Frog624

No matter what form the digital reproduction is in (MP3, WAV, OOG, APE, etc.), the music is a SAMPLING, not the full music stream you get on an LP. Of course, there are many people who have listened to their music with the volume over 90 db for a long time and their hearing no longer can tell the difference. But - the LP wears as it is played whereas the digital music never deteriorates (unless the digital stream is corrupted); take your pick.

rustfarmer

Frog624 says what matters to me--SAMPLING is less than analog.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Hey Mr. Earl, I can fully appreciate your post... I have been following early Delta Blues recordings and there is def. no hi fi involved.... sometimes the authenticity of the music overrides the technical aspects of the sound.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Hopefully, the authenticity of music always matters. Good reproduction quality just enhances the listening experience.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Well said.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Went to a Grateful Dead concert back in the day when they toured with the " Wall Of Sound " which essentially was different configurations of seemingly hundreds of JBL studio monitors stacked like cordwood; with top shelf amplification the listening experience was def. enhanced, almost transcendental. As with photography and just about everything else, top shelf equipment enhances any experience.... Geez Louise, now the audio GAS pains are stirring. LOL

Earworms Loc: Sacramento, California

Very interesting. May I ask which company that is?
Here is a picture of the small tube amp that I built.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Very nice work earworms! www.busch-design.com is the site for the quad KT88 monoblocks that I designed, built and currently use.

Earworms Loc: Sacramento, California

I use to do occasional work for Henry Wolcott, Wolcott Audio. He made omnidirectional loudspeakers and some incredibly powerful, low distortion monoblock tube amps. His amps incorporated a digitally controlled auto bias circuit, which set each individual tube at startup/warmup.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

That is quite an amp (and I certainly know of Henry Wocott). Looks like 8 6550s or similar, and 400w would not be overstating the capability. My monoblocks with 4 similar tubes will do 200 watts RMS per channel, but I rate them conservatively at 100 watts at less than 1% THD (a terrible figure for solid state amps, but very reasonable for tubes). Depending on whether you choose EL84s, KT77s, 6550s or KT88s the max plate dissapation is somewhere around 40-45 watts per tube, and assuming 60% efficiency in AB1, that puts you right at 400 watts for the 8 tubes (and then, of course, there’s the necessary power supply for 2 channels).

I do like the auto-bias circuit, especially for consumers. I just set mine at at 40 ma per tube using the meter at start-up, but frankly, they haven’t changed noticably in the many hundreds of hours I’ve run them. I do worry that one of the bias pots will get noisey, and I won’t notice until I see the plates glowing red 😩, so another reason auto bias is cool.

You’re lucky to have been associated with Henry. And yes, I really do need to re-photograph my amp and speakers and clean up the site - the posterization/banding is terrible on this site with those low res shots taken a decade or more ago.

papa Loc: Rio Dell, CA

Tell that to the tube type audiophiles for a big hurrah.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

? Not sure I understand your comment. I completely agree with Bill’s comment on DR - you can prefer tubes without being an LP devotee. It’s indisputable the CDs have a wider dynamic range than LPs, but the same can’t be said regarding tubes vs solid state amps. Tube amps can have as good a DR as transistors provided the power supplies (including filaments) are of good design (DR in amplifiers is typically limited on the low end by power supply noise).

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

I thought I was really doing something putting together a Dynaco preamp kit back in the day..... Trix and Ear sound like the real deal.... CDs or LPs, your choice; I do know that doing a blind Tube/solid state comparison with good speakers will produce a difference and most folks will prefer the tube sound. Like a warm bath opposed to a lukewarm shower. Just my humble opinion as I am not even close to being an audiophile although I still REALLY enjoy my vintage Martin Logan electrostatics.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Dynaco (Dave Hafler’s company) was well known in the 60s. If I remember correctly, they also built a tuner and several different amps including the ST-70, which I believe was rated at 35 watts per channel. Electrostatics can produce some really memorable sound - some need a little help on the bottom (bass) end because the displacement of the membrane is very small, requiring a large area at low frequencies. I vividly remember hear in a thunderstorm played on a pair of Infinity Servostatics, and the effect was stunning.

I was a bit skeptical about tube amps initially, although I had been building them for 40 years as a radio amateur. After designing the Euphoria transmission line speakers using solid state amps (Krells) for testing, I decided to answer for myself whether they sounded better. I started work on a single amp, and after trying some huge but totally impractical designs (using 3-500 Triodes), I settled on a more conventional design. I read the original MacIntosh patents among others, and built a test bed that could be configured as a push-pull/parallel triodes or ultra linear configuration with variable negative feedback (always a hot subject among designers). I was fortunate to have really good test equipment, and after several years (and learning a lot more about power supply design as well), I completed one really good amp. I listened to it in mono for a hundred hours or so, comparing it to the Krell, and then built another for stereo. Since then, I’ve listened to nothing else. I know the damping is lower and the THD/IM is higher than the Krells, but I prefer the sound.