VALVE/TUBE SOUND
- Thread starter MikeMA
- Start date
Steven Toy
Accuphase newbie
I think you answered your own question.
From a human perception pov good valves in an optimised circuit have no inherent sound whatsoever. There are benign distortions that don't look impressive from a measurist's perspective but in a decent push-pull amp these largely cancel each other out.
Valves 'sound' tactile, dynamic, vividly real, open and grain-free. They reproduce instrumental texture and harmonic structure in a way that transistors cannot. If they sound warm and cuddly they are not optimised properly.
I am currently listening to AC/DC Ballbreaker via 3 JAN Philips ECC82s, 4 Tung Sol 6SN7s, 2 Mullard GZ 34 rectifiers and 4 Tung Sol KT120s and it sounds bloody awesome!
From a human perception pov good valves in an optimised circuit have no inherent sound whatsoever. There are benign distortions that don't look impressive from a measurist's perspective but in a decent push-pull amp these largely cancel each other out.
Valves 'sound' tactile, dynamic, vividly real, open and grain-free. They reproduce instrumental texture and harmonic structure in a way that transistors cannot. If they sound warm and cuddly they are not optimised properly.
I am currently listening to AC/DC Ballbreaker via 3 JAN Philips ECC82s, 4 Tung Sol 6SN7s, 2 Mullard GZ 34 rectifiers and 4 Tung Sol KT120s and it sounds bloody awesome!
Steven Toy
Accuphase newbie
Oh yes!
sergeauckland
pfm Member
I don't think so. Take any valve as an example. All such valves, of whatever a manufacture,r must meet the same specification for the basic parameters. The original spec for the valve had a certain tolerance, which is quite wide.
Most people who try valve rolling have one or two examples of each manufacturer, so I alsways ask the question:- If the change of valves from, say, Mullard to Telefunken (or whatever) results in a different sound, is that due to the change between Mullard and Telefunken or just sample variations between the individual valves?
In other words, it would need 100 Mullard valves and 100 Telefunken valves, all from different batches before there was any statistical validity to the belief that MUllard valves sound different to Telefunkens.
Then, there's the even more fundamental question as to whether different valves actually do operate differently. Valve rollers are seldom objectivists, so we've not seen detauled measurements of what's different between a, say, Mullard and a Telefunken in terms of distortion, frequency response, noise or whatever. Even if we did have such measurements, would they have any statistical validity given the pretty wide difference between valves?
All I can say, is that it's possible that one individual Mullard sounds different to one individual Telefunken, but that it's equally possible that another Mullard valve might be no different to that same Telefunken.
It's interesting (to me) that in the '50s and '60s, when valves were at the zenith, there was never any suggestion in HiFi reviews that one manufacturer's valves sounded different to another's. Perhaps then, when valves were ubiquitous, people understood about sample variability.
S.
Most people who try valve rolling have one or two examples of each manufacturer, so I alsways ask the question:- If the change of valves from, say, Mullard to Telefunken (or whatever) results in a different sound, is that due to the change between Mullard and Telefunken or just sample variations between the individual valves?
In other words, it would need 100 Mullard valves and 100 Telefunken valves, all from different batches before there was any statistical validity to the belief that MUllard valves sound different to Telefunkens.
Then, there's the even more fundamental question as to whether different valves actually do operate differently. Valve rollers are seldom objectivists, so we've not seen detauled measurements of what's different between a, say, Mullard and a Telefunken in terms of distortion, frequency response, noise or whatever. Even if we did have such measurements, would they have any statistical validity given the pretty wide difference between valves?
All I can say, is that it's possible that one individual Mullard sounds different to one individual Telefunken, but that it's equally possible that another Mullard valve might be no different to that same Telefunken.
It's interesting (to me) that in the '50s and '60s, when valves were at the zenith, there was never any suggestion in HiFi reviews that one manufacturer's valves sounded different to another's. Perhaps then, when valves were ubiquitous, people understood about sample variability.
S.
You have a good righting style, you make me love valves without even hearing them, perhaps I should
Tony L
Administrator
Whilst there is some very minor sample variation between tubes from a given manufacturer and manufacturing date there are huge differences in design and construction so the reported differences are real and repeatable - you'll never get a ladder-plate Mullard ECC83 to sound like a smooth/long-plate Telefunken no matter what sample variation you dig up. They are chalk and cheese sonically. They are simply different things. You'd hate tubes as your 'read the manual / tick the box' type objectivist stance just doesn't work here. It's a whole different world, more akin to finding the perfect pressing of an album in many ways.
bottleneck
pfm Member
more nonsense about valves.
round and round we go
Tim De Pavaracini reckons he can design a solid state amp that sounds just like a valve amp and vice versa.
My Tom Evans Groove anniversary phono stage sounds just as valve like as my old valve phono stage.. there is a lot of nonsense spoken about valves and solid state - and much of the cliche's are cited above.
round and round we go
Tim De Pavaracini reckons he can design a solid state amp that sounds just like a valve amp and vice versa.
My Tom Evans Groove anniversary phono stage sounds just as valve like as my old valve phono stage.. there is a lot of nonsense spoken about valves and solid state - and much of the cliche's are cited above.
S-Man
StrivingON
Assuming you mean Tim de Paravicini, I can't say I care much for his products, opinions or grammar.
sergeauckland
pfm Member
So you and others say, yet there's never been any numbers attached to these convictions. Just how is a Mullard different to a Telefunken? What is different, frequency response, distortion, what? Does it matter what circuit it's in? All these questions have never been answered as far as I can tell. To me it's akin to the cable issue. Many say they're different, but no-one has, to my knoweldge, produced any evidence, only hearsay.
Why hasn't there been any? Even in the heyday of valves, I don't recall anyone making such statements. What's changed?
S.
Mullardman
Moderately extreme...
I too am not a fan of Tim's tube amps. To me, they have a sound which I can only describe as 'clanky'.
Re: The general tube sound. I agree that tube amps can be bright, dull, warm or cold.
Different makes of the 'same' valve also can sound clearly different.
To me, what defines all implementations of valves if a sense of 'fluidity' and lack of graininess.
Mull
Re: The general tube sound. I agree that tube amps can be bright, dull, warm or cold.
Different makes of the 'same' valve also can sound clearly different.
To me, what defines all implementations of valves if a sense of 'fluidity' and lack of graininess.
Mull
S-Man
StrivingON
Well he did say he can make them sound like SS.
Steven Toy
Accuphase newbie
I think I could change your mind regarding your last statement...
S-Man
StrivingON
Maybe, but my experience of valve preamps is that they add too much colour (e.g. Grounded Grid, EAR, Daniel VTP, Aikido). I used to think discrete transistor was the way to go (eg JE-990) but nowadays I prefer LM4562s.
When I get around to it I do intend to Lampizate one of my CDPs with a pair of those miniture Rusky triodes to see if it can beat the opamp version.
When I get around to it I do intend to Lampizate one of my CDPs with a pair of those miniture Rusky triodes to see if it can beat the opamp version.
Steven Toy
Accuphase newbie
I believe he also stated that he could make ss sound like valves. It is no wonder that his valve amps may sound so clunky.
It is not about euphonic distortion.
sergeauckland
pfm Member
So what is it about valves?
It's not about lower distortion, it's not about a flatter frequency response, or lower noise, so what is it?
S.
I'm not aware of a "valve sound" and of course it depends upon the circuit they are in, just like a tranny. I don't have extensive experience of valves but what I have gives a lovely mid-range that tranny amps just can't match. I say this as someone who loved tranny amps and only bought a valve job for a laugh. About 5 years on my £150 valve amp has taken thousands of pounds worth of tranny amps outside, given them a clip round the ear and sent them home. It's not in the habit of eating valves either, the originals are just fine.
