| Author |
Message |
Paul
Guest
|
 Posted:
Mon Nov 22, 2004 10:06 am Post subject:
Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manual, |
|
|
Ignoble heir to a proud tradition
The history of serious audio amplification-'serious' meaning a
concerted effort to achieve fidelity even when mainstream thought held
it superfluous-is unusual because, even more so than in Amateur Radio
(hams quit building, except for purposely crude and simplistic QRP
equipment,in the late sixties for the most part), it has been largely
driven by hardcore, soldering-iron-wielding hobbyists. From concert
violinist David Sarser to astronaut Norman Thagard, there's a big
tradition of bright people wholly outside their discipline plowing new
design ground and publishing their results, along with more
conventional engineers and technicians whose published works drove
first the do-it-yourself builders and then the industry at large.
Lincoln Walsh, D.T.N. and Reg Williamson-two unrelated Englishmen
twenty years apart-Hafler and Keroes, and many others founded a
tradition carried on well into the solid state era: Bongiorno's
Ampzilla was the first real stake in the heart of the tube amp's
dominance among the hot iron cognoscenti. The "tube revival"-a
misnomer because among really serious audiophiles there never was a
time where everyone agreed solid state was superior or even
acceptable-was, as a previous reviewer notes, a DIY-spearheaded effort
with the indefatiguable Ed Dell's Audio Amateur/Glass
Audio/AudioXPress magazines and later hardcore journals such as Sound
Practices and Vacuum Tube Valley publishing projects, offering parts
and describing the finished homebrews in glowing (no pun intended)
terms. By no means was solid state abandoned, but tube amplifiers have
always been more popular as homebuilt projects.
Many books have been written in the past 50 years on the building of
high fidelity equipment. This one isn't the worst, but that's no
excuse: it's certainly not very good. It's an unedited, disjointed
bunch of facts, half-truths, outright sour grapes, and willfully
misleading statements coupled to some projects with PCB artwork but
little design explanation. The designs themselves look like they are
straight out of Audio Amateur or Practical Wireless (UK) circa 1982.
Combined with the author's Howard Cosell-like writing style and total
lack of fact checking (he lists the manufacturer of Audio Precision
audio test equipment as Thurlby Thandar, a Brit company about as far
from Beaverton, Oregon as could be imagined!) he's far more likely to
provoke High Enders to chuck the book into a river than to change
their mind about anything whatsoever.
His later book is a little better, but not a lot. There are better
writers working for far better publishers with far more useful things
to say for anyone actually wanting to build an amplifier, so my advice
is to simply avoid this book in favor of several other titles. In
recent years, speakers of Japanese, German, and even French have had
more quality titles to choose from than the Anglophone press has
produced-Reiner zur Linde and Isamu Asano especially are most talked
about-but none the less, Slone is not a preffered choice in any
language.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Glenn Baddeley
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 3:40 am Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
Paul, thanks for writing your personal opinion and including 10 lines
to actually comment on the book itself.
| Quote: | some projects with PCB artwork but little design explanation
|
I have read the book from cover to cover and every facet of
every project design is described in great detail, although not
on a per-project basis.
Sure, he has a tendency towards increased complexity to achieve
extremely low distortion figures, and presents some power amps which are
more suited to PA or instrument amplification, but I found the book to
be
quite lucid.
I won't be building any of his amps for hi-fi purposes, but it
was an interesting read. It is mostly in obeyance with the respected
work of
audio guru Douglas Self.
Glenn.
Paul wrote:
| Quote: | Ignoble heir to a proud tradition
The history of serious audio amplification-'serious' meaning a
concerted effort to achieve fidelity even when mainstream thought held
it superfluous-is unusual because, even more so than in Amateur Radio
(hams quit building, except for purposely crude and simplistic QRP
equipment,in the late sixties for the most part), it has been largely
driven by hardcore, soldering-iron-wielding hobbyists. From concert
violinist David Sarser to astronaut Norman Thagard, there's a big
tradition of bright people wholly outside their discipline plowing new
design ground and publishing their results, along with more
conventional engineers and technicians whose published works drove
first the do-it-yourself builders and then the industry at large.
Lincoln Walsh, D.T.N. and Reg Williamson-two unrelated Englishmen
twenty years apart-Hafler and Keroes, and many others founded a
tradition carried on well into the solid state era: Bongiorno's
Ampzilla was the first real stake in the heart of the tube amp's
dominance among the hot iron cognoscenti. The "tube revival"-a
misnomer because among really serious audiophiles there never was a
time where everyone agreed solid state was superior or even
acceptable-was, as a previous reviewer notes, a DIY-spearheaded effort
with the indefatiguable Ed Dell's Audio Amateur/Glass
Audio/AudioXPress magazines and later hardcore journals such as Sound
Practices and Vacuum Tube Valley publishing projects, offering parts
and describing the finished homebrews in glowing (no pun intended)
terms. By no means was solid state abandoned, but tube amplifiers have
always been more popular as homebuilt projects.
Many books have been written in the past 50 years on the building of
high fidelity equipment. This one isn't the worst, but that's no
excuse: it's certainly not very good. It's an unedited, disjointed
bunch of facts, half-truths, outright sour grapes, and willfully
misleading statements coupled to some projects with PCB artwork but
little design explanation. The designs themselves look like they are
straight out of Audio Amateur or Practical Wireless (UK) circa 1982.
Combined with the author's Howard Cosell-like writing style and total
lack of fact checking (he lists the manufacturer of Audio Precision
audio test equipment as Thurlby Thandar, a Brit company about as far
from Beaverton, Oregon as could be imagined!) he's far more likely to
provoke High Enders to chuck the book into a river than to change
their mind about anything whatsoever.
His later book is a little better, but not a lot. There are better
writers working for far better publishers with far more useful things
to say for anyone actually wanting to build an amplifier, so my advice
is to simply avoid this book in favor of several other titles. In
recent years, speakers of Japanese, German, and even French have had
more quality titles to choose from than the Anglophone press has
produced-Reiner zur Linde and Isamu Asano especially are most talked
about-but none the less, Slone is not a preffered choice in any
language. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stewart Pinkerton
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:58 am Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
On 21 Nov 2004 22:13:08 -0800, oatteaseffen@hotmail.com (Paul) wrote:
| Quote: | The "tube revival"-a
misnomer because among really serious audiophiles there never was a
time where everyone agreed solid state was superior or even
acceptable
|
Hardly a misnomer, since only a tiny minority of 'really serious
audiophiles' actually use tube amps. And you can't get 'really serious
audiophiles' to agree about *anything*, so that comment is totally
irrelevant when applied to *any* audio argument!
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JBorg
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 2:04 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
| Quote: | Stewart Pinkerton wrote
Paul wrote:
The "tube revival"-a
misnomer because among really serious audiophiles there never was a
time where everyone agreed solid state was superior or even
acceptable
Hardly a misnomer, since only a tiny minority of 'really serious
audiophiles' actually use tube amps. And you can't get 'really serious
audiophiles' to agree about *anything*, so that comment is totally
irrelevant when applied to *any* audio argument!
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
|
I sense that some, if not, most serious audiophiles do agree about many things
in high-end audio. As an example, some would assent that tube electronics
really do sound really, really, really good for the ears. Problem occurs when
scournful individual would join into conversation and start spouting bad words
all over the thread because they would assert that tube would never sound as
good to their equals in SS electronics. May I have your point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arny Krueger
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 2:04 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
"JBorg" <jborg@eudoramail.com> wrote in message
news:uWEod.25624$6q2.5164@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com
| Quote: | I sense that some, if not, most serious audiophiles do agree about
many things in high-end audio.
|
Exactly. Other than a tiny retrograde luantic fringe, serious audiophiles
avoid tubed equipment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dave weil
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 2:04 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 06:31:29 -0500, "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com>
wrote:
| Quote: | "JBorg" <jborg@eudoramail.com> wrote in message
news:uWEod.25624$6q2.5164@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com
I sense that some, if not, most serious audiophiles do agree about
many things in high-end audio.
Exactly. Other than a tiny retrograde luantic fringe, serious audiophiles
avoid tubed equipment.
|
Why can't you get your spellchecker to work?
Also, if you had said "audio consumers" instead of "serious
audiophiles", you might have been correct. However, considering how
many tube amps change hands each year, it seems like the percentage of
"serious audiophiles" who *don't* avoid tube amps is quite a bit more
than "tiny". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stewart Pinkerton
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 4:45 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:25:49 +1100, Patrick Turner
<info@turneraudio.com.au> wrote:
| Quote: | Arny Krueger wrote:
"JBorg" <jborg@eudoramail.com> wrote in message
news:uWEod.25624$6q2.5164@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com
I sense that some, if not, most serious audiophiles do agree about
many things in high-end audio.
Exactly. Other than a tiny retrograde luantic fringe, serious audiophiles
avoid tubed equipment.
None of the audiophiles I know avoid tube gear.
|
Birds of a feather.................
Only three of the two dozen or so 'serious audiophiles' I know
personally do *not* avoid valve amplifiers. And one of those only has
a valved preamp, he wouldn't touch valved power amps with a barge
pole!
BTW, didn't you mention having designed and built a 300 watt MOSFET
amp for someone? Was he not a 'serious audiophile'?
| Quote: | Most are open minded.
|
Well IME some are, some aren't, and some have minds so open that their
brains fell out..................
| Quote: | Most have not heard what they crave with solid state.
|
Exactly the opposite of my experience, and all the audiophiles I know
have certainly *heard* valve amps on many occasions.
| Quote: | The % of club members who own tube gear in the two audio clubs I know
is about 85dB higher than the general population.
|
Hardly difficult, when not one in a hundred thousand of the 'general
population' will own a tube amp. Almost all of them will of course own
a powerful tubed device, but microwave ovens don't count! :-)
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Turner
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:08 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
Arny Krueger wrote:
| Quote: | "JBorg" <jborg@eudoramail.com> wrote in message
news:uWEod.25624$6q2.5164@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com
I sense that some, if not, most serious audiophiles do agree about
many things in high-end audio.
Exactly. Other than a tiny retrograde luantic fringe, serious audiophiles
avoid tubed equipment.
|
None of the audiophiles I know avoid tube gear.
Most are open minded.
Most have not heard what they crave with solid state.
The % of club members who own tube gear in the two audio clubs I know
is about 85dB higher than the general population.
Patrick Turner. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sander deWaal
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:08 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
Patrick Turner <info@turneraudio.com.au> said:
| Quote: | Arny Krueger wrote:
Exactly. Other than a tiny retrograde luantic fringe, serious audiophiles
avoid tubed equipment.
None of the audiophiles I know avoid tube gear.
Most are open minded.
Most have not heard what they crave with solid state.
The % of club members who own tube gear in the two audio clubs I know
is about 85dB higher than the general population.
|
You just replied to Arnii Krooger, the worst thing that ever happened
to usenet.
He's a happy nerd ;-) with a pocket protector whose entire raison
d'etre is to spoil audio discussions and to spread the gospel that ABX
testing proves all amplifiers to sound the same.
Avoid him, you'll thank me later.
--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. " |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jon Yaeger
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 10:04 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
in article fOednY1nqJ8Sgj7cRVn-jw@comcast.com, Arny Krueger at
arnyk@hotpop.com wrote on 11/23/04 6:31 AM:
| Quote: | "JBorg" <jborg@eudoramail.com> wrote in message
news:uWEod.25624$6q2.5164@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com
I sense that some, if not, most serious audiophiles do agree about
many things in high-end audio.
Exactly. Other than a tiny retrograde luantic fringe, serious audiophiles
avoid tubed equipment.
|
****
What, exactly, is a "serious" audiophile?
I came to like tubed gear only after personally auditioning a wide variety
of SS & valved amps over many years.
I didn't start out saying, "well, I want to be part of an exclusive and
esoteric minority, and spend a small fortune in the process."
I have a number of like-minded electronic hobbyist friends who also just
happen to enjoy listening to music. A lot. One thing that distinguishes me
from my immediate family is the pleasure I derive listening to instrumental
works. For example, my wife and daughter have no patience with music that
lacks vocals.
I also play, or attempt to play, a few instruments. So I am not entirely
tone deaf.
To me and my lunatic music-o-phile friends, in general, good tube designs
sound more open and realistic. Most SS amps, even "good" ones, sound
sterile to my ears . . . like pushing music through grains of sand.
From a scientific point of view, I'll allow that I might be deluded. So
I'll just leave science out of it and say that it's a matter of taste. Some
like chiantis; others chablis. Their subtleties are really incomparable.
I disagree that my interest in tube gear makes me part of a small lunatic
fringe.
OTOH, I'm aware of postings on the NGs from people who claim that you, Arny,
have a certain predilection to minors for carnal purposes. I don't believe
most of the personal attacks appearing in NGs, and I hope that all that is
fiction and that you are unfortunately a victim of slander.
But if true, surely you might appreciate the irony that it would make you a
member of a "retrograde lunatic fringe," or worse . . . ?
Keeping irony alive,
- J |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sander deWaal
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 10:04 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
Jon Yaeger <jono_1@bellsouth.net> said:
| Quote: | I have a number of like-minded electronic hobbyist friends who also just
happen to enjoy listening to music. A lot. One thing that distinguishes me
from my immediate family is the pleasure I derive listening to instrumental
works. For example, my wife and daughter have no patience with music that
lacks vocals.
|
Heh! I noticed that, too.
Vocals bore me. I always thought I was the only one.
| Quote: | OTOH, I'm aware of postings on the NGs from people who claim that you, Arny,
have a certain predilection to minors for carnal purposes. I don't believe
most of the personal attacks appearing in NGs, and I hope that all that is
fiction and that you are unfortunately a victim of slander.
|
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
| Quote: | But if true, surely you might appreciate the irony that it would make you a
member of a "retrograde lunatic fringe," or worse . . . ?
|
Arny's a 'borg. He earned that title with honour.
| Quote: | Keeping irony alive,
|
In Arny-speak: "If irony killed...."
;-)
--
Sander de Waal
" SOA of a KT88? Sufficient. " |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
George M. Middius
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 10:05 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
Jon Yaeger said:
| Quote: | What, exactly, is a "serious" audiophile?
|
The 'borg definition is somebody who worships "accuracy" as the sine qua
non for "serious" audio equipment. No other critierion has any value
because they are all subjective. "Accuracy" can be "measured". Praise God.
| Quote: | To me and my lunatic music-o-phile friends, in general, good tube designs
sound more open and realistic. Most SS amps, even "good" ones, sound
sterile to my ears . . . like pushing music through grains of sand.
|
The problem with this HERESY is that you are a DEVIL WORSHIPPER. Given™
that you can't proove™ you can hear a difference between an "accurate"
system and one of your apostasy-promoting tubed systems, you are obviously
afraid of science. LOt"S! ;-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jon Yaeger
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 10:05 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
in article 4n07q0ltgh8dn69td3e1781cosgbit5hp1@4ax.com, George M. Middius at
Spam-B-Gone@resistance.org wrote on 11/23/04 1:38 PM:
| Quote: |
Jon Yaeger said:
What, exactly, is a "serious" audiophile?
The 'borg definition is somebody who worships "accuracy" as the sine qua
non for "serious" audio equipment. No other critierion has any value
because they are all subjective. "Accuracy" can be "measured". Praise God.
To me and my lunatic music-o-phile friends, in general, good tube designs
sound more open and realistic. Most SS amps, even "good" ones, sound
sterile to my ears . . . like pushing music through grains of sand.
The problem with this HERESY is that you are a DEVIL WORSHIPPER. Given™
that you can't proove™ you can hear a difference between an "accurate"
system and one of your apostasy-promoting tubed systems, you are obviously
afraid of science. LOt"S! ;-)
|
You assume that science can explain all things and that the measurements we
make of amplifiers can account for perceived, subjective aural differences.
In my own experience the connection isn't quite so clear. Maybe my
empirical senses are faulty and/or science hasn't yet quantified the stuff
that makes an amp sound "good."
In these and other matters, I dare say that the Galilean-Cartesian paradigm
ignores a whole lot of useful anecdotal data, and it is a functional useful
-- but not entirely comprehensive -- model for understanding reality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
George M. Middius
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 10:05 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
Jon Yaeger said:
| Quote: | What, exactly, is a "serious" audiophile?
The 'borg definition is somebody who worships "accuracy" as the sine qua
non for "serious" audio equipment. No other critierion has any value
because they are all subjective. "Accuracy" can be "measured". Praise God.
To me and my lunatic music-o-phile friends, in general, good tube designs
sound more open and realistic. Most SS amps, even "good" ones, sound
sterile to my ears . . . like pushing music through grains of sand.
The problem with this HERESY is that you are a DEVIL WORSHIPPER. Given™
that you can't proove™ you can hear a difference between an "accurate"
system and one of your apostasy-promoting tubed systems, you are obviously
afraid of science. LOt"S! ;-)
You assume that science can explain all things and that the measurements we
make of amplifiers can account for perceived, subjective aural differences.
|
Jesus. I didn't realize you were assimilated and then ejected from the
Hive. Hope the nanites aren't still bothering you. My sympathies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stewart Pinkerton
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 23, 2004 10:11 pm Post subject:
Re: Review (3): High-Power Audio Amplifier Construction Manu |
|
|
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:42:28 +0100, Sander deWaal <nospam@wanadoo.nl>
wrote:
| Quote: | You just replied to Arnii Krooger, the worst thing that ever happened
to usenet.
He's a happy nerd ;-) with a pocket protector whose entire raison
d'etre is to spoil audio discussions and to spread the gospel that ABX
testing proves all amplifiers to sound the same.
|
Actually no, he's a happy nerd who may spoil some *illusions* by
shining the bright light of reality on cosy rose-coloured dreams. ABX
testing actually proves that most 'fashionable' tube amps sound
nothing like their input signal. If that's what you really want, then
I guess that's peachy for you. Some of us are into *high fidelity*,
and if we like hollow-state, then we'd go for ARC or C-J.............
| Quote: | Avoid him, you'll thank me later.
|
But not for the reasons you suggest.....................
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in