You are here

Log in or register to post comments
CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Modern circuits, not tubes
cyclebrain
cyclebrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: Jun 16 2006 - 11:40pm
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes

Yea, but we all know that low distortion sounds harsh.
If you could just create an IC with some vacuum tubes in it you would be rich.

cyclebrain
cyclebrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: Jun 16 2006 - 11:40pm
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes

Dup, I just ordered two Hypex UcD400 class D amplifier modules. These are the amplifier modules used in CIA's amplifiers. What are your thoughts on these amps?

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes

Not familiar with them. BUT, making stuff more efficient, is alsways better. All the heat blwon out of my amps, pure waste of energy, and really annoying heating up the space. Surely amps will evolve into hi fi much more efficient, better PF, look how they can get watts and watts out of some very small IC's driving stuff, it just keeps getting better and better. Just remeber, if the old stuff was so good, why did they stop doing it that way? Even GM knows, that a 1957 Chevy is junk, compared to modern vehicles. And GM makes more junk than anyone, but even they moved on. I'd be curious what is teh power factor and efficiency of these new "D' amps, for every watt in, it would be great to at least get .9 out, instead of less than 50% and teh rest blown away by teh fans.

cyclebrain
cyclebrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: Jun 16 2006 - 11:40pm
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes

I would think that you would like the part about the output drivers being driven either off or full on. None of this sissy indecisive in between crap. If you're going to drive a transistor (or Mosfet) drive it hard.

Monty
Monty's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 16 2005 - 6:55pm
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes


Quote:
If you could just create an IC with some vacuum tubes in it you would be rich.

I believe you can find them in the Christmas section at your local Target.

CECE
CECE's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 17 2005 - 8:16am
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes

Driven full on is Class "A" ain't it? Super room heaters. Even before tube amps do anything teh fil current heat is wasting energy, doing nutin' but making tungsten glow. If the solid state device wasn't developed, and we still used tubes in everything, how many more electric power plants would we need? How many things we wouldn't have? tubes are so obsolete, they are so impractical, things do evolve. Just the small signal tubes in my hybrid pre amps and DAC and phase inverters put out so much wasted heat energy, it's incredible. Electric motors, AC compressors have all improved and become much much more efficient, why do audio stick to wanting to claim that inefficient tubes are better? How come more efficient speaker drivers are better, but the amps that drive them should be inefficnet tubes?

cyclebrain
cyclebrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: Jun 16 2006 - 11:40pm
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes


Quote:
Driven full on is Class "A" ain't it? Super room heaters. Even before tube amps do anything teh fil current heat is wasting energy, doing nutin' but making tungsten glow. If the solid state device wasn't developed, and we still used tubes in everything, how many more electric power plants would we need? How many things we wouldn't have? tubes are so obsolete, they are so impractical, things do evolve. Just the small signal tubes in my hybrid pre amps and DAC and phase inverters put out so much wasted heat energy, it's incredible. Electric motors, AC compressors have all improved and become much much more efficient, why do audio stick to wanting to claim that inefficient tubes are better? How come more efficient speaker drivers are better, but the amps that drive them should be inefficnet tubes?


No, class A amps bias their drivers midpoint between max voltage and max current. At idle and usual low power listening levels lots of power consumed. Class B amps use a pair of output devices, each biased off when idle. Much lower power consumtion at idle and low power output.
At your listening level, max power, power consumed is equal.
Are you serious? You have a hybrid preamp, a tube DAC and a tube phase inverter? Why the hell a phase inverter?
You're not serious are you?
And I'm sure that you will agree that comparing an amplifier just on it's efficency is a poor method.

tandy
tandy's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: May 24 2006 - 3:57pm
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes


Quote:
http://www.electronicproducts.com/ShowPage.asp?FileName=poycn01.jan2007.html

How about the electrical field messing with the adjacent circuitry in the chip? That won't show up measuring HD.

By the way, when you come back dup, will you share with us all the different kinds of distortion in an audio system? HD is only one of many.

cyclebrain
cyclebrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: Jun 16 2006 - 11:40pm
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes


Quote:

Quote:
http://www.electronicproducts.com/ShowPage.asp?FileName=poycn01.jan2007.html

How about the electrical field messing with the adjacent circuitry in the chip? That won't show up measuring HD.

By the way, when you come back dup, will you share with us all the different kinds of distortion in an audio system? HD is only one of many.


There is also IM distortion, TIM distortion and of course imaginary distortion.

Scooter123
Scooter123's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Oct 5 2006 - 4:07pm
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes

Dup, you have obviously never learned why the 57 Chevy is so highly regarded. They were so much NOT junk that they would run damn near forever. It's the reason why there are so many of them still around. They were an "Ever Ready Bunnie" of a car with an engine capable of a million mile lifespan (those old small blocks could be re-bored many many times).

Obviously you haven't driven a GM product long term. My 1986 Olds Cutlass gets driven every day, idles so smooth that you hardly know it's running, and is coming up on 160,000 miles without any major problem. Basically, it's had oil changes, brakes, tires, and one alternator. Then there is my 1985 Monte Carlo SS, going strong at 232,000 miles. Just got back from vacation with the Monte hauling 5000 lbs of boat and trailer on a problem free 1500 mile round trip. Try hooking up 5000 lbs of boat and trailer to your Camry and see how long that will last. My bet is it won't be 22 years and 230,000 miles, more like 500 miles and the tranny will burn out from the load.

Then talk to my brother in law. So far he has had a Mazda RX-7 that needed an entire engine at 47,000 miles, a Toyota Forerunner that needed a valve job at 82,000 miles and has a rear bumper that is nearly rotted away after only 5 years. He is currently so pissed at Toyota that anyone mentioning buying a new car gets a tour of Toyota quality with the rear bumper being prominent as they get shown the repair invoice for the valve job and it's 2400 dollar charge. Needless to say, his next vehicle won't be a Toyota.

As for the "improvements" made in the past 20 years, I have some concerns about them that keep me from buying a new car. Anti-Lock brakes have been proven by several studies to not being any better than the older braking systems and they can actually INCREASE braking distances in some situations. For example, right side wheels on ice, left on pavement can cause a huge increase in braking distance with many ABS systems. Then there are Air Bags. Frankly those things scare me enough that it keeps me from even thinking about a new car. To many stories about broken arms, burns, and other injuries. Since I buckle up 100% of the time I really don't think I need a bomb in the steering wheel.

Poor Audiophile
Poor Audiophile's picture
Offline
Last seen: 9 months 3 weeks ago
Joined: Feb 14 2006 - 7:35pm
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes

Good post Scooter! You must be a car guy & an audiophile like myself. I'm sure we're oddballs here, oh well!
I know this isn't a car forum, but I drive a 1992 Buick Roadmaster(173,000 miles). Runs great! Newest car I've owned. Though I'm a "Buick guy", I like all classics. I've liked those Montys since they first came out. My project car is a 1972 Buick Skylark. As for tubes, I'd try them if I could afford them! lol I gave up debating American vs Foreign cars. Some people are infatuated w/ all things(cars or whatever) foreign for some reason. "To each their own".

cyclebrain
cyclebrain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: Jun 16 2006 - 11:40pm
Re: Modern circuits, not tubes

I would think that people here would understand the difference between runs forever but is a piece of crap, bad suspension, poor brakes, overweight, cheap vs expensive, few dealers, friends say "what kind", performance gain vs cost gain is rediculous. My 77 Porsche 911 has 298,000 mi.
My two Ducatis are quirky less then perfect bikes, but still cause me great passion.

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading