SS Sound vs. Tube Sound (for the umpteenth time)

I do not understand the question. Do you mean why SS amps may have less extended low end at high power? Power supply limitations and device characteristics (e.g. thermal limiting, quasi-saturation effects, etc.) come to mind. However, I was thinking primarily of HF effects, one of which is slew limiting, that limits bandwidth. I did not realize you meant at both extremes, sorry.
 
IIRC Some the same people arguing that ss has superior bandwidth have argued wide bandwidth is not that significant.
 
I don't have any acoustic data for my room. What I have is ten 2' x 4' sound absorbing panels in my room. If you can find any of my posts where I posted pictures and/or videos of my room, you can see them. Again, I'm not claiming some ultimate sound treatment, I'm just saying that my room isn't untreated.

Can you give me a link or a reference to the thread where you posted these pictures? BTW, I am specifically addressing treatment in the bass frequencies, as are debating the effect of amplifier damping in the low frequencies.
 
No worries Don - the original example Myles gave as justification for valves NOT having bandwidth limitations did reveal a considerable reduction in the power bandwidth at the lower end, not much of significance at the top.

Ah, did not look back. Transformer saturation and lower current capacity/higher output impedance are the usual reasons cited for reduced tube low-end bandwidth at high power. Of course, the usual transformer (not autoformer) configuration means you don't get DC out of tubes. That has never really bothered me; if there's a lot of DC coming out something is wrong, or about to be. :)
 
Can you give me a link or a reference to the thread where you posted these pictures? BTW, I am specifically addressing treatment in the bass frequencies, as are debating the effect of amplifier damping in the low frequencies.

He has absorption panels for reflections , not bass traps , so nothing of interest towards your debate ....
 
Ah, did not look back. Transformer saturation and lower current capacity/higher output impedance are the usual reasons cited for reduced tube low-end bandwidth at high power. Of course, the usual transformer (not autoformer) configuration means you don't get DC out of tubes. That has never really bothered me; if there's a lot of DC coming out something is wrong, or about to be. :)

Hysteresis.......:)
 
^ Yeah, but I'd have to define that one, and explain it, and was too lazy/busy to draw the usual picture showing it in the core. We could start adding all sorts of secondary and tertiary effects too, or discuss the impact of exponential vs. factorial distortion series, single-ended vs. differential circuits, etc. but I think I'm already past contributing to this one...

But yeah, hysteresis is a biggie... I could probably simulate it to show the impact, but I'm lazy.
 

I've been reading this PDF with great interest, and while folks debate what is limited bandwidth, I thought I'd point out some interesting claims in the PDF wrt amplifiers, that I have read from other designers as well:

On Harmonic distortion:
I don't know of any definitive info that demands a series of harmonics in a certain way, EXCEPT that higher order odd components are very bad. This includes 7th,9th, etc. However, I agree with the right to state the opinion that the large 2nd harmonics makes a good sounding amp.
...
"... The seventh harmonic, however, introduces an element of discord; if the fundamental note is c', its pitch is approximately b (flat) , which forms a dissonace with c. The same is true of the ninth, eleventh, thirteenth, and all higher ODD-numbered harmonics; these add dissonance as well as shrillness to the fundamental tone, and so introduce a roughness or harshness into the composite sound. The resultant quality of tone is often described as METALLIC"
...
It can be debated whether 2'nd harmonic is really necessary to make good sounding audio reproduction. Analog tape, for example, has virtually no 2'nd harmonic distortion, just 3rd and sometimes 5th harmonic, yet can be very pleasant to listen to, without adding 2'nd harmonic to the mix.
...
First of all, 3'rd harmonic is actually almost as acceptable as 2'nd harmonic. How do we know? Because 3'rd harmonic is the only distortion normally measurable on analog magnetic tape, and its value is usually between .1% and 10% depending on output level. How is it that we can, or could listen to analog tapes without crying out in pain? It is the HIGHER ORDER ODD HARMONICS that are the big problem. For example, 7th and 9th harmonic. 8th harmonic should be OK, within reason. Transistors generate much more higher order distortion than do tubes. This is because of the curvature of their transfer function, due to very nonlinear Gm. Tubes also have some nonlinearity in gain, but they work on a different principle and change less over current, and usually have less distortion, and it will be of lower order in general.
...
It is a waste of time to talk about THD, UNLESS you also know the order of the harmonic(s) that are present. .01% 7th harmonic may be more annoying and even more audible than 0.5% of 2'nd or 3'rd harmonic. This has been known for about 70 years at least. It is just conveniently forgotten about by mid-fi manufacturers.
...
Third harmonic cancellation is another story. It is difficult to do. Still, pure third is not so bad. After all, analog magnetic tape had typically 1% third harmonic at operating level, increasing to over 15% on peaks, yet it could sound pretty darn good. Third harmonic distortion, and its IM products are still close to the music. It is the 5th, 7th and 9th harmonics that should be removed or avoided at any cost.

On amplifier bandwidth:
Amplifier bandwidth is usually determined by the amount of negative feedback available.

On negative feedback:
At very high levels, all class A amps are going to generate their worst distortion. Only extremely high feedback can suppress this. This is why I use global feedback. I have to meet THX specs. This is important for Parasound, and our dealers. I personally think that zero global feedback is usually best, all else being equal. I noticed that the 'Stereophile' graphs use 20dB/division.
...
However, Otala and others showed us that negative loop feedback caused as many problems as it eliminated. Therefore, many designers, including Otala, Hansen, and Pass, and even me, on occasion, have relied much more or even completely on local feedback, which still presents SOME problems, but not nearly as many sonic problems as loop feedback.
...
I would prefer not to use feedback, BUT I can make an acceptable audio product with feedback, if it is necessary to meet mid-fi specs as well. Charles Hansen knows this and has stated it here.
...
On my testbench is a preamp that is amazingly similar to what Charles Hansen builds (for good reason, since first I saw his design ). It runs open loop. When I look at the harmonic series on a scope or FFT analyzer, it is amazingly 'pure'. This means that it contains very few higher order distortion products. [ack: I can attest to that, this is why I chose the Ayre P-5xe phono, for its zero-feedback design, few high order harmonics, high slew rate, and FET input]

On slew rate:
I don't know if I can make better sense of everything that you are talking about, but slew rate is a LIMITING CONDITION that you don't want to approach. Do you need 500V/us? Couldn't hurt! Can you get away with 10V/us? Maybe with a bass amp, even a midrange amp, but not a full range amp, for best solid state audio fidelity. [ack: Spectral claims 600V/us]
...
Please keep the slew rate above 50V/us. Trust me.
...
Well, the Levinson JC-2 is really a discrete op amp phono stage, with a transconductance amp line stage. The line amp, especially, was designed after Otala paramaters: High open loop bandwidth and high slew rate, however it was also class A, and used a FET input stage, so that it could be direct coupled to the input pot. The JC-2 could use low value stage coupling caps, much like tube circuits, because of the input FETS. This turned out to be an advantage, as we found out later.

He also talks about many other things like A/B, A/B/X, loudspeakers, crossovers, digital, etc but will save those for another day.

Thanks for the link Myles. Enjoy!

Peter

PS: And here's a little secret with locked PDFs, which you can't presumably print or copy their text: just unlock them with http://www.pdfunlock.com/ :D
 
'Noise floor' means different things to different people. I suspect here the meaning isn't the background hiss level when no music is playing, rather the silence between the notes. Tube amps undeniably come with higher levels of background hiss in general.

Yes, it certainly does ... however ... how one defines "noise floor characteristics" is often based on experience (or lack of) ... in that ... most audiophiles I've met have indeed experienced a system with a dead-silent background, but few have experienced a system that's truly revealing of low level sonic information.

As an example, many systems today offer a dark and silent background, but far too often that background is "dead" silent, nothing exist beyond that dark state. Most 'philes would consider that a "low noise" system ... however ... IMO ... a highly refined "low noise" system isn't "dead-silent" ... rather ... it reveals layers of 3D ambient space as a form of silence ... and it should do so beyond the obvious levels of tape hiss, LP noise or even component hiss/hum, which may, or may not exist.

It's kinda the same false argument as perceived digital "silence" compared to analog "silence". In general most would claim that digital offers a lower noise floor compared to dragging a rock thru vinyl. Depending on the state of their analog system, they well indeed be correct within the context of their system. However, I've gone on record many times over claiming that my Turntable offers much superior "noise floor characteristics" than any CDP player I've heard.

What my turntable reveals is that important low level ambient information down into & past obvious noise floor artifacts (hiss, hum, etc), which re-creates an illusion of the actual recorded space (which on a top-system can often be felt as well as heard). Digital based systems tends to offer a static "dark" noise floor ... cutting-off ambient info at the pass.

Many audiophiles prefer a "dark-silent" background and most good digital based systems offer "dead-silent" backgrounds in comparison to many analog based systems ... but ... a dark & silent background void of low level data and ambient space isn't necessarily how I'd define a "low noise" system.

tb1
 
I've been reading this PDF with great interest, and while folks debate what is limited bandwidth, I thought I'd point out some interesting claims in the PDF wrt amplifiers, that I have read from other designers as well:

On Harmonic distortion:


On amplifier bandwidth:


On negative feedback:


On slew rate:


He also talks about many other things like A/B, A/B/X, loudspeakers, crossovers, digital, etc but will save those for another day.

Thanks for the link Myles. Enjoy!

Peter

PS: And here's a little secret with locked PDFs, which you can't presumably print or copy their text: just unlock them with http://www.pdfunlock.com/ :D

Most today prefer to use nested feedback , think of feedback as adding salt to your meal ....:)

too much !!!
too little or none ... !!!

Yeah ...:)
 
Please explain to me how tubes have a technical advantage for superior peamp drive and bandwidth over SS. Whatever superiority tubes may or may not have over SS, I don't think it will be found on a spec sheet.

Transistors, power transistors in particular, have a non-linear capacitive aspect that exists in the junctions of the device. It is multiplied with current. This contributes to odd-ordered harmonic generation. Since our ears use odd orders to determine sound pressure, this has a big effect on the resulting sound- it will sound louder and brighter even if odd ordered harmonic generation is only 100ths of a percent. Our ears are tuned to listen for them- we are more sensitive to their presence than we are human vocal frequencies.

When I talk "noise-floor" characteristics, I refer to a systems inner ability (or inability) to not swallow, hash over, or fog over very tiny details ... like those that define venue.

With regard to the above context ... the noise floor potential of my system is therefore defined via its power-line to system component architecture, which utilizes a limited star type grounding scheme, with specific components purposely lifted from ground. It's unique to my systems architecture. Each component is separated from the mains via a dedicated PLC, which more importantly separates each component from polluting the other. Connection quality (very much related to noise floor) either from a power or signal transfer perspective has been refined accordingly.

Personally, I consider all the above aspects of "noise-floor reduction" far more important that a components utilization of either SS or Tube. Within this type system, noise floor characteristics are therefore more defined based on it's source component delivery.

tb1

The use of feedback in audio amplifiers causes the noise floor of the amp to change. Instead of mere noise, from active and passive components, the noise floor becomes a harmonic and inharmonic noise floor, much of it the result if intermodulation at the feedback node. The ear can hear 20 db into a natural noise floor despite the masking characteristic, but cannot penetrate the harmonic noise floor of an amp with feedback. This means that such an amp will be inherently lacking low level detail, sheerly out of the ear's masking rule.

We are now seeing SS amps and preamps that don't use negative feedback and have measurements that are beyond reproach. Ayre is one example I can think of right off the top of my head.

While it is true that tube amps clip more gracefully than SS because they tend to compress the top of the waveform instead of cutting it off, they still can't sound twice as powerful no matter how many old wive's tails you believe in. A 100 watt tube amp can only put out 100 watts. It can't put out 200 watts no matter how much you want to believe it can. By contrast, a true 200 watt SS amp is always a 200 watt amp and a 100 watt tube amp is always a 100 watt amp. The moral to the story here is don't clip your amp.

The problem is that with the odd-ordered harmonic generation, people will be screaming at you to turn the transistor amp down (if you don't have the sense to do it yourself). Tube amps tend (this is a generalization of course) to have a larger percentage of *usable* power and as clipping is approached, will do so gracefully enough that the ear is fooled into thinking that the sound is louder than it really is (due to the presence of odd ordered harmonics) but the harmonic generation may not be so bad that one wants to turn it down. Electric guitar players take advantage of this all the time (they use tube amps for the most part).

Without blind testing etc. I don't think you can label SS as 'grey' or 'metallic' or anything else. Likewise valves being 'warm', 'smooth' or 'musical'. What I do know is those descriptions are exactly how I would expect those devices to sound - if I believed that a thing naturally sounds how it looks.

Transistors get called 'bright', 'harsh' etc. on account of the odd ordered harmonic distortions they make (although tubes can certainly be guilty of this too). Since our ears are tuned to these harmonics, it should not be any surprise that one *can indeed* have certain expectations- usually based on experience.

in general, solid state designs (at the power amp) use 100% feedback and tube units use very little. And tube units are more bandwidth limited. These things make a difference in the spectral spray of harmonics in regards to amplitude at given power levels. They ARE different. But, its not the "vacuum" in the tube, as in both cases (ss or tube), it is still finally charge flow through the speaker wires in the end.

At the pre amp, a 12AX7, used without feedback, will produce more "color" than a proper feedback transistor.

its tone baby, and third harmonics "etch" the sound, make it "clearer" to a point, etc. ie thats what tape does. in all cases, the distortions are increased vis the original signal, but their spectrum is different. and as carver proved, solid state can sound like tubes, and in fact, for preamps, tubes can sound like solid state, its a matter of feedback level.

Tubes have all the bandwidth you could ever want. An analog color TV needs video circuits with MHz worth of bandwidth- and would not have been possible if tubes did not have bandwidth. More to the point, bandwidth is a product of the designer's intent, not the device. You can have output transformers that have MHz bandwidth- the ZERO is in fact such an example. For practical reasons excessive bandwidth can be headache as RFI can be a problem. We once built an amplifier that was effective as an RF amplifier at 30MHz. We had to do a lot to keep RF out of the amp, else it fried tweeters pretty quick for 'no good reason' :)

Our MA-3 can make full power at 100KHz. So when you talk about bandwidth, its probably more accurate to talk about transformers being the possible 'limitation' rather than tubes generically.

Bill-That is exactly what I'm saying. Tubes have their shortcomings no matter how much you love them, especially tube amps. High output impedance and low dampening factor are two huge things that affect the performance of tube amps with regards to ultimate bass quality and linear high-frequency extension when interfaced with everyday crossover networks and non-flat speaker impedances. The magic of tube amps has always resided in the midrange for me (which is where most of the music lives and breathes). And that is probably the area where the bloom is off the rose for me with regards to SS. We can all talk about how SS and tube sound are converging closer and closer, but I don't think that is really true other than the fact that tube amps have become ‘more’ neutral, but yet they are not neutral. There is much more work to be done there and I don’t know that tubes can overcome their inherent limitations with regards to high impedance and low transconductance and noise. But, there is also much more work to be done with SS. I still think that SS is a little threadbare in the midrange compared to really good tube amps.
This is not entirely true. For example, there are no loudspeakers made that are 8 ohms and need more than 20:1 for a damping factor. Some speakers need far less- there are even speakers that are over-damped if the damping factor exceeds 1:1.

IOW you cannot make such a generalization- this is because even though the industry wanted tubes to go obsolete 50 years ago, they failed to do so. As a result there are plenty of speakers around that need lower damping factors in order to sound right. The very first sealed box speaker, the Acoustic Research AR-1, is such an example. It was designed for an amplifier with an output impedance of 7 ohms.

The problem is that the industry saw an opportunity to make money. When transistors started to become practical, the industry realized that with feedback they could linearize the amp and sell it for 90% of the cost of a tube amp of the same power, but with only 10% of the parts cost. This was a big incentive! Since such amplifier designs rapidly took on the ability to double power as impedance was halved, the idea that an amplifier should be a Voltage Source emerged. But tubes don't double power in that way, yet have always had their adherents. As a result there are speakers that don't work with amps that don't double power, and there are speakers that don't work with amps that do. for more information see http://www.atma-sphere.com/Resources/Paradigms_in_Amplifier_Design.php

If you mix the two technologies, tonal abberations emerge. IOW, there is no blanket statement like the one immedately above- the correct statement is that amps and speakers have to be matched together for best results and there is no way around that. If you have chosen a speaker that only works with a voltage source amp, then expect to be painted into the transistor corner. The converse is also true- there are many speakers that exhibit tonal abberation if transistors are used. Quite literally in some cases the crossovers don't even use the same rules! You have to match amps and speakers, and the spec sheets aren't going to tell you a lot about this as its sort of inconvenient truth that the industry likes to sweep under the carpet.
 
The use of feedback in audio amplifiers causes the noise floor of the amp to change. Instead of mere noise, from active and passive components, the noise floor becomes a harmonic and inharmonic noise floor, much of it the result if intermodulation at the feedback node. The ear can hear 20 db into a natural noise floor despite the masking characteristic, but cannot penetrate the harmonic noise floor of an amp with feedback. This means that such an amp will be inherently lacking low level detail, sheerly out of the ear's masking rule.

Perhaps, I can't offer an educated opinion based on the above "noise floor" criteria you stated.

What I am qualified to discuss is the sonic effect that certain power line devices, dedicated conditioning, grounding schemes, and attention to connection quality, as related to a achieving a lower "noise-floor" within my system ... irrespective of amplifier types.

tb1
 
Generally speaking putting the speaker to your ear will allow you to clearly hear any noise.that is present.IME
 
Transistors, power transistors in particular, have a non-linear capacitive aspect that exists in the junctions of the device. It is multiplied with current. This contributes to odd-ordered harmonic generation. Since our ears use odd orders to determine sound pressure, this has a big effect on the resulting sound- it will sound louder and brighter even if odd ordered harmonic generation is only 100ths of a percent. Our ears are tuned to listen for them- we are more sensitive to their presence than we are human vocal frequencies.



The use of feedback in audio amplifiers causes the noise floor of the amp to change. Instead of mere noise, from active and passive components, the noise floor becomes a harmonic and inharmonic noise floor, much of it the result if intermodulation at the feedback node. The ear can hear 20 db into a natural noise floor despite the masking characteristic, but cannot penetrate the harmonic noise floor of an amp with feedback. This means that such an amp will be inherently lacking low level detail, sheerly out of the ear's masking rule.



The problem is that with the odd-ordered harmonic generation, people will be screaming at you to turn the transistor amp down (if you don't have the sense to do it yourself). Tube amps tend (this is a generalization of course) to have a larger percentage of *usable* power and as clipping is approached, will do so gracefully enough that the ear is fooled into thinking that the sound is louder than it really is (due to the presence of odd ordered harmonics) but the harmonic generation may not be so bad that one wants to turn it down. Electric guitar players take advantage of this all the time (they use tube amps for the most part).



Transistors get called 'bright', 'harsh' etc. on account of the odd ordered harmonic distortions they make (although tubes can certainly be guilty of this too). Since our ears are tuned to these harmonics, it should not be any surprise that one *can indeed* have certain expectations- usually based on experience.



Tubes have all the bandwidth you could ever want. An analog color TV needs video circuits with MHz worth of bandwidth- and would not have been possible if tubes did not have bandwidth. More to the point, bandwidth is a product of the designer's intent, not the device. You can have output transformers that have MHz bandwidth- the ZERO is in fact such an example. For practical reasons excessive bandwidth can be headache as RFI can be a problem. We once built an amplifier that was effective as an RF amplifier at 30MHz. We had to do a lot to keep RF out of the amp, else it fried tweeters pretty quick for 'no good reason' :)

Our MA-3 can make full power at 100KHz. So when you talk about bandwidth, its probably more accurate to talk about transformers being the possible 'limitation' rather than tubes generically.


This is not entirely true. For example, there are no loudspeakers made that are 8 ohms and need more than 20:1 for a damping factor. Some speakers need far less- there are even speakers that are over-damped if the damping factor exceeds 1:1.

IOW you cannot make such a generalization- this is because even though the industry wanted tubes to go obsolete 50 years ago, they failed to do so. As a result there are plenty of speakers around that need lower damping factors in order to sound right. The very first sealed box speaker, the Acoustic Research AR-1, is such an example. It was designed for an amplifier with an output impedance of 7 ohms.

The problem is that the industry saw an opportunity to make money. When transistors started to become practical, the industry realized that with feedback they could linearize the amp and sell it for 90% of the cost of a tube amp of the same power, but with only 10% of the parts cost. This was a big incentive! Since such amplifier designs rapidly took on the ability to double power as impedance was halved, the idea that an amplifier should be a Voltage Source emerged. But tubes don't double power in that way, yet have always had their adherents. As a result there are speakers that don't work with amps that don't double power, and there are speakers that don't work with amps that do. for more information see http://www.atma-sphere.com/Resources/Paradigms_in_Amplifier_Design.php

If you mix the two technologies, tonal abberations emerge. IOW, there is no blanket statement like the one immedately above- the correct statement is that amps and speakers have to be matched together for best results and there is no way around that. If you have chosen a speaker that only works with a voltage source amp, then expect to be painted into the transistor corner. The converse is also true- there are many speakers that exhibit tonal abberation if transistors are used. Quite literally in some cases the crossovers don't even use the same rules! You have to match amps and speakers, and the spec sheets aren't going to tell you a lot about this as its sort of inconvenient truth that the industry likes to sweep under the carpet.

Thank you for taking the time to write this. i have read it once thru carefully...and expect to do so again and try to remember some of it.
 
You should read the SS guy's version first , before commiting all to memory, there are oddities carefully left out .... :)

I will Iterate by saying a Hybrid makes the most logical sense and tubes have an inherent advantage when discussing some drive stages in pre's, that's not to say , SS have not made grounds, SIT is obviously a step forward and for the record, SS is all i use today, I do have a BAT pre, but the threshold FET10 is what i'm using mostly these days, not only for sonics, but for it's consistency..

Regards,
 
Perhaps, I can't offer an educated opinion based on the above "noise floor" criteria you stated.

What I am qualified to discuss is the sonic effect that certain power line devices, dedicated conditioning, grounding schemes, and attention to connection quality, as related to a achieving a lower "noise-floor" within my system ... irrespective of amplifier types.

tb1
I'd love to have that discussion in a separate thread... Maybe i'll start one with a couple questions and you can reply.
 
Transistors, power transistors in particular, have a non-linear capacitive aspect that exists in the junctions of the device. It is multiplied with current. This contributes to odd-ordered harmonic generation. Since our ears use odd orders to determine sound pressure, this has a big effect on the resulting sound- it will sound louder and brighter even if odd ordered harmonic generation is only 100ths of a percent. Our ears are tuned to listen for them- we are more sensitive to their presence than we are human vocal frequencies.



The use of feedback in audio amplifiers causes the noise floor of the amp to change. Instead of mere noise, from active and passive components, the noise floor becomes a harmonic and inharmonic noise floor, much of it the result if intermodulation at the feedback node. The ear can hear 20 db into a natural noise floor despite the masking characteristic, but cannot penetrate the harmonic noise floor of an amp with feedback. This means that such an amp will be inherently lacking low level detail, sheerly out of the ear's masking rule.



The problem is that with the odd-ordered harmonic generation, people will be screaming at you to turn the transistor amp down (if you don't have the sense to do it yourself). Tube amps tend (this is a generalization of course) to have a larger percentage of *usable* power and as clipping is approached, will do so gracefully enough that the ear is fooled into thinking that the sound is louder than it really is (due to the presence of odd ordered harmonics) but the harmonic generation may not be so bad that one wants to turn it down. Electric guitar players take advantage of this all the time (they use tube amps for the most part).



Transistors get called 'bright', 'harsh' etc. on account of the odd ordered harmonic distortions they make (although tubes can certainly be guilty of this too). Since our ears are tuned to these harmonics, it should not be any surprise that one *can indeed* have certain expectations- usually based on experience.



Tubes have all the bandwidth you could ever want. An analog color TV needs video circuits with MHz worth of bandwidth- and would not have been possible if tubes did not have bandwidth. More to the point, bandwidth is a product of the designer's intent, not the device. You can have output transformers that have MHz bandwidth- the ZERO is in fact such an example. For practical reasons excessive bandwidth can be headache as RFI can be a problem. We once built an amplifier that was effective as an RF amplifier at 30MHz. We had to do a lot to keep RF out of the amp, else it fried tweeters pretty quick for 'no good reason' :)

Our MA-3 can make full power at 100KHz. So when you talk about bandwidth, its probably more accurate to talk about transformers being the possible 'limitation' rather than tubes generically.


This is not entirely true. For example, there are no loudspeakers made that are 8 ohms and need more than 20:1 for a damping factor. Some speakers need far less- there are even speakers that are over-damped if the damping factor exceeds 1:1.

IOW you cannot make such a generalization- this is because even though the industry wanted tubes to go obsolete 50 years ago, they failed to do so. As a result there are plenty of speakers around that need lower damping factors in order to sound right. The very first sealed box speaker, the Acoustic Research AR-1, is such an example. It was designed for an amplifier with an output impedance of 7 ohms.

The problem is that the industry saw an opportunity to make money. When transistors started to become practical, the industry realized that with feedback they could linearize the amp and sell it for 90% of the cost of a tube amp of the same power, but with only 10% of the parts cost. This was a big incentive! Since such amplifier designs rapidly took on the ability to double power as impedance was halved, the idea that an amplifier should be a Voltage Source emerged. But tubes don't double power in that way, yet have always had their adherents. As a result there are speakers that don't work with amps that don't double power, and there are speakers that don't work with amps that do. for more information see http://www.atma-sphere.com/Resources/Paradigms_in_Amplifier_Design.php

If you mix the two technologies, tonal abberations emerge. IOW, there is no blanket statement like the one immedately above- the correct statement is that amps and speakers have to be matched together for best results and there is no way around that. If you have chosen a speaker that only works with a voltage source amp, then expect to be painted into the transistor corner. The converse is also true- there are many speakers that exhibit tonal abberation if transistors are used. Quite literally in some cases the crossovers don't even use the same rules! You have to match amps and speakers, and the spec sheets aren't going to tell you a lot about this as its sort of inconvenient truth that the industry likes to sweep under the carpet.

Great and enlightening post. The last paragraph explains a lot about synergy, that "magic" property we can not explain technically most of the time.
 
Generally speaking putting the speaker to your ear will allow you to clearly hear any noise.that is present.IME

Yet, that alone will tell you next to NOTHING about it's true noise floor potential.

tb1
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing