LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  April 2007

ARSCLIST April 2007

Subject:

Re: (dream) restoration phono preamp opinions wanted

From:

"Steven C. Barr(x)" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sun, 8 Apr 2007 22:25:24 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (39 lines)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "phillip holmes" <[log in to unmask]>
> Sorry to spout off late.  Tubes can be just as quiet as transistors.  
> I've heard noisy examples of both.  With classic tube stuff, you're 
> going to have to replace the power supply caps.  They're crap.  The ESR 
> of modern electrolytic caps are several orders of magnitude better than 
> what was available back then.  As Tom points out, DC filaments are the 
> way to go.  There were high end preamps back then that used DC on the 
> filaments and choke regulation in the B+.  One of my favorites is the 
> Harmon-Kardon Citation 1.  It has adjustable turnover and rolloff.  It's 
> very quiet and the sound remains constant as the tubes age because of 
> the judicious use of local/loop feedback.  The zero feedback stuff is 
> BS--they'll always be prone to tube aging and noise.  If you have to 
> rebuild one of these, they're very crammed with parts, so quite a chore 
> to work on.  There are upgrade kits available for these that will 
> replace the nasty electrolytic caps, the coupling caps and some other 
> noisy parts.  A complete rebuild would take hours, but when you're done, 
> it'd be world class.  I have one that'd covered in 20 years of dust.  
> One of these days....  It uses stepped attenuators for tone controls.  I 
> doubt anything like this, made as an audiophile product, would be 
> affordable.  Just looking at the parts list, I'd bet it'd run at least $3k.
> http://www.drtube.com/schematics/harmankardon/cit1.gif
> http://www.quadesl.com/refurb/refurb_hkCitation1.html
> 
The point is here...that if both tube hardware and solid-state hardware
can produce essentially-undistorted amplified version of sound-signal
input, why should there be any reason to choose one or the other?

As a user of intentionally-distorted tube amplifiers (for harmonica
playing)...I know that vacuum-tube hardware offers a much more
endurable version of distortion than does its solid-state equivalent.
However, if we design amplifiers of either sort so as to produce
effectively undistorted output...there should be no audible difference
between the two. At this point, it becomes more a question of nostalgia...
the same thing that inspires me to seek out 78's of performance for
which I already own master-pressing reissue discs!

Steven C. Barr

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Error during command authentication.

Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=111). The server is probably not started.

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager