Why do people that own vintage gear think It's better than new gear

[still-one]

I have no issue with anyone preferring the sound of vintage gear when compared to current offerings. That said I do not believe that the State of The Art of our audio hobby has not progressed over that past 50 years.

 

[DaveC]

It's hard to say... we do have better parts in some ways but some of the highest regarded parts today could have been made decades ago... Jupiter copper foil caps could be made with copper foil, wax and paper, Dueleund resistors are carbon in a paper tube, ole WE wire is still considered to be very good by many people. Tubes are STILL the best amplification devices available.

As far as results go it's hard to argue the new JBL M2 isn't technically superior to most past designs, even recent ones, but IMO that doesn't mean it actually is more fun to listen to or sounds more like real music. In terms of subjective appreciation of recorded music I think maybe we have not made progress in decades...

 

[still-one]

It's hard to say... we do have better parts in some ways but some of the highest regarded parts today could have been made decades ago... Jupiter copper foil caps could be made with copper foil, wax and paper, Dueleund resistors are carbon in a paper tube, ole WE wire is still considered to be very good by many people. Tubes are STILL the best amplification devices available.

As far as results go it's hard to argue the new JBL M2 isn't technically superior to most past designs, even recent ones, but IMO that doesn't mean it actually is more fun to listen to or sounds more like real music. In terms of subjective appreciation of recorded music I think maybe we have not made progress in decades...

Sorry, tubes haven't been the best amplification devices in years. You may like how they "sound" but that doesn't that's just your preference.

 

[DaveC]

Sorry, tubes haven't been the best amplification devices in years. You may like how they "sound" but that doesn't that's just your preference.

Lol, you have no clue. It's not my subjective opinion, it's fact that tubes are more linear amplification devices vs SS.

 

[microstrip]

Sorry, tubes haven't been the best amplification devices in years. You may like how they "sound" but that doesn't that's just your preference.

In some sense tubes are the best amplification devices - they are intrinsically more linear than solid state devices, tube rectifiers are less noisy than semiconductor diodes. Some solid state designers, such as Nelson Pass or John Curls openly refer that their reference are tubes. However they have limitations such as cost, size, reliability, lifetime and power needs that restrict their application.

 

[YashN]

In some sense tubes are the best amplification devices - they are intrinsically more linear than solid state devices, tube rectifiers are less noisy than semiconductor diodes. Some solid state designers, such as Nelson Pass or John Curls openly refer that their reference are tubes. However they have limitations such as cost, size, reliability, lifetime and power needs that restrict their application.

There's another non-negligible advantage of tubes amplifiers that hasn't been mentioned: circuit simplicity.

In many (too many?) solid state implementations, those who design and build the circuits just string Opamps - because that's how they were taught. ? In the end, if you follow the circuitry, you can see how part of it goes through a staggering amount of transistors (because a single Opamp is made up of many transistors).

Compare that to a simple Single-Ended Triode Amplifier circuit.

All of these transistors affect the SQ, especially when it comes to the ever-important transient reproduction, which itself affects many perceived characteristics of sound.

Unfortunately, many people focus on other things like 'Power rating', etc...

It's a rather staggering revelation when you sit down and listen properly to a SET Tube Amp which 'barely outputs 8W per channel' and it crushes your SS amp which supposedly can reach something like 80-100W per channel (people do talk about that, but you have to come to the realisation yourself by listening).

A couple of feedbacks I had from making friends listen to my SET Tube Amp:
- 'Never heard music sounding that good, effortless' - Brazilian friend (we listened to some songs he knows well in my collection, including Antonio Carlos Jobim)
- 'Best sound I've heard, hearing so many new things' - Canadian friend (we listened to Sade's Best Of and Queen's 'Radio Ga Ga' among others).

 

[bonzo75]

It's hard to say... we do have better parts in some ways but some of the highest regarded parts today could have been made decades ago... Jupiter copper foil caps could be made with copper foil, wax and paper, Dueleund resistors are carbon in a paper tube, ole WE wire is still considered to be very good by many people. Tubes are STILL the best amplification devices available.

As far as results go it's hard to argue the new JBL M2 isn't technically superior to most past designs, even recent ones, but IMO that doesn't mean it actually is more fun to listen to or sounds more like real music. In terms of subjective appreciation of recorded music I think maybe we have not made progress in decades...

The new JBL m2 or the older k2 66000 aren't even close to sounding anywhere like good speakers I have heard. There are good JBLs. But not these. I heard a DIY with JBL that was extremely good. I am sure some of the older models or refurbed ones in Japan could be good.

 

[DaveC]

The new JBL m2 or the older k2 66000 aren't even close to sounding anywhere like good speakers I have heard. There are good JBLs. But not these. I heard a DIY with JBL that was extremely good. I am sure some of the older models or refurbed ones in Japan could be good.

Exactly, the technical advances as far as perfect dispersion and frequency response miss the mark imo... a very simple and efficient speaker + SET amp using top quality parts is subjectively far superior to me and this technology has been around for many decades.

One area I might make exception is for bass reproduction, modern low frequency drivers + DSP and class D amps have major advantages. The typical vintage 15" driver with a light cone and relatively weak motor produces far more distortion than a modern driver with a stiff cone and powerful motor. Also, advances in motor design such as shorting rings to lower inductance make a big difference. Now, I do think vintage drivers can approach modern standards to some degree but the bass system would require much more surface area and/or bass horns. Today's top 15" bass drivers can achieve low distortion and excellent performance without massive size and multiple drivers. Personally, I'd rather have a bass horn with vintage drivers than a modern 15" bass reflex cabinet, but very few people have the space or finances for extreme solutions, including myself at this point.

 

[YashN]

Exactly, the technical advances as far as perfect dispersion and frequency response miss the mark imo... a very simple and efficient speaker + SET amp using top quality parts is subjectively far superior to me and this technology has been around for many decades.

Absolutely. Once I heard my SET Tube Amp in its default configuration, and knew its strengths compared to my SS amp, I knew I needed to give it a proper efficient set of speakers. For now, I only have the Totem Mites to pair with it. They're technically not as efficient as they would need to be for the SET Tube Amp, but I have a configuration where I sit not too far from the speakers and the room dimension in that direction is rather small so the small power output doesn't appear so at all up to quite high volumes.

I've decided on building Open-Baffles this time though.

I can tell you the detailed mid-range is there as well as the solidity of reproduction of attack transients is all there, as is the 'musicality'. I can pick up all the little performance details on Al Di Meola's and Paco de Lucia's 'Mediterranean Sundance'.

Now, this is in the default configuration. I apparently can extract even more performance from this Tube Amp with some additions like a Choke, PIO Cap/Motor Run Cap, Cathode-Feedback or what not.

One area I might make exception is for bass reproduction, modern low frequency drivers + DSP and class D amps have major advantages. The typical vintage 15" driver with a light cone and relatively weak motor produces far more distortion than a modern driver with a stiff cone and powerful motor. Also, advances in motor design such as shorting rings to lower inductance make a big difference.

One great thing and which is in my plans overall is to bi-amp and cross-over all the mid-to-high to the SET Tube Amp, and the lows to a great SS amp (or else a Push-Pull Tube).

 

[Al M.]

Absolutely. Once I heard my SET Tube Amp in its default configuration, and knew its strengths compared to my SS amp, I knew I needed to give it a proper efficient set of speakers. For now, I only have the Totem Mites to pair with it. They're technically not as efficient as they would need to be for the SET Tube Amp, but I have a configuration where I sit not too far from the speakers and the room dimension in that direction is rather small so the small power output doesn't appear so at all up to quite high volumes.

Try the Reference 3A MM de Capo BE monitors:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?20786-Review-Reference-3A-MM-de-Capo-BE-monitors

They have an efficiency of 92 dB/W/m. Incredibly dynamic sound with my 2 x 15 W push-pull triode mono blocks, all the way up to just beyond 95 dBa at my seating position, which is also relatively close to the monitors, even though in a mid-sized room (I could play louder but I don't want to damage my ears; for rock with more sustained sound levels I play in the 85-90 dBa range, plenty darn loud).

One great thing and which is in my plans overall is to bi-amp and cross-over all the mid-to-high to the SET Tube Amp, and the lows to a great SS amp (or else a Push-Pull Tube).

I don't cross-over because I do not want to risk losing liveliness of sound. My monitors obviously roll of naturally, and I have a sub internally powered with SS amplification (REL Storm III) where I set the roll-off frequency at 41 Hz. The bass gradually fades out above that frequency, while the monitors take over.

 

[YashN]

I don't cross-over because I do not want to risk losing liveliness of sound.

When it's done well, you lose nothing and gain a lot.

I'm building my own Open-Baffles.

 

[Al M.]

I don't cross-over because I do not want to risk losing liveliness of sound.

When it's done well, you lose nothing and gain a lot.

What do you gain?

My monitors don't even have an internal crossover either, only a capacitor to protect the tweeter; the amps drive the mid-woofer directly -- a major reason for the great sensitivity. Having said that, the system that is my current reference has Magico M Project speakers driven by CAT JL7 tube amps. Obviously the speakers have a crossover network, but need powerful amplification (the CAT amps are 2 x 200 W).

 

[stehno]

View attachment 28073

david

Oops. My bad. BTW, nice museum.


"A man's physical and mental limitations are infinite." - Me

 

[YashN]

What do you gain?

The 'magic' of Single-Ended Triode Tube Amplification for the mid-to-high (especially the mid as it is known to perform very well there) as well as the power of Great SS or Push-Pull Tube Amps for the low-end.

 

[DaveC]

Yup, it's really nice having a ~104 dB sensitive mid/high section with minimal crossover... just a single cap on the mid and tweeter. My 7W EL34 SET works great with it and a 550W D-amp drives the 15" Acoustic Elegance woofers, which are 94 dB sensitive.

 

[Al M.]

The 'magic' of Single-Ended Triode Tube Amplification for the mid-to-high (especially the mid as it is known to perform very well there) as well as the power of Great SS or Push-Pull Tube Amps for the low-end.

Oh, I see. I thought you were talking about cross-over benefits for the speakers, but you meant benefits for the amps. Yes, that makes sense.

For my push-pull triode amps of low wattage (15 W/ch) I don't need a crossover, but then the bass of the monitors doesn't go that deep, and the deep bass is provided by the SS driven subwoofer. If I had SET amps I might think about a cut-off filter for the low frequencies, but then these monitors have been repeatedly reported to be SET friendly.

 

[DaveC]

Oh, I see. I thought you were talking about cross-over benefits for the speakers, but you meant benefits for the amps. Yes, that makes sense.

For my push-pull triode amps of low wattage (15 W/ch) I don't need a crossover, but then the bass of the monitors doesn't go that deep, and the deep bass is provided by the SS driven subwoofer. If I had SET amps I might think about a cut-off filter for the low frequencies, but then these monitors have been repeatedly reported to be SET friendly.

That's a tough one because you'd need a very large cap that will be very expensive to roll off the lows on a speaker level passive... the best way to do it would actually be in the coupling section of your amplifier, which is probably LC coupled and the C value could be reduced to roll off highs, that way there's be little to no sonic penalty, or even an improvement by upgrading the caps. Next best would be a simple line-level cap on the amp input, to size it all you need is the amps input impedance. If you use a nice cap like a Jupiter Copper it wouldn't be very noticeable.

It's only worth considering if you're running into excursion limits on your monitor's woofers, if so it would allow you to play at higher volumes with less distortion.

 

[Al M.]

That's a tough one because you'd need a very large cap that will be very expensive to roll off the lows on a speaker level passive... the best way to do it would actually be in the coupling section of your amplifier, which is probably LC coupled and the C value could be reduced to roll off highs, that way there's be little to no sonic penalty, or even an improvement by upgrading the caps. Next best would be a simple line-level cap on the amp input, to size it all you need is the amps input impedance. If you use a nice cap like a Jupiter Copper it wouldn't be very noticeable.

It's only worth considering if you're running into excursion limits on your monitor's woofers, if so it would allow you to play at higher volumes with less distortion.

Yes, as I said I don't think it's necessary with my push-pull amps. The mid-woofers don't seem to move that much, certainly I haven't noticed the wild driver excursions that I saw on my previous monitors with much smaller mid-woofers. In fact, switching from those speakers to the new ones I noticed right away a drastic drop in distortion.

I sit rather nearfield; if sitting further away I might have more concerns. I did measure a drop of 5 dBa volume from 80-90 dBa just a few feet behind my listening position; to compensate for this at that location further back would put a whole lot of energy and stress on both speakers and amps.

 

[PeterA]

Yes, as I said I don't think it's necessary with my push-pull amps. The mid-woofers don't seem to move that much, certainly I haven't noticed the wild driver excursions that I saw on my previous monitors with much smaller mid-woofers. In fact, switching from those speakers to the new ones I noticed right away a drastic drop in distortion.

I sit rather nearfield; if sitting further away I might have more concerns. I did measure a drop of 5 dBa volume from 80-90 dBa just a few feet behind my listening position; to compensate for this at that location further back would put a whole lot of energy and stress on both speakers and amps.

Al, do you sit close to nearfield for less stress on both your speakers and amps at a certain volume level, or to lesson the effect of the room on the overall sound, or a little of both? I always thought your room was quite large and well behaved, especially with the new treatments and furniture arrangements. I don't think of your system as sounding stressed at higher volume levels.

Also, have you tried adjusting your toe in as you moved back those few feet behind your usual seating position?

 

[microstrip]

(...) I sit rather nearfield; if sitting further away I might have more concerns. (...)

How far do you seat from the speakers?