Re: Vacuum Tubes - Are They Warmer Sounding?

"flipper" <flipper@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:fko144ltak7lrq47ro6g7dafvtqk4hmc4c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Fri, 30 May 2008 13:51:31 -0700 (PDT), Peter Wieck
> <pfjw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>

>> Not to worry. Arny is blessed with invincible ignorance
>> and complete deafness/blindness to any arguments other
>> than his own and terms other than those he defines
>> himself. When dealing with that sort of individual, the
>> only valid response is none after that condition is
>> established. He is on a crusade to bust myths - in other
>> words, he is preaching his exclusive brand of revealed
>> religion against that of others.

Hmm don't you see dialog like this on afternoon TV soap operas?

>> Unless you are also requiring others believe as you do
>> and share your precise brand of revealed religion, you
>> will understand that for those for whom tubes are an
>> enjoyable hobby and just one more aspect of the audio
>> hobby in general,

What I know is that tubies have a lot of cherished notions that don't
stand 
up to informed technical investigation. The OP for  this thread was a
small 
collection of those notions.

>>  Arny is a pathetic fool that really
>> wants nothing more than to take everybody's ball home so
>> they can't play without his permission and approval -
>> which, as it happens - is the failure of other preachers
>> as well if not so obviously.

Notice the prerequisite personal attack. If you try to inform some people 
about the weaknesses of their cherished beliefs, one receives this sort of

response from many of them.

>> So, let the religionists battle it out, hopefully away
>> from here, and let the rest of us get on with enjoying
>> ourselves, and tubes, and their foibles good and bad.
>
> I haven't tried to 'convince' anyone of tube amp merits,
> or the lack thereof.

Nahh, you just told us a number of tubie fairy tales.

> All I did was say there are those
> who believe there's audible merit to circuit simplicity.

The first bogus idea is that circuit simplicity can even have audible
merit. 
It's a mixture of irrelevant modes - one being circuit design, another
being 
sound quality.  It has long been known that many approaches to the best 
possible sound quality, such as OTL tubed power amps, can involve anything

but simple circuits and low parts count. However, it is also known that 
simply throwing parts at a problem doesn't necessarily solve it better. 
Therefore it is easy for most of us to see that circuit simplicity and 
audible merit are irrelevant.

I then pointed out that with classic tubes, a power amp with decent 
performance will require about 21 discrete parts, some of them being quite

large, heavy, awkward, hard-to-obtain, and expensive. I found that a 
superior alternative can built using one little piece of readily-available

silicon, together with about 6 other inexpensive, readily obtainable
parts. 
So, even if the stated thesis was relevant, it would still be an effective

critique of tube bigotry.

> I didn't even say 'tube' and there's plenty of folks with
> that philosophy designing 'simple' SS amps, one of which
> I posted a link to.

I've already shown that the concept of simplicity correlating or being a 
cause of sound quality is bogus, whether for tubes or SS.


>Arny's so hair on fire hell bent to save the world
> from the 'tube threat' that he barely even sees what's
> written, much less understand it.

Nahh, I'm not saving the world, I'm just tying a few tube bigots up in
knots 
using their own outdated preferences and false claims.


> The hair on fire SS bigot pontificating about 'tube
> bigots' makes for comic relief, though.

True the idea that people would be so emotionally involved with tubes that

they would resort to libel and childish nattering is quite comic.