Wireless World article c1980 Valve v Transistor

[PJL]

I have some transmission line speakers that are a difficult LF load and it is surprising how different the bass can sound on different amplifiers. Good article but hardly impartial and comes to the conclusion wanted by the interested party.

[Radio Wrangler]

The bit in the article I didn't like was how one individual insisted that only his preferred model of loudspeaker should be used or he wasn't playing.

Thinking of the Quad II, 303 and 405, they will certainly show differences when asked to shift large currents at low frequencies.

I too have some transmission line speakers which produce difficult impedances down towards their LF end. Add in a liking for pipe organs, and I had good reason to design a power amplifier especially for them. The setup's been in use for over 30 years and it still works well. It's interesting to observe people's reactions to it. Musicians are generally well impressed. Joe public thinks it's bass-light and then realises that they go low and flat rather than having a bump at the bottom of a truncated LF response to induce the impression of extended bass. Hifi aficionados are mostly at a loss and without visible brand names, most don't know what to say.

What I can point out and demonstrate are changes in the quality and style of recordings. In a lot of ways recordings have got better, but the realism of an orchestra simply miked has been lost. I also dislike the trend for treble cutting the instruments whenever a vocalist comes in to make her stand out, and then putting the instrument treble back between verses. Cowellization?

And that amp can drive +/-20 amps and +/-50v as needed. Silly, really but designing it was a bit of fun. A colleague was also designing a hifi amp and there was a bit of friendly rivalry. We agreed to each declare that we'd won (He left HP and went to develop more stuff and manage product development at Linn), whereas a small number of mine were made at HP.

David

[Gillian]

Hi everyone,I am reading this thread with interest.
Turretslug mentioned about room acoustics and reflections affecting audio performance.
Interestingly we had a rep bring in a Lyngdorf room acoustic canceling amplifier at one time.
Suffice to say it was one of the most boring sounding amps,I have ever heard and a Marantz Esotec pre and power amp from the 1980's completely trounced its performance.The rep left rather sheepishly and had to concede defeat.
Gilp

[turretslug]

Originally Posted by Gillian

Turretslug mentioned about room acoustics and reflections affecting audio performance.

Not me, I just rambled at a tangent in response to an aside!

[GrimJosef]

Originally Posted by Gillian

Hi everyone,I am reading this thread with interest.
Turretslug mentioned about room acoustics and reflections affecting audio performance.
Interestingly we had a rep bring in a Lyngdorf room acoustic canceling amplifier at one time.
Suffice to say it was one of the most boring sounding amps,I have ever heard and a Marantz Esotec pre and power amp from the 1980's completely trounced its performance.The rep left rather sheepishly and had to concede defeat.
Gilp

But was it correct ? The essence of high fidelity is, um, fidelity. It's been possible for years to buy amps which add extra 'excitement' or 'pizazz' or 'wow' to your music. They're great for a disco. But if you want to hear what the musicians recorded then you need an amp that adds or subtracts nothing. Absolute neutrality. Flavourless. Like drinking distilled water. A straight piece of wire with gain. Anything else, however much it might sound like fun, is distortion.

Cheers,

GJ

[emeritus]

I well recall the first time I attended a live concert, which was at the Royal Festival Hall, London, and thinking that the both the treble and bass were distinctly lacking. I was subsequently given to understand that the RFH was rather dead acoustically.

[Radio Wrangler]

"We're holding the party in the anechoic chamber! All the distilled water you can drink!"

David

[Gillian]

Hi, No I do not believe it can have been accurate.
It used digital audio processing to compensate for room acoustics.
Therefore it was not in any sense a wire with gain.
I do nothing you can add anything that is not already there and if you do,it is arguably distortion.
Subtraction is just the same, distortion.
Room acoustics are just that, good or bad.
If I want that group or musician to perform in my room in reality or by media proxy ,I will just have to put up with how the room that they are in sounds and if I do not like it. Move to a different room,if I can.
Equalisation used in the studio is used in a different way, music creation is a different thing from reproduction.
Some purists object to the use of multitrack recording,it can be used in a creative way though.
This can create a 3 dimensional sonic picture, of conurse it's artificial, but then so is a painting by a great master.
So to cap it off, we should ideally reproduce electro acoustically what is recorded as accurately as possible.

Best Regards
Gill

[GrimJosef]

Originally Posted by Gillian

Hi, No I do not believe it can have been accurate.
It used digital audio processing to compensate for room acoustics.
Therefore it was not in any sense a wire with gain.

Ah yes, digital correction for the room response. I agree it's controversial.

Room acoustics are just that, good or bad.
If I want that group or musician to perform in my room in reality or by media proxy ,I will just have to put up with how the room that they are in sounds and if I do not like it. Move to a different room,if I can ...
So to cap it off, we should ideally reproduce electro acoustically what is recorded as accurately as possible.

The problem comes of course when we don't live in the ideal world i.e. the one where there's a large choice of different listening rooms available. Most of us only have one or two rooms to choose from. But we still don't want them to 'sing along' with the music any more than we would want our dog to howl along. If we're lucky we can 'tailor' the room by careful positioning of the speakers and the furniture, by a suitable choice of carpets, curtains etc and, perhaps, by the use of commercial acoustic treatment products. If these aren't sufficient though then the only option is to try to cancel the room's effects electronically. It may not be perfect. But quiet dog howling surely is better than loud dog howling .

Cheers,

GJ