precious insights, to date, have not done anything to
improve my system.

Have you learned anything from your visits here?

Other than some of us are too stupid to be human?

Happy Ears!
Al