[Niteshade]

I always believed the simple circuit over a complex one has the most potential NOT to interfere with all the subtle nuances of a recording. Amplifiers which use multiple gain stages to bump up what negative feedback has stripped away really wreaks havoc on the subtle nuances present in some music.

The virtues of NFB are apparent, but there are side effects. Sterility can be one of them. If an amp can pump out a 100 watt sine wave that's as 'pure as the wind driven snow' but it's at the cost of massive small signal attenuation, is it worth it? Sounds like Dolby Noise Reduction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_noise_reduction_system

I never used Dolby NR on my cassettes. It sounds awful.

Here is another good article: http://www.stereophile.com/reference/70/index.html

The quest for transparency begins with an understanding of how it is achieved.

Side note: The subtle use of NFB may not be damaging. Hopefully this will please some folks. 

[Brown]

while i do not know for sure, i suspect that, when it comes to electronic audio gear, more technically accurate may be less musically neutral.

 I agree Doug. There is some gear out there, both tube and SS, that can come across as sterile. Depending of course on the associated equipment within the rest of the system. Absolute neutrality does not (cannot) exist as there are far too many variables starting with the recording itself.

 I think one of the biggest problems with audiophile terms is that everyone has a different perception of what they mean.

agree 100%. From the microphone on out its colored. OK play a guitar in a small room, then a large room. The acoustics of the room will affect the presentation. Ever hear a string quartet at Carnegie as opposed to say Lincoln center. Two different presentations same instrument. The acoustics or color of the room have as affect. As soon as the string is struck the neutral note is altered by its environment. the heck with all this small signal talk. DO YOUR ROOM, you will realize more.

[*Scotty*]

Brown, I think you have missed the point. What we are referring to when we are using the term neutral in this thread is striving not to add any colorations or editorial content to the program material in the recording. The original live performance undergoes alteration by the recording process, and it hopefully bears some resemblance to the original event.
What we are defining as neutral or High Fidelity reproduction of the original source consists of preserving as much of the information present in the recording as possible in what ever form or color it may have. How the instruments sound may have been altered by the acoustics of the space in which it was played or how the mic used deviates from accuracy in translating the acoustic waveform into an electronic signal is not an issue.   
Scotty

[dyohn]

"Absolute neutrality" is almost antithetical to the reason for using tube amplifiers and preamps in the first place.  If you really want neutrality, you will probably be happier with solid state gear.

[doug s.]

"Absolute neutrality" is almost antithetical to the reason for using tube amplifiers and preamps in the first place.  If you really want neutrality, you will probably be happier with solid state gear.

i must respectfully beg to differ w/you here.  or, maybe this is where a word or statement means two different things to two different people.  as i stated before, this is what it means to me:

"...while i do not know for sure, i suspect that, when it comes to electronic audio gear, more technically accurate may be less musically neutral...."

i want my audio playback to sound more like real music.  tube amplification (and especially tube preamplification) is what gets me closer to that...

ymmv,

doug s.

[pardales]

...

[DSK]

"Absolute neutrality" is almost antithetical to the reason for using tube amplifiers and preamps in the first place.  If you really want neutrality, you will probably be happier with solid state gear.

i must respectfully beg to differ w/you here.  or, maybe this is where a word or statement means two different things to two different people.  as i stated before, this is what it means to me:

"...while i do not know for sure, i suspect that, when it comes to electronic audio gear, more technically accurate may be less musically neutral...."

i want my audio playback to sound more like real music.  tube amplification (and especially tube preamplification) is what gets me closer to that...

ymmv,

doug s.

Doug, I have to agree with you. If, for example, a tube preamplifier (not an "old school" lush, euphonic, blatantly "Coloured" one) makes the instruments sound more real and closer to the "live performance", then it is more neutral not less as it is making less change.

It sounds like dyohn may not have read the thread properly, or is simply taking something he has read at face value and forwarding it on as if fact. Often such generalisations had a shaky basis to begin with but are forwarded on as "fact" from poster to poster to poster to poster ......

OTOH, if dyohn has done the comparisons for himself and his comment is based on his own ears and experience, I have no problem with it. We just hear differently or have different interpretations of "neutral" or what real instruments sound like.

[Freo-1]

"Absolute neutrality" is almost antithetical to the reason for using tube amplifiers and preamps in the first place.  If you really want neutrality, you will probably be happier with solid state gear.

i must respectfully beg to differ w/you here.  or, maybe this is where a word or statement means two different things to two different people.  as i stated before, this is what it means to me:

"...while i do not know for sure, i suspect that, when it comes to electronic audio gear, more technically accurate may be less musically neutral...."

i want my audio playback to sound more like real music.  tube amplification (and especially tube preamplification) is what gets me closer to that...

ymmv,

doug s.

I'm with Doug on this one.

By the way, I got MUCH closer to Neutral with my DYI preamp than I have with commercial manufactured tube amp equipment. 

[dyohn]

Well, I guess it depends on your definition of "neutrality."    To me, an "absolutely neutral" signal path (which does not exist) introduces nothing to the signal.  A theoretical straight wire with gain.  In general, valve gear introduces many more (and often unpredictable) signal artifacts than does solid state gear, and while it is undeniable that the even order distortion of valves can make the signal sound more warm and, perhaps, "musical" than an IC, arguing that that is the same as "neutral" is a different use of that term than any I'm familiar with.  If valves were "neutral" there would be no point to sports like "tube rolling."  BTW, I use and love tube DACs, so it's not like I'm an anti-valve guy, just that I maintain that they are not "neutral."

[Brown]

Brown, I think you have missed the point. What we are referring to when we are using the term neutral in this thread is striving not to add any colorations or editorial content to the program material in the recording. The original live performance undergoes alteration by the recording process, and it hopefully bears some resemblance to the original event.
What we are defining as neutral or High Fidelity reproduction of the original source consists of preserving as much of the information present in the recording as possible in what ever form or color it may have. How the instruments sound may have been altered by the acoustics of the space in which it was played or how the mic used deviates from accuracy in translating the acoustic waveform into an electronic signal is not an issue.   
Scotty

Cool. There is only one way to tell. Measure what goes in said component
[ transfer function] and what comes out. The only Manf. that I know of who does this is Nelson Pass. For us regular guys without the necessary equip its our ears. Subjective as it is though it works for me.
   For this conversation can we say that if an obvious coloration is present such as boomy bass, thin, bright or dark character its colored. If its clean and open its neutral.

[doug s.]

Well, I guess it depends on your definition of "neutrality."    To me, an "absolutely neutral" signal path (which does not exist) introduces nothing to the signal.  A theoretical straight wire with gain.  In general, valve gear introduces many more (and often unpredictable) signal artifacts than does solid state gear, and while it is undeniable that the even order distortion of valves can make the signal sound more warm and, perhaps, "musical" than an IC, arguing that that is the same as "neutral" is a different use of that term than any I'm familiar with.  If valves were "neutral" there would be no point to sports like "tube rolling."  BTW, I use and love tube DACs, so it's not like I'm an anti-valve guy, just that I maintain that they are not "neutral."

that is exactly what i was talking about, & what i suspected you mean.  i believe that neutral, in an electronic sense means coloured in a musical sense...    there is no such thing as "straight wire with gain" on the recording side of the equation.  so, even if it were possible to have it on the playback side (which it's not, imo), if you did have the theoretical "straight wire with gain" on the playback side, it's not gonna be musically neutral...

doug s.

[miklorsmith]

YEAH!

Hypothetical - what if some of that "harmonic richness" that great tubed gear adds replaces some of what was lost in the recording/mastering/production/playback systems?

In that case, you'd have imperfect delivery of a flawed reproduction that just    so     happens to be closer to the live event. 

More neutral, or less?

This may just be a deluded vision of a warped mind looking for order in the universe but it's the only explanation that connects all the dots as I see them.

[dyohn]

that is exactly what i was talking about, & what i suspected you mean.  i believe that neutral, in an electronic sense means coloured in a musical sense...    there is no such thing as "straight wire with gain" on the recording side of the equation.  so, even if it were possible to have it on the playback side (which it's not, imo), if you did have the theoretical "straight wire with gain" on the playback side, it's not gonna be musically neutral...

doug s.

Hey Doug.  Your description above completely alters the term "neutral."  Electronic neutrality = accurate and unadulterated signal path from source to loudspeaker.  You get whatever the recording engineer chose to put onto the recording with nothing added by the system that is not already there.  This is, of course, almost impossible, and is why we all choose the different systems we all choose.  If you (or anyone else) happens to "like" the particular colorations added to or subtracted from the source by the components in your signal chain, then so be it, you LIKE it and it is probably not going the be the same exact thing someone else might "like."  But calling something "musically neutral" because you happen to like the way it sounds has about as much meaning as me calling McDonald's sickening because every time I eat there I get the Hershey squirts.     We all react differently to input stimuli.  The goal of electronic neutrality is for the gear to add as little as possible to the source, so that each user may then adjust and change it to suit their particular set of reactions.

And thus I say again: valve gear is not generally neutral.  It adds a particular set of colorations that, if you like them, are pleasing to the ear.  If you don't like them, they they are not pleasing.  But colorations they all do add, and in most cases they are far less neutral than solid state components.

[Daygloworange]

Hey Doug.  Your description above completely alters the term "neutral."  Electronic neutrality = accurate and unadulterated signal path from source to loudspeaker.  You get whatever the recording engineer chose to put onto the recording with nothing added by the system that is not already there.   

I have to agree. Neutral is neutral. Nothing added, nothing gained. If you blur the meaning of neutral, then there is no baseline to reference from. It becomes entirely subjective. Then we are all screwed. 

The problem (again) stems from the recordings. There are no perfect recordings (there are really good ones however). There is no perfect mic that is perfect for every application. Just go onto any recording studio website and you will find a page that lists their microphone inventory. The list is usually long. Same with mic pre-amps, and Eq's, compressors etc... They usually have tens of thousands of dollars invested (usually much more) in mics, pre's and Eq's etc...

All these are used to subjectively color the sonic capture of the musical event at the discretion of whomever...

With these tools you can make a snare drum sound like a piece of paper being crumpled, all the way to a gunshot.

Mics are rarely chosen for a particular situation because of their (neutrality or faithfulness), quite the contrary, they can vary wildly in how they sound. They are chosen for what they do to the capture of the musical event, and it's use given the context of the particular recording.  Certain instruments or performers will be miked to be prominent, while others are miked to be more in the background. Any yes, mics are often chosen to make things sound "more musical and rich".

The saying in the studio goes, "he who Eq's less, Eq's best".  Mic selection is critical, as is mic placement. You can spend untold hours trying to fix something that wasn't recorded well, and sometimes not at all.


Cheers

[*Scotty*]

By making a case for adding distortion during the reproduction of the information captured in the original recording you have abandoned the concept of High Fidelity.
Once again there is nothing wrong with a personal preference for a certain type sound associated with added 2nd harmonic distortion. However this preference should be recognized for what it is,a compromise necessary for some individuals to suit their perception of what is required for their individual satisfaction. The individual should also be aware of the price he has
paid. By adding distortion to the playback of your music you have masked information that was present in the recording. In essence you have added dirt to the window through which you are viewing the performance and decreased the transparency of the system and the amount of low level information you might have heard.
Distortion levels from tubes doesn't have to be excessive. The Audio Research Reference 3 line preamplifier has a THD level of about .003% at 2volts out, the SP16L line preamplifier has about .0025% THD. The Audio Research VT200 has a THD of about .08% at 100watts/8ohms. If we as consumers don't demand higher transparency and neutrality from the gear we buy then we will have only ourselves to blame when there is no alternative to colored and distortion laden equipment that fails to transmit the essence of the music to our loudspeakers and our ears.
Scotty

[rajacat]

that is exactly what i was talking about, & what i suspected you mean.  i believe that neutral, in an electronic sense means coloured in a musical sense...    there is no such thing as "straight wire with gain" on the recording side of the equation.  so, even if it were possible to have it on the playback side (which it's not, imo), if you did have the theoretical "straight wire with gain" on the playback side, it's not gonna be musically neutral...

doug s.

Hey Doug.  Your description above completely alters the term "neutral."  Electronic neutrality = accurate and unadulterated signal path from source to loudspeaker.  You get whatever the recording engineer chose to put onto the recording with nothing added by the system that is not already there.  This is, of course, almost impossible, and is why we all choose the different systems we all choose.  If you (or anyone else) happens to "like" the particular colorations added to or subtracted from the source by the components in your signal chain, then so be it, you LIKE it and it is probably not going the be the same exact thing someone else might "like."  But calling something "musically neutral" because you happen to like the way it sounds has about as much meaning as me calling McDonald's sickening because every time I eat there I get the Hershey squirts.     We all react differently to input stimuli.  The goal of electronic neutrality is for the gear to add as little as possible to the source, so that each user may then adjust and change it to suit their particular set of reactions.

And thus I say again: valve gear is not generally neutral.  It adds a particular set of colorations that, if you like them, are pleasing to the ear.  If you don't like them, they they are not pleasing.  But colorations they all do add, and in most cases they are far less neutral than solid state components.

Can you prove the assertion that solid state gear is more neutral then tubes? Perhaps the infinite tonal spectrum is not measurable using current technology. Really, even with the absolute top of the line SS gear there are obvious differences in sound quality. Since state of the art SS gear can't achieve consistency then there must be something out there that is not being measured using SOTA lab equipment. Shouldn't all SOTA SS gear sound the same? Perhaps tube gear fills in the  "x" factor that SS gear neglects. If you just use measurements as your design criteria then there would be no reason to even listen to the gear before marketing it. Is there a measurement that will predict if an amp will have good holographic qualities which something that tube amps excell? Please inform me what that measurement is.

-Roy

[Daygloworange]

By making a case for adding distortion during the reproduction of the information captured in the original recording you have abandoned the concept of High Fidelity.

Ya, I've said that myself countless times.

Once again there is nothing wrong with a personal preference for a certain type sound associated with added 2nd harmonic distortion.

Ya, I've always said that as well. 2nd order harmonic distortion can be very pleasant. In fact, that is why musical instruments sound pleasant. It's the overtones. Pure sine waves go through your skull like a nail.

By adding distortion to the playback of your music you have masked information that was present in the recording. In essence you have added dirt to the window through which you are viewing the performance and decreased the transparency of the system and the amount of low level information you might have heard

Very true as well. You hit the nail right on the head. I grew up recording on analog tape for many years. Started digital sampling in the late 80's. With the digital recorders now, the playback is so much more faithful to the input, it's astonishing. It takes a while to get used to it. It really does. You actually miss the distortions and compression artifacts from analog tape. They were part of "the" sound. The other huge factor is noise floor. If you've ever pulled up 24 (muted) faders of an analog multitrack to unity gain on a mixer with nothing recorded on the tape, and then un-mute them one at a time till you have 24 tracks of analog running to the monitors.......ughhh....it's pretty bad. Of course this is where a lot of low level detail is masked.

But once you become accustomed to the greater faithfulness of digital, going back is like 3 sugars in your coffee, when you been drinking it black for years. (Well.....maybe not for everyone... )

But I'll never tell someone that they are wrong for liking the sound that they prefer. In fact, I'll defend their personal preferences.

Great post Scotty.   


Cheers

[dyohn]

Can you prove the assertion that solid state gear is more neutral then tubes? Perhaps the infinite tonal spectrum is not measurable using current technology. Really, even with the absolute top of the line SS gear there are obvious differences in sound quality. Since state of the art SS gear can't achieve consistency then there must be something out there that is not being measured using SOTA lab equipment. Shouldn't all SOTA SS gear sound the same? Perhaps tube gear fills in the  "x" factor that SS gear neglects. If you just use measurements as your design criteria then there would be no reason to even listen to the gear before marketing it. Is there a measurement that will predict if an amp will have good holographic qualities which something that tube amps excell? Please inform me what that measurement is.

-Roy

You're jumping to quite a few conclusions there.  I never mentioned anything about "sound quality" or "X-factors" or that all gear using the same components would sound the same.  That would be silly.  (Although, what *IS* an "X-factor" and how would you measure it??)    The definition of neutral is the accurate reproduction of the source material, not how "musical" the gear is.  How about you show me a set of measurements where typical valve amplifiers are more accurate than typical SS gear?  Oh, and for convenience sake, let's use CEA-490-A as our measurement criteria.

I was very careful to allow for the infinite variety of subjective judgements we all (ALL) use when selecting audio gear and am NOT taking the position that any amplifier topology is inherently "superior" to any other.  To each his own, it's all up to our individual ears and to what we like to hear.  But if we use the classic audio definition of the term "neutral" as "adding nothing" then I maintain that typical SS gear is "more neutral" than typical valve gear.

This has nothing to do with "musicality" (another subjective term that means different things to different users) nor with the subjective judgement of "value."  Please don't put that on anything I wrote.

[rajacat]

Placement of instruments in space. How do we predict if a piece of gear will do that with accuracy. There is more to sound then just frequency response. Why do most audiophiles, while acknowledging that digital is convenient, still, by and large, agree that analog reproduction via the stone age tech of the turntable provides the most realistic sound. The SS vs. tubes could be an analog of this situation.

-Roy

[miklorsmith]

OK, cool.  I'll defend others' rights to make up their own minds certainly.

I've heard a number of very highly regarded systems where all the parts were touted for their accuracy.  I've never found one enjoyable.  I forget - what's the measurement for dynamic accuracy?

SS vs. tubes, yes, apropos comparison.

Another comparison would be the question of whether we're truly measuring all aspects of sound correctly.  I know what I think and from what I've read most designers agree with me.  A few don't - Vladimir Lamm being a notable figure.  I have his LL2 Deluxe preamp and it's awesome.