[darrenyeats]

Sorry, not to be contrary, but I must say that the most accurate rendering not only of perspective but also colour that I have ever seen was in a life-size painting by some unknown-to-me French painter from around 1875.

If only you had a hi-rez camera with you - you could have posted a photo of the painting here so we could appreciate the colour and perspective too
Darren

[doug s.]

nope, the hi-rez camera woulda ruined it...   

doug s.

Sorry, not to be contrary, but I must say that the most accurate rendering not only of perspective but also colour that I have ever seen was in a life-size painting by some unknown-to-me French painter from around 1875.

If only you had a hi-rez camera with you - you could have posted a photo of the painting here so we could appreciate the colour and perspective too
Darren

[Daygloworange]

nope, the hi-rez camera woulda ruined it...   

Would you feel that way if the camera had tubes in it?   

Cheers 

[Bob in St. Louis]

 

[opaqueice]

Let's see, space, heat, power requirements, cost, density,...  All good reasons to celebrate the transistor.  But audio fidelity?  I doubt that was one of the critera!  Transistor designs were responsible for high global feedback, the distortion wars, and a couple of other ills.  Was that an advancement?

BTW - I used to work for Bell Labs (you may have heard of them - they invented the ummmm... transistor) where I did CAD design of ICs.  You can get technical if you want to.

I teach in a physics department, and I have yet to see tubes in any of the extremely high precision cost-no-object amplifiers used in the labs around here.  It's easy to measure the comparitively high non-linearities in tube amps, as I'm sure you're aware.  You're not actually debating that point, are you?  So I guess you mean something else by "audio fidelity"?

Incidentally according to the BBC some guy in Canada (Lilienfeld) invented and patented the transistor in 1927, but the materials weren't there yet to make use of it.

[Daryl]

Thankyou, Opaqueice and Darren Yeats.

Very well said.

[Daryl]

But if you don't follow the technical stuff, just ask yourself why just about every piece of high-quality electronics on the planet (other than audiophile gear), including amplifiers, uses transistors.  Or why they're regarded as one of the greatest technological advances of the 20th century (there's a reason for that!).  The only serious applications I know of where tubes are still used are military (because tubes are resistant to the EMP from a nuclear attack) and space applications (because of cosmic rays).  So unless you're planning on taking your stereo into orbit and/or want it for company during a nuclear winter, that's a good case of the exception that proves the rule.

But who cares?  I want to listen to music, not the most linear possible amplifier, and if I like tube sound or tube looks (and I do) I don't see any problem.

Let's see, space, heat, power requirements, cost, density,...  All good reasons to celebrate the transistor.  But audio fidelity?  I doubt that was one of the critera!  Transistor designs were responsible for high global feedback, the distortion wars, and a couple of other ills.  Was that an advancement?

BTW - I used to work for Bell Labs (you may have heard of them - they invented the ummmm... transistor) where I did CAD design of ICs.  You can get technical if you want to.

Sorry Bob Rex but....

It really burns me up when people try to pass themselves off as experts.

Yours posts so far make it obvious your understanding of the subject is limited.

I do think it's neat that you did work at bell labs and do drawings for them.

[Daryl]

BobRex,

how extremely refreshing to have your informed input on this and other matters!

Seriously.

P.S. One of my favorite Bell Labs "rules" is the rule of 400,000, where the frequency response characteristics of an electro-acoustic transducer (headphone or speaker) are such that the product of the high and low -3 dB points should be 400,000, e.g., 20 - 20,000 Hz, 40 - 10,000 Hz or 60 - 6,666 Hz.

Not at all informed.

The rule of 400,000 is a poor idea.

True it can keep the sound of a pocket radio from sounding high or low pitched by keeping it's bandwidth centered upon 630hz.

Really though that's like showing up late to work and then making up for it by leaving early.

When designing speakers which will not be full range you reproduce as much of the signal as possible.

High frequency response is easy to come by so you don't limit that.

If the range of the low frequencies must be limited as in a small monitor they will sound 'light' in the bass if the response is flat but limited in extension (say 60hz or so).

You restore the balance or 'bass weight' in a small speaker by elevating the lowest frequencies it can produce just enough that it sounds 'full'.

There is opportunity here to make vocals have that tubby FM radio sound and therefore that is the challenge to a designer of small speakers to make them sound full but not bloated.

[macrojack]

High Fidelity is dead.

[doug s.]

not at my house.  and, i bet not at your house, either!   

doug s.

High Fidelity is dead.

[Freo-1]

Here is an interesting link about tube amps and tube sound:

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/archive/1640

Both tubes and solid state equipment can sound great, or terrible! There are many variables that go into that equation, not the least of which is the speaker/amplifier interaction!

I have both a tube and solid state setup, and they both perform well. I generally prefer the tube gear for 2 channel audio, but also get great results for multi channel surround sound from the solid state setup.  The article describes the advantages and disadvantages of each.   As to which is better, that, is a debate for the ages.

In general, high quality audio reproduction is in trouble. When the Ipod and MP3 players are the dominant media,  that does not bode well for the future.   

[WEEZ]

Good post, Freo. 

I am hopeful that the '33% of pre-recorded music in lo-rez' sighted in db cooper's original post is not a trend for the future. Because if it is, macrojack is right.

I prefer to be optimistic.....

[macrojack]

Doug - You're right. Hi-Fi is not dead at my house but it is seriously wounded since I sold my Zu's and installed these JBL's.
I think you overestimate the significance of a few thousand aging audio freaks. We are the past. The future is heading in a different direction. Quantity is being emphasized over quality. Disagree if you wish. All you starry eyed prognosticators can cite your reasons why you don't agree and call me a pessimist for pointing this out. Money has overwhelmed our industry. The days of innocence are gone. Most manufacturers are hand to mouth. Some, like Thiel, have enough momentum to attract corporate suitors but most will evaporate in short order. The Dream Is Over!

Several well-known manufacturers have told me that they will be able to make a living fixing what they already made when the other shoe drops but they feel for newer guys with less traction because time is running out.

One of my kids may pursue audio on his own. The other one probably will not. This is a household where they grew up on the stuff and have had it spoonfed to them. Pachelbel's Canon in D was playing in the other room when they were born at home. Still, the interest is modest. Most young people have not had that exposure, don't care, and never will.

I hope you are able to understand that when I say it is over, I am making a projection. I don't mean it has stopped breathing but it has stopped generating new cells. The end is near.

Soon our demographic will be limited to the very rich and the very poor.....and so will our audio products.

[doug s.]

it is certainly true that hi-fidelity is at the mercy of the recording industry, no matter how adwanced the technology of playback systems becomes.  but, imo, there will always be a fringe element in the recording industry that cares about the quality of the recording, so, even if it is no longer mainstream, hi-fidelity recordings (and therefore playback) will live on.  even in the winyl hey-dey, recordings such as those offered by mo-fi, survived by offering even better recordings.  if the mainstream becomes dumbed-down, the independent hi-fidelity recording studios will prosper...  personally, i really don't care what the mainstream music industry does, as it's not held much interest for me for many years, due to content...

of course, it would be nice if the mainstream went to something like 24/192 dvd-a, but i don't see any incentive for them to do so now.  in 1983, when cd's came out, the recording industry incentive was increased profits, not hi-fidelity, as the cost to produce cd's is pennies, compared to dollars for winyl, & they could still charge double the price.  too bad they cheaped-out back then; they still could have made a fortune if they adopted 24/192 as the standard format, but it would have incrementally reduced profit as the initial set-up costs would have been a bit more.  oh well...   

doug s.

[macrojack]

Doug - See if you can find a really good recording of "TAPS". Nothing like a bugle solo to bring down the curtain.

[doug s.]

macro, the only reason i disagree w/your projection, is because, imo, hi-fidelity has always been a lunatic fringe part of the mainstream music industry, both for mfr's & for listeners.  hi-end mfr's have always been hand-to-mouth, w/a few becoming well-known & prosperous.  "same as it ever was"   

i always thought hi-end was my pioneer receiver, dual turntable, bose 901 speakers, & graphic equalizer/pink noise generator to flatten out the frequency response - a system i bought at the ripe old age of 13, back in 1969.  it wasn't until i heard thiel speakers, electrocompaniet electronics, & vpi source, in ~1984 that i realized i'd been missing a lot. :  and, then, i finally realized what my step-brother was telling me, back in 1969, that i shoulda gotten jbl speakers, empire turntable, & dynaco amplification...   

my kids, at 12 & 16, have been exposed to my hobby.  they love music.  while they appreciate the conwenience of lo-rez formats, the also enjoy, & can hear & appreciate the difference of a decent audio rig.  i would be wery surprised, if years down the road, they don't have a hi-rez playback dsystem in their dwellings...

regards,

doug s.

Doug - You're right. Hi-Fi is not dead at my house but it is seriously wounded since I sold my Zu's and installed these JBL's.
I think you overestimate the significance of a few thousand aging audio freaks. We are the past. The future is heading in a different direction. Quantity is being emphasized over quality. Disagree if you wish. All you starry eyed prognosticators can cite your reasons why you don't agree and call me a pessimist for pointing this out. Money has overwhelmed our industry. The days of innocence are gone. Most manufacturers are hand to mouth. Some, like Thiel, have enough momentum to attract corporate suitors but most will evaporate in short order. The Dream Is Over!

Several well-known manufacturers have told me that they will be able to make a living fixing what they already made when the other shoe drops but they feel for newer guys with less traction because time is running out.

One of my kids may pursue audio on his own. The other one probably will not. This is a household where they grew up on the stuff and have had it spoonfed to them. Pachelbel's Canon in D was playing in the other room when they were born at home. Still, the interest is modest. Most young people have not had that exposure, don't care, and never will.

I hope you are able to understand that when I say it is over, I am making a projection. I don't mean it has stopped breathing but it has stopped generating new cells. The end is near.

Soon our demographic will be limited to the very rich and the very poor.....and so will our audio products.

[doug s.]

 

doug s.

Doug - See if you can find a really good recording of "TAPS". Nothing like a bugle solo to bring down the curtain.

[dB Cooper]

According to a statistic cited by Steve Jobs at today's Apple media event, a third of all prerecorded music sold in the last year wasn't even released in CD format, but only in lo-res formats used to conserve download bandwidth and hard drive space. A third of prerecorded music.

db,

I'm interested in finding out specifically what "third" of music last year was available only in lo-res formats.

Can you provide a link to that?

Cheers

Right now I only have a link to the Apple Keynote in which Jobs made the claim.

http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/s83522y/event/index.html?internal=g4h5jl83a

I can't make the contact directly (it's "ticklish" as an Apple employee to be perceived as discussing Apple on boards like this one, which is verboten) but on the Apple PR contact page, the senior manager of PR for iPod, AppleTV, and iTunes, Tom Neumayr, would surely have the info or know where to get it. Unfortunately I don't have time at the moment to get into deep research anyway. Not trying to be evasive, just busier than a one legged man at an ass-kicking contest; that's why I haven't been in this thread that much.

[Steve Eddy]

Both tubes and solid state equipment can sound great, or terrible! There are many variables that go into that equation, not the least of which is the speaker/amplifier interaction!

Right.

And the thing is, even though there are some inherent differences in the behavior of tubes and transistors, whenever there are comparisons between tubes vs. transistors, virtually all of them are comparing apples to oranges. You can't take an ultra simple, single-ended tube amp and compare it to a much more complex, complimentary symmetry transistor amp and think you've compared tubes to transistors.

se

[darrenyeats]

All you starry eyed prognosticators can cite your reasons why you don't agree and call me a pessimist for pointing this out.

Macrojack - you pessimist

Well, I agree that firms are going out of business. But the quality of domestic equipment is getting better in general at each price point. So that means better sound for more people. I know if the great masses have their hands on quality sound systems it takes the kudos away from us hi-fi heads. But it's not all bad.

There are many parallels between hi-fi and cars. I see classic hi-fi similar to classic cars. There will always be a niche market for these - so it will never die completely. There will always be people who appreciate the sense of style and the feeling of luxury and attention to detail that existed earlier. Modern hi-fi - transistor amps, active speakers, red book, subwoofers etc etc - is like modern cars. In every way that is actually measurable they *perform better* than old cars (speed, economy, safety) although they could be considered soul-less for that.

So when we discuss valves vs transistors etc we have to be careful what is meant. If you'd rather drive a classic Rolls Royce than a BMW M5 then that is a valid personal choice which is beyond criticism. If you claim the classic Rolls Royce is faster, more economical, safer or more practical than an M5 (all areas which can be quantified to some extent) you are just mistaken.
Darren

PS: FYI I'm not into BMWs myself - just used it for the sake of illustration